Squadron Bay question and maybe house rule opinions

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: Squadron Bay question and maybe house rule opinions

Postby Ged on Thu 09 Aug 2018 13:32

Our game up here in Alaska has progressed to the point where carriers and GB/FQ are about make their debut on the hex-map (SL5-SL6). As a player who has only recently discovered Solar Starfire, I'd like to express how much I appreciate AlexanderKnight's questions and the forum member's thorough answers pertaining to carrier design and Smcft logistics.

Like AlexanderKnight, I too thought that BL.02 permitted carriers to support squadrons equal to the number of hangers +1 in the BL (excluding XOL). The analogy I concocted to convince myself was that of a semi-automatic pistol with a 10-round magazine +1 in the chamber (11 rounds total).

I admittedly overlooked G1.01.1 but the situation described does differ slightly from that presented in BL.02. Applying both rules simultaneously implies that a carrier can, during extreme circumstances, haul squadrons equal to twice its available hangers plus 1 squadron per BL. I understand that squadron functionality will be severely impeded during such an arrangement, but its a good start in defining the boundaries.
Ged
Lieutenant JG
Lieutenant JG
 
Posts: 16
Joined: Mon 18 Jun 2018 00:27
Location: Anchorage Alaska

Re: Squadron Bay question and maybe house rule opinions

Postby Cralis on Thu 09 Aug 2018 15:00

LesMasters wrote:I should have written (BL) rather than "launch bay" (though that is what they are called in the Solar rules).


Oh my apologies, I thought you were saying that the launch bays were part of the hangar like they are in older rules.

And I really should have checked USF first, I now have a nagging feeling it doesn’t have launchers in the hangar bays either.

...is probably intended to emphasise the fact that this use of (BL) to "store" homeless strays is an emergency situation, and the fact that you have some hard choices to make: either abandon any craft (and their crews) in excess of your surviving carrying capacity, or block (or at least seriously impede) the relaunch of any craft you do have in hangar bays (and which can be rearmed, etc.).

In other words, the extra squadron(s) would be carried in the same way as those landed due to lack of capacity elsewhere. BL.02 does imply that these additional craft are held in the (BL) itself.


What I quoted from your previous post is spot on. You are correct, in an emergency a squadron or small craft can occupy the BL, but it cannot be rearmed or refueled, and the BL cannot launch or land anything else while occupied. I didn’t mention it because I didn’t have anything to add :)

I think maybe he is confusing that BL is not tied to a specific hangar. It can launch or land craft from any hangar or boat bay.
Image
User avatar
Cralis
SDS Member
SDS Member
 
Posts: 10677
Joined: Tue 30 Jun 2009 19:27
Location: Oregon, USA

Re: Squadron Bay question and maybe house rule opinions

Postby LesMasters on Fri 10 Aug 2018 05:50

Hi, Cralis

I think we may be talking at cross-purposes here. I'll reiterate my original proposition.
1. Prior to battle, a carrier has its full complement of fighters stored (as per normal procedure) in its shuttle bays (where they can be loaded and armed as and when required);
2. It then picks up one additional squadron per (BL), which it "stores" in the (BL) (as per BL.02). These squadrons were armed and fuelled elsewhere (presumably at the home base), so they won't need loading/arming aboard the carrier.

The proposition was that it would carry these extra shuttles (in the (BL)) until they were launched into combat. This could be a considerable period of time, so my only addition here is recognition of BL.02.1 - the carrier would need sufficient life support for the extra crews.

Apologies for this: I'm not sure if you're misreading what I said, or I'm misreading you.

I did check out G1.01.1 but wasn't taken by it. It reminded me of childhood car journeys where one of the other passengers needed constant toilet breaks.

Admiral of the Fleet (by now virulent purple in the face, and about to explode): "Captain Smythe.. Who's idea was it to try and squeeze two squadrons into one bay to increase firepower?"
Captain Smythe (backing off to the other side of the Bridge): "Erm... you did, Admiral... Sir..." (Prepares to duck.)

Les
LesMasters
Captain
Captain
 
Posts: 193
Joined: Mon 30 Nov 2009 12:26

Re: Squadron Bay question and maybe house rule opinions

Postby Cralis on Fri 10 Aug 2018 11:51

LesMasters wrote:I think we may be talking at cross-purposes here. I'll reiterate my original proposition.


I addressed your proposal by pointing out the overcrowding of squadrons is covered under G1.01.1... technically your proposal falls under the golden rule: if it doesn’t say that you can, then you cannot. And the rules don’t say that you can park craft in BL in non-emergency situations.

1. Prior to battle, a carrier has its full complement of fighters stored (as per normal procedure) in its shuttle bays (where they can be loaded and armed as and when required);
2. It then picks up one additional squadron per (BL), which it "stores" in the (BL) (as per BL.02). These squadrons were armed and fuelled elsewhere (presumably at the home base), so they won't need loading/arming aboard the carrier.


