Author Topic: Exploration Mothership  (Read 3225 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Borealis4x (OP)

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • Posts: 717
  • Thanked: 141 times
Exploration Mothership
« on: December 28, 2020, 10:44:55 PM »
Since I've been awoken to the glory that are Survey FACs and Fighters, I've wanted to create a jump-capable Exploration Mothership capable of carrying surveyors around along with everything else an exploration ship would need, such a survey teams, sensors, and defenses against Precursors.

My current tech level is probably too low to make the design very efficient, but here is the what the design would basically look like:

Code: [Select]
Drake class Exploration Cruiser (P)      59,974 tons       1,160 Crew       8,835.1 BP       TCS 1,199    TH 2,500    EM 0
2084 km/s    JR 3-50      Armour 1-136       Shields 0-0       HTK 273      Sensors 0/32/0/0      DCR 37      PPV 45.68
Maint Life 2.56 Years     MSP 38,485    AFR 1066%    IFR 14.8%    1YR 8,220    5YR 123,307    Max Repair 3465.7 MSP
Hangar Deck Capacity 5,000 tons     Troop Capacity 5,000 tons     Cargo Shuttle Multiplier 6   
Captain    Control Rating 5   BRG   AUX   ENG   CIC   PFC   
Intended Deployment Time: 24 months    Flight Crew Berths 100    Morale Check Required   

J60000(3-50) Military Jump Drive     Max Ship Size 60000 tons    Distance 50k km     Squadron Size 3

Lockheed-Boeing Aerospace C.1250/10k 'Aldrin' Ion Drive (2)    Power 2500    Fuel Use 1.58%    Signature 1250    Explosion 5%
Fuel Capacity 1,000,000 Litres    Range 189.8 billion km (1054 days at full power)

Quad Gauss Cannon R300-17.00 Turret (8x12)    Range 30,000km     TS: 16000 km/s     Power 0-0     RM 30,000 km    ROF 5       
Beam Fire Control R32-TS16000 (30%) (1)     Max Range: 32,000 km   TS: 16,000 km/s     69 38 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Active Search Sensor AS281-R100 (30%) (1)     GPS 105000     Range 281.4m km    Resolution 100
Active Search Sensor AS8-R1 (30%) (1)     GPS 21     Range 8.6m km    MCR 771.7k km    Resolution 1
ELINT Module (4)     Sensitivity 32     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  44.7m km

ECCM-2 (1)         This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes



 

Offline DavidFRS

  • Petty Officer
  • **
  • D
  • Posts: 19
Re: Exploration Mothership
« Reply #1 on: December 28, 2020, 11:34:14 PM »
Adding one more fire control will help with taking out more than one salvo of missiles.
 

Offline nuclearslurpee

  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • Posts: 2978
  • Thanked: 2240 times
  • Radioactive frozen beverage.
Re: Exploration Mothership
« Reply #2 on: December 29, 2020, 01:59:05 AM »
Adding one more fire control will help with taking out more than one salvo of missiles.

Even better, replace your Gauss turrets with CIWS, which is more tonnage-efficient for point defense and doesn't require a fire control or active sensor.

The downside of CIWS is that it only protects the ship it is mounted on, i.e. it is useless for fleet PD because it will not fire to protect any other ships in the fleet, but for a survey carrier designed to operate alone this is not a problem.

I'd also suggest using only passive sensors, not actives. Active sensors are really only useful if you want to shoot at something, and even if you keep the Gauss turrets instead of installing CIWS you only need a short-range active to detect missiles >5 sec away. Passive sensors are more than sufficient to detect anything close enough to be a threat to the mothership, and no sensor can possibly cover an entire system to protect the parasites anyways so I wouldn't bother trying.

The ELINT module is largely superfluous in my opinion and I would put it on a specialized ship, either another parasite or an unrelated class. ELINT requires finding a population and camping out in orbit over it for a long time to slowly gather intel, which doesn't mesh with the mission profile of a survey carrier which wants to jump into a system, launch a fleet of parasites to survey the system as quickly as possible (ideally <1 year with the right allocation of parasites), and jump out to the next system.

