Archive through July 23, 2014
Star Fleet Universe Discussion Board: Federation & Empire: F&E INPUT:
F&E Proposals Forum:
0-FOLDER: The Designer Found Merit:
Variable cost for Replacement Capital Shipyards:
Archive through July 23, 2014
The idea of paying different EP amounts for building replacement shipyards has come up again in the Planetary Ops forum. However as no real playtest rule exist yet and I really doubt that such a rule will make it into PO
The idea has some merrit though. The Klingon and Federation shipyards are huge but cost the same to replace if lost as the Gorn, Lyran, or even Tholian shipyards.That hardly seems apropriate. Also, most races will be incapable of building half of thier full production if they loose their capital. Could they build a smaller ship yard and upgrade it later?
These are interesting questions and I'd love to see what everybody else thinks of the idea.The idea of paying different EP amounts for building replacement shipyards has come up again in the Planetary Ops forum. However as no real play test rule exist yet and I really doubt that such a rule will make it into PO
The idea has some merit though. The Klingon and Federation shipyards are huge but cost the same to replace if lost as the Gorn, Lyran, or even Tholian ship yards would. That hardly seems appropriate. Also, most races will be incapable of building half of their full production if they loose their capital. Could they build a smaller ship yard and upgrade it later? What would the production layout for such a yard be? How many FFs, DWs, & CWs do you have to have for each CA or DN on your schedule?
These are interesting questions and I'd love to see what everybody else thinks of the idea. There’s no way that it could be done in time for PO, but it will make an interesting discussion for EcoWars.
In a way, we already have an embryonic form of this in the game in the form of the Hydran Old Colony shipyard, though it seems to function more as a super minor shipyard. I wouldn't be opposed to having construction cost be tied to the particular race, as long as the cost wasn't too low or too high. I could see costs ranging from 10-20 EP/turn over 6 turns, but nothing much outside that range; being unable to build anything larger than a frigate or destroyer for 6 turns is a high enough cost to make it worthwhile to hang on to a capital.
Tying this in somewhat with the minor shipyard rule under discussion, I'd say that the question of building the smaler shipyard has already been dealt with; a race that loses its main shipyard can build some minor ones and (sort of) carry on. It would be interesting to exploe the idea of being able to convert a major conversion yard into a full main shipyard at some sort of reduction in cost and time as opposed to building a main shipyard from scratch.
Maybe the cost should be broken down by production schedule. For example, Hydrans can build 1xDN, 1xCC, 2xCA, 6xCW, 2xDD, and 12xFF per year (I can't recall the year I used, probably late war.) How much does each slipway cost?
From the Minor shipyards rule, it costs 20EPs to produce a CW slipway that can produce 1 CW per turn (2x per year). Perhaps a CA slipway costs 15EPs but can only produce 1xCA per year. That would fit with the idea that CWs could be built more quickly than CAs. Same would be true for DDs, 10 EPs, can build 1xDD per year. DN is 20 EPs, but only 1xDN per 2 years... Granted this makes shipyard construction very expensive, but it would allow players to decide on their own production schedule (within certain limits...)
I find this interesting from a campaign POV. Imagine building an empire begining in the early years. Which ships would you choose to build? As new models became available, how would you upgrade your shipyards (say from a D4 slipway to D6)?
Based on the small drydocks I have seen around the UK changing a conversion/repair facality which just works inside the existing hull would require the demolition of the surrounding town. The logistics of getting large enough sheets of hull plate to build a ship from scratch would make a newbuild (of yard) cheaper than an expansion of the existing repair yard
IIRC the Campaign Designers Handbook printed SSD's of the small, medium and large naval Construction docks (NCD).
they resemble the FRD greatly and the price of a FRD is (IMO) possibly similar to what the Small NCD might cost if it were a item that F&E could produce.
I would assume that we could determine what the F&E cost of the various NCD's would be.
from there we could determine if the published replacement cost of a ship yard is apropriate.
the other way is to determine how many of each of the NCD's each race needs to satisfy its own build rate... and once we have that pro rate the per turn cost for each race.
The tricky part becomes in trying to decide what other resources facilities and things are needed to begin ship production.
for example, the best ship building facilities in the galaxy wont do you much good if you dont have a skilled workforce available and willing to build your fleet.
maybe thats what the Orions do with their Orion Slaver ships... 
This deserves a look.
Quote:the other way is to determine how many of each of the NCD's each race needs to satisfy its own build rate... and once we have that pro rate the per turn cost for each race.
That's what I do.
Klingons should be able to build a Kzinti sized shipyard for a Kzinti sized price.
I agree.
However, I'm concerned of the possible outcome of dial-a-shipyard, where one could build just the elements they want. Say you have to rebuild, and you choose only to build the CW and FF shipyards, plus extra, and flood the zone with little ships. Or just the opposite, and build extra DN shipyards and spew out 3 DN per turn.
