Author Topic: Military Station(s) Feedback  (Read 2098 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline kuhaica (OP)

  • Chief Petty Officer
  • ***
  • Posts: 31
  • Thanked: 26 times
Military Station(s) Feedback
« on: January 06, 2021, 01:46:07 PM »
So, I like the idea of space stations a lot.  Like, a lot.  Big huge chunks of metal floating with a million guns on them.  Unfortunately for me, C# doesn't like that as much, so I've been forced to make a "Modular" sort of system.  My problem here, I'm not too sure if these are functional as designs and more concerned about how the maintenance mechanics work, as presently I have 160 Maintenance Modules on one of the modules so I can support the whole of the station and a fleet, as I'm under the impression that 10k tons of maintenance apply to 1 ship of 10k tons or 2 ships of 5k tons.

Regardless, criticism is appreciated

The Sensor Hub of the Station, at the minimum it'll have one of these with a max of 3 in case I want backups.  As soon as I get some ECM's I'll be sure to make future versions with them since the added weight isn't much of a problem.
Code: [Select]
Resilience-Sensor Hub class Space Station      10,000 tons       320 Crew       3,371.1 BP       TCS 200    TH 0    EM 0
1 km/s      Armour 15-41       Shields 0-0       HTK 84      Sensors 0/0/0/0      DCR 106      PPV 44.19
Maint Life 4.07 Years     MSP 5,506    AFR 112%    IFR 1.6%    1YR 531    5YR 7,967    Max Repair 1400 MSP
Captain    Control Rating 1   BRG   
Intended Deployment Time: 24 months    Morale Check Required   


Quad Holyfield Armaments (AM) Mk1 10cm C4 Near Ultraviolet Laser Turret (3x4)    Range 90,000km     TS: 15000 km/s     Power 12-16     RM 30,000 km    ROF 5       
Midgaurd Sensor Systems Mk1 Beam Fire Control R320-TS15000 (1)     Max Range: 320,000 km   TS: 15,000 km/s     97 94 91 88 84 81 78 75 72 69
Lancaster Systems Magnetic Confinement Fusion Reactor R10 (6)     Total Power Output 60    Exp 5%

Phenoix ASS-1 (R Missile) Active Search Sensor AS78-R1 (1)     GPS 1400     Range 79m km    MCR 8.6m km    Resolution 1
Phenoix ASS-1 (R 5k tons) Active Search Sensor AS51-R100 (1)     GPS 2800     Range 51.8m km    Resolution 100
Phenoix ASS-1 (R 1k tons) Active Search Sensor AS30-R20 (1)     GPS 560     Range 30.3m km    Resolution 20

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes


Firstly, I know Laser PD isn't the most cost-effective, Gauss would be much better, however, Gauss tech in this playthrough is clearly cursed as every time a scientist tries to research it, they die.  My big concern here is that I don't know if having more Single turrets is better then the 6 Quads as I normally just missile spam and I'm very much still a greenhorn.
Code: [Select]
Resilience-PD Module class Space Station      9,999 tons       324 Crew       2,564.6 BP       TCS 200    TH 0    EM 0
1 km/s      Armour 15-41       Shields 0-0       HTK 114      Sensors 30/30/0/0      DCR 106      PPV 88.38
Maint Life 7.39 Years     MSP 3,082    AFR 118%    IFR 1.6%    1YR 99    5YR 1,484    Max Repair 240 MSP
Captain    Control Rating 1   BRG   
Intended Deployment Time: 24 months    Morale Check Required   


Quad Holyfield Armaments (AM) Mk1 10cm C4 Near Ultraviolet Laser Turret (6x4)    Range 90,000km     TS: 15000 km/s     Power 12-16     RM 30,000 km    ROF 5       
Midgaurd Sensor Systems Mk1 Beam Fire Control R320-TS15000 (1)     Max Range: 320,000 km   TS: 15,000 km/s     97 94 91 88 84 81 78 75 72 69
Lancaster Systems Magnetic Confinement Fusion Reactor R52 (3)     Total Power Output 156    Exp 5%

Thermal Sensor TH5-30 (1)     Sensitivity 30     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  43.3m km
EM Sensor EM5-30 (1)     Sensitivity 30     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  43.3m km

