Rolands actually have plenty of room for Marines

Theemile wrote:I believe the Illustrious Class CLs had flag decks, and lead DD squadrons, so more the replacements for those. Star Knight and Crusaders just were CA squadron flags.

Manticore, and most other nations, don't seem to mix-and-match squadron classes on the regular. A 'squadron' is generally a full-time thing, so you want them all to be the same type of ship, even if they aren't the same classes within that type. We saw this even as far back as Hancock Station, Honor had one of the very first Reliant-class battlecruisers with HMS Nike. But BatCruRon5 had 1 Reliant, 4 Redoubtables, and 3 Homers, for three different classes in one squadron, but they were all battlecruisers. You generally don't mix a Light Cruiser in with Heavy Cruisers for full-time things, for brief operations sure, we saw that often from both Peep and Manticoran POV's, but never full-time squadrons that's asking for trouble.

tlb wrote:

tlb wrote:So was the Roland designed as a replacement for the Star Knight?

Theemile wrote:Personally, While I know a Roland can beat up a Star Knight and take it's lunch money before school every day of the week, I'd say no. In a Peer environment, It's designed to be the minimum survivable combatant. Unfortunately, the Star Knight represents the Tip of the Spear 3 technological levels back (early laser head combatant). Against a Peer, or gen removed Heavy Cruiser(Sag-B or -C analog), it would quickly run out of munitions for little to no damage to it's adversary, and would be unable to perform the heavier jobs a CA excels at due to it's smaller crew.

I was thinking more as the minimum modern ship with a flag command deck.

I believe it was mentioned in SI2 or SI3, that EVERY Roland gets a flag deck, specifically due to the very example you quoted. Even though destroyers are honestly the one ship type that least requires flag accommodations at all. If they need a flag officer, it's because they're assigned to escort larger ships, which is exactly the same reason that meant the Prince Adrian's could also not have flag decks and it not be a super huge problem at the time.


Going forward, ideally you'd want every every single cruiser to have flag decks, to avoid a Janacek builddown. But that's because cruisers operate in divisional pairs most of the time, seeing a singleton cruiser was pretty rare, except as part of routine cycling. Plenty of examples of singleton ships moving around for routine movements for either R&R or maintenance type reasons.

But destroyers only seem to have two deployment options, they either operate entirely as singletons doing anti-piracy, or they're attached to fleet formations where someone else could bring the flag deck. A new generation of follow-up destroyers to the Rolands could easily be the 'new Prince Adrian', where they suppress the flag decks entirely for an extra missiles, and/or increasing Marine quarters even further that what they should be able to carry now.


As I'm pretty certain Roland's could handle either 12 or 24 Marines right now, without even borrowing flag deck space at all. If a notional Roland Mark II were designed and suppressed the flag deck entirely, and used that space exclusively for more marine quarters? They could easily fit an entire full platoon of 36 Marines plus the Sergeant and LT on board, and maybe still have room to cram in an extra few reloads of missiles.


That would make the notional Roland Deuce one helluva pirate hunter, while still contributing heavily towards fleet actions. More missiles to shoot the bad guys with, without running out as fast as Roland Primes do. And having a full platoon of marines, instead of no marines at all, means good for SAR boarding or boarding the mean nasty pirate ships or any captured freighters.


Which also avoids situations like Saltash. Imagine how difficult it would have been if Abigail Hearns and her armsman Mateo, hadn't been part of DesRon 3011. Boarding that station with ~3 squads of purely naval ratings, and playing laser-tag with two companies of Gendarmes? And nobody actually being trained for ground combat, there would have been an awful lot of dead people on both sides now.

Theemile wrote:I believe the Illustrious Class CLs had flag decks, and lead DD squadrons, so more the replacements for those. Star Knight and Crusaders just were CA squadron flags.

