Valor-class Fleet Carrier

[Ayden Cater]

Image Source: Here
Affiliation: Galactic Alliance
Manufacturer:

• Original Design - ????
• Modern Design - Corellian Engineering

Model: Valor-class Fleet Carrier
Modularity: Minor (Squadrons)
Production: Minor
Material:

• Durasteel-Titanium Alloy (Hull Plating)
• Quadanium (Structural Frame)
• Transparisteel (Viewports)

Classification: Fleet Carrier, Fleet Tender

Length: 925 meters
Width: 430 meters
Height: 465 meters

Armament:

• Twenty-Four Dual Heavy Laser Cannon Turrets (Effectively Twenty-Four Quad Laser Cannons)
• Sixteen Ion Cannon Turrets (Starfighter-grade Ion Cannons)
• Twenty-Four Anti-Missile Octets

Hangar:

• Eight Squadrons

Special Features:

• Fleet Tender - The Valor has an assortment of worksleds that can perform rough patchwork on capital ships.

Maneuverability: 17
Speed Rating: 11
Hyperdrive Class: 1.0

Strengths:
Flight of the Valkyries - The Valor-class Fleet Carrier hosts a large assortment of fighters capable of launching from one of its four main hangers.

Get You Patched Right Up - As a fleet tender, the ship has a wide assortment of parts to repair starfighters, bombers, shuttles, and even has hull plates and some parts for capital ship patch-work. Though starfighter repairs could technically be done even while in combat, both types of repairwork is best down outside of combat so as to avoid the worksleds being destroyed.

Everybody Get Loose, Footloose! - The Valor is a very agile ship for its size, both a necessity and by-product of its lack of heavy weaponry.

Weaknesses:
Let It All Hang Out - The Valor achieves its large squadron count by pushing the main engine bank to the ventral side of the ship. Though steps were taken to armor it, it remains never the less a very prominent target to hit from virtually all sides.

City So Nice, They Named It Twice - It is worth stating again that because of its position, the Valor's engines are virtually undefendable from any angle unless approached from the dorsal-side of the ship. No amount of shielding or armor plating can stop that, and if the Valor is not fiercely guarded then it will almost assuredly end a battle crippled if the damage does not outright destroy the ship.

I'm a Lover, Not a Fighter - The Valor is designed as a fleet tender and carrier. As a result, it lacks any capital guns or warheads whatsoever. While its modest defense gun count lets it defend itself against moderate starfighter assaults, the Valor is defenseless if caught out of place without its starfighter or capital ship escort.

Bit Drafty, Isn't It? - With four primary and three secondary hangers, the Valor can be difficult to secure if the enemy tries to board from multiple shuttles. While its larger than average crew count can potentially help mitigate this, it remains nevertheless a flaw in design which further reinforces the need for the ship to have a strong fleet escort.

Was That The Primary Buffer Panel? - As the Valor is not designed for direct military engagements, it is only armored in strategically important locations. Thus if the shields ever give, the ship is in danger of sudden and catastrophic damage should the hull be breached. This is due to the numerous cargo elevators and large cargo holds to store parts and in-repair fighters.

​

Description: Based upon the design of an ancient Republic cruiser, the Valor-class Fleet Carrier is designed to fulfill a key role within the Alliance. As the Alliance is often on the move, their needs tend to move with them. As to keep from creating appealing military targets to raid, and as to avoid bringing hostilities to member worlds, the Alliance military is often on the move. But ships break down and need repairs. Some worlds, like Fondor, have such a strong defensive presence that the Alliance can freely settle in and use the orbital facilities to repair. But such planets are already very busy and cannot always take in ships for repairs. Thus a mobile solution was needed, and thus the Valor-class Fleet Carrier was born.

The Valor-class is meant to be a mobile staging area for starfighters and other military support craft. Sporting four main hangers and three secondary hangers, the Valor-class can hold an impressive number of starfighters and bombers for its size. The primary hangers are where combat-ready fighters are stored and launch from. In order to conserve space, starfighters and bombers are stored in racks along the ceiling as well as to the sides of the hanger deck. This allows the hangers to not be massive holes in the ship's sides while still allowing it to hold a large assortment of craft. Obviously it's difficult to get a pilot into a top-rack starfighter if the one below it is being prepped at the same time. Thus crafts are sent out in waves, with the bottom-most starfighters being prepped and launched first. Then the top-rack fighter is lowered to the deck and prepped.

