Author Topic: Shipyard Changes  (Read 6062 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Steve Walmsley (OP)

  • Aurora Designer
  • Star Marshal
  • S
  • Posts: 11658
  • Thanked: 20379 times
Shipyard Changes
« on: October 17, 2007, 08:11:43 AM »
I have revamped shipyards for v2.4, based on the recent shipyards thread. The changes are as follows:

Each shipyard now has a name and consists of a Shipyard Complex plus one or more Slipways. The cost of the Shipyard Complex is 3600 (was 4800 in old rules) and it is built exactly as before using construction factories. When completed, the Shipyard Complex has a single Slipway with a capacity of 1000 tons. Additional Slipways and extra capacity for existing Slipways are built by the Shipyard Complex itself (without affecting the building of ships). Each Shipyard Complex is dedicated to building a specific class of ship and may build one of that class in each Slipway. The Complex may be retooled (see below) to build a different class of ship and this does not affect any ships currently under construction but once retooling is underway, no new tasks can be started. This simulates a shipyard getting ready for future construction while completing work on existing shipyard tasks. In effect, a Shipyard Complex has two distinct levels. The Slipway level, where ships are built, refitted, repaired and scrapped at the Racial Shipyard Rate, and the Shipyard level, where extra slipways are constructed, extra capacity is added and retooling is carried out, also at the Racial Shipyard Rate.

The functionality of the existing Shipbuilding tab on the Economics window has been cut down. The tab now shows the list of current tasks and the following buttons (all of which function identically to v2.3): Delete Task, Pause Task, Higher Priority, Lower Priority, Schedule. The list of shipyards has been replaced by a list of slipways, which is identical to the v2.3 shipyard list except that the first column shows the name of the shipyard at which each slipway is located. All the other columns are as before.

A new Manage Shipyards tab has been added. The top section is a grid control for shipyard complexes with the following columns:
?   Shipyard Name: Name of the shipyard complex
?   Total Slipways: How many slipways are in this shipyard complex
?   Capacity per Slipway: The maximum size ship that can be built at this shipyard complex
?   Available Slipways: How many slipways are empty. If this is zero, the Add Task button is greyed out when selecting this shipyard.
?   Assigned Class: The only ship class that can be built in the slipways of this shipyard complex
?   Current Complex Activity: What activity this complex is currently engaged in (this includes no activity, adding a slipway, adding extra capacity to all slipways or retooling for a different class).
?   Progress: Percentage of current activity that has been completed
?   Completion Date: When this activity is estimated to be complete.

Below the grid control is a section entitled Shipyard Complex Activity. This is where the expansion or retooling of the shipyard is set in motion. The player selects a shipyard complex and can then choose can choose from the following activities:
?   Add 500 ton Capacity per Slipway: This tasks adds 500 tons to the capacity of every slipway in the complex and costs 120 BP per slipway. So setting this activity for a shipyard complex with four slipways would cost 480 BP. Mineral use is split between Duranium and Neutronium.
?   Add 1000 ton Capacity per Slipway: As above except it costs 240 BP per slipway and adds 1000 tons instead of 500 tons
?   Add 2000 ton Capacity per Slipway: As above except it costs 480 BP per slipway and adds 2000 tons of capacity
?   Add Extra Slipway: This costs 120 BP for every 500 tons of capacity per slipway at this shipyard complex. For example, if a shipyard had a capacity of 5000 tons per slipway then adding an extra slipway would cost 1200 BP. Mineral use is split between Duranium and Neutronium.
?   Retool for Selected Class (class chosen from separate dropdown): Costs 0.5x ship class cost plus 0.25x ship class cost per slipway. So if a shipyard with two slipways wanted to start building a class that cost 800 BP, the cost to retool would be 800 x (0.5+0.25+0.25) = 800 BP. If there were four slipways, the cost would be 800 x (0.5+(0.25x4)) = 1200 BP. Mineral use is based on the minerals used in the class. Only classes that are small enough to fit within the shipyard?s capacity can be selected.

