I am new to this board and have not found anything similar. I also do not have any CL's past 17. So if this has already been proposed, my apologies.

I envision Orbital Defense Platforms around planets. These would essentially be bases with starship equivalant fire power. They would not rotate like bases, but could orbit.

I see 5 classes of these existing. FF, DD, CA, BCH/DN, and BB size equivalents.

They would not have the docking capabilities of a BS/BATS/SB.

The larger classes (BCH/DN and BB) would be capable of carrying Phaser-4's.

These units would have a large shuttle deckhouse 6 for FF and DD. 12 For CA. 18 For BCH/DN. 24 for BB. And could use PF augmentation modules as well.

They could be in addition to ground bases for strategic planets. Or replace ground bases where planetary circumstances make GB's unreliable.

I do not have a whole lot of time to dedicate to this right now. But if there is sufficient interest I will try and mark up Generic SSD's.

By Alex Chobot (Alendrel) on Tuesday, January 14, 2003 - 12:42 pm: Edit

I really don't see a need for these. If something is important enough to warrant that level of static defense, then it's important enough to build a base there, and have a monitor in the mean time. If it's not that important, then ground bases and some DefSats should be sufficent.

By Ed Grondin (Ensignedg) on Tuesday, January 14, 2003 - 01:11 pm: Edit

Correction they would rotate...

Alex thanks for the input. I agree that if it is that important a base would be built but economically speaking this could be a short term solution.

And although I don't think the rules provide for any reason that ground bases would not be available there could always be scenario imposed reasons that a given planet would not be effective for ground bases. This would have to be some distortion effect produced by the planet that would make ground base weapons unreliable.

Not so much a need as an alternative.

Another potential reason comes to mind. If a planet had it BS/BATS/or SB destroyed these units could be moved in temporarily. Granted an MB could be placed, but MB's would not be anywhere near as capable as something like this.

By Alex Chobot (Alendrel) on Tuesday, January 14, 2003 - 01:56 pm: Edit

Would they have positional stabilizers? If so, then they are just bases, albiet without the strategic abilities of bases, and not very useful.

Are they ships without warp engines? If so, then you've just overtaxed your fleet's tug capabilities to move these around, and why not just build a starship in that slipway instead and just have it go there when needed?

As for the GB issue, nothing some time with tractors and towing asteroids into orbit won't fix

By Geoff Conn (Talonz) on Tuesday, January 14, 2003 - 02:42 pm: Edit

If it was something inbetween the size of a monitor and a defsat perhaps. Although one wonders why they wouldn't build a base.

But again there are several purposes to a base (supply, repair, movement of staff and material, etc.) that an ODP wouldn't function as.

So there is some room to slip these in.

By Ed Grondin (Ensignedg) on Tuesday, January 14, 2003 - 03:05 pm: Edit

Alex..

They would have positional stabilizers. I realize that they would not be fully functional bases. They are not intended to be.

They are intended as a stop gap (while a base is built or rebuilt). Or firepower augmentation for existing bases or planetary defenses.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Tuesday, January 14, 2003 - 03:09 pm: Edit

...Like a mobile base.

By Alex Chobot (Alendrel) on Tuesday, January 14, 2003 - 03:09 pm: Edit

The job you just described is exactly what monitors are built for (or your neighborhood frigate squadron).

If they have stabilizers, then they are gonna be just as expensive/involved to produce and deploy as bases are in the first place.

By Les LeBlanc (Lessss) on Tuesday, January 14, 2003 - 03:46 pm: Edit

Agreed, an asteroid and a few Ph-4 platforms work better at less cost, dumping a bunch of defsats to be trimmed down in number later is probably cheaper in the short term as well to face an imminent threat.

Then there is the Monitor.. Almost DN firepower at cruiser cost and it does move.

What you are essentially proposing is a small monitor.. CA,CL,DD forepower on a small hull at cheap cost. A series of small slow overgunned ships. (Snipe-C anyone)

By Ed Grondin (Ensignedg) on Tuesday, January 14, 2003 - 04:49 pm: Edit

Les this is not a mini monitor proposal. John yes in a sense something like an MB but also a whole lot more powerful.

Alex I think your arguments against make the most sense.

It appears as though there are simply to many other items that could fill this roll.

I personally like the idea myself, but I also see where it is not necessary.

Does anyone know what became of the sector base proposal? Was there ever a plan for something larger than a starbase (something that would only be at the capitol and a couple other major planets?)

By Alex Chobot (Alendrel) on Tuesday, January 14, 2003 - 04:59 pm: Edit

Sector bases are still scheduled for R8.

The next step from the starbase is the X-starbase.

By Scott Tenhoff (Scottt) on Tuesday, January 14, 2003 - 05:09 pm: Edit

Re: Sector Bases. Slated for R8 I believe.

This ODB is going to have to be in the size of a MB, because a BATS/BS is the next step up.

It's going to have to be (somehow) breakdownable, into components to move. For ease of setup, and ease of moving when the battlefront moves. Otherwise, once the battlefront moves, it becomes a wall decoration.

See, with this ODB, you need to describe the differances between it and a MB. Like:
1) A mobile Base is a supply point. Seen in F+E
2) A mobile Base is a repair point. Seen in F+E as Repair ships can go there.

A ODB is:
1) Heavy Overgunned Base with lots of weapons, and few other system.
2) Lots of escape equipment (read some sort of saucer/boom) to let the crew escape, because it will be a deathtrap for the defenders if they are overrun.

This could possibly be made so that there is a 2nd way to build a base at a planet.

System 1:
MB deployed->upgraded to BATS->upgraded to SB.
System 2:
ODB deployed->upgraded to BATS->upgraded to SB.

