Modular warships

Hello everyone;

    I have been off the list since August, and am not sure how to go
through the archives, so I apologize if this topic has been resolved.
The are two kinds of modularity: plugins and sockets, and modules.

    The plugin and socket is a simple substitution of systems of equal
size, mass, and arc (the assumption is that if they have the same mass
and arc, they are the same shape).  The PDS, fire control, and class-1
beam batteries are all similar, so it would not be unreasonable to allow
them to be exchanged as needs warrant.	The class-3 beam and p-torp
could also be interchangeable, for the same reasons.

    The difficulty arises when someone wants to replace a weapon with
another weapon that does not conform to these assumptions.  My proposal
is that you can replace a class-n beam with two class-(n-1) beams that
fire in the same arc as the original weapon (ie if you replace the
Komarov's class-4 beams with 16 class-1's, they only fire into two
arcs).	This represents the assumption that larger beam batteries are
recessed into the hull further than smaller batteries.	As the ganged
weapons share a mounting, they can only be fired at one target, and are
disabled/repaired as if they were one system (the more realistic method
is that if any fail, the mount fails and no fire is possible until at
least one is repaired).  To represent the shared mounting, ganged
class-1's can not destroy more than one fighter or missile, but do roll
all the dice for the attempt.  As a FC can replace a class-1, the ganged
mount can include its own FC.

    Any class-n beam can be replaced by 2^(n-1) submunition clusters
firing through any of the beam's arcs (must be chosen at installation
[before the scenario starts]), but no more than 2^(n-2) can be fired at
once (minimum of 2).  A class-n beam can be replaced with 2^(n-1) PDS
units that are limited to the arc of the original beam battery, but they
can engage multiple fighters, and get rerolls.	The last substitution is
the one-for-one replacement of a class-2 beam with an ADFC (limited to
the arc of the class-2).  There is no additional cost for socketting
equipment mountings.

    Truly modular warships are ships with semipermanent, bolt on
structures that allow them to be tailored for specific mission
profiles.  They consist of a core module that includes the core systems,
FTL drives, and maneuver drives (usually), and an array of attachments
that include weapons, fire control, and other special systems.

    In my opinion the core module should be at least 40% of the maximum
size of the ship, and there are (depending on preferences) 6 or 8
possible places to mount modules to the core.  They are one for each
firing arc, plus top and bottom, or bow, stern, port, starbord, top and
bottom.  Also no single module can be larger than the core module in a
military vessel.  Merchant container ships are two drive modules joined
by a series of cargo containers and tend to be very long and changing
their facing is difficult.

    The maximum size of a module connecting to a core module's mounting
point is fixed during construction.  It is assumed that all modules of
the same mass (except core modules) are the same shape.

    The core module's FTL drive must be large enough for maximum total
mass, or past a point, it becomes non-FTL capable.  The crew factor is
determined by the vessel's total combined mass.  The core module's
complement of rew factors must be allocated on the core module's damage
track.	Crewfactors due to the mass of modules may be assigned to any
module with at least 1 point of hull integrity.  Modules with a mass of
20, or more, must have at least 1 crewfactor (unless it has no hull
integrity).

    If the module mountings are not symmetrical, the asymmetric mount
must have its size specified during the design, and a module of that
mass must always be installed, for balance purposes.  The ship must be
balanced top to bottom, side to side, and back to front. Drive modules
not in the aft mounting point must be balanced by a drive module on the
opposite side.

    Modules are designed and built using the same rules for starships,
except systems are limited to only three arcs (except top and bottom,
which can have any), they may not mount FTL, and hull integrity is can
be any amount (even zero).  A core module with both top and bottom
mountings for modules may not have more then three arcs for any of its
systems (unless the core module is more than 10x the mass of the
bolt-on), because the bolt-on module will be in the way.

    For the purposes of allocating damage, the modules are ordered by
mass and a d100 is used to allocate damage (simple example: BC
consisting of a 40 mu core module and six 10 mu modules would have the
table 0-39 core, 40-49 m1, 50-59 m2, 60-69 m3, 70-79 m4, 80-89 m5, and
90-99 m6).  Modules take damage, make threshold checks, and are
destroyed seperately.  If the module takes more damage than it can
withtand, it is destroyed and the rest of the damage is re-rolled (you
can either keep rolling until it hits something, or the mathematically
minded can recreate the d100 chart).  Modules with zero hull integrity
are destroyed and the full damage is re-rolled.  Maintaining balance in
response to damage is not necessary, as the imbalance can be coped with
long enough to get to a depot.	Loss of the core module causes the loss
of the ship.

    One thing that comes out of these rules is that small ships should
use sockets, and larger ships can take advantage of modules.

Sincerely;
Richard Bell
aka "Mary" (her name appeared on the cable bill)
aka Sa'Vasku poseur