Shipyard Activity can be paused, to conserve minerals, or abandoned. If an Add Extra Slipway or Retool activity is abandoned then all work is lost. If an Add Extra Capacity activity is ended then the percentage of work done on the task will be added to the shipyard, rounded down to the nearest hundred tons. For example, if a shipyard has done 75% of an Add Extra 500 Capacity activity when it is abandoned, then the shipyard gains 300 capacity (500 x 0.75 = 375).

The rate at which extra slipways or extra capacity is added is based on the shipbuilding rate of the population at which the shipyard is based. So adding an extra slipway for 1200 BP would take an amount of time equal to 1200 / pop shipbuilding rate. This includes any bonuses from commanders and any penalties for unrest, radiation, etc. The rate at which retooling takes place is based on the shipbuilding rate of the population at which the shipyard is based multiplied by the number of slipways. So changing to a new class for 800 BP would take an amount of time equal to 800 / (pop shipbuilding rate * slipways). This actually means that shipyards with a lot of slipways will take slightly less time to retool than smaller complexes and will pay a little less per slipway, although the overall cost will still be higher. This is to simulate the benefits of mass production.

While all the above is happening, the shipyard can still build ships. A third section called Create Task is at the bottom of this tab. This is very similar to the existing Shipyard Tab in v2.3 and includes the following controls:
?   Task Type dropdown: Tasks available are Construction, Refit, Repair and Scrap
?   New Class text box: Shows the class that can be built in the currently selected complex
?   Refit Class Dropdown. Slipways can refit any other class to their dedicated class. This dropdown and the accompany ship dropdown allow the user to select a ship to be refitted to the new class. This dropdown is also used (with a different label) for Repair and Scrap. Any Slipway can repair or scrap any ship as long as the ship?s size is within its capacity. At some point in the future I may replace this with some type of Repair Yard
?   Ship Name box: Name of ship about to be built
?   Build Cost: Cost of the construction, refit, repair or scrap task.
?   Task Group: The fleet in which new construction will be placed
?   Completion Date: Estimated date on which the task will be finished.
?   Required Materials: Shows list of minerals that will be consumed by this task.

The new manning requirement for shipyards is equal to one million for each shipyard complex plus 100 per ton of total capacity. For example, a Shipyard with two 5000 ton slipways would be 1m + (10,000 x 100) = 2m. The new signature of shipyards for sensor purposes is equal to the manning requirement in millions x 20.

Because of these changes and the extra detail they add, shipyards can no longer be transported by freighter. They will also no longer appear in ruins so you don?t have a useless shipyard you can?t move.

New races will get half the number of shipyards they had in the past but each shipyard complex will have 1-3 slipways and will have a capacity of 2D5 x 1000 tons (2000 ? 10,000).

This probably sounds a more complex change than it is in reality. In game terms, the differences are that shipyard capacity is actually a little cheaper than before but takes longer to build. However, because you can build up capacity while your construction factories are working on something else and also while ships are being built, in reality I think that shipyard capacity will grow more quickly than before. It also means that you need to put some thought into buliding your fleet and what ship types you will need in the future. Building additional slipways is easier than creating new shipyards and yards with many slipways are cheaper to retool on a per-slipway basis. However, more shipyards gives you more concurrent classes to build.

Steve
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Steve Walmsley »
 

Offline Randy

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • Posts: 146
  • Thanked: 1 times
(No subject)
« Reply #1 on: October 17, 2007, 11:28:49 AM »
Just a few comments...

1. Retool mineral cost - So for the 1200BP retool cost for the 800 BP ship, does this mean it takes 1.5x the minerals to build the ship to retool to build the ship?

2. Retool time - for a 800BP ship, if the complex has 2 slipway the cost = 800, if four then cost = 1200. If racial build rate = 800 then the 2 SWSY will take 800/1600 or 6 months, while the 4 SWSY will take 1200/3200 or  4.5 months Right?

3. I think given the retool cost, the cost for SW and SY are extremeely high. In the range of 10 to 20 x...  But I'd rather see the retool mineral cost be based on the same minerals used to build the SW and SY in the first place.

