|
Deralian Naval and Planetary Defenses Request
| |
| King_Deralius_XX | Date: Tuesday, 24 May 2011, 2:19 PM | Message # 1 |
 Lieutenant
Group: Users
Messages: 45
Status: Offline
| Navy
1 Modified Venator Star Destroyer (plus complement)
3 Modified DP20 Frigates
plus several CR20 and CR25 Troop Carriers that have been modified for logistical use
Planetary Defenses
Planetary Shield
2 Planetary Turbolasers
1 Golan Space Defense SpaceGun
Venator Star Destroyer Modification
Eight (8) Medium Dual Turbolaser Turrets replacing the eight (8) Heavy Turbolasers, with terracing added
Addition of 40 Turbolaser Turrets
Heavy SPHA Turbolaser Cannon installed in Ventral Hangar Bay
Fighters - two (2) squadrons of ARC-170 Starfighters, three (3) squadrons of Alpha-3 Numbus-class V-Wings, three (3) squadrons of V-19 Torrent Starfighters
Shuttles - Thirty (30) Nu-class Attack Shuttles, sixteen (16) LAAT/i Gunships, ten (10) LAAT/c Gunships [Unoccupied hangars converted to use as storage facilities, medical centers, or additional troop barracks]
Surface Complement - Four hundred (400) Marines, five (5) TX-130 Saber-class Fighter Tanks, four (4) All Terrain-Recon Transports, four (4) All Terrain-eXpiramental Transports, three (3) All Terrain-Tactical Enforcers, four (4) SPHA-Ts, one hundred and fourty-four (144) BARC Speeders, sixty-six (66) Republic Troop Transports [Only typical surface complement, can be expanded to full load, or more, if necessary]
DP-20 Frigate Modification
Added ability to mount a fighter rack, capable of carrying one shuttle or four Alpha-3 Numbus-class V-Wings
His Majesty Deralius the Twentieth
King of Deralia and Deralian Dominions
|
| |
| |
| Jace_Varitek | Date: Sunday, 29 May 2011, 5:33 PM | Message # 2 |
 Generalissimo
Group: Administrators
Messages: 2245
Status: Offline
| Before I go into too much depth, how would you feel about the original defenses we had for Deralia; that is, theater shields instead of a planetary shield? In my mind, Deralia just can't transcend its status as a secluded Outer Rim world enough to convince me it would have a planetary shield. Unless you're willing to open yourself to some minor controversy and claim that Veritas used his influence on the Defense Committee to arrange it (his job should have some perks for Deralia). I think I would be more okay with it, under those circumstances. What do you think?
Jace Varitek
Manager/Administrator from January 2003 to Present
My recent posts here, pre-2009 archives here
"When my information changes, I change my opinion. What do you do, sir?"
—John Maynard Keynes
Furthermore, a dancing Wookiee:
|
| |
| |
| King_Deralius_XX | Date: Thursday, 02 Jun 2011, 10:58 AM | Message # 3 |
|
Lieutenant
Group: Users
Messages: 45
Status: Offline
| Yes, regarding the defenses, and the fleet really, Veritas would be exerting his influence "to test expansion of Outer Rim defenses".
His Majesty Deralius the Twentieth
King of Deralia and Deralian Dominions
|
| |
| |
| Jory_Carson | Date: Tuesday, 07 Jun 2011, 6:50 PM | Message # 4 |
 Major general
Group: Users
Messages: 317
Status: Offline
| What are the total defences that Deralia has?
|
| |
| |
| King_Deralius_XX | Date: Thursday, 09 Jun 2011, 0:44 AM | Message # 5 |
|
Lieutenant
Group: Users
Messages: 45
Status: Offline
| Absolutely... nothing...
His Majesty Deralius the Twentieth
King of Deralia and Deralian Dominions
|
| |
| |
| Jace_Varitek | Date: Thursday, 09 Jun 2011, 8:24 PM | Message # 6 |
|
Generalissimo
Group: Administrators
Messages: 2245
Status: Offline
| I don't know how this happened.. apparently when I read the request the first time, I saw "planetary shield" and stopped there. I didn't see that you had also requested a planetary turbolaser and a Golan defense platform. So, I get that the Defense Committee is at work here, but even so, all three of these things are far too much for Deralia. I can, however, be persuaded to APPROVE of either a planetary shield, a planetary turbolaser, or a Golan platform. All three of these things in tandem are far too much, especially when a fleet is involved, too. As for that fleet, with respect to the Venator-class (which, as you know, I am loathe to approve, ever) I don't think I can bring myself to approve of one that actually has armament added to it. Drop the 40 turbolaser turrets and the SPHA-T ("capable of causing extreme direct fire damage") and I'll vote to APPROVE it, as well as the 3 modified DP-20 frigates (2 of them only if you opt for a Golan platform, which seems only fair to me).
Also, I may be wrong, but I'm pretty sure the Capital Ships Act has articles about troop landers, gunships, etc.
Jace Varitek
Manager/Administrator from January 2003 to Present
My recent posts here, pre-2009 archives here
"When my information changes, I change my opinion. What do you do, sir?"
