Weedle McHairybug wrote:A bit of a sidenote, but I find it to be slightly ironic that the carrier-type ships for the Imperial Navy are smaller than the dreadnoughts/battleships, often barely being at battlecruiser level, when in real life, the opposite is true, that the carriers are more likely to dwarf even dreadnoughts (certainly the supercarriers such as the Nimitz-class.).
Carriers being smaller than capital ships is actually true to their real life equivalents. Look at a few carriers and their contemporary capital ships:
Of these, Graf Zeppelin might be dismissed as a first attempt and Illustrious/KGV as treaty-limited, but the others are all post-treaty ships designed against a background of long experience, and they're all a lot smaller than their contemporary battleships. True, modern carriers are a lot bigger, but there are no contemporary capital ships to compare them against.
While that's a good point, that only considers displacement not actual size, which is always going to give you a slightly skewed view since battleships have to carry 8-12 heavy guns (at 100+ tonnes apiece) plus several thousand tonnes of armour as well, which carriers do not. Using same classes but using length instead:
So in terms of physical size rather than displacement, carriers are pretty damn close to their contemporary battleships and in two cases (Midway/Iowa and Zepellin/Bismarck) are longer by ten metres or more.
Baltar: "I don't want to miss a moment of the last Battlestar's destruction!"
Centurion: "Sir, I really think you should look at the other Battlestar."
Baltar: "What are you babbling about other...it's impossible!"
Centurion: "No. It is a Battlestar."
Corrax Entry 7:17: So you walk eternally through the shadow realms, standing against evil where all others falter. May your thirst for retribution never quench, may the blood on your sword never dry, and may we never need you again.
Weedle McHairybug wrote:A bit of a sidenote, but I find it to be slightly ironic that the carrier-type ships for the Imperial Navy are smaller than the dreadnoughts/battleships, often barely being at battlecruiser level, when in real life, the opposite is true, that the carriers are more likely to dwarf even dreadnoughts (certainly the supercarriers such as the Nimitz-class.).
Carriers being smaller than capital ships is actually true to their real life equivalents. Look at a few carriers and their contemporary capital ships:
Of these, Graf Zeppelin might be dismissed as a first attempt and Illustrious/KGV as treaty-limited, but the others are all post-treaty ships designed against a background of long experience, and they're all a lot smaller than their contemporary battleships. True, modern carriers are a lot bigger, but there are no contemporary capital ships to compare them against.
While that's a good point, that only considers displacement not actual size, which is always going to give you a slightly skewed view since battleships have to carry 8-12 heavy guns (at 100+ tonnes apiece) plus several thousand tonnes of armour as well, which carriers do not. Using same classes but using length instead:
So in terms of physical size rather than displacement, carriers are pretty damn close to their contemporary battleships and in two cases (Midway/Iowa and Zepellin/Bismarck) are longer by ten metres or more.
Part of that, though, comes down the restrictions of our aircraft - needing a runway for takeoff and landing, and the better the planes (generally, at that time) the bigger the runway. Remove that restriction and consider only how many smallcraft per unit volume of "carrier", and the tonnage disparity makes more sense as a comparison point.
The guns are currently all ISDII octuples. I'm thinking of changing the brim-trench ones into consolidated batteries of quadruple barbettes like on the Secutor. Reactor volume scaling puts this ship at around 5.5 ISD equivalents - almost an Allegiance. Round down for carrier considerations chewing into power, so looking at 4-5 ISD equivalents.
Giel's carrier was the original horn-pronged carrier, then Relentless, then this ship, chronologically by design date. If you have not seen IMPS:Relentless and Troops before that by the same people, you are doing yourself an immense disservice. It's anime TIE fighter short cool. Trust me.
As for my rationalizations of a horned prow design in general (other than that it looks awesome, which it does):
It is less structurally sound than a solid dagger. The issue is that hangar operations cares about area as much as volume. Having compact internal volume may be well and good for unitary elements like turrets, reactors, etc., but is death for a carrier's sortie generation. For flight control, I think two options is good: one area for deployment, and one for recovery. Even more options are good for splitting a possible ground force stream from fighters. Having launch bays forward in the prongs are good because it maximizes bay area, and keeping a ventral hangar setup is good for options for retrieval.
