Prev: Re: FT3 rules and SMs Next: Re: Robotech stuff (longish)

FTFB--new fleet design philosophies.

From: jatkins6@i... (John Atkinson)
Date: Wed, 24 Jun 1998 23:46:20 -0500 (CDT)
Subject: FTFB--new fleet design philosophies.

    It occours to me that with the changes brought about by the Fleet 
Book that there are now innumerable 'styles' of ship that one could 
concentrate on.  We can go the NSL route and go for armor, beams, and 
no speed, or the FSE which is dead opposite (BTW, Why, oh why did GZG 
make the FSE models so darn cool?  It's annoying--I won't play 
Frenchmen but I really, really like the ships).  

But has much thought been given as to what would be wanted if one had 
the luxury to specialize _within_ one's fleet?	I'm assuming multiple 
capital ship construction yards and a good bit of resources.  Let us 
examine major areas of concern for the de-centralized space fleets:

Home Fleet:  This would represent the main 'fleet' per se, the 
battleline and carriers.  Major striking arm, built from ground up with 
fleet battles in mind, not independant operations.  Primary focus is on 
Dreadnought classes and Fleet Carriers, with escorts as appropriate. 
Escorts will be designed for anti-fighter and capital ship strike 
mission--speed is not too essential, given that they are tied to the 
battleline anyway.  May include independant destroyer and cruiser 
squadrons for scouting.  Missle armament would be a good idea given 
that this force is not really into long-range, long-term missions with 
no logistical support, as might be more common out on the frontier.

Commerce raiding:  May be administratively part of above or of frontier 
fleets, but has different enough requirements.	Two major elements:  
"True" battlecruisers (BBs with the armor and shields stripped in favor 
of engines:  The NAC BB minus armor and shields yields a BB-armed 
thrust 6 ship with reasonable survivability vs escorts) and smaller 
escort-sized armed with needle batteries and possibly operated 
off-the-books by privateers under letters of marque and reprisal.  Both 
may, in time of war, hunt down enemy replenishment ships, and 
battlecruisers may bushwhack destroyers or small cruiser forces.  
Speed, lightning speed, more lightning speed are the watchwords here.  
Also since their opponents are not likely to be heavily shielded (DDs 
and FFs), beam batteries are ideal, while missles would be right out 
given their mission profiles.

Local Defense forces:  I'm thinking mostly smaller ships, with low 
thrust (Come on, they're defending a planet.  Just where would they 
go?), lots of survivability and weapons.  They won't stop a battleline 
in any case, so focus on smacking raiders and probing attacks.	
Possibly supplement with a few high-thrust ships for patroling system 
as a whole vs commerce raiders.  

Local Fleets:  sub-sections of the empire may maintain smaller fleets, 
especially on frontiers.  Few battleline ships, if any--and what they 
have will likely be CVL/BB/Light BB (former BC size, since I'm using 
Battlecruiser to designate a stripped and faster BB).  Ideally the 
scarce large capital ships will be something like the NSL 
'Carriernaught' (four fighter groups and battleship beam armament)-- 
flexibility is watchword.  Heavy emphasis on cruisers, which would be 
used in small squadrons or singly in most cases.  Destroyer squadrons 
would also be useful, especially for hunting comerce raiders.  
Destroyer squadrons should be designed as an integrated whole rather 
than accumulation of individuals.

Convoy Escorts:  No missles, likely predominately small ships (12 
frigates can be split among 6 convoys, 1 SDN has to be in one place).  
Some maneuverability is needed, say about thrust 4, but you don't 
really need thrust 6--you're tied to thrust 2 freighters anyway.  Beam 
batteries, some torps for dealing with capital raiders.  Since these 
are small forces, fighters may be disproportionately effective--CVEs 
built on Lt BB hulls seem to be ideal.

John M. Atkinson


Prev: Re: FT3 rules and SMs Next: Re: Robotech stuff (longish)