Author Topic: A new guy with a first warship in need of critique.  (Read 1395 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline obsidian_green

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • Posts: 67
  • Thanked: 8 times
    • View Profile
A new guy with a first warship in need of critique.
« on: June 01, 2017, 10:30:51 PM »
Hello fellow players.   Aurora's great.   I would love feedback on my first warship design from my first game. 

Whinny colonists on Mars and Luna kept demanding protection from non-existent threats and kept spamming the notifications of their rebelliousness and the subsequent restoration of order by garrison troops I landed to keep them in line, so I finished up some relevant techs, designed some ship components and threw this together to shut them up:

Code: [Select]
Troy class Area Defence Cruiser    12 000 tons     372 Crew     2935.6 BP      TCS 240  TH 420  EM 240
5000 km/s     Armour 5-46     Shields 8-375     Sensors 22/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 20     PPV 69.64
Maint Life 3.15 Years     MSP 1529    AFR 115%    IFR 1.6%    1YR 232    5YR 3482    Max Repair 525 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 18 months    Spare Berths 0   

600 EP Internal Fusion Drive (2)    Power 600    Fuel Use 21%    Signature 210    Exp 10%
Fuel Capacity 1 000 000 Litres    Range 71.4 billion km   (165 days at full power)
Delta R375/180 Shields (3)   Total Fuel Cost  23 Litres per hour  (540 per day)

Twin 12cm C4 Ultraviolet Laser Turret (2x2)    Range 160 000km     TS: 16000 km/s     Power 8-8     RM 4    ROF 5        4 4 4 4 3 2 2 2 1 1
Twin R80t/C4 Meson Cannon Turret (2x2)    Range 80 000km     TS: 16000 km/s     Power 8-8     RM 8    ROF 5        1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0
Twin Gauss Cannon R3-100 Turret (2x6)    Range 30 000km     TS: 16000 km/s     Power 0-0     RM 3    ROF 5        1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Fire Control S08 160-16000 (L12cm) (1)    Max Range: 320 000 km   TS: 16000 km/s     97 94 91 88 84 81 78 75 72 69
Fire Control S02 R32-TS16000 (1)    Max Range: 64 000 km   TS: 16000 km/s     84 69 53 37 22 6 0 0 0 0
Fire Control S04 R80k-TS16000 (1)    Max Range: 160 000 km   TS: 16000 km/s     94 88 81 75 69 62 56 50 44 38
Tokamak Fusion Reactor P8-50t (6)     Total Power Output 48    Armour 0    Exp 5%

Active Search (PD) MR2mk-R50 (1)     GPS 32     Range 2.6m km    MCR 279k km    Resolution 1
Thermal Sensor TH2-22 (SR) (1)     Sensitivity 22     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  22m km

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes

My intention is to use a pair of these as area defense for one or more offensive ships, the easy option being a missile cruiser with only CIWS besides the missile loadout, but I also like the idea of a mothership for FAC as fast as missiles (have to play around with that idea to judge feasibility).   A true carrier seems like a lot of work when I really need to figure out how to efficiently establish my first extrasolar colonies (have to design some tuggable Orbital Habitats and the tugs, faster 250000t cargo ships to get infrastructure and factories elsewhere .  .  .   might even need more shipyards .  .  .   takes forever, lol). 
« Last Edit: June 01, 2017, 11:23:49 PM by obsidian_green »
 

Offline Barkhorn

  • Commander
  • *********
  • Posts: 325
  • Thanked: 45 times
    • View Profile
Re: Another new guy with a ship wanting critique.
« Reply #1 on: June 01, 2017, 11:28:57 PM »
I can't tell from your design, but your AFR seems pretty high for how many MSP you have.  Which says to me that you used maintenance storage bays instead of engineering spaces.  I think you should consider cutting some or maybe all of them in exchange for more engineering spaces.  Engineering spaces provide MSP as well as lowering your AFR.

Your shields are anemic.  They'll do almost no good.  The only positive thing they'll do is prevent a single HPM hit from frying your sensors.  But the second HPM hit will.

