Shouldn't the frigates really be classified as corvettes?

I have to laugh at the people who voted down my big post above: “OMG he’s using reasoning, research and *gasp* facts to prove his point! Quite, vote down and save our ignorance rather than post a thought-provoking counter-argument!”

 

So, let us address those who did bother, on some level or another, to offer a reply…

 

 

As the guy above said, who cares? There is no military ship class designation for spaceships because that stuff doesn’t exist. The devs picked a name which makes it obvious that they are bigger and heavier. Corvette in some games refers to a 1-person scout, so that would be more ambiguous.

 

But by the same logic, almost every game I have played uses “frigate” to refer to a capital ship.

 

Case in point, Colony Wars. The fighters in Colony Wars are roughly the size of Star Conflict fighters. Star Conflict Frigates, on the other hand, are much, much smaller than Colony Wars ones; in fact, a SC Frigate is about the size of a CW APC, which Frigates carry in some missions.

 

Perhaps using the term “Corvette” is confusing to some people, but I don’t see why. If we’re going off scale, they should probably be called bombers, as they certainly meet a lot of the criteria; larger than fighters, slower than fighters, armed with comparable main guns as fighters, etc. The only reason they aren’t “bombers” though is the lack of bombs. So… what do you call a bomber with no bombs? I guess you could call them “Strike Craft”, but does that really sound right for the Engineer or Guard ships?

 

The point to take away is this: If you think calling them bombers or strike craft or support ships sounds wrong, we “pro-Corvette” people think the same thing about calling them frigates, and quite possibly for the very same reasons.

 

 

 

In the age of sail, the term “Frigate” meant one thing. In the age of steam, it meant another.

 

Makes sense that in the age of space travel it will have yet another. 

 

No inconsistency at all here.

 

That is a fair point, and I will agree that meanings are likely to change. However, words have lots of layers of meanings. I would like to give you an example…

 

Imagine you were watching the news and you were told that ten insurgents had been captured. Now imagine the word “insurgents” replaced with “terrorists”. Do you think your view of the situation would change? What if they were freedom fighters?

 

This kind of thing does make a difference. When you use words like “terrorist”, it instantly paints the individuals as evil. Freedom fighters, on the other hand, tend to be looked at more positively.

 

In the context of this discussion, myself and others see “Frigate” as a term that describes quite large vessels; what we would term ‘capital ships’. Since Star Conflict frigates appear relatively small and could potentially only have one crewman (looking into the cockpits), that name doesn’t really fit to us.

 

It is not an invalid use of the word frigate, for the reasons you mention, but that doesn’t mean it is the best choice of name.

 

 

 

Your thinking is flawed.  You are making the assumption that there is a corvette class of ships in this universe, which we have no evidence of.

 

So going off the evidence we have, and without making up things that don’t currently exist, it is pretty obvious that we are flying Frigates.

 

Noooooo… that’s not the case at all. The argument was, if you read, that they should be called Corvettes, since they do not really fit what we generally consider to be a Frigate. The argument that “we don’t have Corvettes because no Corvette has been mentioned” is a non-starter; you might as well argue that the game shouldn’t be renamed “Star Battles” because they called it Star Conflict, so Star Battles can’t exist.

 

Done.

Corvettes, Destroyers, and Frigates are all the same thing really. Because really they are the same ship but function rather differently.

 

In naval terms its rather similar to one another. The term frigate is manly used for support warships; that’s any warship, but really frigates are built as small escort vessels. In this game its fairly proper to call frigates, er frigates because that is their role, that is what they do, they support their team. Guard ships and engineering ships reflect this role best.

 

Corvettes are a type of frigate, however they are designed mainly for speed. You can make a frigate in this game more faster really and trade off for being lightly armed and armored. Which in naval terms is what a corvette is, a lightly armed but maneuverable warship. An engineering ship can be built in such a way.

 

Destroyers are the same as frigates, but are more designed for combat, a warship that is heavily armed to deal much damage yet remain as maneuverable as a frigate. You can build Long range gunships into those of a destroyer mainly because you don’t have to worry much about tanking and can focus more on damage.

 

So why not call them corvettes? Well that’s like calling ‘to-may-to’, ‘to-mah-to’ (tomato)… Its all the same thing really.