I think the natural posture for one of these ships in fleet action is way out at the edge, pointed away from the enemy. A carrier will need to mask its hangars from fire somehow, so a ship with bays all around may actually be worse than one with bays in 1-2 places.
I also happen to think that most of the horned-prow ships are conversions of full daggers or modifications on full dagger designs. Giel's carrier is a straight modification of the Praetor. I expect this ship to be paired with a 4.2-4.5km full dagger medium cruiser. A modification would keep the structural elements that run along the edge of the dagger, and remove a lot of heavy stuff (reactors, armor, guns/recoil mechanisms) and replace them with... air or void (hangar and launch area). That makes the structural implications much less.
I expect the carrier variants to be quicker with a similar same powerplant, but less well armed due to loss of weapons in the bow and subsidiary reactor power.
I'll make sure to watch that Relentless and Troops series when I have the time (unfortunately, being busy with Metal Gear Wiki and trying to make sure I not only expand on the various Event FOB descriptions as well as their prizes, but also fully expand my FOBs and get 100% in everything before I inevitably retire from the Metal Gear Wiki due to some negative issues I have with that series and to some extent the users on there [like or hate anything, I'm not exactly one who intends to leave something unfinished or leave out any facts, as it's simply not good form at all] isn't exactly going to leave me much free time. And that's not even taking into account Star Fox Zero, which I'm eagerly awaiting for its release on the Wii U.). Those series definitely sound interesting though, and from the looks on the website and the concept art for Episode 1 more specifically, I can certainly see why it looks like the Relentless.
And nice work on the improvements to the ship, and I must admit, the upper portion of the left claw and the ventral area aside, it looks like you've nearly gotten the finishing touches down. Though that being said... didn't the central bay portion have some detailing on the side of the ridge the central bay was on? What happened to it?
I know you said you'd like to take a break on the big vessels, and I respect the decision, but I might as well ask... if and when you do get back to big vessels, do you ever consider making actual renders for the Bellator's design cousins, the Mandator I, II, and III-class dreadnoughts? You already did the Bellator, and although I know the size variations between the Bellator and the Mandator III were mostly due to miscommunication with Fry on the figures, I'm still a bit curious regarding how all four ships would look, beyond simply the knowledge that they share the same humpback design features, I mean (besides, based on the in-universe reason for the size divergences between the two, I'd suspect the Mandator III-class would be littered with various turrets and other weaponry). But hey, it's no hurry, since you've already got enough on your plate as it is, what with the Stormtrooper transport, the Preying Mantis finishing touches, the fleet carrier finishing touches, and probably that Giel's carrier ship from the comics and all that, and besides, you said you wanted to take a break from the big vessels, and I'm more than willing to honor that decision.
And since someone suggested either on here or Scifi-Meshes that you do an expansion of the Naval Station Validusia a while back due to the obvious new vessels you have made since you first made it, I might as well ask... I know the docking arms were derived from Star Wars: X-Wing, but was there anything either in real life or any place else in Star Wars Legends that you were inspired to create that naval station? Like, was it based on the Norfolk Naval Shipyards or something like that? I know that you certainly thought based on a prior comment that the naval station was obviously of high-enough strategic importance for the Empire to mandate the presence of otherwise rarely-produced TIE/D Defenders to guard it (mostly due to the Star Dreadnoughts being housed there), but not much else beyond that.
I was also going to ask about the Ilthmar's Fist, Stellar Halo, Luminous, Event Horizon, and Aurora rendering jobs, but I'll wait to do that, at least until I both find out what specific class those ships were (if they were even of the listed classes for battlecruisers and Star Dreadnoughts in The Essential Guide to Warfare belonging to the Empire, anyway, since that's where they originated, or at the very least named) and see if creating them is allowed with his say so, in case of copyrights. Depending on his answer on them, you might already have the renders for them anyways and thus wouldn't be necessary, or you may have to make new renders (either a ship class from Star Wars you have yet to design, or even one that was simply made up by you/fanon by another user). Of course even if I do get an answer, I won't press the issue much other than telling you which classes, if any, the ships belong to as an FYI, knowing your wanting to take a break from big ships.
