How's my fleet?

[liq3 (OP)]

I'm fairly new to the game, my current game being the longest at 44 years.   

My fleet has served me well so far, taking out many ships above it's tech level.   It's currently running 7 Resolution Bs and 3 Ark Royals Mk.  II.   

I'm curious if there's ways I could improve it.   Oh, I've been using my grav/geo surveys as jump escort (haven't lost one yet).   

Code: [Select]

Resolution B class Destroyer Escort    7,000 tons     561 Crew     1170.96 BP      TCS 140  TH 420  EM 0
3000 km/s     Armour 7-32     Shields 0-0     Sensors 12/12/0/0     Damage Control Rating 2     PPV 20
Maint Life 1.8 Years     MSP 209    AFR 196%    IFR 2.7%    1YR 81    5YR 1210    Max Repair 210 MSP
Magazine 188    

Ion Engine E8 (7)    Power 60    Fuel Use 80%    Signature 60    Armour 0    Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 250,000 Litres    Range 80.4 billion km   (310 days at full power)

Size 1 Missile Launcher (20)    Missile Size 1    Rate of Fire 10
Missile Fire Control FC34-R1 (1)     Range 34.7m km    Resolution 1
Wasp V AMM (188)  Speed: 44,900 km/s   End: 1.8m    Range: 5m km   WH: 1    Size: 1    TH: 449 / 269 / 134

Active Search Sensor MR87-R160 (1)     GPS 10080     Range 87.7m km    Resolution 160
Active Search Sensor MR23-R1 (1)     GPS 210     Range 23.1m km    Resolution 1
Thermal Sensor TH2-12 (1)     Sensitivity 12     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  12m km
EM Detection Sensor EM2-12 (1)     Sensitivity 12     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  12m 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

Huh, I just noticed that my Ark Royals are much faster then my Resulotions.   mmmm.   Did I mention I've had the Resolutions from the start? :]

Code: [Select]

Ark Royal Mk.II class Missile Destroyer    6,950 tons     516 Crew     1202 BP      TCS 139  TH 720  EM 0
5179 km/s     Armour 8-32     Shields 0-0     Sensors 12/22/0/0     Damage Control Rating 2     PPV 32
Maint Life 2.33 Years     MSP 216    AFR 193%    IFR 2.7%    1YR 54    5YR 813    Max Repair 63 MSP
Magazine 265    

Magneto-plasma Drive E8 (9)    Power 80    Fuel Use 80%    Signature 80    Armour 0    Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 250,000 Litres    Range 80.9 billion km   (180 days at full power)

Size 4 Missile Launcher (50% Reduction) (16)    Missile Size 4    Rate of Fire 200
Missile Fire Control FC175-R160 (2)     Range 175.3m km    Resolution 160
Tiger IV ASM (66)  Speed: 24,900 km/s   End: 29.2m    Range: 43.7m km   WH: 6    Size: 4    TH: 199 / 119 / 59

Active Search Sensor MR87-R160 (1)     GPS 10080     Range 87.7m km    Resolution 160
Thermal Sensor TH2-12 (1)     Sensitivity 12     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  12m km
EM Detection Sensor EM2-22 (1)     Sensitivity 22     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  22m 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

PS.  I'm also thinking my next fleet will be these ships, but replacing all the missile launchers/magazines with box launchers (and tweaking other stuff).  :]

[Hawkeye]

Everything below is obviously IMO

Resolution B:

Only 1 MFC for your AMM launchers means, each DE can only engage a single enemy missile salvo per 5-sec tic.
This will probably not be a major problem, as long as you keep all 7 of them in a single fleet, but once you are forced to split your fleet up to cover several threats simultaneously it will become one. My suggestion would be to rip out some launchers for two additional MFCs.
They also carry 209 MSP while the largest piece of equipment (probably a sensor) would need 210 MSP to fix, meaning it can not be fixed, requiring a "return to base"
Upgrading to Magneto Plasma Drives will be expensive, but until you do, you could just as well kept Ion Drives in the Ark Royal.
Noticed the EM sensor seems to be quite a bit older than the one on the Ark Royal.

Ark Royal Mk. II:

Remove two engines to keep the fleet speed similar.
I am not a big fan of the reduced size launchers except for 25% (so you can still reload in the field) or the box launchers. IMO, you have two choises. Either obliterate the enemy with one huge salvo (25% or Box) or overwhealm his PD with a stream of salvos with as little time between salvos as possible (full-sized). Anything in between achieves neither the one nor the other.
Full sized launchers: Mag space for 10+ salvos as an absolute minimum
25% launchers: Mag space for 2 reloads
Box launches: No Mag space required, but needs to return to base for reloading
Given that your Resolutions seem to also serve the role of being the eyes of your fleet, you could loose the sensors (if the active isn´t all that large, personally I would keep it as a backup).

