Recommendations for Early Game Ship Design.

[nightlord84 (OP)]

Hello! I'm a new player just starting his first game on 5. 52 (trans-newtonian start).  I read through the wiki pages, the forum tutorial, and a few forum threads on the Academy, Tips, and Ship Design boards, so I feel that I have a basic understanding of armaments and ship design.  Unfortunately, while I now know what a lot of things do I'm not so sure about how to use them together to make a functioning ship, so I was hoping that the community could help me out.   

1.  How exactly does turret turning speed function and how does it effect the firing capabilities of the turret?

2.  What does "gear" mean in turret turning speed?

3.  What is a reasonable maintenance life and range for a ship? (trying not to overdo engineering sections and fuel stores)

4.  When should shields and armor (when is armor better than shields and vice versa) be used and how much of each for different types of ships?

5.  What range should be aimed for with AMMs? I developed a starting AMM with the following stats

Missile Size: 1 MSP  (0. 05 HS)     Warhead: 1    Armour: 0     Manoeuvre Rating: 27
Speed: 24000 km/s    Endurance: 8 minutes   Range: 11. 3m km
Cost Per Missile: 1. 075
Chance to Hit: 1k km/s 648%   3k km/s 216%   5k km/s 129. 6%   10k km/s 64. 8%
Materials Required:    0. 25x Tritanium   0. 57x Gallicite   Fuel x125

but noticed that the Fire Control needed to get the same max range (against missiles size 6 and below) is quite large.


Active Sensor Strength: 448   Sensitivity Modifier: 80%
Sensor Size: 28 HS    Sensor HTK: 1
Resolution: 1    Maximum Range vs 50 ton object (or larger): 107,520,000 km
Range vs Size 6 Missile (or smaller): 11,708,928 km
Range vs Size 8 Missile: 17,203,200 km
Range vs Size 12 Missile: 38,707,200 km
Chance of destruction by electronic damage: 100%
Cost: 448    Crew: 140
Materials Required: 112x Duranium  336x Uridium

 Is this how things are supposed to work or am I designing my AMMs or Fire Controls incorrectly? Maybe I'm just not understanding anti-missile defense? I made a fire-control with range matching my current ASM and it was pretty small (much worse resolution obviously).

6.  What are some reasonable stats for fighters as far as payload, size, speed, armor, etc. ? What general ballpark should I aim for? Here's my attempt at a design:

Condor class Fighter-bomber    500 tons     8 Crew     100. 6 BP      TCS 10  TH 36  EM 0
3600 km/s     Armour 1-5     Shields 0-0     Sensors 1/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 0     PPV 4. 5
Maint Life 7. 92 Years     MSP 25    AFR 10%    IFR 0. 1%    1YR 1    5YR 11    Max Repair 32 MSP
Magazine 30   

FTR Ion Engine E800 (1)    Power 36    Fuel Use 8000%    Signature 36    Armour 0    Exp 25%
Fuel Capacity 20,000 Litres    Range 0. 9 billion km   (69 hours at full power)

Size 5 Box Launcher (6)    Missile Size 5    Hangar Reload 37. 5 minutes    MF Reload 6. 2 hours
Missile Fire Control FC76-R100 (1)     Range 76. 8m km    Resolution 100
Judgement-1 (6)  Speed: 18,000 km/s   End: 62. 5m    Range: 67. 5m km   WH: 5    Size: 5    TH: 120 / 72 / 36

Active Search Sensor MR12-R100 (1)     GPS 1600     Range 12. 8m km    Resolution 100


7.  What is the typical speed for a freighter/tanker/colony ship/jump gate construction ship?

8.  What general level of armaments, speed, defenses, sensors, etc.  should I be looking for in first-generation escort cruisers, main line cruisers, and fleet carriers? (sorry to ask such a broad question)

9.  Are combined gravitational/geological survey ships better than separate classes?

10.  How do turrets compare to AMMs for anti-missile defense duty? What's a good turret AM setup? A good AMM setup? (How many turrets, how many FCs, how many AMM launchers, how many FCs, what types of each)

Sorry to bombard you guys with so many questions.    I'm really excited about designing some ships but I'm kind of stumbling about in the dark at this point.  Any advice you can spare for a n00b would be appreciated.  Also, I'd like to warn you that I will probably think up a bunch more questions if I receive some help.    Thanks in advance!

