Aurora 4x
C# Aurora => General Discussion => Topic started by: jscott991 on October 19, 2023, 01:57:55 PM
-
I'm about 20+ years into my restart and I think I've perused enough tips, reviews, guides, and my old posts here to ask if I'm the right track designing warships.
This is my current basic warship design using my top techs (I think). I have smaller ships that I'm using, but they are built using the same principles just scaled down. Oh, ignore the high deployment time. This cruiser design was originally being used to picket outer systems that didn't have a colony within easy range. My other warships are all 12 month deployments.
Is this an okay design? I have almost zero experience at combat in Aurora, preferring almost to play it as an empire simulator rather than a wargame, so I have no idea how fast or long ranged NPR ships tend to be.
Allegiant II class Light Cruiser 11,772 tons 286 Crew 2,062.7 BP TCS 235 TH 1,440 EM 1,500
6116 km/s Armour 3-46 Shields 50-375 HTK 100 Sensors 8/11/0/0 DCR 2 PPV 50.64
Maint Life 0.58 Years MSP 219 AFR 554% IFR 7.7% 1YR 379 5YR 5,686 Max Repair 136.8 MSP
Commander Control Rating 1 BRG
Intended Deployment Time: 24 months Morale Check Required
Magneto-plasma Drive EP160.00 (9) Power 1440 Fuel Use 50.0% Signature 160 Explosion 10%
Fuel Capacity 1,000,000 Litres Range 30.6 billion km (57 days at full power)
Delta S25 / R375 Shields (2) Recharge Time 375 seconds (0.1 per second)
20cm C5 Far Ultraviolet Laser (2) Range 256,000km TS: 6,116 km/s Power 10-5 RM 50,000 km ROF 10
Twin 15.0cm C5 Far Ultraviolet Laser Turret (3x2) Range 256,000km TS: 20000 km/s Power 12-10 RM 50,000 km ROF 10
Beam Fire Control R256-TS3000 (1) Max Range: 256,000 km TS: 3,000 km/s 72 69 66 63 60 57 54 52 49 46
PD Beam R64-TS12000 Beam Fire Control R64-TS12000 (1) Max Range: 64,000 km TS: 12,000 km/s 84 69 53 38 22 6 0 0 0 0
Tokamak Fusion Reactor R8 (7) Total Power Output 56 Exp 5%
Active Search Sensor AS29-R100 (1) GPS 1600 Range 29.6m km Resolution 100
Active Search Sensor AS6-R1 (1) GPS 16 Range 6.4m km MCR 574.5k km Resolution 1
Thermal Sensor TH1.0-8.0 (1) Sensitivity 8 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 22.4m km
EM Sensor EM1.0-11.0 (1) Sensitivity 11 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 26.2m km
ECM 10
This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
This design is classed as a Warship for auto-assignment purposes
-
So couple of things
1. I would up the armor to at least 4 if not higher. that way it can resist a hit from a strength 9 missile and still have at least a little armor left over
2. would up the maintenance life to at least 1 year.
other thoughts:
I'm assuming that the turreted 15 cm lasers are meant to double as point defense. The problem there is that I know of few missile volleys that are only 6 missiles in size. I'm all for making this decision for Role Play reasons (something like "the imperial navy mandates all cruisers have a PD capacity of at least six"), but if you are looking for pure effectiveness I would probably put lasers of all one size no turrets and beef up the other defenses. You'll be able to fit more weapons that way.
With those changes it's not a bad ship. It won't be single handedly winning wars, but would be a perfectly good poor bloody infantry of the navy.
-
Thanks!
On the point defense question, if I'm not mistaken, Gauss Cannons are the preferred PD system, but I forgot to develop them and am crashing that line of tech at the moment. I will pull the laser PDs off ships when I have the Gauss ready.
-
Looks decent, i'd repeat the maint comment (add more engineering sections).
I would recommend an accompanying AWACS type ship (like a flying sensor). Might also be advisable to go to a higher engine boost factor if you can, since its a beam ship so its going to need to race through an engagement envelope. 6000km/s isnt bad for MPD tech level but its also a beam ship.
I will pull the laser PDs off ships when I have the Gauss ready.
I usually go for a dedicated PD ship personally.
-
My biggest question in this game is how fast beam ships should be at each engine tech level.
I read somewhere that if you dedicate about 40% of total space to engines, you should be faster than most NPR ships. So that's how I've been designing beam ships.
-
To be honest it kindof depends on the design doctrine the AIs you are facing go for, which afaik has been semi-random for a while now. I dont know for a fact if the target fleet speed/engine% is randomized, but it probably is. For beam ships you mainly just want to be much faster than your intended targets. I would say its not unreasonable for a beam ship to be even 50% engine mass and maximum engine boost factor.
I would say 5000-6000km/s is kindof normal speed for MPD level (again kindof subjective), but you might want to even gun for 10,000km/s or more for a beam pursuit ship. Probably would need to sacrifice fuel range to do that.
e: if you have AIs with like 3000km/s ships then your speed is probably fine, for instance
-
I've only ever fought one NPR. It was in my previous 110+ year game. It was an NPR whose homeworld, for some reason, was not compatible with it, so it was dying when I encountered it. My ships were MUCH faster so I learned nothing.
I've heard that the bug that caused created NPRs to have homeworlds that were hostile to them has been fixed, so I probably won't encounter that again.
-
I would say its a little dangerous to be building a fleet with no enemy in mind, but if you want to hedge on a hypothetical enemy you should emphasize speed as much as possible over firepower and fuel range. You could allow the fuel range to decay to even 3-5bkm (which might happen rather rapidly with no other design changes at high engine boost factor) and have a very fast ship that has a much lower chance of being out-raced (even at the same tech level, NPRs tend not to make really extreme designs).
In other words, I'd say at a baseline try to get as much engine boost tech as you reasonably can (like at least 4x imo but you can keep going) and then shoot for like 50% engine mass. Worst case scenario you encounter a lower tech enemy instead and wasted money on excess engines/fuel burn but at least they cant outrun you.
Its worth noting if the game spawns an NPR in a newly explored system, it will derive its tech levels off of your own (i tend to turn that off).
As a stopgap you could build against whatever your max current engine boost factor is, maybe research a few easy techs first if the first levels are missing.
-
Okay, so running through the list here...
11,772 tons
6116 km/s
These are the most serious problems with the design and I expect you to rectify them immediately. If there are not at least two zeroes at the end of each of these numbers you are playing the game wrong and will be shot out of a railgun forthwith. >:(
That said for MP tech it is a reasonable speed for a beam ship.
