Let's Rule the Stars: An Aurora 4x Participation Let's Play

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Video Games > Let's Play! > Let's Rule the Stars: An Aurora 4x Participation Let's Play

OddObserver: Apr 3, 2009

I would appreciate if you could sign me up as an administrator, if possible. Surely some rock out there needs someone to sysadmin the automatic mines.

P.S. Good call not using the real star name list, IMHO --- while it's nice to have names like Alpha Centauri, it's also full of similar-sounding prefix + numeric names,
which are kinda a pain. (Was it Gliese 674 or Gliese 687? --- etc.)

# ¿ Jul 17, 2020 00:21

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 26, 2024 16:59

OddObserver: Apr 3, 2009

EclecticTastes posted:

Believe me, I won't.

It's not about effectiveness, it's about being a symbol of how much rear end we kick and how many names we take. A giant, impractical spaceboat crammed with all our most cutting-edge tech (well, the stuff that makes sense to include together; you obviously don't want colony ship stuff on a vessel that's likely to see combat). Something we'd send on science/diplomatic missions during peacetime just to remind everyone else of the sort of thunder we can bring when angered.

If the target truly can't determine it was us who fired it at that range, I propose we call this amazing idea The Anonymissile. Also we need to make it as soon as is feasible.

A big limitation is that it's hard for any single ship to have adequate anti-missile defense... or maybe I just didn't build them big enough.

# ¿ Jul 19, 2020 22:15

OddObserver: Apr 3, 2009

LLSix posted:

Here's a particle beam armed FAC. I vastly prefer the Inspector Gadgets, and since we don't have a FAC yard, they compete for the same shipyard.

I could not figure out how to fit a particle beam into 500 tons for a fighter design.

On that note, anyone know what's up with fighter beam fire control in C# Aurora?

# ¿ Jul 30, 2020 17:21

OddObserver: Apr 3, 2009

Since we're doing fighters, here is one with more firepower and less zip (and may be more accurate? dunno how bad the Gauss penalty is -- this is with 2000 bands for the hit rate).

code:

Poseidon class Heavy Fighter (P)      485 tons       22 Crew       58.7 BP       TCS 10    TH 64    EM 0
6607 km/s      Armour 1-5       Shields 0-0       HTK 3      Sensors 0/0/0/0      DCR 0      PPV 3
Maint Life 1.99 Years     MSP 7    AFR 19%    IFR 0.3%    1YR 2    5YR 35    Max Repair 32.00 MSP
Lieutenant Commander    Control Rating 1   
Intended Deployment Time: 0.3 days    Morale Check Required    

[320 RP] Nuclear Pulse Engine  EP64.00 (1)    Power 64.0    Fuel Use 715.54%    Signature 64.00    Explosion 20%
Fuel Capacity 5,000 Litres    Range 0.3 billion km (10 hours at full power)

Poseidon-Hyperion 10cm Railgun V20/C2 (1x4)    Range 16,000km     TS: 6,607 km/s     Power 3-2     RM 20,000 km    ROF 10        1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0
[48 RP] Beam Fire Control R16-TS6000 (1)     Max Range: 16,000 km   TS: 6,000 km/s     88 75 62 50 38 25 12 0 0 0
[60 RP] Pebble Bed Reactor R2-PB20 (1)     Total Power Output 2    Exp 10%

[ 12 RP] Active Search Sensor AS2-R10 (1)     GPS 12     Range 3m km    Resolution 10

This design is classed as a Fighter for production, combat and planetary interaction

(It looked disapprovingly at me when I tried a 1.5 power reactor

)

Lots of components, but engine is the only expensive one... hmm, how do I look them up, though?

OddObserver fucked around with this message at 00:43 on Aug 1, 2020

# ¿ Aug 1, 2020 00:41

OddObserver: Apr 3, 2009

What's the range requirement the BB needs?

# ¿ Aug 7, 2020 23:56

OddObserver: Apr 3, 2009

OK, let's thrown a mediocre-ish beam ship to start things off a bit?

Pros/Cons:
- No missiles, which may be a mistake, since it's dependent on getting in range. I am hoping someone will put together a nice missile BB.
- 4x carronades have a heck of a kick
- 4x dual-purpose quad laser turrets also provide a lot of firepower..
... but 10 sec recharge rate makes them dubious as point defense. This sort of setup works better with nicer capacitor tech,
that can get them down to 5/sec --- 10 cm/C3, or 12 cm/C4. It's also a bit awkward, since might need to shuffle fire controls depending
on range.
- Not sure if shields are enough to make a difference?

