Author Topic: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions  (Read 351620 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Akhillis

  • Chief Petty Officer
  • ***
  • A
  • Posts: 46
  • Thanked: 5 times
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #1575 on: November 25, 2019, 06:55:57 PM »
It is an interesting concept and something I would embrace on a Sol/Earth/Human start but its details need to be carefully thought through so that non-human/non-Earth games are not shafted. Does a Hive Mind bug race need military academies?

A Hive Mind bug race is always going to be require a bunch of role-playing X as Y (scientists? Fleet training? Morale?).
The Sorium must flow
 

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Star Marshal
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 11669
  • Thanked: 20441 times
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #1576 on: November 26, 2019, 02:57:27 AM »
Another thing I have pondered in Aurora C#... would it not be time to lift the restriction on minimum resolution of sensors at 1HS and allow from 1-20 MSP as well.

Given that you very well can build fighter craft that are very small it might be a good thing. Otherwise tiny little scout ships can become VERY difficult to find even with a dedicated RES 1 active sensor.

So a small craft with a 0.1 HS engine and and 0.3 sensor could probably be about 30-35t, this little craft would still be quite potent at detecting stuff but be very difficult to find in return given its size is so much smaller than the smallest possible resolution scanner in the game. And you might even make it even smaller.

35 tons is about 0.7 HS or equal to a size 14 missile.

Small sensors are far more effective in C# compared to VB6, especially Res-1, so it is easier to detect missiles and other small objects. As a result, I've started adding small but effective missile detection sensors to a lot more designs. Check the comparison table in this post.

http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=8495.msg102701#msg102701
 

Offline Jorgen_CAB

  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • J
  • Posts: 2837
  • Thanked: 673 times
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #1577 on: November 26, 2019, 06:06:05 AM »
Another thing I have pondered in Aurora C#... would it not be time to lift the restriction on minimum resolution of sensors at 1HS and allow from 1-20 MSP as well.

Given that you very well can build fighter craft that are very small it might be a good thing. Otherwise tiny little scout ships can become VERY difficult to find even with a dedicated RES 1 active sensor.

So a small craft with a 0.1 HS engine and and 0.3 sensor could probably be about 30-35t, this little craft would still be quite potent at detecting stuff but be very difficult to find in return given its size is so much smaller than the smallest possible resolution scanner in the game. And you might even make it even smaller.

35 tons is about 0.7 HS or equal to a size 14 missile.

Small sensors are far more effective in C# compared to VB6, especially Res-1, so it is easier to detect missiles and other small objects. As a result, I've started adding small but effective missile detection sensors to a lot more designs. Check the comparison table in this post.

http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=8495.msg102701#msg102701

I know... I have been staring at that for some time and made some tools to do the math for me.

The reason for my suggestion is that small sensors are also ALOT more efficient as well.

A 30t scout could reasonably have 0.3HS res 100 sensor and it would take a size 50 comparable sensor to detect that at the same range. Don't remember if you allowed smaller fuel tanks than 5000 but I think I remember the smallest being 1000 or so now for small ground fighters as they don't need that much fuel, could be fitted on a small scout as well for minimal size if that is the case and make the size even smaller than 30t.

A 0.3HS resolution 100 sensor with Strength 21, Sensitivity 11 have a range of roughly 21 million km against 5000t.

A resolution 1 sensor at size 50 would spot that small sensor scout at 21 million km. I also would need a size 15-17 EM detector to sense that scout at that range too.

I'm just looking for options to use smaller resolution active sensors as an option so these RES 1 don't need to be inflated too much to find very small scouts.

I do understand that it would also make missile detection easier, so it would be a trade off with that as a balancing issue.

I don't necessarily thing this is a problem in and of itself... I see no wrong in small scouts being very powerful as it opens the game up for more interesting scouting potential where fog of war are more pronounced.
« Last Edit: November 26, 2019, 07:53:33 AM by Jorgen_CAB »
 

Offline Tikigod

  • Lieutenant
  • *******
  • Posts: 195
  • Thanked: 55 times
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #1578 on: November 26, 2019, 07:52:25 AM »
Another thing I have pondered in Aurora C#... would it not be time to lift the restriction on minimum resolution of sensors at 1HS and allow from 1-20 MSP as well.

Given that you very well can build fighter craft that are very small it might be a good thing. Otherwise tiny little scout ships can become VERY difficult to find even with a dedicated RES 1 active sensor.

