[OFFICIAL] Re: National Characteristics?

>Hey all,
>	Does anyone have a specific "characteristic" listing for the
various
>planetary organizations?
>	Like what weapons are favored by who....Does NAC use more needle
>beams?  NSL use more torps...etc?
>
>	I know a fleet book is on the way (called Geohex today	and he
said at
>least two more months...) but what about in the interim?  Is there any
>agreed upon standards?
>
>Thanks
>Joe

OK, here we go: these are some VERY rough outlines that I posted to the
playtesters a short while ago for comments, so I may as well release
them
to the wider audience. They will form the core of the fleet design
doctrines in the Fleet Book. Note that nothing which follows is yet
confirmed, and anything MAY get changed between now and publication of
the
FB!

Some of the systems mentioned are new ones that will be detailed in the
FB
(and later in FTIII): HBS is Heavy Beam System (which will be a variant
of
the one used in the EFSB), while SMB is Salvo Missile Battery (a
completely
new (to FT, that is) type of missile system). Armour will also use a new
system (similar to additional damage boxes) rather than the "Kra'Vak"
style
armour rules in MT.

1) NAC: Mainly general-purpose ships, using a broad mix of weapons and
systems - beams, torps and SMBs. HBSs are frequently used on heavier
classes. Some designs are be specialised, but most are multi-role.
Strong
screens are the primary passive defence, though some armour is employed
especially on the heavier units. Mobility is generally average-to-good.
Fighters are normally based on specialised carriers which rely on
supporting ships for much of their defence.

2) ESU: Most ships are beam-heavy in their armament, with a sprinkling
of
SMBs on some classes. HBSs  and torps are used relatively little. Armour
and screen use is fairly balanced, many ships carrying both. Mobility is
average for most ships. Fighters are operated from specialised carriers;
these ships generally have more offensive armament and tougher defences
than NAC counterparts, but carry correspondingly fewer fighters. Many
ESU
ship designs, especially the Cruiser and small Capital types, are
optimised
for long-term independant operations.

3) NSL: Another beam-heavy force, using few SMBs or Torps, but HBSs are
common where mass allows. NSL doctrine is for powerful ships in offence
and
defence, with mobility a lower priority - thrust levels tend to be low.
Armour is used heavily, often in preference to screens. Fighters tend to
be
based in smallish quantities on the large general combat ships rather
than
specific carrier designs.

4) FSE: SMBs are used extensively (with good magazine capacities where
mass
is available), with beam weapons seen as secondary systems. Some
specialised Torp-armed classes exist. FSE ships are relatively fragile,
with a lower priority on defences than (say) the NSL, but this is partly
offset by the fact that their large capital ships are VERY big. As with
the
ESU, fighter carriers are seen as multi-role ships and carry other
offensive systems besides their fighter complement. Mobility is a
priority,
with most classes having good thrust levels.

Jon (GZG)