|
C B C A The idea of the nucleus of a species being a remote space brothel leftover from an ancient empire is highly amusing.
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2020 17:35
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 20:02 |
|
|
The Gadget looks great both on a cost/time front and a capabilities front, certainly way better than the tin can I'm saddled with right now. It's gonna be horribly obsolete in a generation but that's how all early game Aurora ships are and we've got a war on against a superior enemy that we need passable ships for ASAP.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2020 17:38
|
|
|
Not Alex posted:The idea of the nucleus of a species being a remote space brothel leftover from an ancient empire is highly amusing. You're assuming it's not still in operation. I'm absolutely convinced that it (or rather, the corporation that owns it) literally bought the government and is now the controlling force behind these aliens.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2020 17:41
|
|
|
EclecticTastes posted:You're assuming it's not still in operation. I'm absolutely convinced that it (or rather, the corporation that owns it) literally bought the government and is now the controlling force behind these aliens. I enjoy how much you live up to your avatar.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2020 18:18
|
|
|
The biggest risks I see with this design is that is is gambling hard on: - Kookans having no missiles that can target it. A handful of missiles will down one, and it isn't especially fast (to reliably dodge) or especially small (to sneak under targeting). - Kookan beam weapons actually being a vanilla railgun/laser instead of a particle beam or having some range techs. +2 range techs from where we are now will get them past 96000km, and those aren't a huge amount of research LLSix posted:Ughh, I can't even make good AMMs using the new designs. C# changed how missiles are built. The best AMM I can build only has ~10% chance to hit same tier missiles. Either I'm doing something wrong or missiles in general and AMMs in specific got hit by a very big nerf bat. I know VR doesn't like AMMs but I thought they'd provide a good floor for how accurate we can expect ASMs to be. My AMMs hover right around a 50% hit chance vs known Pleasure Pit ship speeds. It doesn't mean missiles don't work as primary weapons, just that you need to consider "How will I carry enough ammunition to actually kill things?" as a design question Similar to how beams as primary weapons need to have an answer to "How will I survive to get close to a missile ship?" (run them out of ammunition is a possible valid answer) e: Obligatory Wyern Knockoff  - No-retool - 2 years per ship build time - 4 salvos of 20 missiles, has time to get off all 4 vs a 4000km/s enemy (enemy closes 17mkm) - 60RP for missile launcher - Uses too much fuel to reposition - Boring Will work out a carrier+bomber and a floating brick design in a bit Foxfire_ fucked around with this message at 18:51 on Jul 30, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2020 18:25
|
|
|
Well, that escalated quickly, although this was to be expected when the Navy handles things. Industry A Right now, we keep way to many eggs in a single basket, Sol. Each colonized system must be capable of sustaining itself and if possible build and maintain a defensive force, on the ground and in space. Colonial Policy B We don't need more colonies, which we could barely defend. Let's consolidate our gains, fortify and prepare for the coming war. Military B I'm not advocating even the slightest slowdown of naval expansion, I merely note the urgent need for well-rounded, locally produced and capable ground-forces. The last operation showed how even a modest operation depleted our fuel-reserves, having colonies capable of defending themselves, including orbiting battle-stations, would free up forces and fuel-reserves for the battle-fleet. Furthermore the message of the Kooken hinted at some ancient threat, a threat which might have produced the ruins on Europa and Adrantis A II. I must again urge our policy-makers to authorize the creation of a specialized group of embedded scientists and military engineers to investigate these ruins in order to characterize this ancient cataclysm as well as possibly salvage advanced technology. the Kooken B Humanity is for the first time under threat from Xenos. They lulled us into a false sense of security and stabbed us in the back in a futile bid towards reclaiming their fallen empire. We must prepare our forces as fast as possible and carry the battle back to the homeworld of these treacherous Xenos! Tech focus: Defensive The idea of supplementing our armor with shields sounds interesting, any ship which survives an encounter will be avaible to fight again later.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2020 19:10
|
|
|
Foxfire_ posted:The biggest risks I see with this design is that is is gambling hard on: This is mostly true, and I even say as much in my post, but you need to recheck your math. Against same tech missiles the Inspector Gadget will dodge more than half the missiles shot at it. That's a pretty reliable dodge. Admittedly, it doesn't need to get hit very often to kill it so I don't expect it to beat missile boats, but you've made several posts now about accuracy that don't seem to jive with the numbers I'm seeing in the class and missile designer. So either I'm misunderstanding how hit rates are calculated or you're still relying on intuition from VB6, which is something that I know has tripped me up several times. LLSix fucked around with this message at 19:25 on Jul 30, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2020 19:17
|
|
|
Yeah, it dodges somewhere between 70-50% of missiles shot at it. But any missile hit penetrates armor. So if you shoot 10 missiles at it, 3 hit and it probably sinks. Pretty much any missile ship will be able to throw 10 missiles in the time it takes it to close to beam range. To survive vs missiles, it would either need a higher dodge (so any hit is unlikely), or some armor (so the occasional hit isn't catastrophic). As is, any missile ship with a modest magazine is a hard counter that can freely destroy many Gadgets.
