It's been sometime since F1 (the revised F1 doesn't count)and R6 have been printed. And no new ships or styles of Jindarian ships have come forth. So what this thread is to discuss is simple.

What sorts of new ship styles that have since been published should be included for the Jindarians?

With their reconfigyrable NWO's both on Metal and Rock ships there isn't a huge need for individual variants. But quite a few ship types can't be mimicked by those means. (Or require waving the Jindy NWO rules for some permannet conversions.)


Would any of the following ship types deserve further development? Either for "real" use or as "needed" Campaign use ships.

Fast Ships

War/Battle Cruisers (Metal)

(War?) Medium Cruiser (Rock)

Heavy/Light Strike Cruiser Variants (Carrier Escort X etc)

Metal DN for those who don't like the Rock ships

Tug (Metal) (IMO the Shipyard cruisers are more than adequate but once again for non rock uses.)

Oversized Carrier. CVP/CVD etc

I have a couple of loose ideas myself. But IMO many of them are obvious variants and would just need a small amount of Steve time to come up with a YIS BPV etc.


Mostly this thread is to hash out if any of them could/should be produced either for real or campaign uses.

By Kenneth Jones (Kludge) on Saturday, October 21, 2006 - 09:33 pm: Edit

Taking the existing Heavy/Light Strike cruisers first.

A CV would seem to be an abvious starting point. With MRG's a Jindy CVS/CSL would seem to be a great fit. It would play to Jindarian strenghts. Virtually allowing the CV to escort itself.

Real: It would seem to be a perfect fit for using Metal ships. They can and do prospect. But in the long run, they are much more expendable than the Rock ships. Since the Jindavo's are reluctant to use up valuable Prospecting shuttle space for Carriers putting the fighters on a non rock ship that is bound to be of less total importance to the Caravan would seem to be appropriate.

Campaign: It would seem to be a useful ship for CV campaigns. And would fit player campaigns fairly well IMO>

By Joseph R Carlson (Jrc) on Sunday, October 22, 2006 - 02:16 pm: Edit

Kenneth,

Perhaps a DNL, who's mission is to attack the galactic's military infrastructure and patroling forces. Combine the DNL with the CV, you have suggested, and this squadron could be a covering/interdiction force when a caravan moves.

The usually Jindarian design has the rail guns in the corners of the ship. The DNL would have 2xWRG-FA; 2xLRG covering the L+LF and RF+R arcs; 2xMRG covering the L+LR and RR+R arcs.

The CV could have a DCS style variant (12xMet-3 fighters and 6xPFs).

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Sunday, October 22, 2006 - 03:21 pm: Edit

Why not look at ships/bases/etc which would fit into the niches provided by the Jindarian Freehold in the Omega Octant, or with the two caravans out in the Lesser Magellanic Cloud?

If there are more Jindy ships to be done, better to start with tytpes and classes which would help flesh out the background, rather than just because they don't have the same dozens of variants that other races have.


Gary

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Sunday, October 22, 2006 - 03:54 pm: Edit

What are Jindarans?

They're locusts. They come into an area, strip it of resources, and leave again.

They don't build DNLs because they don't conduct war in the normal sense of attrition and holding territory.

They don't want to fight anyone. They just want to be left alone. The problem is that they have no sense of boundaries.

I think a CV is the place to start. Jindo ships are well-enough defended against seeking weapons that a jindo CV wouldn't require escorts.

The Jindo use for fighters would be different too. The Jindos work on a different scale as empires do. Each caravan is an independent economic unit. They don't have large populstions to draw on for a attrition unit crews. They may not have large amounts of resources to expend on attrition unit production.

Jindo ATUs wouldn't be built for high-speed combat so much as being a speed bump that covers for the rock ships as they (the rock ships) run away. Jindo fighters might well be remote-controlled, designed and built to be remoted-controlled.

I forget whether jindos have fighter designs. I think they do. If not, it would be an opportunity to design something unique. Something between a defsat and a fighter.

By Michael C. Grafton (Mike_Grafton) on Sunday, October 22, 2006 - 04:25 pm: Edit

Like a fighter designed to be remotely controlled. Built without any way to mount a pilot? That would make a lot of sense.

But they already have prospecting shuttles that have some offensive potential in addition to their daily money making uses. A fighter would be solely to fight and thus would only be useful for SPENDING money on.

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Sunday, October 22, 2006 - 04:30 pm: Edit

Maybe the Jindarians in Omega managed to develop such a craft based on the later (and larger) Maesron Tachyon Missiles?

TM tech did get around a bit, spreading into FRA, Bolosco and Zosman hands/claws/relevant appendages... Maybe the Freehold figured that they would be a more economical solution than piloted fighters?


Gary

By Joseph R Carlson (Jrc) on Sunday, October 22, 2006 - 04:31 pm: Edit

Rock ship classes include CVA, SCS, BCV, and BCS.