The secondary hangers house worksleds which assist with capital ship repairs as well as serve as the return point for critically damaged fighters. Crash nets, fire suppression systems, and tractor beams dot these hangers to assist in retrieving crippled fighters. Once such craft are brought onboard and any potential explosions contained, they are loaded onto cargo lifts and lowered onto the repair deck which stretches almost the entire length of the ship. These lifts can handle starfighters of all sizes, and even light freighters (Starfighters and other craft <= 50 meters long / wide). Storage space and parts means that fighters and bombers can be virtually repaired from any state, though obviously bottom lines mean that some will simply be marked for salvage. Once they are repaired, they are sent to one of the primary hangers for storage or launch.

Similarly, the worksleds can ferry hull plates to apply patch work repairs to capital ships that have suffered serious or critical hull breaches. Engine repairs, radiation leaks, and other structural repairs can be carried out, though obvious such repairs represent more of a band-aid than an actually full serve repair job at an orbital facility. But when it comes to having your ship explode or vent the entire supply of oxygen, or having an ugly bit of metal slapped over a hole and radiation absorbing foam sprayed all over a damaged engine block most will take the latter.

However, for all its support capabilities, the Valor is vulnerable. While it has a modest assortment of anti-starfighter weaponry, it lacks any means of directly engaging enemy capital ships. Its large assortment of hangers, cargo holds, and lifts means that its interior structure is incredible vulnerable and fragile. Armored plates were placed over the most sensitive areas, but since the ship is not meant for combat there are many gaps, some quite large, in the protection. The shields of the ship are certainly military-grade, but even they will fail if pressed in combat. But beyond these, there is one absolutely critical, potentially fatal flaw that all captains should remember when a chance comes up to perform a daring rescue.

In order to make space for the various fighters and repair supplies, the ship's hyperdrive and main engine block were moved to the ventral section of the ship. This means the ship suffers from asymmetric acceleration, inhibiting the ship's true maneuverability, as well as a far more dire flaw. Such a placement mean that this crucial system is virtually undefendable from any angle. If the ship jumps into a hot combat area, unless it has immediate fleet support then it is virtually assured that the ship's engines will be destroyed. At best this cripples the ship. At worst it will lead to sympathetic explosions and the total annihilation of the entire ship and any craft it might be carrying.To take a Valor-class into direct combat then is a virtual death sentence for all aboard.

• Advanced Sensor Array
• Cargo Elevators
• Encryption Network
• Escape Pods
• Holonet Transceiver
• Large Cargo Holds
• Long Range Communications Array
• Repair Deck
• Secondary Hangers
• Standard Deflector Shield Generator
• Standard Detention Cells
• Standard Life Support Systems
• Standard Navigational Systems
• Standard Targeting System

Development Thread: N/A
Intent: To develop a fleet carrier and tender for the Galactic Alliance
Who Can Use This: Galactic Alliance folks
Primary Source: Canon Ship

 

[Ellie Mors]

Under Review.

 

[Ellie Mors]

Production: Minor

Length: 925 meters

Speed Rating: 11

Hangar: Ten Squadrons

Advanced Sensor Array

Development Thread: N/A

Alright, right now this is the only combination of things which are keeping me from approving this. You have the absolute maximum squadron size, a much better-than-average speed rating, advanced sensor equipment, and no development on a ship that is only 125 meters over the minimum size for the ship classification. If this were a ship a bit further up in length with development to explain the speed (which, here, is explained by the armaments, and perhaps the exposed reactor) I don't think there would be much of a problem with this, but this isn't going to be passed through as it is right now.

I am going to quote excerpts from the template for Dedicated Carriers which will help to corroborate with this.

Dedicated Carrier
Link: http://starwars.wikia.com/wiki/Carrier
Variants: Dedicated Carrier, Command Ship, Escort, Heavy Carrier, Planetary Assault Carrier
Average Length: 800-3000 Meters.

Hangar: (Please provide the amount of fighters this submission can hold in it's hangar by count of Squadrons, which hold 12 average Starfighters. The higher your squadron count, the lower your Armament and number of Special Features should be. Bigger ships can accommodate more Armament and more Squadron Count, but will require a development thread once you pass 1,600 in length -even if generic. This submission's Max Squadron Count: 10, with 10 being the max for a 3,000 meter ship with a low armament. Feel free to provide a list of names for your squadrons, like the notorious Red Squadron. Alternatively, you may swap squadrons for Vehicles or other items of note.)

