|
Phrosphor posted:Is it worth starting to lay the foundations of a colony ship? Or is it cheaper to fill a container ship with cryo bays to keep under the tonnage limits for jumps? Colony ships are usually cargo ships with the cargo bays ripped out and replaced by cryo bays, yeah. They're pretty standard designs.
|
# ? Sep 21, 2017 02:13 |
|
|
# ? Mar 29, 2024 02:15 |
|
Let's talk missile sizes. Personally, I like the quirky size 2 missile designs we have now, but most people seem to want to see size 3 or size 4 with a few size queens holding out for size 6s. In the fight between size 3 and size 4, I think size 3 is the clear winner. It does almost as much damage and has similar chances to hit. Critically, missile damage is done like thiscode:
Size 3: WH 4, 82% to hit 5k Size 4: WH5 92% to hit 5k quirky size 2s: WH 4, 43% to hit 5k with half the hit rate and 2/3 the size of the size 3, they're more competitive than I expected, and the smaller size would help us pack more launchers. Gargantuan size 6s: WH9, 87.1% to hit 5k with more than twice the damage and even better chances to hit, these heavy weight bruisers are real contenders for the championship. However, keep in mind that they're much vulnerable to PD and AMM fire since every lost missile reduces damage by twice as much as well.
|
# ? Sep 21, 2017 02:43 |
|
Does anyone even have any PD tech yet?
|
# ? Sep 21, 2017 02:47 |
|
Size 2s having half the hit rate means they'll probably inflict considerably less damage unless large numbers of missiles are being shot down. They're really only practical if we're expecting to face heavy point defense for our missiles where like half of the volleys are being shot down. Size 4s main advantage is it's easier to fit a sensor suite onto them, making it so the missiles can potentially lock onto new targets if their target (or the ship that launched them) is destroyed.
|
# ? Sep 21, 2017 02:57 |
|
Phrosphor posted:Does anyone even have any PD tech yet? Oh yeah, it's standard in all navies now, it played a big role in the last war. Everyone's got turrets and gauss guns, that's what you need for a PD network.
|
# ? Sep 21, 2017 03:08 |
|
Saros posted:
To assist in standardizing engine sizes here is a modification of Saros' skunkworks save. In addition to the missile sizes discussed above, it also has standardized engine designs based around a fleet speed of 5,500 km/s. The engines are compromises between size, speed, and fuel efficiency. For 3k size ships I have provided a LR Outsystems Destroyer drive. One of these will hurtle our warships through the stars at 5516 km/s. Size-wise, it leaves exactly half the tonnage for weapons, equipment, and fuel assuming a relatively thin skin of 4 armor layers. For 4.5k size ships you can use either 2 LR Outsystems Small drives or 1 LR Outsystems Large drive depending on if you prefer fuel efficiency or resilience to battle damage. Size-wise it leaves 1,850 tons (37 HS) for weapons, equipment, and fuel assuming a comfortable skin of 6 armor layers. For 9.9k size ships you can use either 4 LR Outsystems Small drives or 2 LR Outsystems Large drive depending on if you prefer fuel efficiency or resilience to battle damage. Size-wise it leaves 4,850 tons (97 HS) for weapons, equipment, and fuel assuming a perhaps slightly underamored skin of 6 armor layers. I hope this is helpful. Phrosphor posted:Does anyone even have any PD tech yet?