[Theokrat]

Resolution:

Your Active Search Sensor against missiles has a lower range than the associated firecontrolls. Since you cant fire at anything that you can not spot in the first place, this is suboptimal. Either get a bigger search sensor, or reduce the FC.

There is also no point in having the resolution-160 search sensor on board the AMM design. The ship cant fire at ships so far away anyway. Also if you stick with a AMM sensor on AMM ships there is little downside to cruize with this sensor activated all the time, since its emissions are very small. Conversely, if you keep the ASM sensor on board you could only turn on both or neither (the way the game works). Thus if you have sensors on, you can be spotted at 50 times (!) the distance by EM detectors.

[liq3 (OP)]

Ok, decided it's time to design some new ships (has nothing to do with the hive fleet I just found).  So, taking both of your advice into account. 

The 4 R20 fire controls on the Ark Royals are for the spoiler.  I've decided on a standard speed of at least 5000km/s, so they're both the same speed now.  :]

Code: [Select]

Ark Royal Mk.III class Missile Destroyer    7,000 tons     351 Crew     1216.4 BP      TCS 140  TH 720  EM 0
5142 km/s     Armour 8-32     Shields 0-0     Sensors 11/11/0/0     Damage Control Rating 2     PPV 48
Maint Life 3.03 Years     MSP 217    AFR 196%    IFR 2.7%    1YR 35    5YR 531    Max Repair 74 MSP
Magazine 320   

Magneto-plasma Drive E6 (9)    Power 80    Fuel Use 60%    Signature 80    Armour 0    Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 200,000 Litres    Range 85.7 billion km   (192 days at full power)

Size 4 Box Launcher (80)    Missile Size 4    Hangar Reload 30 minutes    MF Reload 5 hours
Missile Fire Control FC105-R160 (5)     Range 105.2m km    Resolution 160
Missile Fire Control FC24-R20 (4)     Range 24.8m km    Resolution 20
Tiger IV ASM (80)  Speed: 24,900 km/s   End: 29.2m    Range: 43.7m km   WH: 6    Size: 4    TH: 199 / 119 / 59

Active Search Sensor MR102-R160 (1)     GPS 11760     Range 102.3m km    Resolution 160
Thermal Sensor TH1-11 (1)     Sensitivity 11     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  11m km
EM Detection Sensor EM1-11 (1)     Sensitivity 11     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  11m 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

Also, that MR23-R1 Active on the resolution is 10HS.  >. > Thing is huge.  Need it for 2500k km R6msp range. 

Code: [Select]

Resolution Mk II class Destroyer Escort    7,000 tons     404 Crew     1398.4 BP      TCS 140  TH 720  EM 0
5142 km/s     Armour 8-32     Shields 0-0     Sensors 11/11/0/0     Damage Control Rating 2     PPV 37.5
Maint Life 3.5 Years     MSP 250    AFR 196%    IFR 2.7%    1YR 31    5YR 468    Max Repair 210 MSP
Magazine 250   

Magneto-plasma Drive E6 (9)    Power 80    Fuel Use 60%    Signature 80    Armour 0    Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 200,000 Litres    Range 85.7 billion km   (192 days at full power)

Size 1 Box Launcher (250)    Missile Size 1    Hangar Reload 7.5 minutes    MF Reload 1.2 hours
Missile Fire Control FC24-R1 (4)     Range 24.2m km    Resolution 1
Wasp V AMM (250)  Speed: 44,900 km/s   End: 1.8m    Range: 5m km   WH: 1    Size: 1    TH: 449 / 269 / 134

Active Search Sensor MR23-R1 (1)     GPS 210     Range 23.1m km    Resolution 1
Thermal Sensor TH1-11 (1)     Sensitivity 11     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  11m km
EM Detection Sensor EM1-11 (1)     Sensitivity 11     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  11m 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


[xeryon]

What I don't like is how few AMM's you carry.  BUT, if you are using Box launchers for your ASMs and now have to return to base to reload missiles after every single engagement the quantity of AMMs you carry isn't such a big deal.  I like to design more for the capacity of longer duration or multiple engagements before needing to return to repair and resupply.  To that affect I would increase the MSP supplies on each ship.  A lot more if you are like me, at least a little more even for your hit and run setup you have now.  If you start taking hits in the field with as few supplies as you are carrying you are going to be in a situation where a derelict ship is going to need to be left behind or ordered back to base before the battle is over.

