|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Jan 1, 2005 17:03:12 GMT -5
This thread is going to be the summary and final determination for 'warp travel' in the ASP. I'll be hopefully drawing together the various arguments and sorting everything out. While at first it was intended as a determined summary, I thought that I would allow for a tiny bit more discussion. The structure of the thread will essentially work that I open up a point for discussion, see whether things are making sense and then make a "Thus Sayeth the Law" statement on how it is going to be based upon the nature of that discussion. I will then change to another 'warp travel' topic and the same process will ensue. Please try and stay OnT as much as possible. If you feel that there is a parallel topic that needs to be addressed, please include it at the end of your post sparated by a horizontal rule (code (hr), but replace the () with []). The Fleets of AnargoThis is one thing that has been continually asked, pondered and generally argued about. The 'fluff' is fairly clear that the largest amount of shipping is the Merchant Fleet, comprising ~90% of the shipping of the Imperium, the remaining 10% being split between the Military and Civil Fleets. For arbitrary determination to stick to the 'fluff' even though it doesn't make a fantastic amount of sense when we compare it to reality, the following split: Merchant - Military - Civil: 90 - 8 - 2 So, we know from Battlefleet Anargo that there are a total of 112 Military ships in the Anargo sector. (That is, significant enough to warrant mention.) This means: 1260 Merchant - 112 Military - 24 Civil Hmmn... a tad on the boring side with such a low number of Civil ships, more so given the capability of the Imperium to build them, but that is the 'fluff' (or an interpretation of one).
As an aside, interestingly enough it implies (based upon volume calculations of the Imperium, fudged slightly such that there are around 10,000 sectors) that there are somewhere in the realm of 12,600,000 Merchant ships (these being the 'uber' transporters that we commonly hear about), 1,000,000 Military ships, and 240,000 Civil ships... 
So, are people comfortable with these numbers. It means that Anargo has a few more ships than Gothic, which is a bit on the worrying side, but it also begins to allow us to break down the potential cargo carrying capacity of the Anargo Merchant Fleet and, therefore, just what gets shifted about and from where to where. As worlds continue to be built and, soon, integrated into the Archive as 'accepted' this becomes increasingly important. |
|
|
|
Post by Sojourner on Jan 1, 2005 17:06:13 GMT -5
Do these numbers exclude the vast numbers of small private or corporate vessels which you've always waxed lyrical about? Otherwise, I can't see how this assertion makes sense within the bounds you've been hinting at previously.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Jan 1, 2005 17:10:43 GMT -5
This is not meant to be an argumentative thread. I have a preference for a greater number of Civil vessels, indeed by an order of magnitude at least. But you have to start somewhere. (One way 'out' of the situation is that the 24 vessels refers to the 'uber vessels' which are such a drastic part of the 40k image. An increase in the number of vessels might be possible by significantly decreasing the displacement and thereby ensuring that they don't really 'register'. A bit hand-wavy, but it would make for a slightly more interesting place...) And unsurprisingly, opinions can change over time. It's the wonderful joys of discussion, reflection and consideration! |
|
|
|
Post by CELS on Jan 1, 2005 21:54:53 GMT -5
And of course, there are other ways to increase the number of Civil ships, though it requires some more fudging. For example, you can interpret the fluff as saying that the split is really 90-5-5, in which case we suddenly have 112 civil ships (but over 5000 merchant ships). You can also interpret the fluff as saying that the split is 87-7-6, giving us 130 civil ships and something like 1,400 merchant ships. Or you can go really crazy and use a 87-5-8 split, giving us 179 civil ships.
What's this about 'uber-vessels' though? Previously, I've thought that that was a term for huge carrier-starships that would carry non-warp ships to other systems and subsectors... but are those such a drastic part of 40k image?
Personally, I don't really have a big problem with the number of civil ships. When reading about the Merchant fleet though, I can't find anything about Merchant ships being owned by the Imperium. That they serve the Imperium is obvious, but perhaps it would be possible for corporations and cartels to build ships that are given Merchant charters and then serve the Imperium at the same time as they serve their owners?
Example: The Anexus corporation wants to make money on their excess productions from Proculus. They finally afford a transport which can be used to carry minerals from Proculus to Meksum, to pay their tithes for the Imperium. Fortunately, they build the transport big enough to carry more minerals than it is required to. Thus, the ship has a profit when it arrives at Meksum and sells its extra rare crystals, gold and diamonds from Proculus to private buyers.