Foxfire_ fucked around with this message at 19:29 on Jul 30, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2020 19:25
|
|
|
Foxfire_ posted:Yeah, it dodges somewhere between 70-50% of missiles shot at it. But any missile hit penetrates armor. So if you shoot 10 missiles at it, 3 hit and it probably sinks. Pretty much any missile ship will be able to throw 10 missiles in the time it takes it to close to beam range. To survive vs missiles, it would either need a higher dodge (so any hit is unlikely), or some armor (so the occasional hit isn't catastrophic). As is, any missile ship with a modest magazine is a hard counter that can freely destroy many Gadgets. Trimming the deployment time to 6 months allows for a second layer of armor. Getting a third while staying in the smaller shipyard requires trimming deployment time to 3 months and swapping the large fuel storage out for 4 standard fuel storage (reduces range to 11bkm). I don't think either design will allow all of them to reach beam range, but the 3 armor layer version would mean it takes multiple hits on the same or adjacent column to penetrate which would give at least some of the swarm a chance to close to beam range. Unless they have better missile warhead tech than we do. The nicest thing about the Inspector Gadget is it offers a relatively cheap way to bait out any additional abilities the Kookens have that we haven't seen yet.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2020 19:32
|
|
|
LLSix posted:I enjoy how much you live up to your avatar. I'm just saying, don't be surprised when their flagship is "Kookens Pleasure Pit presents: The XK-5 Annihilator-class Dreadnought, co-sponsored by Gorbor's Homestyle Flurgle Nuggets".
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2020 19:34
|
|
|
Oh boy here we go again. Sign me up to the navy, please. I already look forward to dying gloriously to alien missiles, millions of kilometers before being able to shoot back. Re: Design discussion. The Gadgets are a stop-gap proposal to be able to do something about the turtles now. Going by that line of thinking I have two questions: 1: How difficult is it to get maintenance facilities on Folly to maintain the (tiny) Gadgets? 2: If that is vaguely feasible, what's the use case for a maintenance life beyond 'Sally forth and die gloriously' or perhaps 'Charge their homeworld'? It seems to me that 3 layers of armour have a far greater utility value than a multi-month deployment time.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2020 20:05
|
|
|
If it's cheap enough to put out a bunch of them, sitting them on a jump point would be a pretty valid form of defense while we get our infrastructure and work on a proper war fleet via research, unless C# Aurora changed how jump cooldowns work.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2020 20:06
|
|
|
For missile defense, I evaluate "# of shots needed to cause internal damage" by: - Armor: Made a little python script that drops strength-4 damage templates down a rectangle of armor x size boxes and counts how many are needed. Run that 1000 times and take the mean number - Point Defense: Set the range band/target speed in the class design to a missile @ 10000km so Aurora gives fire control hit probability, apply turret hit penalty, then binomial formula to expected number of hits for its number of shots - Speed: Guestimate missile hit percentage from the missiles listed hit chances and the ships speed, then multiply # of shots needed according to that For Gadget (16 wide): - 1 armor: 3 missiles [1 hit to penetrate armor / 40% hit rate] - 2 armor: 9 missiles [3.6 hits to penetrate armor / 40% hit rate] - 3 armor: 13 missiles [5 hits to penetrate armor / 40% hit rate] A rock with missiles  If researching new engines takes too long, skip it! Tool one of the commercial yards for a tug and build a couple to also use for hauling terraforming stations. Drop a missile base a few million km off of the jump point and have it just sit there with active on watching for anything entering. Use thick armor to absorb any return missile fire (since it can't dodge anything) plus some shields to prevent chip damage. - 182 shots to get through armor + 10 shots for shields - 4 salvos of 60 missiles, then it needs a nonexistent collier to reload it - 1 year tooling time, 2.5 years per ship build time  - 60RP for a reloadable mini launcher Foxfire_ fucked around with this message at 20:32 on Jul 30, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2020 20:12
|
|
|
You've convinced me. Here's the uparmored IG. With a deployment time slashed to 2 months and a ranged of 11.6 billion km it is now a FAC with delusions of grandeur. I think it has the range to get there and back, but I'm having a hard time finding exact numbers. On the plus side, it now has 4 times the survivability which means a 5 ship fleet will be able to punch through a light missile attack. It lost 300 km/s of speed though, so if the alien beamships end up just slightly faster than us, I'm going to say I told you so.  The Dwayne is a fun design.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2020 20:58
|
|
|
OddObserver posted:On that note, anyone know what's up with fighter beam fire control in C# Aurora? They no longer exist, I'm unsure as to the reason why. It definitely complicates fighter design.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2020 21:00
|
|
|