[Erik L]

1. Weapons fire using the tracking speed of the fire control and turret or ship for non-turreted weapons. If you have a target doing 10,000km/s and your tracking speed is 4000, you'll suffer reduced chances to hit.

2. Turret has to turn. Gears make it turn.

3. This is pure opinion. 1-2 years for combat vessels. 5-6 for survey.

4. Armor is good at all tech levels. Shields are better mid/late tech. But armor should always be included.

5. Your fire control is 28HS, hence to long range. Reduce the size and you can get a FC to match your AMM range.

6. Box launchers should not have magazines associated with them. It'll take way too long to reload. Drop the magazine and reduce the maintenance. 8 years is high for a fighter.

7. For me, usually around 1/3 military speed.

8. Ahh... Whatever you can design and build. Ship design is a personal preference. I usually build two types of escort, AMM and beam. And two types of main combatants, Missile and beam. Carriers/FAC tenders would be a third, but... Go with the best you can design and build.

9. Not in my opinion. Example: 10 combined ships. Set as 2 groups of 5. Survey 2 systems. Geo the Grav/Grav then Geo. No matter. Geo takes longer in most systems because of all the bodies. Now I've got the Grav scanners on those ships idle. Separate ships. Geo survey 1 system. Grav Survey 3-4 in the same time (dependant on system bodies of course). I usually have at least twice as many systems grav surveyed as I do geo surveyed.

10. AMM vs. Turrets. AMM have a much longer range and can intercept further away from the fleet (good thing). Especially if there are leakers. Again, getting into the personal preference side, I advocate layered defenses. AMM escorts for distance interception, beam escorts for mid-short interceptions, and CIWS for individual close-in defense. Of course, ECM helps reduce the range at which your fleet can be targeted. I also prefer AMM to be linked in groups of 5-1. 5 launchers to 1 FC. I also build my ships to a size, so that will limit the number of turrets/FC/launchers I can put in. Not too many quad turrets fit on a 6000 ton hull. And most turrets will require power plants, further reducing the number of turrets.

[Dutchling]

6. Box launchers should not have magazines associated with them. It'll take way too long to reload. Drop the magazine and reduce the maintenance. 8 years is high for a fighter.

The 30 magazine space in the design are the missiles in the box launchers.

Also, the elaborate a bit on turret speed:
If I'm correctly, the tracking speed of a beam / kinetic weapon is  (your ship speed or turret speed (w/e is higher)) or fire control tracking speed (w/e is lower).
I could be wrong though..

[Erik L]

The 30 magazine space in the design are the missiles in the box launchers.

Also, the elaborate a bit on turret speed:
If I'm correctly, the tracking speed of a beam / kinetic weapon is  (your ship speed or turret speed (w/e is higher)) or fire control tracking speed (w/e is lower).
I could be wrong though..

My bad. No caffeine yet.

[nightlord84 (OP)]

Thanks!  A few more questions.   

Regarding question 5 it seems to me that shrinking the FC will make the range too much shorter than the missile's range.  As it stands it is:

AMM - Range: 11.  3m km
FC - Range vs Size 6 Missile (or smaller): 11,708,928 km

So isn't the FC matched correctly to the AMM for detecting small missiles so that the AMM can start engaging at its maximum range? Or should AMMs be aimed to hit attacking missiles closer than that?

Also, for question 4 what ratios should I go with roughly? Say I have gamma shields and equivalent armor tech.  What should my ratio be between shields and armor be approximately? What about with higher tech levels?

What size ships should I aim for? (Right now I am constrained by shipyard capacity, but for the future should I keep expanding ships in size indefinitely or is there a reasonable final level to aim for?)

What would an anti-ship beam system look like? Turreted or not turreted? How many weapons and how many FCs?

What is a reasonable turning speed for a turret to engage missiles?

