Mason Fighter design

[MoonDragon (OP)]

I've been toying with fighter design, and it turns out my lasers are way too big to slap on my fighters at this tech level. So, I ended up going with a mason cannon. Here's the final design:

Code: [Select]

Warrior class Fighter    480 tons     60 Crew     108.5 BP      TCS 9.6  TH 23.04  EM 0
10000 km/s     Armour 3-5     Shields 0-0     Sensors 1/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 0     PPV 4
Annual Failure Rate: 96%    IFR: 1.3%    Maint Capacity 0 MSP    Max Repair 32 MSP    Est Time: 0 Years

Lockheed InCoFu FTR Drive E300 (1)    Power 96    Fuel Use 3000%    Signature 23.04    Armour 0    Exp 25%
Fuel Capacity 10,000 Litres    Range 1.3 billion km   (34 hours at full power)

R9/C6 Meson Cannon (1)    Range 90,000km     TS: 10000 km/s     Power 6-6     RM 9    ROF 5        1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0
Magelan FTR FC S02 48-12000 (1)    Max Range: 96,000 km   TS: 12000 km/s     90 79 69 58 48 38 27 17 6 0
Siemens InCo Fusion Reactor Technology PB-1 AR-0 (1)     Total Power Output 6    Armour 0    Exp 5%

This design is classed as a military vessel for maintenance purposes
This design is classed as a fighter for production and combat purposes
One glaring issue is a lack of engineering facilities. Haven't researched those yet (small ones). I suppose I can offset that by slapping Maintenance module(s) onto a mothership. Mothership, or nearby AWACs ship would provide active sensors for the fighters.

Now for some general questions. Does this fighter make sense? Would it be useful? Is it missing anything obvious? I understand that masons ignore shields/armour. Does that mean that a swarm of these guys could tear a ship apart from inside, assuming they can get close enough? Would these guys make a reasonable missile defense? If I do not have missile tech developed, would fighters like this work as a means of chasing down an enemy with beam weapons? I have level 3 armour on these guys (basically padded them as close to 500 as I could with armour). Is that good, bad, stupid, smart?

[MoonDragon (OP)]

Does it make sense to slap an active sensor onto a fighter? Something like (extension of the above design):

Code: [Select]

Seeker class Fighter    455 tons     38 Crew     184.5 BP      TCS 9.1  TH 23.04  EM 0
10549 km/s     Armour 3-5     Shields 0-0     Sensors 1/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 0     PPV 0
Annual Failure Rate: 91%    IFR: 1.3%    Maint Capacity 0 MSP    Max Repair 105 MSP    Est Time: 0 Years

Lockheed InCoFu FTR Drive E300 (1)    Power 96    Fuel Use 3000%    Signature 23.04    Armour 0    Exp 25%
Fuel Capacity 10,000 Litres    Range 1.3 billion km   (34 hours at full power)

Engels Labs Active Search Sensor S21-R1 (1)     GPS 21     Range 210k km    Resolution 1
Engels Labs Active Search Sensor S105-R10 (1)     GPS 1050     Range 10.5m km    Resolution 10

This design is classed as a military vessel for maintenance purposes
This design is classed as a fighter for production and combat purposes

My reasoning being: the mothership can field large passive sensors. The active sensor fighter can keep station away from the mothership, to potentially draw any enemy fire to itself, rather than to the carrier. The carrier can be flanked by a couple of dedicated AMM frigates.

[waresky]

AM loving Fighter Bomber with "BOX Misisle Launchers" are more and more deadly.

The only trouble was "reload" on Motherboard waste time..but MIsisle FIghter r definely most deadly boat.

[Charlie Beeler]

I've been toying with fighter design, and it turns out my lasers are way too big to slap on my fighters at this tech level. So, I ended up going with a mason cannon. Here's the final design:

Code: [Select]

Warrior class Fighter    480 tons     60 Crew     108.5 BP      TCS 9.6  TH 23.04  EM 0
10000 km/s     Armour 3-5     Shields 0-0     Sensors 1/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 0     PPV 4
Annual Failure Rate: 96%    IFR: 1.3%    Maint Capacity 0 MSP    Max Repair 32 MSP    Est Time: 0 Years

Lockheed InCoFu FTR Drive E300 (1)    Power 96    Fuel Use 3000%    Signature 23.04    Armour 0    Exp 25%
Fuel Capacity 10,000 Litres    Range 1.3 billion km   (34 hours at full power)

R9/C6 Meson Cannon (1)    Range 90,000km     TS: 10000 km/s     Power 6-6     RM 9    ROF 5        1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0
Magelan FTR FC S02 48-12000 (1)    Max Range: 96,000 km   TS: 12000 km/s     90 79 69 58 48 38 27 17 6 0
Siemens InCo Fusion Reactor Technology PB-1 AR-0 (1)     Total Power Output 6    Armour 0    Exp 5%

This design is classed as a military vessel for maintenance purposes
This design is classed as a fighter for production and combat purposes
One glaring issue is a lack of engineering facilities. Haven't researched those yet (small ones). I suppose I can offset that by slapping Maintenance module(s) onto a mothership. Mothership, or nearby AWACs ship would provide active sensors for the fighters.