For a similar reason, I'd consider the troop capacity superfluous as you don't want your mothership camping out over a planet waiting for a survey team to finish their job when you could be jumping to another system, and survey-eligible bodies are rare enough (maybe one in every 2-4 systems) that most of the time the troop bay is wasted tonnage (and thus fuel, jump drive size, armor, ...). As ground surveys are rarely time-sensitive, a simple jump-capable light troop transport of 10,000-20,000 ton capacity will do the job and of course you will have these in your auxiliary fleet. I also note that if you intend to carry both GEO and XEN teams, both will be less effective in their roles as you really want a good mass (10k or so) of that unit type on the ground to finish surveys in a quick time. God help you if you also want to tote around CON vehicles... moral of the story: just use a separate transport ship, your life will be so much easier in the long run.

I would consider the non-bridge modules superfluous, although ENG and maybe AUX are not wasted tonnage as much as I don't think you need them. CIC and PFC are wasted tonnage and crew for what are highly situational modules on an exploration vessel. The hit bonus for your turrets/CIWS from a CIC sounds nice, but you should rarely be in a situation where it is significant and usually the extra 10% bonus to point defense will not make the difference of life or death - either the missile waves are small and you deal with them fairly comfortably, or the missile waves are overwhelming and you're dead anyways. Rarely is there a middle ground. PFC is useless since you don't need the boost to refueling rate for survey fighters/FACs, you will have ample time while traveling between jump points.

Broadly you really want to bring the size of the ship down for two reasons. One: a smaller jump drive (by the way, check that your jump drive matches your engines, not your ship. A military ship with commercial engines uses a commercial jump drive - save 15% or more on car insurance maintenance and research with this one easy tip!). Two: get that atrocious maintenance life up to, like, five years or better. You will very quickly want survey fleets that can go on five-year missions or even longer as the galactic map expands and flying home to do overhauls takes longer and longer. The way to do this is to cut out the extraneous components, throw on enough engineering labs to keep things in shape, and then throw in some maintenance storage modules so your parasites have something to draw from while they're in the hangar. I think you can reasonably get a 5k hangar ship down to 15-25k tons with an engine, a hangar, a couple passive sensors, and a bunch of scary-looking CIWS turrets on top to intimidate the locals provide point defense, exact size depending on component designs.

Second-to-last comment, you want at least two armor layers on any long-range exploration ship you expect to survive an encounter with the Precursors. Spoilers follow: Precursor missiles tend to use warheads with damage to penetrate only two layers of armor, thus this will ensure that you do not take internal damage from a stray missile that passes your point defense. Ideally three layers of armor is safer, but two is the minimum.

Last comment:
Quote
59,974 tons
Round numbers please.  ;)
 
The following users thanked this post: Borealis4x, DavidFRS

Offline Black

  • Gold Supporter
  • Rear Admiral
  • *****
  • B
  • Posts: 868
  • Thanked: 218 times
  • Gold Supporter Gold Supporter : Support the forums with a Gold subscription
    2022 Supporter 2022 Supporter : Donate for 2022
    2023 Supporter 2023 Supporter : Donate for 2023
    2024 Supporter 2024 Supporter : Donate for 2024
Re: Exploration Mothership
« Reply #3 on: December 29, 2020, 04:10:50 AM »
I think that arming survey carrier is waste of tonnage. It will sit on jump point most of the time, waiting for parasites to survey the system. And if enemy is waiting at jump point, then it is most likely dead anyway. Speed is quite low, so enemy can hunt you down with beam ships easily so you really want to sit at jump point and only risk the parasites.

I am using armed survey cruisers, but they carry survey equipment so the chance that they will get in range of hostiles is much bigger than for carrier.

If you want to go for weapons anyway, I disagree with nuclearslurpee about switching to CIWS. I posted about this in some different threat when I decided to switch from CIWS to smaller gauss for my combat carriers and the CIWS are really not worth it for ship that is not commercial design.

I agree with him however, that ELINT and troop transport capacity has no place on this ship and that command components are also useless for this particular design. I would only keep ENG as that helps with ship maintenance during deployment. And you definitely want several armour layers.