4. Mass production benefit - this will rarely be seen given the overall philosophy of low ship numbers.  You would need to build a lot of ships at the same time to derive any benefit out of it. But you also need a SY complex the right size. For example, if you had a complex with 12 SW and another with 6 SW, but you wanted to build 8 ships of a particular class, which complex should retool to build it? The 12 SW yard will retool for about 13% less cost per SW, but 75% more overall.
  This increased cost works out to the cost of 1.5 ships...

5. "Capacity is cheaper to but slower to build"
  I believe you will find the reverse is true - you can build capacity faster, but it will cost _much_ more.

  For example, considering your Manchu III class battle cruiser (10,000 tons, 1711 BP) and assuming minerals are used 1:1 with build points, under the old rules to be able to build a single one of these on a planet with no SY would cost 4800 BP, 4800 minerals plus ship cost.
  With the new rules in the same situation it will cost 5760 BP plus 5760 minerals for the capacity, plus 1283.5 BP and 1283.5 minerals for retooling for a total cost of 7043 BP and minerals plus the cost of the ship. A net 47% increase in cost.

To be able to build 10 at a time the infrastructure costs would be:
Old style:  48000 BP and Minerals
New: 32,400 BP and minerals (1/3 cheaper) - good.

To build 10 each of 10 different designs (assume all designs are equivalent to the Manchu III, and exclude the actual cost of the ships):
Old: 48,000 BP and minerals
New: 78,690 BP and minerals (2/3 more expensive) - bad...

the break even point comes at about the third design built - it would cost about the same both ways.

This says to me that the retool cost is way too high, while the build cost seems about right...
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Randy »
 

Offline mavikfelna

  • Lieutenant
  • *******
  • Posts: 157
    • http://www.geocities.com/mavikfelna
  • 2021 Supporter 2021 Supporter : Donate for 2021
(No subject)
« Reply #2 on: October 17, 2007, 12:10:57 PM »
I really think you should be able to build multiple classes within a shipyard.

Having to have a seperate yard for Geo survey and WP survey ships when the only difference between the two is the sensor type seems really silly. Even the Russian shipyards that you're basing this change on could usually build 2 or 3 different classes of sub, even at the smaller yards.

I'm not sure what limit on the number of classes that are able to be built in a given yard should be. Maybe add 50% to the retooling cost for each class already available in the yard. You can remove a class from the available list at any time for no cost, but if you then want to restart building that class, you have to pay the full retooling cost like any other new class.

So as an example. You could have a commercial yard, making your freighters and colony transports, including jump variants, an auxillaries yard making a collier design and a troop transport, a "littoral" craft yard for your corvettes and 2 gunboat designs, a carrier yard making 1 carrier design, and a cruisers yard making 2 different classes of cruisers.  You might have 10 slipways in the commercial yard, 1 in the auxillary yard, 5 in the littorial yard, 1 in the carrier yard and 2 in the curiser yard.

If you then decided to remove a freighter class to replace it with a newer design, it would cost an additional 200% of the normal retooling cost (4 total design).  If you decided to remove the carrier design and retool to a new carrier, the retooling cost would be normal, since there would be no additional classes being built. Or if you added a new auxilliar, say a salvage ship, to the auxilliary yard, it would be an additional 150% cost because of the existing two classes and adding a 3rd.

Hope that makes sense.

--Mav
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by mavikfelna »
 

Offline Steve Walmsley (OP)

  • Aurora Designer
  • Star Marshal
  • S
  • Posts: 11658
  • Thanked: 20379 times
(No subject)
« Reply #3 on: October 17, 2007, 12:13:48 PM »
Quote from: "Randy"
1. Retool mineral cost - So for the 1200BP retool cost for the 800 BP ship, does this mean it takes 1.5x the minerals to build the ship to retool to build the ship?
Yes for a yard with four slipways, which is 0.375x the ship cost per slipway.

Quote
2. Retool time - for a 800BP ship, if the complex has 2 slipway the cost = 800, if four then cost = 1200. If racial build rate = 800 then the 2 SWSY will take 800/1600 or 6 months, while the 4 SWSY will take 1200/3200 or  4.5 months Right?
Yes. I am not completely happy with this but if I don't include a modifier for the number of SW then it would take a long time to retool large SY. I have also considered using racial build rate plus 1/2 racial build rate for every SW. In this case it would 800/1600 (6 months) for the 2 SW shipyard and 1200/2400 (6 months). Bear in mind that you don't have to take the SY offline to do the retooling so with good planning, there should only be minor delays in production.

