|
I love that as everyone begins to understand and comprehend the power of some of the weapons we can create all pretenses of economic research and development go out the window. Our citizens look on in horror, remarking about how many space hospitals could have been built with the resources we put into massive missiles or guns.
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 02:00
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 00:47 |
|
|
Virtual Russian posted:I love that as everyone begins to understand and comprehend the power of some of the weapons we can create all pretenses of economic research and development go out the window. Our citizens look on in horror, remarking about how many space hospitals could have been built with the resources we put into massive missiles or guns. Screw space hospitals, I want more efficient factory and mine production. Get back to work and dig for those precious TN metals drat you!
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 02:06
|
|
|
Yes it's just a fighter with the crew stripped out for more engine and a 25 megaton warhead, but what if we tried to fit a 50 megaton warhead instead?
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 02:08
|
|
|
How about missiles packed with whatever they put in Heal Grenades and such? And if you replace that with Data that'll do for education.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 02:11
|
|
|
Zurai posted:Interesting. I had no idea the math for time to live with armor was nonlinear like that. Definitely something I'll keep in mind for future ship designs. It's a consequence of how armor penetration works. This is from one of the hypothetical Tempest vs Avalanche runs:  Most of the armor is still there when they start taking internal hits. Thicker armor means that that the outer layers are less likely to be bypassed by lucky hits elsewhere. Over large armor depth, it'll average into bands where the outer armor is completely gone, a transition region, then bands of completely present. Pointier weapon damage templates increase the size of the transition area and let the attacker deal damage without destroying all the armor first.  
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 02:32
|
|
|
Virtual Russian posted:I love that as everyone begins to understand and comprehend the power of some of the weapons we can create all pretenses of economic research and development go out the window. Our citizens look on in horror, remarking about how many space hospitals could have been built with the resources we put into massive missiles or guns.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 02:34
|
|
|
Virtual Russian posted:I love that as everyone begins to understand and comprehend the power of some of the weapons we can create all pretenses of economic research and development go out the window. Our citizens look on in horror, remarking about how many space hospitals could have been built with the resources we put into massive missiles or guns. To be fair our current situation seems almost designed to produce a garrison state. We have two hostile species with current military superiority on our borders, and a third that has so far been peaceful. We are penned in and with the Kookens already reaching Sol we are close to out of time.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 02:39
|
|
|
Crazycryodude posted:Yes it's just a fighter with the crew stripped out for more engine and a 25 megaton warhead, but what if we tried to fit a 50 megaton warhead instead? Edit: Good news! My memory is terrible and a 199 strength warhead would be easily capable without a loss in missile speed. Lando131 fucked around with this message at 04:01 on Aug 10, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 03:51
|
|
|
Lando131 posted:I'm glad you asked! Did you know that the next generation of warhead tech would allow Atrocity bombs capable of 196 points of damage? That's 14 layers of armor penetrated in a single hit! It would require a very slight engine size reduction, but is very possible. Wowsers! Is there any problems enough spacenukes can't solve?
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 04:00
|
|
|
If we want defensive missile bases we can design “ships” with no engines (they have to be carried or towed into position) but with launchers/sensors/fire control, so they can still shoot things. Theoretically you could also design a central sensor platform and pair it with a constellation of distributed launcher/FC platforms, I think. However, I believe that our intention is not to be fighting the enemy in our own orbits at all.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 04:05
|
|
|
If we really, really want missile based defenses we can torture Virtual Russian by designing mines. Edit: May as well! Here's an example of a mine that can fit our existing Size 10 launchers.  Once an enemy target comes within 2,000,000 of the mines they release two size 4 Piranha Anti-Ship Missiles each. These missiles have active sensors with which to track their  It's easy to make versions with more missiles per mine too, but size 10 is our largest existing launcher and RP costs go up as missile/mine size does as well. Dump a few hundred of these on a jump point and anyone coming through is about to have a very bad day. The downside is that the micro involved in deploying minefields is difficult and tedious and however effective burning out an LPer with them isn't a great idea given that's how all past Aurora LPs have ended. Lando131 fucked around with this message at 04:38 on Aug 10, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 04:09
|
|
|
I think there might be a bug preventing two stage missiles from working in this version. They don't appear to do anything in my tests.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 05:08
|
|
|
I love all this tech posting and analysis.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 08:13
|
|
|
PurpleXVI posted:I love all this tech posting and analysis. Same! It's gotten a lot more serious since our position as sci fi Poland in a 1937 galaxy has become ever more horrifyingly apparent
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 09:46
|
|
|
Gnoman posted:I think there might be a bug preventing two stage missiles from working in this version. They don't appear to do anything in my tests. Yes they are bugged currently, otherwise I would have suggested mines a long time back. They are a pain, but they work well.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 11:44
|
|
|
I sort of think the BB is a bit overambitious this early on but it's super fun to see these designs. Personally I think going for a large carrier hull and a swarm of smaller 8-16t ton ships we could more easily afford to lose would be more cost effective but we'll see how our first real engagements turn out. Is it possible to refit our ships with new fire controls later? Because starting construction with current tech should be a priority and then we can refit later for accuracy once that tech comes in.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 11:56
|
|
|
Refit is possible, yeah, though it can get prohibitively expensive if the thing you're refitting is too different from the thing you're turning it into. With the really big boats though things like fire controls are pretty small components and we might be able to refit to next-gen FCs without retooling the yard. Our doctrine is all kinds of not ideal for our situation and that's what makes it fun. I'd definetely hate seeing 30 kilotons of armoured brick zooming in at 7000 kps though, regardless of what I'm playing. You just know that it's gonna be a bad time when that hits beam range. Actually, what's the status on mesons in C? Weren't they changed to not bypass all armour anymore?
