My Entire Starting War Fleet (First try)

[381654729 (OP)]

I discovered this game about 3 years ago, back when I was too young to comprehend what was going on at all.    Now that I made it into first year engineering, I believe I am finally smart enough to try this game again.    I started a game with twice (240000) the tech points compared to default because I want to give myself a chance.   Since I believe in "doing it right the first time", I restarted and restarted and restarted the game until I finally felt satisfied, which of course makes this not the first time unless I do some creative accounting.   Anyway, here's the fleet I've managed to design after spending all those tech points (some of which went to non-military areas like construction and production):

Code: [Select]

Musketeer class Missile Frigate    5,000 tons     118 Crew     711 BP      TCS 100  TH 312  EM 0
3120 km/s     Armour 3-26     Shields 0-0     Sensors 1/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 0     PPV 20
Maint Life 3.1 Years     MSP 1044    AFR 400%    IFR 5.6%    1YR 163    5YR 2449    Max Repair 96 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months    Spare Berths 2    
Magazine 203    

156 EP Ion Drive (2)    Power 156    Fuel Use 69.6%    Signature 156    Exp 10%
Fuel Capacity 600,000 Litres    Range 31.0 billion km   (115 days at full power)

Size 4 Missile Launcher (5)    Missile Size 4    Rate of Fire 40
ASM FC 51.5Mkm (1)     Range 51.5m km    Resolution 45
Size 4 Anti-ship Missile (51)  Speed: 27,400 km/s   End: 30.5m    Range: 50.1m km   WH: 4    Size: 4    TH: 146/87/43

ASM Sensor 59.5Mkm (1)     GPS 5760     Range 59.5m km    Resolution 60

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
This is my "standard" missile boat, I had to keep it under 5000 tons due to starting shipyard size restrictions.    5 launchers is as much as I could fit onto the ship while still keeping (in my opinion) decent speed and acceptable range.    I figure that at 711 BP, this class will be cheap enough to mass-produce (if there is ever such a thing), and thus the low missile volume per ship would not handicap me too much since I can have (say) 10 of them aim at the same target, hopefully getting some through.    The sensor is a backup, as there is a more powerful sensor somewhere else in the fleet.   

Code: [Select]

Allegiance class Escort    11,000 tons     247 Crew     1868.7 BP      TCS 220  TH 336  EM 0
3054 km/s     Armour 3-44     Shields 0-0     Sensors 1/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 1     PPV 29.7
Maint Life 1.04 Years     MSP 1133    AFR 774%    IFR 10.8%    1YR 1050    5YR 15754    Max Repair 352 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months    Spare Berths 1    
Magazine 381    

336 EP Ion Drive (2)    Power 336    Fuel Use 57.6%    Signature 168    Exp 10%
Fuel Capacity 1,050,000 Litres    Range 29.8 billion km   (113 days at full power)

Quad PD VL Laser Turret (1x4)    Range 48,000km     TS: 10000 km/s     Power 12-12     RM 2    ROF 5        3 3 2 1 0 0 0 0 0 0
PD Laser FC 9kkm/s (1)    Max Range: 48,000 km   TS: 9000 km/s     79 58 38 17 0 0 0 0 0 0
Power Plant 13.5 (1)     Total Power Output 13.5    Armour 0    Exp 5%

Size 1 Missile Launcher (15)    Missile Size 1    Rate of Fire 10
AMM FC 3.35Mkm (2)     Range 30.7m km    Resolution 1
Size 1 Anti-missile Missile (381)  Speed: 27,400 km/s   End: 1.8m    Range: 3m km   WH: 1    Size: 1    TH: 164/98/49

PD Sensor 3.01Mkm (1)     GPS 352     Range 28.2m km    MCR 3.1m 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

The escort, with zero offensive capability.   The design feels.  .  .   weird, especially the part with 15 launchers on 2 FCs.   I'm not OCD enough to change it now, since three of this class is already in production.   I chose to use a quad laser turret instead of a gauss cannon turret for closer-range PD, because I felt that if I use a gauss cannon for this role, there will be literally nothing in my fleet to handle something like a meson fighter squad dive-bombing my fleet.   Now that I think about it, with this turret, I probably still have literally nothing in my fleet to handle something like a meson fighter squad dive-bombing my fleet.   Oh well. 