It is advisable to squeeze in one more layer of armor if you can.  Because of the way damage templates work, 6 layers of armor is almost twice as hard to penetrate with a laser as 5.  A laser that does 12 damage will penetrate 5 layers of armor in one hit, while it takes 21 (!!!) damage to penetrate 6 layers in one hit.

I like how much firepower you have.  The lasers especially.

The Gauss turrets fire pretty slowly at R3, you may get a better RoF out of the same tonnage if you used railguns instead.  Railguns fire faster than Gauss until your Gauss rate of fire tech is at R4.

I think you should build something else to keep colonists quiet though.  Think a few small ships with relatively short deployment times, since they're never gonna be far from a population.  Cheap parts too so they're easy to spam.

Oh, btw you don't need a shipyard for an orbital habitat.  If it is commercial, has no engines, and has an orbital habitat module, your factories can build it.  Look on the industry tab under "Build PDC".  I just found this out today.
« Last Edit: June 01, 2017, 11:34:53 PM by Barkhorn »
 
The following users thanked this post: obsidian_green

Offline obsidian_green

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • Posts: 67
  • Thanked: 8 times
    • View Profile
Re: A new guy with a first warship in need of critique.
« Reply #2 on: June 02, 2017, 12:47:31 AM »
Thanks!

10 engineering spaces.  This is my first run, so I might be erring on the side of caution with the 18 month intended deployment and all that fuel (which should come in more than one tank now that I think about it).  Maybe that's driving up the AFR?

I figured the scant shields would do what the aurora wiki suggested---take the edge off of high damage weapons, but I'll gratefully bow to experience and fiddle to get the armor up to what you suggest; I'll probably need to sacrifice either a weapons system or fuel to get me to my planned, 5000km fleet speed with this drive.  I anticipate these Troy-class as TG missile defense and have built them first because scientist specialties pulled me this way.  Planning on a missile cruiser to take out any attackers before they close into firing range.

My worry with railguns was the slow tracking speed since I can't turret them.  I didn't figure the 4 shots vs.  3 would outweigh the targeting deficit.  You're saying it does? Might I opt for a pair of 10cm twin-laser turrets instead, looking for a good 3-layer PD . . .  those gauss turrets were heavy anyway.

Thanks about the Orbitals.  I'm sure there's tons of important details I'm missing.  I'd approach my entire start differently, given how it's played out.  Was very slow with factory expansion and should have timed automine production to coincide with my survey of the Solar System.  Wasted time building labs before expanding factories too and didn't know to add more academies to get the scientists I was missing . . .  and when I got them my first SF and MK guys died pretty quickly on me.   :(
 

Offline Michael Sandy

  • Captain
  • **********
  • Posts: 439
  • Thanked: 8 times
    • View Profile
Re: A new guy with a first warship in need of critique.
« Reply #3 on: June 02, 2017, 02:52:06 AM »
I like that the fire control speed and turret speed match.  The fire control outranging the beams is a bit unusual, because it takes a LOT of research.

You have enough range so that versus some enemies, you will completely outrange them, and possibly be faster too.  Or at least you can build specialized ships for that.

Among your research priorities should therefore be ECCM, so that your wonderful range advantage is not defeated by ECM.

Your point defense fire controls and tracking are a bit low.  Missiles at your tech level are going to be in the 40k range, depending on boost technology.  I myself went with fighters for my early PD needs, for the x4 tracking speed on fire control.  Coupled with fighter combat officers, I figured a turreted 4x 1/12 sized gauss turret would be effective.

If the fighter bonus and grade bonus apply AFTER the 1/12 size penalty to accuracy, then each size 3.6 turret could be expected to take out 4-5 missiles.
 

Offline obsidian_green

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • Posts: 67
  • Thanked: 8 times
    • View Profile
Re: A new guy with a first warship in need of critique.
« Reply #4 on: June 02, 2017, 02:31:34 PM »
Thanks.  The involved steps I supposed about using fighters scared me away.  Having built survey and cargo ships, a warship design seemed like an easy jump and, since all my tech seemed best geared for PD, I went with that.  I'm a little crestfallen that my tracking speed isn't adequate, since it exceeds some examples from the wiki . . .  and since my shipyard just finished tooling up for the design, lol.  I'm on the verge of fire-rate 4 gauss cannons, so I might retool the shipyard again before I finally lay down keels.