What do you think?
|
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Jan 2, 2005 0:40:55 GMT -5
For example, you can interpret the fluff as saying that the split is really 90-5-5, in which case we suddenly have 112 civil ships (but over 5000 merchant ships). All of which are possible. I offered it up quickly for discussion before I decide on what it is going to be. This is where people get to constructively stick their oar in rather than rehash old arguments. What's this about 'uber-vessels' though? Previously, I've thought that that was a term for huge carrier-starships that would carry non-warp ships to other systems and subsectors... but are those such a drastic part of 40k image? When I say uber-ships I generally refer to the 5km-long gargantuan monstrosities. Every ship bigger than the last, etc. Things with billion-tonne displacements for... well... some reason about which the only one that really makes sense is intimidation. When reading about the Merchant fleet though, I can't find anything about Merchant ships being owned by the Imperium. There is little direct information, merely the requirement for a Charter. With the large number of ships it was my desire to have a proportion of the Merchant Fleet engaged in tithe redistribution and other "dedicated" activities. The only real problem is that you have even less 'free trade', with all trade pre-determined by Charter and an inflexible economy... Well, kinda inflexible. The point of discussion, however, is the approximate composition and numbers involved. Precise function is something to be discussed at a later date (though kept in mind at the moment) and which may require subsequent revision. More comments, if you will (other members, that is!). |
|
|
|
Post by Dazo on Jan 2, 2005 5:36:42 GMT -5
I think thats the norm isnt it, most transporters are massive, you have to remember they are shifting the produce of a entire planet, so you need lots and lots of massive ships, or millions of smaller ships. How many, bulk transport ships and oil tankers ply the ocean waves on earth, you also have all the long distance land transport (18 wheeler rigs) rumbling all over the place.
Whats all this 90-5-5 stuff, does the imperium really build the fleets to a % , if they need more warships or transporters then surely they would build to demand.
Anyway, CELS suggestion sounds fine.
Excess from Proculus is raw materials, there would be no point in selling it, as the Cartels need raw materials themselves. They are in effect reducing the amount of material the Imperium needs to give them in terms of tithes from other worlds, and reducing how much material that needs to be bought in to cover any short fall. This would mean they are still actually making money even though they dont sell the stuff they mined.
But your example would ring true for other worlds that company works on, seleca for example, which has a massive luxury and non tithable goods market.
Also there should be more civil ships I think, 24 just wouldn't be enough I think. perhaps a few hundred might be a better number.
|
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Jan 2, 2005 10:31:05 GMT -5
I think thats the norm isnt it, most transporters are massive, you have to remember they are shifting the produce of a entire planet... While it is doubtful that they remove the 'entire produce of a planet' and, indeed, that beggers belief it does raise the parallel issue (i.e. let us not get sidetracked) of 'world composition' and the tithe. Whats all this 90-5-5 stuff, does the imperium really build the fleets to a % , if they need more warships or transporters then surely they would build to demand. You will not only that is how it is described in the 'fluff' and which is used here to produce some rough guestimates of numbers. The 'fluff' states that ~90% of Imperial ships are Merchant ships, which levels the remaining 10% as a division between Military and Civil. Since we know how many Military ships there are (based on the Gothic sector average) knowing the rough division - obviously - allows a more determined estimate. Anyway, CELS suggestion sounds fine. That is because it is fine and, indeed, always has been. (Well, there was a point when I had a thing about the Civil Fleet because of what I still consider the boorish imagery of these super-ships, but there we go. Opinions and approaches change and people who then go "You're not being consistent with what you said before" should, ultimately, be quiet and remember that it is a good thing that opinions can change! And, ultimately, the process is just as important as the 'obvious image' since it produces a greater continuum than disparate, hodge-podge 'images'! ) The main problem here is that transportation becomes a tad more on the tedious side in terms of flexibility. But there we go. Utimately the point here is not only to address the but also the numbers involved. Several thousand multi-km ships is quite a dent in resources. Just face it, using rough guestimates the 'smallest' possible ship that is at least 1/ 10th the size of one of these ships cost a significant percentage of the GWP of a significantly industrialised world! Excess from Proculus is raw materials... This is parallel material and not required here. Also there should be more civil ships I think, 24 just wouldn't be enough I think. perhaps a few hundred might be a better number. And thus back to the point of this part of the thread. |
|
|
|
Post by CELS on Jan 2, 2005 11:49:55 GMT -5
The important thing at this stage is that as many people as possible make their voice heard and say what they think would be a reasonable number of civil ships (and thus, merchant ships and military ships). There are a few things that can't really be changed, unless we want to contradict the only fluff there is concerning fleets. Example. If we want to have 500 civil ships in the Anargo sector, and say that the split is 90% Merchant, 1% Military and 9% civil ships (unlikely, but bear with me) then that would by implication mean that there are 5000 merchant ships in the Anargo sector. The blue book (BFG) states that the Gothic sector had hundreds, maybe thousands of active transport during the Gothic sector. When you consider that the Gothic war was absolutely enormous and that a lot of transports probably came in from neighbouring sectors, it doesn't make much sense to have 5000 transports in our very average Anargo sector. Personally, I think going over 1000 merchant ships in the Anargo sector is a bit scary. I can accept 1260 merchant ships, but 1500+ is no good.
We have 112 military ship, which is acceptable. Did the Gothic sector have 80 ships including fleet tenders though? Oh, and note that even the military fleet includes transports.