Quote
3. I think given the retool cost, the cost for SW and SY are extremely high. In the range of 10 to 20 x...  But I'd rather see the retool mineral cost be based on the same minerals used to build the SW and SY in the first place.
The minerals are based on the class because if you are building cargo ships you will presumably need very different equipment that if you were building warships.

Quote
4. Mass production benefit - this will rarely be seen given the overall philosophy of low ship numbers.  You would need to build a lot of ships at the same time to derive any benefit out of it. But you also need a SY complex the right size. For example, if you had a complex with 12 SW and another with 6 SW, but you wanted to build 8 ships of a particular class, which complex should retool to build it? The 12 SW yard will retool for about 13% less cost per SW, but 75% more overall.
  This increased cost works out to the cost of 1.5 ships...
I think you would avoid getting into a situation where you only have two shipyards with large numbers of SW. Also, bear in mind that you don't have to retool so you can build every ship at once. If you had a SY with 2 SW, you could retool that and build 8 ships over a period of time (as happens in reality)

Quote
5. "Capacity is cheaper to but slower to build"
  I believe you will find the reverse is true - you can build capacity faster, but it will cost _much_ more.
I said later in the same paragraph that "in reality I think that shipyard capacity will grow more quickly than before"

Quote
 For example, considering your Manchu III class battle cruiser (10,000 tons, 1711 BP) and assuming minerals are used 1:1 with build points, under the old rules to be able to build a single one of these on a planet with no SY would cost 4800 BP, 4800 minerals plus ship cost.
  With the new rules in the same situation it will cost 5760 BP plus 5760 minerals for the capacity, plus 1283.5 BP and 1283.5 minerals for retooling for a total cost of 7043 BP and minerals plus the cost of the ship. A net 47% increase in cost.

To be able to build 10 at a time the infrastructure costs would be:
Old style:  48000 BP and Minerals
New: 32,400 BP and minerals (1/3 cheaper) - good.

To build 10 each of 10 different designs (assume all designs are equivalent to the Manchu III, and exclude the actual cost of the ships):
Old: 48,000 BP and minerals
New: 78,690 BP and minerals (2/3 more expensive) - bad...

the break even point comes at about the third design built - it would cost about the same both ways.

Which is good, because that is the type of thing I was aiming for. In reality, unit costs fall as you bulid more of a particular class. Also, it is cheaper under the new system to create shipyards to build smaller ships so Empires with less money and smaller ships will be better off than before.

Steve
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Steve Walmsley »
 

Offline Steve Walmsley (OP)

  • Aurora Designer
  • Star Marshal
  • S
  • Posts: 11658
  • Thanked: 20379 times
(No subject)
« Reply #4 on: October 17, 2007, 12:43:07 PM »
Quote from: "mavikfelna"
I really think you should be able to build multiple classes within a shipyard.

Having to have a seperate yard for Geo survey and WP survey ships when the only difference between the two is the sensor type seems really silly. Even the Russian shipyards that you're basing this change on could usually build 2 or 3 different classes of sub, even at the smaller yards.

I'm not sure what limit on the number of classes that are able to be built in a given yard should be. Maybe add 50% to the retooling cost for each class already available in the yard. You can remove a class from the available list at any time for no cost, but if you then want to restart building that class, you have to pay the full retooling cost like any other new class.

So as an example. You could have a commercial yard, making your freighters and colony transports, including jump variants, an auxillaries yard making a collier design and a troop transport, a "littoral" craft yard for your corvettes and 2 gunboat designs, a carrier yard making 1 carrier design, and a cruisers yard making 2 different classes of cruisers.  You might have 10 slipways in the commercial yard, 1 in the auxillary yard, 5 in the littorial yard, 1 in the carrier yard and 2 in the curiser yard.