Now for some general questions. Does this fighter make sense? Would it be useful? Is it missing anything obvious? I understand that masons ignore shields/armour. Does that mean that a swarm of these guys could tear a ship apart from inside, assuming they can get close enough? Would these guys make a reasonable missile defense? If I do not have missile tech developed, would fighters like this work as a means of chasing down an enemy with beam weapons? I have level 3 armour on these guys (basically padded them as close to 500 as I could with armour). Is that good, bad, stupid, smart?

For a beam fighter this is not a bad design. Personally I rarely add armor over level 1 to fighters.  If you expect to have operation in a nebula then the armor makes sense.  Otherwise the more speed the better since it degrades the accuracy of in coming fire.

Based on the engine tech your using the missile intercept role is going to be iffy.  Your tracking speed is 10k and the missiles you can expect are going to be in excess of 30k.  For this role even fighters need turrets to truely be effective.  In my opinion, gunboats tend to be a little better choice for the detached intercept role.

Anti-shipping is going to have them well inside PD envelopes.  Large swarms of them will be effective though.  

Expect loses and plan resupply accordingly.  Currently the this means either returning to a population that has a stockpile or carriers dedicated to ferrying fresh fighters forward.

If you plan to have these fighters picket somewhere then the engineering will be needed.  Or if you plan regular long range sorties.  

A maintaince module on the mothership will normally be useless.  They only function when in orbit of a colony that has sufficient mined minerals on hand.

As you've already noted they will require another platform with active sensors to paint targets for them.  Not neccessarily a bad thing.

[Charlie Beeler]

Does it make sense to slap an active sensor onto a fighter? Something like (extension of the above design):

Code: [Select]

Seeker class Fighter    455 tons     38 Crew     184.5 BP      TCS 9.1  TH 23.04  EM 0
10549 km/s     Armour 3-5     Shields 0-0     Sensors 1/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 0     PPV 0
Annual Failure Rate: 91%    IFR: 1.3%    Maint Capacity 0 MSP    Max Repair 105 MSP    Est Time: 0 Years

Lockheed InCoFu FTR Drive E300 (1)    Power 96    Fuel Use 3000%    Signature 23.04    Armour 0    Exp 25%
Fuel Capacity 10,000 Litres    Range 1.3 billion km   (34 hours at full power)

Engels Labs Active Search Sensor S21-R1 (1)     GPS 21     Range 210k km    Resolution 1
Engels Labs Active Search Sensor S105-R10 (1)     GPS 1050     Range 10.5m km    Resolution 10

This design is classed as a military vessel for maintenance purposes
This design is classed as a fighter for production and combat purposes


My reasoning being: the mothership can field large passive sensors. The active sensor fighter can keep station away from the mothership, to potentially draw any enemy fire to itself, rather than to the carrier. The carrier can be flanked by a couple of dedicated AMM frigates.

This is a good start on a scout fighter.  

You got good actives for seeing missiles and fighters at useful ranges.  If your intention is to have a CSP (combat space patrol) who's job is missile and fighter intercept then your sensor mix is correct.  Detection of larger ships will be degraded because of the resolution choices.

[MoonDragon (OP)]

Thank you so much for the feedback, Charlie. It's very appreciated.

My sensor choices were limited by two aspects: size of fighters (therefore sensors), and the sensors I already had built. I suppose I could have researched sensors with the same antenna size, but larger resolution. I still can actually. So I guess I will. The trick is that, for now at least, I have no missiles. So I'd have to be close to shoot at things anyways.

[Paul]

If you're not set on making them fighters, you could use the gunboat engine and just make it about the size of a fighter. You can get faster small ships by doing that, plus they use 1/10th of the fuel of fighters. The downside is you'll need to use a small shipyard to manufacture them instead of the fighter factories. It'll also make them a bit larger, since the engines will be bigger - but the extra speed can be handy.