Somtaaw wrote:I believe it was mentioned in SI2 or SI3, that EVERY Roland gets a flag deck, specifically due to the very example you quoted. Even though destroyers are honestly the one ship type that least requires flag accommodations at all. If they need a flag officer, it's because they're assigned to escort larger ships, which is exactly the same reason that meant the Prince Adrian's could also not have flag decks and it not be a super huge problem at the time.

Going forward, ideally you'd want every every single cruiser to have flag decks, to avoid a Janacek builddown. But that's because cruisers operate in divisional pairs most of the time, seeing a singleton cruiser was pretty rare, except as part of routine cycling. Plenty of examples of singleton ships moving around for routine movements for either R&R or maintenance type reasons.

Isn't the expectation that the Light Cruiser will go away, with its functions being rolled into the Destroyer? This is part of the weight inflation in every class, with the result that certain classes will disappear.

tlb wrote:

Theemile wrote:I believe the Illustrious Class CLs had flag decks, and lead DD squadrons, so more the replacements for those. Star Knight and Crusaders just were CA squadron flags.

Somtaaw wrote:I believe it was mentioned in SI2 or SI3, that EVERY Roland gets a flag deck, specifically due to the very example you quoted. Even though destroyers are honestly the one ship type that least requires flag accommodations at all. If they need a flag officer, it's because they're assigned to escort larger ships, which is exactly the same reason that meant the Prince Adrian's could also not have flag decks and it not be a super huge problem at the time.

Going forward, ideally you'd want every every single cruiser to have flag decks, to avoid a Janacek builddown. But that's because cruisers operate in divisional pairs most of the time, seeing a singleton cruiser was pretty rare, except as part of routine cycling. Plenty of examples of singleton ships moving around for routine movements for either R&R or maintenance type reasons.

Isn't the expectation that the Light Cruiser will go away, with its functions being rolled into the Destroyer? This is part of the weight inflation in every class, with the result that certain classes will disappear.

I'm not entirely sure. Prior to the First Haven War, destroyers weren't often used for anti-piracy, they were almost purely scouts and 'manned recon platforms' effectively speaking. Light Cruiser squadrons were the primary 'anti-missile screen' for heavy cruisers and battle cruisers, who were themselves tasked to screen wallers. By the time podnoughts and CLACs rose up, Haven Sector nations all had far superior recon drones, and LACs started providing the lion's share of countermissile duties for less overall tonnage and crew.

So the light cruiser is certainly an endangered class at this point in time. All it's duties can be performed nearly as well, if not better, in virtually everything except being the smallest units that still have marines on board. Remember how Estelle and Khumalo really didn't want to elevate to using a heavy cruiser or battle cruiser during the New Tuscany incidents, and were already using an older destroyer... their only way to bop New Tuscany's nose was to either deploy a bigger Roland (light cruiser size) or be clearly overreacting and sending an actual heavy cruiser... so they needed something somewhere in between older/smaller destroyers and modern heavy cruisers.


So honestly what the Grand Alliance should do, is effectively kit-bash the Wolfhound's and Roland together, and call it a Light Cruiser, but it would effectively be closer in theory to a Warhammer 40k Strike Cruiser. Something big enough to carry a bunch of Marines and also a worthwhile armaments load while still being small enough to build in larger quantities and be 'unthreatening' if they need to be tapped to operate in someone else's space. Somewhere a little, but not too much, bigger than Roland's but smaller than the Saganami's, they'd have enough room for the missiles, fuel, and marines to make it all work.


This hypothetical light cruiser that's a kitbash of a Roland and a Wolfhound should obviously be a Mark 16 broadside-based ship because that's the gold standard now for missiles. Roland's only carry something like 7 or 8 reloads per tube, so this light cruiser should be carry 15-20 reloads which would still make it useful in fleet actions. Toss in a few larger than average grasers for broadside so when they slap a pirate, much like Wayfarer, you're slapping a destroyer or cruiser-size pirate with superdreadnought beams. That way even if they engage while sidewall might somehow work, the beam vs sidewall power differences means it won't matter.


