Posted by: Jorgen_CAB
« on: April 30, 2019, 12:13:00 PM »I fully agree with everything Michael said above and this is very close to my own development in my games, especially in a multi faction environment where things develop more dynamically and less in leaps and bounds.
I have the same reservation with the OP ships in that they are not well though out of in terms of what they are suppose to do, in terms of game mechanics that is... not role play mind you. The destroyer itself obviously have way more fuel than it will ever need. I have never had any ship outside freighters move continuously at max speed until they get to a location where they can refuel.
The endurance of a ship should be based on the max distance you think you will ever move until you get access to a refuelling location, this can be a ship or location.
Deployment rate should always be considered based on the ships role. How long do you think any missions the ship will be issued will take. The faster a ship is the less time you also need to consider going from the rally point to the mission site. So the higher the technology the lower your deployment rate might become, but it also is depending on how far out from any rally points your ships are going to be travelling. I also deem deployment of over 12 month to be relatively unrealistic for an efficient warship by human standards. For research, exploration and deep scout missions I can live with times up to 24-36 months. But these are role playing limitations I impose on myself.
Maintenance life cycles are a bit more complicated... but I like to have my warships with at least around 2.5 years in service before forced maintenance. This is generally a good amount of time for which you can use a large part of a fleet for at least 6-12 month for a large offensive without risking too much when you need to send ships back for maintenance. The larger the ships the longer I tend to give them in maintenance cycles since they usually have less places to perform proper maintenance and upgrades on.
Always put at least a 125t hangar on every ship above 2000t more on larger ships... fighter utility ships are just that useful and important. Small scouts are the key to engaging an enemy on your term and not theirs. Loosing a small 100-400t scout is nothing to even loosing a 2000t scout corvette.
Also, don't forget to put passive EM sensors on your fighter scouts. You want to know when the enemy are using sensors to find them.
I have the same reservation with the OP ships in that they are not well though out of in terms of what they are suppose to do, in terms of game mechanics that is... not role play mind you. The destroyer itself obviously have way more fuel than it will ever need. I have never had any ship outside freighters move continuously at max speed until they get to a location where they can refuel.
The endurance of a ship should be based on the max distance you think you will ever move until you get access to a refuelling location, this can be a ship or location.
Deployment rate should always be considered based on the ships role. How long do you think any missions the ship will be issued will take. The faster a ship is the less time you also need to consider going from the rally point to the mission site. So the higher the technology the lower your deployment rate might become, but it also is depending on how far out from any rally points your ships are going to be travelling. I also deem deployment of over 12 month to be relatively unrealistic for an efficient warship by human standards. For research, exploration and deep scout missions I can live with times up to 24-36 months. But these are role playing limitations I impose on myself.
Maintenance life cycles are a bit more complicated... but I like to have my warships with at least around 2.5 years in service before forced maintenance. This is generally a good amount of time for which you can use a large part of a fleet for at least 6-12 month for a large offensive without risking too much when you need to send ships back for maintenance. The larger the ships the longer I tend to give them in maintenance cycles since they usually have less places to perform proper maintenance and upgrades on.
Always put at least a 125t hangar on every ship above 2000t more on larger ships... fighter utility ships are just that useful and important. Small scouts are the key to engaging an enemy on your term and not theirs. Loosing a small 100-400t scout is nothing to even loosing a 2000t scout corvette.
Also, don't forget to put passive EM sensors on your fighter scouts. You want to know when the enemy are using sensors to find them.