Post reply

Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.

Note: this post will not display until it's been approved by a moderator.

Name:
Email:
Subject:
Message icon:

shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview

Please read the rules before you post!


Topic Summary

Posted by: Kirkegaard
« on: May 14, 2014, 09:24:30 AM »

I have improved my missiles a lot, still testing out but thanks for the input so far.

Code: [Select]
Missile Size: 9 MSP  (0.45 HS)     Warhead: 10    Armour: 0     Manoeuvre Rating: 13
Speed: 105600 km/s    Engine Endurance: 82 minutes   Range: 518.4m km
Active Sensor Strength: 2.4   Sensitivity Modifier: 180%
Resolution: 100    Maximum Range vs 5000 ton object (or larger): 4 320 000 km
Cost Per Missile: 18.695
Chance to Hit: 1k km/s 1372.8%   3k km/s 455%   5k km/s 274.6%   10k km/s 137.3%
Materials Required:    2.5x Tritanium   1.44x Boronide   2.4x Uridium   12.355x Gallicite   Fuel x3750
Code: [Select]
Missile Size: 1 MSP  (0.05 HS)     Warhead: 0    Armour: 0     Manoeuvre Rating: 42
Speed: 30000 km/s    Engine Endurance: 133 minutes   Range: 240.0m km
Active Sensor Strength: 0.6   Sensitivity Modifier: 180%
Resolution: 1    Maximum Range vs 50 ton object (or larger): 100 000 km
Cost Per Missile: 1.975
Chance to Hit: 1k km/s 1260%   3k km/s 420%   5k km/s 252%   10k km/s 126%
Materials Required:    0.36x Boronide   0.6x Uridium   1.015x Gallicite   Fuel x225
Posted by: Charlie Beeler
« on: May 14, 2014, 09:19:04 AM »

Your components don't add up much less match the listed specs.  The components for your sz1 missile come to 1.24 and the sz9 adds too 11.7.

Let's look at the tech first:

Engine tech of Solid-core Anti-matter.  That's an engine power of 40 per hullspace or 2 per msp.
Cobalt Warhead - 10pts per msp
Missile Agility 160 - 160 per msp

It does not look like you used power multiplier tech at all.  Also it looks like the fuel modifier tech is at a much lower tech level than the engine tech.

The other comments about both missiles being too slow are correct.  Assuming you face a race with equal engine tech a ship with 25% hs in engine without power modifiers applied have a speed of 10k/kps.

Using the presumption of max power tech being fulling researched and fuel modifier being at a similar research level an ASM can be reasonably expected to have specs like this: speed 101.5k/kps(350% power multiplier), with a range of 135.5m/km(20% fuel modifier) and a hit change against 10k/kps target of 101.5%(no additional agility).  (for a sz 4 missile) Component specs are: 1 x 2.9msp engine, 1msp warhead, .1msp fuel,  cost 7.575/dev 757.5RP.  As sz 8 missile could use 2 x 2.9msp engines with fuel and warhead doubled and only a slightly reduced range for a cost of 10.075/dev 1007.5RP.

And AMM specs like this: speed 196.8k/kps (600% power), range 38.1m/km-flight time of 3.23 minutes(20% fuel modifier), maneuver rating of 13 for a hit change vs the above ASM of 25.2%.  Component specs are:  1 x .82msp engine, .1msp warhead, .0157msp agility, .0643msp fuel,  cost 2.7602/dev 276.02RP.

Considering the speeds involved the sensor packages are a waste of missile space.


Quote from: Kirkegaard on May 13, 2014, 05:03:44 PM
I will just jump in here, I am quite far into my game technology wise and have also defeated a few enemy ships and gotten destroyed by others. I now use a size 1 and a size 9 missile. Could I get you to take a look at them?