Edit: at least this shows that 4x new engine and 10x large fuel storage is a good starting point to get decent speed + meet range requirement when filling out the tonnage cap.

OddObserver fucked around with this message at 00:42 on Aug 8, 2020

# ¿ Aug 8, 2020 00:39

OddObserver: Apr 3, 2009

Here is a more coherent version of my proposal, I think:

This has the disadvantage of requiring expensive research into a proper Gauss cannon --- one that's accurate (turrets for those are expensive!).
On the plus side, better point defense (plus a bit more shields) make me more confident it actually can close in - 27 shots every tick instead of 16
every other is a lot more defensive power (and almost as much damage, though at worse penetration).

Also more carronades were put in, and a bit more redundancy of lighter components.

(Obviously, newer gen shields would be nicer, too).

# ¿ Aug 8, 2020 13:25

OddObserver: Apr 3, 2009

LLSix posted:

In a pinch, they can also be pressed into serving as fuel tankers, which I don't think we have a current generation design of yet.

Don't you need a refueling system module for that?

... And I guess the nice thing about stations + tugs is less retooling worries?

# ¿ Aug 9, 2020 03:45

OddObserver: Apr 3, 2009

Lando131 posted:

No idea on the latter but the delay is right here:
The annoying bit is that it's in seconds and you should be careful to set the box back to 0 so every subsequent order isn't also given a delay. Supposedly there's a 'wait until X amount available' order in the future that'll negate the need for math which'd be nice.

It's in the similar spot for the "Follow" order.

# ¿ Aug 9, 2020 13:45

OddObserver: Apr 3, 2009

Servetus posted:

Which weapons show the most Elan?

1. Ramming to have marines board.
2. Ramming.
3. Carronades --- they have really sharp damage dropoff with distance.

# ¿ Aug 9, 2020 23:12

OddObserver: Apr 3, 2009

1. H Fisher
(assuming this is the no upgrades version)
2.F Bomb truck

# ¿ Aug 11, 2020 03:25

OddObserver: Apr 3, 2009

Question: is there a way of seeing how costly a refit would be from the ship designer?

# ¿ Aug 30, 2020 20:51

OddObserver: Apr 3, 2009

Thanks. One more hint: you may need to uncheck the "obsolete" checkbox on designs to get them to show up.

Here is an ultra-boring starter: Gladius E:

quote:

Gladius E class Fast Attack Craft 868 tons 39 Crew 119.7 BP TCS 17 TH 139 EM 0
8022 km/s Armour 1-8 Shields 0-0 HTK 5 Sensors 0/0/0/0 DCR 0 PPV 3
Maint Life 8.51 Years MSP 63 AFR 12% IFR 0.2% 1YR 2 5YR 23 Max Repair 23.2 MSP
Lieutenant Commander Control Rating 1
Intended Deployment Time: 6 days Morale Check Required

Kodo Turbines Nuclear Pulse Fighter Engine EP46.40 (3) Power 139.2 Fuel Use 840.36% Signature 46.4 Explosion 20%
Fuel Capacity 20,000 Litres Range 0.5 billion km (17 hours at full power)

Lazarev Kinetics 10cm Railgun V20/C1 (1x4) Range 16,000km TS: 8,022 km/s Power 3-1 RM 20,000 km ROF 15
Kodo Electronic Division Beam Fire Control R16-TS7000 (1) Max Range: 16,000 km TS: 7,000 km/s 38 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lee-Park Improved Pressurised Water Reactor R1-PB20 (1) Total Power Output 1 Exp 10%

Lalbhai & Akkiyana Active Search Sensor AS14-R20 (1) GPS 360 Range 14.5m km Resolution 20

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes

This replaces the engine, fire control, and drops the surprisingly heavy missiles to lighten it up. Refit cost is 100 bp:

quote:

Engine 69.6 bp
FC 5.6 bp
Overhead: 20 bp
Size: 10 bp

(There is a 102 bp one that keeps the missiles but replaces the armor, but it also slower at 7km/s)

... It takes 119.7 BP to build one new, so it's 83.5% of the cost. Engine replacements aren't cheap.