My long range fire control was intended for a 15cm laser, but when I designed the laser I found my capacitor rate didn't match the power requirement, so I couldn't use as I intended (assuming I got the right ideas from the wiki to begin with) for PD.  I just used the already designed fire control (probably costing me HS, but I was juggling so many other new concepts, that slipped by me).

What I haven't yet figured out to my satisfaction are the priority hierarchy when designing---that fire control I built before the laser was probably a mistake, for instance.  I need to build orbital habitats to establish my first extrasolar colony and a tug to haul them, but I have the dilemma of not wanting to design an Orbital too large to transport and not knowing how to design the tug without knowing how powerful it needs to be to get the payload where it needs to go.

(Never mind that I can't dedicate my factories to actually building the orbital components when I need to keep churning out automines before Earth runs out of duranium, lol . . .  Aurora is great . . .  all will be moot when the extraterrestrial nasties arrive to wipe me out while I'm muddling through all this stuff!)
 

Offline Iranon

  • Captain
  • **********
  • Posts: 460
  • Thanked: 31 times
    • View Profile
Re: A new guy with a first warship in need of critique.
« Reply #5 on: June 02, 2017, 05:34:34 PM »
For a first warship, it's great!

1) Gauss cannons are slightly more effective than railguns against fast targets such as missiles at your tech level and ship speed: Including crew, power, differences in fire controls etc, weight between 2 railguns and 1 turreted Gauss barrel is a wash.
8 shots at 5000km/s vs. 3 at 16000km/s; I'd still favour railguns - much better aganst slow targets, may be cheaper.

2) Personally, I'd ditch the meson weapons unless you have a specific plan for them. They don't play well with anything else.

3) I'm not a fan of 12cm lasers, even if they are the best match for your capacitor tech... but seems to match your requriements.

4) You should be able to maintain performance and total size by halving your fuel load in favour of bigger, less stressed engines of the same power.

*

Some things I don't actually consider mistakes:

a) Overengineered fire controls. It can act as a buffer against enemy ECM; while ECCM may be more cost-efficient, it goes to waste if the enemy doesn't field ECM while longer FC range improves accuracy either way.

b) Light shields over significant armour. Shields to prevent shock damage, and to avoid scratching the paint when occasional hits are expected, such as a gunnery duel at extreme range or the occasional leaker against missiles you can almost handle.  The armour adds a much larger safety margin if things get ugly and is useful in nebula systems.
 

Offline Michael Sandy

  • Captain
  • **********
  • Posts: 439
  • Thanked: 8 times
    • View Profile
Re: A new guy with a first warship in need of critique.
« Reply #6 on: June 02, 2017, 05:48:25 PM »
I didn't consider the FCs a mistake, I just thought they were surprising, because I have seen errors the other way a LOT.  Having longer ranged FCs means your long ranged fire will be accurate, which is kind of important.

Normally you don't see FC research a full tier (possibly two) ahead of the beam research.
 

Offline obsidian_green

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • Posts: 67
  • Thanked: 8 times
    • View Profile
Re: A new guy with a first warship in need of critique.
« Reply #7 on: June 02, 2017, 10:55:31 PM »
Please elaborate on the meson weapons problem.  I'd love to save myself unnecessary headaches.  I figured they'd help against armored missiles (per the wiki) and even at 1 dmg would be effective against incoming small missiles.  If forced to brawl, they give me guaranteed 4 dmg regardless of enemy defenses.

Further reading suggests my layered ranges just aren't extensive enough to be effective (as three layers anyway), but I'm grateful for the practice it gave me in anticipation of future tech.  I can expect those 12cm lasers to get two shots at 30,000km/s incoming, right? I figure I'll have to set the other two systems to Final Fire, since they will only get one shot at their ranges anyway---might as well be a higher percentage close one.