If you then decided to remove a freighter class to replace it with a newer design, it would cost an additional 200% of the normal retooling cost (4 total design).  If you decided to remove the carrier design and retool to a new carrier, the retooling cost would be normal, since there would be no additional classes being built. Or if you added a new auxilliar, say a salvage ship, to the auxilliary yard, it would be an additional 150% cost because of the existing two classes and adding a 3rd.

Hope that makes sense.

It does. At the moment, retooling costs are based on either the new cost of a class or the refit cost from the previous class, whichever is closer. So if you want to build several geo ships and then retool to build several grav survey ships, it would cost you a lot less than retooling a yard currently building colony ships.

One option I considered was allowing a shipyard to also build ships of different classes that are within a small refit cost (perhaps 10% of total cost) of the class they are setup to build. This would allow you to build close variants without having to retool. The drawback to this is that every time you a player selected a shipyard I would have to recheck the refit cost of all classes, which might take a while.

In any event, I think once people start playing with the new shipyards, they may find this isn't a big deal at they might think. Most races are going to start with several shipyards with 1-3 SW per shipyard so unless they want to concurrently build a wide range of different types, the retooling shouldn't be a major issue, given some planning. You could either build the geo and grav survey ships in two separate, small yards or build the geo then sort out the small retooling costs before the geo's are complete so you are ready to immediately build grav survey ships.

Steve
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Steve Walmsley »
 

Offline Doug Olchefske

  • Petty Officer
  • **
  • Posts: 29
  • Thanked: 1 times
(No subject)
« Reply #5 on: October 17, 2007, 01:18:12 PM »
Quote from: "Steve Walmsley"

In any event, I think once people start playing with the new shipyards, they may find this isn't a big deal at they might think. Most races are going to start with several shipyards with 1-3 SW per shipyard so unless they want to concurrently build a wide range of different types, the retooling shouldn't be a major issue, given some planning. You could either build the geo and grav survey ships in two separate, small yards or build the geo then sort out the small retooling costs before the geo's are complete so you are ready to immediately build grav survey ships.

Steve


This is exactly the issue. I frequently have multiple classes being built at the same time, adding one or two at a time. With this change I'll need multiple shipyards with 1 or 2 slipways and have to track which builds which. This change is fine if you surge out a bunch at once, but I usually don't need a bunch at once.

In this case I think you've added more complexity and micromanagement at the expense of utility and fun. I think you'd be better off having fewer but larger shipyards and have specialization at the slipway level.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Doug Olchefske »
 

Offline Steve Walmsley (OP)

  • Aurora Designer
  • Star Marshal
  • S
  • Posts: 11658
  • Thanked: 20379 times
(No subject)
« Reply #6 on: October 17, 2007, 01:33:42 PM »
Quote from: "Doug Olchefske"
This is exactly the issue. I frequently have multiple classes being built at the same time, adding one or two at a time. With this change I'll need multiple shipyards with 1 or 2 slipways and have to track which builds which. This change is fine if you surge out a bunch at once, but I usually don't need a bunch at once.
I would have thought the reverse would be true. This new method favours one or two ships of a particular being built concurrently, as in reality, rather than trying to suddenly build ten at once, which happens in Starfire but not in reality. In terms of tracking what shipyards build what class, that is done for your on the new Manage Shipyards tab

Quote
In this case I think you've added more complexity and micromanagement at the expense of utility and fun. I think you'd be better off having fewer but larger shipyards and have specialization at the slipway level.

I am prepared to reconsider this after playtesting but if specialization was at the slipway level, there is no point having shipyards and slipways. You may has well have the old system and just specialise each individual shipyard. Although having many shipyards with one or two slipways each under the new system will accomplish the same thing.