Should I try to gradually make bigger missiles for my bigger ships or should I just improve upon a single size and add more launchers?

How can I ensure that a two-stage missile unleashes its payload at the correct time? (both design and actual use in battle)

Final question (for now): Is there any reason to use dual turrets  (or single or triple) vs.  say quad turrets if you aren't limited by energy supply?

Thanks again for the advice.   I may soon be able to build a fleet that is at least somewhat battle-worthy! 

[Ashery]

Still fairly new myself, so there will be gaps in my knowledge (Esp. re:missiles).

1) There are two tracking speeds to take into account:

BFC: This is simply the tracking speed of your attached BFC.
Weapon: For a non turreted weapon, this is the higher of the following two values: The max speed of the ship and your base (1x size) BFC tracking speed. For a turreted weapon, the value is solely based upon the turret design.

I can't comment on their exact influence over hit rate (I believe it's close to (tracking speed)/(target's speed), but I'm not sure how they interact when your BFC and weapon tracking speeds don't match up (Do they simply take the lower of the two?)).

2) Difficult to answer without giving an answer like Erik's. If you're talking about the "Turret Tracking Speed (10% Gear) 1250km/s" bit you see in the research tab, it simply means that the turret will add 10% to the HS of the turreted weapon(s) for each 1250km/s increment of tracking speed you add on (Not that it has to be in a 1250 increment, but you get the point). Things get a bit more complex when you deal with more weapons in a single turret as a mechanic was recently introduced that gives a bit of a discount on gear requirements for the "larger" turrets.

3 + 4) In agreement with Erik.

5) Can't really comment.

6) Depends on what you're using the fighters for. If you're using them strictly as a way to overwhelm opposing PD with box launchers without moving away from the carrier, speed and armor are pretty much meaningless. If you're using them up close and personal with beam weapons, you'll need to figure out a good balance of speed and armor while still keeping modest offensive capabilities.

As far as your particular design goes: I'd cut down on engineering (You could theoretically go without any engineering at all, but I'm not sure how to repair component damage without'em) and fuel (A full sized fighter won't have the mobility to make extra fuel a worthy investment). You also don't need a sensor on the fighter itself as it can rely on fleet bound sensors. If you feel inclined to include a sensor with your fighters, toss in a couple dedicated sensor fighters.

I also suggest to start ramping up the +power, -efficiency tech for your fighter engines if you ever plan on moving them away from your carrier.

7) Depends on your style. My current commercial designs have 35.6% of their HS dedicated to engines. I'm also considering applying some level of the +power, -efficiency tech to my next generation of commercial engines. The only downside is increased fuel use (If a commercial ship is under attack, it's already frakked regardless of the engine explosion chance) and that's completely irrelevant for civilian shipping.

8) Can't really comment. I can say, however, that I probably delayed a bit too long to build my first military (At the start of my 29th year, conventional start, my first ships started task force training exercises).

I will say that I'd recommend to use a dedicated sensor vessel and only have small backup systems on individual ships so that they don't become completely blind should you lose your dedicated sensor vessels.

9) I combine the two, but that's primarily because it removes a significant amount of micromanagement.

Code: [Select]

Victory MkII class Geosurvey Ship    3,000 tons     285 Crew     674.5 BP      TCS 60  TH 160  EM 0
2666 km/s    JR 3-50     Armour 1-18     Shields 0-0     Sensors 1/1/2/2     Damage Control Rating 3     PPV 0
Maint Life 7.3 Years     MSP 422    AFR 24%    IFR 0.3%    1YR 14    5YR 208    Max Repair 100 MSP

J3000(3-50) Military Jump Drive     Max Ship Size 3000 tons    Distance 50k km     Squadron Size 3
Magneto-plasma Drive E7 (2)    Power 80    Fuel Use 70%    Signature 80    Armour 0    Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 250,000 Litres    Range 214.2 billion km   (930 days at full power)

Gravitational Survey Sensors (2)   2 Survey Points Per Hour
Geological Survey Sensors (2)   2 Survey Points Per Hour
That design has served me very well over the last couple decades of game time. All I do is send one to a system and ignore'em until he's done with the entire system (They're setup to do grav and then geo. And, actually, I don't completely ignore'em as I check each jump point as they find'em).

