How is apparently everyone doing combat and winning with low tonnage ships?

[Barkhorn]

I don't understand how your particle lances have less range than your plasma carronades.  Your teching is very weird.

[Jorgen_CAB]

I don't understand how your particle lances have less range than your plasma carronades.  Your teching is very weird.

Plasma tech is extremely cheap, that is how.

[captainwolfer]

I don't understand how your particle lances have less range than your plasma carronades.  Your teching is very weird.

Also keep in mind that while the plasma technically has more range, practically speaking the particle beams will do a lot more damage near their max range due to not having damage fall-off.

[Squigles]

I agree with almost everything people are saying here with the exception of dropping active sensors. There is almost zero reason not to include sub 1hs active sensor of some sort on every ship with a gun.

That being said, looking specifically at your Anarchy class. You say your stated goal for this vessel is to operate as a swarm of beam combatants as defenders at jump points and move little if at all outside of that role. Given that role description, I can say the following.

1. Your fuel tanks are massively overturned for your role. Deploy a micro fuel tanker design to escort them to their destination and save yourself 500-800 tons on your swarm ships.

2. These are close range beam combatants intended to engage spoilers at point blank range. If they come under fire their shields will NOT have the opportunity to recharge. Therefore shields on this design/role are little more than vastly overweight armor. Instead give yourself more actual armor and save some tonnage in the trade.

3. As their role is defensive, they will not be breaking into squadrons and doing offensive jumps. Therefore a jump drive is only required to arrive at their destination. This can be accomplished via a dedicated jump tender design, or incorporated into other existing support vessels.

4. You have 3 guns, a massively overturned fire control range....and a CIC. Instead of a CIC you could mount an entire additional weapon. Unless your tactical officer on every single one of these designs is godlike, and you regularly encounter situations where your overtuned range and crew grade don’t approach a 100% hit chance, this class will always be better with another gun instead of the CIC.

[nuclearslurpee]

2. These are close range beam combatants intended to engage spoilers at point blank range. If they come under fire their shields will NOT have the opportunity to recharge. Therefore shields on this design/role are little more than vastly overweight armor. Instead give yourself more actual armor and save some tonnage in the trade.

Shields are actually an ideal module to mount here instead of armor, because they blunt the penetration ability of lasers and in fact any other weapons that would overmatch armor. Of course the most firepower is gained from mounting no shields and 1 layer of armor, but if some protection is desired shields work quite well in the specific case OP is dealing with.

[Squigles]

Shields are actually an ideal module to mount here instead of armor, because they blunt the penetration ability of lasers and in fact any other weapons that would overmatch armor. Of course the most firepower is gained from mounting no shields and 1 layer of armor, but if some protection is desired shields work quite well in the specific case OP is dealing with.

You’re probably not wrong here. I’m so used to either deploying with particle beams where incoming laser damage is attenuated to next to nothing, or I’m crashing the party with thick enough armor that a 40 point laser blast won’t pen. I forgot how much better shields are at dealing with point blank lasers if you’re not dedicating enough tonnage for armor thick enough to resist.

[liveware]

A good way to get more bang for your buck with small ships is make them carrier based. A 30k ton carrier can carry several 3-5k ton ships. You can mount some pretty effective weapons on 3-5k ton ships and still get good speed and reasonable armor/shields if you can live with shorter range parasites (I've had good luck with parasites capable of about 1b km).

Carrier-based ships can also get away with reduced engineering spaces as they can't suffer maintenance failures when docked at their mothership. More space for guns and engines 😎

[Stormtrooper (OP)]

you've massively overloaded it with armor, shields

doubt - it's meant to fight off invaders. Some of their ships have nasty lasers. And its armor is already weak.

For wormhole defense, you're not relying on armor, you're relying on jump shock and putting out as much DPS as you can in the few increments you get before the enemy sensors come online. More to the point, you're certainly not relying on a jump drive to help you in any way (and even if this were a JP assault class, squadron jumps are a better approach).