—John Maynard Keynes
Furthermore, a dancing Wookiee:
|
| |
| |
| Jace_Varitek | Date: Thursday, 09 Jun 2011, 8:26 PM | Message # 7 |
|
Generalissimo
Group: Administrators
Messages: 2245
Status: Offline
| (( I can't edit the last post without it messing up the BB code, so please pretend the red "Approve" is green. There was one occasion when I was posting on requests when I was high and I thought it was hilarious to confuse the colors in that way. Suffice to say, I'm over that. ))
Jace Varitek
Manager/Administrator from January 2003 to Present
My recent posts here, pre-2009 archives here
"When my information changes, I change my opinion. What do you do, sir?"
—John Maynard Keynes
Furthermore, a dancing Wookiee:
|
| |
| |
| King_Deralius_XX | Date: Thursday, 09 Jun 2011, 8:39 PM | Message # 8 |
|
Lieutenant
Group: Users
Messages: 45
Status: Offline
| Oh, judging requests high, or in my case drunk, is always fun. Anyways, on to my side of this...
Since this is the initial request, being as Deralia's defense are nill, and your arguement does have merit in Veritas' influence being able to get some of this done but not everything right now, I will not argue this point and opt to take... hmm... the planetary shield, as tempting as the planetary turbolaser is. As for the Venator, it has been made compliant to that certain legislation, but modified to be modular in that regard and able to revert back to its original capacity easily, and even expand that capacity by making use of the vacant hangars, which otherwise are being used as extra storage and medical facilities.
Regarding the weapons, I point to the original design. The Venator is clearly designed as a pure starfighter carrier, despite it's Star Destroyer classification. It seems intimidating, and I understand your loathing of it, however the only true problem in regards to our RP with it, is its insane fighter complement, which is the clear indication of it's intended role. A Carrier. To add to that clear role is the fact that the original designs only capital ship offensive weaponry is the eight Heavy Dual Turbolaser Turrets, which have been replaced in my request by eight Terraced Medium Dual Turbolaser Turrets, along with an original two Medium Dual Turbolaser Turrets, and four Heavy Proton Torpedo Tubes. There also fifty-two Point Defense Laser Cannons, but using those against a capital ship is like using a rifle to shoot down a fighter jet; might cause some damage, but it isn't going to cut it. With the radical deduction in fighter capacity, the added forty Turbolaser Turrets are an attempt to balance the Venator as a design, and make it equal as a carrier and a destroyer, while also remaining comparatively weak to the modern standard (the modern standard being the Imperial-class Star Destroyer which has more firepower and better shields). With that arguement made, I ask that you reconsider the modifications.
His Majesty Deralius the Twentieth
King of Deralia and Deralian Dominions
|
| |
| |
| Jace_Varitek | Date: Thursday, 09 Jun 2011, 8:47 PM | Message # 9 |
|
Generalissimo
Group: Administrators
Messages: 2245
Status: Offline
| You do make good and convincing points. My (only) reluctance now is that the Venator shouldn't be considered in a vacuum; you also have, in this case, 3 DP20 frigates—essentially "capital ship killers" (or, to be more generous, "capital ship incapacitators" or "chaser awayers" I suppose). Do you not feel that the DP20's more than offset the ship-to-ship weakness inherent in the Venator-class?
Jace Varitek
Manager/Administrator from January 2003 to Present
My recent posts here, pre-2009 archives here
"When my information changes, I change my opinion. What do you do, sir?"
—John Maynard Keynes
Furthermore, a dancing Wookiee:
|
| |
| |
| King_Deralius_XX | Date: Thursday, 09 Jun 2011, 9:07 PM | Message # 10 |
|
Lieutenant
Group: Users
Messages: 45
Status: Offline
| You do have a point, for the most part, about the DP20's. My only concern though is that, despite its always impressive common stand-alone appearances in The Clone Wars, with the downgrading of it's Heavy Turbolasers, it is much weaker than its original design. The extra turbolaser turrets are intended to, in a sense, make up that gap in making it close in its capabilities, and more diversified really, but still inferior in a sense. This is also following my assumption that medium turbolasers are a step up from turbolasers. Lacking those extra turbolasers would require almost constant full escort at times. While we do try to strike a bit of a dilemma in each fleet in regards to the decision to be either offensive or defensive and not entirely both at all times, at the same time, your main capital ship shouldn't be unable to operate on its own. On top of that, I would say the most appropriate DP20 identifier is "chaser awayer", but a committed enemy would be able to push through them with a heavy enough ship.