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes


The Ordnance Hub, the first "true" station.  Honestly, no idea if this will work, I've been having trouble with just a regular civilian Colliers.  Regardless I have this one ticked as one as well.  Another thing to note, all the missiles are intended to be short-ranged, they won't need to be going to far sitting on a jump-point
Code: [Select]
Resilience-Ordance Hub class Space Station      252,786 tons       1,245 Crew       9,261.8 BP       TCS 5,056    TH 0    EM 0
1 km/s      No Armour       Shields 0-0     HTK 154      Sensors 0/0/0/0      DCR 51      PPV 0
MSP 10,022    Max Repair 2400 MSP
Magazine 29,000   
Lord-Captain    Control Rating 3   BRG   AUX   ENG   
Intended Deployment Time: 24 months   
Ordnance Transfer Hub - Capable of transferring ordnance to multiple ships simultaneously

Hellfire ASM-1 (Size 10) (600)    Speed: 14,240 km/s    End: 32.6m     Range: 27.9m km    WH: 25    Size: 10.0000    TH: 166/99/49
Sirocco ASM-1 (Size 6) (1000)    Speed: 15,800 km/s    End: 23.2m     Range: 22m km    WH: 16    Size: 6.0000    TH: 158/94/47
Firebreath ASM-1 (Size 2) (3500)    Speed: 9,500 km/s    End: 58.4m     Range: 33.3m km    WH: 4    Size: 2    TH: 126/76/38
Mist AMM-1 (Size 1) (10000)    Speed: 12,400 km/s    End: 181.4m     Range: 135m km    WH: 1    Size: 1    TH: 165/99/49

Missile to hit chances are vs targets moving at 3000 km/s, 5000 km/s and 10,000 km/s

This design is classed as a Commercial Vessel for maintenance purposes
This design is classed as a Space Station for construction purposes

Like with the ordinance hub, I'm just trying to make this beast of a station work.  Any help/understanding with how the maintenance system works would be appreciated
Code: [Select]
Resilience-Maintenance Hub class Space Station      1,000,098 tons       10,060 Crew       43,958.5 BP       TCS 20,002    TH 0    EM 0
1 km/s      No Armour       Shields 0-0     HTK 1537      Sensors 0/0/0/0      DCR 51      PPV 0
MSP 510,027    Max Repair 2000 MSP
Troop Capacity 1,000 tons     Cargo Shuttle Multiplier 15   
Commander    Control Rating 1   BRG   
Intended Deployment Time: 24 months   
Recreational Facilities
Maintenance Modules: 160 module(s) capable of supporting ships of 320,000 tons


This design is classed as a Commercial Vessel for maintenance purposes
This design is classed as a Space Station for construction purposes


My Gunship Hangar Module, I could make it smaller by stripping the missiles off of it, but I like backups.
Code: [Select]
Resilience-GunShip Hangar Module class Space Station      20,000 tons       435 Crew       3,273.1 BP       TCS 400    TH 0    EM 0
1 km/s      Armour 10-65       Shields 0-0       HTK 118      Sensors 0/0/0/0      DCR 115      PPV 20
Maint Life 14.06 Years     MSP 11,580    AFR 91%    IFR 1.3%    1YR 109    5YR 1,639    Max Repair 364 MSP
Hangar Deck Capacity 3,000 tons     Magazine 1,820   
Captain    Control Rating 1   BRG   
Intended Deployment Time: 24 months    Flight Crew Berths 60    Morale Check Required   

Fuel Capacity 2,532,000 Litres    Range N/A

Agustus Precision Arms Size 1 Missile Launcher (20)     Missile Size: 1    Rate of Fire 10
Asgard AM MFC Mk1 (R Missile) Missile Fire Control FC80-R1 (2)     Range 80.6m km    Resolution 1
Sirocco ASM-1 (Size 6) (120)    Speed: 15,800 km/s    End: 23.2m     Range: 22m km    WH: 16    Size: 6.0000    TH: 158/94/47
Mist AMM-1 (Size 1) (1080)    Speed: 12,400 km/s    End: 181.4m     Range: 135m km    WH: 1    Size: 1    TH: 165/99/49

Strike Group
3x Black Rat Gunship   Speed: 10017 km/s    Size: 19.97

Missile to hit chances are vs targets moving at 3000 km/s, 5000 km/s and 10,000 km/s

