[FT]UNSC ship ideas (was graser-1 slightly overpowered)

Quick recap: as part of discussion on the graser-1 I suggested
some new USNC ship designs to which Oerjan replied:

Lake Mk IV: replace the beam-2 and beam-1 on a III by a
third fore 3 arc graser-1.

> This makes the Lake even more sensitive to being outflanked than it

Mountain Mk II: replace beam-2s and 1s by three 3 arc
graser-1s, port, starboard, and fore.

> In compensation the Mk II's FP/FS arcs are slightly stronger than the
(Particularly
> if the enemy is Kra'Vak, of course... and in the GZGverse timeline the

I was thinking of the Mk number as denoting a variant, not necessarily a
replacement. (Similar to WWII Spitfire Mks for
photo-reconaissance or high-altitude interceptors.) They're
not compulsory! The UNSC ships are described as very modular and being built
at a time of rapid development, so should have more variants than other human
fleets.

> From the playtesting point of view, these beta designs are an

The descriptions of the Lake and Luna make it clear that the UNSC is steadily
developing graser technology as the Xeno War continues, and fitting more and
more grasers to their ships over time. These seem quite reasonable
extrapolations to me.

As to weaknesses, I'll argue that those missions are not what they are
designed for. Do you criticise a current day Aegis for being unable to sink
submarines? In the closing stages of the Xeno War the UNSC starts building
destroyers that seem less effective against the Kra'Vak, but capable of doing
serious damage to the less agile human capital ships. Would anyone be
surprised?

(Assuming that the Human timeline in Fleet Book 3 doesn't end
abruptly in the 2190's with "NO FURTHER ENTRIES" :-) )

Flaws and all, I really think it would be a good idea for
the UNSC designs to have more all-graser variants.

cheers,

> Hugh Fisher wrote:

> Quick recap: as part of discussion on the graser-1 I suggested

[...]

> From the playtesting point of view, these beta designs are an ideal

From the playtesting point of view, "sooner" was several years ago. My reply
was based on several years of playing both with and against such designs, and
in my experience from those games the armaments you suggest

make the ships too vulnerable to being outflanked and outranged both by other
human ships and by the various GZGverse aliens to be particularly effective.

> The descriptions of the Lake and Luna make it clear that the

It would be quite reasonable *unless* they also found problems with the
suggested graser-heavy weapon fits, eg. the problems already discussed
in this thread.

> As to weaknesses, I'll argue that those missions are not what they are

You're arguing that the non-missile Lake variants are not designed to be

able to escort heavier UNSC ships? Whatever. I OTOH would argue that escorting
heavier UNSC ships is the *primary* mission for the Lakes and
Hunters, with any anti-capital-ship strike capability being a secondary
role only.

> Do you criticise a current day Aegis for being unable to sink

No, but I would critizise the admiral who proposes to send all his frigates
on close-range assaults against enemy capital ships (thus leaving the
Aegis
and CVN without decent anti-sub protection) and therefore wants to refit

his frigates with anti-ship weaponry only.

> In the closing stages of the Xeno War the UNSC starts building

You're assuming that the various aliens will cease being serious threats at
the end of the Xeno War. I'm not :-/

Regards,