Armour 3-46 Shields 50-375
Armor should be thicker. A beam warship must expect to engage in close-range exchanges of fire and take hits, so you need the armor to do so. Shields are okay but could be better - you need to develop the larger size techs, as shield efficiency scales with Size^(3/2) so larger shield generators are always better as long as they will fit on your ship.
Maint Life 0.58 Years MSP 219 AFR 554% IFR 7.7%
This is going to be a big problem because your ship will probably explode from engine failure before it even sniffs that 24-month deployment time. As a general rule, Maint Life > Deployment Time > Fuel Endurance unless you have a good reason to do otherwise. Fuel endurance is the shortest because a ship may hold position on-station. Crew deployment is in the middle since it is easily handled at any populated colony. Maint life is the longest since maintenance failures are the biggest threat to your ship, and maintenance supplies are more expensive and logistically-demanding than having 10,000 people on a planet somewhere.
Commander Control Rating 1 BRG
An Auxiliary Control is a good addition to most large warships - cheap to research, small and cheap to add to a ship, good to give lower-level commanders jobs, and helps boost crew training on new ships.
Magneto-plasma Drive EP160.00 (9) Power 1440 Fuel Use 50.0% Signature 160 Explosion 10%
Consider using fewer, larger engines to achieve the same total engine power. Fuel efficiency scales with the inverse SQRT of engine size, so if you used, e.g., three size-30 engines here you would cut fuel consumption by over 40%. There is some benefit to using more, smaller engines in terms of hits-to-kill but I usually don't find this as compelling as fuel efficiency improvements - enough to use 3-4 engines instead of 2, but not enough to use 9 engines instead of 3.
20cm C5 Far Ultraviolet Laser (2) Range 256,000km TS: 6,116 km/s Power 10-5 RM 50,000 km ROF 10
Beam Fire Control R256-TS3000 (1) Max Range: 256,000 km TS: 3,000 km/s 72 69 66 63 60 57 54 52 49 46
This is not enough lasers to seriously threaten anything larger than a shuttlecraft. The BFC tracking speed is too slow and should match the ship speed if you want to have good hit rates.
Twin 15.0cm C5 Far Ultraviolet Laser Turret (3x2) Range 256,000km TS: 20000 km/s Power 12-10 RM 50,000 km ROF 10
PD Beam R64-TS12000 Beam Fire Control R64-TS12000 (1) Max Range: 64,000 km TS: 12,000 km/s 84 69 53 38 22 6 0 0 0 0
These lasers lack a purpose. 15cm lasers are too large and (until Capacitor Level 6) fire too slow to be good point defense, but these are too small to be main battery weapons when you could have more 20cm lasers instead, which is what I would recommend here. Also, note that you can make the lasers cheaper by using a lower capacitor tech level and still getting the same ROF.
BFC looks fine for the tech level, although your BFC techs are underdeveloped for the MP Drive/20cm Laser tech level.
Sensors look fine.
I would say the main problems with the design are (1) lack of firepower, (2) poor maintenance life/low engineering capacity, and (3) weak passive defenses (armor/shields). I will also restate that 15cm lasers are not really good for point defense as 10cm lasers work fine and are smaller + cheaper. Maybe this will change in 2.2 but for now it is not optimal.
I read somewhere that if you dedicate about 40% of total space to engines, you should be faster than most NPR ships. So that's how I've been designing beam ships.
This is a reasonable rule of thumb. You can go lower for missile or carrier-based fleets, I like 32% as it tends to give nice round numbers.
-
For a new player and at low-to-mid tech levels, it is generally advisable to build a fleet of specialist ships instead of trying to solve the Riddle of Awesome General Purpose Ship That Handles Anything The Screenwriters Can Imagine, aka Enterprise from Star Trek.
So your fleet should have a dedicated sensor/command ship, a dedicated PD ship and a dedicated beam combat ship (slugger). There are multiple ways which to achieve this goal, for example building a jump-tanker with a hangar and loads of MSP that can send a couple of sensor scout-fighters (think of AWACS) while also enabling supply of the other ships and jump capability and rounded out by the largest passive sensors you can achieve. That way you can leave it behind at the JP while the scout(s) go ahead to scout for the fighting ships.
A dedicated PD ship should only have resolution-1 active sensor and then either a ton of 100mm railguns or a bunch of gauss turrets. It's BFC should be as high as you can make it.
The battleships need to be fast, well shielded & armoured, and have lot of weapons to really achieve a mission kill on their targets ASAP. The longer a fight takes, the more MSP your guns will eat and the more chances there are for the enemy guns to chew up your ships.
A ship that tries to do all three roles is almost always inferior to its specialist cousins and, especially for new players, there is a huge risk of wasting tonnage by putting a little bit of everything on it, like you're making the space navy equivalent of potpourri. I'm guilty of it myself often enough! So yeah, I'd scrap that ship completely and go back to the drawing board, as sad as that is.
-
I wouldn't necessarily totally scrap it, but building on the jump tanker thing a bit, afaik you can make a big commercial hangar ship for cheap that can ferry military ships to save on fuel. It cant do maintenance but it can be worth it because the fuel bill can really hurt once these things start flying around regularly.
-
Allegiant II class Light Cruiser 11,772 tons 286 Crew 2,062.7 BP TCS 235 TH 1,440 EM 1,500
6116 km/s Armour 3-46 Shields 50-375 HTK 100 Sensors 8/11/0/0 DCR 2 PPV 50.64
Maint Life 0.58 Years MSP 219 AFR 554% IFR 7.7% 1YR 379 5YR 5,686 Max Repair 136.8 MSP
Commander Control Rating 1 BRG
Intended Deployment Time: 24 months Morale Check Required
Magneto-plasma Drive EP160.00 (9) Power 1440 Fuel Use 50.0% Signature 160 Explosion 10%
Fuel Capacity 1,000,000 Litres Range 30.6 billion km (57 days at full power)
Delta S25 / R375 Shields (2) Recharge Time 375 seconds (0.1 per second)
20cm C5 Far Ultraviolet Laser (2) Range 256,000km TS: 6,116 km/s Power 10-5 RM 50,000 km ROF 10
Twin 15.0cm C5 Far Ultraviolet Laser Turret (3x2) Range 256,000km TS: 20000 km/s Power 12-10 RM 50,000 km ROF 10
Beam Fire Control R256-TS3000 (1) Max Range: 256,000 km TS: 3,000 km/s 72 69 66 63 60 57 54 52 49 46
PD Beam R64-TS12000 Beam Fire Control R64-TS12000 (1) Max Range: 64,000 km TS: 12,000 km/s 84 69 53 38 22 6 0 0 0 0
Tokamak Fusion Reactor R8 (7) Total Power Output 56 Exp 5%
Active Search Sensor AS29-R100 (1) GPS 1600 Range 29.6m km Resolution 100
Active Search Sensor AS6-R1 (1) GPS 16 Range 6.4m km MCR 574.5k km Resolution 1
Thermal Sensor TH1.0-8.0 (1) Sensitivity 8 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 22.4m km
EM Sensor EM1.0-11.0 (1) Sensitivity 11 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 26.2m km
ECM 10
This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
This design is classed as a Warship for auto-assignment purposes
I didn't look too closely but I did see one major flaw, the tonnage is 11,772, a non round number. You can massively improve your design by making it a round number. I would like to suggest adding more MSP and engineering spaces, beam weapons need more MSP generally since they can suffer breakdowns. 12K tons is much nicer than 11,772 tons. Speed and armour might be a little light for a beam ship but don't quote me on that last one.