Specifically the hangar quote. "This submission's Max Squadron Count: 10, with 10 being the max for a 3,000 meter ship with a low armament." Here we have a ship which is low in armaments, has a decent design flaw in the exposed reactor, but the size for it and the lack of development, and the inclusion of an advanced system, is going to make me ask for development or edits. The ship is also minor production, which also puts a strain on any willingness to allow it to be kept as-is.

You can:

• Lower squadron count to a more realistic number for a ship of this size, maybe 4, with the advanced system remaining. No development necessary.

or

• Lower the squadron count to a maximum of 6 and remove the advanced system. No development necessary. You can bump it up to 7 if the production is lowered to limited.

Keeping it entirely as-is will require quite a bit of development at minor production, somewhere around 40-50 posts, of which you can fall anywhere within those two and still be golden. If you have any concerns, or if I missed anything, please let me know via reply, and tag me with what you plan to do

Edit: We can also talk about increasing the speed to cut some of the development down or alleviate some of the above-mentioned requests, if that works for you.

[member="Ayden Cater"]

 

[Ayden Cater]

[member="Bianca"]

According to the Speed Chart, 11 is still on the fast end of normal for a cruiser.

It has the max number of squadrons because it has no capital guns, no defense guns, swiss cheese interior, and an engine mount that's begging to be slapped. The only thing keeping this a military ship, honestly, is the fact that it's got the squadrons.

Canonically, the Flurry was a ship with 50 fighters and that was with just a sliver of hanger space on the back end a 340 meter craft. Extrapolate up and you get to the ten squadron figure.

Advanced sensors and fast speed - This ship needs those things because it's meant to not be in a fight. Again, this should be stressed: this ship has NO capital guns OR warheads. It doesn't have a low armament amount, it's got almost none. Even going by the old 2.0 guide for armaments, in which case this would be a Support Heavy Cruiser, this thing is woefully underarmed ( 48 out of 140 defense guns ). So it has to see an enemy and get out because a corvette could wreck this thing.

The ship is also minor production, which also puts a strain on any willingness to allow it to be kept as-is.

What does this mean?

I mean, I'm not married to the 10 squadrons, but for a ship with no capital weapons, warheads, heavy armor, or even heavy shielding, and with some extrapolated canon backing, I don't feel it's out of place to ask for more squadrons that would otherwise be the norm and not have to do a bunch of development for it. A lot of sub-1,000 meter ships have an advanced system or redundant or heavy shields, even with no dev threads. I again don't feel like 'advanced sensors' is anything worth noting, especially against the light of this being a minor production vessel, which historically has meant that the submission gets a little more leeway the further down production it goes.

 

[Ellie Mors]

According to the Speed Chart, 11 is still on the fast end of normal for a cruiser.

This is a 925 meter dedicated carrier, which is 125 meters over the minimum for that area of the speed chart. 12 would be fast/normal for a ship of this size, and I'm perfectly okay with the ship being this fast (at this size) due to the weaknesses and all that. The tidbit about explaining the speed was if you had decided to just make the ship bigger, but you can still make the ship slower to compensate for development as noted in my previous reply.

Canonically, the Flurry was a ship with 50 fighters and that was with just a sliver of hanger space on the back end a 340 meter craft. Extrapolate up and you get to the ten squadron figure.

Yes, and canonically the Venator had well over 10 squadrons of ships and we don't allow that in the factory. If it gets submitted, it is required that it follow our standards. The reference to canonical material will not be accepted while the template is very explicit of what the maximum squadron count is intended for.

Advanced sensors and fast speed - This ship needs those things because it's meant to not be in a fight.

Yes, and as I mentioned before, I am perfectly okay with both, but squadrons will need to be lowered or development added. Refer to the list of choices made above for that.

Eighteen Dual Heavy Laser Cannon Turrets (Effectively Eighteen Quad Laser Cannons)

Eighteen dual heavy laser cannons is not eighteen quad laser canons. Eighteen dual heavy laser cannons is still 18 * 2 * 2, which comes out to 72. I'm not sure where you are getting the 48 gun figure.

What does this mean?