All that aside, here's my finalized design.

Code: [Select]
Troy class Area Defence Cruiser    12 000 tons     371 Crew     3012 BP      TCS 240  TH 420  EM 540
5000 km/s     Armour 6-46     Shields 18-375     Sensors 22/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 21     PPV 68.91
Maint Life 3.32 Years     MSP 1726    AFR 104%    IFR 1.5%    1YR 238    5YR 3564    Max Repair 525 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 18 months    Spare Berths 1   

600 EP Internal Fusion Drive (2)    Power 600    Fuel Use 21%    Signature 210    Exp 10%
Fuel Capacity 500 000 Litres    Range 35.7 billion km   (82 days at full power)
Delta R375/180 Shields (7)   Total Fuel Cost  53 Litres per hour  (1 260 per day)

Quad 12cm C4 Ultraviolet Laser Turret (1x4)    Range 160 000km     TS: 16000 km/s     Power 16-16     RM 4    ROF 5        4 4 4 4 3 2 2 2 1 1
Quad R80t/C4 Meson Cannon Turret (1x4)    Range 80 000km     TS: 16000 km/s     Power 16-16     RM 8    ROF 5        1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0
Quad Gauss Cannon R3-100 Turret (1x12)    Range 30 000km     TS: 16000 km/s     Power 0-0     RM 3    ROF 5        1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Fire Control S04 R80k-TS16000 (MCT) (1)    Max Range: 160 000 km   TS: 16000 km/s     75 70 64 60 55 49 44 40 35 30
Fire Control S08 160-16000 (UL12cmT) (1)    Max Range: 320 000 km   TS: 16000 km/s     77 75 72 70 67 64 62 60 57 55
Fire Control S02 R32-TS16000 (GCT) (1)    Max Range: 64 000 km   TS: 16000 km/s     67 55 42 29 17 4 0 0 0 0
Tokamak Fusion Reactor P8-50t (6)     Total Power Output 48    Armour 0    Exp 5%

Active Search (PD) MR2mk-R50 (1)     GPS 32     Range 2.6m km    MCR 279k km    Resolution 1
Thermal Sensor TH2-22 (SR) (1)     Sensitivity 22     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  22m km

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes

I traded half the fuel load/range (which also allowed me to get a little fuel tank redundancy I wanted, but forgot, in the first attempt) and managed to get my armor levels up to 6 and get my shields up to 18.  I fiddled with doubling my fire controls, so I could target each turret separately, but couldn't find enough weight-saving to retain my planned 5000km/s fleet speed, but that allowed me to recognize the weight-savings of quad turrets versus my double twins and add extra engineering space (and lower AFR) to get down to fleet speed.  I'm losing some redundancy, but I can't have everything, lol.


 

Offline Barkhorn

  • Commander
  • *********
  • Posts: 325
  • Thanked: 45 times
    • View Profile
Re: A new guy with a first warship in need of critique.
« Reply #8 on: June 02, 2017, 11:13:35 PM »
The problem with the mesons is that, just like your Gauss cannons, they only have enough range for one shot before the missiles hit.  But unlike the Gauss cannons, they only fire 1 shot per gun per 5 second tick, while your Gauss cannons fire 3 per gun per tick.  A meson turret can kill 4 missiles at most before they hit, a Gauss turret can kill 12.
 

Offline Iranon

  • Captain
  • **********
  • Posts: 460
  • Thanked: 31 times
    • View Profile
Re: A new guy with a first warship in need of critique.
« Reply #9 on: June 03, 2017, 04:24:54 AM »
Mesons have neither the range of lasers nor the volume of fire of railguns or Gauss weapons. Against ships, 1 point of armour-piercing damage may or may not be better than 2-4 points of laser damage depending on the target... but mixing isn't very good:
If you add mesons to a mostly-laser armament, you'll inflict little damage before you burn through shields/armour anyway so you may as well use a weapon that gets there faster. If you add lasers to a mostly-meson armament, chances are they won't do anything before the mesons finish the fight.