EDIT: I noticed the AFR 1066%, you need more Engineering and less Maintenance Bays.
« Last Edit: December 29, 2020, 04:14:36 AM by Black »
 
The following users thanked this post: DavidFRS

Offline liveware

  • Bug Moderators
  • Commodore
  • ***
  • Posts: 742
  • Thanked: 88 times
Re: Exploration Mothership
« Reply #4 on: December 29, 2020, 07:23:46 AM »
I used small carriers similar to the below design to survey my first 100 or so systems in a recent game. The design posted in MP engine tech but the basic design is unchanged since the NPE tech era:

Code: [Select]
Lexington IV class Strike Carrier      10,000 tons       161 Crew       1,052.4 BP       TCS 200    TH 480    EM 0
2400 km/s      Armour 4-41       Shields 0-0       HTK 59      Sensors 5/5/0/0      DCR 10      PPV 0
Maint Life 4.70 Years     MSP 897    AFR 80%    IFR 1.1%    1YR 67    5YR 998    Max Repair 120 MSP
Hangar Deck Capacity 3,000 tons     Magazine 300   
Commander    Control Rating 2   BRG   AUX   
Intended Deployment Time: 36 months    Flight Crew Berths 60    Morale Check Required   

UNRC Commercial Magneto-plasma Drive  EP480.00 (1)    Power 480    Fuel Use 4.33%    Signature 480    Explosion 5%
Fuel Capacity 500,000 Litres    Range 207.8 billion km (1002 days at full power)

S5M4 Guided Missile (50)    Speed: 40,000 km/s    End: 3.4m     Range: 8.2m km    WH: 16    Size: 5    TH: 173/104/52
S1M4 Scout Drone (5)    Speed: 1,000 km/s    End: 862.3d     Range: 74,505.6m km    WH: 0    Size: 1    TH: 3/2/1
S1M4 Surveillance Drone (5)    Speed: 600 km/s    End: 591.4d     Range: 30,657.3m km    WH: 0    Size: 1    TH: 2/1/0

UNRC M2M Ship Detection Gravimeter (1)     GPS 1050     Range 28.1m km    Resolution 100
UNRC M2M Missile Detection Gravimeter (1)     GPS 11     Range 6.1m km    MCR 545.7k km    Resolution 1
UNRC M2M Small Craft Detection Gravimeter (1)     GPS 210     Range 16.5m km    Resolution 20
UNRC M2M Long Range Gravimeter (1)     GPS 5250     Range 48.1m km    Resolution 500
UNRC M2M Thermal Emission Detector (1)     Sensitivity 5.5     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  18.5m km
UNRC M2M Electromagnetic Wave Detector (1)     Sensitivity 5.5     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  18.5m km

ECM 10

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

Commercial engines give good fuel efficiency and allow for jumping using a commercial jump drive (equipped on a different ship in my case). An advantage to having a commercial jump drive ship which is separate from the survey ship is that the jump ship can be an entirely commercial design and thus maintenance free.

However, recently I have started using the below design which is a dedicated survey ship:

Code: [Select]
Prospector class Survey Corvette      5,000 tons       137 Crew       822.3 BP       TCS 100    TH 220    EM 0
2200 km/s    JR 3-50      Armour 3-26       Shields 0-0       HTK 34      Sensors 5/5/2/2      DCR 5      PPV 0.3
Maint Life 6.28 Years     MSP 514    AFR 40%    IFR 0.6%    1YR 22    5YR 336    Max Repair 100 MSP
Magazine 16   
Commander    Control Rating 1   BRG   
Intended Deployment Time: 36 months    Morale Check Required   

UNRC J5000(3-50) Military Jump Drive     Max Ship Size 5000 tons    Distance 50k km     Squadron Size 3

UNRC Magneto-plasma Drive  EP220.00 (1)    Power 220    Fuel Use 8.51%    Signature 220    Explosion 5%
Fuel Capacity 279,000 Litres    Range 118 billion km (620 days at full power)

UNRC Size 1 Missile Launcher (30.0% Reduction) (1)     Missile Size: 1    Rate of Fire 3000
UNRC Missile Fire Control FC5-R1 (1)     Range 5.4m km    Resolution 1
S1M2 Surveillance Satellite (10)    Speed: 0 km/s    End: 0m     Range: 0m km    WH: 0    Size: 1    TH: 0/0/0
S1M2 Targeting Relay Satellite (2)    Speed: 0 km/s    End: 0m     Range: 0m km    WH: 0    Size: 1    TH: 0/0/0
S1M4 Surveillance Drone (2)    Speed: 600 km/s    End: 591.4d     Range: 30,657.3m km    WH: 0    Size: 1    TH: 2/1/0
S1M4 Scout Drone (2)    Speed: 1,000 km/s    End: 862.3d     Range: 74,505.6m km    WH: 0    Size: 1    TH: 3/2/1