Missile Size: 1:
0.1 Warhead
0.1 Fuel
0.39 Agility
0.1 Active sensor
1 0.55 Solid Core AM drive engine

Code: [Select]
Missile Size: 1 MSP  (0.05 HS)     Warhead: 1    Armour: 0     Manoeuvre Rating: 72
Speed: 11000 km/s    Engine Endurance: 37.0 hours   Range: 1 466.5m km
Active Sensor Strength: 0.24   Sensitivity Modifier: 180%
Resolution: 1    Maximum Range vs 50 ton object (or larger): 40 000 km
Cost Per Missile: 2.0195
Chance to Hit: 1k km/s 792%   3k km/s 216%   5k km/s 158.4%   10k km/s 79.2%
Materials Required:    0.25x Tritanium   0.144x Boronide   0.24x Uridium   1.3855x Gallicite   Fuel x250

Size 9.
2 Warhead
1.5 fuel
2.2 Agility
1 Thermal Sensor
2 2.5 Solid Core AM Drive engine:
Code: [Select]
Missile Size: 9 MSP  (0.45 HS)     Warhead: 20    Armour: 0     Manoeuvre Rating: 49
Speed: 11100 km/s    Engine Endurance: 114.4 hours   Range: 4 572.0m km
Thermal Sensor Strength: 1.2    Detect Sig Strength 1000:  1 200 000 km
Cost Per Missile: 15.21
Chance to Hit: 1k km/s 543.9%   3k km/s 147%   5k km/s 108.8%   10k km/s 54.4%
Materials Required:    5x Tritanium   0.72x Boronide   1.2x Uridium   8.29x Gallicite   Fuel x3750

Development Cost for Project: 1521RP

Are they fast enough? If a ship is moving at 5500 km/s the missile is only double speed and it might move quite a lot before my missile get to it?
That let me to the sensors, how should I set them up? I have seen quite a few missiles loosing track of the enemy, and that seems like a waste.
Posted by: Wolfius
« on: May 14, 2014, 07:05:06 AM »

As far as sensors go, after a few bad experiances I prefer to sacrifice a bit of range range(or, rather, up the size and tech of my sensors to compensate as neccessary) and use the FAC standard for all anti-ship fire controls and search sensors, setting resolution to 20 aka 1000 tons. Doesn't get the same range as a looser resolution, but my fleets tend to be acompanied by a scout with a massive sensor(usually a retasked heavy explorer; full suite of huge sensors also help them avoid trouble when out alone in the black), and it insures reasonable detection and engagment ranges against most targets. Mate with good ranged resolution 1 sensor and you have a simple and robust setup, and it means fewer sensor design research projects. 1 long range scout sensor for finding alien ships, one offencive missile active sensor w/ matching fire control to suit your anti-ship missiles, one antimissile active sensor with matching fire control to suit your anti-missiles, and you've got the basics covered; you can generally see anything before it can shoot at you and shoot at anything before it gets particularly close, regardless of what your opponent is using.

Messing with a wider range of more specialised sensors can be fun, but sometimes KISS is best, especially when you're learning the game and trying to find something that works.

That said, don't be afraid to experiment.
Posted by: alex_brunius
« on: May 14, 2014, 02:20:20 AM »

Quote from: Kirkegaard on May 13, 2014, 05:03:44 PM

Size 9.
2 Warhead
1.5 fuel
2.2 Agility
1 Thermal Sensor
2 2.5 Solid Core AM Drive engine:
Code: [Select]
Missile Size: 9 MSP  (0.45 HS)     Warhead: 20    Armour: 0     Manoeuvre Rating: 49
Speed: 11100 km/s    Engine Endurance: 114.4 hours   Range: 4 572.0m km
Thermal Sensor Strength: 1.2    Detect Sig Strength 1000:  1 200 000 km
Cost Per Missile: 15.21
Chance to Hit: 1k km/s 543.9%   3k km/s 147%   5k km/s 108.8%   10k km/s 54.4%
Materials Required:    5x Tritanium   0.72x Boronide   1.2x Uridium   8.29x Gallicite   Fuel x3750

Development Cost for Project: 1521RP

Are they fast enough? If a ship is moving at 5500 km/s the missile is only double speed and it might move quite a lot before my missile get to it?

The size 9 missile looks like it has excessive range, surley you are not engaging targets 4572 million km away?

Also for lower techs it's normally better to go for a bigger engine, a fast missile will both get a higher hit chance and be harder to shoot down. The high agility missile will only get the first benefit.