So a small craft with a 0.1 HS engine and and 0.3 sensor could probably be about 30-35t, this little craft would still be quite potent at detecting stuff but be very difficult to find in return given its size is so much smaller than the smallest possible resolution scanner in the game. And you might even make it even smaller.

35 tons is about 0.7 HS or equal to a size 14 missile.

Small sensors are far more effective in C# compared to VB6, especially Res-1, so it is easier to detect missiles and other small objects. As a result, I've started adding small but effective missile detection sensors to a lot more designs. Check the comparison table in this post.

http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=8495.msg102701#msg102701

I know... I have been staring at that for some time and made some tools to do the math for me.

The reason for my suggestion is that small sensors are also ALOT more efficient as well.

A 30t scout could reasonably have 0.3HS res 100 sensor and it would take a size 50 comparable sensor to detect that at the same range. Don't remember if you allowed smaller fuel tanks than 5000 but I think I remember the smallest being 1000 or so now for small ground fighters as they don't need that much fuel, could be fitted on a small scout as well for minimal size if that is the case and make the size even smaller than 30t.

A 0.3HS resolution 100 sensor with Strength 21, Sensitivity 11 have a range of roughly 21 million km against 5000t.

A resolution 1 sensor at size 50 would spot that small sensor scout at 21 million km.

I'm just looking for options to use smaller resolution active sensors as an option so these RES 1 don't need to be inflated too much to find very small scouts.

I do understand that it would also make missile detection easier, so it would be a trade off with that as a balancing issue.

Would be pretty interesting if there was a branch technology tech for ECM or a similar parent technology that dealt with providing additional masking for any objects that fit within some kind of payload designation. It would essentially reflect the peak capability of your current parent masking technology tech that can't be utilised on a larger scale (For simplicity sake the point where any object has some kind of crew requirement) and on objects that do benefit from the technology it loses additional ECM bonus effectiveness with each size designation step up.

Of course it would be possible to do all of this code wise as a natural part of just how sensor detection works, but I think making it a progressive technology advancement could be more interesting from a 'game' perspective and actually introduces some kind of investment drive.
The popular stereotype of the researcher is that of a skeptic and a pessimist.  Nothing could be further from the truth! Scientists must be optimists at heart, in order to block out the incessant chorus of those who say "It cannot be done. "

- Academician Prokhor Zakharov, University Commencement
 

Offline Jorgen_CAB

  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • J
  • Posts: 2837
  • Thanked: 673 times
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #1579 on: November 26, 2019, 08:01:46 AM »
Another thing I have pondered in Aurora C#... would it not be time to lift the restriction on minimum resolution of sensors at 1HS and allow from 1-20 MSP as well.

Given that you very well can build fighter craft that are very small it might be a good thing. Otherwise tiny little scout ships can become VERY difficult to find even with a dedicated RES 1 active sensor.

So a small craft with a 0.1 HS engine and and 0.3 sensor could probably be about 30-35t, this little craft would still be quite potent at detecting stuff but be very difficult to find in return given its size is so much smaller than the smallest possible resolution scanner in the game. And you might even make it even smaller.

35 tons is about 0.7 HS or equal to a size 14 missile.

Small sensors are far more effective in C# compared to VB6, especially Res-1, so it is easier to detect missiles and other small objects. As a result, I've started adding small but effective missile detection sensors to a lot more designs. Check the comparison table in this post.

http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=8495.msg102701#msg102701

I know... I have been staring at that for some time and made some tools to do the math for me.

The reason for my suggestion is that small sensors are also ALOT more efficient as well.

A 30t scout could reasonably have 0.3HS res 100 sensor and it would take a size 50 comparable sensor to detect that at the same range. Don't remember if you allowed smaller fuel tanks than 5000 but I think I remember the smallest being 1000 or so now for small ground fighters as they don't need that much fuel, could be fitted on a small scout as well for minimal size if that is the case and make the size even smaller than 30t.

A 0.3HS resolution 100 sensor with Strength 21, Sensitivity 11 have a range of roughly 21 million km against 5000t.

A resolution 1 sensor at size 50 would spot that small sensor scout at 21 million km.

I'm just looking for options to use smaller resolution active sensors as an option so these RES 1 don't need to be inflated too much to find very small scouts.