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 12:02
|
|
|
Innocent_Bystander posted:Refit is possible, yeah, though it can get prohibitively expensive if the thing you're refitting is too different from the thing you're turning it into. With the really big boats though things like fire controls are pretty small components and we might be able to refit to next-gen FCs without retooling the yard. They have a percent chance to bypass each armor layer and if they fail they do 1 damage to that armor layer instead of internal. I believe the chance starts at 50%. The next tech level is a 40% chance per layer. Against the armored bricks we're considering building they'd be mostly useless.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 16:06
|
|
|
Yeah, mesons got nerfed pretty hard. They seem like mostly PD weapons now, since they're more accurate than gauss cannons of similar size while still recharging fast and being turretable. They seem like they'd be great against fighters, once you get some range on them.
|
|
#
?
Aug 10, 2020 16:27
|
|
|
Hey can you make me a naval officer please
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2020 00:02
|
|
|
Ok, It's voting time. I normally include all relevant info and ship readouts, but it would make this a truly massive post. I'm just going to post the options and trust that everyone will be fine with that. I'm also just going to get the military ships voted on for now due to some logistical reasons, they are what is most important. On commercial ships: I suspect there was some confusion about building stations with industry, as many stations were designed to be produced in our yards. Also I can't figure out a great way to vote on which commercial ships to build, as it makes no sense to choose one commercial vessel per yard to produce over the next update or two, when we need several badly. For now, I'm going to build first a diplomacy vessel, then a harvester station or ship. In the future I'll organize commercial production votes better. To simply keep things moving I'll pick winners myself as I put what I need into production. Sorry, I hope no one feels their effort was in vein, I'm truly impressed by the number and quality of ships I've been presented with. So here is the voting Docket, please quote it or at least bold your selections, thanks! ++++++++++++2113 Shipyard Production Vote++++++++++++ 1. What ship will our large military shipyard produce? A. OddObserver's Menelaus B. LLSix's Seas the Day C. Gnoman's Supernova D. Gnoman's Phantom E. Lando131's Cudgel F. Zurai's Avalanche G. Foxfire_'s Tempest H. Neophyte's Fisher (this is the low research version) I. Lando131's Wolf Hawk 2. What ship will our small military shipyard produce? A. Gnoman's Penny-class CT C. Lando131's Breaker Gadget-class CT D. Lando131's Prometheus-class FAC E. Foxfire_'s Brain-class CT F. Foxfire_'s Bomb Truck-class CT G. Zurai's Acrid-class RC and Acid-class CT H. LLSix's Hawkeye-class CT ++++++++++++ End of Vote++++++++++++ Edit: I'm indenting to use the most recent submission of all versions. Virtual Russian fucked around with this message at 03:37 on Aug 11, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2020 02:27
|
|
|
The Penny II wqs intended as a upgrade option if we biilt Pennys, not as a seperate submission.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2020 02:35
|
|
|
1. F Avalanche 2 G Acrid and Acid Servetus fucked around with this message at 02:45 on Aug 11, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2020 02:43
|
|
|
Servetus posted:1. F Avalanche this
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2020 02:46
|
|
|
Servetus posted:1. F Avalanche
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2020 03:16
|
|
|
1. H Fisher (assuming this is the no upgrades version) 2.F Bomb truck
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2020 03:25
|
|
|
Virtual Russian posted:++++++++++++2113 Shipyard Production Vote++++++++++++ Defensively, Avalanche is the best ship for picketing a jump point, closing with something making a combat jump and getting good hits in before jump shock wears off, and still being dodgy+durable enough to win a protracted brawl. It's main weakness compared to Tempest is that's it's worse at enduring long-range missile bombardment. Before we do aggressive ops into the Mushroom Kingdom, we'll want to scout it with more expendable craft to get an idea of missile threat before committing heavy ships. Bomb Truck because it complements Avalanche. Most things that the various beam corvettes beat are already beaten by Gadgets. They're adding threat vs things faster than Gadget but slower than themselves, which isn't a huge range. Once Avalanches launch, those can clown any enemy the corvettes can threaten. Adding a missile threat gives us orthogonal capability since they can engage at ranges Avalanche and Gadget can't. A Bomb Truck-Gadget team adds a strong mid-range punch that's otherwise missing. Gadget is slower, but I think that's fine for a strategic scout, a fleet can move at 4000km/s till it finds a target, then the fast ships can break forward to engage it. Eventual fleet roles would be something like: - Light scout: Gadget - 36mkm active - Armored scout: Wyern - 27mkm active, thermal passive - Long range fire support: Kobold - 25mkm missile attack - Beamship/anchor: Avalanche - Short range fire support: Bomb Truck - 1mkm / 10mkm missile attack depending on loadout (could also cheaply refit the fire control to the long range one if scouting shows there is a big long-range missile threat we haven't seen) Foxfire_ fucked around with this message at 03:41 on Aug 11, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2020 03:35