Where with the MB you start with all the non-combat equipment first. The ODB, you start with all the heavy weapons first.

(The way I'm seeing this ODB would be as "Beach Defenses" from WW2. Something to slow down the enemy when they first attack a planet, and attempt to inflict as much damage as possible, and then it's trashed and unless probably.)

By Garth L. Getgen (Sgt_G) on Tuesday, January 14, 2003 - 05:36 pm: Edit

Ed, welcome aboard!!

I have to agree with the others here ... as a stand-alone "mini-base", this idea doesn't work too well compared to other options. However, perhaps if it were a Heavy DefSat used to supplement a Starbase’s firepower ...

At any rate, please keep throwing ideas around here .... it'll take a while, but someday you'll come up with something SVC/SPP likes.


Garth L. Getgen

By Robert Cole (Zathras) on Tuesday, January 14, 2003 - 05:46 pm: Edit

All:

Actually, I can find at least one place where the Orbital Defense Platform could come in handy:

The Hydran guilds. They are separate from the Monarchy, but operate their own military. Indeed, it was the Guilds which (if memory serves) brought fighter technology about.

I could see the Guilds wanting to build a defensive station that would be cheaper than a BATS, but more capable than a BS (BS are easy prey, IMHO). So a station between the two makes sense.

A similar idea was proposed to me by Chris Fant (years ago now), and I plan on developing something for my webpage sometime soon.

There are other races that might want these: Lyran Counties, Fed National Races (Andorians, Vulcans, etc.), possibly the member races of the ISC.

Of course, these would probably be Middle Years / Early GW level bases. By the time the GW goes into full swing, Alliance bases are dying, and Coalition bases are being upgraded.

Just my 0.02.

42

By Andy Palmer (Andypalmer) on Tuesday, January 14, 2003 - 06:12 pm: Edit

..perhaps some Heavy Weapons modules for SAMS (System Activity Maintenance Stations). Throwing a PH-4, 2 PH-3, and some APR in each module would give it 1/2 of BS firepower at a lot less cost (perhaps 75 total?), but without any of the Logistics support and facilities of a BS.

By Alex Chobot (Alendrel) on Tuesday, January 14, 2003 - 06:25 pm: Edit

Adn I'm not gluing 4 of these onto my starbase why? (Gotta leave the other 2 spots for PF modules!)

By Garth L. Getgen (Sgt_G) on Tuesday, January 14, 2003 - 09:19 pm: Edit

Alex, I didn't mean to have them ON the SB, just in orbit around it.

RE: Hydran ... how about a Klingon-only early-years orbital platform to control the conquered methane-breathers.


Garth L. Getgen

By Alex Chobot (Alendrel) on Tuesday, January 14, 2003 - 09:23 pm: Edit

Garth, I was refering to Andy's proposal (basically a ph-4 augmentation module).

By Andy Palmer (Andypalmer) on Tuesday, January 14, 2003 - 11:17 pm: Edit

...and drop 4 HBMs?? 24 fighters vs 4 Ph-4s. I'd love to face that SB..

By Alex Chobot (Alendrel) on Tuesday, January 14, 2003 - 11:20 pm: Edit

Fighters? Isn't that what ground bases are for? And bombers, too.

By Andy Palmer (Andypalmer) on Wednesday, January 15, 2003 - 07:12 am: Edit

..so all your Starbases rotate around planets?

By Daniel G. Knipfer (Dgknipfer) on Wednesday, January 15, 2003 - 10:31 am: Edit

One of the R modules (6 or 7, don't remember which) had a more combat capable version of a Mobile Base. I think they where called Operational Bases, but I don't remeber.

Heavy Def Sats might be a possible idea for this concept. Twice the size of a large Def Sat with 50% more firepower. That would give Def Sats some real serious fire power.

By Steve Petrick (Petrick) on Wednesday, January 15, 2003 - 11:41 am: Edit

Designing an Orbital Defense Platform will always get you into trouble (as in there are limits, not that anyone will be mad or upset).

Box #1 a Phaser-4. Boxes #2 and #3 APRs to power the Phaser-4. Box #4 an APR to power the shields. Box #5 A control station (Bridge, Aux, or Emer) to control the station. About Ten boxes of shields in all directions Total of 60).

No hull because no one lives on it, the crews are transported up from the planet surface, do their shift, than transport back down. No shuttle, no tractor, no lab (although the control space can function as a lab). No Cargo storage (see hull above) or barracks (see hull above). No other weapons because this is bare bones.

But also no damage control rating, i.e., if it is damaged, it is dead.

Plasma races simply walk in and shot gun launch a type-R from a ship that has 14 ECM (six generated, six lent by a scout, and two from passive fire control).

Disruptor races hang out at 15 hexes range, or if there are enough of them at 30 hexes range, and pulverize the stations one by one with relative impunity.

Photon races simply hang out at 30 hexes range.

With no batteries or enough power for any significant shield reinforcement, long range massed phaser fire will kill them, albeit slowly.

The problem is the tradeoff in size versus vulnerability. Little things are relatively easy to kill. Adding mass makes it harder to kill, but once you start adding mass, you are back to the Base Station in short order.

By Geoff Conn (Talonz) on Wednesday, January 15, 2003 - 06:32 pm: Edit

But Steve even if it had the same mass as a BS, it wouldn't have the same internals nor the same supply and repair capacities. The point being it is not a base, nor a monitor. But something heavier than a defsat.

This reminds me of the DS9 episode where the Dominion minefield turned out to be anything but a minefield....that was very cool.

By Alex Chobot (Alendrel) on Wednesday, January 15, 2003 - 06:37 pm: Edit

Geoff, did you read the original proposal? They weren't for heavy DefSats, but for, essentially, bases that were all guns and no strategic support capacity.