I do understand that it would also make missile detection easier, so it would be a trade off with that as a balancing issue.

Would be pretty interesting if there was a branch technology tech for ECM or a similar parent technology that dealt with providing additional masking for any objects that fit within some kind of payload designation. It would essentially reflect the peak capability of your current parent masking technology tech that can't be utilised on a larger scale (For simplicity sake the point where any object has some kind of crew requirement) and on objects that do benefit from the technology it loses additional ECM bonus effectiveness with each size designation step up.

Of course it would be possible to do all of this code wise as a natural part of just how sensor detection works, but I think making it a progressive technology advancement could be more interesting from a 'game' perspective and actually introduces some kind of investment drive.

Yes... I have already suggested more options for electronic warfare, stealth and that stuff. Larger ships should be allot better at EW than small ships in general.

I would also not mind if active sensors had to be supplied with reactors as well depending on their strength, then there is an additional use for technology that boost reactors. In the real world sensors are one of the most energy consuming pieces of equipment on ships, I would think that sensors in Aurora are no exception. They could also burn massive amounts of fuel when online as an extra logistic and limiting small scouts who are just one big active sensor. But this is a different issue and not that important.

Electronic warfare and stealth are definitely something I would like to see at some point, but I would likely want to play C# version first before anything like that is added... ;)
 

Offline Scandinavian

  • Lieutenant
  • *******
  • S
  • Posts: 158
  • Thanked: 55 times
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #1580 on: November 28, 2019, 12:56:37 AM »
Even crew that you are not using should cost wealth, so just tax the economy of the total crew pool with a certain type of wealth cost every month. Even if they are not assigned they need to be constantly trained and ready to be deployed if they aren't not already.

Maybe let the player set how many they want to retain in active reserve, and let the rest go into a pool of civilian reservists, who are still available but whose training level degrades over time (representing the fact that most civilian reservists will not be keeping up full readiness). Most countries in our world maintain a civilian reserve that can be called up in time of particular exigency.
 

Offline sloanjh (OP)

  • Global Moderator
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • *****
  • Posts: 2805
  • Thanked: 112 times
  • 2020 Supporter 2020 Supporter : Donate for 2020
    2021 Supporter 2021 Supporter : Donate for 2021
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #1581 on: November 28, 2019, 09:41:03 AM »
I watched 'The Cruel Sea' last night (excellent 1953 B&W film - recommended viewing). I have a seen it several times over the years but hadn't watched it for a while. It starts with the newly-built Flower class corvette (escort vessel of about 1000 tons) Compass Rose and her newly trained crew in 1939 as they embark on the Battle of the Atlantic. The captain is from the merchant navy, the other officers have a few weeks training and most of the crew have never been to sea before.

The concept of gearing up for war and turning civilians into professional navy officers and crew is something that would be interesting to simulate in more depth than the current mechanics. I'll give it some thought.

Have you ever read the book (author Monsarrat)?  It's been decades since I've read it, but I remember it being excellent, especially in terms of giving a sense the powerlessness of the small escorts in the early war and how arbitrary submarine attacks on convoys were (in the sense of a torpedo hit being a bolt from the blue that they had no idea was coming).

John
 

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Star Marshal
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 11669
  • Thanked: 20441 times
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #1582 on: November 28, 2019, 10:42:19 AM »
I watched 'The Cruel Sea' last night (excellent 1953 B&W film - recommended viewing). I have a seen it several times over the years but hadn't watched it for a while. It starts with the newly-built Flower class corvette (escort vessel of about 1000 tons) Compass Rose and her newly trained crew in 1939 as they embark on the Battle of the Atlantic. The captain is from the merchant navy, the other officers have a few weeks training and most of the crew have never been to sea before.

The concept of gearing up for war and turning civilians into professional navy officers and crew is something that would be interesting to simulate in more depth than the current mechanics. I'll give it some thought.

Have you ever read the book (author Monsarrat)?  It's been decades since I've read it, but I remember it being excellent, especially in terms of giving a sense the powerlessness of the small escorts in the early war and how arbitrary submarine attacks on convoys were (in the sense of a torpedo hit being a bolt from the blue that they had no idea was coming).

John

I've read the beginning on Amazon, then got distracted before I bought it :)

I do plan to read it.
 