Additionally, if the armor is already too weak, it's a serious question as to why bother with it anyways? What are you protecting your ship from? If anything it would make sense to have very light armor and put more HS into shield generators. In any case, trying to have both heavy armor and heavy shields on such a small class is more than it can reasonably manage.

Ultimately, for smaller ships you must give up something to specialize. This can and does even mean giving up armor to mount enough weapons to be effective.

your 93 HS interceptor must dedicate a full 20 HS to fuel! Very inefficient

actually that one I can explain, I didn't care about fuel since it'll be sitting at one place all the time, I just wanted more speed at less weight - it'll basically arrive at jp and sit there for the rest of eternity since distances travelled in CQB beam firefight are rather irrelevant for fuel consumption, meaning in practice it's a "one-time purchase" in terms of fuel for a rather long time. If I wanted this to be more versatile I'd approach it differently.

What you've done here is strictly suboptimal unless somehow the engine you've got here saves resources. The optimal point for propulsion design is a 3:1 engine to fuel mass ratio, although many players will design larger engines to conserve fuel. In fact, using this and running through a calculator after guesstimating your tech levels, you could achieve/exceed the same speed and range with a size 22 engine at 2.10x boost with only 6.7 HS of fuel, which conserves a large amount of space compared to your design (15 HS engine + 20 HS fuel).

you've basically built three ships that fill the same role i.e. a primary beam combatant

Is it really that bad? I wanted to have the best plasma I could have, a swarm of stuff firing every 5 secs (hence Anarchy class) to keep firing without a break and eventually a support with particle lance to gain some range. So is it bad to have a squadron of 3 ships with one role, but slightly different "subroles"?

I suppose in this specific case it makes some sense, though I wouldn't want to devote 2-3 shipyards (depending on if the latter two ships can be cross-built) just to a specialized JP squadron when I could just build one ship to do the job (and probably supplement with my main fleet to fill ancillary roles).

In any case, the major issue is that the ships need to be specialized much more efficiently than they are. Given the techs I can see here I would say to optimize the propulsion, nix the jump drives (use a tender class if you need the jump capability to get somewhere, one tender can transit an entire fleet if you're not doing squadron jumps), cut the armor to maybe 2-3 layers and use bigger shield generators instead as these will be more effective against lasers, most of all focus on getting as many guns as you can into the fight as ships with only 2-3 guns are not going to get the job done. As you have capacitor recharge 8 I would suggest using 25 cm carronades with 16-8 power and recharge, these will have ROF 10 but have much better DPS and penetration than 15 cm with 6-6. These will be 8 HS apiece which I think you can fit at least four onto a 100-HS ship (same size as 8x of the 15 cm but these are much stronger weapons) in addition to 28-30 HS of propulsion and however much for armor, shields, and basic sensors. For the 200-HS (10k ton) ships at least double that should be feasible, possibly plus an extra due to tonnage efficiency.

I would personally probably not use such a small class, and use a class closer to the 15,000 ton range at least for JP defense. This would be a good balance between having enough hull size to mount a good weapons battery with adequate protection, and small enough to produce at a reasonable clip out of my shipyards by this stage of the game. Of course if I were truly desperate I'd be building something cheap and spamable like unarmored plasma FACs, but I assume you're not under quite so much pressure here.

If you only make one change from the feedback in this thread, the #1 #2 and #3 change to make is to axe the jump drives and use a separate tender if you need jump capability. Unless you require a jump drive on every ship for RP reasons in which case - good luck, you'll need it!

Well, thanks... Fair enough, guess for mk2 I'll scrap FTL drives (although yeah, RP was the main reason), though I'll insist on keeping sensors on and maybe I'll scrap armor in favour of getting better shield generators or something. And you've mentioned 25 plasma, how ironic given I designed it initially together with 15 and 40, only to remind myself of its existence long after many of those things left my shipyards. Also how ironic you've mentioned 15k tons range, because, well, my Pike+Blade+Striker dream team is at that, just wanted to try out plasma because I fell in love with missile dps without having to have missiles (and yeah, RP, all sacrifices for my AAR...)

