Author Topic: Ship Classifications  (Read 4762 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Erik L (OP)

  • Administrator
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • *****
  • Posts: 5657
  • Thanked: 372 times
  • Forum Admin
  • Discord Username: icehawke
  • 2020 Supporter 2020 Supporter : Donate for 2020
    2022 Supporter 2022 Supporter : Donate for 2022
    Gold Supporter Gold Supporter : Support the forums with a Gold subscription
    2021 Supporter 2021 Supporter : Donate for 2021
Ship Classifications
« on: April 12, 2008, 03:27:43 PM »
As a general rule, I classify ships in the 3000-4000 ton range as Destroyers, 4000-8000 range as cruisers, 8000-10000 range as battlecruisers and 10000+ range as dreadnoughts.

What do others use for their classifications?
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Erik Luken »
 

Offline Haegan2005

  • Commander
  • *********
  • Posts: 320
    • http://home.grandecom.net/~silkexpressions/WarStars.htm
(No subject)
« Reply #1 on: April 12, 2008, 04:30:27 PM »
DD as escort ships, generally PD related or carry small numbers of other weapons like one or two launchers or lasers.

CA Primary combatant. So far around 6000 tons.

CH larger, better protected combatant with more then 5 launchers or lasers.

BB ten launchers or more, 10000 ton + range. only one race so far has these.

BC  no race has these yet. still thinking about how to classify. Probably mixed laser, missile armament. 8000 ton range.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Haegan2005 »
 

Offline Charlie Beeler

  • Registered
  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1381
  • Thanked: 3 times
(No subject)
« Reply #2 on: April 12, 2008, 04:50:08 PM »
Frigate -          <5k tons
Destroyer -      <8k tons
Light Cruiser -  <10k tons
Cruiser -          10k tons
Battle Cruiser - >10k tons

It's rough and violated frequently.

Haegan,  I like your idea of basing class on a mix of tonnage and combat capability.  Something to think about.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Charlie Beeler »
Amateurs study tactics, Professionals study logistics - paraphrase attributed to Gen Omar Bradley
 

Offline Erik L (OP)

  • Administrator
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • *****
  • Posts: 5657
  • Thanked: 372 times
  • Forum Admin
  • Discord Username: icehawke
  • 2020 Supporter 2020 Supporter : Donate for 2020
    2022 Supporter 2022 Supporter : Donate for 2022
    Gold Supporter Gold Supporter : Support the forums with a Gold subscription
    2021 Supporter 2021 Supporter : Donate for 2021
(No subject)
« Reply #3 on: April 12, 2008, 09:01:05 PM »
Quote from: "Charlie Beeler"
Frigate -          <5k tons
Destroyer -      <8k tons
Light Cruiser -  <10k tons
Cruiser -          10k tons
Battle Cruiser - >10k tons

It's rough and violated frequently.

Haegan,  I like your idea of basing class on a mix of tonnage and combat capability.  Something to think about.


Heh. I could see the panic when one of your races sends a single "cruiser" on a diplomatic mission and the receiving race is expecting 8k tons.

As for armaments, missile ships get the -G added, i.e. DDG, CAG; beam armed ships (and I include meson, railgun, laser, carronade, etc here) have no designation; dedicated escorts get -E added; Scouts usually -X; and carriers -V.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Erik Luken »
 

Offline Charles Fox

  • Petty Officer
  • **
  • C
  • Posts: 16
(No subject)
« Reply #4 on: April 13, 2008, 02:37:01 PM »
In real-world navies at about the time of the first World War, a battlecruiser was about the same displacement as a battleship. The difference was in their roles: the battlecruiser sacrificed either weaponry or armor for speed. Rather than standing in the battle line, a battlecruiser was meant for scouting, or for running down and destroying lighter units, while using its speed to stay away from enemy battleships.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Charles Fox »
 

Offline Haegan2005

  • Commander
  • *********
  • Posts: 320
    • http://home.grandecom.net/~silkexpressions/WarStars.htm
(No subject)
« Reply #5 on: April 13, 2008, 07:19:26 PM »
So that would make a Havertian Navajo scout a DDX?

Quote
As for armaments, missile ships get the -G added, i.e. DDG, CAG; beam armed ships (and I include meson, railgun, laser, carronade, etc here) have no designation; dedicated escorts get -E added; Scouts usually -X; and carriers -V.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Haegan2005 »
 

Offline Erik L (OP)

  • Administrator
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • *****
  • Posts: 5657
  • Thanked: 372 times
  • Forum Admin
  • Discord Username: icehawke
  • 2020 Supporter 2020 Supporter : Donate for 2020
    2022 Supporter 2022 Supporter : Donate for 2022
    Gold Supporter Gold Supporter : Support the forums with a Gold subscription
    2021 Supporter 2021 Supporter : Donate for 2021
(No subject)
« Reply #6 on: April 13, 2008, 08:14:33 PM »
Quote from: "Haegan2005"
So that would make a Havertian Navajo scout a DDX?