Offline SevenOfCarina

  • Lieutenant
  • *******
  • Posts: 170
  • Thanked: 95 times
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #1583 on: November 29, 2019, 01:31:26 AM »
I know... I have been staring at that for some time and made some tools to do the math for me.

The reason for my suggestion is that small sensors are also ALOT more efficient as well.

A 30t scout could reasonably have 0.3HS res 100 sensor and it would take a size 50 comparable sensor to detect that at the same range. Don't remember if you allowed smaller fuel tanks than 5000 but I think I remember the smallest being 1000 or so now for small ground fighters as they don't need that much fuel, could be fitted on a small scout as well for minimal size if that is the case and make the size even smaller than 30t.

A 0.3HS resolution 100 sensor with Strength 21, Sensitivity 11 have a range of roughly 21 million km against 5000t.

A resolution 1 sensor at size 50 would spot that small sensor scout at 21 million km. I also would need a size 15-17 EM detector to sense that scout at that range too.

I'm just looking for options to use smaller resolution active sensors as an option so these RES 1 don't need to be inflated too much to find very small scouts.

I do understand that it would also make missile detection easier, so it would be a trade off with that as a balancing issue.

I don't necessarily thing this is a problem in and of itself... I see no wrong in small scouts being very powerful as it opens the game up for more interesting scouting potential where fog of war are more pronounced.

Except even a tiny, 0.3 HS sensor with resolution 100 is still going to have a very large GPS. I'm not sure how you arrived at that number, but per my the wiki rules:

GPS = size x resolution x ASS = 0.3 x 100 x 21 = 630

So it will get detected beyond it's own range (21.80 m km) by any EM sensor with a sensitivity greater than 12.07, which is a pathetic 1.09 HS with EM sensitivity 11.

EM sensors in C# Aurora will absolutely be extremely important, since, like with Thermal sensors, their effective range actually increases if your opponents have superior sensor technology. That tiny scout of yours will get seen from well beyond it's own range by even moderately sized passive sensors, whereupon it either gets avoided, baited, or is gunned down by interceptors.

The fact is, that in C# Aurora, active sensors areloud and are very very unlikely to actually get in range of an evading enemy fleet running on passives. Ironically, this makes thermal sensors more important - when lighting up actives is suicide, EM passives become useless as no one dares to do so unless they have a definite advantage, and only thermal sensors can actually see anything.

But even so, you can still have scouts along one vector directing missile fire from fleets approaching in a completely different vector, which seems a bit cheesy, given how small scouts can get. I think some sort of range limit for fire direction might be useful, where a fleet has to be withing x range of a scout for it to actually be able to send them targeting information. Maybe some sort of transmitter and/or receiver components?
 

Offline Jorgen_CAB

  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • J
  • Posts: 2837
  • Thanked: 673 times
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #1584 on: November 29, 2019, 02:16:03 AM »
I know... I have been staring at that for some time and made some tools to do the math for me.

The reason for my suggestion is that small sensors are also ALOT more efficient as well.

A 30t scout could reasonably have 0.3HS res 100 sensor and it would take a size 50 comparable sensor to detect that at the same range. Don't remember if you allowed smaller fuel tanks than 5000 but I think I remember the smallest being 1000 or so now for small ground fighters as they don't need that much fuel, could be fitted on a small scout as well for minimal size if that is the case and make the size even smaller than 30t.

A 0.3HS resolution 100 sensor with Strength 21, Sensitivity 11 have a range of roughly 21 million km against 5000t.

A resolution 1 sensor at size 50 would spot that small sensor scout at 21 million km. I also would need a size 15-17 EM detector to sense that scout at that range too.

I'm just looking for options to use smaller resolution active sensors as an option so these RES 1 don't need to be inflated too much to find very small scouts.

I do understand that it would also make missile detection easier, so it would be a trade off with that as a balancing issue.

I don't necessarily thing this is a problem in and of itself... I see no wrong in small scouts being very powerful as it opens the game up for more interesting scouting potential where fog of war are more pronounced.

Except even a tiny, 0.3 HS sensor with resolution 100 is still going to have a very large GPS. I'm not sure how you arrived at that number, but per my the wiki rules:

GPS = size x resolution x ASS = 0.3 x 100 x 21 = 630

So it will get detected beyond it's own range (21.80 m km) by any EM sensor with a sensitivity greater than 12.07, which is a pathetic 1.09 HS with EM sensitivity 11.