Code: [Select]

Orion class Carrier    20,000 tons     350 Crew     3119.2 BP      TCS 400  TH 600  EM 0
3000 km/s     Armour 6-65     Shields 0-0     Sensors 160/160/0/0     Damage Control Rating 3     PPV 0
Maint Life 1.15 Years     MSP 2292    AFR 1066%    IFR 14.8%    1YR 1761    5YR 26416    Max Repair 320 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months    Flight Crew Berths 40    
Flag Bridge    Hangar Deck Capacity 5000 tons     Magazine 183    

300 EP Ion Drive (4)    Power 300    Fuel Use 60%    Signature 150    Exp 10%
Fuel Capacity 1,810,000 Litres    Range 27.2 billion km   (104 days at full power)

Size 4 Anti-ship Missile (46)  Speed: 27,400 km/s   End: 30.5m    Range: 50.1m km   WH: 4    Size: 4    TH: 146/87/43

ASM Sensor 214Mkm (1)     GPS 22400     Range 214.2m km    Resolution 70
Thermal Sensor 160 (1)     Sensitivity 160     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  160m km
EM Sensor 160 (1)     Sensitivity 160     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  160m km

Strike Group
5x Wasp Strikefighter   Speed: 4800 km/s    Size: 10
5x Slayer Fighter   Speed: 9648 km/s    Size: 9.95

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


Code: [Select]

Wasp class Strikefighter    500 tons     2 Crew     99.8 BP      TCS 10  TH 24  EM 0
4800 km/s     Armour 1-5     Shields 0-0     Sensors 1/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 0     PPV 4.8
Maint Life 3.05 Years     MSP 12    AFR 20%    IFR 0.3%    1YR 2    5YR 29    Max Repair 36 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 0.03 months    Spare Berths 14    
Magazine 32    

48 EP Fighter Engine (1)    Power 48    Fuel Use 443.5%    Signature 24    Exp 20%
Fuel Capacity 15,000 Litres    Range 1.2 billion km   (70 hours at full power)

Size 4 Box Launcher (8)    Missile Size 4    Hangar Reload 30 minutes    MF Reload 5 hours
ASM FC 51.5Mkm (1)     Range 51.5m km    Resolution 45
Size 4 Anti-ship Missile (4)  Speed: 27,400 km/s   End: 30.5m    Range: 50.1m km   WH: 4    Size: 4    TH: 146/87/43

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 Fighter for production, combat and maintenance purposes


Code: [Select]

Slayer class Fighter    498 tons     4 Crew     110.6 BP      TCS 9.95  TH 48  EM 0
9648 km/s     Armour 1-5     Shields 0-0     Sensors 1/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 0     PPV 3.75
Maint Life 1.86 Years     MSP 14    AFR 19%    IFR 0.3%    1YR 5    5YR 77    Max Repair 72 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 0.03 months    Spare Berths 12    

96 EP Fighter Engine (1)    Power 96    Fuel Use 434.45%    Signature 48    Exp 20%
Fuel Capacity 15,000 Litres    Range 1.2 billion km   (35 hours at full power)

Gauss Cannon 0.75HS (1x2)    Range 10,000km     TS: 9648 km/s     Accuracy Modifier 12.5%     RM 1    ROF 5        1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Gauss Cannon 3HS (1x2)    Range 10,000km     TS: 9648 km/s     Accuracy Modifier 50%     RM 1    ROF 5        1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Fighter BFC (1)    Max Range: 48,000 km   TS: 12000 km/s     79 58 38 17 0 0 0 0 0 0

This design is classed as a Fighter for production, combat and maintenance purposes
The carrier, and what it carries.   They say fighters are not a good idea for early tech, now I know why.   However with my skill level, I doubt my abilities to even reach non-early tech, so I decided to give it a try now.   The flag bridge is there because I want it to be somewhere in my fleet, as I lack a true "one-of-a-kind" capital ship.   There will probably be two identical copies of this class, one with a flag bridge and one without.   If the game decides to be mean and does not let me build both at the same shipyard, I'll come up with something else. 

The Wasp is slow as it is because its only defense is not its speed, but its.  .  .   expendability.   As long as it can get in the 50Mkm range (less against ECM) to unload the 8(!) ship-killer missiles it carries, there is no reason for me to actually want it back in my hangar.   The carrier only carries one reload for the Wasps for a reason. 

The Slayer doubles as PD, though I realize the inefficiency in their design.   I know that they'll probably be unable to penetrate the enemy's PD screen to shoot ships with their gauss cannons, and the gauss cannons are mediocre at best at shooting down missiles, surely I'd do better if I just put them on the carrier instead.   However I said I wanted to give fighters a try, and here's my try. 

The exact number of each kind of fighter to carry may vary depending on what I need.   The 5-and-5 setup shown is just something I put there as a placeholder.   What will probably happen is that the carrier with the flag bridge carries the Slayers, while the non-flag-bridge carriers carry the Wasps, but only time will tell. 