|
|
|
Gnoman posted:The Penny II wqs intended as a upgrade option if we biilt Pennys, not as a seperate submission. fixed it, sorry.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2020 03:35
|
|
|
I really do feel like the bomb truck would be improved yb some layering of armor to keep a hit from immediately penetrating it, but that would come at the price of speed also.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2020 03:45
|
|
|
Foxfire_ posted:Defensively, Avalanche is the best ship for picketing a jump point, closing with something making a combat jump and getting good hits in before jump shock wears off, and still being dodgy+durable enough to win a protracted brawl. It's main weakness compared to Tempest is that's it's worse at enduring long-range missile bombardment. Before we do aggressive ops into the Mushroom Kingdom, we'll want to scout it with more expendable craft to get an idea of missile threat before committing heavy ships. I actually agree with this. The Acid and Acrid are good ships, but 1) they can't be started right away (they require 1k in engine creation research and... 400ish IIRC? BFC research), and 2) they're "win more with beams". As such, my votes are: Capital Ship: F—Avalanche Escort/Light Combatant: F—Bomb Truck ChaseSP posted:I really do feel like the bomb truck would be improved yb some layering of armor to keep a hit from immediately penetrating it, but that would come at the price of speed also. Yeah, they will explode at the drop of a hat, but they're small missile ships, so ideally they'll be hanging back and letting the Gadgets and battleships draw fire.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2020 03:51
|
|
|
So, capital ship designs fall broadly into three categories. Missile boats, beam ships, and hybrids. Missile boats should be designed to unload all their missiles without ever entering beam range and then withdraw to rearm. Beam ships should be designed to close in, endure heavy fire, and, hopefully, gut the enemy fleets. Hybrids must fill both roles, and so like all generalists, make trade-offs more specialized ships don't have to. Of the three, only the hybrids really meet the doctrine we voted on previously.Virtual Russian posted:B. Missiles are used while closing to medium range, where lasers and particle beams cut our enemies to pieces. This leaves us less vulnerable to PD heavy enemies, but will also potentially put us in range of their laser weapons. Particle beams are very effective, while lasers will fight at reduced strength at this range So which designs are hybrids? B. LLSix's Seas the Day ... Is that really it? Well, that's disappointing. Well, our current generation of light ships are beam ships, so surely there were a bunch of missile designs proposed to fill the gaping hole in our fleet capabilities. D. Gnoman's Phantom code:A. OddObserver's Menelaus  C. Gnoman's Supernova Gnoman posted:
E. Lando131's Cudgel Lando131 posted:*A sketch is found on the back of a napkin.* F. Zurai's Avalanche G. Foxfire_'s Tempest H. Neophyte's Fisher (this is the low research version) I. Lando131's Wolf Hawk Wow, 7 ship designs that are armed only with short-ranged beams. One thing to keep in mind with all the plasma-carronade armed beam ships is that the typical missile launcher reload time listed in the wiki is 20 seconds. That means that plasma carronades, and only plasma-carronades, can only engage every other missile volley, so they provide half as much protection against missiles as any other option. Keep in mind that our large shipyard has 2 slipways, so we'll be building, and probably(?) deploying our capital ships in at least pairs which means we get more value out of point defense than it might seem like at first since point defense fire from any ship in the fleet can be used to protect all the ships in the fleet. Similarly, ships without turrets will shoot down fewer missiles and take more damage, although the 6k ships higher speed means more missiles miss so it's probably a wash. LLSix fucked around with this message at 04:10 on Aug 11, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2020 04:00
|
|
|
