Author Topic: Magneto-Plasma Drive Destroyer  (Read 3079 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline doulos05 (OP)

  • Chief Petty Officer
  • ***
  • d
  • Posts: 45
  • Thanked: 3 times
Magneto-Plasma Drive Destroyer
« on: November 04, 2015, 06:38:00 AM »
OK, I designed my first destroyer.  I'm sure it's terrible, but tell me what I've done wrong and what I should do for Block 2.

Code: [Select]
Clemson class Destroyer    23 000 tons     644 Crew     5157 BP      TCS 460  TH 1600  EM 0
3478 km/s     Armour 2-72     Shields 0-0     Sensors 110/110/0/0     Damage Control Rating 40     PPV 43.58
Maint Life 2.27 Years     MSP 2803    AFR 211%    IFR 2.9%    1YR 737    5YR 11055    Max Repair 630 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 36 months    Spare Berths 1   
Magazine 1375   

Joyce Orbital Systems 800 EP Magneto-plasma Drive (2)    Power 800    Fuel Use 30%    Signature 800    Exp 10%
Fuel Capacity 700 000 Litres    Range 18.3 billion km   (60 days at full power)

Twin Cooper Space & Security 20cm C5 F-UV Laser Turret (1x2)    Range 256 000km     TS: 16000 km/s     Power 20-10     RM 5    ROF 10        10 10 10 10 10 8 7 6 5 5
Doyle Aerospace Beam FC S08 128-16000 (1)    Max Range: 256 000 km   TS: 16000 km/s     96 92 88 84 80 77 73 69 65 61
Adams-Myers Marine Stellarator Power Plant IV (1)     Total Power Output 24    Armour 0    Exp 5%

Burke Cybernetics 10 MSP Torpedo Launcher (2)    Missile Size 10    Rate of Fire 100
Lambert-Greenwood Interceptor Launcher Block 1 (5)    Missile Size 1    Rate of Fire 10
Morgan & Mann ASM Fire Control FC173-R100 (1)     Range 173.3m km    Resolution 100
Morgan & Mann AMM Fire Control FC103-R1 (2)     Range 104.0m km    Resolution 1

Owen Corporation LR Defender MR69-R1 (1)     GPS 630     Range 69.3m km    MCR 7.5m km    Resolution 1
Jackson Dynamics SCAR "Big Eyes" Mk. I MR504-R100 (1)     GPS 63000     Range 504.0m km    Resolution 100
Lee Corporation Thermal Sensor TH10-110 (1)     Sensitivity 110     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  110m km
Walters-Williamson EM Detection Sensor EM10-110 (1)     Sensitivity 110     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  110m km

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
 

Offline 83athom

  • Big Ship Commander
  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1261
  • Thanked: 86 times
Re: Magneto-Plasma Drive Destroyer
« Reply #1 on: November 04, 2015, 07:03:21 AM »
Honestly, it is not that good of a design. For starers, its range is a bit too low. What you can do to make it better is to have 0.7x - 0.8x power engines, you keep about the same speed but you get a far greater range (also add a bit more fuel). Secondly, its far too weak. You should have at least 4 layers of armor, but I recommend 6 layers or armor plus shields (or 8 layers if no shields). You have hardly any weapon systems. Go to the Ships topic and look at what I'm able to cram onto similarly sized ships (the Floreal is an exception as that is a sensor craft with giant af sensors). Drop the deployment to, at most, 12 months, at least 18. That level of maintenance is fine for a military craft.
Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set fire to him and he's warm for the rest of his life.
 

Offline doulos05 (OP)

  • Chief Petty Officer
  • ***
  • d
  • Posts: 45
  • Thanked: 3 times
Re: Magneto-Plasma Drive Destroyer
« Reply #2 on: November 04, 2015, 07:24:07 AM »
Thanks, I knew it was terrible, I just wasn't sure how/why.  Now a few questions before I start queuing up research projects:

So I should go with 0. 7x power engines? 0. 7x Power or 0. 7x fuel efficiency? Wouldn't lowering the power multiplier hurt my speed or am I missing something? Is it that having the smaller power multiple is fuel efficient enough that I can cut my fuel space back and use space for more engines?

How do the weapons systems themselves look? I intended this to be a missile destroyer, I've designed a similar one that's meant for brawling.  How many torpedo launchers should I be aiming to pack into that size design?