-
Thank you everyone. A lot to chew on in the overnight posts.
I use stable jump points so I don't use jump tenders or jump engines. Also, I am unlikely to use fighters in place in starships (just not any fun).
But I will get on making the rest of these changes.
Just out of curiosity, why does the tonnage need to be a round number? What's the advantage? And isn't that kind of annoying to achieve (it must take a lot of trial and error to find the components that end in a zero).
-
There is no reason for round numbers. Except OCD . All my ships have round numbers usually viaadding very small fuel tanks toget the size right, speed I live with although it will normally be the same across the fleet
-
There is no reason for round numbers. Except OCD . All my ships have round numbers usually viaadding very small fuel tanks toget the size right, speed I live with although it will normally be the same across the fleet
The satisfaction of round numbers? A flat surface? A clean room? An orderly house?
-
There is no reason for round numbers. Except OCD . All my ships have round numbers usually viaadding very small fuel tanks toget the size right, speed I live with although it will normally be the same across the fleet
The satisfaction of round numbers? A flat surface? A clean room? An orderly house?
Yeah it doesn't hurt having a little extra engineering space and/or MSP storage to get you to exactly 10,000t (or whatever). If the Maint life is a little over the intended mission duration, then you'll just have a little fewer maintenance failures and more flexibility ;D
-
A dedicated PD ship should only have resolution-1 active sensor and then either a ton of 100mm railguns or a bunch of gauss turrets. It's BFC should be as high as you can make it.
How many Gauss turrets does a PD ship need to be effective? People are poo-pooing two laser turrets as being worthless, but from what I can see an 11,000 tonne ship can maybe mount 3-4 Gauss turrets. Is that enough?
-
There's no such thing as 'enough' in my experience. It's all a set of tradeoffs between different aspects of a layered defense and what enemy you're facing. But Gauss turrets are just way more effective than laser turrets, especially laser turrets at aren't minimum size lasers, most of the time. The PD Turret calculator can be useful to see how much PD performance per ton you're giving up to have your dual-purpose laser turrets:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1gJo3MI1vCu2z3Wa7nIpfz6daAqTodR_m12pESfXEH9Y/edit?usp=sharing
-
How many Gauss turrets does a PD ship need to be effective? People are poo-pooing two laser turrets as being worthless, but from what I can see an 11,000 tonne ship can maybe mount 3-4 Gauss turrets. Is that enough?
"Enough" really depends on what your fleet composition is. 4 Gauss turrets per 12,000-ton escort is enough if your fleet has enough of those escorts to handle an enemy missile attack. For a single ship of this size, 4 full-size Gauss turrets is probably a good amount. I usually prefer half-size Gauss cannons to mitigate salvo overkill effects but this is a fairly minor consideration.
-
In my opinion a serious design should be created out of what you need not some rudimentary template, that is just inefficient and overall very expensive in the long run. There is usually not even a need for large combat ships unless you have a known enemy to combat. Once you have an enemy you need to build the ship around what you know about them.
So the first design should be more cantered around sensors and defences not how you most efficiently can kill stuff.
Speed is a double edged sword... it is super expensive to have allot of speed so you should only have as much speed as you need depending on what you know about he enemy.
You need to have an overarching operational and strategic goal or doctrine in mind when you build any type of ship. How man different shipyards do you intend to dedicate to the different designs you want to make etc...
When it comes to the specific ship I must say that expected maintenance life must be higher than deployment in almost all cases. It should be quite rare that deployment is more important than maintenance time. It generally is much easier to rest the crew or find spots with populations or a recreation module than enough maintenance modules for a number of ships. When you deploy the ship you really don't want to end up with low supplies at the wrong time.
In general I find the discussion on if you should use laser or gauss are completely irrelevant. It is perfectly OK to use turreted laser if you want them in a dual role, lasers are not that bad. But if pure PD is the point then use gauss if you have it, but it is not wrong to also have turreted lasers either. Depending on the difference of the ships speed and you current tracking technology it can be more or less useful with turreted lasers or not. If you tracking technology is 3000km/s and your speed is 6000km/s it might not be that useful with a turreted laser but rather two regular lasers instead for example. In any way this is all very relative.
Speed is also as I said relative... you should not use more speed than what the situation requires as it is very expensive both in resources and fleet tonnage. If you use a purely beam oriented fleet you are likely forced to spend a big portion of the fleet on speed but if you don't then sensors and offensive firepower is more important as are having more variable speed in your fleets for different purposes. The most important thing about speed is that no matter how fast your fleets are your bases, planets and mining sites still can't outrun a slower enemy. At the end of the day it is the colonies and mining sites that matter.
When it comes to how many functions you want in one ship that will depend entirely on your doctrine and the size of your ships. Me personally I tend to have both specialized and generalist ships. But I tend to only use either very small ships about 3500t or less or larger ships 20k or more... I find that ships in between are rather inefficient which has a lot to do with how sensors work and how different components become more efficient if you concentrate them in larger hulls. Most of the ships that I build in the 20k or larger must be able to operate on their own or in small groups so they need to be more or less self sufficient. It is also easier to make small changes to generalist ships and still have them able to be produced in the same yards... so one might be more of a command ship and one might have slightly more PD or slightly more offensive firepower. You can easily manipulate with this to get the fleets you need in relatively short timeframes, much easier than having all your ships being smaller and specialized.