Virtual Russian posted:They no longer exist, I'm unsure as to the reason why. It definitely complicates fighter design. One of Steve's design goals for C# was to eliminate edge cases and special systems like that. It is one of the reasons he axed PDCs, for example. LLSix posted:I can't make a missile I'm happy with. Right now we miss more than half the time. I think we probably need more agility research to be able to reliably hit ships moving at 4k? I'm not sure though. Maybe someone more experienced with missile design could tell us how to make a missile with both adequate range and the ability to hit 4k ships reliably? It isn't so bad as it might seem. Assume we build two of my Avengers, since that's the most recent missile-fighter we have, and there's two slips on the shipyard. Each ship has 15 tubes and 5 rounds per tube, so you're throwing five salvos of thirty missiles. Going by the what they've shown, we can assume that they will get off 16 shots as the missiles come in. If we assume a 100% hit rate on that point defense fire, that leaves 14 missiles. At 50% hit rate, that give seven hits per salvo, or thirty five on a magazine dump. Have each ship pick two or three targets to focus on (our missiles don't have sensors, so we don't want missiles in flight to destroyed targets), and we've got a better than fair chance of taking out a few of them. Pop in, dump the magazines at maximum range, and then retreat while tanking their fire. Have the rest of the fleet sitting on our side of the jump point to blast them if they follow. That said, I wanted to see what I could do for a beam ship, and I came up with this. code:Gnoman fucked around with this message at 22:16 on Jul 30, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2020 21:31
|
|
|
Gnoman posted:
You should either replace the particle beam with something shorter ranged or add a longer ranged beam fire control. Particle Beams' advantage is that they do full damage out to their max range, 100k in this case. Right now you're losing 2/3rds of your beam's range due to the fire control's short range.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2020 22:04
|
|
|
That was an error - it was supposed to have two fire controls, one for range and one to take advantage of the speed of the ship.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2020 22:17
|
|
|
That is a pretty nice ship! Looks like it should be fast to build too, BP is small I get ~25 shots to kill it, plus the gauss deletes about one missile per salvo on average - Chance to be hit by 15000km/s missile: 15000 / 7581 * 10 = 20% - 5.2 strength-4 hits to get through 2x38 armor - Point defense BFC has base 69% @ 10000km * (7581/15000 penalty for overspeed target) * 25% penalty for undersized gauss = 9% to hit per shot x 12 shots is 32% 0 hits, 38% 1 hit, 21% 2 hits
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2020 22:29
|
|
|
Just for the timeline: Engine will take until October to research (as already discussed). Retool will take 6 months From there, each ship will take 7 months to build (less if industry is devoted to building components. So we'd be looking at 23 months until the first units roll out.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2020 22:44
|
|
|
Not Alex posted:
Everything was fine until we tried to leave without paying cover charge.
|
|
#
?
Jul 30, 2020 23:49
|
|
|
Carrier option since no one else has thrown one up:   Carrier itself tries to hide a few hundred mkm away from any threats and relies on other ships or a scout fighter to get a general area for targets, then bombers go in and fire at 5mkm. If everything works out, the enemy sees nothing until missiles pop up on their thermal sensors (we don't have any sensors that could see either the bombers or the carriers at those ranges). If everything doesn't work out, the bombers get shot down by antimissile missiles, the carrier is spotted and can't run away or defend itself. 16 fighter complement, we build about 14 fighters per year. Carrier is a 4 month retool, 21 month build time. Research: - 12RP active sensor for the bomber - 12RP fire control for the bomber - 176RP fighter engine - 450RP carrier engine [75% efficiency, 20HS] - 120RP if we want the scout - A few hundred for a missile that trades range for either a bigger payload or better hit chances since most of the Vulpes range is wasted
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2020 00:00
|
|
|
Foxfire_ posted:- A few hundred for a missile that trades range for either a bigger payload or better hit chances since most of the Vulpes range is wasted code:
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2020 00:15
|
|
|
The Dwayne class missile base has the advantage that it doesn't really go obsolete. You tow it to a jump point and load your newest knife-fight missiles into them and it gets the job done for however long they survive. It does run into the same problem as the other battleship-weight proposals of not being on the field for another two years. As stopgaps go, the future-proofness of the Dwayne in a time of rapid technological development is appealing. In terms of sheer panic-button we-need-ships-now, I think the Gadget is still the frontrunner?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2020 00:18
|
|
|
Innocent_Bystander posted:The Dwayne class missile base has the advantage that it doesn't really go obsolete. You tow it to a jump point and load your newest knife-fight missiles into them and it gets the job done for however long they survive. It does run into the same problem as the other battleship-weight proposals of not being on the field for another two years. Arrath posted:I would agree with this, if my guy hadn't died in the lab. While it may not quite be a spinal laser with engines, I am really liking the Gadget.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2020 00:23
|
|
|
the Gadget is smol, cheap, and punches well above its weight class. with sufficient ELAN nothing can stop our
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2020 00:59
|
|
|
Radio Free Kobold posted:the Gadget is smol, cheap, and punches well above its weight class. with sufficient ELAN nothing can stop our Will we be issuing red trousers?