You also don't have to retool your shipyard if you lose more of one particular type of ship. And you *will* lose some (Nothing like watching a ship take two months to get sucked into a black hole).

10) Can't say.

Edit: For your recent post:

Still can't comment on AMMs.

Speaking of the armor/shield ratio, I'd just completely ignore teching shields until you get to mid-level armor. Can't really comment on the exact ratios once you actually get shields, though.

Military ship size is mainly constrained to your designed jump engines. This is the primary reason most people use only a couple ship sizes and work within those constraints.

Anti-ship beam systems depend highly upon the type of beam weapon used. I'm aiming to use Mesons almost exclusively (Some GC in PD roles) and will be using turreted 20cm Mesons on my next generation of military vessels so they can serve as extra missile/FAC defense should the need arise. Planning on sticking two quad 20cm turrets to a single 16HS BFC, but those plans can change and I'm definitely not experienced enough to give much broader advice.

Your primary constraint for engaging missiles with beam weapons will be your BFC tracking speed as that has a hard cap (4x base), unlike turrets. Personally, I just research the the two techs equally and go with a turret that matches the BFC's 4x speed. This provides a fairly standardized size (The techs sometimes differ slightly) at the cost of more expensive refits (Some people design turrets that track at higher speeds so that they don't have to be replaced every time you design a better BFC).

Can't really comment re:missile size and two stage missiles.

Yes. Once you hit GC RoF 3-4, it's a complete waste if you stick full size (6HS, 100% hit) GCs into a quad turret. You could make the argument that you could use quad half size (3HS, 50% hit) GCs and still maintain the expected hit rate of twin 6HS while benefiting from the slight reduction in gear size, but I always err on the side of consistency over minor HS reductions when it comes to PD. I'm sure there are other situations that warrant using non-quad turrets.

[Erik L]

I agree with Ashery on the ship sizes. Your biggest limiting factor will be jump drives.

My process is design a 4500-6000 ton jump drive. This gets classed as a Destroyer. Early game it will be the staple of my fleets. Survey ships run in the 3000 ton range and carry 5 sensors. They are carbon copies of each other with only the scanners different. So the same yard can make both.

The next size is 7500-9000 ton range. This gets classed as a Cruiser. At this point, I start phasing the offensive destroyers out of production and putting them on picket duty. The escort versions of destroyers get attached to the cruiser elements as escorts.

The next size is usually 12000 tons. This is classed as a battlecruiser. I leave formations of BC with escorting CA/DD as offensive fleets. CA squadrons are now fast reaction groups placed in nodal systems to protect against incursions.

The final size I usually go with is 18000-20000 tons. These are battleships. Once I start building BB, they become the main offensive punch. BC squadrons become screening elements for the BB. CA and DD are in escort roles. Pickets are now 1-2 ship squads of CA or DD, depending on system location. BC squadrons are the fast reaction elements.

For carriers, I rarely build on smaller than BC sized.

The DD/CA rarely have shields. Tonnage is better used for weapons/speed/power/armor. BC/BB have shields. Usually at least a strength of 15-20. For armor, I try to give DD 3-5 pts, CA get 5-8 pts, BC get 10-12, and BB get 15+.

Regarding MFC vs missile size. I tend to design my defenses to handle my offenses. Until I encounter a greater offense. Then I gear to that. For missile sizes. I build 4 "standard" sizes. Size 1 AMM, size 3-5 "light" missiles which get mounted on DDGs. Size 6-8 "medium" missiles which get mounted on CAs. Size 10-12 "heavy" missiles for the BC/BB. PDCs get missiles 2x the size of the heavy and get tagged "capital". Rarely do I design a capital ship launcher.