Not that I mind the player being allow to make an obvious mistake -- I'm just concerned that the player would find one of these "obvious mistakes" to be the winning formula and thus become the new standard strategy.
The obvious solution of course it to have levels of shipyard sizes. A Kzinti-sized shipyard for the Kzinti to build (the Klingons could build to that level and stop), a Klingon-sized shipyard to increase to (could the Kzintis upgrade to that size? I don't think they should be able to. It's beyond their economic capacity to increase to that level).
Question: Would building a smaller shipyard take less time, or is it the same six turns and just a smaller cost per turn?
I'll be interested in seeing how this develops, though it may stay on the back-burner for awhile.
Another thought would be to let a player replacing the big shipyard to lay down the smaller ones on the way and have that count towards the final.
This is a major issue for the Hydrans and the Kzinti, but of limited relevance to any other power, as it is far less likely that any other power would ever lose their capital shipyard, and if/when that happens, the game is likely over anyway.
I always thought it odd that the Hydrans would need to pay the full 90 EP cost of a new yard, considering the existence of their Old Colonies yard. Yes, there should be some cost to upgrade the Old Colonies yard to a full yard, but 90 EP seems unreasonable, especially since the Hydran off-map economy can support only a fraction of the production slots that would be made available.
Perhaps the Hydrans should be given a discount for this reason, at least in the basic game. One thought is that a "Partially Upgraded Old Colonies Shipyard" (for say, 5 EPs a turn over 6 turns, or 30 EPs total) would allow the Hydrans to build all but the hellbore equipped ships on their schedule, plus some ancillary production (so normal amount of FFFs, 1 MB or FRD per year, 2 PDUs per turn, etc.). So, Spring 171 production schedule would be RN, 2xHR, 3xHN (but no PAL, TR, 3xCU); while Fall 171 production schedule would be [UH+DE+2xAH], 2xHR, 3xHN (but no DG, TR, 3xCU). Or something like that. One could further upgrade the Old Colonies yard to a full yard with full production capability for another 5 EPs a turn over 6 turns, or 30 EPs total, if so desired.
This issue is somewhat offset when playing with Planetary Operations, which allows minor and medium shipyards to be built. The Hydrans and Kzinti can build a medium shipyard and several minor shipyards, giving them virtually all the building capacity they can possibly afford. The medium yard costs only 48 EPs, while minor yards can be built for "free" by engineers if also playing with Strategic Operations.
I'm going to have ask why?
Unless you intend to overhaul the Capital Shipyard replacement rule (511.32) and Medium Shipyard rules (450.2) to give a cost of 10pts per FF, 15 pts per DD/DW, 20 per CL/CW, and 25/30 pts per CA and 50 for a DN (75 for the Feds as they can build one DN per turn). I'd build the medium shipyard and use my engineer(s) to build minor shipyards until I could afford to upgrade my medium shipyard to a major shipyard.
The limits would have to match a given's empires maximum build schedule.
And that's where play testing comes in. It would largely be a math exercise. Just role the dice to see what the exploration finds before the Kzinti or the Hydrans are pushed off map. Figure some treasury is evacuated and in the Hydrans case remember the Guild EP's. Then just run the numbers figuring continuing exploration.
Logically this discussion makes sense.
Part of my question surrounds the original capital and the minor shipyards and conversion yards.
We could go either way with this but here it is:
Were the Minor shipyard/conversion yards created to be an extreme extension of the capital yards? IOW is their cost artificially high due to the fact they are NOT centrally located with the original yards they do not have the logistical networks in place. Also these yards are constructed during a time of war (may or may not be valid because glancing through the history many empires were almost constantly at war).
Thinking aloud the Capital yards are built specifically in one similar location and could use previously established supply chains to build. They are for the most part safer from attack do to defenses existing around a HW and the mobility of the fleets coming and going.
I would think that because of this rebuilding a capital yard even in a new established location would have a discounted cost on a line by line basis. (A Capital CW/NCL Yard vs a Minor Shipyard CW/NCL).
The other thoughts that creep in are that if we are going to travel down the road of making the replacement of such yards more realistic, why not the destruction of such yards? Why is it all or nothing? Why cant the yards be damaged (other than the Prime Team Sabotage rule where it suffers delays or ship loss). How about a damage and repair rule for the yards as we have SB Incremental Damage systms? Why is it the same 10 points to devastate a little known Neutral Zone world as it is Earth or Romulus? Lets have the Yards at least contribute to these damage costs. Make it bloodier to capture a capital.