[Theokrat]

If you can spot and engage incoming missiles at 2.5 million kilometers, you could also limit your AMMs to approximately this range. That would free up MSP for the engine and/or agility, increasing your ability to engage incoming missiles.

[liq3 (OP)]

If you can spot and engage incoming missiles at 2. 5 million kilometers, you could also limit your AMMs to approximately this range.  That would free up MSP for the engine and/or agility, increasing your ability to engage incoming missiles.

The range barley affects the hit chance (less then a 5% improvement) so I'm fine with wasting half it's fuel.  :] The last fight with these missiles shot down nearly- actually EVERY ASM they fired.  Their ASMs go 39,000km/s too so.  I will admit I waste a few on overkill (3v1 PD). 

What I don't like is how few AMM's you carry.   BUT, if you are using Box launchers for your ASMs and now have to return to base to reload missiles after every single engagement the quantity of AMMs you carry isn't such a big deal.   I like to design more for the capacity of longer duration or multiple engagements before needing to return to repair and resupply.   To that affect I would increase the MSP supplies on each ship.   A lot more if you are like me, at least a little more even for your hit and run setup you have now.   If you start taking hits in the field with as few supplies as you are carrying you are going to be in a situation where a derelict ship is going to need to be left behind or ordered back to base before the battle is over.

I agree.  Just my current game has been lots of small engagements (biggest was 4 ships, then 2, then later came back and killed 2 PDCs).  Seems my designs have evolved to work with the short range hit and run I'm doing.  Later if I get into a war with a NPR I may very well design longer range ships and fleets.

[Hawkeye]

I don´t realy see the point of AMM Box-launchers. I understand what you are saying re. small engagements in your game so far, but Box-Launcher AMMs simply don´t make a lot of sense to me no matter what kind of engagement you fight.

You can get more total AMMs for the same space with regular launcher + magazines and with several escorts it is very, very rare, that the limiting factor in your missile defense is the number of launch-tubes. Usually, it is the total number of AMMs available. Therefore I´d use regular launchers, say 15 with three MFCs and as much mag-space as possible.

xeryon´s point re. the box ASMs and having to return to base after a single fight anyway is valid, but I still don´t like it.

The additional range on the AMMs can come in handy against fighters/gunboats in an emergency, so I´d keep it.

You have res-20 MFCs on your Ark Royal, but no res-20 sensor. Yes, you can engage the spoiler race at 23mkm due to your AMM sensor, but still, a range 50mkm res-20 sensor should not be prohibitive large.
Personally, I try to fit sensors (and MFCs) with quite a bit extra range into ships, so they can take advantage of new missiles later on without much of a refit (also, longer ranged MFCs counter enemy ECM quite nicely).

[liq3 (OP)]

I don´t realy see the point of AMM Box-launchers.  I understand what you are saying re.  small engagements in your game so far, but Box-Launcher AMMs simply don´t make a lot of sense to me no matter what kind of engagement you fight.

You can get more total AMMs for the same space with regular launcher + magazines and with several escorts it is very, very rare, that the limiting factor in your missile defense is the number of launch-tubes.  Usually, it is the total number of AMMs available.  Therefore I´d use regular launchers, say 15 with three MFCs and as much mag-space as possible.

xeryon´s point re.  the box ASMs and having to return to base after a single fight anyway is valid, but I still don´t like it. 

The additional range on the AMMs can come in handy against fighters/gunboats in an emergency, so I´d keep it.

I did the math.  Using 37. 5HS on box AMM launchers for 250 AMMs.  With 15 normal launchers, I'd only get an extra 47 missiles, and that's from one massive HTK1 mag.  If they ever take internal damage they should only lose up to 3 launchers (and some other part). 

The only benefit I can see from full size launchers is being able to use colliers. . .  I could fit 500 (jump drive) to 1000 missiles on a collier. . .  Maybe not a bad idea.  I'll keep it in mind.  :]

You have res-20 MFCs on your Ark Royal, but no res-20 sensor.  Yes, you can engage the spoiler race at 23mkm due to your AMM sensor, but still, a range 50mkm res-20 sensor should not be prohibitive large.
Personally, I try to fit sensors (and MFCs) with quite a bit extra range into ships, so they can take advantage of new missiles later on without much of a refit (also, longer ranged MFCs counter enemy ECM quite nicely).

mmm, it'd be 5HS (the R20 active), that's 9 ASMs.   My sensor tech is quite far behind. . .  I should fix that.  I also never intend to field the Ark Royals by themselves.  They will ALWAYS have escorts.  It'd just be insanely dangerous otherwise. 

