Subtopic	Posts		Updated
	Archive through October 25, 2006	25		10/25 02:28pm

There aren't any real differences. You simply drop a couple double space shuttles. The Hybrid bit just lets you buy fewer fighters. As a whole J ships are pretty darn uniform. (Makes it easy on the Steves to do variants.) The NWO boxes are the main source of changes.

To compare it to regular races. GSC=CVL. Thats the sum total of the SSD changes.

BTW: The J also have a DN SCS. (It wasn't included in the J CV list.)

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Thursday, October 26, 2006 - 10:01 am: Edit

John,

You also asked how the Jindarians deploy bombers on their ships, and no one has answered that yet.

Basically, they have three methods.

1) Replacing prospecting shuttles: A medium bomber can replace 3 shuttles. A heavy bomber can replace 4. I think this is done under the same rules as "Hybrid" carriers. This would make it impossible for the Jindarians to field a full squadron of 6 bombers by this method. A DN-sized asteroid ship can replace up to 12 prospecting shuttles with fighters. This would allow it to field either 3 heavy or 4 medium bombers. I'm not sure if it's legal to replace the fighters on a CVA with bombers, but if it is, the 24 fighters the CVA carries would allow a full squadron of 6 4-space heavy bomers to be carried. Whether it's worth giving up 24 fighters for only 6 bombers is another matter.

2) Base the bombers on the surface of the asteroid: This does not allow them to put the Bomber Bases from Module J2 on their ships. They are specifically forbidden under the rules from putting small or medium ground bases on ships, though they can put them on "normal" asteroids just like any other race can. Basically, the surface would only include a "landing pad", with all logistics support to keep the bomber functioning being handled inside the asteroid. Cost is 3 BPV per "pad" so fielding a full squadron this way costs 18 BPV in addition to the cost of the bombers.

3) Use the "construction bays" on their "shipyard" asteroids. These "shipyard" asteroids are where the metal hull ships are built. But while a caravan is in transit from one asteroid field to another, they might be used to base bombers, presumably to help protect the caravan in transit, or possibly to take over a defended asteroid field from the previous owner. Once established in the new field, the Jindarians would move the bombers to a conventional bomber base on a "normal" asteroid to help defend the field, and the construction bay would revert to its primary purpose of building new ships.

By Reid Hupach (Gwbison) on Thursday, October 26, 2006 - 12:57 pm: Edit

Funny thing in the new F1 check the dates in the Jindo Bombers, they get their first bombers in ( I think ) Yr 60, a loooooooong time before anyone else. When you couple that with the ability to move them with you through space if the Jindos want to they could really hurt someones system logistics.

By Kenneth Jones (Kludge) on Saturday, October 28, 2006 - 06:53 am: Edit

Uhm the Fed B52 is in Y167 or so. And the CL article on Fed Bombers has even earlier verions IIRC.

By David Slatter (Davidas) on Tuesday, October 31, 2006 - 04:45 am: Edit

Y60 is a quite a bit before Y167, assuming Reid meant Y60 and not Y160.

If Jindos have PFs, they certainly have the "man" power for fighters. No reason for remote fighter/sattelites. Besides, fighter pilots freqeuntly can bail out anyway if you are trying to track them. Furthermore, the Federation went to a fighter-heavy poilicy *precisely* because it results in fewer casualties than PFs. I would also think that on a ship-for-ship basis, ships with fighters take fewer crew unit casualties simply because they are more potent with more BPV. (caveat - that is only always true when said ships have heavy weapons still and don't get saddled with undergunned escorts).

However, I think a good point has been made. Jindos could carry fighters/bombers while in transit, with the prospecting shuttles packed up in cargo. When they settle, they plonk the fighters on asteroids. This would give them an ability to carry their "PDU"s with them - very useful. And I'm sure that a normal caravan would stump up the resources for 3 squadrons fo fighters to help defend them and patrol the area.

By Steven E. Ehrbar (See) on Tuesday, October 31, 2006 - 04:48 pm: Edit

Yeah. Fighters carry one pilot. PFs carry three crew units. With the result that wiping all 24 fighters carried by an Interdiction Carrier causes fewer casualties than destroying one PF.

By Steve Cole (Stevecole) on Thursday, May 06, 2010 - 03:53 pm: Edit

If there is anyting good in here, would somebody pull it out and put it in a separate topic for one specific proposal?