FT-Battleship designs

4 posts ยท Apr 29 2001 to May 1 2001

From: Bif Smith <bif@b...>

Date: Sun, 29 Apr 2001 22:36:31 +0100

Subject: FT-Battleship designs

Thinking about my original post, and some of the replies I`ve had, I`ve come
to a concusion (of sorts). Turrets Must have a separate hull from the
mothership (and armour). Protected by ships sheild. Mass of hull cannot be
greater than the DP of the ships hull. Minimum of 10% of turrets mass must be
turret hull (just like ships). Must mount a power system for rotating turret,
at a mass of 1% of the turret for each arc covered minus 1 (gets 1 arc free).
Can carry any weapon as for the weapons mass for single arc for that weapon,
but can only fire thrugh the arcs covered by the turret, and the turret can
only fire at 1 target per turn (cannot split fire of a single turret between
different targets, even if they are within the same arc as the turret is
firing). Turret can point in any direction in a turn, but in only 1 direction
per turn, doesn`t need to be specified until firing.
Cost is as a normal ship`s systems (ie-hull, drive/rotating equipment,
armour=x2 mass). Doesn`t have to pay for base hull cost (payed for when
building the entire ship in the first place).

I think the above is ballanced by the extra flexibility in limited arc
weapons, balanced by the vulnerablities of the turrets to incoming fire. It
would take more dammage to be inflicted to force a threshold check on
weapons mounted in the hull Vs dammage required to dammage/destroy a
turret, with all the weapons mounted within. The biggest advantage i can see
is in the reduced cost for the extra arcs, but turrets arc very week
to incoming fire. For example-

Turret with 3x Cl3 beams Turret mass=25 Turret cost=62 Hull (turret DP)=8
Armour=4 Cl 3 beam (1 arc) x3=12
Rotaing equipment (5 arcs/4% turret mass)=1

Cl 3 beams (5 arcs) starship mounted Weapons mass=24 Cost=72

As shown above, the turreted ship is 10 points cheaper, but only requires 6 DP
to be inflicted to force a threshold check against a turret.

Any comments?

From: Beth Fulton <beth.fulton@m...>

Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 09:39:33 +1000

Subject: Re: FT-Battleship designs

G'day Bif,

Can you remind me how you take damage on a turret when the ship is under

general fire. And I think I like the idea of setting arc at orders time for
the turret better than it always being optimal, but that opinion may change if
I get to see this system in actions in a game.

Cheers

Beth

From: Bif Smith <bif@b...>

Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2001 07:20:06 +0100

Subject: Re: FT-Battleship designs

[quoted original message omitted]

From: Charles Taylor <charles.taylor@c...>

Date: Tue, 01 May 2001 23:10:32 +0100

Subject: Re: FT-Battleship designs

In message <4.2.2.20010430093757.00a4b840@pop.hba.marine.csiro.au>
> Beth Fulton <beth.fulton@marine.csiro.au> wrote:

> G'day Bif,
I also like the idea of having to specify the turret arc in orders -
fits my mental image of a huge turret slowly moving to bear :-)

I presume that a threshold failure by the drive mechanism locks the turret in
its last position (until fixed). Can the drive mechanism be targeted by needle
beams? (I could make an argument for either case). If an attacker gets real
close (say 6mu, maybe 12) can they target individual turrets? How do you
handle area effect weapons, such as Plasma Bolts?

Well, looks like we've got the makings of a ninja rocketship here (using
either Bif's or my turret designs - I like both of them).