Fleet Design

[Cobaia (OP)]

Hello,

I would like some inputs about my fleet design. I will not enter specifics for the ships, just the functions. I'm looking for inputs regarding the Jump Tenders, I divided my fleet into groups in order to facilitate the Jumping. Are there any others strats? Do you place redundant smaller ships in your fleets, like Missile Destroyers, Escort Destroyers? Do you place more focus on Beam weapons?

War Fleet 1:
1x Command Task Group:
   1x Battleship (Capital Ships Jump Tender, Long Range Sensor Array)
   2x Attack Carriers (40x ASM Bombers)
   4x Escort Carriers (125x PD Fighters)
   4x Heavy Cruisers (2x AEW, Beam Weapons)

2x Strike Group:
   1x Command Cruiser (Cruisers Jump Tender, Sensors)
   10x Missile Cruiser (ASM)

4x Escort Group:
   1x Command Cruiser (Cruisers Jump Tender, Sensors)
   10x Escort Cruiser (PD)

1x Spacemarine Group
   1x Assault Carrier (20x Small Boarding Craft, Transport Jump Tender)
   10x Drop Assault Transport (250x Spacemarine Squads)

1x Support Group
   1x Command Support Vessel (Support Ships Jump Tender, Maintenance)
   5x Tankers (Fuel Support Vessel)
   3x Support Vessels (Maintenance Support Vessel)
   2x Coiler

[Ulzgoroth]

My general view is that there are two very different contexts for jump ships.

For standard transit, your entire fleet only needs one jump tender (maybe two if you need commercial as well as military jump) and the jump tender doesn't need any combat capability. Maybe some self-defense weapons if you expect to expose it to fighter or missile strikes, but most of the time you'll probably leave it on the safe side of a jump point. You might even make the tender a commercial vessel, I think that's possible if slightly tricky. Also, your jump drive doesn't need any squadron size or jump radius upgrades.

On the other hand, sometimes you will want to gatecrash a jump point where the enemy is defending the other side. At that point, everything changes. Your fleet wants to break down into jump squadrons that can make squadron transits to minimize the impact of jump shock. Your jump ships will be putting themselves right into the fire, so they need all the defenses they can get and may want offensive weapons.

It looks to me like your fleet has no real capability for the latter situation. Carriers and ASM cruisers aren't really cut out for gatecrashing, I don't think, and your task groups are probably larger than your squadron transit capacity. Given that? I'd consolidate. You don't need a jump ship in every task group. You could just have one capital ship jump tender stuck in the support group and it would give you almost all the same capability at a much better price.

[Cobaia (OP)]

My general view is that there are two very different contexts for jump ships.

For standard transit, your entire fleet only needs one jump tender (maybe two if you need commercial as well as military jump) and the jump tender doesn't need any combat capability. Maybe some self-defense weapons if you expect to expose it to fighter or missile strikes, but most of the time you'll probably leave it on the safe side of a jump point. You might even make the tender a commercial vessel, I think that's possible if slightly tricky. Also, your jump drive doesn't need any squadron size or jump radius upgrades.

On the other hand, sometimes you will want to gatecrash a jump point where the enemy is defending the other side. At that point, everything changes. Your fleet wants to break down into jump squadrons that can make squadron transits to minimize the impact of jump shock. Your jump ships will be putting themselves right into the fire, so they need all the defenses they can get and may want offensive weapons.

It looks to me like your fleet has no real capability for the latter situation. Carriers and ASM cruisers aren't really cut out for gatecrashing, I don't think, and your task groups are probably larger than your squadron transit capacity. Given that? I'd consolidate. You don't need a jump ship in every task group. You could just have one capital ship jump tender stuck in the support group and it would give you almost all the same capability at a much better price.

My understanding of Jump Engines i thought I needed to match the tonnage and use squadron transit capacity. So I just need a large enough Jump Tender without max Transit capacity for the whole fleet. I will try it out! that simplifies somethings.

Thank you for the useful information!