Regarding anti-ship beams. If you can turret them, do so. Your tracking speed is tons better than non-turreted weapons. I usually only build dual-beam turrets for offense, since the weapons are usually bigger than the PD versions. For me, a PD-class weapon has a 5 second rate of fire. Anything else is offense. PD-class turrets are almost always quad. But, not all beam weapons can be turreted. And offensive turrets are big. Sometimes that extra space difference between 2 turreted weapons and non-turreted can get you an additional weapon. So it all comes down to "quality" (turrets) vs. "quantity" (non-turret). And personal preference. My offensive beam of choice is the Particle Beam. Can't turret those. So my BC/BB are almost always missile armed while the CA get the beams. Occasionally I'll build lasers. Then I'll build beam armed BC/BB.

On the subject of MIRVs. (I know... they aren't really MIRVs)
Look at the range of your submunition. Look at any sensor range on the submunition. Chances are the carrier missile will have the range to get to the edge of your ship's detection range, so your submunition will almost be required to carrier sensors. Put your separation range at the range of your submunition's sensors. This helps ensure that there will be a target within sensor range of the submunition.

[chrislocke2000]

Phew that's a lot of questions and I'm down to just the iPhone at the moment!

Regarding your amm missiles the key thing here is to get your to hit chance as high as possible which mens being well over the 100% Mark for all listed speeds given. You will probably fine that your 11m range missiles have a pretty poor to hit chance because of the amount of fuel instead of manouver points they have. You have also spotted that you end up with needing huge fire controls and sensors to utilise these missiles, which in the early game, will probably be prohibitively expensive and space consuming on your ships.

I like to work on the basis that I can get 3-5 shots off at incoming missiles as a reasonable reaction range. So say I think hostile missiles will be travelling at 30k and my amm launchers fire every ten seconds then I would want a minimum sensor and engagement range to be between 900kk and 1500kk, so a lot shorter rangethen you are proposing.

When I started I found that reading steve's NATO v soviet fiction gave me some great ideas on designs and I've also found a lot of fun in the game in just giving it a go. I lost quite a few flees to design errors to begin with but it was hugely fun watching my elite ships get slaughtered and is probably the best way to learn the game.

[Ashery]

My process is design a 4500-6000 ton jump drive. This gets classed as a Destroyer. Early game it will be the staple of my fleets. Survey ships run in the 3000 ton range and carry 5 sensors. They are carbon copies of each other with only the scanners different. So the same yard can make both.

Five sensors is a bit excessive, no?

I'm having difficulty justifying more than two sensors simply because I figure I'd be better off attaching another engine and cutting down on the transit time as opposed to shaving off a few days or so from the survey time of some of the larger bodies. Or hell, just cut down the size and take advantage of the increased speed/extended range that that gives.

More sensors also end up causing you to waste more time in asteroid fields unless you feel like cutting your turns down to a few hours every time you survey a moderately dense asteroid field.

Completely forgot that the different sensors cost the same and can thus be built in the same shipyard, though, so that eliminates one "advantage" of the combination design.

One thing to note for beam heavy fleets is that you will likely focus heavily on engines/speed, so you may not necessarily need to turret every beam weapon. This is, of course, just my current opinion, but I feel that high speed is paramount to the success of beam equipped fleets as they'll get shredded if they can't close the gap quickly enough (Doubly true for Meson users as your range will likely be even shorter than other beam weapons).

[Erik L]

Five sensors is a bit excessive, no?

I'm having difficulty justifying more than two sensors simply because I figure I'd be better off attaching another engine and cutting down on the transit time as opposed to shaving off a few days or so from the survey time of some of the larger bodies. Or hell, just cut down the size and take advantage of the increased speed/extended range that that gives.

More sensors also end up causing you to waste more time in asteroid fields unless you feel like cutting your turns down to a few hours every time you survey a moderately dense asteroid field.

I tend to skip the asteroids unless I start getting into dire straights on minerals. So the 25 scanners in a squadron can crank out a grav survey in a couple weeks, and a geo survey in a month or so.

[nightlord84 (OP)]

So what does a typical fighter squadron look like? I was thinking something like 5 fighter-bombers + 1 Sensor/command fighter.  Does that look reasonable?

As for commercial jump drives my current largest commercial slipway is 88000 tons.  Should I design a 90000 ton commercial jump drive? I checked and it seemed prohibitively expensive. . .  Maybe smaller would be better? What size is about right for a commercial jump drive ship?