Mesons have other capabilities, most of which don't matter: The AI doesn't use armoured missiles, PDCs, and from my experience they don't armour/shield their ships so heavily that they're worth it (one notable spoilery exception, but against that I prefer lasers for different reasons). Mesons are sometimes competitive by cost because their build cost doesn't scale with capacitor tech; not so relevant before capacitor-6 in my opinion.

Generally, railguns and Gauss cannons are more effective for PD than longer-ranged weapons; long-range area defence vessels are useful because they have the advantage of longer beam range and better armour penetration in beam-vs-beam combat. Gauss is your best PD option by tonnage, 10cm railguns are a compromise: competitive at PD on fast ships, and while they don't have range or armour penetrations they have decent firepower at short range.
 
The following users thanked this post: obsidian_green

Offline obsidian_green

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • Posts: 67
  • Thanked: 8 times
    • View Profile
Re: A new guy with a first warship in need of critique.
« Reply #10 on: June 13, 2017, 10:48:27 PM »
My intended battle group of two Troy class, a missile cruiser and a smaller surveillance ship (Agamemnon B and Albatross classes shared below) encountered hostiles in the system next door and managed to take out two separate fleets of 24 and 20 750-ton fast-attackers (~10,500 km/s).  The Agamemnon seems to have done the lion's share of the work with it's ASMs and AMMs, but the Troy didn't hold up particularly well once the few remaining bogies managed to close within something like 50,000 km and open up with what I believe were railguns.  In this engagement, the gauss turrets proved useless, but I designed this battle group with a different threat in mind . . .  I still don't know if it would succeed against a missile attack, since my point defense setup was not tested.  Here are my missile cruiser and surveillance frigate:

Code: [Select]
Agamemnon B class Missile Cruiser    15 200 tons     375 Crew     2703.6 BP      TCS 304  TH 1520  EM 540
5000 km/s     Armour 6-54     Shields 18-300     Sensors 28/80/0/0     Damage Control Rating 30     PPV 23
Maint Life 4.78 Years     MSP 2168    AFR 94%    IFR 1.3%    1YR 156    5YR 2341    Max Repair 380 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 18 months    Spare Berths 0   
Magazine 675   

760 EP Internal Fusion Drive (2)    Power 760    Fuel Use 18.6%    Signature 760    Exp 10%
Fuel Capacity 750 000 Litres    Range 47.8 billion km   (110 days at full power)
Delta (2.5) R300/180 Shields (7)   Total Fuel Cost  53 Litres per hour  (1 260 per day)

CIWS-160/8 (4x8)    Range 1000 km     TS: 16000 km/s     ROF 5       Base 50% To Hit
ML-S6-Mk2 Missile Launcher (ASM/45s) (3)    Missile Size 6    Rate of Fire 45
ML-S1-50t Missile Launcher (AMM-1) (5)    Missile Size 1    Rate of Fire 10
MFC-19m/2m-Res1t (AMM-1) (1)     Range 19.1m km    Resolution 1
MFC-201mk-R3000t (ASM-1) (1)     Range 201.3m km    Resolution 60
ASM-1 (42)  Speed: 33 700 km/s   End: 49.9m    Range: 100.9m km   WH: 12    Size: 6    TH: 191/114/57
AMM-1 R2.5mk (423)  Speed: 61 200 km/s   End: 0.7m    Range: 2.5m km   WH: 1    Size: 1    TH: 489/293/146

Active Search MR206mk-R4000t (1)     GPS 16800     Range 206.6m km    Resolution 80
Active Search (PD) MR2mk-R50 (1)     GPS 32     Range 2.6m km    MCR 279k km    Resolution 1
Thermal Sensor TH2-28 (SR) (1)     Sensitivity 28     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  28m km
EM Detection Sensor EM10-80 (1)     Sensitivity 80     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  80m km

Missile to hit chances are vs targets moving at 3000 km/s, 5000 km/s and 10,000 km/s

