Author Topic: MBS Blog: Dreadnoughts in Space Games  (Read 2201 times)

Ruckdog

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3066
  • Number of Times Thanked: 189
  • Dive! Dive!
    • View Profile
    • Man Battlestations!
MBS Blog: Dreadnoughts in Space Games
« on: August 01, 2020, 12:16:20 pm »
New post up on the blog! I talk about how odd it is to have "dreadnoughts" in space combat games:

http://www.manbattlestations.com/blog/2020/07/30/dreadnoughts-in-space-games/

RuleBritannia

  • Lieutenant Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 253
  • Number of Times Thanked: 32
    • View Profile
Re: MBS Blog: Dreadnoughts in Space Games
« Reply #1 on: August 03, 2020, 10:56:53 am »
Certainly, its one of the world building things where some designers could do something to build a sense of the world, expand its vision by giving super heavy vessels names that reflect the fleets involved.

Easy E

  • Lieutenant Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 444
  • Number of Times Thanked: 112
    • View Profile
Re: MBS Blog: Dreadnoughts in Space Games
« Reply #2 on: August 03, 2020, 03:57:25 pm »
Personally, I find "modern" post-wwII ship taxonomy even more confusing!  What it eh difference between a frigate and a destroyer now-a-days anyway?  They both carry a lot of missiles and detection gear!

However, I can see why a "future" or space force would use traditional 'Naval" terms to define their warships.  It is traditional!

Plus, Dreadnought sounds cooler than Battleship+.
Support Blood and Spectacles Publishing:
https://www.patreon.com/Bloodandspectaclespublishing

hammurabi70

  • Lieutenant J.G.
  • *
  • Posts: 54
  • Number of Times Thanked: 3
    • View Profile
Re: MBS Blog: Dreadnoughts in Space Games
« Reply #3 on: August 04, 2020, 06:00:05 pm »
New post up on the blog! I talk about how odd it is to have "dreadnoughts" in space combat games:

http://www.manbattlestations.com/blog/2020/07/30/dreadnoughts-in-space-games/

Absolutely agree!!

My go-to source on the topic is the nomenclature used by Ian M Banks: https://concord.fandom.com/wiki/Iain_M._Banks_Culture_Universe_Spaceship_Names https://theculture.fandom.com/wiki/List_of_spacecraft_in_the_Culture_series

Favorite individual ship name:  Lapsed Pacifist  :D
6mm wargames group: 6mm+subscribe@groups.io
http://www.olivercromwell.org/

Dakkar

  • Rear Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1175
  • Number of Times Thanked: 25
  • Mobilis in Mobili
    • View Profile
Re: MBS Blog: Dreadnoughts in Space Games
« Reply #4 on: August 05, 2020, 11:08:59 am »
Origins of names rarely square with common-place usage, so Naval terms are no different. And maybe blame Weber - he loves using Dreadnought as a class in the HH series.

And besides, what would you call something bigger than a Battleship?
Super-Battleship sounds silly, while somehow Superdreadnought sounds bad-ass.

I will say the idea of Destroyers being smaller than Cruisers always bugged me. A Destroyer should live up to its name, and have firepower only second to a battleship or bigger.

What worries me more is what Rank structure will Space Force use? Since they're coming from the Air Force, their ranks will be "baked in" at the start. But the second there's a space-Ship to command, you want that person to be a Captain ... Colonel would just sound way off.
And for that matter, what Air Force terms even are there for Ships? -Fighter / Bomber / Fighter-Bomber / Tanker? None of those work!


"History is-a made at night. Character is what you are in the dark!"
-- Lord John Whorfin, Red Lectroid Leader

Ruckdog

  • Administrator
  • Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 3066
  • Number of Times Thanked: 189
  • Dive! Dive!
    • View Profile
    • Man Battlestations!
Re: MBS Blog: Dreadnoughts in Space Games
« Reply #5 on: August 05, 2020, 01:25:05 pm »
Origins of names rarely square with common-place usage, so Naval terms are no different. And maybe blame Weber - he loves using Dreadnought as a class in the HH series.

And besides, what would you call something bigger than a Battleship?
Super-Battleship sounds silly, while somehow Superdreadnought sounds bad-ass.

Weber and the HH series definitely has had a hand in popularizing the concept, I'd wager!

If we follow real-world practice, then a bigger battleship would just be called...a battleship! I'm being a bit cheeky, but it is true that as early as the 1920s and 1930s, the use of the term "dreadnought" to describe battleships had generally fallen out of favor. It seems that the term was most used when both older mixed-battery and newer all big-gun battleships were still in service and operating side by side. Those older ships were retired rapidly after WWI, so it no longer became necessary to use "pre-dreadnought" and "dreadnought" to differentiate between the types as much, at least in a planning and operational context.