Steve
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Steve Walmsley »
 

Offline Erik L

  • Administrator
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • *****
  • Posts: 5656
  • Thanked: 366 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 #7 on: October 17, 2007, 01:37:36 PM »
So if I have 2 flavors of survey vessels (geo & grav), a DDE, a DDG, a DD, and a DDL class, plus colony and freighters; to build any one of these at a given moment, I'd need 8 shipyards. :(
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Erik Luken »
 

Offline Þórgrímr

  • Rear Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 863
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • The World of the Gunny
(No subject)
« Reply #8 on: October 17, 2007, 01:47:37 PM »
Steve, below is the current schedule for the Bath Iron Works here in the US, notice it is building two different types of DDG's at the same time. And the Zumwalt is just about as different from the other class as you can get.  :D


Code: [Select]
Shipbuilder Location Type of Vessel  Customer Pennant #s  Yard # or  Contract Status Name   Description  Price ($mm)  Delivery

Bath Iron Works  Bath ME Destroyer  U.S. Navy  DDG  104 501 Sterett 9,238 ldt, FY 02 464.4  9-Nov-07
Bath Iron Works Bath ME Destroyer U.S. Navy DDG 106 502 Stockdale 9,238 ldt, FY 03 409.1  6-Jun-08
Bath Iron Works Bath ME Destroyer U.S. Navy DDG 108 503 Wayne E. Meyer 9,238 ldt, FY 04 485.0 16-Jan-09
Bath Iron Works Bath ME Destroyer U.S. Navy DDG 109 504 Jason Dunham 9,238 ldt, FY 04 524.7 14-Aug-09
Bath Iron Works Bath ME Destroyer U.S. Navy DDG 111 505 Spruance 9,238 ldt, FY 05 488.6 30-May-10
Bath Iron Works Bath ME Destroyer U.S. Navy DDG 112 506  9,238 ldt, FY 06  562.4 31-Dec-10
Bath Iron Works Bath ME Destroyer U.S. Navy DDG 1000 507 Zumwalt 14,564 ldt, FY 07 ~1,292 Dec-12

Electric Boat New London CT Submarine U.S. Navy SSGN 729 Firm Georgia 15,275 ldt, FY 05 120 Sep-07
Electric Boat New London CT Submarine U.S. Navy SSN 778 261 New Hampshire 7,700 ldt, FY 03 1,487 Apr-09
Electric Boat New London CT Submarine U.S. Navy SSN 780 262  7,700 ldt, FY 05 1,533 Apr-11
Electric Boat New London CT Submarine U.S. Navy SSN 782 263  7,700 ldt, FY 07 1,744 Apr-13
Electric Boat New London CT Submarine U.S. Navy SSN 784 Option  7,700 ldt, FY 08 1,902 Apr-15


EDIT: I just noticed the Electric Boat SY is also multiclassing, a SSGN and SSN's at the same time. And if you notice, in each case neither class is within 10% of the tonnage of each other.



So I am also in favor of multiple class types for shipyards.



Cheers,
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Þórgrímr »
Sic vis pacem, para bellum
If you want peace, prepare for war
 

Offline Þórgrímr

  • Rear Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 863
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • The World of the Gunny
(No subject)
« Reply #9 on: October 17, 2007, 02:00:20 PM »
Sorry about this extra post but this one highlights the ability to multiclass even better.  :D


Code: [Select]
Shipbuilder Location Type of Vessel Pennant #s Yard # or Status Name Description Price Delivery


Marinette Marine Marinette WI Lighterage U.S. Navy (NAVFAC)   Firm   Year 1 126.0 Dec-07
Marinette Marine Marinette WI Lighterage U.S. Navy (NAVFAC)   Options   Years 2-3 144.0 Dec-09
Marinette Marine Marinette WI Littoral Combat Ship U.S. Navy LCS 1 Firm Freedom FY 05  188.2 31-Dec-06
Marinette Marine Marinette WI Response Boats U.S. Coast Guard   Firm   Year 1   Dec-07
Marinette Marine Marinette WI Response Boats U.S. Coast Guard   Options   Years 2-9   Dec-16
Marinette Marine Marinette WI Tug K-Sea Transportation  LOI    Dec-09
Marinette Marine Marinette WI Tug K-Sea Transportation  LOI    Dec-10



Cheers,
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Þórgrímr »
Sic vis pacem, para bellum
If you want peace, prepare for war
 

Offline Pete_Keller

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • P
  • Posts: 69
(No subject)
« Reply #10 on: October 17, 2007, 02:25:32 PM »
Quote from: "??rgr?mr"
Code: [Select]
Shipbuilder Location Type of Vessel  Customer Pennant #s  Yard # or  Contract Status Name   Description  Price ($mm)  Delivery

