Author Topic: A Set of Missiles  (Read 2216 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Borealis4x (OP)

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • Posts: 717
  • Thanked: 141 times
A Set of Missiles
« on: January 17, 2021, 02:07:10 PM »
So here are a series of missiles I made to cover every occasion. Each missile is a multiple of 3, which makes it easier to standardize magazines across ship designs without much wasted space.

Current Tech:
- Internal Confinement Fusion

- Stage 3 Fusion Warhead: 8 warhead strength per MSP

- 100 Missile Agility per MSP

- 0.4 Fuel Consumption per EPH

Starting off with the humble AMM

Code: [Select]
Rapier AMM
Missile Size: 1.000 MSP  (2.5000 Tons)     Warhead: 1    Radiation Damage: 1    Manoeuvre Rating: 28
Speed: 72,000 km/s     Fuel: 250     Flight Time: 77.6 seconds     Range: 5,587,200 km
Cost Per Missile: 2.400     Development Cost: 240
Chance to Hit: 1k km/s 2016%   3k km/s 672%   5k km/s 403.2%   10k km/s 201.6%

Simple and uncontroversial I'd say. Maybe it could be more accurate at the cost of range, but I'm confident my gauss PD will be able to handle anything that slips through.

Now for the missiles carried 2x by bombers who act as my main striking arm

Code: [Select]
Gladius ASM
Missile Size: 3.00 MSP  (7.500 Tons)     Warhead: 12    Radiation Damage: 12    Manoeuvre Rating: 20
Speed: 40,000 km/s     Fuel: 500     Flight Time: 2 minutes     Range: 4.81m km
Cost Per Missile: 6.60     Development Cost: 660
Chance to Hit: 1k km/s 800%   3k km/s 266.7%   5k km/s 160%   10k km/s 80%

Range might be a bit low. I'd like to to at least be 5m km to keep bombers out of AMM range.

Now the 'standard' ASM missiles; launched by ships for ships

Code: [Select]
Longsword ASM
Missile Size: 6.00 MSP  (15.000 Tons)     Warhead: 24    Radiation Damage: 24    Manoeuvre Rating: 15
Speed: 40,000 km/s     Fuel: 1,750     Flight Time: 5 minutes     Range: 11.91m km
Cost Per Missile: 12.60     Development Cost: 1,260
Chance to Hit: 1k km/s 600%   3k km/s 200.0%   5k km/s 120%   10k km/s 60%

And a long-range variant

Code: [Select]
Claymore Long-Range ASM
Missile Size: 9.0 MSP  (22.50 Tons)     Warhead: 24    Radiation Damage: 24    Manoeuvre Rating: 16
Speed: 40,000 km/s     Fuel: 2,500     Flight Time: 42 minutes     Range: 100.45m km
Cost Per Missile: 16.00     Development Cost: 1,600
Chance to Hit: 1k km/s 640%   3k km/s 213.3%   5k km/s 128%   10k km/s 64%

Finally we get to one of the more interesting missiles I built for myself and that I believe plays a key roll in my carrier fleets. I've always hated how the AI spams AMMs, so to counter it I built these long-range MIRV missiles that will bombard an enemy fleet with 6 tiny missiles each. They don't do much damage, but the point is to get the AI to waste its AMM's chasing them while ignoring the real threat coming from the Gladius missiles launched by the bombers.

Code: [Select]
Onager Saturation ASM
Missile Size: 12.0 MSP  (30.00 Tons)     Warhead: 0    Radiation Damage: 0    Manoeuvre Rating: 10
Speed: 30,000 km/s     Fuel: 5,250     1st Stage Flight Time: 63 minutes    1st Stage Range: 113m km
2nd Stage Flight Time: 85 seconds    2nd Stage Range: 5,106k km
Cost Per Missile: 22.80     Development Cost: 2,280
Second Stage: 'Buckshot' Submunition Mk.1 x6
Second Stage Separation Range: 5,000,000 km
Chance to Hit: 1k km/s 300.0%   3k km/s 100.0%   5k km/s 60.0%   10k km/s 30.0%

And the Second Stage

Code: [Select]
Missile Size: 1.00 MSP  (2.500 Tons)     Warhead: 3    Radiation Damage: 3    Manoeuvre Rating: 10
Speed: 60,000 km/s     Fuel: 250     Flight Time: 85.1 seconds     Range: 5,106,000 km
Cost Per Missile: 2.30     Development Cost: 230
Chance to Hit: 1k km/s 600%   3k km/s 200%   5k km/s 120%   10k km/s 60%

I think that generally covers all the bases in terms of missiles. We've got an AMM, a bomber-based ASM, two primary ASMs with different ranges, and an anti AMM ASM.
 