What about my sensor suites? Are those within reason or should I change those somehow?
 

Offline 83athom

  • Big Ship Commander
  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1261
  • Thanked: 86 times
Re: Magneto-Plasma Drive Destroyer
« Reply #3 on: November 04, 2015, 09:20:50 AM »
Your engine should look something like the attached picture (or 0.8x power, or 0.7x power) but at whatever size you want it to be. Trust me, even though it seems like a waste to use a more efficient engine on a military craft, trust me these work just fine.
Here is my armament for something a bit smaller that I just designed to fill a missile frigate role.
Code: [Select]
Artemis CIWS-250 E1 (2x6)    Range 1000 km     TS: 25000 km/s     ROF 5       Base 50% To Hit
R5S5ML (50% Reduction) (15)    Missile Size 5    Rate of Fire 150
R5S3ML (50% Reduction) (60)    Missile Size 3    Rate of Fire 90
Missile Fire Control FC99-R75 (70%) (6)     Range 99.8m km    Resolution 75
Sparrow A1S3 MCFASM (300)  Speed: 33 300 km/s   End: 41.8m    Range: 83.6m km   WH: 9    Size: 3    TH: 188/113/56
Malafon A1S5 MCFHASM (45)  Speed: 40 000 km/s   End: 29m    Range: 69.7m km   WH: 16    Size: 5    TH: 146/88/44
So around 10-20 torps and at least as many amms.

And yes, those are stupidly big active sensors you have there. Maybe to reduce use 1 1HS 1 resolution sensor, 1 1-2HS 25 res sensor, and 1 1-2HS 100-150 res sensor. Also, your amm fc is a bit big, you only want those to be around 0.3m km range (give or take a few 0.1m km)
« Last Edit: November 04, 2015, 09:47:29 AM by 83athom »
Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set fire to him and he's warm for the rest of his life.
 

Offline MarcAFK

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 2005
  • Thanked: 134 times
  • ...it's so simple an idiot could have devised it..
Re: Magneto-Plasma Drive Destroyer
« Reply #4 on: November 04, 2015, 04:57:12 PM »
Shove those big sensors into a dedicated ship, protect it well because it'll attract a lot of attention
" Why is this godforsaken hellhole worth dying for? "
". . .  We know nothing about them, their language, their history or what they look like.  But we can assume this.  They stand for everything we don't stand for.  Also they told me you guys look like dorks. "
"Stop exploding, you cowards.  "
 

Offline sneer

  • Lt. Commander
  • ********
  • s
  • Posts: 261
  • Thanked: 2 times
Re: Magneto-Plasma Drive Destroyer
« Reply #5 on: November 06, 2015, 08:40:17 AM »
pure beam magneto plasma destroyer from my very last game
Quote
Nelson class Destroyer    16 650 tons     521 Crew     3613 BP      TCS 333  TH 2000  EM 0
6006 km/s     Armour 6-58     Shields 0-0     Sensors 6/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 18     PPV 80.64
Maint Life 1.38 Years     MSP 1085    AFR 277%    IFR 3.9%    1YR 616    5YR 9237    Max Repair 500 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months    Spare Berths 33   

1000 EP Magneto-plasma Drive (2)    Power 1000    Fuel Use 52.41%    Signature 1000    Exp 12%
Fuel Capacity 1 750 000 Litres    Range 36.1 billion km   (69 days at full power)

20cm C4 Ultraviolet Laser ( 8 )    Range 256 000km     TS: 6006 km/s     Power 10-4     RM 4    ROF 15        10 10 10 10 8 6 5 5 4 4
Quad 10cm C3 Ultraviolet Laser Turret (2x4)    Range 120 000km     TS: 16000 km/s     Power 12-12     RM 4    ROF 5        3 3 3 3 2 2 1 1 1 1
Fire Control S08 128-16000 (2)    Max Range: 256 000 km   TS: 16000 km/s     96 92 88 84 80 77 73 69 65 61
reactor 5-30 (2)     Total Power Output 60    Armour 0    Exp 5%