EM sensors in C# Aurora will absolutely be extremely important, since, like with Thermal sensors, their effective range actually increases if your opponents have superior sensor technology. That tiny scout of yours will get seen from well beyond it's own range by even moderately sized passive sensors, whereupon it either gets avoided, baited, or is gunned down by interceptors.

The fact is, that in C# Aurora, active sensors areloud and are very very unlikely to actually get in range of an evading enemy fleet running on passives. Ironically, this makes thermal sensors more important - when lighting up actives is suicide, EM passives become useless as no one dares to do so unless they have a definite advantage, and only thermal sensors can actually see anything.

But even so, you can still have scouts along one vector directing missile fire from fleets approaching in a completely different vector, which seems a bit cheesy, given how small scouts can get. I think some sort of range limit for fire direction might be useful, where a fleet has to be withing x range of a scout for it to actually be able to send them targeting information. Maybe some sort of transmitter and/or receiver components?

I calculated correctly with the EM I just brainfarted and used size instead of sensitivity... ;)

As for lighting up that is a none issue as you are using such sensor craft to put active sensor on an already detected enemy... and a cheap one at that. You could use multiple sensor scouts at multiple vectors and only light them up briefly before turning of the sensor and move to another position. All the while missiles are inbound.

And how do you know they are not a cheap bait for your interceptors... ;)

Given how small and cheap they are it is efficient.

I agree that passive sensor are more important as finding the enemy before you are found yourself is key.

But these really small sensor crafts will be efficient in that they are stealth when they turn the sensor off. An active only need to be on for a few seconds to get data.., you don't run around with them on all the time. Even a small escort could have many such small scouts to send out in active patrols instead or as complement to passive scouting.

Since they are smaller than 50 ton they will be really hard to engage as they are very hard to find. It will also be very cheap with stealthy engines o  such small ships so they are very hard to find on thermal sensors too.
 

Offline SevenOfCarina

  • Lieutenant
  • *******
  • Posts: 170
  • Thanked: 95 times
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #1585 on: November 29, 2019, 03:23:32 AM »

I calculated correctly with the EM I just brainfarted and used size instead of sensitivity... ;)

As for lighting up that is a none issue as you are using such sensor craft to put active sensor on an already detected enemy... and a cheap one at that. You could use multiple sensor scouts at multiple vectors and only light them up briefly before turning of the sensor and move to another position. All the while missiles are inbound.

And how do you know they are not a cheap bait for your interceptors... ;)

Given how small and cheap they are it is efficient.

I agree that passive sensor are more important as finding the enemy before you are found yourself is key.

But these really small sensor crafts will be efficient in that they are stealth when they turn the sensor off. An active only need to be on for a few seconds to get data.., you don't run around with them on all the time. Even a small escort could have many such small scouts to send out in active patrols instead or as complement to passive scouting.

Since they are smaller than 50 ton they will be really hard to engage as they are very hard to find. It will also be very cheap with stealthy engines o  such small ships so they are very hard to find on thermal sensors too.

You'll need so many of them that it'll be inefficient. For painting a fleet when you already know it's exact position, sure, it might be useful to have lots of tiny scouts, but they're never going to keep up with any serious battlefleet because they're going to end up with minimal speed and endurance. Which is pretty much the exact opposite of what you wan for reconnaissance or patrol activities.

Flicking on the active sensors momentarily doesn't mean that an opponent in range won't see the EM surge and investigate. A gunship with reduced-size gauss cannons and reasonably boosted engines is both very inexpensive and hard to counter without defensive assets that will end up presenting a larger target to track, and can be reasonably expected to get close enough that subsequent pulses will paint a bright red target on the scout. A moderately-sized fleet can easily carry dozens of these things. Even bog-standard railgun PD fighters can be easily re-purposed to go scout hunting in a pinch.

And how exactly do you expect to maintain continuous sensor coverage from multiple vectors on a target that will certainly be random-walking itself, and will also be able to see your sensor from maybe twice it's own range? You're assuming that these scouts can effectively surround a likely faster and more endurant enemy, and will know exactly when they are in range so they can activate their actives at the exact same time. They're also going to be completely useless against smaller vessels.

Here's how this will go. You launch fifty of these scout boats and manoeuvre them into place. Combined, they can search an area of
74,753 quadrillion square kilometres. Except that's a circle with a radius of about one AU. Oops? You are absolutely not going to be able to find a hostile vessel hidden in any moderately-sized star system by running around blind with only moments of sensor coverage. Not before it sees you first, and avoids you or guns you down.