Offline captainwolfer

  • Lt. Commander
  • ********
  • c
  • Posts: 224
  • Thanked: 87 times
Re: A Set of Missiles
« Reply #1 on: January 17, 2021, 02:27:54 PM »
So here are a series of missiles I made to cover every occasion. Each missile is a multiple of 3, which makes it easier to standardize magazines across ship designs without much wasted space.

Current Tech:
- Internal Confinement Fusion

- Stage 3 Fusion Warhead: 8 warhead strength per MSP

- 100 Missile Agility per MSP

- 0.4 Fuel Consumption per EPH

Starting off with the humble AMM

Code: [Select]
Rapier AMM
Missile Size: 1.000 MSP  (2.5000 Tons)     Warhead: 1    Radiation Damage: 1    Manoeuvre Rating: 28
Speed: 72,000 km/s     Fuel: 250     Flight Time: 77.6 seconds     Range: 5,587,200 km
Cost Per Missile: 2.400     Development Cost: 240
Chance to Hit: 1k km/s 2016%   3k km/s 672%   5k km/s 403.2%   10k km/s 201.6%

Simple and uncontroversial I'd say. Maybe it could be more accurate at the cost of range, but I'm confident my gauss PD will be able to handle anything that slips through.

Now for the missiles carried 2x by bombers who act as my main striking arm

Code: [Select]
Gladius ASM
Missile Size: 3.00 MSP  (7.500 Tons)     Warhead: 12    Radiation Damage: 12    Manoeuvre Rating: 20
Speed: 40,000 km/s     Fuel: 500     Flight Time: 2 minutes     Range: 4.81m km
Cost Per Missile: 6.60     Development Cost: 660
Chance to Hit: 1k km/s 800%   3k km/s 266.7%   5k km/s 160%   10k km/s 80%

Range might be a bit low. I'd like to to at least be 5m km to keep bombers out of AMM range.

Now the 'standard' ASM missiles; launched by ships for ships

Code: [Select]
Longsword ASM
Missile Size: 6.00 MSP  (15.000 Tons)     Warhead: 24    Radiation Damage: 24    Manoeuvre Rating: 15
Speed: 40,000 km/s     Fuel: 1,750     Flight Time: 5 minutes     Range: 11.91m km
Cost Per Missile: 12.60     Development Cost: 1,260
Chance to Hit: 1k km/s 600%   3k km/s 200.0%   5k km/s 120%   10k km/s 60%

And a long-range variant

Code: [Select]
Claymore Long-Range ASM
Missile Size: 9.0 MSP  (22.50 Tons)     Warhead: 24    Radiation Damage: 24    Manoeuvre Rating: 16
Speed: 40,000 km/s     Fuel: 2,500     Flight Time: 42 minutes     Range: 100.45m km
Cost Per Missile: 16.00     Development Cost: 1,600
Chance to Hit: 1k km/s 640%   3k km/s 213.3%   5k km/s 128%   10k km/s 64%

Finally we get to one of the more interesting missiles I built for myself and that I believe plays a key roll in my carrier fleets. I've always hated how the AI spams AMMs, so to counter it I built these long-range MIRV missiles that will bombard an enemy fleet with 6 tiny missiles each. They don't do much damage, but the point is to get the AI to waste its AMM's chasing them while ignoring the real threat coming from the Gladius missiles launched by the bombers.

Code: [Select]
Onager Saturation ASM
Missile Size: 12.0 MSP  (30.00 Tons)     Warhead: 0    Radiation Damage: 0    Manoeuvre Rating: 10
Speed: 30,000 km/s     Fuel: 5,250     1st Stage Flight Time: 63 minutes    1st Stage Range: 113m km
2nd Stage Flight Time: 85 seconds    2nd Stage Range: 5,106k km
Cost Per Missile: 22.80     Development Cost: 2,280
Second Stage: 'Buckshot' Submunition Mk.1 x6
Second Stage Separation Range: 5,000,000 km
Chance to Hit: 1k km/s 300.0%   3k km/s 100.0%   5k km/s 60.0%   10k km/s 30.0%

And the Second Stage

Code: [Select]
Missile Size: 1.00 MSP  (2.500 Tons)     Warhead: 3    Radiation Damage: 3    Manoeuvre Rating: 10
Speed: 60,000 km/s     Fuel: 250     Flight Time: 85.1 seconds     Range: 5,106,000 km
Cost Per Missile: 2.30     Development Cost: 230
Chance to Hit: 1k km/s 600%   3k km/s 200%   5k km/s 120%   10k km/s 60%