UNRC M2XS Small Craft Detection Gravimeter (1)     GPS 42     Range 7.4m km    Resolution 20
UNRC M2XS Ship Detection Gravimeter (1)     GPS 210     Range 12.6m km    Resolution 100
UNRC M2XS Missile Detection Gravimeter (1)     GPS 3     Range 2.7m km    MCR 244k km    Resolution 1
UNRC M2XS Long Range Gravimeter (1)     GPS 1050     Range 21.5m km    Resolution 500
UNRC M2M Electromagnetic Wave Detector (1)     Sensitivity 5.5     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  18.5m km
UNRC M2M Thermal Emission Detector (1)     Sensitivity 5.5     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  18.5m km
Geological Survey Sensors (2)   2 Survey Points Per Hour
Gravitational Survey Sensors (2)   2 Survey Points Per Hour

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

YMMV on what works best for you, but I massively prefer to use smaller survey ships as they tend to accidently stumble onto enemies when I am not paying attention and get themselves blown up.

Open the pod-bay doors HAL...
 

Offline Borealis4x (OP)

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • Posts: 717
  • Thanked: 141 times
Re: Exploration Mothership
« Reply #5 on: December 29, 2020, 09:32:48 AM »
Thanks for the advice.

I'm interested in why people think passives will be better than actives. I'm not really concerned about the ship hiding and I want it to have as long a sensor range as possible, so they seemed like the best fit. In general I've never know when its best to use actives or passives.

I'll look into using CIWS as an alternative to proper Gauss turrets, but I figure if my ship is going to be a military vessel anyways I might as well give it mil-grade PD. I have the room for it, I don't intend to make the ship smaller than 50k so I can justify this massive naval dockyard I built for some reason.

The command modules are mostly for role-play. I even put them on my freighters! If nothing else, it gives my junior officers an opportunity to build experience rather than sit around the officers lounge on Earth all day.

One big thing I'm wondering about is whether I should use military or commercial engines. I originally was using 10k military engines but replacing them with commercial ones relived a lot of my maintenance and range woes. Though not enough as you can see. Still, I imagine when my tech gets to the point this design is more viable military engines will be efficient enough to be used.
 

Offline liveware

  • Bug Moderators
  • Commodore
  • ***
  • Posts: 742
  • Thanked: 88 times
Re: Exploration Mothership
« Reply #6 on: December 29, 2020, 12:07:35 PM »
Enemies can see your active sensors potentially from beyond your active sensor range. Passives have no signature and are effectively invisible to enemy sensors. That's mainly why people like passives on scouts.

Also, things like colonies give off HUGE thermal and EM signatures which makes them relatively easy to detect at long range even with smaller passive sensors.
Open the pod-bay doors HAL...
 

Offline Black

  • Gold Supporter
  • Rear Admiral
  • *****
  • B
  • Posts: 868
  • Thanked: 218 times
  • Gold Supporter Gold Supporter : Support the forums with a Gold subscription
    2022 Supporter 2022 Supporter : Donate for 2022
    2023 Supporter 2023 Supporter : Donate for 2023
    2024 Supporter 2024 Supporter : Donate for 2024
Re: Exploration Mothership
« Reply #7 on: December 29, 2020, 12:42:52 PM »
I don't see a problem with actives on the carrier, but they should be on-line only if you believe there is something to be detected. If you want to run around system with actives on, do it with parasites, they will give up their position, but not the position of the mothership.

With survey carrier I would do dedicated scout parasite with as powerful passives as possible. They will check near-habitable planets for emissions and if there are some, you can deploy another parasite with powerful active sensor, send it to different location than the mothership and then turn it on and check what is the source of the emissions. Rest of the parasites will be dedicated geo and grav survey ships.

For example, my survey cruisers are equipped with large reduced missile launcher that can launch probes with sensors. I use them to check planets that have low colony cost and enough water to bear life. This way I can check most propable locations that could be dangerous for my ships with minimal risk.
 

Offline nuclearslurpee

  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • Posts: 2978
  • Thanked: 2240 times
  • Radioactive frozen beverage.
Re: Exploration Mothership
« Reply #8 on: December 29, 2020, 02:44:25 PM »
If you want to go for weapons anyway, I disagree with nuclearslurpee about switching to CIWS. I posted about this in some different threat when I decided to switch from CIWS to smaller gauss for my combat carriers and the CIWS are really not worth it for ship that is not commercial design.

