Author Topic: A new guy with a first warship in need of critique.  (Read 1396 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline I_Sicarius_I

  • Petty Officer
  • **
  • Posts: 26
  • Thanked: 1 times
    • View Profile
Re: A new guy with a first warship in need of critique.
« Reply #30 on: June 29, 2017, 05:11:49 AM »
Ah.  Well i mass produced like 500 fighters so i could stick them in my carriers that were being built.  But that save crashed anyhow.  On a second play through and as long as no one is flying them they seem content enough to stay "landed" im on mobile so i cant post my designs atm but i would be welcome to some criticism on my designs. 
 

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 #31 on: July 03, 2017, 02:53:49 PM »
Okay. So here is what turned out to be the final design of my first carrier, which is now loaded with craft and is carrying out trials/task force training:
Code: [Select]
Africa (Spacecraft Carrier) class Carrier    40 000 tons     1181 Crew     8566.58 BP      TCS 800  TH 8000  EM 1200
10000 km/s     Armour 6-104     Shields 40-240     Sensors 1/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 130     PPV 0
Maint Life 9.79 Years     MSP 16060    AFR 106%    IFR 1.5%    1YR 303    5YR 4551    Max Repair 1000 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months    Flight Crew Berths 85   
Flag Bridge    Hangar Deck Capacity 10000 tons     Magazine 864   

2000 EP Magnetic Fusion Drive (4)    Power 2000    Fuel Use 48.57%    Signature 2000    Exp 16%
Fuel Capacity 3 545 000 Litres    Range 32.8 billion km   (38 days at full power)
Theta S4-RC240/288 Shields (10)   Total Fuel Cost  120 Litres per hour  (2 880 per day)

CIWS-25000 (8x5s) (4x8)    Range 1000 km     TS: 25000 km/s     ROF 5       Base 50% To Hit
Active Search (PD) MR6mk/AM705k-R1 (1)     GPS 36     Range 6.5m km    MCR 706k km    Resolution 1

Strike Group
24x C/A-1 Adder Attack Craft   Speed: 17281 km/s    Size: 4.34
12x C/F-3 Arafura Interceptor   Speed: 25252 km/s    Size: 5.94
3x C/RC-2 Anhinga Fast Scout Craft   Speed: 38265 km/s    Size: 7.84

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes

And the specs for its craft complement:
Code: [Select]
C/A-1 Adder class Attack Craft    217 tons     1 Crew     75.2 BP      TCS 4.34  TH 75  EM 0
17281 km/s     Armour 1-3     Shields 0-0     Sensors 1/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 0     PPV 2.7
Maint Life 0 Years     MSP 0    AFR 43%    IFR 0.6%    1YR 4    5YR 64    Max Repair 37.5 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 0.1 months    Spare Berths 3   
Magazine 18   

75 EP (x3) Magnetic Fusion Drive (1)    Power 75    Fuel Use 462.98%    Signature 75    Exp 30%
Fuel Capacity 10 000 Litres    Range 1.8 billion km   (28 hours at full power)

Box Launcher S6-HR45 (3)    Missile Size 6    Hangar Reload 45 minutes    MF Reload 7.5 hours
MFC RN30mk-R3000t (FTR) (1)     Range 30.1m km    Resolution 60
ASM-SR-1 (S6, WH16, R29.8k) (3)  Speed: 54 700 km/s   End: 9.1m    Range: 29.8m km   WH: 16    Size: 6    TH: 364/218/109

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 Fighter for production, combat and maintenance purposes

Code: [Select]
C/F-3 Arafura class Interceptor    297 tons     3 Crew     150.9 BP      TCS 5.94  TH 150  EM 0
25252 km/s     Armour 1-3     Shields 0-0     Sensors 1/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 0     PPV 3
Maint Life 0 Years     MSP 0    AFR 59%    IFR 0.8%    1YR 16    5YR 241    Max Repair 75 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 0.1 months    Spare Berths 1   