Quote
I will say the idea of Destroyers being smaller than Cruisers always bugged me. A Destroyer should live up to its name, and have firepower only second to a battleship or bigger.

It stems from the origins of "destroyer," which was originally "torpedo boat destroyer" before it was shortened. Once reasonably reliable and effective automotive torpedoes were developed in the 1890s, there were those that believed a swarm of relatively cheap torpedo boats could overwhelm and sink much larger battleships and armored cruisers. How do you protect your large capital ships from torpedo boats? Build another ship that can destroy them! In an ironic twist of fate, it also turned out that destroyers were much more effective torpedo platforms than torpedo boats.

Quote
What worries me more is what Rank structure will Space Force use? Since they're coming from the Air Force, their ranks will be "baked in" at the start. But the second there's a space-Ship to command, you want that person to be a Captain ... Colonel would just sound way off.
And for that matter, what Air Force terms even are there for Ships? -Fighter / Bomber / Fighter-Bomber / Tanker? None of those work!

There is a bill in Congress that seeks to force the naval rank structure on USSF, who knows if it will go anywhere though!

Dakkar

  • Rear Admiral
  • *****
  • Posts: 1175
  • Number of Times Thanked: 25
  • Mobilis in Mobili
    • View Profile
Re: MBS Blog: Dreadnoughts in Space Games
« Reply #6 on: August 05, 2020, 01:45:07 pm »
There is a bill in Congress that seeks to force the naval rank structure on USSF, who knows if it will go anywhere though!

Time for the Nerd Nation to make their power known!!!
"History is-a made at night. Character is what you are in the dark!"
-- Lord John Whorfin, Red Lectroid Leader

Easy E

  • Lieutenant Commander
  • ***
  • Posts: 444
  • Number of Times Thanked: 112
    • View Profile
Re: MBS Blog: Dreadnoughts in Space Games
« Reply #7 on: August 07, 2020, 10:40:11 am »
Dreadnought does sound cooler than All Big Gun Battleship.

Unrelated, I don't think Space Force needs to worry about having a manned spaceship for a while.  However, I recommend that the highest ranking officer on a space ship be called a "Carell".  A total break from both AF and Navy! 



Support Blood and Spectacles Publishing:
https://www.patreon.com/Bloodandspectaclespublishing

hammurabi70

  • Lieutenant J.G.
  • *
  • Posts: 54
  • Number of Times Thanked: 3
    • View Profile
Re: MBS Blog: Dreadnoughts in Space Games
« Reply #8 on: August 07, 2020, 07:03:43 pm »
Origins of names rarely square with common-place usage, so Naval terms are no different. And maybe blame Weber - he loves using Dreadnought as a class in the HH series.

And besides, what would you call something bigger than a Battleship?
Super-Battleship sounds silly, while somehow Superdreadnought sounds bad-ass.

I will say the idea of Destroyers being smaller than Cruisers always bugged me. A Destroyer should live up to its name, and have firepower only second to a battleship or bigger.

What worries me more is what Rank structure will Space Force use? Since they're coming from the Air Force, their ranks will be "baked in" at the start. But the second there's a space-Ship to command, you want that person to be a Captain ... Colonel would just sound way off.
And for that matter, what Air Force terms even are there for Ships? -Fighter / Bomber / Fighter-Bomber / Tanker? None of those work!

I think that in origin classification had meaning and should do for the future.

Main article: Ship types of the Culture

Class / Acronym / Description

General Systems Vehicles / GSV / Mobile habitats and / or factory ships, largest Culture ship type. May be home to billions of people.

Medium Systems Vehicles / MSV / Smaller versions of the above. Sometimes former GSVs downgraded as larger GSV classes were developed.

Limited Systems Vehicles / LSV / Smaller versions of the above. Sometimes former GSVs or MSVs downgraded as larger GSV classes were developed.

General Contact Vehicles / GCV / Contact-configured GSVs; Mission-identical to GCUs (see below)

General Contact Units / GCU / Ambassadors, scouts and light transports; also main warship in peacetime

Limited Contact Units / LCU / Smaller versions of the above.

General Offensive Units / GOU / Dedicated main warships

Rapid Offensive Units / ROU / Dedicated fast warships

Limited Offensive Units / LOU / Dedicated warships, smaller than GOUs

Demilitarized ROUs / (d)ROU / Civilianised ROUs used as courier ships, all or most weaponry removed

Very Fast Pickets / VFP / A euphemism for (d)ROU, used in the same role.

Heavy Lifter / HL / Dedicated materials mover, smaller than GCUs.

6mm wargames group: 6mm+subscribe@groups.io
http://www.olivercromwell.org/