I'm curious about the results of this switch, which thread are they in? My understanding is that CIWS are more tonnage-efficient than Gauss turrets (they are literally twin Gauss turrets with built-in actives and BFCs with a reduced total size compared to the separate components, and the only limitation is that they cannot fire to defend any ship except the one carrying them. For a survey ship/carrier that operates alone this is not a limitation. I've gone into the game and confirmed that at the tech levels in the OP a CIWS system is smaller tonnage-wise (7.45 HS) than just a twin Gauss turret (8.16 HS) with the same design (50% size/accuracy, incidentally) - this is before considering the size of BFC and sensor, which pushes the tonnage balance more in favor of CIWS although admittedly only minorly so.

Offhand the only advantage I can think of for a Gauss turret versus CIWS is that the former could benefit from a large anti-missile active sensor and the tech that gives bonus %CTH against missiles which have been on the sensors for a long period of time. However the size of a sensor needed to get such a bonus is large enough that mounting an additional CIWS probably is more economical unless you have a massive amount of tonnage dedicated to PD weaponry. At the OP's tech level against Precursor missiles, you would need roughly a size-9 res-1 active sensor to get the 30-second (6%) tracking bonus while an extra CIWS-160 is only 7.45 HS - this in addition to the fact that you can mount more CIWS turrets than Gauss turrets anyways due to tonnage efficiency.

So as stated I'm very interested in tangible results that show how a "proper" Gauss weapon system is better than CIWS in this situation.
 

Offline Black

  • Gold Supporter
  • Rear Admiral
  • *****
  • B
  • Posts: 868
  • Thanked: 218 times
  • Gold Supporter Gold Supporter : Support the forums with a Gold subscription
    2022 Supporter 2022 Supporter : Donate for 2022
    2023 Supporter 2023 Supporter : Donate for 2023
    2024 Supporter 2024 Supporter : Donate for 2024
Re: Exploration Mothership
« Reply #9 on: December 29, 2020, 02:53:41 PM »
I tried to find the post but no luck, maybe the thread is gone. But basically, I can put two twin 25% gauss turrets with sensors and fire control or 1 and half CIWS systems in the same tonnage. And gauss can cover whole fleet and can be used in offensive mode in a pinch as well.

Designs are bellow, I am roleplaying so you can definitely make more optimal carrier, but the difference between gauss and CIWS can be seen:

Code: [Select]
Project 2048 CVL class Light Carrier      28,000 tons       527 Crew       3,875.2 BP       TCS 560    TH 3,072    EM 2,550
5485 km/s      Armour 3-82       Shields 85-425       HTK 154      Sensors 14/14/0/0      DCR 48      PPV 7.72
Maint Life 3.61 Years     MSP 2,821    AFR 224%    IFR 3.1%    1YR 334    5YR 5,008    Max Repair 384 MSP
Hangar Deck Capacity 3,500 tons     Magazine 1,059   
Captain    Control Rating 5   BRG   AUX   ENG   CIC   PFC   
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months    Flight Crew Berths 100    Morale Check Required   

Rolls-Royce Large Magneto-plasma Drive  EP768.00 (4)    Power 3072    Fuel Use 39.44%    Signature 768    Explosion 12%
Fuel Capacity 6,597,000 Litres    Range 107.5 billion km (226 days at full power)
Epsilon S85 / R425 Shields (1)     Recharge Time 425 seconds (0.2 per second)

Twin 25mm Gauss Cannon Turret (2x8)    Range 40,000km     TS: 20000 km/s     Power 0-0     RM 40,000 km    ROF 5       
SPG-G-80 Gauss PD Fire Control (1)     Max Range: 80,000 km   TS: 20,000 km/s     88 75 62 50 38 25 12 0 0 0

SS-N-2 Sabre (529)    Speed: 26,800 km/s    End: 9.5m     Range: 15.3m km    WH: 4    Size: 2    TH: 241/144/72

SPN-1 Navigation System (1)     GPS 3360     Range 55.1m km    Resolution 120
SPD-1 Missile Detection System (1)     GPS 28     Range 11.2m km    MCR 1m km    Resolution 1
SDR-1 EM Detection Sensor (1)     Sensitivity 14     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  29.6m km
SQR-1 Thermal Detection Sensor (1)     Sensitivity 14     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  29.6m km