150-F EP(x3) Magnetic Fusion Drive (1)    Power 150    Fuel Use 458.3%    Signature 150    Exp 30%
Fuel Capacity 5 000 Litres    Range 0.7 billion km   (7 hours at full power)

Gauss Cannon R4-S1.5-AC25 (2x4)    Range 40 000km     TS: 25252 km/s     Accuracy Modifier 25%     RM 4    ROF 5        1 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
FC S0.5 R48k-TS25000 (FTR) (1)    Max Range: 96 000 km   TS: 25000 km/s     90 79 69 58 48 38 27 17 6 0

This design is classed as a Fighter for production, combat and maintenance purposes

Code: [Select]
C/RC-2 Anhinga class Fast Scout Craft    392 tons     4 Crew     264.4 BP      TCS 7.84  TH 300  EM 0
38265 km/s     Armour 1-4     Shields 0-0     Sensors 1/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 0     PPV 0
Maint Life 8.77 Years     MSP 105    AFR 4%    IFR 0.1%    1YR 2    5YR 37    Max Repair 99 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 0.1 months    Spare Berths 0   

150-F EP(x3) Magnetic Fusion Drive (2)    Power 150    Fuel Use 458.3%    Signature 150    Exp 30%
Fuel Capacity 25 000 Litres    Range 2.5 billion km   (18 hours at full power)

Active Search MR178mk-R100 (36/18) (1)     GPS 9900     Range 178.2m km    Resolution 100

This design is classed as a Fighter for production, combat and maintenance purposes

I've reclassified hulls, so my 20,000t ships will be max size for destroyers (frigates up to 15,000t). I'm reconsidering my present designs in favor of maximizing them for their roles. An area defense missile ship really needs to sport those AMM launchers, which my present design does not---I've been spreading limited capability over multiple ships rather than maximizing capability for a role, then adding secondary capability like anti-ship ... a consequence of the limited enemies I've faced and building escorts before seeing firsthand the offensive potential of a carrier strike element. 3xASM salvos as reserve capability (with 24 reloads instead of 48) should be sufficient if these are going to be carrier escorts rather than independent operators. I'll need dedicated strike cruisers/destroyers if I want them to be more effective against targets defending themselves with 48xAMM salvos, but I wonder if I should bother when I can get 24 separate 3xASM salvos from a carrier's attack craft.

I might now be in the market for cruisers up to 30,000t, but I need those construction brigades to hurry up and build me more places to park them before I build any. I might opt to refit my new destroyers first, to make them better carrier escorts rather than wasting space on both AS and AM capabilities insufficient for either job.
 

Offline Barkhorn

  • Commander
  • *********
  • Posts: 325
  • Thanked: 45 times
    • View Profile
Re: A new guy with a first warship in need of critique.
« Reply #32 on: July 03, 2017, 03:55:41 PM »
How do you plan on getting this through a jump point?  I don't see a jump engine.

Your CAG leaves 1HS of hanger space unfilled, but I don't think there's too much you can do about it.

Any reason you went with CIWS instead of Gauss turrets?  I generally prefer GT's, so my whole task group can benefit.  Not that CIWS are a bad choice on a flagship; you certainly can fit more of them.

You have more flight crew births than you need.  You need 72, you have 85.

I don't really like the Gauss fighters.  With no R1 sensor on any fighters, you can't have your Gauss fighters deal with missiles.  FAC's and fighters will also be dangerous.  They're also fairly short-ranged, totally unable to escort your bombers all the way to the target and back.

Your missile strike group packs a huge punch, but at only 30mkm range, you are likely to be within AMM range.  Your bombers could take heavy casualties, especially because of the lack of support from the Gauss fighters.  The worst part is, given an equal-tech opponent, your bombers will die from AMM fire before your missiles hit, and when they do their missiles will self-destruct.  I would consider designing a new scout with a good R1 sensor, and swapping that in for one of the other scouts.  Other than AMM fire though, your missile strikes will be DEADLY, and you can fire 6 full strikes before you have to visit a collier.

