[Gray113]

There could be an argument in favour of Q ships if they were sufficiently strong enough to defeat a fighter/bomber assult, requiring the enemy to deploy warships to ensure the attack is successfull. This would have two main advantages:
                  1. Less attacks on convoys as the enemy would only commit when essential
                  2. Deployed warships would be vulnerable to counterstrikes.
Of course a way to mitigate this threat would be developed but it could be a relatively cheap way to buy time for resupplying beleaguered outposts.

[The E]

No. Q-ships are a solution looking for a problem given the realities of the war. As pointed out previously, deploying armed merchant ships (Well, armed with more than superficially point defense guns anyway) means that you put the real merchants at risk, since you cannot count on the other side to keep to the conventions of warfare. Also, subspace.

[Gray113]

they're just after our shipping. Cripple our freight, our fuel transport, our medical ability. The rest is collateral

I think the real merchants are already at risk. Giving them a chance to defend themselves without having to constantly have assets on standby for defence may offer a short term advantage. Also as I said before subspace allows both sides the opportunity to use convoys as lures to ambush deployed warships

Edit.

Kingmakers lost six haulers to GTVA skirmishers

In a full scale retreat light forces were able to rip through the Jovian civilian convoys. If The GTVA had to deploy heavier units to attack these convoys then an argument could be made that they would have had to prioritise these assets on military units meaning more civilians could have escaped.

[The E]

Yes, for about half an engagement. I would like to remind you of the very first mission of WiH, where the GTVA pilots had orders to capture the convoy and made it very clear that by travelling under escort, the ships were considered enemy combatants and therefore valid targets.

If you arm merchies with capital-grade weaponry, then the natural response of the attacker needs to be to open fire as soon as possible to neutralize the targets. By not doing that, you can at least make sure that civillians do not get put into the line of fire unnecessarily.

[Gray113]

I was referring to deterrants. Would the GTVA risk assaults such as in mission one if the civilian forces were capable of defending themselves? Would admiral Byrne have had to prioritise the defence of civilian shipping over military assets? There are possibilities opened by the use of armed civilian ships and whilst this may make them seen as a valid military target the GTVA were attacking them before any mention was made of the BETAC protections (though this could have been done before the start of the mission).

[The E]

What kind of possibilities? Forcing the GTVA to treat every ship encountered as potentially hostile? Turning every single ship into a potential threat that needs to be neutralized?

And for what in return? The potential to kill a few fighters? Your cost/benefit calculation on this is not exactly good, you know.

[Gray113]

To look at thing from the GTVA side Calder can now launch assaults on the node meaning their shipping is vulnerable however the losses he has taken would mean that these raids will be done exclusively by strikecraft. Steele cannot divert ships to defend the node without affecting the preparations for the assult on Earth. In these circumstances sufficiently powerfull Q ships could be the ideal solution to cover this short period and allow GTVA convoys to reach their destinations.

[Gray113]

Forcing the GTVA to treat every ship encountered as potentially hostile? Turning every single ship into a potential threat that needs to be neutralized?

No force the enemy to consider the fact that their forces may be outgunned, make them question whether the risk of a attack is worth the potentail gains, force the enemy to consolidate their forces on priority targets and allow more of your forces the opportunity to escape whilst the enemy hesitates.

[The E]

Oh for the love of kittens.

The risk for the attacker is negligible, even if you arm some of the convoy ships. If you launch a fighter strike against a convoy, the fighters have enough time to exfiltrate if they find themselves outgunned. If you launch a Corvette strike against a convoy, it will have enough firepower to kill the attacker regardless (Have you looked at what a Diomedes can do?), or exfiltrate before bad things happen. Your Q-ships would not be able to inflict much damage before they're destroyed.

In all cases, you are proposing a strategy that would make every. single. civillian. ship. a potential enemy combatant that needs to be neutralized and destroyed. If this was a total war scenario, that would be one thing. This isn't. It's a police action writ large, nothing more.

[Mars]

To look at thing from the GTVA side Calder can now launch assaults on the node

Even when the war was young assaults on the node were generally suicidal - consider that the 14th battlegroup took out 5 Karuna at that chokepoint despite being barely held together and with a 50% mutiny rate - with no losses.

. . . meaning their shipping is vulnerable however the losses he has taken would mean that these raids will be done exclusively by strikecraft.

I don't think that means that at all - lighter combatants certainly, but Calder still has 5+ Sanctus and an unknown number of Custos to work with.

Steele cannot divert ships to defend the node without affecting the preparations for the assult on Earth.

Steele is already covering the node, or the UEF would have overrun it already. There is a prohibitive defense at the node - enough that throughout the entire arc of War in Heaven, no one has even considered it in more than a fantastical way.

In these circumstances sufficiently powerfull Q ships could be the ideal solution to cover this short period and allow GTVA convoys to reach their destinations.

How would this be more economical strategically than deploying some more Cretheus or Aeolus combatants? Consider that the cruisers in Nothing is True - a Mentu and a Aten, were more than capable of holding off an attack on the scale that we saw in that mission, in less extraordinary circumstances. While electronics warfare is commonplace, it is not often that an enemy has not only extensive data, but a virus powerful enough to shut down point defenses - it was also unprecedented (as far as we know) in the war. Such an attack would have worked on Q ships as well. I would put a well supported Aeolus on much firmer footing than any number of up-armed freighters in terms of defensive strength.

[Gray113]

The risk for the attacker is negligible, even if you arm some of the convoy ships. If you launch a fighter strike against a convoy, the fighters have enough time to exfiltrate if they find themselves outgunned.