Just as an example, heres a 400 ton gunboat I use as a boarding ship:

Code: [Select]

Lightning class Assault Shuttle    400 tons     40 Crew     408 BP      TCS 8  TH 180  EM 0
93750 km/s     Armour 1-4     Shields 0-0     Sensors 1/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 0     PPV 0
Annual Failure Rate: 6%    IFR: 0.1%    Maint Capacity 128 MSP    Max Repair 375 MSP    Est Time: 2.78 Years
Drop Capacity: 1 Company    

GC-AM750 GB Drive E20 (1)    Power 750    Fuel Use 200%    Signature 180    Armour 0    Exp 105%
Fuel Capacity 20,000 Litres    Range 45.0 billion km   (5 days at full power)

This design is classed as a military vessel for maintenance purposes
Heres the same exact design with a fighter engine:

Code: [Select]

Lightning class Assault Shuttle    195 tons     20 Crew     105.5 BP      TCS 3.9  TH 54  EM 0
57692 km/s     Armour 1-2     Shields 0-0     Sensors 1/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 0     PPV 0
Annual Failure Rate: 1%    IFR: 0%    Maint Capacity 68 MSP    Max Repair 75 MSP    Est Time: 10.42 Years
Drop Capacity: 1 Company    

GC-AM225 FTR Drive E200 (1)    Power 225    Fuel Use 2000%    Signature 54    Armour 0    Exp 175%
Fuel Capacity 20,000 Litres    Range 9.2 billion km   (44 hours at full power)

This design is classed as a military vessel for maintenance purposes
This design is classed as a fighter for production and combat purposes

The gunboat is double the size, but goes significantly faster and uses about 1/5th the fuel. This is at a really high tech level (my game has been going for about 40 years) but you can get a similar boost at low tech levels.

[waresky]

My Carrier got Maintenance Module for overhaul fighters or Parassites..AND..r perfectly functioning.

WHY there all "think" are useless???

Am check my Carrier's parassites "maintenance times" and WHEN are onboard this LOWERED to ZERO..Carrier's Spares Parts are use for parassites service routine maintenance.

Please,..questioning to STEVE..there r some mistakes
Edit: AND am use Carrier for Long Survey service..so my Carriers are VERY far from any planetary "orbit"..are alone out Empires yard or maintenancing services..

[ZimRathbone]

My Carrier got Maintenance Module for overhaul fighters or Parassites..AND..r perfectly functioning.

WHY there all "think" are useless???

Am check my Carrier's parassites "maintenance times" and WHEN are onboard this LOWERED to ZERO..Carrier's Spares Parts are use for parassites service routine maintenance.

Please,..questioning to STEVE..there r some mistakes
Edit: AND am use Carrier for Long Survey service..so my Carriers are VERY far from any planetary "orbit"..are alone out Empires yard or maintenancing services..

I dont think the Maintenance Module does anything (directly anyway) for the embarked fighters  - nor is it supposed to.

None of my carriers have the maintenanace module, only Hangar Bays and Engineering systems, and all of the fighters aboard never suffer maint failures.  When they are out on flight they do occasionaly.  I once had a strike go in against a precursor fleet and just before they were about to launch it must have hit a maintenance check cause six out of eight had a variety of malfunctions (mainly box launchers IIRC).  This was before I started including fighter sized engineering rooms on all the fighters so i lost a fair amount of firepower  (the two fighters that lost their engines would have been stuffed anyway)

[Charlie Beeler]

Maintenance modules function as mobile maintenance facilities.  They still require a colony with minerals already mined to function.  They(modules) do not function when underway.

All ships suspend advancing the service clocks while embarked in hangers and boat bays.  Currently there is no function for motherships to perform overhauls of any embarked ships or smallcraft, that is a function of operational maintenance facilities and modules only.

That is why maintenance modules on combat vessels are a waste of valuble mass.  They are useful for dedicated ships who's purpose is the establishment of forward support bases.

[ShadoCat]

Maintenance modules function as mobile maintenance facilities.  They still require a colony with minerals already mined to function.  They(modules) do not function when underway.

I've never tried it but does that mean that a ship with sufficient maintenance modules and a cargo bay to hold minerals can go to any planet that the player sets to "colony", offload the minerals and then service ships?

[Brian Neumann]

Maintenance modules function as mobile maintenance facilities.  They still require a colony with minerals already mined to function.  They(modules) do not function when underway.

I've never tried it but does that mean that a ship with sufficient maintenance modules and a cargo bay to hold minerals can go to any planet that the player sets to "colony", offload the minerals and then service ships?

The ships will not deteriorate, they will not get their clocks reversed however.  Basically it allows for setting up a fleet base someplace where you can not put colonists.  Their will be no repair function, but the ships stationed there will not fall apart over time, and there will be no time added to thier clock while they are with the modules.  This all assumes that there are enough modules to maintain the ship.  If you are even one module short, then they will have no effect.

Brian

[Vanigo]

The gunboat is double the size, but goes significantly faster and uses about 1/5th the fuel. This is at a really high tech level (my game has been going for about 40 years) but you can get a similar boost at low tech levels.

40 years puts you at a really high tech level? I must be doing something dreadfully wrong. Is this with the default 500m starting population?

[Paul]

I started with 1 billion on that game, so I guess double the initial start

I also invested heavily in research - building lots and lots of research centers. And I kept a good scientist on researching the research rate tech for years, which boosted me up.

[Father Tim]

As an aside, it takes about 35 years to grow/build everything you get from doubling the starting pop.  SO think of it more as a 75-80 year game.