Last thing, engines. I have a hate-hate relationship with them. I don't rely on external calculations (so what if I lose efficiency, it's a game, not a job, I'm not computing stuff ), instead I just try to get some intuition as to how things work and after several battles already got to the level of having a grasp of what my ships can and can't reliably do and how to use them and what to improve and so on. But engines, oh damn, despite all that time I still feel blind and clueless as to how should I do it "intuitively" to be good enough.

[Stormtrooper (OP)]

A good way to get more bang for your buck with small ships is make them carrier based. A 30k ton carrier can carry several 3-5k ton ships. You can mount some pretty effective weapons on 3-5k ton ships and still get good speed and reasonable armor/shields if you can live with shorter range parasites (I've had good luck with parasites capable of about 1b km).

Carrier-based ships can also get away with reduced engineering spaces as they can't suffer maintenance failures when docked at their mothership. More space for guns and engines 😎

That I want to avoid because that's yet another ship design and production to bother with... And I wanted to start spitting them out quickly out of my growing colonies.

[Stormtrooper (OP)]

1. Your fuel tanks are massively overturned for your role. Deploy a micro fuel tanker design to escort them to their destination and save yourself 500-800 tons on your swarm ships.

4. You have 3 guns, a massively overturned fire control range....and a CIC. Instead of a CIC you could mount an entire additional weapon. Unless your tactical officer on every single one of these designs is godlike, and you regularly encounter situations where your overtuned range and crew grade don’t approach a 100% hit chance, this class will always be better with another gun instead of the CIC.

Well, as for 1, I technically could but I fear too much micro with positioning them will be involved.

As for 4, "overturned" fire control range is there for accuracy...

[Stormtrooper (OP)]

Also a side question: what do you think of my "PikeBladeStriker" combo? Guess it could be made better and stuff, but it served me well during numerus battles so far... Strikers are the best, Pikes unfortunately turned out to be a bit slower than Invaders (designed them before first contact as a part of general-purpose assault fleet and back then that over 10 000km/s sounded decent enough), Blades have a niche role because mesons, but once they do get in range and fire those guns ignoring armor... Also they make for a good cannon fodder as they suffer the highest casaulties as Invaders always target these for whatever reason (and Pikes because they're the slowest, but their speed also means they see less combat than Blades and Strikers), allowing Strikers to survive unharmed and keep on firing.

[Squigles]

As for 4, "overturned" fire control range is there for accuracy...

Yup, and nothing wrong with that. The point being made was that with such short range guns and an overtuned BFC, your hit chances are already VERY high inside that range bracket. That being the case, you had very limited opportunity (if any, good crew could easily put you over 100% anyhow) for a tactical officer to improve your hit chances at all, and even if he could it would be a small amount. Given that fact it would give you more damage on target to mount an additional gun instead of a CIC.

[Jorgen_CAB]

Shields are actually an ideal module to mount here instead of armor, because they blunt the penetration ability of lasers and in fact any other weapons that would overmatch armor. Of course the most firepower is gained from mounting no shields and 1 layer of armor, but if some protection is desired shields work quite well in the specific case OP is dealing with.

You’re probably not wrong here. I’m so used to either deploying with particle beams where incoming laser damage is attenuated to next to nothing, or I’m crashing the party with thick enough armor that a 40 point laser blast won’t pen. I forgot how much better shields are at dealing with point blank lasers if you’re not dedicating enough tonnage for armor thick enough to resist.

But shields are even BETTER if you can maintain range, especially if you use particle beams and have fast ships and can dictate the engagement.

[nuclearslurpee]

Last thing, engines. I have a hate-hate relationship with them. I don't rely on external calculations (so what if I lose efficiency, it's a game, not a job, I'm not computing stuff ), instead I just try to get some intuition as to how things work and after several battles already got to the level of having a grasp of what my ships can and can't reliably do and how to use them and what to improve and so on. But engines, oh damn, despite all that time I still feel blind and clueless as to how should I do it "intuitively" to be good enough.