|
# ? Sep 21, 2017 03:14 |
|
Crazycryodude posted:Oh yeah, it's standard in all navies now, it played a big role in the last war. Everyone's got turrets and gauss guns, that's what you need for a PD network. This is what happens when you try and comment in two different Aurora threads at the same time
|
# ? Sep 21, 2017 03:27 |
|
Yeah, this is the one set in 2050 with the socialist Martians, not the one set in 1900 with the genocidal Martians
|
# ? Sep 21, 2017 03:38 |
|
Crazycryodude posted:Yeah, this is the one set in 2050 with the socialist Martians, not the one set in 1900 with the genocidal Martians Now I have to read the other aurora thead thanks
|
# ? Sep 21, 2017 04:25 |
|
Gaze upon the wonder that is Victorian Aurora
|
# ? Sep 21, 2017 04:29 |
|
LLSix posted:To assist in standardizing engine sizes here is a modification of Saros' skunkworks save. It's way easier to share the ship or component stats as text than swapping out Stevefire databases, which also loses all their existing designs. The text output from the Create Research Project screen would be plenty for someone to recreate it
|
# ? Sep 21, 2017 04:46 |
|
What if we put engines on a giant laser for shooting at planet's
|
# ? Sep 21, 2017 06:08 |
|
Did we get any of that microwave beam tech? And could it be mounted on a bunch of swarmy fighters? I like the idea of knocking missiles out of the air at their source and rendering stuff unable to shoot and then boarding it. Let us become the terror that was the Hiigaran Salvage Corp.
|
# ? Sep 21, 2017 14:25 |
|
So what's the deal with facility referring to the whatever tried to get in as "kin"?
|
# ? Sep 21, 2017 15:13 |
|
punched my v-card at camp posted:So what's the deal with facility referring to the whatever tried to get in as "kin"? Well, it straight up told us it was part of an intergalactic society of some kind, and clearly the portal it had us try to open was trying to re-establish contact with what Facility thought was where it's prior compatriots were. Whatever we saw on the other side must have been putting out familiar transmissions (albeit mad and possibly demonic) to what Facility is used to seeing.
|
# ? Sep 21, 2017 15:21 |
|
I've got a feeling that the best defense against warp madness is mortality. If you've got a ship that maintains the same intelligence for who knows how many jumps... Who wants to bet that these predecessors discovered the intersection between artificial intelligence and the psychoactive aspects of jump travel the hard way?
|
# ? Sep 21, 2017 15:40 |
|
the best defense against warp madness is to embrace it
|
# ? Sep 21, 2017 16:42 |
|
IT IS A GOOD PAIN.
|
# ? Sep 21, 2017 17:14 |
|
For the Record, I put together a few missile ship designs comparing the merits of Size 2, Size 3 and Size 4 missiles. I personally like the Size 3 design, Size 4 might have more versatility however if we do decide to add some sensors etc. to the missiles. Ostensibly the biggest question becomes what is Terra's PD situation like, if it is fairly minimal size 4's might be better as each missile has some spare space for sensors/armor/ecm etc., if Terra has excellent PD size 2's are probably the best since you can poo poo out more missiles per volley. Size 3's are I think a good middleground it looks like they can pack pretty similar punch to Size 4's, but don't have extra space for fun add-ons. Each Design has 1.8x the Firepower of the Argyre, 1.5x the Armor, 1.65x the Mag Space, 1000 km/s faster, 2x the missile range, 8 layers of shields, damage control upgrades and more advanced ECCM. code:
code:
code:
Jack2142 fucked around with this message at 18:59 on Sep 21, 2017 |
# ? Sep 21, 2017 18:51 |
|
I still prefer hybrid designs. Not having ships become target dummies when we inevitably run out of missiles seems like a good idea.
|
# ? Sep 21, 2017 21:46 |
|
LLSix posted:I still prefer hybrid designs. Not having ships become target dummies when we inevitably run out of missiles seems like a good idea. Yep. In Discord we also had a great idea to give the hybrids one or two additional salvos of short range torpedoes, keeping the launchers relevant in a beam fight.
|
# ? Sep 21, 2017 21:49 |
|
I Present the Dragon Class Torpedo Boat Destroyer, it is to get within 115 km of the target and shoot off it's torpedoscode:
|
# ? Sep 21, 2017 22:00 |
|
How much damage (in practice) do those Size 8 torps do?