[Thiosk]

You don't need a magazine for box launchers?  If I read that correctly.  You have to go back to a planet to have a missile put back in the box, however.

I'd parrot the others and go EEK on the idea of AMM box launchers.  I'm sure you could make it work, but reloads make me a sad panda.

For big missiles, it can be helpful to run box launchers, some people like that.  The strategy is lovingly called Alpha Strike, where you basically figure out how you want to set it up so there is no way in heck that the aliens can actually hit every missile you put in, and the target is dead no matter what.  For main line ships, thats the advantage to box launchers-- you can fit a LOT more size 6 box launchers without magazines than full size 6 launchers with supporting magazines.

[Hawkeye]

I did the math.  Using 37. 5HS on box AMM launchers for 250 AMMs.  With 15 normal launchers, I'd only get an extra 47 missiles, and that's from one massive HTK1 mag.  If they ever take internal damage they should only lose up to 3 launchers (and some other part). 

Let´s see.
15 size-1 launchers are 15 HS, so 37.5 - 15 = 22.5
A rather low tech, efficiency 85% (RP cost total 7.000 for efficiency 75% + 80% + 85%) gives you a 1 HS, capacity 17 mag
17 x 22 (droping the 0.5 HS _and_ the 1 MFC less in my proposal) gives you 374 AMMs. Now a 50% increase in ammo seems to be quite a substantial improvement to me.

[Theokrat]

Indeed, boxed launched AMMs are not really worthwhile. On the one hand it curtails the total number of AMMs you can carry.

For ASM this still can be a bit of trade-off, as the number of missiles launched simultaneously can be important wot overwhelm enemy defences.

Not so for missiles, who are defenseless themselves, i.e. it does not matter much whether you engage them with one big salvo, or several smaller subsequent salvos. Indeed the later might be preferential as you can wait for the effect of the first salvo to reduce the overkill. It also means you can get away with fewer FCs, which can take up significant space for AMMs.

So, besides the total missiles carried around, the only thing important for AMM-launchers is how many missiles they can fire at an incoming salvo. Say you have 1 HS. That could be 6 box launchers, which could fire 6 AMMs at an incoming salvo. Or it could be 1 full sized launcher, which could fire every 10s. If it takes an enemy missile longer than 60 seconds to travel through your PD-zone, then in fact the full-sized launchers are superior even in respect to the ability to engage large incoming salvos. You have a range of 2.5m km, so if you are targeted by missiles traveling less than  41k km/s you are most definitively better of using full sized AMM launchers - even if you would only be concerned about countering a huge alpha strike of the enemy.

[Brian Neumann]

xeryon´s point re. the box ASMs and having to return to base after a single fight anyway is valid, but I still don´t like it.

If instead of box launchers you put in the 1/4 size slow reload you can rearm in the field.  While you won't get as many total missiles in a launch you can still pack in quite a few this way, and you do not need to return to a base to put the missiles back in your tubes.  This can be especially important for capital ships as you won't tend to have many planets with the facilities to maintain them.  If you can't maintain them then you can't reload them either (or at least the last time that I tried v5.4 or so.)

Brian

[liq3 (OP)]

Ok, I'm convinced, I'll switch over to normal sized AMM launchers once I have reload rate 6 (only gonna take about 2 years to research).  I'll post the designs up once I have them done. 

[TheDeadlyShoe]

It also means you can get away with fewer FCs, which can take up significant space for AMMs.

You don't necessarily need more FCs for an AMM box launcher setup, though it can be useful.

AMM box launchers do have a role in that its possible to enter into combats where the determining factor in missile interception is not magazine space but in burst fire capability, i.e. a relatively small battlegroup being assaulted by box launcher FACs.  Sensor technology/size is also a big factor - the longer range that you can see incoming missiles at, the less you need burst capability (since you can fire more salvos.)  I have on occasion had battlegroups perish with many AMMs in magazine simply because they didn't have enough launch capability. 

Generally speaking though, the consensus is correct - regular launchers are better for size 1 missiles, since thier fire rate results in very few situations where you can't dump missiles fast enough.