(There is probably better things to be done with the "size" BP, at least)

For fun, you can build it on the same yard tooled for one of these (Gladius EG):

quote:

Gladius II class Fast Attack Craft 984 tons 46 Crew 130.7 BP TCS 20 TH 139 EM 0
7076 km/s Armour 1-8 Shields 0-0 HTK 6 Sensors 0/0/0/0 DCR 0 PPV 5
Maint Life 7.17 Years MSP 61 AFR 15% IFR 0.2% 1YR 2 5YR 31 Max Repair 23.2 MSP
Lieutenant Commander Control Rating 1
Intended Deployment Time: 6 days Morale Check Required

Kodo Turbines Nuclear Pulse Fighter Engine EP46.40 (3) Power 139.2 Fuel Use 840.36% Signature 46.4 Explosion 20%
Fuel Capacity 20,000 Litres Range 0.4 billion km (17 hours at full power)

Poseidon-Hyperion 12cm Railgun V20/C2 (1x4) Range 16,000km TS: 7,076 km/s Power 6-2 RM 20,000 km ROF 15
Kodo Electronic Division Beam Fire Control R16-TS7000 (1) Max Range: 16,000 km TS: 7,000 km/s 38 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Lee-Park Improved Pressurised Water Reactor R1-PB20 (2) Total Power Output 2 Exp 10%

Lalbhai & Akkiyana Active Search Sensor AS14-R20 (1) GPS 360 Range 14.5m km Resolution 20

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes

... which also upguns it and modernizes the armor. You can actually refit from Gladius to this for 118.7 cost -- AKA 90.8% of new.

OddObserver fucked around with this message at 22:31 on Aug 30, 2020

# ¿ Aug 30, 2020 22:22

OddObserver: Apr 3, 2009

A couple more:

Zeurs MNA:

Drops basically all beam weapons except the point defense turret and associated fire controls, cryo storage and downsizes maintenance supplies some.
Adds an extra engine and missile loadout, tweaks active search sensor.

(I probably used the wrong missile fire control, though, now I notice. Probably should share one with the bomb truck, given this is basically a bigger, tougher one
anyway).

Refit cost:

(The armor isn't replaced, just needs extra to cover additional tonnage)

... With refit time of about 9 months, as opposed to a bit under 21 months for whole thing.

And for Artemis, one with lots of (cheap) new components modernizing FC and power plant, and new armor but basically nothing new:

(.. and again, also downsides maintenance storage space some)

This basically just makes it a bit faster and a bit more accurate.
(I wonder if someone will come up with something good by getting rid of the ultra-heavy turret?)

Refit cost:

... with refit time of about 4 months, as opposed to about 13 for brand new.

# ¿ Aug 31, 2020 17:08

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ¿ Apr 26, 2024 16:59

OddObserver: Apr 3, 2009

Zurai posted:

Oh wow, I only just noticed that the Bomb Trucks have a fire control that isn't nearly enough range for their missiles. That hurts. 10.8m km range on the MFC and 24.9m km range on the missiles. That's 14.1m kilometers of range wasted. We need to figure out a new missile design for them or refit them to the Foxfire FC27-R20.

Anyway, here's the updated Athena:

I modified it to add the tiny passive EM sensor and the large passive TH sensor, plus I switched the lasers to twin-turret designs instead of single fixed mounts; this makes them better at targeting missiles and fighters, but does make them more expensive both in RP (turrets have to be researched) and size. I dropped one of the seven beams to make the room. It also had to drop a layer of armor. Its primary role is as the eyes of the fleet, with a secondary role of providing a PD envelope. With the 90k km range on the lasers, it's theoretically possible that they'll get two shots on incoming missile volleys, depending on their speed. Anything under 18,000 kps gives them a chance to do so, and none of our PD is going to be terribly effective against anything going faster than that anyway.

You may want to check how well that active sensors works against missiles and may be put in a second close-in high-resolution one?

Edit: nm, probably good enough?

Range vs 1000 ton object 8.1m km
Range vs 250 ton object 509.1k km

OddObserver fucked around with this message at 00:43 on Sep 1, 2020

# ¿ Sep 1, 2020 00:37

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Video Games > Let's Play! > Let's Rule the Stars: An Aurora 4x Participation Let's Play