Hi.


The CBA is an example of the kind of variants which the New Alliance started to build during the Superpower Wars - ships intended to put more tachyon missiles in flight, in order to try and compensate for the reduced ability of the Mæsrons to build more ships (compared to their pre-Collapse levels, at any rate).

So, I was thinking about a couple of options that the New Alliance - and their Vulpa insurgent foes - might have come up with to help things along.


*The first idea was for a CBL. This would take the standard light cruiser, replace its three tachyon guns and the FX PW-3 with TM racks, and add in double seeking weapon control.

(The SCM shows a precedent of replacing PW-3 mounts with TMs - or rather, of taking out PW-3s and shuffling the remaining boxes to make room for missile racks. At least, it would be better to take that phaser out than to lose the nearby FX PW-1...)


*The other would be for the Vulpa, with a VBD bombardment variant of the Insurgent Blockade Runner. Despite its name, the VBR is arguably a better destroyer than the Mæsron DD, and might be quite useful in a pure combat role.

So, I'd exchange the three TGs and the probe launcher (the CAF shows how probes aren't all that high a priority to the Vulpa, on pure combat vessels at least) with TM racks, then add the double seeker control option.

The cargo boxes could be retained, perhaps intended to hold supplies of TMs for it and other ships in a given Vulpa expeditionary force.


Neither variant is all that original, true, but they might still be useful to their respective belligerents.

By Gary Carney (Nerroth) on Monday, June 28, 2010 - 03:24 pm: Edit

One detail I forgot to add - cargo on the CBL.

The CBA loses two of the base hull's APRs to make room for its cargo.

Should the CBL do the same, it would then have no reactors left.

Still, unless there is a better pair of boxes to swap out, the ship might just have to get by with less power...