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes


An actual fighter hanger.  Not much more to say
Code: [Select]
Resilience-Fighter Hangar Module class Space Station      20,000 tons       356 Crew       2,743.1 BP       TCS 400    TH 0    EM 0
1 km/s      Armour 10-65       Shields 0-0       HTK 108      Sensors 0/0/0/0      DCR 108      PPV 0
Maint Life 10.85 Years     MSP 6,421    AFR 113%    IFR 1.6%    1YR 100    5YR 1,497    Max Repair 250 MSP
Hangar Deck Capacity 8,000 tons     Magazine 900   
Lord-Captain    Control Rating 3   BRG   ENG   PFC   
Intended Deployment Time: 24 months    Flight Crew Berths 160    Morale Check Required   

Fuel Capacity 2,509,000 Litres    Range N/A

Mist AMM-1 (Size 1) (405)    Speed: 12,400 km/s    End: 181.4m     Range: 135m km    WH: 1    Size: 1    TH: 165/99/49
Firebreath ASM-1 (Size 2) (250)    Speed: 9,500 km/s    End: 58.4m     Range: 33.3m km    WH: 4    Size: 2    TH: 126/76/38

Strike Group
6x Widow A Strikefighter   Speed: 10003 km/s    Size: 10
12x Hornet A Strikefighter   Speed: 10018 km/s    Size: 4.99
4x Wasp A Strikefighter   Speed: 10015 km/s    Size: 9.98

Missile to hit chances are vs targets moving at 3000 km/s, 5000 km/s and 10,000 km/s

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes


My Fuel hub.  It has a lot.
Code: [Select]
Resilience-Fuel Hub class Space Station      153,469 tons       80 Crew       3,073.8 BP       TCS 3,069    TH 0    EM 0
1 km/s      No Armour       Shields 0-0     HTK 55      Sensors 0/0/0/0      DCR 51      PPV 0
MSP 8,012    Max Repair 2400 MSP
Commander    Control Rating 1   BRG   
Intended Deployment Time: 24 months   
Refuelling Hub - Capable of refuelling multiple ships simultaneously

Fuel Capacity 50,000,000 Litres    Range N/A

This design is classed as a Commercial Vessel for maintenance purposes
This design is classed as a Space Station for construction purposes


The Anti Ship module, all missile-based and while I could have made it bigger, I'm trying to keep all the military platforms 20k or less.
Code: [Select]
Resilience-ASM Module class Space Station      20,000 tons       622 Crew       3,407 BP       TCS 400    TH 0    EM 0
1 km/s      Armour 15-65       Shields 0-0       HTK 120      Sensors 30/30/0/0      DCR 133      PPV 90
Maint Life 10.76 Years     MSP 7,657    AFR 93%    IFR 1.3%    1YR 121    5YR 1,813    Max Repair 250 MSP
Magazine 2,790   
Lord-Captain    Control Rating 2   BRG   CIC   
Intended Deployment Time: 3 months    Morale Check Required   


Agustus Precision Arms Size 10 Missile Launcher (5)     Missile Size: 10    Rate of Fire 25
Agustus Precision Arms  Size 2.0 Missile Launcher (20)     Missile Size: 2    Rate of Fire 15
Asgard AS MFC Mk1 (R 5k Ton) Missile Fire Control FC103-R100 (3)     Range 103.7m km    Resolution 100
Hellfire ASM-1 (Size 10) (150)    Speed: 14,240 km/s    End: 32.6m     Range: 27.9m km    WH: 25    Size: 10.0000    TH: 166/99/49
Firebreath ASM-1 (Size 2) (645)    Speed: 9,500 km/s    End: 58.4m     Range: 33.3m km    WH: 4    Size: 2    TH: 126/76/38

EM Sensor EM5-30 (1)     Sensitivity 30     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  43.3m km
Thermal Sensor TH5-30 (1)     Sensitivity 30     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  43.3m km

Missile to hit chances are vs targets moving at 3000 km/s, 5000 km/s and 10,000 km/s

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes

A dedicated AMM platform, not much to write home about, when I get better tech I'll be updating the AMM's and there fire-control/sensors
Code: [Select]
Resilience-AMM Module class Space Station      20,000 tons       494 Crew       3,770 BP       TCS 400    TH 0    EM 0
1 km/s      Armour 15-65       Shields 0-0       HTK 130      Sensors 0/0/0/0      DCR 120      PPV 60
Maint Life 10.40 Years     MSP 10,456    AFR 153%    IFR 2.1%    1YR 176    5YR 2,642    Max Repair 364 MSP
Magazine 1,960   
Captain    Control Rating 1   BRG   
Intended Deployment Time: 24 months    Morale Check Required   