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2020 01:04
|
|
|
except Railgun Launch Velocity 40000, that might stop our heroic crews Actually, we think they have 20cm railguns (4 tech levels) because of the 4x4 damage spread, don't we? With a matching 4 range techs, that's 160,000km max range. Our particle beams don't outrange them unless the Kookians have only 2 range techs. Foxfire_ fucked around with this message at 01:24 on Jul 31, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2020 01:06
|
|
|
Radio Free Kobold posted:the Gadget is smol, cheap, and punches well above its weight class. with sufficient ELAN nothing can stop our Smol B sebmojo fucked around with this message at 02:00 on Jul 31, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2020 01:25
|
|
|
Foxfire_ posted:except Railgun Launch Velocity 40000, that might stop our heroic crews Yeah. It's a gamble. The Kookens very kookily waited to fire until they were at 0km range so we don't have any idea what their real beam range is.  The only way to find out is to send a navy in and shoot them until they shoot back.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2020 02:11
|
|
|
I would volunteer for that, if I was not already dead.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2020 02:29
|
|
|
LLSix posted:Yeah. It's a gamble. The Kookens very kookily waited to fire until they were at 0km range so we don't have any idea what their real beam range is. Personally, I think leaving them with the option of shooting back is a sign that we haven't put enough research into our weaponry. Ideally, we should have guns big enough to just punch a hole clean through the enemy ship. We should learn the range of their weaponry by salvaging their guns from the wreckage of their fleet.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2020 02:54
|
|
|
Virtual Russian posted:+++++++ Union of Terra Policy for 2110s +++++++ More fuel is necessary for both military and colony growth. We can probably at least hold Accatran even against superior tech, and can probably attack with well-chosen tactics. Defensive systems for better armor will save a lot of tonnage, and lower emissions will be needed for spying on Kookians.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2020 03:14
|
|
|
It just occurred to me, maybe the Pleasure Pit aliens shot us at range 0 because they had to. The might have terrible sensor tech and/or beam fire control designs. It's possible literally any beam weapon would outrange them. I mean, anything is possible.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2020 05:15
|
|
|
LLSix posted:It just occurred to me, maybe the Pleasure Pit aliens shot us at range 0 because they had to. The might have terrible sensor tech and/or beam fire control designs. It's possible literally any beam weapon would outrange them. Maybe they just wanted to do this, in which case we're so incredibly hosed that we may as well surrender now.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2020 05:52
|
|
|
CBAA Propulsion We need to secure our current holdings and expanding further when we have a potential enemy at the gates is a mistake. We should focus on improving the industries of Sol as well as our fuel capacity. All focus should be put to expanding the colony on our one habitable planet to make it a viable supply and industrial center for our fleets at minimal cost. Without knowing anything about the capabilities of the aliens besides the fact they have faster ships, we should focus our attention on reaching parity on speed as well as improve our fuel efficiency so we can achieve longer deployment ranges. Also sign me up as a fleet officer!
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2020 09:42
|
|
|
From my experience losing at many 4X games due to tending towards it, turtling is generally a bad idea. Getting more out of what we have now is all well and good, but what if once we finally feel safe enough to expand again there's already bustling megacities on every planet we had our sights on before Maler reached Voss? e: I guess the issue is I'm used to games where factions generally have a similar start, I suppose it's just as likely here that every jump point beyond those we've explored is inhabited by highly-advanced NPRs bent on wiping out any species that comes into contact with them. Zanzibar Ham fucked around with this message at 09:58 on Jul 31, 2020 |
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2020 09:49
|
|
|
Barring NPRs generated at game start, other civilisations only spawn when we first enter the system they're in, so turtling isn't as big a problem. Fuel costs and travel times also tend to add up really quickly in Aurora. Could we get a galaxy map with travel distances from Sol? That option used to be in VB6, I'm pretty sure it's still in the C version.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2020 14:22
|
|
|
Aurora also tends to have much less opportunity to go "wide", because the combination of usefully inhabitable planets and signoficant resource deposits is much scarcer than a traditional 4x.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2020 14:27
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 27, 2024 20:02 |
|
|
Ah yeah, that'd certainly call for a different way of planning. Still I'd be down for settling into the viable spots we know of, but that's definitely something I'll have to keep in mind voting forward.
|
|
#
?
Jul 31, 2020 15:22
|
|