|
# ? Sep 21, 2017 22:12 |
|
Zaodai posted:How much damage (in practice) do those Size 8 torps do? Its kinda pointless as Beams fill the same role, but don't run out of ammo. LLSix posted:I still prefer hybrid designs. Not having ships become target dummies when we inevitably run out of missiles seems like a good idea. I personally disagree, and I know the Discord chat isn't unanimous on Hybrids vs Specialist ships. I am throwing out an alternate design. Jack2142 fucked around with this message at 22:29 on Sep 21, 2017 |
# ? Sep 21, 2017 22:26 |
|
Zaodai posted:How much damage (in practice) do those Size 8 torps do? 14 damage, and they're essentially uninterceptable at 120,000 km or less. However, the reloading time makes those spinal doom lasers look rapid fire :p
|
# ? Sep 21, 2017 22:36 |
|
So at what point do the other weapon techs start to become viable alternatives to missiles? I followed the first lp for a while and I sorta recall the meson-heavy UN getting outgunned by the Russians most of the time. Could be wildly misremembering though.
|
# ? Sep 21, 2017 22:38 |
|
Yeah, the torpedoes do less damage in the long run than beams, but they do it all at once instead of having to blap it out in little bits every 10 seconds. They're maybe not the thing to build an entire ship around, but they work great for things like hybrid ships so the missile launcher tonnage isn't wasted at beam ranges. E: Dirt5o8 posted:So at what point do the other weapon techs start to become viable alternatives to missiles? I followed the first lp for a while and I sorta recall the meson-heavy UN getting outgunned by the Russians most of the time. Could be wildly misremembering though. Crazycryodude fucked around with this message at 22:41 on Sep 21, 2017 |
# ? Sep 21, 2017 22:39 |
|
I was mostly curious what kind of damage they did relative to that penetration test we got for the Giant Spinal Laser of Doom.
|
# ? Sep 21, 2017 22:45 |
|
That torpedo boat looks interesting, but looking at how the Marisa Meyers preformed in combat I'm a bit leary. Front loading your damage like that is great up until it isn't and then you're useless and dead long before you can reload. Its too much to risk for a 4.5kt ship, maybe in a 3kt it would be more interesting.
|
# ? Sep 21, 2017 22:46 |
|
Zaodai posted:I was mostly curious what kind of damage they did relative to that penetration test we got for the Giant Spinal Laser of Doom. Each torp has a solid chance to cause shock damage to the internals even if they don't pen the armor, and while penetration will of course be nowhere near as good as the GSLoD, raw damage is almost double (a salvo of torps will do ~100 damage, the GSLoD does 53). This means that, while again they might not actually get through the armor as well as a laser, they'll totally strip the enemy's armor off at least and make it so the beams following up get to apply all their damage to internals instead of having to dig through armor.
|
# ? Sep 21, 2017 22:50 |
|
I like lasers. Missiles are cool too. This was totally the right post for the right thread. Yes.
|
# ? Sep 21, 2017 22:51 |
|
Okay right now in the Discord chat there has been a debate raging pretty much since we got the opportunity to design ships, right now I think we can end some discussion by putting two of the biggest issues with partisans on both sides to vote in thread, that weren't covered in the build guides. 1. Should we continue developing Specialized ASM Cruisers such as the Argyre, or should we develop a Hybrid Design that dedicates tonnage to include secondary beam weaponry? 1A. Specialized 1B. Hybrids 2. Should we adopt a Size 3 or a Size 4 as the standard for fleet missiles? Size 3 would allow larger numbers of missiles in mag and per volley, while Size 4 would offer more flexibility in missile design, such as Torpedo's. 2A. Size 3 2B. Size 4 Jack2142 fucked around with this message at 23:36 on Sep 22, 2017 |
# ? Sep 22, 2017 00:57 |
|
As for Item 2, the main factor for me at this point is that we are unsure on what the enemy designs and capabilities will be, since it's likely either Aliens or UT, both of which we've not fought yet. As such, the more flexible S4 are less effective until we can design them in regards to the enemy's observed capabilities. So, I vote 2A. following the golden rule of design-KISS. S3 Missiles will be plenty effective without needing to tweak them. EDIT: If were going all or nothing, I'll vote 1B Tactical_Torpedo fucked around with this message at 15:33 on Sep 22, 2017 |
# ? Sep 22, 2017 01:09 |
|
I'm sure it will surprise no one that I'm in favor of 1B. How much tonnage we want to devote to beams is up in the air, but even having a few beams behind a thousand tons of armor makes for a significant threat (especially with the addition of a salvo of torpedoes). It also avoids possible disasters where a bunch of missile cruisers with empty magazines get bushwhacked by a destroyer or a few fighters while their beam escorts are off fighting the obvious enemy. In the previous war we had hybrid battlecruisers to provide that kind of coverage, but we're looking at cruisers as our largest jump classes so I think we should have at least some hybrids there. For missile size I'm much more ambivalent. After playing around with possible designs, I favor 2B but only just; size 3 missiles without sensors are extremely capable, and still doable with sensors. S4 makes sensors a no brainer and has more versatility for alternate ammunition types like torpedoes.