What performance do you get if you instead use something like a size 5.5 - 6.0 engine with max power modifier ( reducing fuel to 0.2 - 0.7 )?
Posted by: MarcAFK
« on: May 14, 2014, 01:19:14 AM »

Size one missiles are generally used for anti-missile work, as such they need to be as fast as possible, at that tech level perhaps 30-40,000km/s ? If being used for antimissiles you don't need much range, I doubt you'll have a resolution one sensor/fire control  with 500,000,000km range, and even if you do, that's the range for a 50 ton object, you'll get less range against a small missile.
So I suggest making a new engine for that size 1 missile .6 size, maximum speed multiplier. halve your fuel, then see what range you get. Then design a resolution 1 sensor and fire control as long range as you can reasonably fit into your Ships or as big as you can afford to research.
About resolution, missiles don't care what size target you fire them at, as long as you have picked it up on active sensor with any ship in range, and as long as the ship firing the missile has a fire control also within range of the target.
Sensors are best tailored to the size of the target, you can't just make a massive capital ship sensor and expect it to be good at detecting destroyers or god forbid fighters/FACs.
So for instance, a heavy long range missile carrier might have a resolution 150-200 sensor for detecting very large ships at extreme range, your destroyers might use resolution 80-100 for detecting destroyers, and smaller beam armed escorts might have resolution 20-40 sensors for detecting Fast attack craft. Then just put a fire control onto your missile ships which matches the resolution of whatever sensor you're using, and with enough range for your missiles, you should aim for making every missile as long ranged as you can, at least limited by the range of your sensors. But if you have alot of sensor ships picketing a system or your fleet you could just make extreme range missiles and cross your fingers that teh target stays in range of something.
Posted by: Wolfius
« on: May 14, 2014, 12:49:45 AM »

Those missiles seem really slow but with insanely long range, tho I don't think I even played a game to the AM drive ages.

I've had fusion-drive FACs that were more than twice as fast, tho.
Posted by: Kirkegaard
« on: May 13, 2014, 06:49:03 PM »

Thank you,

Can you decide the resolution on the missiles? Or do you mean on the fire control?
Posted by: NihilRex
« on: May 13, 2014, 06:21:11 PM »

Your size 1 missile is too slow.  I am assuming it is a countermissile.  You should be using the MAX power modifer you can for it.

Thermal missile sensors are better for mines\busses.

For normal targets an active sensor is better, with the resolution scaled to whatever targets you are looking for.
Posted by: Kirkegaard
« on: May 13, 2014, 05:03:44 PM »

I will just jump in here, I am quite far into my game technology wise and have also defeated a few enemy ships and gotten destroyed by others. I now use a size 1 and a size 9 missile. Could I get you to take a look at them?

Missile Size: 1:
0.1 Warhead
0.1 Fuel
0.39 Agility
0.1 Active sensor
1 0.55 Solid Core AM drive engine

Code: [Select]
Missile Size: 1 MSP  (0.05 HS)     Warhead: 1    Armour: 0     Manoeuvre Rating: 72
Speed: 11000 km/s    Engine Endurance: 37.0 hours   Range: 1 466.5m km
Active Sensor Strength: 0.24   Sensitivity Modifier: 180%
Resolution: 1    Maximum Range vs 50 ton object (or larger): 40 000 km
Cost Per Missile: 2.0195
Chance to Hit: 1k km/s 792%   3k km/s 216%   5k km/s 158.4%   10k km/s 79.2%
Materials Required:    0.25x Tritanium   0.144x Boronide   0.24x Uridium   1.3855x Gallicite   Fuel x250

Size 9.
2 Warhead
1.5 fuel
2.2 Agility
1 Thermal Sensor
2 2.5 Solid Core AM Drive engine:
Code: [Select]
Missile Size: 9 MSP  (0.45 HS)     Warhead: 20    Armour: 0     Manoeuvre Rating: 49
Speed: 11100 km/s    Engine Endurance: 114.4 hours   Range: 4 572.0m km
Thermal Sensor Strength: 1.2    Detect Sig Strength 1000:  1 200 000 km
Cost Per Missile: 15.21
Chance to Hit: 1k km/s 543.9%   3k km/s 147%   5k km/s 108.8%   10k km/s 54.4%
Materials Required:    5x Tritanium   0.72x Boronide   1.2x Uridium   8.29x Gallicite   Fuel x3750

