Oh cool, I remember the last one of these.
Comments:
Fleet 1: Missile Artillery
3176 total mag space, not counting reloads.
1178+1178+780+1500 = 4636 total warhead, NCR.
This fleet...is actually pretty good, not counting the mistake with the MIRV setup.
I'm a little confused as to why the ships are so big, given that you could easily separate the different sized launchers. Fire control redundancy is generally commendable, but the fleet is pretty much wrecked anyway when the big sensors get broken, as the ships don't have enough MSP for repairs. It's 16% of allowed BP spent on SY size, and I can't see the gain.
With only a factor of 12.5 between your sensor sizes, I'd have consolidated those, but that's more in the realm of personal preference. I play with small sized missile ships a lot, so I tend to use massive fighter res sensors on any fleets without significant missile defense. When I think twice I realize you need at least two sensors to hold two JPs, duh.
I bet I could make a bunch small optimizations, but I'm finicky. I like this fleet anyway.
Fleet 2: Beam Fighters
This is a very interesting fleet. I would have bet on it getting utterly ruined by the missile artillery, but the reinforcements seem to make it usable. Generally speaking, beam fighters at this tech and with these restrictions aren't good. All you get from the fighter size is a cheaper BFC and no bridge. Fast hangar carried ships still have potential, but a larger size would tend to be better. With the reinforcement rules, fighters become clearly superior. Completely different from anything I would have made, and yet interesting.
Fleet 3: Stealth Missiles
1820 total mag space, NCR.
1630+204 = 1834 total warhead.
Frankly, stealth at this tech level is a gigantic waste. Unless you outright can't fit the components, just use smaller ships. It still has some potential, but that's mostly because range focused missile ships are scary. With so little firepower, this is going to have a lot of trouble against anything designed to survive more forceful missile fleets. Maybe it'll win on tiebreakers?
Fleet 4: FRFs
Here we go. This is the fast beam fleet archtype, and it's not bad. I'll save the rest of my commentary.
Fleet 5: FAC missiles.
Total mag space: 1959, NC planet reloads.
Warhead: 1070+1284 = 2354 NC planet reloads.
This is fun. It'll probably win any time it goes to tiebreaker, and it's pretty well designed. It probably doesn't have enough firepower to handle this arena, but you can't do much about that without changing the fleet drastically. I really would have differentiated the scouts by giving one of them a big EM sensor though. Sensitivity 22 just isn't enough to spot an anti-fighter sensor before you're in range. That would cost less than 1k RP, and the warning would prevent any major losses.
Fleet 6: Tractors
Um, IIRC tractors were changed so that you can't link more than two ships together at a time. Have you tested this? If it works, it's an okay slow beam fleet. Not much else to say really.
Fleet 7: Minelayers
1756 total magazine space, NCR.
1120+1248+480 = 2848 total warhead, NCR.
My gut reaction is that this sucks. No ability to survive missile fire, and not enough missiles of its own to destroy fleets with heavy defenses. A second look, and it seems like it'll actually do okay in this arena. A third look, and I see that the fighter "mines" are useless after a month. If a fleet manages to avoid getting utterly destroyed, the follow up probably won't go well for the minelayers. I look forward to seeing the results.
Fleet 8: Beam Leviathans
:/
This type of fleet relies on brute force to win, and I think it doesn't have enough. Also, CIWS and ECM weird me out.
Just for fun, this is the fleet I would make: Fast Heavy
The principle is that you only need one beam cruiser to hold a jump point. This is a good thing, because any beam fleet trying to close in on a decent missile fleet is going to take damage. With the tech and requirements set up the way that they are, high speed made more sense for damage absorbency. ...It basically ended up being a fast rail. I think a higher level of drive tech is worthwhile here, even though it made my RP budget really tight. Then I used a really large drive to improve fuel efficiency. I also went for microwaves instead of heavy railguns. Microwaves are far nastier against anything without shields, and they still do three damage to shields, even at max range. For a mid-range weapon system on really fast ships, I think it's the best choice. Didn't quite turn out as I hoped, but I think it's a pretty good demonstration of what brute force can do.
Tactics: Detach tankers. Leave half behind the JP, hide half in the system. Leave high res sensors off unless trying to find an enemy that dropped their own active sensors. Claim opposing JP. Send part of remaining fleet back to claim own JP after a month of waiting or after all possible systems have been repaired, whichever takes longer. In combat, stay at edge of own microwave range (90k km) until everything electronic is thoroughly fried. Disperse the microwave fire unless opponents are obviously shielded. Kill.