Quote:The other thoughts that creep in are that if we are going to travel down the road of making the replacement of such yards more realistic, why not the destruction of such yards? Why is it all or nothing? Why cant the yards be damaged (other than the Prime Team Sabotage rule where it suffers delays or ship loss). How about a damage and repair rule for the yards as we have SB Incremental Damage systms? Why is it the same 10 points to devastate a little known Neutral Zone world as it is Earth or Romulus? Lets have the Yards at least contribute to these damage costs. Make it bloodier to capture a capital.
Like being able to direct on a shipyard at 3:1 or 4:1.
you mean, so the klingons can waltz into 1401 on turn 2 and blow up the BC slip?
As I said, this isn't as much of an issue when playing with the expansions allowing medium and minor shipyards to be built (minors being free with the help of engineers), but it does affect the basic game.
The Hydrans are generally happy (well, as happy as you can be after having your home world nuked) with a medium yard and a few CW and FF yards. But in the basic game, the 90 EP cost of a replacement yard seems too high, especially considering the presence of the Old Colonies yard. Perhaps the guild income in the expansions represents the stockpile of "manpower" and materials at the old yard? Could this be retconned into the basic game to reduce the cost of building a replacement yard?
The Kzinti can afford to build a full sized yard, and a more or less full build schedule, with financial backing from the Feds/Gorn, so this isn't that big a deal for them. And as mentioned, it is rarely an issue for the other powers.
I really don't see any reason to change the existing rules, because as Turtle said, we have 511.32 and 450.2. The most likely empires to need to replace their shipyards are the Hydrans and Kzintis. If the Klingons ever got in those straits, they'd have worse problems on their plates because they don't really have anywhere to escape to.
This proposal seems like unnecessary bookkeeping, without much gain. After all, if the Federation has to replace their shipyard piecemeal, it makes absolutely no sense, because of their huge build. Also, how do we account for the fact that *everyone's* build schedule increases as the war goes on. Is this caused by a larger shipyard, or merely increased efficiency?
The other issue, of course, is do we decrease costs, or increase them?
The Klingons have a 2:1 build ratio to the Kzintis. Therefore the shipyard replacement costs should also be that same ratio of 2:1. But are we saying the Kzinti shipyard should cost only 45 to the Klingon's 90... or are we saying the Klingon shipyard should cost 180 to the Kzinti's 90?
Decrease the Kzinti, Hydrans, and Gorns, and we have a notable balance benefit to the alliance. Increase the Romulan costs, and it's a negative on the coalition. Change the Klingon or Federation... wouldn't matter, as either of them going down means the game is already over.
That also assumes that there is a correlation between the cost of a shipyard, and the number of ships that it can make. Does that cost merely represent building slips, or does it represent rearranging infrastructure and resources?
Quote:Also, how do we account for the fact that *everyone's* build schedule increases as the war goes on. Is this caused by a larger shipyard, or merely increased efficiency?
That is a really good question. I'd venture for the Federation at least, it's a combination of both.
But I could make a convincing argument either way.
Quote:That is a really good question. I'd venture for the Federation at least, it's a combination of both.
But I could make a convincing argument either way.
Plus, no one has to pay for the increase, either. That may be part of the 'budget' that we (as the leader in charge) don't have to worry about, but then that argues against having to pay for a shipyard in a piecemeal fashion.
And it also depends on the Construction Dock you want to say is "official".
The ones in the Campaign Designer's Handbook or R1.80 in Module R11 (which I personally favor).
If using the latter, I think I would rule that the shipyard components can only be attacked when all PDUs are destroyed AND the starbase, if any.
And then, due to the fact that it can only be fired at (in SFB terms) from a range of three or less, I would say that qualifies it for a reduction of damage in the form of some DirDam ratio. Say, 3:1.
I don't ever recall seeing anything on the actual fabrication of ships in the SFU. I suspect the closet analogy to history would be the Kaiser Roth shipyards that built the Liberty ships or the way ships are built today in sections and then erected. Just on a much larger scale. So part of the expense of the B-10 would be caused by the scale of the support structure to build it for example. The real thing happened in the Battleship race 1900-1940. As ships got larger everything around them had to get larger too.
Here's a thought for balance on this. The replacement cost is the equivalent of higher construction cost of 1 turn's production in the year that the capital is lost.
E.G. Kzinti capital is lost in Y174.
AO construction schedule is
Y174F-Y180F: [CV+MEC+DWE], BC, NCA, 2xCM,
2xDW, 3xFFK. Total = 24+6+4.5+8+6+10+8+9=75.5
Y174S-Y180S: DN, BC, NCA, 3xCM, 3xDW, 3xFFK. Total = 16+8+6+15+12+9=66
The Fall total includes 12 EPs for the fighters of CV.
This is 14.5 EPs less than the 90 EPs (15*6) of (511.32).
The Klingons are 109.5 EPs for Y172.
Edit:
Builds are base hulls listed in the schedule. No substitutions or downgrades.