I plan to augment the range of the entire fleet with a civilian jump tender/tanker, carrying little other than fuel, armor, CIWS, and two jump engines, one military and one commercial.  I believe it's an exploit to put military jump drives on commercial ships, but at my skill level, I need all the exploiting I can get. 

Comments welcome (desperately needed in fact)!

EDIT: Realized that I can't actually use two jump engines on the same jump ship.

[Nightstar]

Well, not too shabby. It'll certainly kill stuff! It's fairly well rounded at that. Fighters, ASMs, AMMs, lasers. You'll have a counter to almost any threat. Your real job now is efficiency.

Criticism:
The Musketeer has different resolutions for its sensor and FC, this is generally a waste. There's some weird situations where that's a good idea, but this probably isn't one.
You seem to be using maintenance storage bays. Engineering spaces are preferred for self use. Even the carrier shouldn't really have more than one maint storage, if that.
Railguns are preferred to unturreted gauss cannons in most situations. Particularly since you seem to already have capacitor recharge 3.
On your fighters... If they're sacrificial, why the engineering space? They're pretty useless after their deployment time is over by a factor of two. In that timeframe, they won't likely suffer failures.
Again on the fighters, does increasing the deployment time to 0.1 month incur any additional costs? I don't think it should. If not, do so.

[381654729 (OP)]

I wholeheartedly accept your criticism on the fighters.  The engineering space and deployment time on the fighters were pure oversight, fortunately none have entered production yet so I can still change the designs.  I thought the gauss cannons would save space compared to railguns due to not requiring a power plant, but looking back again, I realize you're completely right.

Now that you mention it, every single active sensor in my fleet is mismatched with the missile fire controls.  Why exactly is this a bad thing? The way I see it, the important part is for the missile fire controls to match the missiles.  I don't exactly need to spot every enemy my missiles can hit at the extreme edge of my missile range, since as long as I spot them eventually I'll be able to fire at them.  That's my reasoning behind the mismatched sensors, but I think I'm not understanding something here.

I used the maintenance storage bays because I was under the impression that if the MSP a ship can carry is lower than its max repair, it will not be able to repair the component at all in case of a breakdown.  Is this a wrong interpretation of mechanics?

[Jorgen_CAB]

MSP work as you say but engineering bays give you both MSP and lower the chance of maintenance failures.

In general you want about twice the MSP over the maximum needed for repair as a minimum. Ordinary ships should in general use only engineering bays. Supply bays are for support ships or really large general purpose ships.

In general I go for about 150-250% maintenance cycle over deployment time as a general rule.

[381654729 (OP)]

Thank you for the clarification.  I didn't know that engineering spaces added MSP, since their "Rating Type" is "Failure Rate".  Until now I have been adding maintenance storage bays until the MSP is more than the max repair, then adding engineering spaces, and wondering how everyone else doesn't have to do that.

I went ahead and edited the designs with SM, because this was due to something I honestly didn't know, and the change essentially does not affect how my ships function. 

Thank you again for the valuable feedback.  This is truly a fascinating game.

[xeryon]

The engineering bays add a small amount of MSP but also directly reduce your failure rates.  As previously stated adding a storage bay has limited use.  I find I only use them on maintenance ships and on really large craft where adding 10x-20x more engineering bays doesn't greatly reduce my failure rate.

Having mismatching FC and sensors is only a waste if the disparity is great.  Sometimes exactly matching the two systems works out mathematically when you design them and sometimes it just isn't going to happen due to the techs you have available.  Other times it's just easier and cheaper (research wise) to go with a system you have already developed and keeping consistency in the fleets modules lets you prebuild a fat stack of parts with less micro-managing of the build queues.

I noticed an odd disparity in the maintenance life and deployment time on your missile frigates.  You may have already addressed that with the engineering bay change.

Your disposable box launch fighters are such an odd setup.  Totally understand the concept of disposable fighters but only fielding 5 in a carrier makes for a completely impotent salvo.  You fire off a salvo of 40 missiles and now your carrier is essentially worthless in the battle.  With a 50m km range the fighters are not likely to die in most fights so why not just add some additional magazines to the carrier and let your carrier live to fight again without needed to limp all the way home.

Your escort might have limited offensive capability but it actually has a pretty limited defensive one too.  Having so few fire controls on the ship means you will be overkilling missiles.  My preference is to have about 4 launchers per FC in a purely defensive ship which allows much greater flexibility in targeting.

