Request: Aircraft and Notes Page

[Kristover (OP)]

1.  Under the current ground force construct, I note that we don't really have 'air forces'.  Yes, we have fighters (no air to air play yet) that can dramatically effect a battle - but we are missing an entire middle category of aerospace forces like combat helicopters, atmospheric fighters, and the like.  I have been simulating this by creating medium vehicle templates and just calling them 'Combat Aviation Battalions' but I really think there is a space open on the unit true to simulate these forces which would undoubtedly be there.  I propose one more unit type called, 'Aerospace', and it would be equivalent to a medium vehicle template, have the highest manuverabilty of any unit type, have relatively light armor, have the ability to attack the entire battlefield including rear areas like long range artillery, and be especially vulnerable to anti-air weapons.  This would create hard to hit formations that are a useful combat multiplier, but don't have the same utility of space-based ground attack fighters because they can't be easily/rapidly transported and it would also create more incentive for purpose built AA units.

2.  This is merely an RP addition - but I like keeping notes on my units accomplishments and build histories for them.  I can kind of do that now with medals but I would like the ability to add manual notes on ships and ground units so I can satisfy my RP itch.  I don't think this functionality would be hard at all to add and I know the RPers among us would appreciate it.

[Barkhorn]

The fighters we have now can do that already, you set them to ground support and they will have many close-air-support mission options and take part in ground combat like any other ground unit.  To make dedicated aircraft, just don't include any space-oriented parts.

[Kristover (OP)]

Still got to put an engine on it or else it'll be a commercial vessel and can't mount weapons.  Sure, you get put the absolute smallest possible engine on it with no fuel storage but that strikes me as kind of gamey.  Lets have aerospace forces - purpose built 'ground' units that are effective within their niche but don't have the power projection and utility of space-based ground attack fighters.

[Barkhorn]

You can mount weapons, that will make it military.  Try it out.  Fighter pods can be very tiny too, so your ground support fighters can easily be under 100 tons.

[Black]

You can make ground support satelite without engine:

Code: [Select]

Orbital Support Platform class Orbital Weapon Platform      159 tons       2 Crew       59.2 BP       TCS 3    TH 0    EM 0
1 km/s      Armour 2-2       Shields 0-0       HTK 0      Sensors 0/0/0/0      DCR 0      PPV 2.4
Maint Life 31.64 Years     MSP 46    AFR 1%    IFR 0.0%    1YR 0    5YR 1    Max Repair 16 MSP
Magazine 48   
Lieutenant Commander    Control Rating 1   
Intended Deployment Time: 1 months    Morale Check Required   


PB-16 Fighter Pod Bay (3)     Pod Size: 16    Hangar Reload 200 minutes    MF Reload 33 hours
SPG-P- 1 Ground Fighter Fire Control (1)     Range 72.1m km    Resolution 500
BP-16 Bombardment Pod (1)    Armour Penetration: 23     Damage: 45     Shots: 3
AP-16 Autocannon Pod (2)    Armour Penetration: 36     Damage: 30     Shots: 3

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 planetary interaction

Something like Ion Cannon from Command and Conquer, but it will be very easy to hit because the speed.

[Kristover (OP)]

I do like the idea of Orbital Defense Satellites.

[Kristover (OP)]

You can mount weapons, that will make it military.  Try it out.  Fighter pods can be very tiny too, so your ground support fighters can easily be under 100 tons.

I mean yeah sure one could mimic an 'aerospace' force like that but I feel that to be kind of lame - I'll make an exception for Black's idea of orbital defense satellites/platforms because that seems to me to be a pretty nifty idea.  By making 'fighters' without engines we are making a very niche kind of ad-hoc solution that kind of does the job game-wise but ignore the notion that a modern Army would have tons of aerial forces at its disposal. Heck, on my big ocean worlds I build heavy/super-heavy units and rename the template to simulate ocean going 'navies'.

[Norm49]

I was thinking the same thing an i almost made a post like this yesterday but i went to sleep instead so you beat me to it. I my currently trying to make a game start with the army of China, Russia, the US, India, France, the UK, north Korea and maybe Germany fighting as conventional empire for the last resource on earth trying to get to a other nation witch will be my empire (but i wold still have to roll play the other nation since the AI wont make a good job at it.) My nation would develop trans-Newtonian technologies and will have to face a army many time it size using the trans-Newtonian technologies.

Long live the great northern empire of maple maple syrup. 

Any ways my point is I'm having a hard time creating a conventional army no air force / no navy. For the ground force it is not the best but I could get the job done. Developing  this open new game play we discover conventional empire with low tech but huge army! This is something I would like to see in this game. And it is probably not that hard to implant except maybe for the navy because the game have to look at the quantity of water on the planet and transforming it can change everything.

[Jorgen_CAB]

If you use orbital platforms then using shields on them would probably be very effective as the shield regenerate fully between combat rounds. It can probably make them near invulnerable to AA fire. You would need about 100t of shields though so you would want the platforms to be rather big say 3-500t.

[Black]

If you use orbital platforms then using shields on them would probably be very effective as the shield regenerate fully between combat rounds. It can probably make them near invulnerable to AA fire. You would need about 100t of shields though so you would want the platforms to be rather big say 3-500t.

That is something I didn't think about, interesting idea.

[Barkhorn]

Shields are bad on ground support fighters, because all the damage they take will happen in a single increment.  Sure, one light AA won't do much damage, but your fighters might take 30 hits from them every ground combat round.  And those hits are not spread out evenly over 8 hours, they all happen simultaneously.  So your fighters will go from fine to dead in a single round.  They will have no time to recharge shields.

Shields may make sense on bombardment ships against STO's.  You could fly in, fight a few turns, do a little damage, and retreat out of range before the STO's can bring your shields down.  You then recharge your shields and try again.  Any damage you do is permanent, any damage they do is meaningless.

[Jorgen_CAB]

Shields are bad on ground support fighters, because all the damage they take will happen in a single increment.  Sure, one light AA won't do much damage, but your fighters might take 30 hits from them every ground combat round.  And those hits are not spread out evenly over 8 hours, they all happen simultaneously.  So your fighters will go from fine to dead in a single round.  They will have no time to recharge shields.

Shields may make sense on bombardment ships against STO's.  You could fly in, fight a few turns, do a little damage, and retreat out of range before the STO's can bring your shields down.  You then recharge your shields and try again.  Any damage you do is permanent, any damage they do is meaningless.

In my experience that is not likely to happen as you have many platforms so the damage are spread out among them, that is my experience. In my latest ground fighting I had lots of small fighters and they did have extra armour and they almost never died but was mainly wounded so I withdrew them to their hangars for repair. The trick is to have many of them so you don't get all damage on one fighter.