I should clarify though, for thought in its consideration, the replacement of the Heavy Turbolasers isn't a direct replacement, but a modification of the currently standing Heavy Turbolasers to bring them within the definition of Medium Turbolasers, in regards to firepower. I should also address my thoughts on the SPHA-T Cannon modification, as I apparently completely forgot it in my last post. Not to mention the fact that it seemed to be a common modification in the massive Open Circle Fleet (which I've come to personally call the Open Circle Armada), there is a very large weakness to the cannon. One, it is extremely limited in its area of fire. Two, it is extremely limited in its use; while capable of causing massive damage when used, it is said to be only able to handle so much use before the barrel must be changed, which would be impossible in a combat environment. As an aside on damage, I believe it has been said that the Munificent that was 'sploded in RotS, was deprived of its shields at the time; don't quote me on that however. Regardless, the SPHA-T Turbolaser is intended as a weapon of last resort, not a sort of superweapon or domination factor, unless truly needed (which I don't see happening often, if ever, while under Deralia's command). By last resort, I mean getting the enemy to back off of it while it makes a retreat and suffering heavy damage or generally being overwhelmed and needing a way to make the enemy reconsider engaging it (in my mind, due to the original design's inherent weakness, many are going to salivate at the opportunity to engage it should they assume it is unmodified).
His Majesty Deralius the Twentieth
King of Deralia and Deralian Dominions
|
| |
| |
| Jace_Varitek | Date: Saturday, 11 Jun 2011, 9:43 PM | Message # 11 |
|
Generalissimo
Group: Administrators
Messages: 2245
Status: Offline
| As much as it is known to bother Jamie, I really must champion the DP20 here. Yes, heavy ships can push through them, but one of the advantages of the DP20 is its maneuverability. It's certainly not a stalwart, in my view, but rather a ship that's excellent at harrying an enemy force (and inflicting a lot of damage on it in a potentially very short period of time). I wouldn't say the point is that a heavy ship can push through them, but rather, a heavy ship would be foolish to attempt to—the DP20, it seems to me, is a much more manageable enemy when it's in a formation, and personally I'd think twice before breaking that formation and breaking them loose at my flanks or behind or above or below me. Alas, I digress.
You've pretty much sold me on the turbolasers, but I'd still prefer to see them be LTL's rather than MTL's. At the very least, we can try it out in the RP, see how it fares, and if necessary revisit it later, no? However, I'm still reluctant on the SPHA-T's. Yes, they take so long to recharge that they're essentially only good for 1 or 2 shots in a battle and thus, logically, it's best used as a weapon-of-last-resort. However, from personal experience, I have to doubt it's going to be used realistically as a weapon-of-last-resort. Granted, I do know you and trust you to do so, but I'm still not quite comfortable making an exception on this and setting a precedent so I have to tell someone in the future "No, because I trusted him and don't trust you." This was and is my reasoning in denying it, but if you can make a case to the contrary feel free to do so.
Jace Varitek
Manager/Administrator from January 2003 to Present
My recent posts here, pre-2009 archives here
"When my information changes, I change my opinion. What do you do, sir?"
—John Maynard Keynes
Furthermore, a dancing Wookiee:
|
| |
| |
| Jory_Carson | Date: Sunday, 12 Jun 2011, 8:11 PM | Message # 12 |
|
Major general
Group: Users
Messages: 317
Status: Offline
| My reservations hold with Jace's pretty much always as in this case. We are, realistically, dealing with alot of firepower so i am reluctant to vote approval in the face of this. However, I am also content to let the two of you argue this out a bit more before I make my vote.
|
| |
| |
| King_Deralius_XX | Date: Sunday, 12 Jun 2011, 10:56 PM | Message # 13 |
|
Lieutenant
Group: Users
Messages: 45
Status: Offline
| To show that I am willing to work with you on this here, and to ease your mind a bit, I am going to drop the forty turbolasers to LTL's. I must point out, regarding the SPHA-T turret modification, that there are countless IC solutions to such a predicament that could take shape, as well as OOC, I'm even will to take the postulation that I must consult management before using the turret, or something along those lines. Unfortunately, at this very moment, I'm out of arguement points on the SPHA-T turret modification.
And I'm sorry that I keep jumping back on stuff, but things keep hitting me as I write them, a post later, so I'll probably have something magical about the SPHA-T in my next post. I might even have something before this closes arguing for the Golan platform along with the planetary shields. Time will tell, apparently.
His Majesty Deralius the Twentieth
King of Deralia and Deralian Dominions
|
| |
| |
| Jace_Varitek | Date: Monday, 13 Jun 2011, 1:19 PM | Message # 14 |
|
Generalissimo
Group: Administrators
Messages: 2245
Status: Offline
| Okay, you convinced me with what we talked about in Messenger earlier, provided you go through with that (I probably shouldn't mention it here). So, with the MTL's changed to LTL's, I vote to APPROVE at long last.
Jace Varitek
Manager/Administrator from January 2003 to Present
My recent posts here, pre-2009 archives here
"When my information changes, I change my opinion. What do you do, sir?"
—John Maynard Keynes
Furthermore, a dancing Wookiee:
|
| |
| |
| Karth_DeQora | Date: Friday, 17 Jun 2011, 11:45 AM | Message # 15 |
 Colonel general
Group: Administrators
Messages: 1157
Status: Offline
| Walls of text, so much to read through O_O.
Vote to APPROVE.
Man, Myth, Administrative God. Also plays a mean kazoo.
Jace Varitek: In Northern California we just have gangs of vigilante interior decorators.
|
| |
| |
|