[Ulzgoroth]

You need to have the jump drive's max tonnage match the biggest ship you're jumping. And to match military or commercial engines with a military or commercial jump drive. For standard transit, none of the other stats matter - including, as I recently learned, the 'self-jump only' label you get for small jump drives! Also, you don't need a jump ship to be in the fleet that's jumping. You just need a suitable jump ship to be at either end of the jump point. So you can move your support group to the point and then send the rest of the fleet through without ever sending the jump ships too the more dangerous side of things.

For squadron transit, you need to meet the tonnage qualification plus you can only jump a fleet up to the drive's squadron size limit. In exchange you get less jump shock and don't come out right on top of the point on the other end, making a jump point defender on the far side significantly less deadly. (Though still pretty deadly.)

[liveware]

Having experimented with several jump ship designs, I am firmly in the commercial jump drive camp. I use the design below to move my military fleets around:

Code: [Select]

Pegasus C class Jump Tender      200,000 tons       1,473 Crew       12,181.5 BP       TCS 4,000    TH 4,000    EM 0
1000 km/s    JR 2-25(C)      Armour 7-304       Shields 0-0       HTK 248      Sensors 11/11/0/0      DCR 11      PPV 0
MSP 2,038    Max Repair 806.9 MSP
Hangar Deck Capacity 70,000 tons     Cryogenic Berths 3,000   
Admiral    Control Rating 3   BRG   AUX   ENG   
Intended Deployment Time: 3 months    Flight Crew Berths 1,400   

Chaimberlin-Sherman JC200K Commercial Jump Drive     Max Ship Size 200000 tons    Distance 25k km     Squadron Size 2

Chaimberlin-Sherman Commercial Internal Fusion Drive  EP1000.00 (4)    Power 4000    Fuel Use 3.35%    Signature 1000    Explosion 5%
Fuel Capacity 8,669,000 Litres    Range 232.6 billion km (2692 days at full power)

Chaimberlin-Sherman Active Search Sensor AS39-R100 (50%) (1)     GPS 2100     Range 39.8m km    Resolution 100
Chaimberlin-Sherman Active Search Sensor AS68-R500 (50%) (1)     GPS 10500     Range 68.1m km    Resolution 500
Chaimberlin-Sherman Thermal Sensor TH1.0-11.0 (50%) (1)     Sensitivity 11     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  26.2m km
Chaimberlin-Sherman EM Sensor EM1.0-11.0 (50%) (1)     Sensitivity 11     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  26.2m km

This design is classed as a Commercial Vessel for maintenance purposes

This enables improved speed (or other important capabilities) on front-line military ships by removing from them the necessity to transit large distances. I encourage you to consider the strategic advantages of using commercial jump ships for your military fleets.

[liveware]

I would additionally suggest consolidating the majority of your fleet ships into a single large carrier centric fleet design with multiple carrier based fighters designs (or other craft). This allows for range and MSP considerations to be divorced from combat speed and agility considerations, which in my experience are often in conflict. You could then, in theory field something like 10x 'standard' carriers and 5x 'heavy' carriers, and optimize the fighter compliment of each carrier class based on your opponent. Or just build a single carrier class and further optimize fighter designs. Splitting the bombers and the PD fighters between carrier classes is not really worth-while in my opinion. Or better yet, launch all fighter craft from a colony in distress rather than a carrier to save on maintenance costs. Best to have all of your military capacity spread across all of your offensive hangar space I think rather than splitting fighters into different hangars prematurely before combat is comitted.

[Ulzgoroth]

I also suggest using commercial jump ships for your military ships, at least most of the time. Indeed, I did suggest that.

I don't suggest attaching those jump ships to colossal commercial hangar bays. It's an option, to be sure. But using commercial tankers to support your military ships' range requirements and a pair of relatively small commercial jump tenders (one with a military jump drive, one with a commercial jump drive to let the first one jump) can provide the same ability to get around, and can let your warships do so at their own full speed rather than the sluggish pace of a commercial engined titan.

The major upside of the titanic commercial carrier is that while commercial hangars don't do maintenance or reload missiles, they do wind back deployment clocks. If you want to really cut crew quarters to the bone, that could be a big help.

If you just want to economize on fuel by using highly efficient commercial engines to move your military ships around (slowly), I believe you can do that with tractor beam tugs.



(Meanwhile, I'm using commercial jump carriers as the backbone of my own empire right now. But they're surveyor motherships, not meant as warship delivery systems.)