Defensively they would split the difference between Saganami's and Rolands. Both have 20 countermissile tubes, while Saganami's carry slightly fewer but individually more capable laser clusters, while Roland's carry 6 extra smaller and less capable clusters. So the notional Light Cruiser would carry the same type of clusters as Saganami's (which is also the same cluster on podnoughts and Nike BCs isnt it?), but carry numerically more than even Roland's do. They'd still provide less missile defence on a ton-for-ton basis than LACs do, but they should become the best hyper-capable platform for that duty, which keeps them from being too overly specialized in any particular area. Major fleets would have LAC's present, while these Light Cruisers would thicken up the anti-missile zone during smaller actions,


With say, an an entire company of Marines which is exactly how many the Saganami-C's carry, they'd be perfect for pirate hunting for extended periods of time, and supporting local planets against Norbrandt's or drugged-up Stilty uprisings. More marines means more time on station, because every time you send a 'prize' home, you lose those crew for months... the more marines they have, the longer time they spend hunting and less time travelling back to the designated rally point to get crew back.


Between the Mark 16s, the sizable amount of Marines onboard, they'd be able to deploy in large numbers while being small enough to be relatively unthreatening to not be openly flaunting 'gunship diplomacy'. And they'd still be able to serve in fleet vs fleet action, because they were designed to do both, unlike the Wolfhound which is frankly useless anywhere except Silesia until they get rid of all the corruption, and Roland's which are too specialized in fighting in a war with fleet vs fleet actions.

tlb wrote:Isn't the expectation that the Light Cruiser will go away, with its functions being rolled into the Destroyer? This is part of the weight inflation in every class, with the result that certain classes will disappear.

On the contrary, it is the Destroyer which has lost it major roles due to LAC's/RD's and commerce protection role to CL's. Before the Roland design, Destroyers were disappearing. The Ship RMN loves is the CL.

From HoS lets look at the numbers.
Built 19 DD Wolfhound and a ~50 Rolands...
Built ~200 CL Avalon's.

RMN used to have ~400 active DD's and only a handful of CL's
Clearly times have changed.

PS: One reason Roland is not ~fit for Marines which has not been discussed and gets back to size increase--> RD's. RD's launch from boat bays. If you need LOTS of RD's in modern warfare, you lose a boat bay to RD's. Maybe you lose 2 since DD's primary mission is still scouting for the fleet, and since we have fewer DD's and far more LAC's, we need VOLUME for a boat load or 2 of RD's. Modern RD ~250ton Giant.

PPS: RMN now has more modern CA's in service than they do CL's or DD's it appears... The Majority of its DD's are ~+++50 years old

Somtaaw wrote:
. Roland's only carry something like 7 or 8 reloads per tube, so this light cruiser should be carry 15-20 reloads which would still make it useful in fleet actions. Toss in a few larger than average grasers for broadside so when they slap a pirate, much like Wayfarer, you're slapping a destroyer o

DD Roland has 20 Reloads for its 12 tubes for 240 MK16G's and has 40 reloads for its 20 CM tubes for 800CM's.

DD's in missile heavy environment should NEVER get to Graser/Laser range and if they do they should use their MUCH heavier CHASE armament with much HEAVIER bow/sternwall + Buckler where << Drum roll >> Roland has its Heavy Graser's and only has Lasers on its Broadside.

Why? DD's have NO ARMOR and actually most often mission kill is damage to its impeller ring. DD's with ZERO armor, but with buckler and Bow wall has only true way to protect its impellers --> use its hammer heads. And Light Cruisers, if they have any armor would put it on its hammerheads minimizing area required for armor compared to its broadside

PS: Remember MAIN armor is sidewalls, not PHYSICAL armor. In this case with addition of VERY strong Bowwalls and addition of a buckler, this makes the MOST protected aspect of a ship also its SMALLEST aspect of the ship = bow/stern.

Relax wrote:RMN used to have ~400 active DD

IT should be mentioned that in HoS, The DD Chanson class has exceptional long range for a Destroyer class. RMN has ~200 of them. In effect, even the most built ancient 50+ year old DD's in RMN service in effect are CL's.