What I mean is, a ship which is minor produced at 925 meters with above-average/high speed and an advanced system as well as a maximum squadron count and no development is not going to get passed. Extrapolated canon backing or not, it isn't going to be the case. If you feel that isn't fair, you can request a second chance, but I have given you three very fair and very realistic options to go for, and the freedom to barter by trading speed for posts if you choose to go that route.

A lot of sub-1,000 meter ships have an advanced system or redundant or heavy shields, even with no dev threads. I again don't feel like 'advanced sensors' is anything worth noting, especially against the light of this being a minor production vessel, which historically has meant that the submission gets a little more leeway the further down production it goes.

The issue that is being had here is not either the speed or the advanced system together, it is the inclusion of both and maximum hangar size. Having a quick ship with an advanced sensor, or even a lightly armed ship with both, isn't much of a problem, it is only that asking for the largest possible hangar on what is nearly the smallest possible ship along with those two isn't okay, at least not without some development. Minor production is far more lenient than mass-production, yes, but it isn't enough that I can let this go by without development or edits, however.

I will re-iterate the options I have given you, with more elaboration on what altering your ship's speed can do if you wish to keep other features and/or a larger hangar without as much development, and you may offer other edits/options if you feel they don't fit your parameters. I highly suggest going with the choices I am giving you, though, as I feel they are entirely fair for this scenario.

Without Altering Speed:

• Lower Squadron count to 4, and keep the advanced system and speed with no development and minor production.

or

• Lower Squadron count to 6, remove the advanced sensor, and keep minor production and speed with no development.

or

• Lower Squadron count to 7, remove the advanced sensor, and drop production to limited while keeping speed with no development.

With Altering Speed:

• Lower Squadron Count to 5, increase speed to 12. No development, keep advanced sensor, and minor production.

or

• Lower Squadron count to 7, increase speed to 13. No development, keep advanced sensor and minor production.

With Development:

• Lower Squadron Count to 6 and add 10 posts, keep speed & advanced sensor.

or

• Lower Squadron Count to 8, increase speed to 12 (or remove advanced sensor), and add 15 posts of development. Keep minor production and either speed or advanced sensor (whichever it was that wasn't chosen).

or

• Keep everything as-is, include 40-50 posts of development. You may inquire about what various drops in speed would do to post requirement (I'm going to go ahead and say that I'll only ask for 30 if the speed is 13).

[member="Ayden Cater"]

 

[Ayden Cater]

[member="Bianca"]

Quad = 4

Dual Heavy = 4

Dual Heavy = Quad

1 Quad Laser Cannon = 1 Defense Gun

Thus, 18 Dual Heavy Laser Cannons = 18 Quad Laser Cannons = 18 Defense Guns.

----------

So let's evaluate what's out of place for a ship of this size.

Speed 11 - Given that the dedicated carrier is 800 - 3,000 meters in range, 925 meters is not so large that 11 Speed is unusual. Overall, I'd say this is a fairly neutral point.

I feel like I've already addressed the confusion about the defense guns before, so this is a ship that has 0 capital guns, 0 warheads, and only 48 defense guns. Unusual, but in that it's vastly underarmed. So I'd say that's a point in my favor.

If 13 is the average you are citing for a ship this size, then the fact that it's Maneuverabiltiy 15 cancels out it being Speed 11, Thus, its speed is a neutral point.

Only one advanced system - as many light capital ships ( sub-1,000 meters ) that have at least one advanced system, or heavy or redundant shields, I'd say this is also a fairly neutral point. Factoring in that it's also a minor production ship, I'd say with confidence that this is a neutral point.

Three weaknesses to five - Again, I feel this is pretty well a point in my favor, if not two. Unlike the vast majority of things submitted to the factory, particularly starships, this ship's weaknesses are all fundamental and legitimate things that come up in roleplay; It can't fight capital ships, if it's caught without any sort of escort it's basically screwed, it has the barest minimal defense out there, and it's engines are literally undefendable if it even tries to go into a fight short of another ship literally parking underneath it.
As far as canon backing - The Venator is a ship that has long since been identified as an outlier to be dismissed from general sourcing. The factory is built on people introducing subs into it that have canon backing. In fact, I have seen it be ASKED that people find some kind of canon backing for a submission or else be denied. So I don't feel like my finding canon backing here is something that ought to be dismissed. And if the point should be made that my ship has more defense guns than the Flurry would have, I would also point out that my ship has a considerably larger weakness profile than the Flurry would. So again, I feel like this remains a point that falls in my favor.