One last thing, as I really didn't get an answer to this regarding that fleet carrier: Other than it being bigger in terms of overall size than an Evakmar-KDY Consolidator-class Corps Landing Ship as well as larger than an ISD, is there a ballpark measurement for the size of this vessel?
Carrier is ~3.1km. Mandator variants would be a huge project, firmly in the "eventually but definitely not now" sphere. I'd expect a cross between a Bellator and Assertor in terms of final form for the III.
As far as the named ships goes, AFAIK they are all without any information about what they are, apart from them being larger than an ISD.
Nice update. Though I must admit, I didn't see it on your website. Not that it matters... It's still a very nice update, and I see the side of the central bay ridge now has detail again.
And I'm not incorrect in assuming that, despite its size normally placing it in the battlecruiser length according to the Anaxes War College (even though this is for your own fun and not for Legends Canon), it's similar to the Secutor-class Star Destroyer in that it's carrier function as well as lacking much weaponry would downgrade it to destroyer level, right?
Fair enough regarding the Mandator class, and I think I can get a reasonable picture of the Mandator III's final form in my head from your description of it.
Anyways, I'll let you know about those ships as soon as Fry contacts me back.
Just so we're aware, are you planning to have us give suggestions for the name (like with the Chi, Consolidator, and Fulgor-classes), or are you planning to name the carrier yourself (like with the Kontos-class)? Also, I know with Giel's Carrier, it most likely will be Procursator Mark II-class battlecruiser/carrier variant since you said it was most likely a variant of that ship, but I don't think we've actually seen the ship this acted as a variant to (I know it has visual similarities to the Relentless, but I don't think its ever been established whether you got the idea of this project from the Relentless or not).
I'll be honest, the Anaxes system was in place well before I was involved in the project. I would have argued for the breakpoints to be via power generation, or at least volume, but that probably wouldn't have been as snappy on the page. Length I think is a fairly meaningless distinction for warships. Also like any bureaucratic system it should be rife with exceptions My personal preferred split would be 1e24W-1e26W range for Destroyer (light, line, heavy across that range), 1e26W-1e27W range for Battlecruiser (cruiser at bottom range, battlecruiser at top of range), and 1e27W-1e28W range for Dreadnought.
This carrier is firmly in battlecruiser territory. I fully expect the armament to approach 3-4 ISD equivalents as well. Secutor was packing 2.5-3 ISD equivalents in firepower already, so I wouldn't say it was downgraded - more like at the very upper end of destroyer classification.
I will be taking name suggestions for this .
Giel's carrier would be a Praetor variant. I got the forked nose idea from that ship. The superstructure comes from the Bellator design. The full hull companion to the ship I'm working on would never have been seen, since it's original.
This may be a bit generic, but how about a variation of "Portum" Latin for "harbor"
Praying is another way of doing nothing helpful
"Congratulations, you get a cookie. You almost got a fundamental English word correct." Pick
"Outlaw star has spaceships that punch eachother" Joviwan Read "Tales From The Crossroads"! Read "One Wrong Turn"!
fractalsponge1 wrote:. Length I think is a fairly meaningless distinction for warships. Also like any bureaucratic system it should be rife with exceptions My personal preferred split would be 1e24W-1e26W range for Destroyer (light, line, heavy across that range), 1e26W-1e27W range for Battlecruiser (cruiser at bottom range, battlecruiser at top of range), and 1e27W-1e28W range for Dreadnought.
That would be a nice way to designate Star Wars warships, but yeah length for most is certainly the easiest way to picture such a system.
Awesome job with carrier, I know they must take a ridiculous amount of effort on your part for the larger ships. Can't wait to see your take on a Mandator one day. FYI, the Assertor got featured in FFG supplement sourcebook recently in case you didn't know, but I imagine you would. Described as a sector command and control warship. Not as powerful as an Executor, but it says its turbolasers alone could nearly destroy a planet. At least two were made before Yavin, the Assertor and Wrath, which travels in large battle groups with Bellator and Mandator class dreadnoughts. Had a nice picture of one, reminiscent of the EGTW one.
fractalsponge1 wrote:. Length I think is a fairly meaningless distinction for warships. Also like any bureaucratic system it should be rife with exceptions My personal preferred split would be 1e24W-1e26W range for Destroyer (light, line, heavy across that range), 1e26W-1e27W range for Battlecruiser (cruiser at bottom range, battlecruiser at top of range), and 1e27W-1e28W range for Dreadnought.