|
# ? Sep 22, 2017 01:14 |
|
Im weighing in with 1B and 2B. Martian design philosophy needs to be flexible, we are dealing with the unknown and having all the tools for the job available rather than finding ourselves hard countered by something unexpected is vital. However I feel that ships should still have a designated role and be designed with that primary capability in mind Laying down a larger missile size now gives us more leeway in the future.
|
# ? Sep 22, 2017 01:34 |
|
Dirt5o8 posted:So at what point do the other weapon techs start to become viable alternatives to missiles? I followed the first lp for a while and I sorta recall the meson-heavy UN getting outgunned by the Russians most of the time. Could be wildly misremembering though. Broadly speaking missiles are always tactically best but their weakness is in the strategic, logistics aspects. Crazycryodude pretty much nailed it. Zaodai posted:I was mostly curious what kind of damage they did relative to that penetration test we got for the Giant Spinal Laser of Doom. There is regular damage & then distinctly there is also shock damage. Missiles & lasers have different armour penetration templates for causing regular damage. Armour thicker than 5 or 6 starts to really hurt missile penetration badly. Our Giant Spinal Laser of Doom is putting holes through 12 layers. Armour thicker than 8 or 9 starts to blunt most reasonable lasers, although at those damage levels we need to talk shock damage. Any sufficiently big single hit additionally has a decent chance of causing shock damage if it is not stopped by shields, which is a big deal because the shock part of the damage will bypass any & all armour no matter how thick. Giant Spinal Laser of Doom armour penetration (Thanks Nick Esasky!) The way the current game mechanics shake out means that missiles tend to be viciously small bastards but not a lot of individual damage, whereas lasers just keep scaling up and we're very much at the stage where our bigger lasers should be causing shock damage on a regular basis. Torpedoes are a different story. Due to quirks in the PD targeting mechanics a missile launched quite close & travelling sufficiently fast could hit the target before PD can engage it at all. (Except CIWS which has it's own mechanics and will catch it but CIWS is otherwise rubbish so who cares). Such missiles are called torpedoes by convention and by bypassing the PD meta they also bypass the size implications so they tend to go big & pack a lot of boom, enough to trigger shock damage code:
|
# ? Sep 22, 2017 01:56 |
|
Zaodai posted:How much damage (in practice) do those Size 8 torps do? It looks like this when it hits a ship with 10 layers of Armour and 30 shields
|
# ? Sep 22, 2017 01:58 |
|
Tactical_Torpedo posted:For item 1, can we clarify on not ALL ASM Cruiser designs going hybrid if 1B wins? If so, 1B on condition that not all ASM cruisers be Hybrid, just that an arbitrary % in-fleet be Hybrid That would add redundancy when we want to reduce it, so my intention is that we are going all or nothing not mixing fleets with hybrid and not hybrid missile cruisers. For the record I vote, 1A 2B
|
# ? Sep 22, 2017 02:01 |
|
Do we not have any intelligence on UT fleet doctrine?
|
# ? Sep 22, 2017 02:39 |
|
|
# ? Mar 29, 2024 02:15 |
|
They really like carriers and thick armor. Not much beyond that. But even that tidbit is enough for us to plan around things like having to survive big fighter missile waves (or intercept the bombers before thye can launch) and whatnot.
|
# ? Sep 22, 2017 02:41 |