ECM 30

Strike Group
4x RF-1 Osprey (R) Scout Fighter   Speed: 11565 km/s    Size: 2.49
24x F-1 Piranha Fighter   Speed: 11565 km/s    Size: 2.49

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]
Project 2048 CVL - Copy class Light Carrier      28,205 tons       523 Crew       3,806.8 BP       TCS 564    TH 3,072    EM 2,550
5445 km/s      Armour 3-82       Shields 85-425       HTK 152      Sensors 14/14/0/0      DCR 48      PPV 0
Maint Life 3.54 Years     MSP 2,761    AFR 227%    IFR 3.2%    1YR 338    5YR 5,064    Max Repair 384 MSP
Hangar Deck Capacity 3,500 tons     Magazine 1,059   
Captain    Control Rating 5   BRG   AUX   ENG   CIC   PFC   
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months    Flight Crew Berths 100    Morale Check Required   

Rolls-Royce Large Magneto-plasma Drive  EP768.00 (4)    Power 3072    Fuel Use 39.44%    Signature 768    Explosion 12%
Fuel Capacity 6,597,000 Litres    Range 106.7 billion km (226 days at full power)
Epsilon S85 / R425 Shields (1)     Recharge Time 425 seconds (0.2 per second)

Phalanx P-200 CIWS (2x8)    Range 1000 km     TS: 20,000 km/s     ROF 5       
SS-N-2 Sabre (529)    Speed: 26,800 km/s    End: 9.5m     Range: 15.3m km    WH: 4    Size: 2    TH: 241/144/72

SPN-1 Navigation System (1)     GPS 3360     Range 55.1m km    Resolution 120
SDR-1 EM Detection Sensor (1)     Sensitivity 14     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  29.6m km
SQR-1 Thermal Detection Sensor (1)     Sensitivity 14     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  29.6m km

ECM 30

Strike Group
4x RF-1 Osprey (R) Scout Fighter   Speed: 11565 km/s    Size: 2.49
24x F-1 Piranha Fighter   Speed: 11565 km/s    Size: 2.49

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

Edit:
There was thread where someone calculated which gauss is most effective and it was one with small size, don't remember exactly what size that was, but it was bellow 25%, so you can put even more smaller gauss in the same space as CIWS.
« Last Edit: December 29, 2020, 03:01:15 PM by Black »
 

Offline nuclearslurpee

  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • Posts: 2978
  • Thanked: 2240 times
  • Radioactive frozen beverage.
Re: Exploration Mothership
« Reply #10 on: December 29, 2020, 03:39:12 PM »
I tried to find the post but no luck, maybe the thread is gone. But basically, I can put two twin 25% gauss turrets with sensors and fire control or 1 and half CIWS systems in the same tonnage. And gauss can cover whole fleet and can be used in offensive mode in a pinch as well.

snip

Edit:
There was thread where someone calculated which gauss is most effective and it was one with small size, don't remember exactly what size that was, but it was bellow 25%, so you can put even more smaller gauss in the same space as CIWS.

The reason smaller Gauss are more effective has to do with salvo overkill and the resulting wasted shots.

In theory, since Gauss accuracy and size reduction are the same value, a 25% accurate Gauss cannon takes half the tonnage of a 50% accurate Gauss cannon so you can mount twice the shots and get the same average net hit rate. However, when a Gauss gun or turret kills a salvo, any shots left in that weapon are wasted, thus having more turrets with lower accuracy reduces the amount of shots lost to salvo overkill. Because of this, the most optimal Gauss setup seems to be the size-1 (17%) setup in single turrets. See thread here, there's a lot of discussion about various factors but generally number of salvos is the most critical factor that determines this.

However for a deep space survey ship or carrier which is primarily expected to defend against Precursors, a single ship with several PD turrets will really only be able to survive against one or two smaller salvos, and the practical effects of salvo overkill is pretty minimal - worst case for CIWS is you'll waste 5 shots at 50% base accuracy, average case is 3 shots. Against a large number of salvos such as you'd see from a bigger fleet you're probably dead anyways as no survey ship will pack enough PD to defend against several dozen missiles per volley whether in one salvo or twenty.