The HCS (heavy strike cruiser) in R6 is designed for combat (high speed raids against the prospecting ships of other caravans). The DNL I suggested is a slightly larger version of the HCS; I don't think WRGs can be mounted in a SC3 hull. The mission I suggested is just that a suggestion. The attrition war is fought against other Jindos; not usually against galactic forces. A fast raider like the DNL could be used to diversion in a sector while a caravan moved else where.

By Kenneth Jones (Kludge) on Monday, October 23, 2006 - 06:15 am: Edit

I really don't want to see a lot of useless ships for the Jindarians. There are plenty of ships that simply don't make much sense for the Jindarians to use.

CF/DNL: I could easily see the use of Fast ships by the J. as way of not only raiding other Caravans. But as a way of attacking Galactic powers by doing the Monty Python move. (Run Away! Run Away!) Because you need a fast or X ship to really catch a Fast ship.

Survey/Prospecting Cruiser: I changed my mind after thinking about this one. It would seem to make a good deal of sense actually. Who/what searches ahead for the Caravan to see where they could set up shop. Wandering from Star system to Star system looking for ex[ploitable resourecs can be extremely dangerous and time consuming. Not to mention that the caravn would be vulnerable if caught out in open space. You would want to minimize the travel time required.

By Kenneth Jones (Kludge) on Monday, October 23, 2006 - 06:33 am: Edit

I did come up with three possible new classes for the Jindarians that would seem to make sense.

CW (Metal): It would simply be a waste of valuable resources to not use a cheap to produce caravan defender. The CW could easily be scrapped by one of the Shipyard cruisers when reaching the end of it's life cycl. It would have the aggresive FA+L/R arcs of the DW but with MRG's instead. The main reason for it's existance is that during the GW (and Andro invasions) things had gotten sufficiently dangerous that the more combat power you could hang onto seemed like a good idea.

CM (Metal) Modular Cruiser: I can easily see some sort of LCS built with a central module. It would certainly fit the Jindarians semi modular nature with all of their NWO's. They probably saw the benefits of the SPH concept and deemed it good and the idea spread. (Possibly the CM and CW wouldn't be in the same Caravans.) There is a even better reason to actually have the CM. It would only take 2-3 pages to do a ton of Variants. Letting us squeeze in more bang for the buck in a module. And letting us get as many of the "Needed" variants out ASAP.

AC (Metal) Assault Cruiser: This is the least likely IMO. I don't see a "Real" need for it. But I just semi like the idea. Stick a WRG into a SC3 metal ship. But restrict it's firing to the same arcs as a Mauler. The AC could fit the role of a Mauler ship for Campaign games without giving yet another race a CNJ Mauler.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Monday, October 23, 2006 - 02:38 pm: Edit

Jindos have to constantly work on limited resources. I don't think a caravan has an economy of scale sufficient to support a war production class.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Monday, October 23, 2006 - 03:15 pm: Edit

Why not? They have metal-hulled ships already, and the point of a CW is that's it's cheaper to build anyway. I'd think they could build a CW more easily than other metal-hull types.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Monday, October 23, 2006 - 06:56 pm: Edit

Think like a survivalist, not an empire-builder.

A war production hull is designed for short-term usage. It cuts corners and has a short maintenance cycle because it must be built in bulk and because the odds are good it will be destroyed or laid up in a spacedock for battle-damage repairs before it will need maintenance. they build fast and are great in the short-term but they cost more to maintain in the long-term.

Empires at war look for ways to field more hulls in less time precisely because they are trying to hold territory against an opponent who is also trying to hold it.

Jindos hold no territory. Each caravan must be self-sufficient and mobile. If they get in a huge fight over territory, they run for less-contested climes. They do NOT try to hold territory; they do NOT stand their ground.

Jindos don't have planet-loads of potential navy recruits to man a ship built for attrition. Skilled personnel are a scarce resource.

Hull materials occur based on how lucky the caravan is. There will be "bust" times as well as "boom" times and a high-maintenance ship is a big problem during "bust" times.

By Joseph R Carlson (Jrc) on Monday, October 23, 2006 - 10:59 pm: Edit

The Jindarians have a DW (R16.21). It appears to be a permanent coversion of a DD. The DWs are pure combat vessels with expanded railgun arcs, more phasers, and more marines.

(R16.20) says the DD class was designed to be converted in a couple of weeks to (fitted out as a cargo, commando, minesweeper etc.).

It is my opinion that the term war destroyer for a Jindarian DW means a permanent conversion rather than "war production".

A CW following the above reasoning, could be a permanent conversion of an LCS into a pure combat vessel (expanded MG railgun arc, more phasers, and more marines. A CWF could also be built (replace 2x8 warp engines with 2x10 warp engines; replace the rear MRGs with LRGs).

While a DNL might be fun. I think the Jindavo would put the resources into a rock ship or several smaller metal hull ships. I think this fits with how X-technology was used; to make DNXs and BCXs, or DDXs or FFXs. The R sections indicate CAXs and CLXs were rare.

The original idea of a CV seems to be a better fit. I used a slightly lenghtened HCS and made a CV SSD with 12xMeteor-3 fighters and 6xMeteor-H heavy fighters (on tractor-mech links). In line with the DW/CW idea the CV would be a pure combat ship with expanded railgun arcs.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Tuesday, October 24, 2006 - 11:22 am: Edit

I actually had an argument in my mind about CVs. How much could the Jindos really afford to build fighters?

