Re: [FT\DS2] Fleet and Army sizes for games

John Leary wrote:
> 
> --- Tony Francis <tony.francis@kuju.com> wrote:
> ...Snip...
> > Do you charge a points premium for reconfigurable
> > ships ? In campaign terms they
> > have to be more valuable, mass-for-mass, than an
> > equivalent sized ship of fixed
> > design.
> 
> IMHO a 'reconfigurable' ship must be bought as
> well as all the modules the ship can 'morf'
> into.   In a campaign the modules must sit
> somewhere and are useless mass waiting to
> be taken by the enemy, unless they are
> cargo on a freighter somewhere, which
> costs additional points.
>      These are probably not cost effective
> if one looks at a stratigic implication of
> spending lots on points on optional (and
> unusable) modules or buying non-combat
> support ships to carry them around so the
> enemy does not capture them.
> 
Reconfigurable warships should be more expensive than standard
because of the increased access points needed in the wiring,cabling,
ducting,plumbing and structural systems to allow them to be
configurable.
The reconfigurable ship is more fragile because it is designed to come
apart.	Lastly, the reconfigurable ship is less reliable because there
are many more things to go wrong, but they are easier to fix because
of all that accessability.

So a reconfigurable hull is massx2 instead of massx1, must set
aside 10% of mass for accessways/connection points, and add 1 to the
die for threshold and damage control rolls.

There is a reason that no wet navy has tried this, even though it is
nice on paper.