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes


Code: [Select]
Albatross class Recon Frigate    8 000 tons     217 Crew     1738 BP      TCS 160  TH 800  EM 540
5000 km/s     Armour 6-35     Shields 18-300     Sensors 700/80/0/0     Damage Control Rating 9     PPV 0
Maint Life 3.21 Years     MSP 1222    AFR 56%    IFR 0.8%    1YR 179    5YR 2686    Max Repair 700 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 18 months    Spare Berths 0   

400 EP Internal Fusion Drive (2)    Power 400    Fuel Use 24%    Signature 400    Exp 10%
Fuel Capacity 500 000 Litres    Range 46.9 billion km   (108 days at full power)
Delta (2.5) R300/180 Shields (7)   Total Fuel Cost  53 Litres per hour  (1 260 per day)

Thermal Sensor TH50-700 (1)     Sensitivity 700     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  700m km
EM Detection Sensor EM10-80 (1)     Sensitivity 80     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  80m km

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes

As this battle group finished its engagement a second Agamemnon B and a pair of an improved class of area defense cruisers came off the docks.  After fleet training I sent a battle group of my two missile cruisers, two of the new Salamis class, and the Albatross back to Proxima to engage the scary 60,000t, 600 shield-strength monster (which before I couldn't scratch with a few missile volleys before the second fleet of 20 fast attackers drove me off) . . .  I now very much see the value in 15cm lasers over the 12cm variety in the old class.  The engagement would have taken forever without four, 15cm quad-turrets.  Gauss turrets still useless (didn't want to close within the same range those fast attackers managed to hurt me, which worked great), but they still haven't been tested against the intended threat.

Code: [Select]
Salamis class Area Defence Cruiser    15 200 tons     461 Crew     3881 BP      TCS 304  TH 1520  EM 540
5000 km/s     Armour 6-54     Shields 18-300     Sensors 28/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 30     PPV 84.14
Maint Life 5.32 Years     MSP 3192    AFR 92%    IFR 1.3%    1YR 189    5YR 2831    Max Repair 384 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 18 months    Spare Berths 0   

760 EP Internal Fusion Drive (2)    Power 760    Fuel Use 18.6%    Signature 760    Exp 10%
Fuel Capacity 750 000 Litres    Range 47.8 billion km   (110 days at full power)
Delta (2.5) R300/180 Shields (7)   Total Fuel Cost  53 Litres per hour  (1 260 per day)

Quad 15cm C6 Far Ultraviolet Laser Turret (2x4)    Range 300 000km     TS: 16000 km/s     Power 24-24     RM 5    ROF 5        6 6 6 6 6 5 4 3 3 3
Twin Gauss Cannon R4-100 Turret (3x8)    Range 40 000km     TS: 16000 km/s     Power 0-0     RM 4    ROF 5        1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
Fire Control S08 160-16000 (UL12cmT) (2)    Max Range: 320 000 km   TS: 16000 km/s     97 94 91 88 84 81 78 75 72 69
Fire Control S02 R32-TS16000 (GCT) (3)    Max Range: 64 000 km   TS: 16000 km/s     84 69 53 37 22 6 0 0 0 0
Tokamak Fusion Reactor P8-50t (6)     Total Power Output 48    Armour 0    Exp 5%

Active Search (PD) MR2mk-R50 (1)     GPS 32     Range 2.6m km    MCR 279k km    Resolution 1
Thermal Sensor TH2-28 (SR) (1)     Sensitivity 28     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  28m km

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes

I welcome thoughts and advice on the designs and the doctrine.  I recently finished research on the next engine tech and I'm working on a new generation of defenses; after upgrading weapons tech, I'll probably be looking to field an improved battle group with the same doctrine.  I have a shipyard prepped to pump out a single 20,000t addition to my force, but I'm both leaning towards and shying away from (I designed and researched systems that I couldn't use and had to redesign) the notion of it being a carrier so I can specialize for mission.  I could have used a high-powered microwave (for which I've done no research) on the big target at Proxima, where a faster enemy might have diced my fragile fleet, but it would have been a waste of space if I had only encountered the unshielded 750t ships.
 