I decided that they could afford fgihters but they couldn't afford to lose pilots, hence the sugestion of heavy radio control use. Some large caravans might be able to lose fighter pilots, so some fighters might be manned (jindo-ed?).

I don't own the Jindo supplement because I really, really detest the way WRGs of all sizes were built. I can see "war-production" as a pure-ofense ship, but not "war-production" ship in the General War connotation.

I'd caution going too far with pure-war designs, though. Jindo play-balance is very precarious. It's arguable that Jindo tactics as it stands break that play balance. A Jindo that's any more heavily armed threatens to destroy balance even worse. It may well be that war-ships larger than DD-size are simply not balanced, no matter how good a case that can be made for them being built.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Tuesday, October 24, 2006 - 11:58 am: Edit

Uhhh...

Jindarians already have fighters. They have bombers. In fact, Jindo asteroid ships are the only ships that can carry bombers, meaning that Jindarians are the only race that can effectively use bombers offensively.

Where are people getting this notion that Jindarians don't have carriers?

By Richard Wells (Rwwells) on Tuesday, October 24, 2006 - 02:12 pm: Edit

Alan: There is a difference between having fighters and having the resources to lose fighters at the rate of the other races.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Tuesday, October 24, 2006 - 02:54 pm: Edit

Richard,

Yes, but Jindarians can't afford to lose anything at the rate major empires can. There's something about this whole topic that I'm afraid I'm just not comprehending. I was responding to John Trauger's 11:22 am post, which almost sounded like he wasn't aware that the Jindarians already had carriers, even though Joseph Carlson had already pointed out that they do. I may have misunderstood what John was trying to say.

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Tuesday, October 24, 2006 - 06:34 pm: Edit

Would it be better to split out the Omega and Magellanic Jindarian threads from this one (given their diverse settings), or to try to include them in this thread (as it's the same race)?


I'm noticing that the Omega and Magellanic Jindies aren't really on the cards for you guys here - which is ironic, since (in my view, at least) those two areas have the most scope for new Jindarian designs.


Gary

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Tuesday, October 24, 2006 - 10:20 pm: Edit

I'm not entirely aware of what hulls the Jindos have. I don't own J2.

By Joseph R Carlson (Jrc) on Tuesday, October 24, 2006 - 11:05 pm: Edit

John,

The Jindarian ships are in the new F1 and R6; J1 and J2 don't have any Jindos.

They have for rock ships:

Moon Class: DN, CVA, and DNX.
Moonlet Class: BCH, BCV, BCS, and BCX.
Asteroid Class: CA, CVS, CAP, and CAX (most numerous).
Rock Class: CL, CVL, CLP, CLT, CLC (commando), and CLX.

Metal Hull ships, in F1, are the DD and FF classes (full range of variants); R6 are the HCS, LCS, HDW, nad PRF.

(R16.R0) indicates as the GW began Jindarian ships replaced some of the prospecting shuttles with Meteor fighters (DN-12, BCH-8, CA-4); these are hybrid carriers. True carriers are very rare as these ships could not support them selves.

Jindarian rock ships can operate bombers; in squadrons of 6 up to 3 total squadron per (S8.32). Jindarian ships can operate both bombers, fighters and PFs.

Jindarians developed bombers and PFs. The DD carrier variant, DV, carried 12 fighters; had three hatches rear and each side. I have suggested a CV based on the HCS hull with 12 fighters and 6 heavy fighters.

In the section titled operations it states Jindarians when entering a system will try and keep the asteroid ships out of combat and instead use the metal hull ships, fighters, bombers, interceptors, PFs, and prospecting shuttles for combat.

Hope this helps some.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Wednesday, October 25, 2006 - 11:42 am: Edit

Thanks, Joe.

Fills in a few gaps.

So they have no dedicated carriers, just ships with reduced prospecting shuttle counts.

That implies Jindos are reluctant to create specialty units that can't pull their own weight from a resource-gathering perspective. (At least not large ones. The DW being something of an exception and no doubt a luxury from a jindo perspective)

Do bombers take up prospecting shuttle space as well? How do they work?

If you want to give the Jindos a carrier it may need to use a DW hull.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Wednesday, October 25, 2006 - 12:40 pm: Edit

John,

Not quite. The Jindarians do have dedicated carriers, but they are rare. "Hybrid" carriers that replace some, but not all, of their prospecting shuttles with fighters are the more common way to deploy fighters.

You're right that they "are reluctant" to create special units that can't support themselves. But they do do it sometimes.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Wednesday, October 25, 2006 - 01:25 pm: Edit

Alan,

Is there an SSD for a dedicated carrier? Does it just finish replacing prospecting shuttles with fighters?

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Wednesday, October 25, 2006 - 02:28 pm: Edit

John,

Yes there are carrier SSDs but I haven't looked at F1 recently enough to recall exactly how they differ from "standard" warships based on the same hull (or rock).