Minelayers?

[FistusMaximus]

fist off:
are they actually called "minelayers" in english or what is the correct term? i'm german and translated our word for it pretty literally, so i'm not quite sure if thats the correct word.....   

back to the original question:
i've been thinking about which ships would be good for being turned ito a minelayer, and stumbled upon sonething in the rules: it says that only cruisers can be turned into a minelayer, since battleships are considered too precious for such a dangerous task.

however, this was written before the escort cariers came out. and these are exactly what i am looking at.
fluff-wise it would make sense using them as minelayers since it would minimize the danger of it because no "real" warships are endangered in the minelaying mission.

but rule-wise, what is the case?
just "battleships are not allowed to"
or
"ONLY cruisers are allowed to"

any opinions?
or is there actually a clarification in the english ruleset? (sometimes some things get lost during the translation, had that numerous times)

[AndrewChristlieb]

Minelayer is the correct term and no there is nothing Im aware of that says anything except for cruisers may take mines. That aside i think your right escort carriers would make rater fluffy minelayers, maybe thats something that can be added to the BFG-R defenses list.

[RaptorEvolved]

the escort carriers are capital ships, there light cruisers in all respects so they should be able to take them

[Mallich]

the escort carriers are capital ships, there light cruisers in all respects so they should be able to take them

I'm assuming that you're using a different list (maybe BFG:R? I don't know). The escort carriers in the vanilla Armada appendices that I'm looking at now has "Escort/1" in the "Type/Hits" section. They're escorts, hence the name "escort carriers".

[AndrewChristlieb]

Escort carriers are still "escorts" in BFG-R also. Maybe your thinking the Defiant light cruiser?

[FistusMaximus]

Escort carriers are still "escorts" in BFG-R also. Maybe your thinking the Defiant light cruiser?

i think raptor might have gotten that one mixed up, but for my part, i was actually speaking of the real escort carriers.

so, whats your opinion on these? 

[Bessemer]

I don't see why Escort carriers shouldn't be able to take mines. Since it says that Battleships are too valuable to use for such a role, using something cheap like the escort carriers seems ideal.

The only problems really are -1Ld for RO checks, and that minelayers take D3 hits from criticals to LB's.

Seeing as 2-hit models, don't roll on the Critical hit chart, how about minelayer EC's take a critical hit (ie.+1 dam) on a 5+? (BFG-R only obviously)

As for the -1, how about we chuck this for the old running out of Ordnance on a double for EC's? If I remember right, their list entry mentions accidents being common, and few squadrons (or mines in this case) could be carried. Any takers?

[FistusMaximus]

As for the -1, how about we chuck this for the old running out of Ordnance on a double for EC's? If I remember right, their list entry mentions accidents being common, and few squadrons (or mines in this case) could be carried. Any takers?

.....and then you roll a doubles on the first RO.
no, i think the limited supply and being prone to accidents is represented just right by the -1 LD on RO.

after all, yes, mines might be more dangerous if something goes wrong, but think of it, they are easier to handle than bombers or interceptors...  bombers and fighters need crew compartments in the ship, they need fuel and ammo supplies and need the gear to be refuelled and reloaded, and there needs to be repair crews to repair damaged returning craft.
mines are just "activate and chuck it out of the launch bay". 

[Bessemer]

.....and then you roll a doubles on the first RO.
no, i think the limited supply and being prone to accidents is represented just right by the -1 LD on RO.
True, if your lucks anything like like mine
after all, yes, mines might be more dangerous if something goes wrong, but think of it, they are easier to handle than bombers or interceptors...  bombers and fighters need crew compartments in the ship, they need fuel and ammo supplies and need the gear to be refuelled and reloaded, and there needs to be repair crews to repair damaged returning craft.
mines are just "activate and chuck it out of the launch bay". 
Wouldn't want to be the one who gets that gig though!

[RaptorEvolved]

funny but this is the way I thought about the light cruiser whose duty it would be to carry "mines", and worse off deploying them behinf and enemy Capital ship

.....and then you roll a doubles on the first RO.
no, i think the limited supply and being prone to accidents is represented just right by the -1 LD on RO.
True, if your lucks anything like like mine
after all, yes, mines might be more dangerous if something goes wrong, but think of it, they are easier to handle than bombers or interceptors...  bombers and fighters need crew compartments in the ship, they need fuel and ammo supplies and need the gear to be refuelled and reloaded, and there needs to be repair crews to repair damaged returning craft.
mines are just "activate and chuck it out of the launch bay". 
Wouldn't want to be the one who gets that gig though!