I think that generally covers all the bases in terms of missiles. We've got an AMM, a bomber-based ASM, two primary ASMs with different ranges, and an anti AMM ASM.
If enemy missiles have decent ECM your AMMs will go way down in hit chance. If an incoming missile with a speed of 40,000 has ECM 3, your AMMs will go from a 50% hit chance to a 20% hit chance. Admittedly, when accounting for the reduced hit chance from needing to reduce engine size and such, an AMM with ECCM-3 would probably still only have like a 25% hit chance on a missile with ECM-3 and 40,000 speed

My only other issue with these missiles is that I think they could do with being faster, even if that reduces their warhead size. The amount of armor your missiles will penetrate is equal to the square root of the missile damage. So reducing your warhead size to 9 and 16 to increase speed (and thus reduce the hit chance of enemy PD) would penetrate the same number of layers and reduce the chance your missiles will get shot down.

Basically, I think that while these would do well against lower-tech opponents, they may have more trouble against opponents of equal or higher tech level.
 

Offline DeMatt

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • D
  • Posts: 50
  • Thanked: 17 times
Re: A Set of Missiles
« Reply #2 on: January 17, 2021, 08:19:22 PM »
Hmmm...

Rapier looks good to me.  As you said, it might benefit from a bigger engine and less fuel.

Gladius might need its range tweaked.  It depends on whether you want to keep your bombers out of hostile AMM range, I guess.  If yes, it needs more;  if no, it could drop range (down to 1.6Mkm, just outside of maximum energy range) for more speed.

Longsword looks okay.

I'm not a fan of the Claymore;  at 9 MSP, it's big enough to start getting detected further out than the 6 MSP minimum, and it doesn't have a targeting sensor to handle its own terminal guidance.  Maybe take the Longsword and trade in warhead for the sensor & fuel?  You could fire it from the same launchers, then.

It seems to me that the Onager needs a sensor, or it's going to MIRV when it hits the target instead of at a reasonable distance... but my memory could be faulty.  I also wonder what a 6 MSP Onager would look like - limiting your missile sizes is generally a good thing.

I'm convinced the Buckshot needs a sensor.  Without one, it's going to go "huh?  I gots no target!" when the Onager spits it out, and promptly self-destruct.  I think the sensor needs to be powerful enough to see the target at the separation distance, which would be a bit of a problem for a 1 MSP missile... maybe reduce the separation distance.
 

Offline Borealis4x (OP)

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • Posts: 717
  • Thanked: 141 times
Re: A Set of Missiles
« Reply #3 on: January 17, 2021, 08:22:34 PM »
Hmmm...

Rapier looks good to me.  As you said, it might benefit from a bigger engine and less fuel.

Gladius might need its range tweaked.  It depends on whether you want to keep your bombers out of hostile AMM range, I guess.  If yes, it needs more;  if no, it could drop range (down to 1.6Mkm, just outside of maximum energy range) for more speed.

Longsword looks okay.

I'm not a fan of the Claymore;  at 9 MSP, it's big enough to start getting detected further out than the 6 MSP minimum, and it doesn't have a targeting sensor to handle its own terminal guidance.  Maybe take the Longsword and trade in warhead for the sensor & fuel?  You could fire it from the same launchers, then.

It seems to me that the Onager needs a sensor, or it's going to MIRV when it hits the target instead of at a reasonable distance... but my memory could be faulty.  I also wonder what a 6 MSP Onager would look like - limiting your missile sizes is generally a good thing.

I'm convinced the Buckshot needs a sensor.  Without one, it's going to go "huh?  I gots no target!" when the Onager spits it out, and promptly self-destruct.  I think the sensor needs to be powerful enough to see the target at the separation distance, which would be a bit of a problem for a 1 MSP missile... maybe reduce the separation distance.

Wots this about sensors? Never heard about this problem before.

If it needs an active lock, these missiles will be fired from ships that have active sensor ranges of 100m km or higher. 
 

Offline DeMatt

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • D
  • Posts: 50
  • Thanked: 17 times
Re: A Set of Missiles
« Reply #4 on: January 17, 2021, 08:30:29 PM »
Wots this about sensors? Never heard about this problem before.

If it needs an active lock, these missiles will be fired from ships that have active sensor ranges of 100m km or higher.
In the case of the Claymore, it's so that the Claymore can retarget should its initial target die or disappear while the Claymore's en route.  It isn't necessary if you've got a continuous active lock, but then you've got your launch platform shouting at the top of its electronic lungs for forty-two minutes.  Might be a tactical issue.

As I said, I'm not sure if the Onager needs one to handle its "detonate 5Mkm out" duties.  I could easily be wrong.