With how much C# will increase fog-of-war, running down any long-endurance enemy ghost fleets in a system is going to be an utter nightmare. Clearing systems is going to be very, very painful for an attacker and you can never quite be sure there won't be a minefield suddenly appearing amongst your convoy routes.


 

Offline Jorgen_CAB

  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • J
  • Posts: 2837
  • Thanked: 673 times
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #1586 on: November 29, 2019, 02:34:26 PM »

I calculated correctly with the EM I just brainfarted and used size instead of sensitivity... ;)

As for lighting up that is a none issue as you are using such sensor craft to put active sensor on an already detected enemy... and a cheap one at that. You could use multiple sensor scouts at multiple vectors and only light them up briefly before turning of the sensor and move to another position. All the while missiles are inbound. Given how small and stealthy (reduced thermal engines are easy to give these) they are it is very hard to find them once their sensor is off.

And how do you know they are not a cheap bait for your interceptors... ;)

Given how small and cheap they are it is efficient.

I agree that passive sensor are more important as finding the enemy before you are found yourself is key.

But these really small sensor crafts will be efficient in that they are stealth when they turn the sensor off. An active only need to be on for a few seconds to get data.., you don't run around with them on all the time. Even a small escort could have many such small scouts to send out in active patrols instead or as complement to passive scouting.

Since they are smaller than 50 ton they will be really hard to engage as they are very hard to find. It will also be very cheap with stealthy engines o  such small ships so they are very hard to find on thermal sensors too.

You'll need so many of them that it'll be inefficient. For painting a fleet when you already know it's exact position, sure, it might be useful to have lots of tiny scouts, but they're never going to keep up with any serious battlefleet because they're going to end up with minimal speed and endurance. Which is pretty much the exact opposite of what you wan for reconnaissance or patrol activities.

Flicking on the active sensors momentarily doesn't mean that an opponent in range won't see the EM surge and investigate. A gunship with reduced-size gauss cannons and reasonably boosted engines is both very inexpensive and hard to counter without defensive assets that will end up presenting a larger target to track, and can be reasonably expected to get close enough that subsequent pulses will paint a bright red target on the scout. A moderately-sized fleet can easily carry dozens of these things. Even bog-standard railgun PD fighters can be easily re-purposed to go scout hunting in a pinch.

And how exactly do you expect to maintain continuous sensor coverage from multiple vectors on a target that will certainly be random-walking itself, and will also be able to see your sensor from maybe twice it's own range? You're assuming that these scouts can effectively surround a likely faster and more endurant enemy, and will know exactly when they are in range so they can activate their actives at the exact same time. They're also going to be completely useless against smaller vessels.

Here's how this will go. You launch fifty of these scout boats and manoeuvre them into place. Combined, they can search an area of
74,753 quadrillion square kilometres. Except that's a circle with a radius of about one AU. Oops? You are absolutely not going to be able to find a hostile vessel hidden in any moderately-sized star system by running around blind with only moments of sensor coverage. Not before it sees you first, and avoids you or guns you down.

With how much C# will increase fog-of-war, running down any long-endurance enemy ghost fleets in a system is going to be an utter nightmare. Clearing systems is going to be very, very painful for an attacker and you can never quite be sure there won't be a minefield suddenly appearing amongst your convoy routes.

I have done this MANY times in the current version of Auroa as well... these small scouts are generally faster, some times much faster than larger ships. They are often relatively short range though and even shorter range in C#.

These small sensors are way more efficient than a comparable larger sensor so you can have more of them. That is the whole purpose of the new change to the system as you need to quadruple the size of the sensor to scan twice as far.

You keep continuous sensor coverage with using a few scouts that paint the target in turns if necessary, long enough for missile strikes to hit. About 20 million km is a pretty far distance for such a small craft. Even loosing one or two will make little impact on your ability to scout.

And yes, small scouts are very likely to be much faster than a standard warship, at least in the context I usually see them as they trade speed for range. As they are launched from a carrier they don't need efficient engines or endurance. A 10t 2-3x engine on a 30-35t craft will make it go really fast. These scouts are NOT long range or endurance ships. They are small fast scouts with a specific purpose, speed and stealth are their defences.