You can get 95% of the way there on engines if you remember that 3:1 ratio of (total) engine to fuel mass gives optimal performance on a per-ton basis - and that a higher ratio is more fuel-efficient. If you find yourself erring on the side of a smaller ratio, like 2:1 engine to fuel, you're probably building a bad design because there's rarely any need to build such a small engine that drinks so much fuel (even on fighters this is pretty rare).

If you try to stick close to this ratio, or err on the heavier side for fuel efficiency, it's a good starting point to develop an intuition. Of course everyone does things differently, notably I believe Steve sticks to a 1.0x modifier pretty religiously and just builds engines big enough to get the speed he desires as he doesn't care for messing about with calculators and such. I do things differently in each campaign depending on my RP approach.

[papent]

here's some of my current campaign Frigates and other small ships all sub 5k.

I'm personally love small ships and throw packets and pickets any where and everywhere. escorting destroy groups, carrier task groups, orbital landing groups or cruiser squadrons. Small Warships gives a tactical flexibility you don't get with the large ones. i can upgrade these and build them constantly,  i can attach them to whatever capital group is ready for deployment or prepositioned as rapid force squadrons to reinforce system defense FAC groups.

Adm Farragut Series of Railgun Frigates general purpose light combatants

Code: [Select]

Admiral Farragut I class Frigate      3,469 tons       113 Crew       1,120.3 BP       TCS 69    TH 125    EM 270
3603 km/s      Armour 3-20       Shields 9-270       HTK 29      Sensors 14/14/0/0      DCR 2      PPV 14
Maint Life 4.91 Years     MSP 803    AFR 48%    IFR 0.7%    1YR 55    5YR 827    Max Repair 207.8 MSP
Commander    Control Rating 2   BRG   AUX   
Intended Deployment Time: 6 months    Morale Check Required   

Military - Patrol Service Ion Drive (1)    Power 250    Fuel Use 35.36%    Signature 125.0    Explosion 10%
Fuel Capacity 300,000 Litres    Range 44 billion km (141 days at full power)
Gen 1 Delta Z05 - S09 / R270 Shields (1)     Recharge Time 270 seconds (0 per second)

Gen 1 20cm Railgun V50/C12 (2x4)    Range 200,000km     TS: 6,250 km/s     Power 12-12     RM 50,000 km    ROF 5       
Gen 1 Beam Fire Control R288-TS06250 (2)     Max Range: 288,000 km   TS: 6,250 km/s     97 93 90 86 83 79 76 72 69 65
Gen 1 Gas-Cooled Fast Reactor R024 (1)     Total Power Output 24.4    Exp 10%

G1 Active Search Sensor AS030-R020 COM (1)     GPS 560     Range 30.3m km    Resolution 20
G1 Active Search Sensor AS011-R001 COM (1)     GPS 28     Range 11.2m km    MCR 1m km    Resolution 1
G1 COM EM Sensor EM1.0-14.0 (1)     Sensitivity 14     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  29.6m km
G1 COM Thermal Sensor TH1.0-14.0 (1)     Sensitivity 14     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  29.6m km

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes


Code: [Select]

Admiral Farragut II class Frigate      3,427 tons       112 Crew       1,170.7 BP       TCS 69    TH 160    EM 270
4669 km/s      Armour 3-20       Shields 9-270       HTK 29      Sensors 14/14/0/0      DCR 2      PPV 14
Maint Life 4.68 Years     MSP 827    AFR 47%    IFR 0.7%    1YR 62    5YR 926    Max Repair 240 MSP
Commander    Control Rating 2   BRG   AUX   
Intended Deployment Time: 6 months    Morale Check Required   

Military - Patrol Magneto-plasma Drive (1)    Power 320    Fuel Use 35.36%    Signature 160.0    Explosion 10%
Fuel Capacity 300,000 Litres    Range 44.6 billion km (110 days at full power)
Gen 1 Delta Z05 - S09 / R270 Shields (1)     Recharge Time 270 seconds (0 per second)