For a combat fleet of course Gauss turrets are strictly better than CIWS for numerous reasons. However for defending one ship in deep space against small volleys from hostile squadrons CIWS will do the job and generally is the most tonnage-efficient solution in any scenario that such a ship has a real chance of surviving in.
 

Offline Black

  • Gold Supporter
  • Rear Admiral
  • *****
  • B
  • Posts: 868
  • Thanked: 218 times
  • Gold Supporter Gold Supporter : Support the forums with a Gold subscription
    2022 Supporter 2022 Supporter : Donate for 2022
    2023 Supporter 2023 Supporter : Donate for 2023
    2024 Supporter 2024 Supporter : Donate for 2024
Re: Exploration Mothership
« Reply #11 on: December 30, 2020, 02:48:54 AM »
I don't know, I think that even with exploration carriers, you will most likely form small squadrons of two or three ships fairly soon, to be able to deploy more parasites and in this case gauss will get another benefit over CIWS.

I suppose it will depend on what size will be the final design, but with 5000 tons hangar capacity, I would definitely deploy more than one carrier per survey group.
 

Offline nuclearslurpee

  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • Posts: 2978
  • Thanked: 2240 times
  • Radioactive frozen beverage.
Re: Exploration Mothership
« Reply #12 on: December 30, 2020, 11:03:27 AM »
I don't know, I think that even with exploration carriers, you will most likely form small squadrons of two or three ships fairly soon, to be able to deploy more parasites and in this case gauss will get another benefit over CIWS.

I suppose it will depend on what size will be the final design, but with 5000 tons hangar capacity, I would definitely deploy more than one carrier per survey group.

If you're deploying them in groups, that would definitely change the calculus here.

Personally I rarely even have two regular survey ships in the same system at once, let alone carriers with several parasites. Usually my survey fleet / captains are stretched thinly enough trying to have one ship in every system I want to survey that the idea of survey task forces is a distant dream.
 

Offline Black

  • Gold Supporter
  • Rear Admiral
  • *****
  • B
  • Posts: 868
  • Thanked: 218 times
  • Gold Supporter Gold Supporter : Support the forums with a Gold subscription
    2022 Supporter 2022 Supporter : Donate for 2022
    2023 Supporter 2023 Supporter : Donate for 2023
    2024 Supporter 2024 Supporter : Donate for 2024
Re: Exploration Mothership
« Reply #13 on: December 30, 2020, 12:45:37 PM »
I don't know, I think that even with exploration carriers, you will most likely form small squadrons of two or three ships fairly soon, to be able to deploy more parasites and in this case gauss will get another benefit over CIWS.

I suppose it will depend on what size will be the final design, but with 5000 tons hangar capacity, I would definitely deploy more than one carrier per survey group.

If you're deploying them in groups, that would definitely change the calculus here.

Personally I rarely even have two regular survey ships in the same system at once, let alone carriers with several parasites. Usually my survey fleet / captains are stretched thinly enough trying to have one ship in every system I want to survey that the idea of survey task forces is a distant dream.

I see, I normally operate my survey ships in small groups. But if you never do that I suppose it does not make sense to have weapons that can defend several ships at once.

I was also thinking about other uses of such survey carrier. And one such use could be an escort carrier with combat fleet. You detach survey parasites and load beam fighters instead. In such situation, they would most likely operate in groups. So some additional PD could be beneficial. Certainly a niche use but if we are making survey carrier that is not barebone design, why not thing about some secondary use of such ship.
 

Offline nuclearslurpee

  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • Posts: 2978
  • Thanked: 2240 times
  • Radioactive frozen beverage.
Re: Exploration Mothership
« Reply #14 on: December 30, 2020, 12:48:46 PM »
I was also thinking about other uses of such survey carrier. And one such use could be an escort carrier with combat fleet. You detach survey parasites and load beam fighters instead. In such situation, they would most likely operate in groups. So some additional PD could be beneficial. Certainly a niche use but if we are making survey carrier that is not barebone design, why not thing about some secondary use of such ship.

The main reason not to do this would be that a survey carrier is slow and has a large range, while a fleet carrier needs to be fast enough to keep up with the fleet but doesn't need so much range. Additionally it needs ample magazine space to reload its fighters several times and probably wants significantly more armor than a survey carrier needs unless you really trust your PD escorts. The survey ship also needs to carry a jump drive unless you use a separate tender which is another big difference in the class designs.