If you build a beam fleet you should definitely have offensive beams on ALL your major combatants. You really don't want dead weight in close combat as the opponent can just ignore them and concentrate on the ships that is the real danger. For the same reason I put at least some beams on all my combat ships... I don't want any ship to be dead weight if I get caught in close quarter fighting. If I have ten ships in the fight I rather have one laser on each ships than two on half of them as that is mathematically much stronger, even when you consider the extra fire-controls necessary.
If you have not met an enemy yet, don't spend allot of resources building a fleet you don't know will be effective. Just build a few and possibly build some components so you quickly can build a fleet if you need it. For defence you can easily rely on FAC or smaller ships with very low range and a decent amount of sensor platforms. The benefit of really small ships is that you can build them really fast and in great numbers if you desperately need them. Once you found an enemy or alien race you need to scout and probe them to get information about their capabilities and then you can build an appropriate response based on your overall plans, depending on if you are defensive or going on the offensive.
Everything from deployment range, operational range, fuel efficiency, weapons, speed, defences etc... everything should depend on need. If you build all your ships to go 20bkm when you need them to go 50bkm and you can't use fuel tankers as they are too slow, well your design is no good. If you build your ships to go 50bkm when you really don't need more than 15-20bkm because you can use tankers you wasted allot of space and resources better used for other things.
-
In my opinion a serious design should be created out of what you need not some rudimentary template, that is just inefficient and overall very expensive in the long run.
You need to have an overarching operational and strategic goal or doctrine in mind when you build any type of ship.
Everything from deployment range, operational range, fuel efficiency, weapons, speed, defences etc... everything should depend on need.
Highlighting these general words of advice for OP as I agree with these points.
In general I find the discussion on if you should use laser or gauss are completely irrelevant. It is perfectly OK to use turreted laser if you want them in a dual role, lasers are not that bad. But if pure PD is the point then use gauss if you have it, but it is not wrong to also have turreted lasers either.
If you put 10cm lasers into a turret, they are slightly worse than railguns which means they are acceptable for PD - to this extent I agree that lasers are fine for PD instead of Gauss, particularly since Gauss requires a lot of research investment to be effective.
The real problem is that larger lasers like 15cm are not very good for PD as they get off fewer shots and require more power (i.e., more tonnage for reactors instead of weapons). For this reason I don't recommend using larger lasers than 10cm in turrets unless one has a specific need, e.g., anti-FAC weapons against some races - and of course this is the kind of thing you find a need for based on scouting, so I don't recommend this for designing a starting fleet.
Speed is also as I said relative... you should not use more speed than what the situation requires as it is very expensive both in resources and fleet tonnage. If you use a purely beam oriented fleet you are likely forced to spend a big portion of the fleet on speed but if you don't then sensors and offensive firepower is more important as are having more variable speed in your fleets for different purposes. The most important thing about speed is that no matter how fast your fleets are your bases, planets and mining sites still can't outrun a slower enemy. At the end of the day it is the colonies and mining sites that matter.
To add to this: determining "what the situation requires" is rarely straightforward. For a beam fleet, you must consider both speed and range. If you ships use lasers of maximum caliber, you should outrange any other beam weapon unless you are at a severe tech disadvantage. In that case, you can be moderate when it comes to speed. However, if you use railguns as main armament, you will be outranged by most other beam weapons so you want to have higher speed to close that range. Then there is the question of how much higher speed is needed. If your opponent uses lasers with a fleet speed of 4000 km/s, a railgun fleet with 4001 km/s is faster, yes, but it will close the range at 1 km/s while the laser-armed ships whittle you down with impunity. A railgun fleet with 5000 km/s can close the range much quicker, granted you will still receive several volleys of fire but hopefully you can close without too heavy of losses and then use the superior DPS of railguns to win the battle... at least, that's the idea.
There is also the strategic sense of speed. You might think that your missile or carrier-based fleet does not need speed since it has the advantage of very long range, and give them the most efficient engines money can buy. But if an outpost on the far border of your empire comes under attack, your fleet may be much too slow to reach the warzone before the enemy breaks through and sacks the bigger, more prosperous colony in the next system.
This complexity is why for a relatively new or inexperienced player I suggest (as a rough guideline only) keeping it simple and selecting some fraction of mass, in the range from 30% to 40%, and having that fraction be engines with the base efficiency modifier. Once a player has more experience and a better understanding of their particular situation, deviating from this guideline can be done as needed. I do think such guidelines are valuable; while it's good to think carefully about all aspects for ship design, for a new or inexperienced player this can easily become overwhelming and having guidelines to provide a generally reasonable place to start is very helpful. :)
If you build a beam fleet you should definitely have offensive beams on ALL your major combatants. You really don't want dead weight in close combat as the opponent can just ignore them and concentrate on the ships that is the real danger. For the same reason I put at least some beams on all my combat ships... I don't want any ship to be dead weight if I get caught in close quarter fighting. If I have ten ships in the fight I rather have one laser on each ships than two on half of them as that is mathematically much stronger, even when you consider the extra fire-controls necessary.
I do something similar here - all of my offensive ships have a PD turret or two, all of my PD escorts have a spinal laser or 1-2 heavy guns. This makes it more difficult for an opponent to take advantage by eliminating one class of ships from your fleet or exploiting a capability that would otherwise be lacking. Even for missile or carrier-based fleets, I will have 1-2 beam weapons on most ships as backup weapons in case of unexpected close encounters - plasma works well for this as it is cheap and will make an enemy regret being careless if they get too close.
There is usually not even a need for large combat ships unless you have a known enemy to combat. Once you have an enemy you need to build the ship around what you know about them.
This is the only part I really disagree with. Maybe this depends on your game settings, but under the conditions most players use which is playing against NPRs with more or less default settings, it is important to have a combat fleet of decent size and capability or else you may find yourself overrun by a hostile NPR before you can build a sufficient fleet, or at the least suffering significant losses in territory, population, installations, etc. if you have expanded beyond Sol very much. I can understand this for roleplay, many players like the idea of a race that doesn't build a navy until the first encounter with hostile aliens, but from the perspective of what is "best" in gameplay terms I think having a decent number of capable warships is essential. Note that typical NPR battlefleets will mass 200-300k tons, so a small garrison of a single cruiser or FAC squadron will not be enough to stop a determined NPR offensive unless you have some method to exploit the NPR, which I at least think is generally not a fun way to play the game.