Fact that all SCon ships of the same Tier share same caliber weapons exclude any of them being called a Frigate. But without an expansion to the Ship Tree, there is no real need for reclassification. However, I suspect T5 or T6 Frigates will probably fit the naval definition.

 

What’s more interesting to think about is if a small craft designation can / should exist past T4? Making interceptors any faster wouldn’t make sense at T5 and beyond so it’ll mainly be tougher hull, bigger caliber weapons etc. In which case, if the ship tree continues the way it is - are T6 interceptors really small craft ships when compared to their T1 - T2 brethrens? 

 

Honestly classification in SCon is merely a matter of convenience as long as mixed tier battles are not the norm or a proper tierless mechanic replaces the one we have right now.

I don’t really see what naval terminology has to do here, to bve frank, considering how the other two classes don’t really map to naval terms either.

 

Do navy fleets have “fighters”? Do navy fleets have “interceptors”? Is so, how large are those ships? Don’t forget, in this game a ‘frigate’ is, at best, 3x as big as a ‘fighter’… Does that really equate to military warships (destroyers)?

My point is - this game’s spacecraft classification does not have parity with real-life navy vessel classification.

I don’t really see what naval terminology has to do here, to bve frank, considering how the other two classes don’t really map to naval terms either.

 

Do navy fleets have “fighters”? Do navy fleets have “interceptors”? Is so, how large are those ships? Don’t forget, in this game a ‘frigate’ is, at best, 3x as big as a ‘fighter’… Does that really equate to military warships (destroyers)?

My point is - this game’s spacecraft classification does not have parity with real-life navy vessel classification.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Aircraft_carrier

Pretty sure the Navy does use aircraft…

 

As I’ve said before, the “Frigate” is really closer to a bomber or a gunship (think the AC-130) in air force terms; in sea faring terms it’s a gun boat.

 

Real world Frigates can carry helicopters on the back, and extrapolating this into space it is not unreasonable to assume that a space-faring Frigate would likewise be able to carry some kind of small support craft. It’s pretty clear that the current “Frigates” cannot do this; at best, they can handle a few small, remote drones.

Pretty sure the Navy does use aircraft…

Not the point he’s making. Interceptor is an aircraft. Fighter is an aircraft. Frigate is a ship. There’s already no relation between star conflict ship classes and any single type of modern day vehicle.

Not the point he’s making. Interceptor is an aircraft. Fighter is an aircraft. Frigate is a ship. There’s already no relation between star conflict ship classes and any single type of modern day vehicle.

Pretty obvious there is some relation; Interceptors and Fighters are single-seat aircraft which, in game, perform roles we would associate with fighter craft, fighter-bombers or reconnaissance craft.

 

As others have said, on this forum and in the wider scope of speculative fiction, it is not by accident that we associate “Navy” in science fiction with space travel. The Navy, in particular the Navy of the Age of Sail, is in many ways the closest analogy we have to the conditions of deep space travel. I’m sure I’ve mentioned as much before on this thread.

 

Perhaps a simpler solution would be as follows; assuming these ships were applied to a real world armed force, which branch of the armed forces would you give them to? For example, I would consider the as-yet-unreleased “Dreadnought” to be a Navy craft; it is a ship, in the modern vernacular, albeit one that ‘sails’ through space. Its size and the logistical requirements of running it mean that its nearest Earthbound equivalent are the battleships and/or aircraft carriers of the modern navy.

 

But what about Interceptors, Fighters and Frigates? All of these appear to be one-man or two-man craft, though the Frigates may have a slightly larger crew (not much larger though). The manner in which they are deployed, their armaments, their overall design and so on liken these ships to aircraft, and thus they would be Air Force vehicles.

 

Perhaps, then, this topic is being phrased incorrectly. Perhaps even “Corvette” is an incorrect term for these ships; whatever their name, it should be inspired by the Air Force, not the Navy. Where it not for a Fighter class already having the name, I would prefer to call them “Gunships”.

 

Actually, I do like that one…

 

Rename “Gunship Fighter” to “Assault Fighter” (or “Strike Fighter”).

Rename “Engineering Frigate” to “Engineering Gunship”.

Rename “Guard Frigate” to “Close Support Gunship.”