Also, how might I arrange my fleet for good defensive coverage? I get the feeling it'd be best to put my escorts in a separate group ahead of my main fleet but I'm not sure how far.  Should I put them far enough that their AMM range barely reaches the main fleet (so they can be firing at missiles right up until they reach the main ships.  Should I keep my carriers in a separate group behind? Should that group have escorts? Any pointers would be great

[jRides]

Fighter squadrons are a matter of opinion again, I use 11 fighters (with 4xs4 box launchers) and 1 command (2xs4 box launcher & active radar) that's a throw rate of 46 size 4 missiles, which is often quite devastating.

Commercial Jump drives I rarely build, often prefering to gate - but I would build to cover the size of your largest Carrier/freighter/colony vessel - whatever you think will need to jump before a gate can go up.

As for escorts, i think thats subjective and based on situation. As I use Carrier based tactics by preference I always have my carriers protected - the carriers and their jump tenders are usually the biggest vessels by far, and so often primary targets for any xeno scum around. If I need to send the main combatants in it would definitely be without the carriers. Detatching escorts i do, but usually keep them around 50,000km from the main fleet (on angle of attack).

[HaliRyan]

Just how I personally play these, so your mileage may vary...

My typical fighter squadrons are just large groups of fighter-bombers. I originally tried using a small number of separate sensor fighters to maintain target locks, but on a suggestion from someone on the forums switched to using a FAC-based sensor platform. This lets you mount a larger sensor with greater range while maintaining a similar speed to your fighters. My current fighters for example are 300 tons with a 12000 km/s speed, and when I need them to operate out of sensor cover from my fleet, I have two 1000 ton FAC models (a tanker for figher-refueling to extend their range, and the aforementioned sensor boat), both with 12000 km/s max speeds to keep pace with the fighters.

I personally wouldn't bother with a jump drive that large, as I don't feel the research requirement is worth the benefit. Just build a jump gate construction ship instead and put gates down on your main routes between colonies.

For defensive coverage in my fleets I keep AMM-armed destroyers about 1 million km in front of my main group on point defense mode, with turreted beam escorts in final defensive fire mode mixed in with the main group. Since I'm currently using carriers as my primary offense I tend to try to engage from about a billion km away.

[Ashery]

I tend to skip the asteroids unless I start getting into dire straights on minerals. So the 25 scanners in a squadron can crank out a grav survey in a couple weeks, and a geo survey in a month or so.

The only real advantage that I could see coming from this method is that your survey teams would be large enough that it'd be possible to provide a military escort so that your survey vessels won't be destroyed by a lone hostile. Should you not provide such an escort, though, then things can quickly turn worse for you as some unlucky placement could be the death of several survey ships and not just one.

I'm still doubtful of the effectiveness of that setup, though, as you may be able to survey a single system quickly, but you lose a *lot* of time to travel inefficiencies.

Onto other questions:

Can't really say re:sensor fighters, but jRides' setup looks good to my untrained eye.

For commercial jump drives, I'd say low eighties is one potential design goal as that's the size of a reasonably fast troop transport capable of carrying a full division (21 bays). Note that the troop transport will *not* have the jump engine itself, but would instead rely on a jump tender. However, realize that there is currently a bug that effectively sets all commercial ship sizes to 0 for the purpose of determining their build rate, so you might be better off focusing on smaller commercial ships for the time being. Despite my initial design flaw (thought brigades/divisions contained three subunits, not four), I might just keep my initial 66k'ish jump design due to said bug.

How you arrange your fleet depends heavily on what weapons you're using. I've been doing a purely beam based game for smegs and giggles (Save for some sensor buoys), and in that case I'm finding it difficult to justify the use of escorts. Sure, I could break off my ships with 20cm mesons and position them in front, but then if they happen to be the targets for the missiles, they'll get absolutely destroyed due to lack of coverage from my carrier/flagship based GC PD. But I've yet to see any real combat, so I'm sure others will have better advice when it comes to combat.