Hull Numbers
- Thread starter Dragon1
- Start date
Bandit LOAF
Long Live the Confederation!
Fleet Tactics is a great idea, but I don't understand why they chose to do things like this. Every single time we see the weapon it's called a CapShip Missile... so, why consciously go through and change that to Cruise Missile everywhere?
Psych was one of the guys in the old Aces Club who was so much smarter than the 'founders' who insisted on putting submarines and Nimitz-class aircraft carriers into space... so I don't understand why he's water Navy-ing up things with Fleet Tactics.
No idea, they don't actually show up simulated in the game. The idea is that they're the "high caliber" anti-capship/anti-installation weapons, akin to the plasma guns on the battleships or the ion cannons on the Midway-class.
Dragon1
Rear Admiral
Yeah, I am continuing to make corrections on the Cruiser/Destroyer document.
On the Lexington class Heavy Carrier, do we know if the Armada specs are accurate compared to sources in the novels? It is almost hard to type 725 meters x 3,250 tonnes. What exactly made these carriers heavy as opposed to a fully-loaded Concordia class CV that outperforms the Lex in almost all categories. My faith in a carrier surviving a single A/M torpedo when she is lighter than an Exeter-class destroyer is somewhat non-existant.
I upted the BB count to 41 (4 fleets, including 12 carriers with the fleets). Is this enough for the pre-war situation, or should I add more?
On the Lexington class Heavy Carrier, do we know if the Armada specs are accurate compared to sources in the novels? It is almost hard to type 725 meters x 3,250 tonnes. What exactly made these carriers heavy as opposed to a fully-loaded Concordia class CV that outperforms the Lex in almost all categories. My faith in a carrier surviving a single A/M torpedo when she is lighter than an Exeter-class destroyer is somewhat non-existant.
I upted the BB count to 41 (4 fleets, including 12 carriers with the fleets). Is this enough for the pre-war situation, or should I add more?
Dragon1
Rear Admiral
In WC3 we see a destroyer labelled as a Frigate. Easy enough explanation, Origin hadn't come up yet with a model for a Frigate. But perhaps you could say that due to war shortages with the Caernavon class, Confed had decided to remove some of the heavy weapons mounts from some of the older Tallahassee CCs and the older DDs, reconfigure them for various missions (troop transport, command-and-control, etc...) and redesignate them Frigates.
This kind of hits two birds with one stone.
1) We can now have a valid explanation why we see a DD labelled 'Frigate' in the Alcor system.
2) Why the Confed DDs and CCs we come across in WC4 has lower specs than their counterparts of WC3.
But, if you guys don't like the logic behind this, I will kill it.
Bandit LOAF
Long Live the Confederation!
A few more comments for the Battleships document:
* I'd consider 'McAuliffe Ambush' and 'Enyo Engagement' to be proper names, based on the context they're used in things like Claw Marks -- particularly since you're using things like 'Epsilon Initiative'. 'Battle of McAuliffe' is kind of ambiguous - there's battles in McAuliffe in 2634, 2639 and 2654 (and those are just what we know of!).
* Do you mean TCS Media or TCS Medea for that last Yorkshire-class ship?
* I would consider calling the main guns the 'Heavy Plasma Batteries' or somesuch similar. The raison d'etre for the Action Stations battleships is that they're built around these large plasma weapons, which are used for bombarding other ships and installations. Think the space equivalent of the 16-inch guns on an Iowa-class ship.
* Nice catch on the mass for the battleships. Action Stations calls them "fifty thousand tonne battlewagons" at one point.
* My note about 84 fighters on the Concordia-class was in addition to what you had, not instead. You were absolutely right when you said that the fighter complement was 96 -- in 2673. (I guess I didn't do a good job of this; there's lots of places where you're right about things, too.)
* The Midway-class should have six CSM launchers, which refer to the Kilrah-series mission where it launches training missiles.
I don't think the Lexington-class shows up anywhere other than in Armada; I agree that the mass is odd -- and it's because Armada's did specifications strangely.
That said, the 'heavy' in heavy {ship} usually refers to armament -- so the ability to deploy a zillion fighters could make a carrier without much armor a 'heavy carrier'.