Rename “Long Range Frigate” to “Long Range Gunship”

You know, they came up with the naval terminology in the first place because that is what the craft/vehicle/weapon was designed to do. Like for example, an Interceptor is designed as a craft that ‘intercepts’ targets. A fighter, being heavy or light can be anything designed for combat. Light or heavy is dependent on the weight of the vehicle/craft/weapon. The reason why we associate naval/air force terminologies with sci-fi can be said for why we gave the craft/vehicle/weapon the name in the first place. Because that is what it was designed to do. A Space Shuttle transported people to space, the Shuttle Bus used in public transportation can take you to the nearest grocery store.

 

A gunship is a heavily armed but less armored vessel/craft. A good example of it would be the B-17F Flying fortress, modern craft are AC-130. However the term gunship is also used for helicopters and some naval ships mainly vessels/craft with a wide range of weaponry and extra maneuverability in exchanged for survivability. Only two ships in this game can fit the description of gunship and those are Long range frigate and obviously the Gunship fighter. To put it simply, a gun ship is anything you can drive with allot of guns on it…

The Frigates do, to an extent, fit the name “Gunship”: They have six guns on them (okay, the Guard Frigates lost two, but traditionally all frigates had six), they can carry bigger torpedoes / mines than Fighters or Interceptors can, and the LR Frigates pack some pretty huge main guns on top of that.

 

It’s also worth pointing out that light and heavy are relative terms. The Frigate is only “heavy” when compared to a Fighter; compared to a true capital ship it is not going to stand up to much.

 

Case in point: the cargo transporters in the Rig PvE scenario are much larger than Frigates and appear to have a lot more health (and thus would be ‘heavier’). The Dreadnought is an excellent example of this; it’s main batteries also appear to have more armour than a Frigate, and its dorsal missile pods are vastly more durable than any Frigate!

 

This, to me, reinforces the notion that the Frigate is not heavily armoured compared to a true capital ship (ie: what I and others believe should be called a ‘Frigate’). With that in mind, the term Gunship fits quite nicely.

Frigates are not designed to be as armored as a capital ship because they are designed to support. This can be said in both naval and sci-fi terminology. Often classed in both, frigates are designed for ‘anti’ roles. Which larger capital ships are incapable of performing because they are designed to combat capital vessels. There is a massive difference between a warship and a support ship mainly because support ships fill the logistical role.  They defend capital ships or support other craft/vessels in combat to make it easier for the supported vessels to combat the enemy or to provide supplies or assistance to the larger vessels that require it.

 

To be honest with you, the frigates in this game are hard to class as frigates, they are too slow, unmaneuverable, and have too much fire power for a support vessel compared to fighters or interceptors. Having a frigate designed as a destroyer is understandable with multiple weapons such as the Long range frigate and needed, but the guard ship despite having the proper firepower of a support ship is too slow, and the engineer vessel is too well armed counting the drones though the engineer ship seems to be filling both anti and logistic role.

From my understanding:

PT boats are the smallest, hardest to hit, hardest to see and can be made in larger numbers.

Corvettes are small, designed to harass and swarm and can out-range a PT boat.

Frigates are designed more around manuevering and supprt roles (anti-air, anti-torp, point-d, targetting support, scanning support, etc), not specialized for the front-line.

Destroyers are dreadnoughts - all big gun ships, designed to take out large targets.  They are a.k.a. “cruisers”.

Battleships are large versions of destroyers.

Carriers do what carriers do.

 

What the in-game frigates can be categorized as-- well, they don’t fall into any of these classifications, but if I had to choose one, I’d call them corvettes.

Completely and utterly wrong. Check Wikipedia. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Frigate

 

Common PC-gamer misconception is that ship sizes are: cutter-corvette-destroyer-frigate-cruiser. 

reality: cutter-frigate-frigate-frigate-battleship-dreadnought-man-o-war(the big carriers). 

 

The definition of a destroyer is a frigate that is equipped to defend high value targets from small raiding vessels. The definition of a cruiser is a frigate that is equipped for long endurance fighting and raiding. Again, check wikipedia. 

 

As for corvettes, You can probably pass a fighter as one, unless you want to call a fighter “sloop of war”.

 

Check Wikipedia again. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Naval_ship You’ll see that here, the corvette (Around 500 tonnes) is classed as lower in tonnage than the frigate (2000+ tonnes). Considering the size of those ships, I doubt even the in-game frigate could class as a corvette in tonnage.