Prev: Re: EG Appearance Next: Re: NI stealth project

[FT] NAC Fleet Roster (unofficial, of course)

From: "Stop the car?? This is a car chase! I went through considerable trouble to set this up." <KOCHTE@s...>
Date: Wed, 27 Jan 1999 15:31:05 -0500 (EST)
Subject: [FT] NAC Fleet Roster (unofficial, of course)


Here is something I've been working on, on and off, for the better part
half a year now, and has grown by a factor of 2.5 in the past week. It
strongly *patterned* after the US Navy Fleet Roster, a book on which I
from my brother who works at the Annapolis Naval Academy. The main
of this list was to make it easier for pick-up games (someone sets a
ceiling, I would then try and find a force from the list here which
best fit), and makes for making pseudo-historical scenarios a lot
In my last two real-life engagements (against Iceberg last friday - see
also the AAR I posted which has generated a LOT of 'stealth' traffic! -
against Aaron Teske last saturday - AAR yet to be written up; next
I used forces from the accompanying roster. Against Noam's NI stealth
I used Cruiser-Destroyer Group 24, and against Aaron's GW Imperial
Squadron I used Destroyer Squadron 13. You already know the fate of C-DD
Group 24; you will have to await the AAR to see how DD Sqd 13 faired. 

Anyway, a couple of people have suggested that I either post this to the
or put it up on my webpage. As you are reading this, I've obviously
posted it
to the list. :)  I will also put it on my webpage later this week or

Understand this *is* an unofficial roster! And that I did take some
liberties with the naming conventions for the Carrier Battlegroups and
Heavy Battlegroups. Hell, I like naming ships.	:)

Note: if you were to count up the number of ships massing less than the
Battledreadnoughts (for example, the FB says there are only 56 HURON
but I have below 100) you will very likely find discrepencies between
numbers I have here, and the numbers listed in the Fleetbook. This is
because Jon has said that the FB is just a sampling of what each nation
has, and I, in order to do points, abstract in that a destroyer - unless
otherwise noted - is going to be 100 pts (NAC), a heavy cruiser 261 pts
(NAC), etc, be it whatever variant or variety the NAC may really have.
Points can easily be adjusted by differencing the FB points with
you have designed in place of a given ship. I have also presented some
non-FB ships herein, and their difference details - including point
differences - are included at the bottom (along with a little historical
blurb about each one). If you don't like the fact the numbers I have
don't agree with the FB numbers, redesign some other ships to fill out
numbers, OR drop enough of the groups/squadrons/ships to make 'em fit!

I don't know if I'll get any time to do this for the ESU, NSL, or FSE in
near future. I'd love to be able to, but it's a lotta time. If no one
works on them, I'll start the next project by tackling the ESU Fleet


(note: highly unofficial, of course! :)