Quote
As for armaments, missile ships get the -G added, i.e. DDG, CAG; beam armed ships (and I include meson, railgun, laser, carronade, etc here) have no designation; dedicated escorts get -E added; Scouts usually -X; and carriers -V.


If it was a destroyer, yes.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Erik Luken »
 

Offline Haegan2005

  • Commander
  • *********
  • Posts: 320
    • http://home.grandecom.net/~silkexpressions/WarStars.htm
(No subject)
« Reply #7 on: April 13, 2008, 08:57:35 PM »
Hmmm. It's really a scout with lasers attached. However, the lasers fit the definition of a support ship with PD capability only, which fits my campaign description of a destroyer.

Quote from: "Erik Luken"
Quote from: "Haegan2005"
So that would make a Havertian Navajo scout a DDX?

Quote
As for armaments, missile ships get the -G added, i.e. DDG, CAG; beam armed ships (and I include meson, railgun, laser, carronade, etc here) have no designation; dedicated escorts get -E added; Scouts usually -X; and carriers -V.

If it was a destroyer, yes.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Haegan2005 »
 

Offline Erik L (OP)

  • Administrator
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • *****
  • Posts: 5657
  • Thanked: 372 times
  • Forum Admin
  • Discord Username: icehawke
  • 2020 Supporter 2020 Supporter : Donate for 2020
    2022 Supporter 2022 Supporter : Donate for 2022
    Gold Supporter Gold Supporter : Support the forums with a Gold subscription
    2021 Supporter 2021 Supporter : Donate for 2021
(No subject)
« Reply #8 on: April 13, 2008, 09:12:05 PM »
Quote from: "Haegan2005"
Hmmm. It's really a scout with lasers attached. However, the lasers fit the definition of a support ship with PD capability only, which fits my campaign description of a destroyer.


I define scout as a ship with max and full sensor suites, stealth and ecm if available. Scouts usually have a minimal weapon complement.

Your ship, I'd call an Escort, since its main function would seem to be point defense. So the Navajo would be a DDE, not DDX.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Erik Luken »
 

Offline Haegan2005

  • Commander
  • *********
  • Posts: 320
    • http://home.grandecom.net/~silkexpressions/WarStars.htm
(No subject)
« Reply #9 on: April 13, 2008, 09:28:42 PM »
It was meant to be a snesor platform for newer and larger sensors as they came out. Rather then place the larger sensors on ships that are already crammed and looking at the then current maximum jump engine size of 6000 tons... It made sense to make a specialist ship with the space for larger sensors, but it had to be able to defend itself as well.
So it performs three purposes:
1. Long range sensor capability
2. Thinken the PD capability of the fleet.
3. Provide yet another target. :twisted:

Quote from: "Erik Luken"
Quote from: "Haegan2005"
Hmmm. It's really a scout with lasers attached. However, the lasers fit the definition of a support ship with PD capability only, which fits my campaign description of a destroyer.

I define scout as a ship with max and full sensor suites, stealth and ecm if available. Scouts usually have a minimal weapon complement.

Your ship, I'd call an Escort, since its main function would seem to be point defense. So the Navajo would be a DDE, not DDX.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Haegan2005 »
 

Offline Whiskey144

  • Able Ordinary Rate
  • W
  • Posts: 2
Re: Ship Classifications
« Reply #10 on: November 08, 2009, 09:22:04 PM »
this is my take on ship classification. It differs quite a bit I think from others. This classification system is also colored a bit by my hard-SF bent. Aurora is still awesome though.

Fighter- small craft, very fast and hard to hit. Like a recoverable missile bus (missile that shoots missiles), that is crewed. A "gunboat", "gunship", "assault boat/boarding craft", "fighter/bomber", and "bomber" would all be classed as fighters. So would "interceptors".

Destroyers- small vessels with frigate-level firepower, but very little long-term endurance. Typical mission lengths are up to 6 months at most, more typically 2-8 weeks. In other words- good for home patrol and defense, bad for offensive operations. They have some multirole usage, mainly as combatants, point defense, and sensor ships.

