Archive through September 10, 2004
Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Star Fleet Battles: SFB Proposals Board:
New Rules:
Type V (for VLS) drone racks:
Archive through September 10, 2004
A new drone rack with a capacity of 4 or 6 that can fire all of them, subject to control requirements, on a single impulse.
Matt what limitations are imposed on the rack in your proposal? I understand the concept, but think it can be game-breaking. How many boxes on the SSD would each rack take up?
Seems to be akin to the auto reject idea of having rail mounted drones on ships.
Matt Shaw, I have been flirting with making a similar proposal along this line also, and have not for precisely the reason cited by Stephen Brackett.
May I suggest a slightly different appraoach that does not involve the auto reject list?
First, In the Real World, a VLS (vertical Launch System) is based on a "cellular" system in that has groups of missle launchers mated together with individual hatches, sort of a series of single missle racks. these systems come in groups of multiples, (in various stages of development) like 4x4 (16 total missles) or 5x5 (25 total missles).
For simplicity, may I suggest a single 4x4 VLS type drone "rack") it is not really a single rack, but it would fall into the same area where drone racks are covered in the rules.
Now, being able to "flush" all 16 drones in a single turn would be devastating, and (depending on the drone control limits of the launching ship) futile as any drones launched without a control channel would immediately go inert. (see rules on controling drones).
I would suggest that such a VLS 'rack' be allowed to launch no more than 1 drone in any 32 impulse period, no more than 2 within 8 impulses at the turn break. (similar to a type A drone rack launch rate.).
Further, the VLS could not be reloaded in combat (or if it is, no more than 1 drone could be reloaded in any given turn, not all 16 at the same time.)
The VLS could be damaged in combat, but would require 16 hits to destroy the rack...each "hit" destroys 1 drone 'cell' at a time.
the VLS could not use 2 space drones at all, and it could freely substitute 2 '1/2 space drones' for each 1 space drone.
The other Problem I have with this, is the VLS rack becomes a HUGE sink hole for damage points in that a single damage hit would only destroy 1 drone, and 16 points of damage to destroy all 16 drones would seriously unbalance the DAC system.
If any one has a solution around that particular problem, I'd like to hear it?
anyway, thats the thinking I had on the subject of "VLS"s.
It should have the same restrictions as other racks like the speed of reloading. I can also see it being subject to chain reactions. If it had a capacity of 8, I would even suggest that it not be reloadable durring a scenario.
1 hit destroys the whole thing and chain reacts 1 point of damage for every frone still loaded. after all the thing has got to have a downside.
EVIL GRIN.
Stellar shadows anyone.
Well, If you are going that route, I would suggest a higher rate of fire, after all it has to have some reason why people would elect to have it, it has to be superior in some way...
perhaps a "ala carte" approach?
the BPV of the Type A rate (and 16 space magazine) is equal to the value of the type A rack plus 1 BPV point? and if you want a G rack Rate of fire (and the ability to use ADD rounds and type VI drones) the cost in BPV is the same as a G rack plus some variable larger than 1...
that way as the ability of the VLS increase the cost increase at a greater rate...
Why not just a use a C-rack?
BPV same as G rack
1 SSD box
6 space capacity
May carry 1.0 or 0.5 space drones
May fire all of the drones in one impulse, subject to control requirements. May fire on consecutive impulses until empty.
Multiple adjacent V racks are treated like a single shuttle bay for chain reaction purposes. A destroyed loaded V rack will inflict one point on an adjacent V rack and one point internal distributed randomly.
I'm not sure about reloading in a scenario, maybe reloaded a half the rate of a normal drone rack. As a primarily Kzinti player I would side with reloading, but in terms of balance probably not.
I'm not sure where or when this would fit in. Possibly available on Feds X1 ships and everyone else in X2.
Jeff said: "First, In the Real World, a VLS (vertical Launch System) is based on a "cellular" system in that has groups of missle launchers mated together with individual hatches, sort of a series of single missle racks. these systems come in groups of multiples, (in various stages of development) like 4x4 (16 total missles) or 5x5 (25 total missles).
"
As an ex USN gunner's mate, I have seen VLS systems in the following configurations:
16 x 1 (sea sparrow) in individual launch cans on the side of the helicopter hangar on Canadian FFH.
32 cell VLS for seawolf on Brit type 23 FF.
US VLS comes in 8 cell packages, installed in either 32 or 64 round blocks (well 29 or 61 with the strike down crane)
>May fire all of the drones in one impulse,
I think I saw this in a Japanese cartoon. HOOOOMEEENGUUH MISSSIRREE ATTAAAACKU!
Actually, this is already part of the game.
See the Frax Subs in module C4.