There could be an argument in favour of Q ships if they were sufficiently strong enough to defeat a fighter/bomber assult

If a fighter/bomber assult is forced to withdraw then the Q ship has done its job as I was talking about deterrence. The GTVA are not Shivans - they cannot send wave after wave of fighters and bombers against low priority targets. In the event that a convoy was to well defended then they would have to leave it alone or use warships.

If you launch a Corvette strike against a convoy, it will have enough firepower to kill the attacker regardless

Deployed warships would be vulnerable to counterstrikes

Would ether combatant risk going after standard civilian shipping with warships knowing that the assult could escalate into a pitched battle in which the attacker would be placed in a severe disadvantage? Even a Diomedes is vulnerable to counterattacks whilst its jump drives are charging. My guess would be that a target would have to be pretty dam valuable to the enemy before I would risk committing warship assets.

[Gray113]

Mars

Looking back at that post I meant to say that Calder could raid the node rather than assult meaning that I think the strike craft would be used to keep the GTVA off balance through hit and run strikes that would take out supply ships whilst specifically avoiding warships and interceptors. Steele is supplying 5 destroyer battlegroups which could raise to 7 before his assult begins. This would be a lot of shipping and although cruisers and gunships could be used to protect the most critical assets the sheer weight of traffic would mean that defending all would be impossible.
I don't know how the BP guys want to use the Virus aspect but I was under the impression that a countermeasure had already been developed for this.

[The E]

If a fighter/bomber assult is forced to withdraw then the Q ship has done its job as I was talking about deterrence. The GTVA are not Shivans - they cannot send wave after wave of fighters and bombers against low priority targets. In the event that a convoy was to well defended then they would have to leave it alone or use warships.

But deterrence is not a useful strategy here. Committing overwhelming force to kill any Q-ship-escorted convoy is trivially easy. You assume that this supposed deterrence effect would protect a convoy, when in actuality, it would put all convoys at risk because the only protection they have right now is that what the convoys are transporting is more valuable intact than destroyed. There's an incentive to capture, rather than destroy, a convoy. Your silly scheme would reverse that.

You are also assuming that Q-ship conversions or purpose-built Q-ships are something that can be built. This is untrue; if there was yard space available to build new ships or convert existing ones, it is put to better use repairing or upgrading or building real warships.

[Gray113]

There's an incentive to capture, rather than destroy, a convoy. Your silly scheme would reverse that.

There have been no instances so far in BP where I as a player have seen a reference to a convoy being captured by ether side (the other side was referenced The Regressive Customs Tax as an independent trader) however if this is the case then your logic would suggest that there is no point in defending civilian convoys at all as by traveling with a military escort they become legitimate targets and would be destroyed. This would mean then that the only way to successfully protect convoys is to send them out undefended and allow them to be captured without a fight.
Do the UEF allow non essential convoys to be captured rather than risk endangering civilians?

[Aesaar]

They wouldn't be destroyed, they'd be attacked.  The escorts would be destroyed or driven off.  There's always an incentive to capture valuable ships that can't fight back.  You start putting meaningful weapons on freighters, and you start making the effort of disabling, disarming, and boarding not worth the benefits of capture.

[Qent]

What about GTVA Q-ships for catching Fedayeen? When the Ainsariis get close, cargo containers pop releasing Pegasi with TAGs, and the freighters are armed with ULTRAs or something. Assuming the Tevs could engineer a convoy that actually attracts Fedayeen like that one did.

[qwadtep]

What about GTVA Q-ships for catching Fedayeen? When the Ainsariis get close, cargo containers pop releasing Pegasi with TAGs, and the freighters are armed with ULTRAs or something. Assuming the Tevs could engineer a convoy that actually attracts Fedayeen like that one did.

Or they could just give the Charybdis upgraded armor and some AAAs and make life hell for the Feds in general.

Star Trek... so are you flying a big ship?

Unrelated, but a Galaxy-class (TNG Enterprise) is 80m shy of a Deimos, and considered rather large for its universe.

[Raptor831]

There's no real reason for the UEF to actually pursue Q-ships. They don't have the resources or time to implement that. If Steele can attack in anything less than months, then it's a waste of time/resources. If they had any to spare, they'd be repairing/building true warships. Q-ships make more sense against stuff like pirates or the Gefs (maybe, since even they have military surplus essentially).

Also given the fact that if you can send a cruiser from Earth orbit to the convoy in 30 seconds no matter where they are (I didn't realize subspace was like that before), you don't need a Q-ship. You can just listen in on the comms and when you get a signal, you send your defence force. It actually makes you more flexible with fewer assets.

Another thing, the Tevs have a technological advantage here. They have better offensive weapons (read: beams). The only way UEF forces really can press an advantage is by keeping the range open beyond 4 km. And that's with capital-class railguns/mass drivers. Q-ships don't offer any real benefit in that environment either. Unless you armor your ships like a frigate, it's useless, and once you get that much metal on a frame you might as well build a warship.

Really, the nature of subspace kills the idea. It doesn't really cost you to hold your forces in reserve because it doesn't cost much to deploy anywhere. Besides, we need missions to fly, and this gives us exactly that! Jump five shifts, here we come.

[Flak]

Taking out the Ainsariis does little really, if they want anything from them, they will capture the Fedayeen agents instead. As long as Al-Da'wa is still out there, they could always recruit more. If they want to do that sneak attack thing, better to do it to that 1337 ship.

[Drogoth]

Yeah. The only time Q ships make sense - in any sci-fi universe - is for pirate suppression. Every civilian ship is already a pirate target, so you send a Q ship on standard shipping lanes, the pirate comes in all fat and happy to capture the merchant ship, and the merchant ship blows the hell out of them.

In conventional warfare they are worse then useless.