Another issue you may have is simply finding targets.  As it stands now, your scouts have to get within ~180mkm of a contact to see it, and you have to have your actives on.  It may be worth it to shave some space off the carrier to free up enough room for one more boat bay.  In that boat bay I'd put a single scout with a really powerful thermal sensor.  The scout would also have the lowest thermal signature tech engines I could make.  I'd fly it way ahead of my carrier group, scouting any planets that looked habitable.  Upon finding a contact, I'd tail it from as far away as I could, and vector in either a bomber strike.
 

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 #33 on: July 03, 2017, 11:03:41 PM »
Gate transit? Dedicated jump tender I designed after giving up the idea of cramming it onto the carrier:
Code: [Select]
Birsa Munda (M-40200t) class Jump Tender    40 200 tons     545 Crew     3605.25 BP      TCS 804  TH 8125  EM 0
10105 km/s    JR 6-750     Armour 1-104     Shields 0-0     Sensors 1/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 1     PPV 0
MSP 56    Max Repair 1087 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 20 months    Spare Berths 0   

J-40200t(6-750) Military Jump Drive     Max Ship Size 40200 tons    Distance 750k km     Squadron Size 6
625 EP Commercial Magnetic Fusion Drive (13)    Power 625    Fuel Use 2.65%    Signature 625    Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 520 000 Litres    Range 87.9 billion km   (100 days at full power)

This design is classed as a Commercial Vessel for maintenance purposes

CIWS on the carrier? Space savings and a little added jump protection for those standard transits. The rest of the battle group (4 ships, all with at least 2x3 Gauss turrets and AMM) should be able to manage the ASM attacks I've seen thus far, but can't handle the 48xAMM salvos per 5 or 10 sec I saw at the wreck stack. I'm hoping to outrange that.

Flight crew births: it would be great if I had read a formula to compute that on the wiki ... if it's there, I missed it. I started building the carrier before I had definite designs for all the craft it would carry. I had crew numbers for my fighters, but not for scouts and other shuttles I decided to house on my (now) destroyers. Also, unless crew is linked only to HS (and I don't think that's the case---I think certain components add crew) I might need leeway for a different complement of spacecraft. If I'm wrong in thinking that, please let me know because otherwise, I'll be needlessly giving myself a cushion in future designs as well. If HS is the only criteria, I should be going with an absolute number of crew berths instead.

Fighters: this crop was designed for fleet point defense, but I had plans to try them as attack escorts if my strikecraft couldn't get in and get out ... they're cheap enough that I'm willing to lose some as part of the learning process. I need better attack range, but I don't yet have the FC for it. 30m k is the best I can manage at present. I just figure I'll have to try and be crafty with it, lol.

Targeting won't be a problem unless I break doctrine. I'm fielding a dedicated surveillance ship that I intend to be primary eyes for all fleet assets:
Code: [Select]
Cormorant (Surveillance Frigate) class Surveillance Frigate    10 000 tons     296 Crew     3343.1 BP      TCS 200  TH 2000  EM 1200
10000 km/s     Armour 6-41     Shields 40-240     Sensors 900/18/0/0     Damage Control Rating 10     PPV 0
Maint Life 2.79 Years     MSP 2194    AFR 76%    IFR 1.1%    1YR 409    5YR 6138    Max Repair 1000 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months    Spare Berths 1   

2000 EP Magnetic Fusion Drive (1)    Power 2000    Fuel Use 48.57%    Signature 2000    Exp 16%
Fuel Capacity 900 000 Litres    Range 33.4 billion km   (38 days at full power)
Theta S4-RC240/288 Shields (10)   Total Fuel Cost  120 Litres per hour  (2 880 per day)

CIWS-25000 (8x5s) (2x8)    Range 1000 km     TS: 25000 km/s     ROF 5       Base 50% To Hit
Active Search MR648-R100-S10 (1)     GPS 36000     Range 648.0m km    Resolution 100
Active Search (PD) MR32/3.5mk-R1 (36/18) (1)     GPS 180     Range 32.4m km    MCR 3.5m km    Resolution 1
Thermal Sensor TH50-900 (1)     Sensitivity 900     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  900m km
EM Detection Sensor EM1-18 (1)     Sensitivity 18     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  18m km