That would be a nice way to designate Star Wars warships, but yeah length for most is certainly the easiest way to picture such a system.
Awesome job with carrier, I know they must take a ridiculous amount of effort on your part for the larger ships. Can't wait to see your take on a Mandator one day. FYI, the Assertor got featured in FFG supplement sourcebook recently in case you didn't know, but I imagine you would. Described as a sector command and control warship. Not as powerful as an Executor, but it says its turbolasers alone could nearly destroy a planet. At least two were made before Yavin, the Assertor and Wrath, which travels in large battle groups with Bellator and Mandator class dreadnoughts. Had a nice picture of one, reminiscent of the EGTW one.
Care to tell me which FFG supplement sourcebook? That would be interesting to note on Wookieepedia.
It has the Assertor, a new Imperial frigate, a newish Old Republic battlecruiser class, just mentions of the Bellator and Mandator, among a few other cool items.
It has the Assertor, a new Imperial frigate, a newish Old Republic battlecruiser class, just mentions of the Bellator and Mandator, among a few other cool items.
Hmm. Interesting. I guess that explains why a Bellator happened to be among the fleet in that refueling picture.
Also, didn't you say there was a picture of the Assertor in that book? I'd kinda like to see it. I'd also like a full set of figures of its armament, crew, hyperdrive rating, consumables, costs, and compliment as well.
FTeik wrote:Is there a reason for the forked bow to cover half the ship-lenght? Additional hangars perhaps?
You could say that.
Carrier's almost done.
I got an email with a shot of the Assertor in the book. Wasn't my stuff but done from scratch by another artist. The description is not what I would go with - Assertor was designed to be more energy dense and much more survivable than an Executor - probably about 1.5-2x scaling by broadside (depending on what exactly you think an Executor is capable of). The trade off is massive carrier capacity and acceleration. Being in battlegroups with Bellator and Mandators is absolutely what I intended though
Abacus wrote:Looking good! I like the engine exhausts. It looks fast, too.
Indeed, I'm curious about the engine layout, with the split bow design and a lot of open area due to the hangars, what is the design philosophy behind the huge engine bank?
Not critical about it, just curious.
They say, "the tree of liberty must be watered with the blood of tyrants and patriots." I suppose it never occurred to them that they are the tyrants, not the patriots. Those weapons are not being used to fight some kind of tyranny; they are bringing them to an event where people are getting together to talk. -Mike Wong
But as far as board culture in general, I do think that young male overaggression is a contributing factor to the general atmosphere of hostility. It's not SOS and the Mess throwing hand grenades all over the forum- Red
I'm envisioning the carrier as a variant of a full 4.3km dagger medium cruiser. The engines are designed to move that ship along at a good pace, but the carrier version cuts away a secondary reactor, about a third of the hull by volume, a good section of superstructure, and a fair chunk of guns, but keeps the engines. Makes the carrier very agile, which is good for a ship that needs to be able to stay out of melee.
What kind of hanger capacity do you envisage for the fleet carrier? Because the design-pair-battleship-thingie looks like it should hold a fair few fighters on it's own.
Baltar: "I don't want to miss a moment of the last Battlestar's destruction!"
Centurion: "Sir, I really think you should look at the other Battlestar."
Baltar: "What are you babbling about other...it's impossible!"
Centurion: "No. It is a Battlestar."
Corrax Entry 7:17: So you walk eternally through the shadow realms, standing against evil where all others falter. May your thirst for retribution never quench, may the blood on your sword never dry, and may we never need you again.
My personal preferred split would be 1e24W-1e26W range for Destroyer (light, line, heavy across that range), 1e26W-1e27W range for Battlecruiser (cruiser at bottom range, battlecruiser at top of range), and 1e27W-1e28W range for Dreadnought.