Gen 1 20cm Railgun V50/C12 (2x4)    Range 200,000km     TS: 6,250 km/s     Power 12-12     RM 50,000 km    ROF 5       
Gen 1 Beam Fire Control R288-TS06250 (2)     Max Range: 288,000 km   TS: 6,250 km/s     97 93 90 86 83 79 76 72 69 65
Gen-7 Tokamak Fusion Reactor R024 (1)     Total Power Output 24.2    Exp 10%

G1 Active Search Sensor AS030-R020 COM (1)     GPS 560     Range 30.3m km    Resolution 20
G1 Active Search Sensor AS011-R001 COM (1)     GPS 28     Range 11.2m km    MCR 1m km    Resolution 1
G1 COM EM Sensor EM1.0-14.0 (1)     Sensitivity 14     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  29.6m km
G1 COM Thermal Sensor TH1.0-14.0 (1)     Sensitivity 14     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  29.6m km

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes


Code: [Select]

Admiral Farragut III class Frigate      3,933 tons       130 Crew       1,495.3 BP       TCS 79    TH 500    EM 900
6357 km/s      Armour 3-22       Shields 30-360       HTK 33      Sensors 14/14/0/0      DCR 2      PPV 17.85
Maint Life 4.05 Years     MSP 875    AFR 62%    IFR 0.9%    1YR 85    5YR 1,277    Max Repair 250 MSP
Commander    Control Rating 2   BRG   AUX   
Intended Deployment Time: 6 months    Morale Check Required   

Military - Patrol Magnetic Fusion Drive (1)    Power 500    Fuel Use 28.28%    Signature 500    Explosion 10%
Fuel Capacity 300,000 Litres    Range 48.5 billion km (88 days at full power)
Gen 2 Epsilon Z10 - S30 / R360 Shields (1)     Recharge Time 360 seconds (0.1 per second)

Gen 2 20cm Railgun V60/C12 (2x4)    Range 240,000km     TS: 6,357 km/s     Power 12-12     RM 60,000 km    ROF 5       
Gen 2 20cm Railgun V60/C06 Twin Bore (1x2)    Range 240,000km     TS: 6,357 km/s     Power 6-6     RM 60,000 km    ROF 5       
Gen 1 Beam Fire Control R288-TS06250 (2)     Max Range: 288,000 km   TS: 6,250 km/s     97 93 90 86 83 79 76 72 69 65
Gen-8 Magnetic Confinement Fusion Reactor R030 (1)     Total Power Output 30    Exp 7%

G1 Active Search Sensor AS011-R001 COM (1)     GPS 28     Range 11.2m km    MCR 1m km    Resolution 1
G1 Active Search Sensor AS042-R020 BAT (1)     GPS 1120     Range 42.9m km    Resolution 20
G1 COM EM Sensor EM1.0-14.0 (1)     Sensitivity 14     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  29.6m km
G1 COM Thermal Sensor TH1.0-14.0 (1)     Sensitivity 14     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  29.6m km

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes

Adm Wroth Class of K/Lance Frigates

Code: [Select]

Admiral Wroth I class Kinetic Frigate      3,145 tons       95 Crew       869.8 BP       TCS 63    TH 125    EM 270
3975 km/s      Armour 3-19       Shields 9-270       HTK 26      Sensors 14/14/0/0      DCR 2      PPV 10
Maint Life 5.21 Years     MSP 745    AFR 40%    IFR 0.5%    1YR 46    5YR 686    Max Repair 244.9 MSP
Commander    Control Rating 2   BRG   AUX   
Intended Deployment Time: 6 months    Morale Check Required   

Military - Patrol Service Ion Drive (1)    Power 250    Fuel Use 35.36%    Signature 125.0    Explosion 10%
Fuel Capacity 300,000 Litres    Range 48.6 billion km (141 days at full power)
Gen 1 Delta Z05 - S09 / R270 Shields (1)     Recharge Time 270 seconds (0 per second)