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
It won't help with point defense for a strike group, but it shouldn't have a problem lighting up the targets for attack.
« Last Edit: July 03, 2017, 11:05:55 PM by obsidian_green »
 

Offline Barkhorn

  • Commander
  • *********
  • Posts: 325
  • Thanked: 45 times
    • View Profile
Re: A new guy with a first warship in need of critique.
« Reply #34 on: July 03, 2017, 11:20:25 PM »
There's no formula for computing flight crew births that I'm aware of.  I just added up the crew from all your fighters.  When I build a carrier, I design my fighters first, then decide how many of each I'll have on the carrier.  Then I design everything else about the carrier.  Last thing I do is add enough crew compartments to support the CAG I designed earlier.  I agree it can be helpful to have extra flight crew births in case you change what fighters you're carrying.  I just wanted to warn you in case it was a mistake and not by design.

HS is not the only criteria, deployment time and the specific components used also affect crew requirements.

I look forward to hearing how your carrier group fairs in battle, especially against an NPR and not just a spoiler.

BTW: Your sensor frigate's thermals can detect a strength 1000 signature almost twice as far out as Jupiter!
 

Offline El Pip

  • Chief Petty Officer
  • ***
  • Posts: 38
  • Thanked: 4 times
    • View Profile
Re: A new guy with a first warship in need of critique.
« Reply #35 on: July 04, 2017, 01:55:53 AM »
The worst part is, given an equal-tech opponent, your bombers will die from AMM fire before your missiles hit, and when they do their missiles will self-destruct.
Once they've launched the bombers can just fly home, you need to maintain an active sensor lock on your target but you don't need to be in fire-control range. So one option is for the bombers to just get into range, launch and then fly straight back to the carrier, leaving the scout fighter at 170m km to provide active coverage.

Can't say for sure but I think missiles survive the destruction of their launch platform in any event, as long as something is still providing the necessary active sensor coverage. Less certain on this point that the one above though.
« Last Edit: July 04, 2017, 01:57:31 AM by El Pip »
 

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 #36 on: July 06, 2017, 10:46:29 PM »
Can't yet report on how the carrier group manages, but I can better report on the performance of a battle group of two Salamis-class, two Agamemnon Bs and an Albatross. Against the aliens at the wreck stack that fire 48xAMM salvos if I get too close, 18 strength shields, a tracking speed of 16000, 5000km/s speed, and no ECCM are not ideal fleet attributes, lol. They handled slow ASM attacks and most faster opponent ships just fine, but two targets I assume to be motionless at the wreck stack were unapproachable. My little battle group actually managed to survive learning that the wreck stack occupiers fire AMMs like crazy, but every ship was turned to Swiss cheese when I checked the armor after getting out of their range.

After a stint in Earth's groundside naval base (200,000t hangars serve as my naval bases, but only Earth's production capacity has managed to assemble one by 2084---my first playthrough is probably a lesson in empire mismanagement) I sent the force back to that system and tricked the remaining two fast opponents that maintained a distance outside of my missile range by baiting them over my jump-point into the system: I detached my missile ships and transited them while continuing to retreat with the rest of the force, transiting the missile ships back when the furthest enemy contact seemed on top of jump-point. Worked like a charm and I gave the TG commander a "Sheridan Medal" for tactical brilliance in honor of a fictional captain that had a knack for winning against technologically superior opponents.