You do realize XOL serves this purpose already?

Even if the rules allowed this, it will help you only as
much as you have BL. Most carriers won’t have a lot of BL because they require as much space as a hangar bay. But let’s think about it for a moment.

The proposition was that it would carry these extra shuttles (in the (BL)) until they were launched into combat. This could be a considerable period of time, so my only addition here is reecognition of BL.02.1 - the carrier would need sufficient life support for the extra crews.


You won’t be doing this long term because you can’t rearm, refuel, repair... and thus you cannot provide maintenance. L7.02 says that squadrons out of maintenance lose 10 DP per month. I’d also apply L7.04 because this is an intentional act that denies the ability to maintain the craft. It doesn’t state what happens to other small craft, but I will be adding an addition that states they are unserviceable after 1 month.

So maybe this could be a short term action... though I’d rule that the golden rule forbids it ...but long term it would destroy your extra squadrons.
Image
User avatar
Cralis
SDS Member
SDS Member
 
Posts: 10677
Joined: Tue 30 Jun 2009 19:27
Location: Oregon, USA

Re: Squadron Bay question and maybe house rule opinions

Postby LesMasters on Fri 10 Aug 2018 12:08

Hi, Cralis

Thanks for the clarifications. I was fairly sure it would be an unusable tactic even without the golden rule. I was floating the idea to see what would happen.

Les
LesMasters
Captain
Captain
 
Posts: 193
Joined: Mon 30 Nov 2009 12:26

Re: Squadron Bay question and maybe house rule opinions

Postby Cralis on Fri 10 Aug 2018 13:20

I think some of the confusion on BL comes from how different players see it working.

Some players see BL like the top of a modern carrier, Battlestar Galactica, Star Trek, or Robotech. And honestly that’s not realistic. Star Trek’s and BSG’s hangar bays didn’t even have ordnance tied down!! Very unrealistic and/or a huge waste of internal space.

SSF views BL more like Babylon 5, Space:Above and Beyond... even Star Wars where they show the launching and landing of TIE fighters. The launch tubes in BSG would be a good example if the bay+hangars didn’t occupy the entire center of the ship extension. It’s hard to see how one could “park” extra craft in that kind of a BL.

But maybe this short term tactic might be a trick that an exceptional officer or graded leader might be allowed to do? Something to think about...
Image
User avatar
Cralis
SDS Member
SDS Member
 
Posts: 10677
Joined: Tue 30 Jun 2009 19:27
Location: Oregon, USA

Re: Squadron Bay question and maybe house rule opinions

Postby SDTroll on Fri 10 Aug 2018 20:28

Has anyone tried doing something with XOL on their ships and then freighters with the Bf and/or Bg? It seems like an interesting way to do the Hydran idea from SFB, where the XOL carry the fighters into battle or through warp points while the freighters pick them up, repair them and reload them after the battles and carry them to the next fight. It might work with J drives if you use tugs or transit racks for strategic movement. A parasite thing where big ships with transit racks launch smaller fighting ships with XOL which launch fighters or gunboats. Not sure it would be effective, but it would be interesting. :)
SDTroll
Commander
Commander
 
Posts: 125
Joined: Mon 01 Mar 2010 13:09

Re: Squadron Bay question and maybe house rule opinions

Postby Cralis on Fri 10 Aug 2018 23:44

SDTroll wrote:Has anyone tried doing something with XOL on their ships and then freighters with the Bf and/or Bg?


This is one of the primary ways that XOL is used. I've seen both FT and carrier hulls. XOL is mounted on warships going through the WP and gunboats dropped after transit.

A parasite thing where big ships with transit racks launch smaller fighting ships with XOL which launch fighters or gunboats. Not sure it would be effective, but it would be interesting. :)


Heh, Matryoshka ships. Neato.
Image
User avatar
Cralis
SDS Member
SDS Member
 
Posts: 10677
Joined: Tue 30 Jun 2009 19:27
Location: Oregon, USA

Re: Squadron Bay question and maybe house rule opinions

Postby SDTroll on Sun 12 Aug 2018 06:06

Cralis wrote:
Heh, Matryoshka ships. Neato.



Bonus points if you actually paint them like the dolls.
SDTroll
Commander
Commander
 
Posts: 125
Joined: Mon 01 Mar 2010 13:09

Re: Squadron Bay question and maybe house rule opinions

Postby Cralis on Sun 12 Aug 2018 12:23

SDTroll wrote:
Cralis wrote:
Heh, Matryoshka ships. Neato.



Bonus points if you actually paint them like the dolls.


I can express my reaction in emojis (I looked for a way to nest them, but I'm short on time today so we'll have to pretend):

:o :lol: :lol: :roll:
Image
User avatar
Cralis
SDS Member
SDS Member
 
Posts: 10677
Joined: Tue 30 Jun 2009 19:27
Location: Oregon, USA

PreviousNext

Return to Solar Starfire

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 5 guests

cron