ISW Timeline: When Weapons Affect Doctrine

[nik1979]

Hi I was wondering when certain technologies affected doctrine. As is given that all tech options are available in ISW, I have a hard time imagining and visualizing how ships looked in the flow of time.

[jason taylor]

Much of the human sense of aesthetics in the building of vehicles is associated with the need to minimize friction which in space is of course extremely low(better astronomers will tell the average number of micro meteoroids in a given cubic thousand miles). This sense of aesthetics may hang on though it will probably effect pleasure craft more(shipping lords are usually more interested in money to make their own mansions pretty then in prettying up their ships).

Despite that, the emphasis on length that exists in Terran wet-warships might remain for a different reason. A wall of battle, pre-messon gun will need to emphasize the most powerful weapons possible. As it seldom gets close enough for maneuver to be a factor turrets are less necessary. It may be that bay mounts are more common because of their simplistic structure and the fact that the hull itself is an easy place to carry them. Post-messon of course spinal mounts will become more common and these will also emphasize length.

Frontier traders, like the Lightnings, will often be streamlined to allow them to land without a starport on backwater planets, and/or to allow them to land outside the starport on smuggling runs.

The chief ships that emphasize beam would be heavy haulers where cargo space is the main consideration. They may need some consideration of weapons in a generations long period of hostilities, but they often operate well to the rear of the battle area and can afford to minimize.

[nik1979]

How about the military doctrine?

Like the affect of Repulsor Array* Imperial uses Missile doctrine and there is a TL10.

[jason taylor]

Originally Posted by nik1979

How about the military doctrine?

Like the affect of Repulsor Array* Imperial uses Missile doctrine and there is a TL10.

That would effectively be a type of close in weapons system. Of course if repulsors can fire on a wide beam they can disrupt a barrage upon arrival preventing it from overflooding the defensive AIs. The laser can follow on. If you like, the repulsors can be anti-missile infantry to stop the attack and the lasers anti-missile cavalry to take advantage before it reforms.

[nik1979]

Are repulsor arrays directional? Its under bay weapons.

[Voidstar]

One of the known TL 15 uses for repulsor arrays is docking and berthing systems... wether thats directional or not might be found in that material.

A repulsor turret should at TL 15 be able to work as a laser turret with LOS to zero in on incomming missles for defense and possible anti ship boarding...

[nik1979]

if repulsor arrays are directional, then wouldn't facing be declared? If so then they would need to be declared on the ship statistics.

Of course spinal mounts are clearly forward facing, although if there would be any exceptions they would be noted.

that goes that most bay weapons ideally would have facing? If so then some ships would have weapons mounted on the flanks and rear? The advanage becomes that the while the ship is moving one direction, like trying to outflank/outmanuver, their weapons are pointed at the opponent. Once you've detected the enemy and at your best engagement range, you'd want to maintain that right?

[Mike Wightman]

All tech options aren't available throughout the ISW though.

The Earth forces begin at TL9 and steadily rise to TL11, while the Imperium remains fixed at TL10.

Imperial ship design is said to favour missile bays, while the earth ships go for spinals, especially once the meson gun becomes available.

As for repulser arrays, 1 array can affect up to 100 missiles per turn, no facing requirement.

[nik1979]

Thanks Mike.
If thats the case about repulsor arrays, then its kind of a Cognitive dissonance to have Repulsor Arrays at TL10 and a Missile doctrine, unless RA's are an only terran invention? If both have access to RAs what would doctrine look like?

at 50kdtons
Both can carry as many fighters. So I consider it all negated.
35Turret slots for a spinal mount, leaving 88 for repulsor arrays or bay weapons and missile turrets to launch drones. At most a Vilani can have as much as 12 HMA for 432; easily 5 RAs are more than enough to fend off Vilani missile doctrine. the only recourse is using Fusion or Antimater WMD for proximity detonations at which point I'm getting confused.

So does that mean Terra's tech advantage is so great it plays out like when the west Carved up China? Reading the history outline, there appeared to be a fighting chance for the Vilani or am I mistaken? Hoping for some enlightening corrections thanks.

[Mike Wightman]

A light missile array fires 24 missiles per turn, a heavy missile array fires 36, so a 1 repulser array per 3 missile arrays would defend you against an equivalent ship.

As an aside, Earth probably made the jump from TL9 to TL10 relatively quickly - plenty of Imperial tech to study, steal even just trade.

What's more remarkable is how quickly they go from TL10 to TL11.