Modular Ship Design... a crazy idea that just might work.

[UnLimiTeD]

However, the FAC will burn 10x fuel, and you'll have to somehow bring it along.
The only way that could be useful is if the Destroyer can keep fighting while the FAC tugs it.

[sloanjh]

What happens when one of the linked ship modules has Hyperdrive, and the other doesn't? Is it worth carrying a Tractor Beam equipped Hyperdrive-FAC in a Boat Bay inside your mission ship, to tow you around when you are outside the Hyper-limit?

I very very very ( ) strongly suspect that Steve would/will declare this an exploit.  His basic design philosophy is to mold the details of the game mechanics to avoid game imbalance.  There are two levels of this idea:

1)  Being able to fire while under hyperdrive tow:  exploit fer sure (you can't fire in hyperspace).

2)  Being able to take a hyperdrive tow at all:  not sure about this one, I could see him allowing it for "real" tow situations.

One thing that has me very confused - you say you're getting a speed of 55K by having a 1 Kton FAC tow a 16 Kton cruiser.  What's the speed of the FAC without the tow?  if it's not 17x55K then this is a bug.  What should be happening is that only the FAC's engines should be contributing to the hyperdrive speed, which means the speed with tow should be 1/17 the speed without tow.  I suspect that Steve never thought of this situation and both sets of engines are contributing, even though only the FAC set is hyper capable.

John

[Vynadan]

Any ship that uses hyper drives can still fire its weapons - That's how it's (afaik) always been with aurora. I don't understand a hyper capable drive as somehow entering hyperspace or subspace, but just somehow overcharging it.

With tractor towing non-hyper ships I'd think the tractor needs to be stronger (=> speed reduction?) to keep up with the increased speed, but there's no ineratia with trans-newtonian engines in aurora, so ... dunno.

[Girlinhat]

Hyperdrive in Aurora isn't the system-crossing subspace bubble you see in things like Star Trek.  Rather, once you're outside the gravity well, then it becomes possible to take the safety off without having torsion rip your ship apart, and you can shift to a higher gear.

[blue emu (OP)]

I dunno, I'd just put hyper engines on the destroyer.^^

I wouldn't.

Hyperdrive engines are bulky. At my current tech level, they are 1.6 times more bulky than regular military engines. For my 16,000-ton Heavy Cruiser, that would be an extra 2700 tons of displacement... which would mean carrying 2700 tons less weapons, fire control, ammo, armor, etc.

Plus, of course, even a pure Hyper-CA wouldn't move this fast. I'm getting the Cruiser's speed (5,175 kps), boosted by the FAC's tug (to 5,547 kps), then multiplied by ten for Hyperdrive (to 55,470 kps)... all at the cost of ONE Hyperdrive engine: the one on the FAC. The CA has only normal military engines.

I very very very (   ) strongly suspect that Steve would/will declare this an exploit.

... and Blue Emu breaks another game!

(HOI-2 was patched twice, and HOI-3 patched once, in order to patch out exploits that I had invented).

FAC without tow is 11,500 kps... 115,000 in Hyper. CA without tow is 5,175 kps. Together: 55,470 kps.

I'm getting CA (5,175 kps) tow-boosted by FAC (5,547 kps) in Hyperdrive (55,470 kps).

I suspect that Steve never thought of this situation

Steve lacks my twisted imagination.

We need a ROFL smiley.

In defense of my exploit, a little techno-babble:

Assume that Hyperdrive engines create a temporary rip or weakness in space-time, allowing the ship's engines to gain traction on an underlying layer of sub-space. A second ship, following immediately behind the first and "drafting" it, can use the same axis of weakness to follow the lead ship at hyperspeed. Since the path of weakness heals quite quickly, the second ship needs to stay tucked immediately behind the first one... best achieved by locking them together with a tractor beam.

I have... in effect... invented the "Hyperdrive Ram"... a small single-purpose ship module which leads a conventional warship and opens a Hyperspace route for it.

[Steve Walmsley]

Yes, this one is an official exploit

I'll probably add some code to prevent ships being able to use hyperdrive while towing.

Steve

[blue emu (OP)]

Yes, this one is an official exploit

I'll probably add some code to prevent ships being able to use hyperdrive while towing.

Steve

 

... I guess I'll have to enjoy it while it lasts, then.

[UnLimiTeD]

Why is that?
I think it's absolutely fine.
You'd need a bit of code that only boosts those engines that actually have hyperdrive
That'll also allow to mount different kinds of engines

[sloanjh]

Why is that?
I think it's absolutely fine.
You'd need a bit of code that only boosts those engines that actually have hyperdrive
That'll also allow to mount different kinds of engines

Agreed - I think there's a valid need to be able to tow e.g. a SY to a binary companion.  (OTOH if you (Steve) don't I'm not going to fight it too hard).

I think you can get away with two small bugfixes:

1)  Only hyperdrive engines contribute to hyperdrive speed.
2)  A ship under hyper-tow is considered in hyperdrive for the weapons firing checks.
3)  Ummmm IIRC you're not supposed to be able to fire in hyperdrive.  Are you sure this check is actually in?  One of the preceding posts makes me wonder....

John (the exceedingly excellent counter)

[blue emu (OP)]

Just a small update.

In my on-going game (now in its 28th year) I am currently designing a new line of warships, every one of which will have a tractor beam and a minimal Hangar Deck for carrying a utility Hyper-equipped FAC. This will enable every ship in the fleet to use modules.

I'll let you know how it works out.

I'm still considering a re-start with a Navy designed from scratch using the modular design philosophy.

[Brian Neumann]

I'm still considering a re-start with a Navy designed from scratch using the modular design philosophy.

If you do go for an all modular design just remember that you will have problems with major jump point assaults.  Deep space or defending against a jump assault you should be fine, but in the assault the number of ships you can take through is really going to bite you as each module is a seperate ship.

Good luck and let us know how it goes.

Brian

[UnLimiTeD]

A Hangar+Tractor is what, 1550 tons?
That'd be three more engines, I'd definitely just create Hyperengines on the actual vessel.
But yeh, let us know how it plays out.

[blue emu (OP)]

A Hangar+Tractor is what, 1550 tons?
That'd be three more engines, I'd definitely just create Hyperengines on the actual vessel.
But yeh, let us know how it plays out.

Naturally the design philosophy has drawbacks... in any reasonably balanced game, every decision will offer both advantages and disadvantages.

Some of the advantages are:

1) The smaller shipyards required... half-size for two-module ships, one-third size for three-module ships, etc.
2) Fewer maintenance facilities required, and fewer workers to run them, leaving more population for other tasks.
3) Interchangeability... the ability to configure a battle fleet based on mission requirements.
4) Faster build times and faster refits based on smaller size; partial refits based on modularity.

Some of the disadvantages include:

1) The need to devote extra mass to Tractor Beams.
2) The surface-to-volume ratio which increases armor tonnage.
3) Shields only protect the carrying module.

[Hawkeye]

IIRC, Steve changed the code some versions ago to disalow tractor chains. So no three (or more) module ships

[blue emu (OP)]

IIRC, Steve changed the code some versions ago to disalow tractor chains. So no three (or more) module ships

That was what I thought, but one of the forum members posted a few days ago that he had tested it in v5.53 and it still worked.

I'll test it now...