Gen 1 Particle Beam-12 (1)    Range 200,000km     TS: 6,250 km/s     Power 30-10    ROF 15       
Gen 1 Beam Fire Control R288-TS06250 (1)     Max Range: 288,000 km   TS: 6,250 km/s     97 93 90 86 83 79 76 72 69 65
Gen 1 Gas-Cooled Fast Reactor R030 (1)     Total Power Output 30.2    Exp 20%

G1 Active Search Sensor AS030-R020 COM (1)     GPS 560     Range 30.3m km    Resolution 20
G1 Active Search Sensor AS011-R001 COM (1)     GPS 28     Range 11.2m km    MCR 1m km    Resolution 1
G1 COM EM Sensor EM1.0-14.0 (1)     Sensitivity 14     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  29.6m km
G1 COM Thermal Sensor TH1.0-14.0 (1)     Sensitivity 14     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  29.6m km

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes


Code: [Select]

Admiral Wroth II class Kinetic Frigate      3,113 tons       94 Crew       922.8 BP       TCS 62    TH 160    EM 270
5140 km/s      Armour 3-18       Shields 9-270       HTK 26      Sensors 14/14/0/0      DCR 2      PPV 10
Maint Life 4.98 Years     MSP 770    AFR 39%    IFR 0.5%    1YR 52    5YR 774    Max Repair 244.9 MSP
Commander    Control Rating 2   BRG   AUX   
Intended Deployment Time: 6 months    Morale Check Required   

Military - Patrol Magneto-plasma Drive (1)    Power 320    Fuel Use 35.36%    Signature 160.0    Explosion 10%
Fuel Capacity 300,000 Litres    Range 49.1 billion km (110 days at full power)
Gen 1 Delta Z05 - S09 / R270 Shields (1)     Recharge Time 270 seconds (0 per second)

Gen 1 Particle Beam-12 (1)    Range 200,000km     TS: 6,250 km/s     Power 30-10    ROF 15       
Gen 1 Beam Fire Control R288-TS06250 (1)     Max Range: 288,000 km   TS: 6,250 km/s     97 93 90 86 83 79 76 72 69 65
Gen-7 Tokamak Fusion Reactor R030 (1)     Total Power Output 30.5    Exp 15%

G1 Active Search Sensor AS030-R020 COM (1)     GPS 560     Range 30.3m km    Resolution 20
G1 Active Search Sensor AS011-R001 COM (1)     GPS 28     Range 11.2m km    MCR 1m km    Resolution 1
G1 COM EM Sensor EM1.0-14.0 (1)     Sensitivity 14     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  29.6m km
G1 COM Thermal Sensor TH1.0-14.0 (1)     Sensitivity 14     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  29.6m km

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes


Code: [Select]

Admiral Wroth III class Lance Frigate      3,147 tons       99 Crew       1,132.4 BP       TCS 63    TH 500    EM 330
7945 km/s      Armour 3-19       Shields 11-264       HTK 27      Sensors 14/14/0/0      DCR 2      PPV 12
Maint Life 4.33 Years     MSP 849    AFR 40%    IFR 0.6%    1YR 73    5YR 1,092    Max Repair 466.5 MSP
Commander    Control Rating 2   BRG   AUX   
Intended Deployment Time: 6 months    Morale Check Required   

Military - Patrol Magnetic Fusion Drive (1)    Power 500    Fuel Use 28.28%    Signature 500    Explosion 10%
Fuel Capacity 300,000 Litres    Range 60.7 billion km (88 days at full power)
Gen 2 Epsilon Z05 - S11 / R264 Shields (1)     Recharge Time 264 seconds (0 per second)

Gen 1 Particle Lance-06 (1)    Range 240,000km     TS: 7,945 km/s     Power 17-12    ROF 10       
Gen 1 Beam Fire Control R288-TS06250 (1)     Max Range: 288,000 km   TS: 6,250 km/s     97 93 90 86 83 79 76 72 69 65
Gen-8 Magnetic Confinement Fusion Reactor R021 (1)     Total Power Output 21.2    Exp 7%

