Re: Outrim Coalition

From: "Oerjan Ohlson" <oerjan.ohlson@telia.com>

> I like the ORC background, but... if their main enemy is supposed to
be
the
> Kra'Vak, weak hulls and heavy screens is not a very sensible design
> doctrine, like.

a) The ORC has to make do with what it can get.
b) You're right - it's difficult to see how the designs could be worse
in terms of survivability vs the KV. (OK, if they replaced 50% of their
fragile hull with armour it would be worse. Worse still if 99%. Worse
still
if
they only 1 hull box and no armour. I meant "difficult to see how a
relatively
sane design could be worse". So there.<g>)
c) OTOH the firing arcs are unmatched, even by the OU in its dreams<g>.
This
makes their weaponry rather good against KV in cinematic.Enough to
overcome
their weakness in defence? Dunno. Unlikely. They have good arcs, not
great
weapons power.

> OTOH, if you put them on the Phalon border instead, the designs make a
lot
> more sense. It'd also make their general volume of space a
> not-too-illogical place to withdraw warships from during the Xeno war
> (especially in 2193)... and Phalons being what they are, withdrawing
the
> human warships means that the colonies would've had to fight for their
> lives anyway :-/

Very good idea. Shall we just say that the *surviving* ORC are now
pretty
much
all facing the Phalons, the ones facing the KV having either been vaped
(due
to
having sub-optimal ships) or driven out?

> >Eta Cassiopiae Strike Cruiser (Actual Mass ~80)
>
> Only seems to use 45 of its "48" Mass:

> Optimising it gives Mass 42, NPV 144.

Correct. Cut n Paste error, I was using a spreadsheet and didn't wipe
some
costed extra arcs from weapons that didn't exist. Thanks for the
correction.
Maybe I'd better make the Actual Mass ~75 then.

You're right about the firing arcs of the torps BTW - FP,F and F,FS

The firing arcs for the Battleship are AP,FP,F x 2 and F,FS,AS x 2 BTW.

These designs are taken straight from FT2 and MT, a straight translation
as
best I could with no attempt at optimisation. To make them rather more
like
a
conventional FB1 design, and probably more effective, you'd have to add
20%
of
hull value as armour, so 12 hull => 12 hull, 3 armour, and increase
mass/cost
accordingly. As it is, they're eggshells armed with rapiers (rather than
hammers).

Conversion principles:

FT2: 90' forward firing arcs -> FB1: 120' FP/F and F/FS if 2 of em, else
180' FP/F/FS
FT2: 270' firing arcs -> FB1: 300' (or 360' if 300' isn't possible. eg
Class-1, Class-2)
FT2: ADAF-> FB1: PDS+ADFC
FT2: 180' Forward-left -> FB1: AS/FS/F
FT2: 180' Forward-right -> FB1: F/FP/AP