To summarize... people should post their take on the composition of merchant, military and civil ships in the Anargo sector. If no people make any other suggested, supported by fluff and logical arguments if possible, then there's really no reason for Kage to change his mind. A golden opportunity to help shape the Anargo sector Personally, I have no problems with the split presented in the first post. Of course, I wouldn't mind if this was changed to 88-8-4 either... That would give us 1,232 merchant ships, 112 military ships and 56 civil ships... |
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Jan 2, 2005 13:29:54 GMT -5
Personally, I have no problems with the split presented in the first post. Of course, I wouldn't mind if this was changed to 88-8-4 either... That would give us 1,232 merchant ships, 112 military ships and 56 civil ships... And I wouldn't have a problem with that. I'm just waiting to hear back from a few more people without rehashing old arguments. Hmmn... I wonder if I should set a time limit for replies to this thread? <ponders> |
|
|
|
Post by Philip on Jan 2, 2005 17:20:53 GMT -5
1260 Merchant - 112 Military - 24 Civil
Sees OK.
|
|
|
|
Post by Tynesh on Jan 2, 2005 18:36:55 GMT -5
This don't sound bad at my end.
With civilian ships we must decide how many of the large civilian organisations within the Anargo Sector are going to be able to afford or need to utilise.
Even big corporations that need to move bulk materials from system to system may not need to use their own vessels since merchant fleets can carry the cargo.
For instance agriworlds, even if run by civilian setups, will have a near total % of their output as tithes so merchant navy vessels will collect the foodstuffs.
As for other industries I am not sure.
How does the IG get moved? Is it by the Navy and their transports (Military vessels) or by the merchant fleet?
|
|
|
|
Post by Kage2020 on Jan 2, 2005 18:49:07 GMT -5
Temporary Determination
At this point the 88-8-4 seems more fun, so the one that I'm going to work with.
We may need to return to this at some point, but maybe not.
Questions of Scale
Military vessels
- Battleship (Battle Barge), 3,000 - 4,000 million m3 volume, average body length: 4,718 meters
- Grand Cruiser, 2,000 - 3,000 million m3 volume, average body length: 2,963 meters
- Cruiser (Heavy Cruisers, Battle Cruisers) , 1,000 - 2,000 million m3 volume, average body length: 3,347 meters
- Light Cruiser (Strike Cruiser), 500 - 1,000 million m3 volume, average body length: 2,752 meters
- Frigate, 200 - 500 million m3 volume, average body length: 2,061 meters
- Destroyer, 50 - 200 million m3 volume, average body length: 1,462 meters
- Corvette, 10 - 50 million m3 volume, average body length: 909 meters
Non-military vessels
- Super-heavy barge, 2,500 - 10,000 million m3 volume, average body length: 5,144 meters.
- Heavy Barge, 800 - 2,500 million m3 volume, average body length: 3,432 meters.
- Barge, 200 - 800 million m3 volume, average body length: 2,216 meters.
- Carrack, 50 - 200 million m3 volume, average body length: 1,207 meters.
- Galleon, 10 - 50 million m3 volume, average body length: 750 meters.
- Freighter, 1 - 10 million m3 volume, average body length: 516 meters.
- Clipper, 200,000 - 1,000,000 m3 volume, average body length: 247 meters.
- Sprint trader, 200,000 - 1,000,000 m3 volume, average body length: 201 meters.
- Caravel, 40,000 - 200,000 m3 volume, average body length: 114 meters.
Once that is done, it behoves us to consider the distribution of the various ships sizes. Are all 1,260 Merchant ships those ridiculously long 5km monstronsities? Are all Civil ships piddly little yachts that people normally associate with them?
|
|
|
|
Post by Philip on Jan 2, 2005 20:18:02 GMT -5
Are all 1,260 Merchant ships those ridiculously long 5km monstronsities? Are all Civil ships piddly little yachts that people normally associate with them? No, and maybe (most with a few exceptions) |
|
|
|
Post by CELS on Jan 2, 2005 20:29:24 GMT -5
 I don't think he was looking for yes or no answers... That said, I'll quickly edit this to include the requested categorisations... |
|
|
|
Post by RascalLeader on Jan 2, 2005 21:07:25 GMT -5
Personally I would say no -Since the cost to build such ships would be about the same amount as a sub sector (Think of the massive warp drive and engines needed for the sucker) they would not be highly numerous.
I would suggest that around <300 of them are super transports, <400> of them would be mid sized ones and <600> would be the smaller freighters.
The Reason for this is simple; the cost of the ships. Its much easier to build smaller vessels but they are less profitable cargo haulers.
Larger ships do make much more sence because of how much they can hold, so they don't have to make several dozen trading runs to make a good profit. However the are also anomasly expensive to build, so are much rarer.
|
|
I don't think he was looking for yes or no answers... That said, I'll quickly edit this to include the requested categorisations...