Troop Transport- pretty much, TTs are just lightly armed frigates. They swap weapons space for troop carriage capability. They can either carry 500-2000 power-armor troopers, or a 150-500 man armored assault force. Armored assault forces are primarily used for fire support in planetary operations (like artillery). TTs are also useful as logistics vessels, carrying spare parts, additional ordnance, and extra food/water/air/fuel, due to their capacious internal bays.

Frigates- sizeable vessels, these are essentially small battleships. They are smaller than battleships, with a proportionately smaller firepower and survivability "rating". They have excellent (8-24 months) endurance, and have high delta-vs (change in velocity, meaning can go a lot of places). Frigates can perform a variety of roles, including: fleet combatant, fighter carriage, point defense, sensor net operations, C4ISR (Command, Control, Communications, Computers, Intelligence, Reconnaissance, Surveillance), and planetary raids.

Pocket Battleship- approximately midway between frigates and full-sized battleships, they have battleship-level firepower and usually survivability, but are smaller, require less crew, and tend to have greater endurances (12-36 months, though 48-96 months is possible) than frigates and even some larger warships. The reasoning behind a pocket battleship is- fewer crew, fewer pieces, smaller ship (for material frugality).

Battleship- this is a beast of warfare. Note that, if you have the resources to build a fleet of battleships, the only reason not to is so you can have more frigates/pocket battleships in more places at once. Endurance is very long (48 months is normal).

Supercarrier- these are inferior to battleships in many respects, but do have the advantage of- huge troop bays, huge hangar bays, and massive ordnance and supply carriage. Basically, supercarriers are really big troop tranports, but with frigate-sized guns (and lots of them).
 

Offline Beersatron

  • Gold Supporter
  • Rear Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 996
  • Thanked: 7 times
  • Gold Supporter Gold Supporter : Support the forums with a Gold subscription
Re: Ship Classifications
« Reply #11 on: November 08, 2009, 10:39:18 PM »
Necro! ;)

Also, I rarely go above CL in my games because I prefer spamming them instead of 'wasting' time on expanding the SY capacity and then retooling and because Steve releases a new DB before I feel the need for a larger vessel.
 

Offline Sotak246

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • Posts: 129
Re: Ship Classifications
« Reply #12 on: November 09, 2009, 01:38:08 AM »
I usually use these as my weight classifications:

Frigate           3000-5000
Destroyer        5000-6000
Light Cruiser   6000-8000
Cruiser            8000-10000
Battle Cruiser  10000-12000
Battleship        12000-25000
Dreadnought    <25000

My fleets tend to be heavy with Cruisers and Battle Cruisers with a small back bone of Battleships.  The DDs are divided between escort and patrol type vessels.  My CLs are almost exclusively escort types for task force anit-missile defense.  Frigates are usually early game builds then relegated to picket duties.
 

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Aurora Designer
  • Star Marshal
  • S
  • Posts: 11677
  • Thanked: 20470 times
Re: Ship Classifications
« Reply #13 on: November 09, 2009, 06:20:42 AM »
I try to avoid setting a range for particular types of ship, mainly because sizes tend to inflate over time and what was classed as a battleship a hundred years ago might be a large destroyer today. For example, when the ironclad battleship HMS inflexible was built in 1876, she mounted larger guns than those of any previous British warship and had the thickest armour ever to be fitted to a Royal Navy ship. She was 11,000 tons. That was the size of a heavy cruiser in WW2 and a large destroyer today. An Arleigh Burke is 8500 tons, a Royal Navy Type 45 is 8000 tons and a Japanese Kongo is 9000 tons. The Zumwalt class is 14,500 tons. A WW1 destroyer was 1-2000 tons.

That is the reason I left hull designations as purely cosmetic so people could decide for themselves and perhaps change those designations over time as ships generally get larger.

Steve
 

Offline waresky

  • Registered
  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1486
  • Thanked: 8 times
  • Alpine Mountaineer..ohh Yeah!
Re: Ship Classifications
« Reply #14 on: November 09, 2009, 07:58:31 AM »
Quote from: "Sotak246"
I usually use these as my weight classifications:

Frigate           3000-5000
Destroyer        5000-6000
Light Cruiser   6000-8000
Cruiser            8000-10000
Battle Cruiser  10000-12000
Battleship        12000-25000
Dreadnought    <25000

My fleets tend to be heavy with Cruisers and Battle Cruisers with a small back bone of Battleships.  The DDs are divided between escort and patrol type vessels.  My CLs are almost exclusively escort types for task force anit-missile defense.  Frigates are usually early game builds then relegated to picket duties.
25000 (puny) DREADNOUGHT Class???

AHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHHH..:D
In 2200 25.000 tons r right a decent Light Cruiser:DDDDD