Starting War Fleet Advice Wanted

Home of SOLAR STARFIRE, 6th edition, rules based on the upcoming history of the Terran Solar Union.

Moderators: SDS Members, SDS Owner

Forum rules
1. Nothing obscene.
2. No advertising or spamming.
3. No personal information. Mostly aimed at the posting of OTHER people's information.
4. No flame wars. We encourage debate, but it becomes a flame when insults fly and tempers flare.

Try to stick with the forum's topic. Threads that belong to another forum will be moved to that forum.

Re: Starting War Fleet Advice Wanted

Postby Lomn on Thu 07 Feb 2019 09:39

Cralis wrote:In version 6.02 the SS still requires a minimum of 1 Q system (for command & control), even though the SY itself does not require any additional life support or crew quarters. In the next version we are going to remove that requirement for any SS that contains only SY.
If that's the intent, I would suggest revising H1.02, because I don't think it's actually written that way (based on how the rule evolved from Ultra). BLUF: nothing in the "you better have Q" text ever appears to say "(minimum 1)". This appears to be an Ultra carryover because H used to be mandatory and used to require Q coverage, thus being an implicit "minimum 1".

H1.02, Required Systems: "There are a few systems that are essential for every large unit. Primarily these systems are life support (quarters), maintenance storage, and engines." So, there's our H/Q/I checklist. But while the header says "required", the text does not. And "essential" is slippery. I don't think there's any binding text in this paragraph.

H1.02.3, Engines: "Every ship...." OK, right, BS/AF don't have engines as discrete systems on the Control Sheet (SS/PDC don't have engines at all; note that this rule should be updated to match H1.06.3 as "no engines on SS") No problem. I note this here to highlight the "slippery" point re: "essential" above.

H1.02.2, Maintenance Storage: "Every large unit has enough inherent storage...." Here's change impact 1 from Ultra: maintenance storage systems, in the sense of things on the Control Sheet, are not required. The required component is integral to everything else, and the explicit systems are optional. So, ditto the point about "essential".

H1.02.1, Life Support and Quarters (Q): "Every large unit requires enough Q systems [AppAA-Q] to provide to every HS of the ship except for: (SY), (SYM), (MS), H, and A systems." Here's change impact 2 from Ultra: H was mandatory, and H wasn't in this exempted list, so the mandatory H in turn required a mandatory Q. But now twofold, H isn't mandatory and it doesn't require Q coverage either. A SS that is strictly (SY)x10 is a large unit with enough Q systems to provide Q coverage to every non-(SY) HS of the unit. This meets the text of H1.02.1.

H1.06.3, Specific Large Unit Types - Space Stations: "SS only require Q". OK, but how much? We've answered that for the starting shipyard above: 0. This text (as well as that for bases and AFs in the parallel sections) appears to be intended to contrast with H1.06.1: SS are not ships and do not require engines. But per the above, this is clarification: engines are only required by H1.02.3, and that para is specific to ships.

OK, what about other text? AppAA.Q has the AA.Q.02.2-.4 (note that there are two AA.Q.2.03s; one should be incremented). Insufficient, Failing, and No Life Support. Does the unit have an active Q or not. Arguably, the shipyard has no Q and drops straight to No Life Support. But AA.Q.02.1, Normal Life Support comes before all that: "when the SC on a unit is equal to or below the life support capacity of the unit." The shipyard meets this criteria due to the intrinsic capacity of the (SY).

Then, D.04.5, Losing the Bridge: "A unit losing its last operable quarter receives [combat effects]...." OK. This space station core is bridgeless. I personally as a player don't care; all the military stuff is going in a module, which will need Q, and so I won't care that my (SY) systems have negative to-hit, etc. D6.03.1 says that the SS modules are independent of all of the other components, so they won't pick up the core's bridge penalty. But even if that's not intended (D6.03.11 has a "loss of command" reference re: the core that doesn't map properly), this is in the realm of pragmatic rather than required.

---

So, concluding, all of the rule text I can find that speaks to Q as a requirement is premised on the absolute presence of other systems that require Q support -- not the mandated presence of Q itself. This was a one-to-one mapping in Ultra, but is not in Solar. If units have an absolute requirement for Q, then that should be explicitly stated, probably in H1.02.1 (with the exception for the starting SS-(SY) carved out if desired).

This does strike parallels with prior theorycrafting that I think we've done like "what if I build a BS that's just H for a maintenance depot" -- per the same H1 paragraphs above, no Q required, because H doesn't need crew. I think the fix, though, ought to be clarifying that (SY)/(SYM)/(MS) are systems that provide Q capacity, such that the requirement traces as follows:
  • Every large unit must have an SC of at least 1 (thus handling the H-only BS case)
  • Every large unit must provide enough life support for its SC [PDC life support requirements are fully intrinsic and require no standalone systems]
  • Q are life-support-providing systems that provide life support equal to AppAA.Q
  • (SY), (SYM), and (MS) are life-support-providing systems that provide life support equal to their SC
  • Per F3.01, H and A systems do not have SC and therefore do not require life support
  • AppAA.Q.02.x changes "active Q" to "active life-support-providing system, including (SY), (SYM), and (MS)"
  • AppAA.Q should probably clarify that (LQv) is not a life-support-providing system
  • D.x stays the same; (SY), etc, do not count as bridges -- but possibly make that explicit
Done this way, you don't need a specific carve-out for the starting shipyard, and you also allow a player to build an (MS)-only SS, or an (SYM)-only BS, or an (SY)-only AF. Do you want to allow those construction facility configurations? Well, the BS and AF are hideously vulnerable. I'd let players build them.
User avatar
Lomn
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral
 
Posts: 519
Joined: Tue 30 Oct 2012 08:19
Location: MSFC, Alabama

Re: Starting War Fleet Advice Wanted

Postby SCC on Thu 07 Feb 2019 17:50

@Cralis you'll need to update Section GG as that's got a couple of examples where a NPR gets (0) HQa(SY) (0/0) when they regain spaceflight.