If a fleet start seeing pings of dozens of small scouts in an area they can certainly avoid that area, that can also be the intention when you then funnel an enemy into a different area where you placed your passive scouts. They don't need to cover an area fully either as no sane admiral would fly their capital ships in the general direction and risk being detected as you don't know where the scouts are or will be. So a handful of scouts would be able to cover a pretty large area by making random searches here and there. It might also be a trap to go after them as well, how do you know?!?

Is it worth the risk destroying an extremely cheap little 30-35t scout and risk loosing something way more expensive.

You also DON'T search in squares or circles, the whole purpose with more space efficient sensors is that you search in LINES or at least layered lines, that means a small sensor are four times more effective than comparable large sensors if they are all of the same speed. I really don't understand why you would scan an entire system like this, this is a tactical tool not a strategical. It is for when you know the general area of an opponent, these scouts don't replace passive scouts, buoys, stations or ships. They are a tactical tool with a specific use. Why do you assume they are used in the attack role... I don't think it matters if they are used offensively or defensively.

There are many fun ways they could be used with other assets.

So, the reason I asked for lower resolution sensors was that you could more easily paint such craft from a distance and shoot them down with small AMM like missiles. In the current form the only option is more or less a beam interceptor. The smallest beam interceptor are likely to be at least about 75-100 ton or so as the smallest Gauss is 25t for the weapon itself and then you need a fire-control, engine, fuel etc.

Against the AI all these points are moot as they will clearly be OP against the AI no matter what, even more so than in VB6 Aurora. I'm talking about multi-faction games where several sides are human controlled.
« Last Edit: November 29, 2019, 02:40:16 PM by Jorgen_CAB »
 
The following users thanked this post: Agoelia

Offline Ciphascain

  • Leading Rate
  • *
  • C
  • Posts: 10
  • Thanked: 7 times
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #1587 on: December 06, 2019, 02:30:20 AM »
For the infantry it might be cool if there was a powered and in powered infantry version.  So I could build lots of cheap unpowered infantry for some things and have an elite core of powered armoires infantry (I. e 40k).  Might not be the biggest thing but would be nice for rp purposes. 
 

Offline Jorgen_CAB

  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • J
  • Posts: 2837
  • Thanked: 673 times
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #1588 on: December 06, 2019, 03:13:34 AM »
There already are different armour options for infantry that could represent regular or power armoured infantry.
 

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Moderator
  • Star Marshal
  • *****
  • S
  • Posts: 11669
  • Thanked: 20441 times
Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Reply #1589 on: December 06, 2019, 03:26:30 AM »
For the infantry it might be cool if there was a powered and in powered infantry version.  So I could build lots of cheap unpowered infantry for some things and have an elite core of powered armoires infantry (I. e 40k).  Might not be the biggest thing but would be nice for rp purposes.

Here is an excerpt from my current c# test campaign:

Research into Improved Genetic Enhancement was completed in Y2505. With the new technology available, a new type of solder, the Space Marine, was created by Terran geneticists. Equipped with new heavy powered infantry armour, trained in boarding combat and armed with a heavy bolter that had the same firepower as a crew-served anti-personnel weapon, the Space Marine was a formidable warrior. The Terminator Space Marine was even more heavily armed and carried a Storm Bolter, which had equivalent firepower to the secondary weapon of a Leman Russ battle tank. The first Space Marine formations to be trained would be Assault Forces of thirty Space Marines, six Terminator Space Marines and two command personnel. A single Thunderhawk assault transport would carry each Assault Force. As a strike cruiser had three such transports with over a hundred Space Marines in total, the force assigned to each strike cruiser would be known as a Space Marine Company.

Space Marine
Transport Size (tons)  12     Cost  2.4     Armour  16     Hit Points  12.8
Annual Maintenance Cost  0.3     Resupply Cost  6
Crew-Served Anti-Personnel:      Shots 6      Penetration 10      Damage 10
Boarding Combat
Improved Genetic Enhancement

Terminator Space Marine
Transport Size (tons)  20     Cost  4     Armour  16     Hit Points  12.8
Annual Maintenance Cost  0.5     Resupply Cost  9
Heavy Crew-Served Anti-Personnel:      Shots 6      Penetration 15      Damage 10
Boarding Combat
Improved Genetic Enhancement


http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?board=266.0
 
The following users thanked this post: Ciphascain