Michael Powers:
The C rack has a smaller capacity to what the V rack holds, 6 spaces verses 16 spaces of drones.
A c rack would have to be off line for a full turn during reloading, a V rack with its larger capacity need not be reloaded as often.
Matt Shaw: I defer to your superior knowledge and expertise! 
If you leave the V rack with 6 points of drone space capacity, then you have to address Michael powers point about the C rack.
Question, have there been any examples of chain reactions in the Real world VLS systems? were there any ships seriously damaged or destroyed due to VLS mishaps?
Or another question, would a missle explosion in one of the VLS cells automatically detonate missles in the adjacent cells?
I would submit that the expanded drone capacity, when combined with the launch rates of the various existing types of drone launchers would be a reasonable compromise.
trying to "ripple fire" a drone rack total drone space capacity inside of one 32 impulse turn would have to address the following:
1. Game balance, 4 x 1 space (or 8 x 1/2) drones) from a single SSD box in 32 impulses(or even a quarter turn of 8 impulses) may be too powerful under the existing rules.
2. Shock, would the firing of a V rack induce shock to the launching unit or ship?
3. would firing the V rack run the potential risk of destroying or damaging the rack? (granted such wouldnt happen in real world, but we're talking Star Fleet Battles here, not the same thing.)
4. would there need to be a "cool off period" after the V rack launched its ordinance?
I would suspect that I am missing some other factors as well.
With scatterpacks and seeking weapon drogues out there, you want yet another way to launch many drones in one impulse?
And Jeff, the C rack hold 4 spaces of drones, not 6.
Robert, Matts post at 10:59am specified a 6 space capacity.
Sorry for not making my point clearly, and yes, I should have differentiated between Matts proposal and the actual capacity of a C rack.
Dont we already have something called an H-rack on bases that is basically what is being described here?
Should be allowed only on specially built ground bases (if at all).
It's pretty over the top.
Cfant:
The rule reference you are looking for is (FD3.8) Type H starbase drone rack, included in the captains basic set, page 76.
I dont have the Starbase SSD here, but IIRC it has a 5 box magazine, plus the launcher, each magazine holds 4 spaces of drones.
Matt's proposal (I think) holds the launcher and the drones in a single SSD box, but you might get him to verify that.
You know?
this kind of rack the V rack with the ability to fire all of its drones in a single turn is exactly the kind of system one would want on a class of war ships used in Traveler RPG, (Fleet Intruders) where you know going in that the enemy is entrenched and the attackers intent is to blow large and gaping holes in the oposition...
Other than PF's, most SFB ships tend to be general utility types that could do many missions well, but also have some ability to do all missions...
A fleet intruder only purpose is to make frontal assaults when there is no other choice.
granted, in the Traveler system, limits in jump drive technology and range limits make terrain more of a feature than in SFBs...
A specialty drone rack could make a class of fleet intruders a viable option in the game...
provided one has the courage to face the possiblities...
Um one question, can a Arleigh Burke class destroyer or Bunker Hill class Cruiser ripple fire their entire magazine in the manner described?(I know it's the Ticonderoga class but the first 4 ships have Mark 26 launchers not the Mark 41 VLS)
CraigTenhoff, bro,
I'm sure you can add an unclassified response to Benjamin's comment above, regarding VLS's.
Real life doesn't enter into this.
We're talking being able to toss off a scatterpack at will without so much as burning an admin shuttle.
Just say "no".
I don't know about any accidents with VLS, no ship that has one has had it damaged in combat. The closest possibility would be CG-59 USS Princeton which hit a mine in the gulf in 88 or 89 I think. Ship had loads of shock damage, don't know specifics on launchers. A hit close to launcher that starts a fire could hopefully be dealt with by flooding the missiles. A hit and detonation amongst the missiles and your ship is a memory.
CG-52 US Bunker Hill was the first VLS ship (OK, combat ship, the system was tested on USS Norton Sound). A Ticonderoga can fire off the whole lot (120+) of missiles in 2 minutes, the limiting factor is the ability to guide the birds, not the ability of the launcher to fire them.
As for SFB, I am assuming that a V rack would be similar to an 8 cell VLS module.
It would occupy one box on an SSD and not be reloadable during a scenario.
I also do not believe that it should be capable of firing ADDs.
The real problem I see in game balance is the ability of the firing ship to hand off guidance to a scout or other ship.
Other than tossing off sheer overwhelming numbers of drones in a short space of time and then getting a free drone hit in the bargain?
Not to mention making a carrier escort say a NAC a very nasty proposition against a drone race. What reason would you have for disallowing a ADD. If the rack can fire 0.5 space drones it should be able to fire ADDs.