That said, it's true that until you have good intelligence you can be fairly conservative or minimal with your designs. If I'm playing "optimally", I will usually start with a single main weapon type and possibly a secondary point defense weapon (Gauss or 10cm Railguns) and have a larger offensive ship with smaller PD-focused escort ships (plus jump-capable versions as necessary), and usually a third hull type which is a dedicated scouting/sensor platform. A decently large fleet of this composition will be enough to at least credibly oppose most NPRs one could encounter, and you can work more specialist ships or new weapon types into the fleet over time while the first generation is doing its job.
Of course if you play with multiple player races, then the rules can change, but since most players play against NPRs and the NPRs do not follow house rules, I think in general one should plan to build warships prior to contact unless roleplay dictates otherwise.
-
Having come to this game from Starfire (and David Weber novels), it is weird to me to not mount Point Defense of some kind on most ship classes, but I can certainly take advice and go in a different direction. Gauss turrets are huge.
I was hoping medium sized laser turrets could double as antiship and antimissile weapons in sufficient numbers but I can ditch them in favor of just straight lasers for anti-ship purposes and Gauss-equipped PD ships.
-
There is usually not even a need for large combat ships unless you have a known enemy to combat. Once you have an enemy you need to build the ship around what you know about them.
This is the only part I really disagree with. Maybe this depends on your game settings, but under the conditions most players use which is playing against NPRs with more or less default settings, it is important to have a combat fleet of decent size and capability or else you may find yourself overrun by a hostile NPR before you can build a sufficient fleet, or at the least suffering significant losses in territory, population, installations, etc. if you have expanded beyond Sol very much. I can understand this for roleplay, many players like the idea of a race that doesn't build a navy until the first encounter with hostile aliens, but from the perspective of what is "best" in gameplay terms I think having a decent number of capable warships is essential. Note that typical NPR battlefleets will mass 200-300k tons, so a small garrison of a single cruiser or FAC squadron will not be enough to stop a determined NPR offensive unless you have some method to exploit the NPR, which I at least think is generally not a fun way to play the game.
That said, it's true that until you have good intelligence you can be fairly conservative or minimal with your designs. If I'm playing "optimally", I will usually start with a single main weapon type and possibly a secondary point defense weapon (Gauss or 10cm Railguns) and have a larger offensive ship with smaller PD-focused escort ships (plus jump-capable versions as necessary), and usually a third hull type which is a dedicated scouting/sensor platform. A decently large fleet of this composition will be enough to at least credibly oppose most NPRs one could encounter, and you can work more specialist ships or new weapon types into the fleet over time while the first generation is doing its job.
Of course if you play with multiple player races, then the rules can change, but since most players play against NPRs and the NPRs do not follow house rules, I think in general one should plan to build warships prior to contact unless roleplay dictates otherwise.
Well... I did not exactly say you don't need a fleet... the point being that small ships with low range is far quicker and easier to build in masse and is perfectly fine for defending until you can get a larger fleet that is more offensive. Large ships is mainly needed when you want to take the fight to the enemy. Until you meet someone all you need is smaller ships in modest numbers and some component lying around so you quickly can assemble more if you really need them fast.
So... I did not mean you should not have a fleet. Just one tailored for defending your territory thus smaller ships are the better more efficient option. I simply meant there is no real need for a big space superiority navy before you meet someone, that is quite expensive. That does not mean you can't prepare for it when you need it.
It takes allot of efforts both in terms of research and resources to build proper offensive forces, not to mention ground invasion fleets to support them.
-
Well... I did not exactly say you don't need a fleet... the point being that small ships with low range is far quicker and easier to build in masse and is perfectly fine for defending until you can get a larger fleet that is more offensive. Large ships is mainly needed when you want to take the fight to the enemy. Until you meet someone all you need is smaller ships in modest numbers and some component lying around so you quickly can assemble more if you really need them fast.
So... I did not mean you should not have a fleet. Just one tailored for defending your territory thus smaller ships are the better more efficient option. I simply meant there is no real need for a big space superiority navy before you meet someone, that is quite expensive. That does not mean you can't prepare for it when you need it.
It takes allot of efforts both in terms of research and resources to build proper offensive forces, not to mention ground invasion fleets to support them.
I guess it depends how you define "large" and "small". To me, "small" ships are FACs or corvette sizes in the ~3,000 ton range, which are too small to be proper warships IMO... they are too easily blown up by a few shots and are not efficient enough to have even the fairly short range needed for a starter fleet without significant sacrifices elsewhere, among other issues. Anything else I usually consider "large" in the sense of not-small, so 10,000 or 15,000 tons which I think is reasonable for a starting force of DEs and CLs for instance. Of course these are general-purpose ships with ample passive and active defenses, not offensive juggernauts.
I will say there is also some metagaming which is possible in that a player can design their early fleet to combat spoiler races if they are not too concerned about roleplay.
-
Just out of curiosity, why does the tonnage need to be a round number? What's the advantage? And isn't that kind of annoying to achieve (it must take a lot of trial and error to find the components that end in a zero).
Once you see the light, you too will join the Round Tonnage Lobby!
Yeah it is sometimes hard but I do like having all my ships be the same speed, which is much easier to get if you use round tonnages and the same engine to tonnage ratios for your whole fleet. Once you get a feel for designing things it's a little easier. It's mostly just a fun thing though, also I know I have seen at least one person who wanted a round number for fuel but did not care too much for the ship tonnage, so maybe we're just the odd ones for wanting round tonnage over round anything else lol.
I mean, what am I saying? Everybody knows that people who use round tonnage ships have fleets that are 50% stronger and are rated more handsome by all those hot singles who keep on sending people in their area messages. Make sure you round off those tonnages!
-
Well... I did not exactly say you don't need a fleet... the point being that small ships with low range is far quicker and easier to build in masse and is perfectly fine for defending until you can get a larger fleet that is more offensive. Large ships is mainly needed when you want to take the fight to the enemy. Until you meet someone all you need is smaller ships in modest numbers and some component lying around so you quickly can assemble more if you really need them fast.
So... I did not mean you should not have a fleet. Just one tailored for defending your territory thus smaller ships are the better more efficient option. I simply meant there is no real need for a big space superiority navy before you meet someone, that is quite expensive. That does not mean you can't prepare for it when you need it.
It takes allot of efforts both in terms of research and resources to build proper offensive forces, not to mention ground invasion fleets to support them.
