Prev: Military and Civilian Jump Drives Next: Re: UNSC fleet carrier design

[FT] UNSC design

From: "Paul Radford" <paulradford@i...>
Date: Thu, 21 Sep 2000 21:14:39 +0100
Subject: [FT] UNSC design

>> Not *my* UN committee!  ;-)
>> Mk

Nor mine!

>Do you have any UN designs, I'd be interested in having a look, I
>found many (which is why I'm designing my own - see 'lazy' comment
>above!) since starting this project I've found some on Paul Radford's

Thanks for the plug! :)

>Under his campaign section - they are a bit different, and he's fitted
>some with Railguns (like K-guns, but with a different SSD symbol).

The ssd symbol represents the magnetic guides for the kinetic penetrator
also indicates the fire arc.

In retrospect, having done these designs, i was kind of conforming to
physical miniatures having what looks to be something that could be
described as a spinal mount. I wouldn't normally do something like that
especially using perceived launch doors to determine how many fighter
a ship carries. There are no game mechanics to describe how fighters are
launched other than each fighter bay can launch its group in a single
Is this accomplished from a single rapidly recycling launch tube or does
each fighter have its own door? In game turns, it doesn't really matter.
Everyone, including myself seems to like the UNSC miniature designs but
really, any official ssds would require something new or different in
that they are not entirely based upon B1-4 's, P-torps and SMLs like FB1
ships. If by design, or by artistic license, the miniatures really do
suggest spinal mount.

The main question is what do they represent? Something like a wave gun?
"big laser" weapon? A plasma bolt "cannon"?

New weapons need new rules and to hope that my designs could get some
of acceptance, i went with something that already exsists and has been
playtested extensively (unlike perhaps the wave gun or nova cannon
<shudder!>). I thought maybe a kinetic enregy rail gun and as such
based them on K-guns. Equally, i could have thought plasma bolt
K-gun arrived in my brain first.

Experience has taught many of us that thrust 4 ships really are not the
for single arc weapons (I get the impression that NAC ssds are quite
unpopular) but where Tuffleyverse designs are concerned, doctrine is
important. IMHO i think this is a good thing. If you don't like them
you don't use them or redesign them. Real world navies have doctrines
tend to adhere to based upon historical and geographical experience. The
Chinese navy for example is based upon littoral and coastal operations
little experience of deep water operations. Until about 10 years ago
(apologies if i got this time scale wrong), the US Navy was almost the
opposite to this. Anyway, i digress.

So, while not completely effective, a class 3 rail gun is on average,
same as a p-torp with regards to damage it can cause. A class 4 rail gun
more effective. Cost effectivness in terms of mass and points cost is
addressed here. If the UNSC ships were to have a thrust of 6, then their
single arc effectiveness would increase.

However, what could be done to make a rail gun, something a little
from a k-gun and not just a copy. Here is my suggestion. Alternate
ammunition types.

-KP (Kinetic Penetrator) are a sheathed kinetic penetrator similar to
how i
imagine K-gun rounds to be, and as such inflict damage in the same way

-KPI (Kinetic Penetrator,  Incendiary) are a penetrative round designed
penetrate the hull, vapourising into directed plasma. This could ignite
very structure of the ship (pyphoric effect) and create significant
overpressure capable of blowing out whole hull sections. In game terms,
they would damage equal to rail gun class. Each subsequent turn, the
will take two points of damage from the spreading incendiary effect
until it
is dealt wth by damage control teams (as in the same way that Sa'Vasku
pods are dealt with).

Again, i am not speculating on costs in terms of mass and points.
the mass could be increased by 1 to cover the cost of alternate types?



"Oh my god! They've summoned Cthulhu! You bastards!

Web Pages:

ICQ#: 84199462

Prev: Military and Civilian Jump Drives Next: Re: UNSC fleet carrier design