[381654729 (OP)]

The first test in combat for this fleet resulted in its total destruction: the enemy's fleet consisted of almost exclusively ~1000 ton gunboats armed with close-range missiles, and I have no missile FC that can hit them at that range, even though I could see them.  I rage-quit the game.

Lesson learned.  I will do better in my new game.

[NihilRex]

That happened to me quite a few times.

I restart anytime I find that my fleet doctrine needs  a complete rewrite, and try again.

For varied threats, I've found that you need at least 2 versions of everything.

Offensive punch?  Need one for numerous small, rabid gerbils, and another for Godzillas.
Defensive effects?  Need one for pollen, and another for incoming asteroids.

How exactly you do that is up to you.  At the moment I'm experimenting with PD fighters, that push out ~80k km from the flag and prepare to provide area PD missile coverage.

[Jorgen_CAB]

Ha... try fighting with a dozen or so different human factions all played by an intelligent being (me ) and you will need like gazillion levels of everything to cover all the bases. Especially in the mid and later game. At the start you are always limited mostly by your technology for diversity. Add in political pressures for forcing the military to do stuff (or develop stuff) that perhaps is not sound tactical decisions but perhaps the humane (or popular) thing to do.

[chrislocke2000]

The first test in combat for this fleet resulted in its total destruction: the enemy's fleet consisted of almost exclusively ~1000 ton gunboats armed with close-range missiles, and I have no missile FC that can hit them at that range, even though I could see them.  I rage-quit the game.

Lesson learned.  I will do better in my new game.

If you can face it I'd strongly suggest sticking to the same game. I had a similar situation where I lost a chunk of a fleet to the same sort of hostiles. Loved the tension of going back into the system with my replacement fleet not knowing if the revised vessels would cope.

[381654729 (OP)]

If you can face it I'd strongly suggest sticking to the same game. . .

The fact that I (unknowingly) made my entire empire lack vowels also has to do with the decision to restart. 

Though this is rapidly departing from the intended discussion on ship design, so it's probably best to leave it for now.

[xeryon]

I rage quit the first few debacles I ran into until I realized that getting annihilated was really just part of the story that plays out in my head while I play.  Now when my fleet gets squashed by the first encounter I write it into the story: fire the fleet commander for incompetence, redesign new ships with updated technology and try again.  The downside to losing your opening fleet is really nothing.  The early game ships are universally terrible.  In the time it took you to build those your home planet grew and prospered and building your next gen ships will have better tech and likely take less time.  Even if the opening fleet was victorious you would likely be refitting and/or replacing those ships in the next few game years anyway.

[Prince of Space]

I think that part of the reason why early game warships are so terrible is that the tech trees front load some of the research costs. A large chunk of my initial RP expenditure and early research priorities is composed of reduced size missile launcher and laser tech, the different sizes of fuel tanks and engineering sections, and one-off projects like tractor beams and asteroid mining modules. Unlike capacitor recharge or mining production rates, these tech chains don't extend very far, so there's a real temptation to get them out of the way early.

If I also hold myself to the RP allotment built into the game, I end up with crappy warhead tech, and crappy turret tracking speed tech, and so on, at least until my researchers can catch me up. My solution is to build my early fleet with an emphasis on exploration, surveys, and spotting trouble before I blunder into it. I've never had a compelling strategic or role play reason to build a fleet capable of interstellar expeditionary warfare before I've even colonized Luna.

But that's just me. You might find it distasteful to run from a first contact encounter.

[Jorgen_CAB]

From a role-play perspective I see no reason to even research more than bare-bone military technology if I play with a unified earth that explores the galaxy. Even if we find ruins and wrecks in space they are mostly thousands of not hundreds or millions of years old, so not any immediate threat based on the probability that we humans would exist at the same time as any other conscious being this close to us.

All my efforts in my previous games have been on 80-90% on civilian expansion and colonization until we stumble on to something that threatened us. I believe that is what we humans would do in a similar situation. If there only is one state with monopoly on military force and technology there would never be any real military threat left other than a none human one. Forces would mainly be of the police type.

It would obviously leave me more or less defenseless against an aggressive NPR, but I believe that is how it would be.

If you on the other hand play in a multi-faction start then you will need to play the game much different. But then again all factions will start with similar technologies and it no longer really matter if you have slow ships, your enemies will too. It does not matter if you build warships with low tech levels, they can still be super strong in comparison with what the enemy has.

I have never rage quit the game so far... I have restarted many campaign over and over but not because they were going badly... rather the reverse for me.

[NihilRex]

I dont often rage quit.  Usually it is a boredom issue, or a sudden realization of something that I had been doing majorly wrong that should have been obvious.