I guess it depends how you define "large" and "small". To me, "small" ships are FACs or corvette sizes in the ~3,000 ton range, which are too small to be proper warships IMO... they are too easily blown up by a few shots and are not efficient enough to have even the fairly short range needed for a starter fleet without significant sacrifices elsewhere, among other issues. Anything else I usually consider "large" in the sense of not-small, so 10,000 or 15,000 tons which I think is reasonable for a starting force of DEs and CLs for instance. Of course these are general-purpose ships with ample passive and active defenses, not offensive juggernauts.
I will say there is also some metagaming which is possible in that a player can design their early fleet to combat spoiler races if they are not too concerned about roleplay.
Yes, ships in the size of FAC and up to about 3000t are pretty effective in the early stage when you only defend territory, larger ships are not really necessary. When you have limited research labs and you want to limit research and construction potential that is better, while you build up at least one shipyard to build bigger ships eventually. It is much faster to build smaller rather than larger ships in quantity when you need them and you don't need complicated fleets to defend territory, neither do you need range in excess of what you need to operate in a single system. You just need tankers or fuel stations to ferry them around stationed in strategic places.
While you are expanding and researching basic technologies you will not have access to the tools to really leverage larger ship hulls anyway, it is generally getter to be able to operate under enemy general sensor resolutions as much as possible. A 2500t corvette can have some railguns for PD, a small hangar of 50-100t for a sensor scout and enough for a pretty decent missile load out. FAC don't really need PD at all. If you go beam only that will probably not work well early on no matter how you do it as you don't have neither speed nor gun range advantage over any potential enemy. Another good thing early on is that you get to train up your commanders in more ships rather than less. Pure defensive ships also don't need much more than about 3 months of deployment time and maintenance of maybe 6-12 months at most if even that. You can have small sensor scouts with longer deployment times though.
Once I'm in need for "deep space" combat operations I generally will have a few yards with at least 20k+ size available but I see no real reason to build bigger ships if I don't have the technology to make them meaningful. In some cases they just become auxiliary carriers for FAC until my technology matured for proper warships.
-
Having come to this game from Starfire (and David Weber novels), it is weird to me to not mount Point Defense of some kind on most ship classes, but I can certainly take advice and go in a different direction. Gauss turrets are huge.
I was hoping medium sized laser turrets could double as antiship and antimissile weapons in sufficient numbers but I can ditch them in favor of just straight lasers for anti-ship purposes and Gauss-equipped PD ships.
Aurora is usually viewed as a space combat 4x game. However, it is also very much a role-playing and story-telling game. Therefore, if you believe that every ship should have at least some point defence, then design them that way. I tend to run campaigns around a theme, such as WH40k or Battlestar Galactica, etc. and then design ships to match the theme. Once the game gets underway, designs evolve based on need and combat experience in that particular game. You will get some excellent advice on these forums about how to avoid common mistakes on ship design and the many factors that need to be considered as a factor in design and how those factors should be weighted in different situations. However my advice is not to get too hung up on 'optimal' designs. Just build what feels right for your vision of your Empire and experience will drive future designs.
For example, here is a Lunar class cruiser from my current campaign. It has two types of offensive energy weapons, a battery of point defence weapons, six missile tubes and a hangar bay. It is definitely not an 'optimal' design, although at 37,500 tons it can get away with it. It is also not intended for solo operations and would function as part of a fleet. Below that is a much smaller frigate, with both offensive and defensive energy weapons.
Lunar class Cruiser 37,500 tons 1,120 Crew 5,623.2 BP TCS 750 TH 3,000 EM 5,520
4000 km/s Armour 6-99 Shields 184-368 HTK 220 Sensors 18/24/0/0 DCR 18-4 PPV 187.2
Maint Life 2.03 Years MSP 3,191 AFR 625% IFR 8.7% 1YR 1,034 5YR 15,512 Max Repair 375 MSP
Hangar Deck Capacity 1,000 tons Magazine 650 / 0
Captain Control Rating 2 BRG AUX
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months Flight Crew Berths 20 Morale Check Required
Ravenor Drive Systems RDS-750B Gas-Core Drive (4) Power 3000 Fuel Use 49.92% Signature 750 Explosion 12%
Fuel Capacity 1,603,000 Litres Range 15.4 billion km (44 days at full power)
Valentinian-Stern VS-46 Void Shield (4) Recharge Time 368 seconds (0.5 per second)
Astaroth Kinetics AK-20 Weapons Battery (12x4) Range 160,000km TS: 4,000 km/s Power 12-4 RM 40,000 km ROF 15
Valentinian-Ventris V4-200 Lance Battery (4) Range 200,000km TS: 4,000 km/s Power 10-3.5 ROF 15
Astaroth Kinetics AK-10 Light Weapon Battery (12x4) Range 40,000km TS: 4,000 km/s Power 3-3 RM 40,000 km ROF 5
MK I Energy Weapon Fire Control (4) Max Range: 256,000 km TS: 4,000 km/s ECCM-0 96 92 88 84 80 77 73 69 65 61
MK I Light Energy Weapon Fire Control (2) Max Range: 80,000 km TS: 4,000 km/s ECCM-0 88 75 62 50 38 25 12 0 0 0
R-24B Gaseous Fission Reactor (4) Total Power Output 98.1 Exp 5%
MK I Standard Torpedo Launcher (6) Missile Size: 12 Rate of Fire 175
MK I Small Target Fire Control (1) Range 27.5m km Resolution 10
MK I Torpedo Fire Control (1) Range 89.1m km Resolution 120
MK I Standard Torpedo (54) Speed: 25,000 km/s End: 5.3m Range: 8m km WH: 12 Size: 12 TH: 83/50/25
MK I Torpedo Detection Array (1) GPS 16 Range 6.4m km MCR 574.5k km Resolution 1
MK I Cruiser Active Augur Array (1) GPS 15360 Range 89.1m km Resolution 120
MK I Large Thermal Augur Array (1) Sensitivity 18 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 33.5m km
MK I Large Electromagnetic Augur Array (1) Sensitivity 24 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 38.7m km
Strike Group
1x Thunderhawk Assault Transport Speed: 9504 km/s Size: 19.99
Sword class Frigate 9,375 tons 306 Crew 1,521.3 BP TCS 187 TH 750 EM 1,380
4000 km/s Armour 4-39 Shields 46-368 HTK 65 Sensors 6/8/0/0 DCR 5-5 PPV 46
Maint Life 2.36 Years MSP 507 AFR 141% IFR 2.0% 1YR 125 5YR 1,870 Max Repair 187.5 MSP
Commander Control Rating 2 BRG AUX
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months Morale Check Required