One wonders if one compared RMN DD's compared to say RHN/SLN DD's or CL's would the RMN DD be more aligned with a RHN/SLN CL?

Not 100% on topic, but darned close:
WHY do SD's have ANY marines at all? This has to take ~50,000t on an SD hull with their ~1000 marines. This makes no sense.

SD's should be like Frigates.
Frigates are Barely a warship. Limited by $$$
Ergo--> No marines
SD's are THE offensive warship. Limited by tonnage
Ergo--> Should have no marines

Especially if defending home system, no reason for marines at all
If attacking a MAJOR system to take/boarding action, uh, why not place this into the CA/BC role which already covers this aspect? Or once system conquered bring in a fast transport waiting in hyper?

Anyways, yet one more long time, Uh, WHY does this exist in the novels? I know not exactly directly, but...

Relax wrote:Not 100% on topic, but darned close:
WHY do SD's have ANY marines at all? This has to take ~50,000t on an SD hull with their ~1000 marines. This makes no sense.

SD's should be like Frigates.
Frigates are Barely a warship. Limited by $$$
Ergo--> No marines
SD's are THE offensive warship. Limited by tonnage
Ergo--> Should have no marines

Especially if defending home system, no reason for marines at all
If attacking a MAJOR system to take/boarding action, uh, why not place this into the CA/BC role which already covers this aspect? Or once system conquered bring in a fast transport waiting in hyper?

Anyways, yet one more long time, Uh, WHY does this exist in the novels? I know not exactly directly, but...

I'm guessing it's because they space is not at a premium, so they may as well embark marines and transport them somewhere they need to go. After you conquer a system, you're going to need those marines and having a battalion aboard each SD saves a couple of marine transports.

But they shouldn't be embarked if no conquering or liberation is in the plans.

tlb wrote:Isn't the expectation that the Light Cruiser will go away, with its functions being rolled into the Destroyer? This is part of the weight inflation in every class, with the result that certain classes will disappear.

Relax wrote:On the contrary, it is the Destroyer which has lost it major roles due to LAC's/RD's and commerce protection role to CL's. Before the Roland design, Destroyers were disappearing. The Ship RMN loves is the CL.

I do not remember where the discussion was, but with destroyers getting into the Light Cruiser size; the demarcation was going to be on what jobs need to be performed. If there still are destroyer jobs then there will still be a destroyer class; so the light cruiser might go away and there becomes one dominant cruiser class, that performs whatever cruiser jobs there are.

Getting back to the Roland, a crew of 62 works out to a Captain and an Exec and three shifts of 20 working 8 hours on and 16 off. If you need to construct a prize crew then you have messed up one shift and some people are working 12 hours on and 12 off. Can it be that pirate hunting and so on will be a cruiser job going forward?

tlb wrote:Getting back to the Roland, a crew of 62 works out to a Captain and an Exec and three shifts of 20 working 8 hours on and 16 off. If you need to construct a prize crew then you have messed up one shift and some people are working 12 hours on and 12 off. Can it be that pirate hunting and so on will be a cruiser job going forward?

Not necessarily. It will just not be a Roland-class job, and likely not a Wolfhound-class either because those only have 87 people embarked.

But I think you're right. Pirate hunting using destroyers was possible in Silesia due to the tight clustering of systems to patrol and given the proximity of the Basilisk and Gregor termini of the Junction. The destroyers could fall back easily to resupply if needed. Now that Silesia are actual parts of the Manticore and Andermani empires, we expect piracy inside it to have massively reduced, if nothing else because the IAN and RMN will deploy LACs to keep any wannabe pirate from having a good day in their systems.

Anti-piracy activity will therefore be outside of Silesia, in the systems that didn't opt to join Manticore, those that were outside of the Confederation in the first place, or further out in the regions between the empires and Haven and Grayson. That means ships engaging in anti-piracy will need endurance ("legs") and that is what sets a light-cruiser apart from a destroyer.