[liveware]

I also suggest using commercial jump ships for your military ships, at least most of the time. Indeed, I did suggest that.

I don't suggest attaching those jump ships to colossal commercial hangar bays. It's an option, to be sure. But using commercial tankers to support your military ships' range requirements and a pair of relatively small commercial jump tenders (one with a military jump drive, one with a commercial jump drive to let the first one jump) can provide the same ability to get around, and can let your warships do so at their own full speed rather than the sluggish pace of a commercial engined titan.

The major upside of the titanic commercial carrier is that while commercial hangars don't do maintenance or reload missiles, they do wind back deployment clocks. If you want to really cut crew quarters to the bone, that could be a big help.

If you just want to economize on fuel by using highly efficient commercial engines to move your military ships around (slowly), I believe you can do that with tractor beam tugs.



(Meanwhile, I'm using commercial jump carriers as the backbone of my own empire right now. But they're surveyor motherships, not meant as warship delivery systems.)

Commercial jump carriers are somewhat less micro-intensive than tugs, but tugs are an essentially equivalent option. The advantage of commercial hangars is that a ship so equipped can jump ships with military engines even if the jump ship is equipped with commercial engines. Thus improving fuel efficiency of military fleets deployed at long range.

That said, commercial jump stations are probably more efficient than carriers... but I cannot speak from my own experience in this regard. Commercial jump stations are on my list of things to test in my next bout of imperial design revisionism.

Either way, my opinion is that military jump drives are horribly space inefficient and have no place on any ship which is expected to engage hostile forces.

[Ulzgoroth]

Commercial jump carriers are somewhat less micro-intensive than tugs, but tugs are an essentially equivalent option. The advantage of commercial hangars is that a ship so equipped can jump ships with military engines even if the jump ship is equipped with commercial engines. Thus improving fuel efficiency of military fleets deployed at long range.

That said, commercial jump stations are probably more efficient than carriers... but I cannot speak from my own experience in this regard. Commercial jump stations are on my list of things to test in my next bout of imperial design revisionism.

Tugs are much smaller than mega-carriers, so they're cheaper and move faster when unloaded. And allow you to use much smaller commercial jump drives.

I'd rather build jump tenders with engines than jump stations without for most cases IME - if I want a jump engine at a jump point absolutely all the time I probably just want to stabilize the point. IIRC you don't stabilize pints, so that would add to the appeal of the station option.

Either way, my opinion is that military jump drives are horribly space inefficient and have no place on any ship which is expected to engage hostile forces.

Aside from specialist gatecrasher units we're entirely in agreement there.

[liveware]

Commercial jump carriers are somewhat less micro-intensive than tugs, but tugs are an essentially equivalent option. The advantage of commercial hangars is that a ship so equipped can jump ships with military engines even if the jump ship is equipped with commercial engines. Thus improving fuel efficiency of military fleets deployed at long range.

That said, commercial jump stations are probably more efficient than carriers... but I cannot speak from my own experience in this regard. Commercial jump stations are on my list of things to test in my next bout of imperial design revisionism.

Tugs are much smaller than mega-carriers, so they're cheaper and move faster when unloaded. And allow you to use much smaller commercial jump drives.

I'd rather build jump tenders with engines than jump stations without for most cases IME - if I want a jump engine at a jump point absolutely all the time I probably just want to stabilize the point. IIRC you don't stabilize pints, so that would add to the appeal of the station option.

Either way, my opinion is that military jump drives are horribly space inefficient and have no place on any ship which is expected to engage hostile forces.

Aside from specialist gatecrasher units we're entirely in agreement there.

Your memory serves you well.

In all honesty I never build JP stabilizations modules, though I have researched them and theorycrafted several interesting use cases for them. I just don't have an epic enough empire yet to justify their use. I currently consider them on par with commercial jump stations but commercial jump stations have the advantage that they can be self-destructed/abandoned in an emergency to close the associated jump point. Stabilized jump points are stabilized forever... no go-backsies.

So I rely entirely on jump drive equipped ships of various designs at present to hold my empire together.