Now for a bit of build advice, which is better, an extra Shield (or maybe armor) systems, Hs and Mgs combo or Mg for a scout missile destroyer?
SCC
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral
 
Posts: 791
Joined: Fri 08 Mar 2013 15:11

Re: Starting War Fleet Advice Wanted

Postby Lomn on Thu 07 Feb 2019 20:17

SCC wrote:Now for a bit of build advice, which is better, an extra Shield (or maybe armor) systems, Hs and Mgs combo or Mg for a scout missile destroyer?
I would probably drop the Mg option. I figure early destroyers are not big enough to actually survive 20-turn missile exchanges in the battle line and not fast enough to hold the range open for 20-turn exchanges at distance, so a full Mg is probably overkill. Mgs + Hs buys you an extra HTK for minimal money versus the Mg, and probably still has enough ammo.

S/A vs Mgs+Hs gets into the economics. Are you willing to pay that additional premium for the HTK and ammo? Harder to say. The other consideration: do you think you'll be able to take advantage of that Hs for long-range cruises or post-battle repair rolls? If so, go Mgs+Hs, particularly as an alternative to a full H somewhere.
User avatar
Lomn
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral
 
Posts: 519
Joined: Tue 30 Oct 2012 08:19
Location: MSFC, Alabama

Re: Starting War Fleet Advice Wanted

Postby Cralis on Thu 07 Feb 2019 23:38

SCC wrote:@Cralis you'll need to update Section GG as that's got a couple of examples where a NPR gets (0) HQa(SY) (0/0) when they regain spaceflight.


That's already been flagged for change due to the change.

Now for a bit of build advice, which is better, an extra Shield (or maybe armor) systems, Hs and Mgs combo or Mg for a scout missile destroyer?


Remember that the missile systems contain 10 turns of munitions, the magazines are for extra rounds. But the Hs would give your ships a bonus to make jury-rigging rolls. The shield, of course, would give it an extra HTK that can regenerate between combats. It's just what you want the most.
Image
User avatar
Cralis
SDS Member
SDS Member
 
Posts: 11014
Joined: Tue 30 Jun 2009 19:27
Location: Oregon, USA

Re: Starting War Fleet Advice Wanted

Postby SCC on Fri 08 Feb 2019 00:57

@Lomn, I trying to get the best value for my money (see below for an interesting thought)

@Cralis I remembered about the 10 free shoots.

Just had a weird thought: Ammunition Colliers could make an interesting addition to the Survey Fund units and match up well as both uses of FT increase the Maintenance %

And what fund do I normally pay for Ammunition Colliers and Ammunition Depots? They generally aren't armed but definitely fit the Battle Fund.
SCC
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral
 
Posts: 791
Joined: Fri 08 Mar 2013 15:11

Re: Starting War Fleet Advice Wanted

Postby SCC on Tue 12 Feb 2019 01:23

So I've crunched the numbers some and revised my fleet design.

6 of these:
Sling-Class Missile Destroyer 30HS/21TS
[2] Sx4 Ax4 Xa (Ica) Qa Ya (Ica) Rax3 (Ica) Qa [3]
Trg: 1 Cost: 343/51.5 HTK: 18 Sx4, Ax4, Rax3

2 of these:
Hive-Class Planetary Survey Ship 12HS/7TS
[2] {(Bsa)x8} Xa Qa (Ica) [3]
Cost: 194.2/29.2 HTK: 11

42 of these:
Trailblazer-Class Survey Ship 12HS/9TS
[2] S Ax2 Xa La H (Ica) Qa [3]
Trg: 1 Cost: 128.2/19.3 HTK: 8 S Ax2 La

3 of these:
Fireworks-class Munitions Transport 12HS/7TS
[2] Mgx6 H Qa Xa H (Ica) [3]
Cost 146/21.9 HTK: 11 Mgx6

And finally 1 of these:
Finder-class Survey Vessel
[2] Xa H Qa (Ica) [4]
Cost 64.5/9.7 HTK: 4

Total cost: 8,333.3, or exactly my budget, I am the man!
SCC
Vice Admiral
Vice Admiral
 
Posts: 791
Joined: Fri 08 Mar 2013 15:11

Re: Starting War Fleet Advice Wanted

Postby krenshala on Tue 12 Feb 2019 18:55

I know, I'm a week late to this party ... but.

K2.05.4 is an optional rule allowing you to combine Survey and War Fleet funds, giving you 10k MCr for building ships. The only limitation is no more than 5k MCr of non-X using ships, and no more than 60 X equipped ships.
-- krenshala
None survive the harvest!

Yeah, I'm finally back (again)! Sometimes, life (and 13yo son's) don't leave you time to play SF and earn a paycheck. :/

No, really! Matt actually made me an admin here!
krenshala
SDS Member
SDS Member
 
Posts: 2706
Joined: Thu 02 Jul 2009 17:13
Location: Austin TX, NorAm, Sol III

Previous

Return to Solar Starfire

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest