construction times...

Based upon the construction times for real life "ships", it might be
better to assume that time to construct ships takes months according to
this new formula:

Baseline construction time = sqrt(mass)*2.

Thus, mass 14 ships now take 7.4 months, 32 mass ships now take 11
months
and so on.  I am going to point out a couple of thoughts, and then you
can
all have fun telling me why the construction times should be shortened
rather than lengthened as I have just done <grin>.

1) construction times were altered based upon actual construction times
required for world war II ships (after using baseline of 1 mass = 250
cubic yards).

2) I used the US construction rates based on the fact that industry will
probably be highly mechanized and automated - and qualify for heavily
industrialized.  The gent who pointed this out on the list should be
thanked for that observation...

3) World war II ships were not sealed hulls, nor were they highly
specialized platforms as compared with today's ships.  In short, I
figure
to maintain the "ratio" of construction time in that modern day craft
will
be more complex, and built to more exacting standards.	

  Using the new formula, will now get the ships built more or less to
World War II standards, thus the Iowa type ship (mass 239), would take
30.919 months to make, which is only two months off from the listed
historical time.
  Personally, this "effort" to standardize construction rates, unless
coupled with some "economic" model, isn't going to be worth much.  
  Also, if we are using historical models, a mass 48 ship should not be
considered a "battleship".  However, rather than try to "redesign" the
game, if possible, I would like to try and keep to the flavor of it, and
still interject some "rational" limitations on build rates ect...
  As for the concept of "random" construction times, I can live with it.
But the question I place before you now is this:

Assuming that we go along with World War Construction rates for
comparable
sized/volume ships, then we should also explore the concept that navies
will be similarly large.  In a crash course for survival of your "race"
after a disasterous battle, you discover that you have to roll for each
and every of the 200 hulls you are building - weeelllll, that might make
you lose enthusiasm for the dice rolling rather quick.	Also in answer
to
the gent who states that he prefers faster construction rates to help
offset those really disasterous battles - well, history has a few
examples
of what happens when such events occur - it's called surrender.  Sue for
peace, and then resume hostilities once you are rebuilt.  In short, what
I
would like to see for campaign battle type rules, are those that mimic
what history says happens generally, and then people can "modify" such
rules to their circulatory organ's delight... <grin - been aching to use
that phrase now for some time>.
  Now, if I can only get a handle on what kind of rules I should be
looking to build when it comes to "income" and construction capacity.
Before 1800, you could not have built any Iowa class battleships, and
yet
there was a sizable population on earth at that moment.  Come 1900,
science coupled with industrialization, allowed for such beasties to be
built.	Maybe I should consider the idea that there are three "tech
levels involved here.  Current - with everything in it. Early, with most
everything in it, but some things slightly different - ie heavy beams
take
3 mass.  During current times, it is an A battery.  During early times,
it
was a "B" battery...   And then finally, the "Pre" tech, where current
tech wasn't even on the drawing boards.
  One thing I am attempting to keep within limits is the idea that
shipbuilding is not some enterprise that can be started up today, run at
full steam for 2 years, and then left mostly idle for the next 10 years
before "wartime" gears it back up to full production.  Once the market
is
saturated with merchant hulls, the ship building industry will "die out"
unless maintained in some manner.  This is currently happening today in
the US, where defense spending cuts have lowered the workforce in
specialized fabrication industries to the point that they almost no
longer
exist!

  FT analogy to modern day ship:

Converting the USS NIMITZ to FT stats, it would have to have a 422 mass
hull, and have 15 fighter bays!  It should have some 13 weapon mounts,
and
hold a crew of 5,698 people.  It should have heavy duty sensors on it,
and
maybe even some "screens"...  To make matters worse, this beastie should
have quite a bit of "cargo space" in order to maintain extended
operations
for it's fighters as well as escort ships.  Now THAT, would be a carrier
in FT's terms!	On the other hand, a ship with 211 hit points would not
be
one that I would like to try and wear down, thank you very much.  If it
took 70 points of damage just to reach a level one threshold check...

Oh well, musings complete for now, since it is now (locally speaking),
04:15, and time for me to go home from work...

Hal