I lost my first ship, one of my surveyors, in a different system against a FAC group of these same aliens ...
Code: [Select]
Yuri Gagarin class Survey Ship    10 000 tons     172 Crew     1636 BP      TCS 200  TH 300  EM 0
6250 km/s    JR 3-50     Armour 6-41     Shields 0-0     Sensors 36/1/2/2     Damage Control Rating 8     PPV 0
Maint Life 2.62 Years     MSP 869    AFR 94%    IFR 1.3%    1YR 179    5YR 2681    Max Repair 312.5 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 36 months    Spare Berths 0   

J10200(sq3-50k) Military Jump Drive     Max Ship Size 10200 tons    Distance 50k km     Squadron Size 3
625 EP/TR.25 Commercial Magnetic Fusion Drive (2)    Power 625    Fuel Use 2.65%    Signature 150    Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 750 000 Litres    Range 509.4 billion km   (943 days at full power)

CIWS-25000 (8x5s) (2x8)    Range 1000 km     TS: 25000 km/s     ROF 5       Base 50% To Hit
Thermal Sensor TH2-36 (1)     Sensitivity 36     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  36m km
Improved Gravitational Sensors (1)   2 Survey Points Per Hour
Improved Geological Sensors (1)   2 Survey Points Per Hour

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes

... and dispatched every 5000km/s warship in response, my 10,000km/s ships still engaged in TF training (some still at it). The enemy got off a missile attack that sailed right past most of my PD because they went way heavy on the ECM and were able to launch before I could target ... lesson learned and scientists currently teching up on ECCM. They didn't weather my missile attack when they closed with my fleet for little discernible reason, unless Aurora had the enemy attempt to sacrifice itself for the sake of a small population of aliens I found and wiped out without thinking about the practice it might afford my two marine companies and the intel I might have snatched from prisoners. :( (Hilda Pickens claims it was prudent to wipe out an enemy observation post while her fleet operated in the system and who am I to argue? She is a Sheridan Medal recipient after all ... but I suspect revenge for the doomed crew of Miroslaw Hermaszewski that Pickens's slow force couldn't reach before their life support gave out.)

Anyway, I've seen enough to convince me that my current builds are ugly ducklings of limited utility. I think I can make them work, but their roles were too ill-defined when I designed them. I'm tempted to build an entirely new battle group at the current engine tech level ... primarily because 12 month intended deployments aren't enough to even conduct TF training. My next bunch (assuming I can mine enough of the gallicite and neutronium that's getting a little low) should be better optimized and I'll post the final designs after I reach a compact ECCM with which I'm comfortable. The consequent teching in ECM should also make my next crop of ASMs more deadly.
 

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 #37 on: July 14, 2017, 04:07:34 AM »
Update on the carrier battle group: it performed beautifully against an NPR I'm pretty sure I'm comfortably out-teching. The battle (which took about a week in realtime even with the spacetime bubble on, good grief) seemed to pit what looked like the entire enemy fleet against my battle group of four combatants, the carrier wing, and a surveillance ship. Strike groups of missile fighters are pretty effective against poorly defended ships, as are my gauss fighters though I lost one to ASMs when they engaged a flight of 5 FACs. The 15cm quad lasers did much work after I gauged that the enemy didn't have much in the way of close defenses. I have to build something to take out whatever is launching 40+ AMM salvos near what I assume is the homeworld and I'm currently waiting for Earth to crank out more ASMs for my strikefighters so I can kill more of what appear to be enemy battle stations. Hopefully they were launching the AMMs; if not it will mean even more waiting for ASM production back on Earth.

I think I've already mentioned my concerns with these designs---the 12 month deployment is too short to facilitate fleet training, the engines are too greedy (a tradeoff I knew I was making that I'll remedy at the next level of engine tech), and the weapons loadout could be better specialized. I'll add magazine capacity to that---I need more missiles---but that might just mean I need to bring along the ordnance ships I left at home and crank out more missiles before I need to use them.

More generally, this engagement highlights a need to design and bring along some beam FACs, which my next carrier design or new 30,000t cruisers should be able to house---just from a management standpoint, I need more ships with single FCs to chase down defenseless contacts. I'm glad I designed some rescue shuttles to scoop enemy life pods, but the Marine attack shuttles proved more trouble than they were worth, clicking past constant interruptions telling me how many seconds remain until I get a combat report just doesn't seem worth the trouble.
 
The following users thanked this post: superstrijder15

 

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