Active Search Sensor MR13-R20 (1)     GPS 560     Range 13.8m km    Resolution 20
Active Search Sensor MR174-R200 (1)     GPS 22400     Range 174.2m km    Resolution 200
Active Search Sensor MR12-R1 (1)     GPS 112     Range 12.3m km    MCR 1.3m km    Resolution 1
Thermal Sensor TH1-6 (1)     Sensitivity 6     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  6m km

ECCM-1 (2)         ECM 10

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes

not a perfect design ( FC ) but it was alarm design after wormhole appeared early ;)
« Last Edit: November 06, 2015, 08:44:11 AM by sneer »
 

Offline doulos05 (OP)

  • Chief Petty Officer
  • ***
  • d
  • Posts: 45
  • Thanked: 3 times
Re: Magneto-Plasma Drive Destroyer
« Reply #6 on: November 06, 2015, 11:51:57 PM »
Quote from: sneer link=topic=8023. msg82479#msg82479 date=1446820817
not a perfect design ( FC ) but it was alarm design after wormhole appeared early ;)
What exactly is wrong  with the fire controls? Not enough? Size/range mismatch?
 

Offline clement

  • Pulsar 4x Dev
  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • *
  • c
  • Posts: 137
  • Thanked: 13 times
Re: Magneto-Plasma Drive Destroyer
« Reply #7 on: November 07, 2015, 02:37:56 PM »
What exactly is wrong  with the fire controls? Not enough? Size/range mismatch?

The resolution 1 AMM Fire Control is way to large for what it needs to be. It really only needs to have a range similar to whatever the range of your Anti-missile missile. I make them with ~10 to 20% more range than the initial missiles I am putting on the ship so that as missile technology improves the ships can take advantage of that growth without needing a refit of the electronics.

As said by someone else, I would take the large thermal and electronics sensors and the "Big Eyes" sensors and put them on a dedicated ship that is heavily armored and has decent point defense. Those are fleet level sensors that do not need to be on every ship. That will give you a lot more space for weapons. You can replace the "Big Eyes" sensor with a more reasonable sensor for the ship.

Here is a cruiser class similar in size that I have used as at that technology level. It is intended to move as a squadron or as part of a fleet.

Code: [Select]
Knight class Cruiser    22 000 tons     602 Crew     4311 BP      TCS 440  TH 2400  EM 0
5454 km/s     Armour 6-69     Shields 0-0     Sensors 1/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 14     PPV 78.08
Maint Life 2.07 Years     MSP 1715    AFR 276%    IFR 3.8%    1YR 536    5YR 8042    Max Repair 400 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months    Spare Berths 0   
Magazine 821   

Marsh-Finch MP-800 Military Drive (3)    Power 800    Fuel Use 35%    Signature 800    Exp 10%
Fuel Capacity 1 500 000 Litres    Range 35.1 billion km   (74 days at full power)

Twin Humphries Weapon Systems 12cm UV Laser Turret (2x2)    Range 160 000km     TS: 16000 km/s     Power 8-8     RM 4    ROF 5        4 4 4 4 3 2 2 2 1 1
Gibbons Warning & Control BFC-128-16000 (2)    Max Range: 256 000 km   TS: 16000 km/s     96 92 88 84 80 77 73 69 65 61
Sutton-Poole Stellarator Fusion Reactor PB-1 (3)     Total Power Output 18    Armour 0    Exp 5%

Gordon Precision Arms S-1 Launcher (6)    Missile Size 1    Rate of Fire 10
Gordon Precision Arms S-5 Missile Launcher (10)    Missile Size 5    Rate of Fire 50
Gibbons Warning & Control MFC-Res120-R121 (2)     Range 121.4m km    Resolution 120
Gibbons Warning & Control MFC-Res1-MR34-R3.7 (2)     Range 34.7m km    Resolution 1
Mark 4 Counter Missile (136)  Speed: 28 000 km/s   End: 2.3m    Range: 3.9m km   WH: 1    Size: 1    TH: 224/134/67
Mark 9 Missile (120)  Speed: 22 400 km/s   End: 54.3m    Range: 73m km   WH: 9    Size: 5    TH: 142/85/42

Gibbons Warning & Control AS-Res120-R126 (1)     GPS 12600     Range 126.5m km    Resolution 120
Gibbons Warning & Control AS-Res-1-MR34-R3.7 (1)     GPS 315     Range 34.7m km    MCR 3.8m km    Resolution 1

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