So if something like 4-5 Squadrons is the norm for a carrier, then I don't think 8 squadrons is an outrageous number to ask for. As I said before, I'm not married to this idea of it having 10 squadrons. But with everything that I've listed, it should not be wildly out of hand for it to have 8 squadrons, at minor production, with two more

Asking for 50 posts of development is outrageous for a minor production ship with virtually no weaponry or defensive systems.

----------

Let's look at what ANOTHER judge submitted.

Here is Darth Vulkan's Guardian-class Shield Support Cruiser. It too is a dedicated carrier in the same basic size bracket that mine is. It's Limited Production as opposed to mine being Minor. We'll keep this in mind going forward.

It has 6 Squadrons against my present 10. Alright.

Now let's look at what other systems it has.

It has

• Heavy Ray AND Particle shielding ( So that's two different heavy shield systems, so at least one advanced system if not two )
• An Aegis Shield Transfer Array ( Barring anything else, I'd say this is safely an advanced system )
• Ion Shielding ( Again, I'd say this is probably an advanced system )
• Reinforced Matrix armor plating ( Reinforced vs standard armor plating, I'm pretty sure this ought to be another advanced system. In fact, Duranium is mentioned as being specifically more durable than titanium, so the various other armor platings ought to push this to two advanced systems )
• A Tri-Tracker where it already has sensors and targeting, so this too is basically an advanced system
• Cap Drains, a segregated comm network, a comm-scan system, and TWO Isotope-5 reactors; I feel all these bundled up are worth at least an advanced system
• An actual advanced navigation system would obviously be equal to an advanced system
• His ship has more weaponry than mine, so that's at least a point in its favor vs mine.

So his has basically SEVEN to TEN advanced systems depending on how you count them, and his ship has no development AND it's smaller than mine. So let's say that three of those get used in pushing production up to minor, and it it's an advanced system per additional squadron over the six his has. That still puts me at just barely at being equal to the conservative number of advanced systems his has over mine. Mine still has no combat potential, direct or indirect, whereas his has the armor, shields, AND weaponry to contribute AT LEAST indirectly in a fight. Plus it has a whole suite of other systems over what mine has.

I can push my ship to Speed 12 / Maneuverability 16, which puts my ship basically equal to his for Speed and Maneuverability. But with EVERYTHING else that his has that mine does, even if mine is at minor production vs limited and has 9-10 squadrons vs 6, these are barely equal, conservatively, or his are wildly better being generous.

I also feel the need to go ahead and at least tag [member="Spencer Jacobs"] so that she is at least aware of this other ship and is aware that I'm simply holding myself to the standards set forth by other Factory Judges submissions. I have no problem lowering one or two squadrons, or putting in 10-15 posts of development, but to ask me to put in 50 posts of development where another judge put in none for a STUNNING array of systems and defenses that my ship lacks is grossly unfair, bordering on nepotism.

 

[Allyson Locke]

[member="Ayden Cater"] [member="Bianca"] This is getting out of hand. The part of the Judge/Submitters conversation is to work things out and come to an agreement. Not to dig your heels in and argue your point till you're blue in the Face. I'm taking this submission myself. I will review the submission AS ITS OWN SUBMISSION since its not tied to the submission that Draco had submitted.

As a reminder: Each submission is its own, it is judged based on its own merit and not by other things that have been put through in the past. There is no such thing as precedence and using other things to support an argument that shouldn't be happening is frustrating not only to Factory staff but to the submitter as well. Again I will be reading this over and treating it as its own sub, I will review the other ship as well again AS THEIR OWN SUBMISSIONS. They are not based on each other so there is no reason to compare and contrast them.

Here on out the only submission that matters is the submission that is being judged.

 

[Allyson Locke]

[member="Ayden Cater"] After going over this, I do agree that 50 is a bit high for the ship. But there is still a needed dev. Keep as is 25-30 posts. Lower the squad count to 4 or 6 and the speed to 12-13 for 15-20 posts.

 

[Allyson Locke]

[member="Ayden Cater"] Tossing this into archives until the Dev is complete - Just message me when you're all done.

 

[Allyson Locke]

Moved to Archives - PM [member="Spencer Jacobs"] for removal / if denied for Second Chance please post and tag Spencer Jacobs for review.

Thank you!