Agustus Precision Arms Size 1 Missile Launcher (60)     Missile Size: 1    Rate of Fire 10
Asgard AM MFC Mk1 (R Missile) Missile Fire Control FC80-R1 (3)     Range 80.6m km    Resolution 1
Mist AMM-1 (Size 1) (1960)    Speed: 12,400 km/s    End: 181.4m     Range: 135m km    WH: 1    Size: 1    TH: 165/99/49

Missile to hit chances are vs targets moving at 3000 km/s, 5000 km/s and 10,000 km/s

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes


So yea.  That's my "Station" any suggestions would be great
 

Offline CowboyRonin

  • Petty Officer
  • **
  • C
  • Posts: 25
  • Thanked: 11 times
Re: Military Station(s) Feedback
« Reply #1 on: January 06, 2021, 03:16:10 PM »
The sheer logistics of this boggles my mind.  If you're as early on as the sensor tech (rating 6) indicates, I cant' imagine you have the shipyards, construction yards, or tug fleet to make this remotely practical.  Can those various 10K armed modules even be built in the same military yard (i.e. are they close enough to build as options when the yard is tooled for one of them)?  Unless you're playing with reduced research rates, I have visions of tugs hauling sensor or weapon modules back for upgrades and then not getting them back before they need more upgrades. 

Aurora is great in that this is even a possibility - but just because it's possible doesn't mean it's practical or wise.

"They were so busy worrying about how they could do it that they didn't stop to think if they should do it." (I think that's the quote, it's been a day or two since I saw Jurassic Park last).
 
The following users thanked this post: kuhaica

Offline kuhaica (OP)

  • Chief Petty Officer
  • ***
  • Posts: 31
  • Thanked: 26 times
Re: Military Station(s) Feedback
« Reply #2 on: January 06, 2021, 03:45:41 PM »
I do have the logistics to support this endeavour of mine, as I kind of. . .  go overboard with Construction and Logistics.  And yea, these are very, very inefficient use of production time.  My plan is to basically make the stations and leave them there rather than moving items around to get upgraded. 
 

Offline RougeNPS

  • Lt. Commander
  • ********
  • R
  • Posts: 217
  • Thanked: 38 times
Re: Military Station(s) Feedback
« Reply #3 on: January 06, 2021, 05:01:16 PM »
Love this. Suggestion: Put troops on some of these to prevent boarding actions. If you are going to have basically stations, put at least some basic troops on them.
 
The following users thanked this post: kuhaica

Offline Froggiest1982

  • Gold Supporter
  • Vice Admiral
  • *****
  • F
  • Posts: 1331
  • Thanked: 590 times
  • Gold Supporter Gold Supporter : Support the forums with a Gold subscription
    2021 Supporter 2021 Supporter : Donate for 2021
    2022 Supporter 2022 Supporter : Donate for 2022
    2023 Supporter 2023 Supporter : Donate for 2023
Re: Military Station(s) Feedback
« Reply #4 on: January 06, 2021, 05:24:46 PM »
My problem here, I'm not too sure if these are functional as designs and more concerned about how the maintenance mechanics work, as presently I have 160 Maintenance Modules on one of the modules so I can support the whole of the station and a fleet, as I'm under the impression that 10k tons of maintenance apply to 1 ship of 10k tons or 2 ships of 5k tons.

You can no longer use the same maintenance facilities to support multiple ships (VB6 mechanic). The total tonnage you can maintain it is cumulative so, once you reach the cap, that's it.

For example, if you build a 20,000 ton ship, you also need 20,000 tons of extra maintenance facility capacity to support it.

Your impression was correct.

 
The following users thanked this post: kuhaica

Offline Squigles

  • Chief Petty Officer
  • ***
  • S
  • Posts: 40
  • Thanked: 11 times
Re: Military Station(s) Feedback
« Reply #5 on: January 06, 2021, 05:26:15 PM »
Unless I’m mistaken, since you will be providing on-site maintenance facilities, you can significantly rework your hangar modules.

You’re paying maintenance overhead on the entire module because it is classified military. If you replace your hangars with commercial hangars (and magazines) you can make them commercial instead. At that point you only have to pay maintenance overhead on the actual military fighters, which should reduce the load on your maintenance facilities. By a lot.

Meanwhile, while the commercial hangars are not as size efficient, they cost the same. Since you can then build then in commercial yards the increased size won’t matter much at all, and will actually take less yard space/workers compared to building them in military yards.