Offline Iranon

  • Captain
  • **********
  • Posts: 460
  • Thanked: 31 times
    • View Profile
Re: A new guy with a first warship in need of critique.
« Reply #11 on: June 14, 2017, 02:41:48 AM »
Albatross and Salamis look fine to me, I'm not so sure about Agamemnon.

- CIWS aren't very efficient on ships meant to operate with others, and with a homogenous fleet speed you probably want to bring some area defence cruisers along.

- One 3-missile salvo is very easily stopped by point defence; I'd look into reduced-sized launchers and field more of them.

- Sensor package seems excessive. I'd get rid of the Passives. Actually, I'd go one step further and put the EM sensor on a different sensor ship (smaller than the TH scout is fine - EM signatures tend to be either huge or neglegible).

- ASM range seems a little short for the fire control; lagging behind a bit is reasonable in light of ECM but half the range seems excessive. I'd rather turn down the resolution a little to have a reserve against smaller ships.

Generally, I think you're better off fielding a leaner, more powerful warship. Eliminate optional components/reloads if you don't need them, put them on supporting vessels if you do.
 

Offline Detros

  • Commander
  • *********
  • Posts: 340
  • Thanked: 23 times
    • View Profile
Re: A new guy with a first warship in need of critique.
« Reply #12 on: June 14, 2017, 03:46:18 AM »
Unless you are sure you are going to use these ships separately, other ones than the sensor ship should be good with just size 1 reserve sensors.
Generally I would say you should concentrate on the sensor techs in the near future. It is noticeably starting to lag behind other branches. If I read it right, you have Gaus at 4 shots/5s while passive sensors at strength 8. Otherwise, some nice ships.
 

Offline Barkhorn

  • Commander
  • *********
  • Posts: 325
  • Thanked: 45 times
    • View Profile
Re: A new guy with a first warship in need of critique.
« Reply #13 on: June 14, 2017, 11:38:16 AM »
Speaking of sensors, don't forget that improving your EM sensor tech will also improve your active sensors.
 

Offline obsidian_green

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • Posts: 67
  • Thanked: 8 times
    • View Profile
Re: A new guy with a first warship in need of critique.
« Reply #14 on: June 14, 2017, 11:39:07 PM »
Quote
Albatross and Salamis look fine to me, I'm not so sure about Agamemnon.

Dunno.  In my only action thus far, it was just a single Agamemnon that saved the day, with a Troy twice getting knocked out of action.  It might be a stinker against future threats, but it's exceeded expectations thus far.

At the time I placed the CIWS, the Agamemnon had a larger signature than the pair of Troy area-defense cruisers that went with it, so I figured it would draw enemy targeting . . .  saved space to use CIWS instead of full gauss turrets.  The Salamis-class replacements are as massive, but the hostiles defied my expectations anyway by targeting a Troy, so I'll bear CIWS-appropriateness in mind in the future.

Three-missile salvos aren't enough even if they're good missiles? The missile-designer app (that thing's great!) led me to believe they'd do decently against faster PD tracking speeds than my own and that at least half should get through.  I've produced 9-dmg versions with a better hit-chance, but I wanted to expend the older models first.

Everyone seems to be in agreement about my sensor kerfuffle . . .  some combination of going a little redundancy-crazy or being unsure of ship roles down the line led me there.  Next-generation warships should be more efficient on that front if I can get over my hang ups.  I'm very inclined to go with Detros's suggestion of size-1 reserve sensors . . .  I don't know if I can stomach an individual ship being completely blind.  Sensor tech improvements are definitely on my docket (EM sensitivity already bagged and corresponding strength improvement is coming up after a tracking speed improvement).

What I've found, and might be willing to accept, are the fragility of these designs.  If anything big or numerous gets in close with rapid fire weapons they'll probably tear up the entire battle group.  Just two or three, likely damaged, 750t attackers managed to twice knock out an area defense cruiser, but my intended doctrine had always been to engage at greater range and stop all incoming---I would have fared perfectly in my running engagements if I had two of the missile cruisers, as I now deploy.  Attackers capable of closing and out-ranging my own beams will probably be great trouble, but I'm hoping nothing that fast will be durable enough to survive my missile attack.
 

 

Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51