LLSix posted:So, capital ship designs fall broadly into three categories. Missile boats, beam ships, and hybrids. Missile boats should be designed to unload all their missiles without ever entering beam range and then withdraw to rearm. Beam ships should be designed to close in, endure heavy fire, and, hopefully, gut the enemy fleets. Hybrids must fill both roles, and so like all generalists, make trade-offs more specialized ships don't have to. Of the three, only the hybrids really meet the doctrine we voted on previously. That's our fleet's tactical doctrine, not our individual ships' design mandate. The doctrine is still achieved with a mixed beam-battleship/missile-corvette fleet (or vice-versa); another reason to vote for the Bomb Truck CT. Also, I'd like to point out another portion of that same doctrine: quote:A. Large Battleships capable of high speeds, with heavy protection, and bristling with weapons. Think the fighting ships of steel that dominated late 19th and early 20th Century. Judging by that metric (and remembering that the medium-range doctrine specifically lists lasers) and talking in relative terms: Menelaus: 4600 speed, 12 armor, 6 plasmas, 27 gauss. Medium speed, medium-low armor, medium-high amounts of short-range weapons. Seas the Day: 3500 speed, 10 armor, 12 lasers, 12 missile launchers (192 missiles). Slow speed, low armor, high amounts of long- and medium-range weapons. Supernova: 4600 speed, 20 armor, 8 plasmas, 24 gauss. Medium speed, highest armor, medium-high+ amounts of short-range weapons Phantom: 4600 speed, 10 armor, 30 missile launchers (270 missiles). Medium speed, low armor, medium-high amounts of long-range weapons. Cudgel : 2300 speed, 8 armor, 240 gauss, 200 box missile launchers (150 size 1/50 size 20). This is intended as a joke design, I believe, but still: slowest speed, lightest armor, absurdly high amounts of short-range weapons. Avalanche: 6500 speed, 12 armor, 12 lasers. High speed, medium-low armor, medium amounts of medium-range weapons. Tempest: 6000 speed, 20 armor, 4 lasers, 1 particle beam. High speed, highest armor, low amounts of medium-range weapons. Fisher: 4600 speed, 15 armor, 16 plasmas, 60 railguns. Medium speed, medium-high armor, high amounts of short-range weapons. Wolf Hawk: 7000 speed, 15 armor, 16 railguns, 6 microwaves. Highest speed, medium-high armor, medium amounts of short-range weapons. Of those, technically only the Avalanche fits the description of "high speeds, heavy protection, bristling with medium-ranged weapons". And even then, it's a little light on both the "heavy protection" and "bristling with weapons" end of things. We just don't have the tech to make designs that are awesome in every aspect.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2020 04:36
|
|
|
ChaseSP posted:I really do feel like the bomb truck would be improved yb some layering of armor to keep a hit from immediately penetrating it, but that would come at the price of speed also. The expectation is that anything shooting at it is going to be firing salvos of at least 10 missiles, and a couple of layers of armor aren't really going to survive that anyway. Speed instead of armor helps play keep-away as well as dodge missiles. LLSix posted:So, capital ship designs fall broadly into three categories. Missile boats, beam ships, and hybrids. Missile boats should be designed to unload all their missiles without ever entering beam range and then withdraw to rearm. Beam ships should be designed to close in, endure heavy fire, and, hopefully, gut the enemy fleets. Hybrids must fill both roles, and so like all generalists, make trade-offs more specialized ships don't have to. Of the three, only the hybrids really meet the doctrine we voted on previously. The problem is that our doctrine is kind of bad at actually fighting and there's scary aliens nearby  - If you're too slow to close to beam range, any tonnage you spend on beams is useless since they can't fire - If you're relying on getting into beam range, any tonnage you spend on missiles is inefficient since a beam can put out more damage, faster, with more penetration Going all in on either beams or missiles will beat a hybrid, hybrids need either a tech or tonnage advantage to win
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2020 04:40
|
|
|
Really do need to get some better laser wavelength tech to extend the range and thus reduce time we are being shot out in the future. With any luck we may be able to get a quick decisive fleet victory to quickly neutralize the Koots shipyards and just keep a fleet ontop of their homeworld. ChaseSP fucked around with this message at 05:12 on Aug 11, 2020 |
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2020 05:06
|
|
|
Spinal mounts would be an excellent thing to get. Not useful for heavy batteries, but it would make a superb corvette weapon.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2020 05:26
|
|
|
Hell yeah fighters that are just some crew and engines strapped onto a bigass laser is the poo poo. Also would end up with an extra level of penetration with our 12cm lasers I think which is even better
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2020 05:28
|
|
|
Servetus posted:1. F Avalanche
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2020 06:21
|
|
|
B and G based entirely on coolness of ship names.
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2020 08:31
|
|
|
I don't have a strong option one way or another, but I want to die in a glorious
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2020 08:36
|
|
|
|
| # ? Apr 28, 2024 00:47 |
|
|
F and F
|
|
#
?
Aug 11, 2020 08:56
|
|