I don't believe that a fort is mostly armor.
Honor Among Enemys wrote:But the maneuver's authors had assumed that since battleships were useless in fleet actions, the PN might throw them at the Junction from Trevor's Star for the sole purpose of whittling down the fortresses, instead. The umpires had calculated that the Peeps could have put roughly fifty through the Junction in a single transit. That was little more than thirteen percent of their total battleship strength, which meant—in theory—that they could do the same thing more than once if it worked . . . and for their sacrifice, the "Peep CO" in the war games "destroyed" thirty-one fortresses, or a quarter of the entire Junction Defense Force.
If peep battleships, which are missile heavy and fire BC missiles can kill more forts on a ton for ton basis in the case of a surprise attack, than I don't see how the forts can have much heavier armor than SD's.
kzt wrote:darrell wrote:An SD is about 45% weapons (4M out of 8.5m) a fort will be more than 75% weapons, so a 12M fort will be more than 9m weapons, so 50% bigger has more than twice the weapons tonnage.
No a fort is mostly armor. There is a joke in one of the tech articles produced by a Bu9 guy where he says (paraphrasing) "there is a word for ships that have enough armor to stop enemy weapons from doing damage. That word is 'fort'".