Development Cost for Project: 1521RP

Are they fast enough? If a ship is moving at 5500 km/s the missile is only double speed and it might move quite a lot before my missile get to it?
That let me to the sensors, how should I set them up? I have seen quite a few missiles loosing track of the enemy, and that seems like a waste.
Posted by: MarcAFK
« on: May 12, 2014, 11:47:20 PM »

In almost every case you want to use a single missile with maximum power multiplier. Multiple smaller engines are terribly fuel inefficient, but will save you needing to design seperAte engines.
Missile engines are  very cheap to research however.
Generally the engine should be around 40-50% of the missile, until you start getting to higher tech levels.
Posted by: NihilRex
« on: May 12, 2014, 04:39:53 PM »

Hit Chances with missiles is heavily influenced by speed.  It is usually better to use a bigger engine than to add agility.

Try to use the estimator at http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php/topic,5855.msg60061.html#msg60061

I can only figure out the missile estimator myself, but it works very well.
Posted by: Charlie Beeler
« on: May 12, 2014, 01:57:13 PM »

Quote from: Llamatoesl on May 12, 2014, 12:46:16 PM
Missile Size: 5. 12 MSP  (0. 256 HS)     Warhead: 9    Armour: 0     Manoeuvre Rating: 38
Speed: 5600 km/s    Engine Endurance: 218 minutes   Range: 73. 1m km
Cost Per Missile: 5. 426
Chance to Hit: 1k km/s 212. 8%   3k km/s 38%   5k km/s 42. 6%   10k km/s 21. 3%
Materials Required:    2. 25x Tritanium   3. 176x Gallicite   Fuel x1750

Development Cost for Project: 543RP
This is about as close to my fire control as I could get.  I'm working on a more powerful version for PDCs and cruisers, but this should be my baseline missile.

What engine/fuel modifier/power modifier/Warhead/missile agility/Agtive Sensor/EM techs do you currently have?  This missile looks to be have to little engine and way too much agility. 
Posted by: Sematary
« on: May 12, 2014, 01:00:09 PM »

Can you lower its size by 0.12 MSP? Or up it to size 6? If not then you are wasting space essentially. A size 5.00000001 missile still has to be shot out of a size 6 launcher so its best to work in whole numbers.
Posted by: Llamatoesl
« on: May 12, 2014, 12:46:16 PM »

Missile Size: 5. 12 MSP  (0. 256 HS)     Warhead: 9    Armour: 0     Manoeuvre Rating: 38
Speed: 5600 km/s    Engine Endurance: 218 minutes   Range: 73. 1m km
Cost Per Missile: 5. 426
Chance to Hit: 1k km/s 212. 8%   3k km/s 38%   5k km/s 42. 6%   10k km/s 21. 3%
Materials Required:    2. 25x Tritanium   3. 176x Gallicite   Fuel x1750

Development Cost for Project: 543RP
This is about as close to my fire control as I could get.  I'm working on a more powerful version for PDCs and cruisers, but this should be my baseline missile.
Posted by: Theodidactus
« on: May 12, 2014, 11:14:46 AM »

Quote from: Llamatoesl on May 12, 2014, 10:46:00 AM
Thanks.  i have taken some of the advice- Unfortunately, the only missile fire control I could build with a decent resolution was massive.

it sounds like you're fundamentally limited by tech level, and then there's little you can do without some hard-core research.

The final numbers are not as important as the balance between them, if that makes sense.
You're not making a "mistake" unless these numbers don't line up:
- the range of the missile
- the range of the fire control for the missile
- the range of the active scanner/sensor that detects targets the missile will hit.

"newbie mistakes" usually aren't pitifully short ranged missiles or whatever, it's typically that someone has, say, a missile fire control that can lob missiles 20 million km, but missiles that only have a range of 5 million km, or ships that lack an active sensor and therefore can't see anything at all.

Basically, if 5 million kilometers is all you can do, then it's all you can do. the important thing is whether the ship itself has a missile that goes about that far, and has an active sensor or a support ship with an active sensor that goes at least that far.

This is why some earlier posters were saying it might be a good idea to post the design for the whole ship in the bureau of ship design. it's tough to critique a single weapon system in a vacuum. Posting the whole design will let us say things like "sure this thing has missiles but it also has no armor so its going to be torn to pieces before it does anything" or "your ship has very short range so it's not going to be able to fly out and engage targets without running out of fuel."