Ravenor Drive Systems RDS-375B Gas-Core Drive (2) Power 750 Fuel Use 70.60% Signature 375 Explosion 12%
Fuel Capacity 650,000 Litres Range 17.7 billion km (51 days at full power)
Valentinian-Stern VS-46 Void Shield (1) Recharge Time 368 seconds (0.1 per second)
Astaroth Kinetics AK-20 Weapons Battery (4x4) Range 160,000km TS: 4,000 km/s Power 12-4 RM 40,000 km ROF 15
Astaroth Kinetics AK-10 Light Weapon Battery (6x4) Range 40,000km TS: 4,000 km/s Power 3-3 RM 40,000 km ROF 5
MK I Light Energy Weapon Fire Control (2) Max Range: 80,000 km TS: 4,000 km/s ECCM-0 88 75 62 50 38 25 12 0 0 0
MK I Energy Weapon Fire Control (2) Max Range: 256,000 km TS: 4,000 km/s ECCM-0 96 92 88 84 80 77 73 69 65 61
R-17 Gaseous Fission Reactor (2) Total Power Output 34.5 Exp 5%
MK I Frigate Active Augur Array (1) GPS 5760 Range 54.5m km Resolution 120
MK I Torpedo Detection Array (1) GPS 16 Range 6.4m km MCR 574.5k km Resolution 1
MK I Electromagnetic Augur Array (1) Sensitivity 8 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 22.4m km
MK I Thermal Augur Array (1) Sensitivity 6 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 19.4m km
This design is from a recent BSG campaign. It is carrier-warship hybrid, which again is not intended as an optimal design. Generally carriers are built to stay out of combat and good advice would be to minimize defences and maximise hangar space. Alternatively, if you are building a warship for energy-range combat, then don't waste a lot of internal space on hangars. In this case, the design was to match the lore, so it had both fighters and railguns and actually proved to be very effective anyway. Although once again size helps a lot. Later versions actually increased close combat capability. Here is the campaign: http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=12909.0
Galactica class Battlestar 75,000 tons 1,465 Crew 9,093.3 BP TCS 1,500 TH 4,800 EM 0
3200 km/s Armour 8-158 Shields 0-0 HTK 372 Sensors 12/12/0/0 DCR 53 PPV 149.28
Maint Life 2.04 Years MSP 4,016 AFR 849% IFR 11.8% 1YR 1,290 5YR 19,356 Max Repair 300.00 MSP
Hangar Deck Capacity 24,000 tons
Commander Control Rating 3 BRG AUX ENG
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months Flight Crew Berths 480 Morale Check Required
Zeus Drive Systems ZDS-600 Gas Core Drive (8) Power 4800.0 Fuel Use 32.66% Signature 600.00 Exp 10%
Fuel Capacity 3,269,000 Litres Range 24 billion km (86 days at full power)
Ares Kinetics AK-20 Railgun (12x4) Range 160,000km TS: 4,000 km/s Power 12-3 RM 40,000 km ROF 20
Ares Kinetics G20-8 Gauss Cannon Turret (4x8) Range 20,000km TS: 16000 km/s RM 20,000 km ROF 5
Hyperion R256-S4 Beam Fire Control (2) Max Range: 256,000 km TS: 4,000 km/s
Hyperion R64-S16 Beam Fire Control (2) Max Range: 64,000 km TS: 16,000 km/s
R-18 Gaseous Fission Reactor (2) Total Power Output 36.5 Exp 5%
Artemis-70 Active Sensor (1) GPS 12960 Range 70.8m km Resolution 120
Artemis-5M Missile Detection Sensor (1) GPS 12 Range 4.8m km MCR 430.9k km Resolution 1
Themis EM-12 Passive Sensor (1) Sensitivity 12 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 27.4m km
Themis TH-12 Passive Sensor (1) Sensitivity 12 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 27.4m km
Strike Group
4x Raptor-S Scout Speed: 3201 km/s Size: 19.99
2x Raptor-M Assault Transport Speed: 7003 km/s Size: 19.99
60x Viper MK I Fighter Speed: 8001 km/s Size: 6
In summary, I would design what feels right for the style of Empire you are building. If you want to replicate Honorverse-style ships, then go ahead. Its your game. This is not a criticism BTW of the excellent advice provided in this thread. I'm just stating a different option, which is to let role-playing drive your choices. Over time, combat experience will inform your future design choices.
-
That is sort of what I do in everyone of my games too, except I don't really have any specific theme in mind and just go with the flow most of the time and ships are build due to necessity and what the perceived threat is.
If I don't feel there is a threat I would just role play it that way and not even build much of any combat ships at all other than some patrol ships, might even skimp on military technology too for some time. That generally means that early combat ships usually are very simple and straight forward and fleets really don't have much complexity at all.
I don't see it as wrong to build up a fleet because you as a player know there might be dangerous threat in the next system, that is up to every one to decide how they like to play. Me personally I don't turtle in Sol for a long time but rather send out my explorer to explore as much and as fast as they can if I feel that is what my civilisation would do because they can. That usually leave very little time to even build a decent fleet even if I wanted to, having unprepared outer colonies or mining sites exposed can actually be quite interesting from a role play perspective.
When I say that I tend to jump from smaller to rather big ships in my campaigns that is more of a dynamic thing than a specific principle. I also build ships in the range of 5-15k as well but in most circumstances that range seem to never be realised very much due to many different reasons.
What I generally try to avoid though is to have different classes of ships just to have them, unless it is a natural progression type thing. There is no point in having a 9000t frigate that do XYZ if I also have a 18kt destroyer doing the exact same thing, unless it is a technological or temporal progression. The larger ships are generally just the better option in almost all cases. Every platform need to fill a specific purpose when it is designed, though that purpose might not be valid ten or twenty years later and I will have to decide if I should keep updating it or replacing it with another ship class.
Ship size for example tend to be a development of engine size. I rarely find that yard space for ships to be the deciding factor, it is very easy to build really huge shipyards if you want them. The question is if you can leverage that ship with the technology you have available and if your needs are that great. But if you always group your 9kt destroyers in squadrons of five you probably could look at just deploy a single ship of 40kt instead. A 40kt ships can generally be modified using the same yard to fulfil multiple roles in different ways too, so if you need more or less PD you can usually do that and still produce the same ship in different configurations in the same yard. The main benefit with a 9kt ship is that you can build them faster, but long time build speed is rarely in my experience an issue, that is only an issue short term. Smaller ships also emit less thermal, so that is also a concern to consider, that means that tactically a group of smaller ship can enjoy faster speed for the same thermal detection range.