Production Tech:
Construction [14] Fuel [12]
Order of Battle:
5x Hurk Cruiser (925.67 BP each after fuel+discounts)
1x Hurk 10 Cruiser
1x Hurk 100 Cruiser
1x Hurk EM Cruiser
8x Fwoosh 4 (161.55 BP each after fuel+discounts)
[300 BP in SY expansion]
Hurk class Cruiser 6 250 tons 176 Crew 1272.6 BP TCS 125 TH 1250 EM 0
10000 km/s Armour 8-30 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 2 PPV 17
Maint Life 2.24 Years MSP 1318 AFR 125% IFR 1.7% 1YR 354 5YR 5304 Max Repair 625 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 6 months Spare Berths 0
Cryogenic Berths 200
1250 EP Internal Fusion Drive (1) Power 1250 Fuel Use 61.14% Signature 1250 Exp 12%
Fuel Capacity 100 000 Litres Range 4.7 billion km (5 days at full power)
R9/C3 High Power Microwave (2) Range 90 000km TS: 10000 km/s Power 6-3 RM 9 ROF 10 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0
10cm Railgun V1/C3 (3x4) Range 10 000km TS: 10000 km/s Power 3-3 RM 1 ROF 5 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Fire Control S02 24-12000 (1) Max Range: 48 000 km TS: 12000 km/s 79 58 38 17 0 0 0 0 0 0
Fire Control S02 96-3000 (1) Max Range: 192 000 km TS: 3000 km/s 95 90 84 79 74 69 64 58 53 48
Tokamak Fusion Reactor Technology PB-1 (19) Total Power Output 15.2 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Active Search Sensor MR2-R1 (1) GPS 40 Range 2.4m km MCR 261k km Resolution 1
This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
Main line cruiser. 1x maint storage bay, 2x eng spaces, 1x small eng space. Hurk 10 and Hurk 100 have those sensor resolutions respectively, with no other changes. Hurk EM changes the sensor to a size 3.75 EM, and switches the cyro for a size 1 res 1 active.
Fwoosh 4 class Oiler 800 tons 4 Crew 95.5 BP TCS 16 TH 30 EM 0
1875 km/s Armour 1-7 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 0 PPV 0
Maint Life 10.73 Years MSP 37 AFR 10% IFR 0.1% 1YR 1 5YR 9 Max Repair 8 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 6 months Spare Berths 1
30 EP Internal Fusion Drive (1) Power 30 Fuel Use 12% Signature 30 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 560 000 Litres Range 1050.0 billion km (6481 days at full power)
This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
2x large fuel, 1x fuel, 1x small fuel, small eng.
Tech
8k: Construction 14
8k: Mining 14
3k Fuel 12
7.5k: Composite armour
6k: 15 cm microwave
6k: Microwave range 3
2k: Small eng section
1k: large fuel section
7k: Fuel consumption 0.7
120k: Internal fusion drive
1k: Maximum engine power modifier x1.25
6k: Capacitor recharge 3
6k: BFC range 24,000
6k: FCSR 3000 km/s
2k: EM 6
=189,500 RP for techs
1,200: R9/C3 High Power Microwave
300: 10cm Railgun V1/C3
6,250: 1250EP Internal Fusion Drive (size 50, EPM 1.25)
75: 30 EP Internal Fusion Drive (size 3, EPM 0.5)
400: Active Search Sensor MR2-R1 (size 4, res 1)
400: Active Search Sensor MR7-R10 (size 4, res 10)
400: Active Search Sensor MR24-R100 (size 4, res 100)
100: Active Search Sensor MR0-R1 (size 1, res 1)
220: EM Detection Sensor EM3.75-22.5 (size 3.75)
430: Fire Control S02 24-12000 (4x speed, 1x range)
430: Fire Control S02 96-3000 (1x speed, 4x range)
=295 RP left over
Predictions:
Fleet 1:
Beats 2, 4, 7, 8. 8 is assuming it concentrates fire, because CIWS and shields really mess with distributed fire.
Loses to 3, 5
6. I'd weight it towards a win, but it depends on targets I guess.
Fleet 2:
Beats: 4, 6 go go microwaves.
Loses: 3, 5? Not entirely confident. I think 5 is going to do better than 3 though.
Loses 8. It could pull a win if 8 splits its fleet, but since tiebreaker goes to 8 after destroying some of the reinforcements, I'm not sure that'll happen.
Loses 7. Not enough defense to survive the mines.
Fleet 3:
Loses 4. Can't overcome the PD effectively.
Beats 5. Slightly better range ends up counting for all. 5 closes to range, fires, survives the first few waves of missiles, then goes boom.
Loses 6. Again, not enough firepower.
Loses 7. AMMs wreck the traditional mines, but loses the range battle to the fighter mines. Could win if it somehow knew to avoid where the mines were, but it probably doesn't.
Loses 8. Not enough firepower.
Fleet 4:
Loses 5? It takes a whole lot of damage anyway. The fast scouts could be the saviors, except they probably die to AMMs.
Beats 6. Hangs out at 40k km and dominates.
Beats 7. At 5s timestep and perfect crew, it should be able to avoid running into the mines, and the fig-mines can't do enough damage on their own. Loses if it somehow hits the minefield straight on. Remember that a single ship will empty a full minefield, because mines aren't smart.
Beats 8? 48 guns vs 40, and 72% accuracy vs 44, vs about 1200 total defense vs 800. Um, it seems pretty close. Could lose if they headed into the range of the high-speed FC.
Fleet 5:
Loses to 6 I think. Does some damage, but still not enough.
Loses to 7. AMMs beat mines, still doesn't know how to dodge the fighter mines.
Should beat 8 unless it spreads fire.
Fleet 6:
Not sure about 7. Depends on if the tractor chaining works I think.
Same with 8. Can't do enough damage at long range to break the shield :p. All the fleet at once would beat 8, but... yeah.
Fleet 7:
Depends on if its mines get shot down by lasers. At the given deployment range, should happen, so loss.
None of your fleets seem to really dominate. Interesting.
Oh, apologies for never getting the orders in for that old version of this. I swear I wrote them out...