Electric Boat New London CT Submarine U.S. Navy SSGN 729 Firm Georgia 15,275 ldt, FY 05 120 Sep-07
Electric Boat New London CT Submarine U.S. Navy SSN 778 261 New Hampshire 7,700 ldt, FY 03 1,487 Apr-09
Electric Boat New London CT Submarine U.S. Navy SSN 780 262  7,700 ldt, FY 05 1,533 Apr-11
Electric Boat New London CT Submarine U.S. Navy SSN 782 263  7,700 ldt, FY 07 1,744 Apr-13
Electric Boat New London CT Submarine U.S. Navy SSN 784 Option  7,700 ldt, FY 08 1,902 Apr-15

EDIT: I just noticed the Electric Boat SY is also multiclassing, a SSGN and SSN's at the same time. And if you notice, in each case neither class is within 10% of the tonnage of each other.



So I am also in favor of multiple class types for shipyards.



Cheers, ??rgr?mr


??rgr?mr,

The SSGN is an upgrade from SSBN to SSGN.  It is NOT new construction.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Pete_Keller »
 

Offline Þórgrímr

  • Rear Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 863
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • The World of the Gunny
(No subject)
« Reply #11 on: October 17, 2007, 02:34:53 PM »
Maybe so, but the point is still relevant, two different classes are being worked on at the same time.  :D



Cheers,
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Þórgrímr »
Sic vis pacem, para bellum
If you want peace, prepare for war
 

Offline Pete_Keller

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • P
  • Posts: 69
(No subject)
« Reply #12 on: October 17, 2007, 02:56:10 PM »
??rgr?mr,

Where did you get the info?

Pete
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Pete_Keller »
 

Offline Þórgrímr

  • Rear Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 863
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • The World of the Gunny
(No subject)
« Reply #13 on: October 17, 2007, 03:22:02 PM »
Quote from: "Pete_Keller"
??rgr?mr,

Where did you get the info?

Pete


Right here good sir.  :D


http://www.coltoncompany.com/shipbldg/contracts.htm



Cheers, ??rgr?mr
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Þórgrímr »
Sic vis pacem, para bellum
If you want peace, prepare for war
 

Offline Randy

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • Posts: 146
  • Thanked: 1 times
(No subject)
« Reply #14 on: October 17, 2007, 03:47:47 PM »
Quote
The minerals are based on the class because if you are building cargo ships you will presumably need very different equipment that if you were building warships.


But what you are making the ship out of really has nothing to do with the _tools_ used to build the ships.

If I'm building a gold wiring jig, likely I am not making the jig out of gold just because the wires are gold.

 Same for armor - I'll build the tools out of the cheapest materials that can do the job, but I really don't need all the braces used to hold the hull in place before joing the plates together made out of the same high grade armour that I'm using to build the hull...

  Same goes for various pieces on all the weapon systems.

  On the other hand, the robots used to build each ship are largely the same - they just need different programs (and attachments).

  Given the above, I'd assume that building a SW and SY will use roughly the same materials regaurdless of the actual ships being built at that SY.

  It just feels so wrong that the actual class determines the minerals required for the tools...

  And while we are at it, what happens to the old tools? They can't be getting recycled, otherwise the initial class an SY is tooled for would cost more than subsequent classes. And if they are merely being set aside, then going back to a previous class that an SY was tooled for should cost _much_ less.  So which is it? :-)


   The retooling times will encourage larger numbers of SW - the optimum seems around 5 or 6 (more results in diminishing returns for the investment, less is lower efficiency). This sort of gets a reasonably fast retooling time and minimizes the cost associated with retooling.

The only way this dosn't work is if you build a lot of one-off designs. Of course, with the retooling rules, there is _very_ little incentive for a one-off. It will tie up an entire SY until done, will cost a minimum of 75% of the cost of the ship, and then there is the retooling time itself - 75% of the construction time of the ship.
  Simply going to 2 SW reduces the retool time to 50%, and the retool cost to 100%...

Conceptually, I like the overall idea. I just think that certain parts need to be rebalanced - most importantly the retooling costs in minerals.
« Last Edit: December 31, 1969, 06:00:00 PM by Randy »