Tugs might be smaller than mega commercial carriers but since I possesses only single digit numbers of said 'mega' carriers they are not a terrible burden. Hence their assignment of 'Admiral' as their commanding officer. They are rarely idle and rarely do they engage in any mundane fleet operations. Tugs in every colonized system would quickly become a micro burden from my perspective. I have other ships which can handle those roles.

[Ulzgoroth]

As far as using tugs to move around your warships, you would be replacing your supercarriers with tugs on a one-for-one basis. Same amount of micro there. (In general it could be rather more, but since you fill those monster hangars with a single capital ship it isn't.) Slightly more if you count assembling the three-ship transport fleet (tug, military jump tender/tanker, commercial jump tender), but you can keep those groups together indefinitely once they're formed.

[liveware]

As far as using tugs to move around your warships, you would be replacing your supercarriers with tugs on a one-for-one basis. Same amount of micro there. (In general it could be rather more, but since you fill those monster hangars with a single capital ship it isn't.) Slightly more if you count assembling the three-ship transport fleet (tug, military jump tender/tanker, commercial jump tender), but you can keep those groups together indefinitely once they're formed.

Much the to disdain of many, I plan on continuing my use and advocacy of commercial jump carriers. I must say they have provided me with considerably improved strike distance and efficiency. I expect to find a better solution in the future, but for now, commercial jump carriers are a critical component of my space navy.

I find tankers of strategic use but of no tactical use. The same is true of colliers.

[Jorgen_CAB]

Does it really matter if tugs or commercial carriers are used to move military ships around your empire as the function is basically to save fuel?

Tugs probably are the most efficient option though if the only thing is that you want to move fleet assets from one base of operation to the next in a strategical manner and time is on your side.

When things get messy I would personally not rely on either as time and speed are more important than saving on my fuel economy.

I don't see any problem of using tugs (or carriers) to bring my ships to my prepared staging areas from which the military ships will use their own engines to conduct tactical operations. In fact I see it as wasting resources not to use tugs for moving military ships around in a strategic sense as military engine can be a huge drain on fuel. In some instances I have had an entire fleet burn one year of empire wide fuel production in a few months of operations and that IS expensive.

Now this obviously depends on how fuel efficient military engines you design, but I tend to not have too efficient military engines as I either need speed or use the tonnage for other than engines on my military designs.


On some of the other point the OP asked about...


In general I have three general categories if military ships which are Main Strike, Escort and Patrol/Recon. Often some of the roles can be performed by the same class of ships but in general I tend to build ships for one main role that fit into those roles.

As small craft combat tend to come rather early in C# I tend to find carrier centred deep space combat to be very common so carriers tend to become the "Main Strike" role early on.

In the escort role I tend to build around the destroyer concept, a ship which concentrate on defending the carriers from mainly small craft and missiles and who usually carry a strong beam defence. They can be used for recon but rarely posses the ability to harm capital ships at long ranges, but they can potentially close to beam combat and engage there are they are designed to withstand enemy missile barrages.

The third category of ships are either frigates or cruisers whose job is patrol and reconnaissance in many different forms, these ships need to have decent defences but also offensive means to dispose of smaller enemy forces. They need to be able to operate alone or in small groups and are the main ships to secure a specific are for staging a possible offensive action or they will be the first ship to respond to a potential invasion. These ships are usually stationed more scattered around a larger empire while the other classes tend to be more centralised and used strategically rather than tactically.

I certainly use ships of all potential sizes but my main capital ships tend to be quite large as size does matter in terms of durability and capability, Patrol ships can be both large and small and both have merits. Pure scout ships are obviously better is small and fast so I tend to use carrier concept for most actual scouting as most if not all my ship have some form of hangars to house at least some scouting craft in them. If I can know the force of an enemy I also know if and when it is smart to engage them with my forces.

I don't tend to produce highly specialised ships unless they are really small as the waste in retooling and yard economy is not the best. I usually see that working within the range of producing small variances in the same yards to be very effective. That means that I can maintain one destroyer, one cruiser and one frigate design using small changes to vary their mission parameters. You can even refit ship between the variances so fast they become almost modular, especially if those components are available to be swapped in or out. Just make sure to retool the class for the most expensive variant you have. This way I can have MANY variant of ships using the same yard and configure them based on my needs.