But this is why, in my campaigns, I tend to operate bigger rather than smaller capital ships but then also have smaller support ships for very specialized tasks and why I generally have a large gap from about 3kt to about 20-30kt ships in general. I pretty much start all my campaigns at conventional start too, I don't even remember when I started a campaign in any other way.
-
That is an excellent post Steve, thank you so much. I primarily play this game as a roleplaying escape, not so much as a wargame. I just don't want to be designing ships that are totally terrible in case I ever do run into that one NPR I create midgame and hope I never see.
I do have one question and this might be because I am misunderstanding how to tell how much power my lasers need.
For this ship:
Astaroth Kinetics AK-20 Weapons Battery (4x4) Range 160,000km TS: 4,000 km/s Power 12-4 RM 40,000 km ROF 15
Astaroth Kinetics AK-10 Light Weapon Battery (6x4) Range 40,000km TS: 4,000 km/s Power 3-3 RM 40,000 km ROF 5
MK I Light Energy Weapon Fire Control (2) Max Range: 80,000 km TS: 4,000 km/s ECCM-0 88 75 62 50 38 25 12 0 0 0
MK I Energy Weapon Fire Control (2) Max Range: 256,000 km TS: 4,000 km/s ECCM-0 96 92 88 84 80 77 73 69 65 61
R-17 Gaseous Fission Reactor (2) Total Power Output 34.5 Exp 5%
How much power does it need for those lasers? I'm not exactly sure what kind of weapons you are using (does it have 10 quad turrets), but it doesn't seem that 34.5 total power is enough.
For this frigate of mine:
31.250cm C5 Soft X-ray Laser (1) Range 384,000km TS: 6,667 km/s Power 26-5 RM 60,000 km ROF 30
Twin 15.0cm C5 Soft X-ray Laser Turret (2x2) Range 360,000km TS: 20000 km/s Power 12-10 RM 60,000 km ROF 10
Beam Fire Control R384-TS10000 (1) Max Range: 384,000 km TS: 10,000 km/s 97 95 92 90 87 84 82 79 77 74
PD Beam Fire Control R96-TS20000 (1) Max Range: 96,000 km TS: 20,000 km/s 90 79 69 58 48 38 27 17 6 0
Inertial Confinement Fusion Reactor R10 (5) Total Power Output 50 Exp 5%
I get that I need 26 + 12 + 12 in power, or 50 total. Is that correct?
Is there an easy place to see the power requirements of a ship without adding it in my head?
-
To read the power correctly, the first number is the total power needed to fire, while the second is the power accepted by the capacitors per 5-second increment.
So:
Astaroth Kinetics AK-20 Weapons Battery (4x4) Range 160,000km TS: 4,000 km/s Power 12-4 RM 40,000 km ROF 15
Astaroth Kinetics AK-10 Light Weapon Battery (6x4) Range 40,000km TS: 4,000 km/s Power 3-3 RM 40,000 km ROF 5
The AK-20 Battery requires 12 power to fire and can charge up 4 power per (5-second) increment, thus it can fire every three increments or every 15 seconds (ROF 15). Since there are four AK-20s, the total power draw is 16 per increment.
The AK-10 Battery requires 3 power to fire and can charge up to 3 power per increment, thus it can fire on ever increment or every 5 seconds (ROF 5). Since there are six AK-10s, the total power draw is 18 per increment.
Adding 16 + 18 gives a total power draw of 34 per increment. The actual reactor has 34.5 which is actually a bit over the requirement, which is a typical outcome since reactor power cannot be set exactly (it scales as Size^(3/2), I think).
In your example:
31.250cm C5 Soft X-ray Laser (1) Range 384,000km TS: 6,667 km/s Power 26-5 RM 60,000 km ROF 30
Twin 15.0cm C5 Soft X-ray Laser Turret (2x2) Range 360,000km TS: 20000 km/s Power 12-10 RM 60,000 km ROF 10
You should be able to work out the following:- The total power draw per increment is 25.
- If you examine this closely you will see that both lasers draw more power per increment than necessary. This is important, since a lower capacitor rating results in a cheaper weapon. HINT: look at the total power required to fire, then look at the ROF, then look at the power drawn per increment. Can you achieve the same ROF with a lower capacitor level?
-
I don't quite understand you, but what I do understand makes me think I'm putting WAY too many power plants on my beam ships.
-
I don't quite understand you, but what I do understand makes me think I'm putting WAY too many power plants on my beam ships.
When in doubt, remove all the power plants, and look at the message in the bottom right of the build screen, then add power plants back one at a time, and see the numbers change.
But also yeah, you have a lot of wasted capacitor capacity on those lasers.
-
I don't quite understand you, but what I do understand makes me think I'm putting WAY too many power plants on my beam ships.
Feel free to specify what is confusing for you, I'm sure we can clear it up! :)
-
31.250cm C5 Soft X-ray Laser (1) Range 384,000km TS: 6,667 km/s Power 26-5 RM 60,000 km ROF 30
This laser needs 26 power to fire. Your capacitors feed it 5 power per 5 seconds so it takes 30 seconds to fire, a 4.5 capacitor would also take 30 seconds to charge it and your reactor could generate .5 power less per turn
Twin 15.0cm C5 Soft X-ray Laser Turret (2x2) Range 360,000km TS: 20000 km/s Power 12-10 RM 60,000 km ROF 10
Each of the lasers in this turret needs 6 power to charge, each of them has a capacitor feeding 5 power per 5 second turn, you would get the same rate of fire with a rating 3 capacitor meaning you could have 3 less power generated from your reactor for each laser if you gave them a capacitor of 3 and still have the same rate of fire.
Essentially if your capacitors use more power than the laser needs that power is wasted. So for the spinal laser it is nor important but you are using 167% of the power needed for each 15 cm laser. While reactors are not that big using an oversized capacitor also increases the cost of the laser , so ideally you should have a capacitor rating either equal to the power demand of the laser for a ROF of 5 , or half for rof 10 or a third for rof 15 etc.
-
I don't quite understand you, but what I do understand makes me think I'm putting WAY too many power plants on my beam ships.
Feel free to specify what is confusing for you, I'm sure we can clear it up! :)
I now know how to calculate power needs accurately (it's the second number on the lasers, not the first), but I'm still trying to figure out when it makes sense to go down to a worse capacitor.
At least I was. Andrew has explained it above in a way I get now.
-
Easiest way to see it is to design the laser, then lower the capacitator to see if it changes the ROF. If it doesn't stick with the lower capacitor rating.