Edit: As an example, right now if you deploy 1 of each of your hangar modules, you have 40k tons of military hardware needing maintained, the modules themselves take care of maintaining their 11k tons of hangar capacity (8k and 3k respectively). If you redid them as commercial you would have your maintenance facilities taking care of the fighter maintenance, the commercial hangars would not....but it would only be 11k tons of overhead instead of 40k.
« Last Edit: January 06, 2021, 05:33:01 PM by Squigles »
 
The following users thanked this post: kuhaica

Offline Froggiest1982

  • Gold Supporter
  • Vice Admiral
  • *****
  • F
  • Posts: 1331
  • Thanked: 590 times
  • Gold Supporter Gold Supporter : Support the forums with a Gold subscription
    2021 Supporter 2021 Supporter : Donate for 2021
    2022 Supporter 2022 Supporter : Donate for 2022
    2023 Supporter 2023 Supporter : Donate for 2023
Re: Military Station(s) Feedback
« Reply #6 on: January 06, 2021, 05:38:00 PM »
Unless I’m mistaken, since you will be providing on-site maintenance facilities, you can significantly rework your hangar modules.

You’re paying maintenance overhead on the entire module because it is classified military. If you replace your hangars with commercial hangars (and magazines) you can make them commercial instead. At that point you only have to pay maintenance overhead on the actual military fighters, which should reduce the load on your maintenance facilities. By a lot.

Meanwhile, while the commercial hangars are not as size efficient, they cost the same. Since you can then build then in commercial yards the increased size won’t matter much at all, and will actually take less yard space/workers compared to building them in military yards.

I wouldn't as military hangars not only rewind the clock, they maintain all the parasites for free and at no MSP cost. While you don't pay maintenance on ships in a hangar, you still have to pay maintenance on the hangar itself.

Commercial hangars only stop the clock from running.

Also there was a bug preventing box launchers to be reloaded in commercial hangars, but honestly I don't remember if it was fixed at the end.
« Last Edit: January 06, 2021, 05:47:07 PM by froggiest1982 »
 
The following users thanked this post: kuhaica

Offline Squigles

  • Chief Petty Officer
  • ***
  • S
  • Posts: 40
  • Thanked: 11 times
Re: Military Station(s) Feedback
« Reply #7 on: January 06, 2021, 05:47:11 PM »
That was kind of the point. The military hangars maintain the fighters for free. Maintaining his military hangar modules though will cost more than maintaining the fighters, both in terms of MSP and tonnage overhead against the maintenance facilities.

Meanwhile he’s already sitting on top of maintenance facilities. If he needs to rewind his clock, it will be a few days worth, immensely less expensive than years of MSP expenditure on his modules in military form.

The box launcher bug might be a pain in the arse if it’s not fixed. He is however also sitting on an ordnance transfer as well, so reloading can still occur if more slowly even if it is still bugged.

Either way, it’s an idea for him. Just figured since deep space maintenance facilities tend to have tonnage allowance at a premium it would be a good way to save a lot of tonnage, especially if he plans multiple hangar bay modules.
 
The following users thanked this post: kuhaica

Offline kuhaica (OP)

  • Chief Petty Officer
  • ***
  • Posts: 31
  • Thanked: 26 times
Re: Military Station(s) Feedback
« Reply #8 on: January 06, 2021, 05:50:11 PM »
Quote from: Squigles link=topic=12262. msg146052#msg146052 date=1609976831
That was kind of the point.  The military hangars maintain the fighters for free.  Maintaining his military hangar modules though will cost more than maintaining the fighters, both in terms of MSP and tonnage overhead against the maintenance facilities.

Meanwhile he’s already sitting on top of maintenance facilities.  If he needs to rewind his clock, it will be a few days worth, immensely less expensive than years of MSP expenditure on his modules in military form.

The box launcher bug might be a pain in the arse if it’s not fixed.  He is however also sitting on an ordnance transfer as well, so reloading can still occur if more slowly even if it is still bugged.

Either way, it’s an idea for him.  Just figured since deep space maintenance facilities tend to have tonnage allowance at a premium it would be a good way to save a lot of tonnage, especially if he plans multiple hangar bay modules.

While useful to know, I'll test this out in my game and see if I run into any trouble, but for this station at least I'll keep to using Military hangers.  But from what I understand, your method should work, It'll just be a bit more micro intensive I think.

Love this. Suggestion: Put troops on some of these to prevent boarding actions. If you are going to have basically stations, put at least some basic troops on them.

