Re: Brigade's SemFed designs
From: "Oerjan Ohlson" <oerjan.ohlson@t...>
Date: Thu, 4 Nov 1999 19:49:59 +0100
Subject: Re: Brigade's SemFed designs
----------
> Från: Tony Francis <tony@glassghost.com>
> Till: gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
> Ämne: Re: Brigade's SemFed designs
> Datum: den 4 november 1999 11:42
>
> Oerjan Ohlson wrote:
>
> > No, not even commercial companies get away from my scrutiny <g>
> >
> > First off, the "clock direction" system is somewhat difficult to
read.
> > Tony, may I suggest that you use the fire arc codes on p.4 in FB
> > instead?
> >
>
> Don't have my copy of the FB to hand but I will have a look at these.
>
> >
> > CAPITAL SHIPS
> >
> > Ben Gurion Class SDN is NPV 611, not 610.
>
> Hull mass 176 = 176 pts
> Hull Integrity 3 (average) = 53 (52.8) mass = 106 pts
> Main Engines 2 = 18 (17.6) mass = 36 pts
> FTL = 18 (17.6) mass = 36 pts
> Armour 9 = 9 mass = 18 pts
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Here's the difference - well, half of it, anyway. It says 8 armour on
the web page (at least it did last when I looked at it two days ago).
> Screens 2 = 18 (17.6) mass = 54 pts
> PDS x 4 = 4 mass = 12 pts
> FCS x 4 = 4 mass = 16 pts
^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
And here's the other half: the web page says 5 FCS. I'm still in error;
the design on the web page should be 612 pts :-/
> > Ramat David Class DN is NPV 511, not 499. It is equipped with 2
> > "Class-2 (11-1)" (ie, (F)-arc only) batteries, but but C2 batteries
> > come with 3 arcs as minimum.
> >
>
> Whoops, typo, should be "11-5".
Ah, good.
> > CARRIERS
> >
> > Dayan Class CVA: Design is OK, but to me "Hangar Space-72" means
one
> > single huge hangar with space for 72 Mass of small craft rather
than a
> > hangar with space for 48 Mass (8 fighter squadrons) or 8 separate
> > fighter bays. Not sure which of the latter two you mean, but some
of my
> > Needle-armed ships would love a single huge hangar <g>
> >
>
> Hmmm, I guess that isn't too clear. The ship has 72 mass allocated
for
> hangar space, which allows it to carry 48 mass of small craft. These
are
> allocated as 8 fighter bays as you suspect.
It's just that you describe the Mass 48 hangar on the Merkava as a
"hangar space-32" :-/
> > CRUISERS
> >
> > Meir Class CH: OK. It carries 4 Class-2: 2 x 9-3 (FP/F/FS) and 2 x
> > 7-1 (AP/FP/F), ie Alarishi-style offset batteries - but only for
the
> > light guns, since the C3 batteries are mounted symmetrically. Is
this
> > intentional?
>
> Damn, they should be 2 x 7-1 and 2 x 11-5 (too much late night
cutting
> and pasting here).
OK.
> > Soltam Class CA: Shouldn't this ship have some FCs? <G> (Judging
from
> > the TMF and NPV specified, it should have 3 of them but they're not
> > listed on the web page.)
>
> Ooops ... three sounds about right.
:-)
> > ESCORT VESSELS
> >
> > Reshef Class CT: This ship is either TMF 14, NPV 47 or TMF 15, NPV
50,
> > but *NOT* TMF 15, NPV 47... apart from that it's OK <g>
>
> The error was in an older version of the spreadsheet which didn't
> calculate the weapon mass correctly (only added the mass of one
> weapon, not both) so it should be 15, 50. However, there's no
advantage > gained from this (the difference is simply in the mass of
the FTL, yes ?)
Yep.
> so I guess I'll make it 14, 47.
OK.
> > ASSAULT SHIPS
> >
> > Merkava Class Assault Ship: Only uses 152 Mass. Screen-1 missing?
>
> Yes.
OK.
> > " Hanger Space-32; 2 x fighters groups plus 2 x TMF 10 shuttles"
> >
> > This is the biggest reason I complained about all those carriers
above;
> > here you suddenly state the total capacity of the hangar instead of
its
> > total size instead of the other way around :-/ I much prefer this
> > notation to the one used for the other carriers, though.
> >
>
> Fair point. I'll clarify the way that I state hanger space for all
ships.
As long as you do it the same way for all ships, I'm satisfied :-)
> > Shafrir Class Assault Lander: If this is a *lander*, I'd probably
want
> > some streamlining as well :-/
>
> Hmmm ... good point also. My spreadsheet doesn't cater for
streamlining
> which is why I forgot it !
OK. Remove 5 Cargo space for Partial streamlining, cost 126?
> > MERCHANTS AND FREIGHTERS
> >
> > Negev Class Heavy Freighter: OK, but... screens on a Fragile hull
looks
> > like a waste of money since they only give about half the
protection
> > the same Mass of armour would (if they protect at all, which they
only
> > do against beams and EMP missiles at the moment), and they cost
more
> > than the armour would :-(.
> >
> > Golan Class Container Ship: OK, but see Negev comment about
screens.
>
> Interesting point. I tend to design my ships to what feels 'right',
rather
> than analysing the designs to provide the most efficient ships
(unless I'm
> playing a grudge match, in which case I can min-max with the best of
> 'em ...).
Somehow it doesn't feel right to me that commercial shipping lines -
*Jewish* commercial shipping lines, who have an age-old reputation to
live up (down?) to ;-) - would shell out a lot of cash for a system
which doesn't provide any real protection, when they could get at least
far better protection for a lower cost... <g>
> > Golan Class Merchant Fighter Carrier: Judging from the TMF and NPV
of
> > this ship, the External Fighter Rack is Mass 10, Cost 30 - ie
larger
> > and more expensive than a standard fighter bay. If that is true,
what's
> > the point with using the external rack (except that the model looks
> > cool)?
>
> Bug in the older spreadsheet again. NPV is in fact 257.
> For some reason I've entered two FCS in the spreadsheet as well,
OK. The web page only says 1 FCS.
> whereas there isn't much point giving it more than one ... which
means I have an extra mass to play
> with. I'll have to rework this altogether. The external fighter racks
I've
> costed up simply as a fighter bay (mass-9, 27pts) since I give them
an
> identical functionality in a game.
OK.
> Thanks for all that (I think).
<g> I did the same for Jon, though in that case it was prior to
publishing rather than afterwards <g>
Best wishes,
Oerjan Ohlson
oerjan.ohlson@telia.com
"Life is like a sewer.
What you get out of it, depends on what you put into it."
- Hen3ry