		      NAC Fleet Rsoter

   ** Destroyer Squadrons **

Designation		  Comprised of			 ~NPV
-----------		  ------------			 ----
Destroyer Squadron 1	  3xCL, 4xDD, 4xFG		 1225
Destroyer Squadron 2	  1xCE, 2xCL, 3xDD, 2xFG, 4xCT	 1179
Destroyer Squadron 3	  2xDD, 2xCT			  282
Destroyer Squadron 4	  5xCL, 4xDD, 2xFG, 2xCT	 1479
Destroyer Squadron 5	  1xCE, 1xDD, 4xFG		  643
Destroyer Squadron 6	  8xDD, 4xFG			 1124
Destroyer Squadron 7	  1xCE, 4xDD			  619
Destroyer Squadron 8	  2xCL, 10xDD, 4xFG		 1658
Destroyer Squadron 9	  1xCL, 5xDD, 3xFG		  910
Destroyer Squadron 10	  6xDDH 			  786
Destroyer Squadron 11	  1xCE, 1xCL, 3xDD, 4xFG	 1010
Destroyer Squadron 12	  1xCL, 2xDD			  367
Destroyer Squadron 13	  1xCL, 4xDDH, 2xDD, 1xFG	  972
Destroyer Squadron 14	  2xCL, 1xCLE, 2xCVE, 4xFG	 1033 + ftrs
Destroyer Squadron 15	  3xCL, 4xDD, 2xCT		  983
Destroyer Squadron 16	  1xCE, 2xCL, 4xDD, 2xFG	 1115
Destroyer Squadron 17	  3xDD, 3xFG, 2xCT		  625
Destroyer Squadron 18	  1xCL, 4xDDH, 2xCVE, 1xCT	  974 + ftrs
Destroyer Squadron 19	  6xDDH 			  786
Destroyer Squadron 20	  1xCE, 1xCE+, 6xCL, 4xCT	 1606
Destroyer Squadron 21	  2xCL, 2xDD, 2xCT		  616
Destroyer Squadron 22	  1xCE+, 2xCL, 4xDD, 4xFG	 1279
Destroyer Squadron 23	  3xCL, 1xDD, 6xFG		 1987
Destroyer Squadron 24	  1xCLE, 2xDD, 2xFG, 4xCT	  695
Destroyer Squadron 25	  1xCE, 1xCL, 4xDD, 2xFG, 6xCT	 1194
Destroyer Squadron 26	  1xCl, 4xDD			  567
Destroyer Squadron 27	  2xCE, 2xCL, 4xDD, 2xFG	 1334
Destroyer Squadron 31	  1xCl, 6xDD, 10xCT		 1177
Destroyer Squadron 33	  4xCE, 4xCL, 2xDD, 2xFG	 1906
Destroyer Squadron 34	  1xCE, 1xCL, 2xDD		  586
Destroyer Squadron 35	  1xCE+, 1xCL, 4xDD		  788
Destroyer Squadron 36	  1xCL, 5xDD			  667
Destroyer Squadron 37	  1xCL, 1xCLE, 2xDD, 3xCVE, 2xFG 1007 + ftrs
Destroyer Squadron 38	  2xCE, 2xCE+, 4xCL, 3xDD, 2xFG  2010
Destroyer Squadron 41	  1xCL, 4xDD, 2xFG		  729
Destroyer Squadron 43	  1xCL, 2xDD			  367
Destroyer Squadron 44	  3xDD, 3xCVE			  609 + ftrs

   ** Cruiser-Destroyer Squadrons **

Designation		  Comprised of			 ~NPV
-----------		  ------------			 ----
Cruiser-DD Group 1	  3xCA, 1xCE, 1xCL, 4xFG	 1493
Cruiser-DD Group 2	  2xCA, 2xDD			  722
Cruiser-DD Group 3	  4xCA, 2xCE			 1482
Cruiser-DD Group 4	  1xCA, 1xCE+, 1xCL, 8xDD	 1449
Cruiser-DD Group 5	  3xCA, 1xCE+, 1xCL		 1171
Cruiser-DD Group 6	  1xBCN, 3xCA, 1xCM, 2xCE, 2xCL, 2530
Cruiser-DD Group 7	  2xCA, 1xCM, 1xCE, 3xCL, 3xDD	 1759
Cruiser-DD Group 8	  2xBC, 1xCE, 6xDD		 1535
Cruiser-DD Group 9	  1xCA, 1xCE+, 4xCL, 2xDD	 1350
Cruiser-DD Group 10	  1xCA, 1xCM, 1xCE, 4xDD, 2xFG	 1259
Cruiser-DD Group 11	  1xBCE, 2xCA, 2xCL, 4xDD	 1616
Cruiser-DD Group 12	  2xBCN-B, 1xCE, 1xCE+, 2xCL,	 1890
Cruiser-DD Group 13	  3xBC, 10xDD, 6xFG		 2560
Cruiser-DD Group 14	  3xCA, 3xDD, 2xFG		 1245
Cruiser-DD Group 15	  3xCA, 4xFG			 1107
Cruiser-DD Group 16	  2xBCN, 1xCE, 2xCL, 2xDD	 1469
Cruiser-DD Group 17	  2xCA, 1xCE, 1xCL, 4xFG	 1232
Cruiser-DD Group 18	  2xCA, 1xCE+, 1xCL, 2xDD, 2xCVE 1316 + ftrs
Cruiser-DD Group 19	  1xBCN, 1xCA, 1xCE, 3xDD, 3xFG  1381
Cruiser-DD Group 20	  2xBCN-B, 2xCA, 2xCE, 2xCL,	 2700
			    4xDDH,  2xDD, 4xFG
Cruiser-DD Group 21	  1xBCN-B, 1xCA, 2xCE, 4xDDH	 1581
Cruiser-DD Group 22	  2xCA, 2xCM, 1xCE+, 3xDD, 2xFG  1639
Cruiser-DD Group 23	  1xBCN, 2xCM, 2xCE, 3xDD, 2xCVE 1736 + ftrs
Cruiser-DD Group 24	  1xBCN, 1xCA, 1xCM, 1xCE,	 1598
			    3xDD, 3xFG
Cruiser-DD Group 25	  1xCA, 1xCE, 1xCE+, 3xDD	 1001