Good idea! I'll be sure to update these before I start production.
 

Offline sadoeconomist

  • Petty Officer
  • **
  • s
  • Posts: 17
  • Thanked: 10 times
Re: Military Station(s) Feedback
« Reply #9 on: January 06, 2021, 07:43:23 PM »
If your ordnance hub station has 72,500 tons of commercial magazines and no armor or shields, wouldn't it have a massive chain reaction and explode if it was hit by basically anything? That's the biggest issue I can see here.  An ordnance transport needs to have some protection and military magazines with a reasonable HTK if it might be in the line of fire, or it needs to be well behind the front line - it's not safe to have anything with commercial magazines sitting on a JP where it could suddenly come under fire.  That's the main reason you probably want your fleet anchorage and JP defense to be in separate locations.  If you want to get around that, you could keep your ordnance hub somewhere nearby but out of immediate danger and have a squadron of smaller protected colliers with military magazines (which you would probably have with your fleet anyway) shuttle ordnance from there to the JP.  Having your ordnance stockpile on the surface of a colony would be far safer, though.  Or maybe you could just tow the station back and forth as needed? It shouldn't be hanging out on the point during combat though.

If this is a JP defense setup shouldn't it have more beams and fewer missiles? As it is, you could put it quite a few mkm away from a JP and still be in range with all your sensors and offensive weapons but out of an invader's beam range, but then you couldn't really take proper advantage of an invader's jump shock and that might be a big advantage for a defender to give away.  It'd be a good setup for covering multiple very close JPs? It'd still be mostly unable to fight back against an attacker that's over 30mkm away except with those 135mkm range AMMs (why not more speed/agility instead of fuel on those?) so you'd have to be careful that nothing could get around it and come into the system from another direction.
 
The following users thanked this post: kuhaica

Offline Squigles

  • Chief Petty Officer
  • ***
  • S
  • Posts: 40
  • Thanked: 11 times
Re: Military Station(s) Feedback
« Reply #10 on: January 07, 2021, 05:29:19 AM »
If your ordnance hub station has 72,500 tons of commercial magazines and no armor or shields, wouldn't it have a massive chain reaction and explode if it was hit by basically anything? That's the biggest issue I can see here.  An ordnance transport needs to have some protection and military magazines with a reasonable HTK if it might be in the line of fire, or it needs to be well behind the front line - it's not safe to have anything with commercial magazines sitting on a JP where it could suddenly come under fire.

I didn’t even notice the no armor tag on that thing. Yeah, it’d go up like a Roman candle the instant something sneezed on it.

That being said, commercial magazines on the front lines can be fairly safe if armored due to the changes to shock damage in C# compared to VB6. Shock damage chance is now damage/hull size, with any result of less than 5% being ignored (unless shock is different than Steve’s post on C# changes).  With something being over 5000 HS, it would need a single hit of over 250 damage to even trigger a chance for shock. So it does at least need to be split open first.
 

Offline kuhaica (OP)

  • Chief Petty Officer
  • ***
  • Posts: 31
  • Thanked: 26 times
Re: Military Station(s) Feedback
« Reply #11 on: January 08, 2021, 11:38:00 AM »
I'll be sure to rethink how to handle the Ordnance stations. Having dedicated supply ships that hang out further back with the Ordnance would be a good way to handle it. Just means I need a tiny fleet of ships that are all missile rack and nothing else to ferry goods.
 

Offline kuhaica (OP)

  • Chief Petty Officer
  • ***
  • Posts: 31
  • Thanked: 26 times
Re: Military Station(s) Feedback
« Reply #12 on: January 10, 2021, 01:00:18 PM »
So. A funny update. I managed to get half of my military stations present before I encountered a very angry very aggressive NPR. The PD Stations performed fairly well, however, the Ordnance Hub was obliterated. I had a secondary hub that was 100 million away. It too was targeted while the weapon platforms were firing upon the NPR force. In conclusion. The overall idea of these stations worked. The Weapon platforms did amazing, the maintenance platforms get them supplied and let me dock fleets that couldn't make it back to earth and rewind their clocks.

All in all. Would do it again with proper time and investment. I, however, believe after the hassle of logistics that I had to constantly choose between building a new ship, or a weapons platform. So I was left with having only 2 completed stations and a third mostly completed. Because I value mobility over my wall of guns.

Thank you to everyone who commented and gave some solid advice.