|
|
|
 |

June 18th, 2003, 10:07 PM
|
 |
Shrapnel Fanatic
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Southern CA, USA
Posts: 18,394
Thanks: 0
Thanked 12 Times in 10 Posts
|
|
Re: Is "BattleCruiser" a relative size? -- discussion
As I predicted, noone is arguing that BC has to be 600 kT. 
|

June 18th, 2003, 10:19 PM
|
 |
Major General
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 2,174
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Is "BattleCruiser" a relative size? -- discussion
I suppose that technically the size is arbitrary rather than relative.
__________________
Of course, by the time I finish this post, it will already be obsolete. C'est la vie.
|

June 18th, 2003, 10:20 PM
|
 |
General
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Indiana
Posts: 3,229
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Is "BattleCruiser" a relative size? -- discussion
__________________
Ragnarok - Hevordian Story Thread
-------------------
I think...therefore I am confused.
They were armed. With guns, said Omari.
Canadians. With guns. And a warship. What is this world coming to?
The dreaded derelict dwelling two ton devil bunny!
Every ship can be a minesweeper... Once
|

June 18th, 2003, 10:30 PM
|
 |
General
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Cincinnati, Ohio, USA
Posts: 4,547
Thanks: 1
Thanked 7 Times in 5 Posts
|
|
Re: Is "BattleCruiser" a relative size? -- discussion
Quote:
Originally posted by Wanderer:
In 1805, battleships were still called 'ships of the line' and displaced roughly 2,000 tons. In 1916 the average displacement was roughly 25,000 tons and by 1945 there were battleships displacing almost 80,000 tons. To an SE4 race that's only discovered 200kT ships, 200kT probably looks like a battleship, not a frigate.
|
Wow... in 140 years, what was called a "battleship" got 40 times bigger...
That said, I like Soulfisher's original suggestion of ships getting gradually bigger over time - something like this stripped-down Version of the tech tree might work:
Tech Level 1
Escort I - 100 kT
Cruiser I - 400 kT
Battleship I - 1000 kT
Tech Level 2
Escort II - 120 kT
Cruiser II - 480 kT
Battleship II - 1200 kT
Tech Level 3
Escort III - 150 kT
Cruiser III - 600 kT
Battleship III - 1500 kT
etc.
where each hull size would maintain its maximum engines and other characteristics even as it gets larger and larger...
Oh, and I like SJ's proposal for maintenance costs... now all we have to do is bug Aaron to make maintenance independent of construction cost in SE5! 
__________________
The Ed draws near! What dost thou deaux?
|

June 18th, 2003, 10:36 PM
|
 |
Shrapnel Fanatic
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Southern CA, USA
Posts: 18,394
Thanks: 0
Thanked 12 Times in 10 Posts
|
|
Re: Is "BattleCruiser" a relative size? -- discussion
Too bad you can't make vehicle sizes obselete. 
|

June 18th, 2003, 10:42 PM
|
 |
General
|
|
Join Date: Mar 2002
Location: Indiana
Posts: 3,229
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Is "BattleCruiser" a relative size? -- discussion
Quote:
Originally posted by Imperator Fyron:
Too bad you can't make vehicle sizes obselete.
|
I'm sure that's been posted in the wish list for SEV then, right? If not it should be. This would open up some more modding possibilities.
__________________
Ragnarok - Hevordian Story Thread
-------------------
I think...therefore I am confused.
They were armed. With guns, said Omari.
Canadians. With guns. And a warship. What is this world coming to?
The dreaded derelict dwelling two ton devil bunny!
Every ship can be a minesweeper... Once
|

June 18th, 2003, 10:42 PM
|
 |
Captain
|
|
Join Date: Oct 2002
Location: Brazil
Posts: 827
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Is "BattleCruiser" a relative size? -- discussion
The reason why aircraft carriers have ruled the seas since WWII is that seagoing ships are vulnerable to torpedoes.
Before the carrier battles in the Pacific, the rationale for building bigger ships was that a bigger ship could carry bigger guns, which would have a longer range and therefore be able to destroy a smaller ship before its guns were able to fire. Torpedo boats changed all that, because they could harm a large ship and were too manoeuverable to be tracked by the big guns.
So a battleship would be surrounded by destroyers, which would fire at any incoming torpedo boats before they could attack the main ship.
Airplanes were a new variation on the torpedo boat concept, and they were so successful that they rendered the battleship obsolete. The modern counter for them is the Aegis cruiser.
So if you want a game universe in which carriers rule the spacelanes, you need a sci-fi equivalent for torpedoes, which is small enough to be carried aboard your starfighters. The Star Wars universe has this, which is not surprising since the concept behind SW space battles has always been 'WWII in space'.
__________________
Have you ever had... the sudden feeling... that God is out to GET YOU?
Well, my girl dumped me and I'm stuck with the raftmates from Hell in the middle of the sea and... what was the question again???
|
Thread Tools |
|
Display Modes |
Hybrid Mode
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
|
|