   ** Carrier Battlegroups **

Designation		  Comprised of			 ~NPV
-----------		  ------------			 ----
Ark Royal Battlegroup	  1xCV, 2xBCN, 2xCA, 2xCE+,	 3194 + ftrs
			    5xDD, 4xFG
Independence Battlegroup  1xCV, 2xCVL, 1xBDN, 2xBC,	 5510 + ftrs
			    4xCA, 2xCE, 1xCE+, 3xCL, 3xDD, 2xFG
Connestoga Battlegroup	  1xCV, 4xCA, 1xCE, 3xCL, 4xDD,  3220 + ftrs
			    4xFG, 2xScout
Hornet/Yorktown 	  2xCV, 2xCVL, 6xCA, 2xBCE,	 5870 + ftrs
     Battlegroup	    2xCE+, 2xCL, 3xDD, 2xFG
Intrepid Battlegroup	  1xCV, 1xBCN, 1xBC, 3xCA, 2xCE, 3685 + ftrs
			    2xCL, 4xDD, 4xFG
Agamemnon Battlegroup	  1xCV, 1xBDN, 2xCA, 3xCE+,	 2795 + ftrs
			    1xCL, 2xDD, 1xFG
Saratoga II/Matterhorn	  1xCV, 1xSDN, 1xBCN, 2xCA,	 3675 + ftrs
     Battlegroup	     2xCE, 3xCL, 2xDD, 4xFG, 2xScout
Enterprise Battlegroup	  1xCV, 1xCVL, 1xBDN, 1xBB,	 4983 + ftrs
			    1xBCE, 4xCA, 4xCE, 1xCL, 2xDD, 3xFG, 2xScout
Nimitz Battlegroup	  1xCV, 1xCVl, 4xCA, 2xCE+,	 3325 + ftrs
			    3xDD, 4xFG, 2xScout
Lexington Battlegroup	  1xCV, 1xBDN, 5xCA, 3xCE, 4xDD, 3890 + ftrs
			    4xFG, 2xScout
Forrestal Battlegroup	  1xCV, 2xCVL, 1xBDN, 2xBCN-B,	 4898 + ftrs
			    3xCA, 2xCE, 1xCL, 3xDD, 4xFG, 2xScout
Invincible/Vinson Massif  1xCV, 2xCVL, 1xSDN, 1xBCE,	 5260 + ftrs
     Battlegroup	    1xBC, 3xCA, 2xCE+, 2xCL, 4xDD, 3xFG, 2xScout
Prometheus Battlegroup	  1xCV, 2xBDN, 2xBCE, 3xBCN-B,	 5607 + ftrs
			    3xCA, 1xCE+, 2xCL, 4xDD, 4xCVE, 4xFG,

   ** Heavy Battle Squadrons **

Designation		  Comprised of			 ~NPV
-----------		  ------------			 ----
Valley Forge Group	  1xSDN, 4xBB, 2xCE		 2704 + ftrs
Normandy/Vistula	  2xSDN, 1xBDN, 2xBB, 4xCA,	 4488 + ftrs
     Group		    4xCE
Shiloh Group		  1xSDN, 2xBB, 2xCLE, 4xCL	 2291 + ftrs
Eiger/Denali Group	  2xSDN, 2xBDN, 2xBB, 2xBC,	 4413 + ftrs
Richmond Group		  1xSDN, 3xBDN, 2xBB, 1xBCE	 3230 + ftrs
Antietam Group		  1xSDN, 3xBB, 3xBC, 1xBCN,	 4168 + ftrs
Agincourt Group 	  1xSDN, 3xBDN, 4xBB, 2xCA	 4204 + ftrs
Annapurna Group 	  1xSDN, 2xBCN-B, 3xBB		 2894 + ftrs


NAC Notes:
o assuming Heavy Frigate for FGs; otherwise -20 pts per standard frigate
o BCE: drop SMLs and 1xFireCon, 1 aft arc off each Class-3, add 2xADFC,
    1xClass-2 (3-arc), 5xPDS, 1xArmour; +2 pts	-  AEGIS CLASS
o BCN: drop SMLs, add Needle Beam, 3-arc P-torp, 1xPDS; 0 pts  - 
o BCN-B: drop Needle Beam, add 1xClass-2 (3-arc); 0 pts
o CM: drop ADFC, add 2 arcs to Class-3; -2 pts	-  SENECA CLASS
o DDH: Mass 40, Ave Hull, Thrust-6, 4xClass-2 (FP/F/FS), FireCon, 1xPDS,
    131 pts  -	TUFFLEY CLASS
o CVE: Mass 30, Weak Hull, Thrust-6, 1x Hangar Bay, 2x PDS, 1x Armour;
    pts  -  ZEPHYR CLASS  (yes, based on Weber's "Insurrection" tin-can
o CLE: drop off-center Class-2 batts, add 1x ADFC & 2x PDS; +2 pts  - 
o CE+: an improved CE - drop p-torp, add 1xADFC, 2xPDS; +2 pts	- 

NAC Notes II:
o Purpose of this roster is to allow for quick pick-up games, using a
  force with a given point value.

o It is *assumed*, unless otherwise noted, that the ships assigned to a
  Group or Squadron are essentially FleetBook ships or a variant thereof
  variants may need to have their point values checked). This is just
for ease
  of play so others can use this roster if they so desire.

o CLs and CEs were included in Destroyer Squadrons as CLs are seen as
  Destroyers (or Destroyer Leaders, or 'capital ship' destroyers), and
  CEs were included to offer some anti-missile/anti-fighter protection
  some squadrons. As not all squadrons would necessarily be sent to
  prone to fighter/missile attacks, not all squadrons have been assigned
  CE (or grouping of CEs).

o BCs were given to Cruiers-Destroyer groups as BCs are seen as Command
  Cruisers or 'capital ship' cruisers ('cruiser leaders'?). 

o Just because a given Group or Squadron is assigned as it is, this does
  preclude the commander of the force from having the option of
  his forces as the situation requires (thus Destroyer Squardon 41,
  consists of 1xCL, 4xDD, 2xFG, is sent to a system to investigate
  raider activity in the region; commander of the force could opt to
  the group up in any way that is best seen fit, so a given scenario may
  include 2xDD and 2xFG vs a raider force; this would still be Destroyer
  Squadron 41, but a subgroup of the squadron).

Ship Design Notes:

BCE - After a few devastating skirmishes with the FSE, it was realized
that the
FURIOUS CE didn't always offer sufficient protection (and in fact as
would be
later learned, wasn't anywhere near as good an anti-fighter/missile
platform as
the NAC had hoped; too many other roles it was trying to fill), so for
fleet protection a number of MAJESTIC hulls were re-designed to be
vessels. The basic hull structure remained the same, just the internal
configuration and capabilities changed. This design proved to be highly
effective for anti-fighter and anti-missile operations - and it still
a significant punch for ship-to-ship combat. While it could survive
longer than
a VANDENBURG CA against Ships-of-the-Line, it really was not intended to
head-to-head with dreadnoughts.

BCN - in order to provide for independent operations that were below the
purview of BBs, yet would put a CA in over its head, the NAC came up
with a
non-ammo using BC design, created to longer-duration missions. The
design, shown here, mounted a Needle Beam for disabling shots. It would
learned through experience that this weapon was little-used in combat,
many crews grew lax about its upkeep during standard maintenance

BCN-B - a variant to the BCN, which swaps out the Needle Beam for a
Class-2 battery, giving it just that much more 'punch' power. Crews of
BCN-Bs were a much happier lot in combat than those of the BCNs.

CLE - in an effort to save some costs, the NAC commissioned a series of
cruiser escorts to supplement the FURIOUS CEs in the fleet. They ended
proving to be slightly more capable than the FURIOUS CEs, but they also
did not
have the armor levels of their cousins (ie, no armor!) Thus while they
to be more effective in the anti-fighter/missile role, they also proved
to be a
little more fragile in ship-to-ship action. Retaining the level-1 screen
help against beam attacks, though, and it is hoped that the high-thrust
of the CLE will also insure its survivability.

CE+ - after studying the ESU's highly effective 'defense close-support'
of the BEIJING/B CEs, the NAC decided to pull some of the currently
construction FURIOUS CEs and redesign them for a more specialized
anti-fighter/missile role. Thus was born the FURIOUS II, which could now
offer anti-fighter/missile protection to two seperate ships, or
withering protective fire for one ship. By losing the pulse torpedo, it
the extra punch the original FURIOUS class had, but this was not a large
detriment as the restricted arc of the pulse torpedo (and the Class-3
did not always allow it to come into play in ship-to-ship combat
actions. As it
is, the Class-3 battery doesn't always come into play, either. Some
Designers have suggested replacing the Class-3 battery with either 4
more PDS
arrays, or a couple of offset Class-2 batteries, or a combination of
both. So
far only two FURIOUS IIs currently under construction have been slated
to drop
their Class-3 batteries in lieu of another suite of PDS'. They will be
to the ENTERPRISE Carrier Battlegroup (replacing the current 4 CEs in
roster) in order to judge their effectiveness in combat trials. Most CE+
were assigned to Carrier Battlegroups, with a number of others being
in the Cruiser-Destroyer Groups and some in the Destroyer Squadrons on
experimental basis (these DD Squadrons would be sent into areas prone to
probability of encountering enemy fighters/missiles). None have been
directly to Heavy Battle Squadrons. Usually an HBS will gain CE+
from an accompanying Cruiser-Destroyer Group.

CM - with the FURIOUS CE being an all-around ship that did not quite
make it
for what it was designed for, BuShips came up with a specific
cruiser using the CE hull. This cruiser dropped all pretense at being an
cruiser by losing the ADFC, and to expand it's combat capabilities, the
battery arc was expanded to become a 3-arc battery. While not as fast at
VANDENBURG CAs, this new design has proven itself capable in combat

DDH - A specialized heavy/attack destroyer, the TUFFLEYs were designed
operate in packs, much like wolves Their tactics evolved to the point
they acted like extra-huge fighter squadrons. They generally require
ships, though, in most situations. They do not function well in
operations. Against fighters and missiles they have limited defenses.

CVE - Looking for a cheap way to deliver fighters to a theater of
without dedicating one of the specialized carriers or dreadnought ships,
NAC came up with these 'tin can' carriers. These are generally assigned
Destroyer Squadrons or Cruiser-Destroyer Groups where having a
dreadnought or
one of the specialized carriers would be overkill, but yet where some
of fighters is desireable. As these ships look identical to the
DDs, it generally is impossible for an enemy to determine which is which
either the ship in question fires weapons or launches fighters. This has
more than a few raiders and skirmish instigators a surprise when a
couple of
'lowly' destroyers suddenly disgorge a flight of fighters. Of course
ships were not meant to stand up there with the TICONDEROGAs, so an
enemy may
figure out they are CVEs by their hanging back, and take appropriate

Tactical Doctrines

Heavy Battlegroups are rarely sent out unless Heavy Power is needed for
operation, and then when they are, they are often accompanied by at
least one
or two Cruiser-Destroyer Groups, and a few Destroyer Squadrons as
escort. Two
Heavy Battlegroups (the AGINCOURT and ANNAPURNA Groups), when sent to
with high probabilities of encountering fighters or missiles, will have
assigned to them either several anti-fighter/missile escort ships, or
Cruiser-Destroyer Groups which have sufficient anti-fighter/missile

Carrier Battlegroups are generally well-rounded enough to operate in
independent operations, with no definite need for escorting
Groups or Destroyer Squadrons, but often one or two will be assigned if
are available (the NAC Naval Command is rather loathe to risk losing
prize carriers if it can be prevented).

Cruiser-Destroyer Groups are sent on a wide variety of missions:
diplomatic escort duty, 'show of force/flag', inner system patrol,
They will be assigned to accompany Heavy Battle groups in the event of
fleet maneuvers and/or actions.

Destroyer Squadrons are sent on an even wider variety of missions than
Cruiser-Destroyer Groups. They are sent to areas where cruisers would be
considered a 'bit much' or overkill, to general patrol duties, general
duties, scouting duties, frontier patrol tours, etc. They are often
to escort Heavy Battlegroups in major fleet actions.

In all groups/squadrons ships may be sent out on an individual basis,
on the mission (see Notes II, above). No group/squadron is restricted to
together for a given scenario/game. This is just the command the ships
assigned to.


Prev: Re: EG Appearance Next: Re: NI stealth project