However, the Buckshot needs a sensor because the Buckshot gets its targeting from the Onager, not the ship that launched the Onager.  Onager dies when it launches the Buckshots, so the Buckshots promptly lose any external targeting.
 

Offline captainwolfer

  • Lt. Commander
  • ********
  • c
  • Posts: 224
  • Thanked: 87 times
Re: A Set of Missiles
« Reply #5 on: January 17, 2021, 09:50:38 PM »
Wots this about sensors? Never heard about this problem before.

If it needs an active lock, these missiles will be fired from ships that have active sensor ranges of 100m km or higher.
In the case of the Claymore, it's so that the Claymore can retarget should its initial target die or disappear while the Claymore's en route.  It isn't necessary if you've got a continuous active lock, but then you've got your launch platform shouting at the top of its electronic lungs for forty-two minutes.  Might be a tactical issue.

As I said, I'm not sure if the Onager needs one to handle its "detonate 5Mkm out" duties.  I could easily be wrong.

However, the Buckshot needs a sensor because the Buckshot gets its targeting from the Onager, not the ship that launched the Onager.  Onager dies when it launches the Buckshots, so the Buckshots promptly lose any external targeting.
This is incorrect. The only use for sensors on missiles (excluding sensor buoys or mines) is to have missiles be able to hit new targets if their original target is destroyed while the missile is en-route. However as far as I've seen if they lose their original target the missiles will stop dead in space unless a new target enters their sensor range, so sensors on anti-ship missiles is only useful when enemy ships are chasing your ships.

Also MIRV missile 2nd stages do get targeting from the missile fire control
 

Offline Jorgen_CAB

  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • J
  • Posts: 2822
  • Thanked: 673 times
Re: A Set of Missiles
« Reply #6 on: January 18, 2021, 01:51:52 AM »
Wots this about sensors? Never heard about this problem before.

If it needs an active lock, these missiles will be fired from ships that have active sensor ranges of 100m km or higher.
In the case of the Claymore, it's so that the Claymore can retarget should its initial target die or disappear while the Claymore's en route.  It isn't necessary if you've got a continuous active lock, but then you've got your launch platform shouting at the top of its electronic lungs for forty-two minutes.  Might be a tactical issue.

As I said, I'm not sure if the Onager needs one to handle its "detonate 5Mkm out" duties.  I could easily be wrong.

However, the Buckshot needs a sensor because the Buckshot gets its targeting from the Onager, not the ship that launched the Onager.  Onager dies when it launches the Buckshots, so the Buckshots promptly lose any external targeting.
This is incorrect. The only use for sensors on missiles (excluding sensor buoys or mines) is to have missiles be able to hit new targets if their original target is destroyed while the missile is en-route. However as far as I've seen if they lose their original target the missiles will stop dead in space unless a new target enters their sensor range, so sensors on anti-ship missiles is only useful when enemy ships are chasing your ships.

Also MIRV missile 2nd stages do get targeting from the missile fire control

If you mainly fire large salvos and wait for the impact before firing a new one it makes a bit more sense, say carrier warfare type of missile combat or from box launched system defence crafts.

I also find that it is better to have slightly larger missiles rather than smaller if you also possess decent ECM (from 20% and above) with a bigger yield. First of there is a much bigger chance you can do shock damage with bigger yields and larger warhead also have a much bigger impact on doing internal damage quicker than you first might think... both from chock and penetration. As long as you can calculate the amount of missiles you need to penetrate the enemy PD screen you want as large a missile as possible to do actual damage and not sandblast their armour. A strength 9 might be good for early tech but at this technology you need at least 16 strength and an ECM module (2.25 MSP per ASM missile at this tech). I believe a size six missile could work for fighter launched ones but for longer ranged missiles you probably need 7-8 size. A size 9 warhead can only do shock damage to a size 9kt ship while a 16 warhead can deal shock damage on ships up to 16kt in size.

At this level of technology you should at least be able to possess ECM 2 if not level three, use it... it also is worth considering using ECCM on ASM missiles rather than agility to compensate for the enemy using ECM on their ships, at least from ECM 3 and above.


The idea is to damage the opponents ships because which then leave them vulnerable to close ranged attacks or being picked of by smaller volleys of missiles so spreading the damage is way more efficient than one might think. Use the intelligence screen to know how many missiles you need to penetrate the screen and then target the enemy ships with reasonable amount of missiles to start damaging them, not destroy them. Wounded ships will be much easier to kill one by one...  ;) ...you also don't necessarily need to kill all enemy ships for them to break off an attack if you have limited ammunition or capabilities.
« Last Edit: January 18, 2021, 02:49:21 AM by Jorgen_CAB »