G1 Active Search Sensor AS030-R020 COM (1)     GPS 560     Range 30.3m km    Resolution 20
G1 Active Search Sensor AS011-R001 COM (1)     GPS 28     Range 11.2m km    MCR 1m km    Resolution 1
G1 COM EM Sensor EM1.0-14.0 (1)     Sensitivity 14     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  29.6m km
G1 COM Thermal Sensor TH1.0-14.0 (1)     Sensitivity 14     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  29.6m km

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes

COMD Dewey Gunship Series my PD escort class

Code: [Select]

Commodore Dewey III class Gunship      2,820 tons       69 Crew       707.2 BP       TCS 56    TH 200    EM 30
7094 km/s      Armour 2-17       Shields 1-150       HTK 23      Sensors 14/14/0/0      DCR 1      PPV 16.32
Maint Life 3.03 Years     MSP 556    AFR 64%    IFR 0.9%    1YR 91    5YR 1,362    Max Repair 240 MSP
Cryogenic Berths 200   
Commander    Control Rating 2   BRG   AUX   
Intended Deployment Time: 6 months    Morale Check Required   

Military - Vanguard Magnetic Fusion Drive (1)    Power 400    Fuel Use 16.19%    Signature 200.0    Explosion 8%
Fuel Capacity 200,000 Litres    Range 78.9 billion km (128 days at full power)
Gen 1 Gamma Z01 - S01 / R150 Shields (1)     Recharge Time 150 seconds (0 per second)

Gen 1 Gauss Cannon R500-100 Twin Turret (1x12)    Range 50,000km     TS: 25000 km/s     Power 0-0     RM 50,000 km    ROF 5       
Gen 1 Beam Fire Control R096-TS25000 (1)     Max Range: 96,000 km   TS: 25,000 km/s     90 79 69 58 48 38 27 17 6 0

G1 Active Search Sensor AS011-R001 COM (1)     GPS 28     Range 11.2m km    MCR 1m km    Resolution 1
G1 COM EM Sensor EM1.0-14.0 (1)     Sensitivity 14     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  29.6m km
G1 COM Thermal Sensor TH1.0-14.0 (1)     Sensitivity 14     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  29.6m km

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes

COMD Porter series of escort Area defense escorts

Code: [Select]

Commodore Porter III class Escort      3,021 tons       80 Crew       644.2 BP       TCS 60    TH 200    EM 30
6622 km/s      Armour 2-18       Shields 1-150       HTK 32      Sensors 14/14/0/0      DCR 1      PPV 10
Maint Life 3.42 Years     MSP 533    AFR 73%    IFR 1.0%    1YR 69    5YR 1,041    Max Repair 240 MSP
Magazine 180   
Commander    Control Rating 2   BRG   AUX   
Intended Deployment Time: 5 months    Morale Check Required   

Military - Vanguard Magnetic Fusion Drive (1)    Power 400    Fuel Use 16.19%    Signature 200.0    Explosion 8%
Fuel Capacity 200,000 Litres    Range 73.6 billion km (128 days at full power)
Gen 1 Gamma Z01 - S01 / R150 Shields (1)     Recharge Time 150 seconds (0 per second)

Gen 1 Size 1 Missile Launcher (10)     Missile Size: 1    Rate of Fire 5
G1 Missile Fire Control FC022-R001 Standard (3)     Range 22.3m km    Resolution 1
AMR G1 'Kongo' (180)    Speed: 49,600 km/s    End: 1.6m     Range: 4.7m km    WH: 1    Size: 1    TH: 281/168/84

G1 Active Search Sensor AS011-R001 COM (1)     GPS 28     Range 11.2m km    MCR 1m km    Resolution 1
G1 COM EM Sensor EM1.0-14.0 (1)     Sensitivity 14     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  29.6m km
G1 COM Thermal Sensor TH1.0-14.0 (1)     Sensitivity 14     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  29.6m 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