* I'd consider 'McAuliffe Ambush' and 'Enyo Engagement' to be proper names, based on the context they're used in things like Claw Marks -- particularly since you're using things like 'Epsilon Initiative'. 'Battle of McAuliffe' is kind of ambiguous - there's battles in McAuliffe in 2634, 2639 and 2654 (and those are just what we know of!).
* Do you mean TCS Media or TCS Medea for that last Yorkshire-class ship?
* I would consider calling the main guns the 'Heavy Plasma Batteries' or somesuch similar. The raison d'etre for the Action Stations battleships is that they're built around these large plasma weapons, which are used for bombarding other ships and installations. Think the space equivalent of the 16-inch guns on an Iowa-class ship.
* Nice catch on the mass for the battleships. Action Stations calls them "fifty thousand tonne battlewagons" at one point.
* My note about 84 fighters on the Concordia-class was in addition to what you had, not instead. You were absolutely right when you said that the fighter complement was 96 -- in 2673. (I guess I didn't do a good job of this; there's lots of places where you're right about things, too.)
* The Midway-class should have six CSM launchers, which refer to the Kilrah-series mission where it launches training missiles.
I don't think the Lexington-class shows up anywhere other than in Armada; I agree that the mass is odd -- and it's because Armada's did specifications strangely.
That said, the 'heavy' in heavy {ship} usually refers to armament -- so the ability to deploy a zillion fighters could make a carrier without much armor a 'heavy carrier'.
Dragon1
Rear Admiral
Cool. I will go back and do.
Thanks for all the comments Loaf, this is really starting to come together.
I am doing the CC/DD section right now.
TCS Medea (as in Satrapy of the old Persian Empire), not Media, my bad.
Any idea on how many fighters the Lexington CV is supposed to carry? I thought I saw somewhere a complement of 40, but this sounds way too light.
Thanks for all the comments Loaf, this is really starting to come together.
I am doing the CC/DD section right now.
TCS Medea (as in Satrapy of the old Persian Empire), not Media, my bad.
Any idea on how many fighters the Lexington CV is supposed to carry? I thought I saw somewhere a complement of 40, but this sounds way too light.
Bandit LOAF
Long Live the Confederation!
Here's a few more notes:
* I noticed you gave all the ships their proper full name, so the McClellan should be the TCS William B. McClellan.
* Probably not worth making the Waterloo the CC-08, since every Waterloo-class ship says '8' on it in Wing Commander II (which actually, now that I think about it, doesn't include the TCS Waterloo herself).
* The TCS Hades was a "testbed", so a designation doesn't need to be explained away. There are several differences worth noting between the Hades and the Cerbrus: she's 17 meters shorter, carries 50 less crew and has ten Dual-Mount Heavy Laser Cannons in place of the later ships ten Dual-Mount Tachyon Cannons.
* Spelling, Paradigm - 'destoryer' should be 'destroyer' and 'erea' should be 'area'
* Probably worth working in something about the Paradigm/flagship reference from Origin FX.
* 'Pluncket' should be Plunkett.
* Length of the Confederation-class should be 983.7 meters.
* Histories for the TCS Cordoba and TCS Oleron are awkward because we have a shot of which ships are at Pegasus when it's destroyed, and they're all Concordia and Bengal-class.
* I noticed you gave all the ships their proper full name, so the McClellan should be the TCS William B. McClellan.
* Probably not worth making the Waterloo the CC-08, since every Waterloo-class ship says '8' on it in Wing Commander II (which actually, now that I think about it, doesn't include the TCS Waterloo herself).
* The TCS Hades was a "testbed", so a designation doesn't need to be explained away. There are several differences worth noting between the Hades and the Cerbrus: she's 17 meters shorter, carries 50 less crew and has ten Dual-Mount Heavy Laser Cannons in place of the later ships ten Dual-Mount Tachyon Cannons.
* Spelling, Paradigm - 'destoryer' should be 'destroyer' and 'erea' should be 'area'
* Probably worth working in something about the Paradigm/flagship reference from Origin FX.
* 'Pluncket' should be Plunkett.
* Length of the Confederation-class should be 983.7 meters.
* Histories for the TCS Cordoba and TCS Oleron are awkward because we have a shot of which ships are at Pegasus when it's destroyed, and they're all Concordia and Bengal-class.