Heavy Cruiser

[Cavgunner (OP)]

Rate please... this 1st-generation cruiser is supposed to be a multi-function vessel capable of fleet or independent operations.

Yes, I know the missiles are overly large at size 8.  For the moment I'm stuck with them.  

I don't think I got the sensors and fire control right.



Aegis class Heavy Cruiser    18200 tons     1728 Crew     2862.4399 BP      TCS 364  TH 810  EM 240
2967 km/s     Armour 5-61     Shields 8-400     Sensors 8/22/0/0     Damage Control 37     PPV 117
Annual Failure Rate: 66%    IFR: 0.9%    Maintenance Capacity 2654 MSP
Magazine 498  

Ion Engine E6 (18)    Power 60    Fuel Use 60%    Armour 0    Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 400,000 Litres    Range 65.9 billion km   (257 days at full power)
Gamma R400/12 Shields (4)   Total Fuel Cost  48 Litres per day

CIWS-240 Goalkeeper (2x6)    Range 1000 km     TS: 12000 km/s     ROF 5       Base 50% To Hit
Twin 10cm C3 Visible Light Laser Turret (3x2)    Range 60,000km     TS: 15000 km/s     Power 6-6     RM 2    ROF 5        3 3 2 1 1 1 0 0 0 0
Fire Control S04 32-12000 H70 (1)    Max Range: 64,000 km   TS: 12000 km/s     84 69 53 37 22 6 0 0 0 0
Gas-Cooled Fast Reactor Technology PB-1 AR-1 9 (2)     Total Power Output 18     Armour 1    Exp 5%

Archer II (Size 8) (6)    Missile Size 8    Rate of Fire 60
Missile Fire Control FC69-R100 (70%) (1)     Range 69.3m km    Resolution 100
Arrowhead II Anti-ship Missile (62)  Speed: 30,000 km/s   End: 20.8m    Range: 37.5m km   WH: 8    Size: 8    TH: 140 / 84 / 42

Thermal Sensor TH1-8 (70%) (1)     Sensitivity 8     Detect Signature 1000: 8m km
Active Search Sensor MR23-R100 (70%) (1)     GPS 2100     Range 23.1m km     Resolution 100
Active Search Sensor MR0-R1 (70%) (1)     GPS 10.5     Range 840.0k km     Resolution 1
EM Detection Sensor EM2-22 (70%) (1)     Sensitivity 22     Detect Strength 1000: 22m km

ECCM-1 (1)         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

[Thiosk]

One thing i'm training myself not to do is have so many dang engineering spaces.  Failures happen on ships, but chances are you won't be flying your vessels so far away from resupply that they only need come back every few years.  Think about it this way, when it comes home for a refuel, it should also get a resupply, so cut the eng spaces\maint storage in like half.

CIWS are auto pea shooters.  Since you already have fire control, turrets, and offensive missiles, might as well just put more turrets on?


I like the speed of the missiles, but their range is meager.  You can probably cut its warhead in half.  Srsly.  8 its a big warhead.

Lets looks at your fire control range\resolution + the search sensors.
Your ship can 'see' big things at 23 million km.
Your ship can shoot at big things at 69 million km
Your missiles can fly 37 m km.  

Theres a mismatch here.  Your sensors are functionally useless.  You can't fly towards the enemy to get him in your range because you won't see him until he's already been in your range for a long time.  


In my campaign, i wasn't producing ion based warships, so i don't know practically how your ranges stack up.  But the sensor problem is why you build recon ships to escort.  I've got a space based array thats nothing but shields, scanners, armor, and engines.  My active sensor range is 200 m km and its just a tiny blue ring in space.  My missiles range 100 m km.  

[Hawkeye]

I´d go for either a quad turret with one firecon, or keep your two twin turrets but add another firecon. As it is, both turrets can only shoot at the same target anyway (a quad turret has more hits-to-kill (HTK) than a twin, so it is harder to take out).

I agree with Thiosk on the CIWS. Ripping those two out will likely free up enough space to add a second firecon and upgrade the turrets to tripple ones.

The range of that res-1 sensor against size-6 or smaller missiles seems to be around 90.000km. If this is correct, it is way too short-ranged. An enemy missile moving at just 20.000 km/s would cross your sensor coverage within a single 5-second increment, leaving you without any chance to shoot at it. You´d want the sensor to detect size-6 missiles out to at least 250 to 300 k.
Note: If your guns are properly set-up for PD purpose, they will probably shoot anyway, still, I´d like to have some warning of incoming missiles before they impact.

Also agree with Thiosk on the anti-ship active. Range is way too short if working independantly.

On the missiles:
Now, having a MFC with a larger range than the missiles can fly is not a bad thing, as this can counteract enemy ECM, but 37mkm IS rather short ranged. You might want to put some research into fuel efficiency (Power and Propulsion) as this also increases range for missiles with a given amount of fuel.
Alternatively, reduce warhead to 7 and put the space into fuel. You don´t have to go for the full 70 mkm of your MFC, but something around 50+ mkm would be nice.

The shields are not of much use. Strength 8 means, they can stop a single missile of yours. Personally, I consider anything below 20 as pretty useless. Shields come into their own when they get strong, as they start to recharge during combat.
Example:
A shield strenght of 100 with a recharge time of 300 secs means, you are recharging 0.33 points of shield each second. If the enemy launches every 30 seconds, your shields will recharge about 9.9 points of strength between salvos, which would be enough to keep the occational leaker from depleating your shields.

On maintenance:
What you should be looking at is NOT the Annual Failure Rate, but the Est. Time
I am aiming for something between 2 and 3 years, personally, except for survey ships, which will be build to last a lot longer.





 

[Brian Neumann]

On maintenance:
What you should be looking at is NOT the Annual Failure Rate, but the Est. Time
I am aiming for something between 2 and 3 years, personally, except for survey ships, which will be build to last a lot longer.

Part of the reason for having enough maintenance for 2-3 years is so that when it has been a couple of years since an overhaul, you still can stay out for most of a year.  The failure rate goes up on a linear (iirc) rate with the second year being twice the rate of failure as the first year, the third year it would be three times, ect.  If you have had your ships out patroling or guarding an important point without having maintenance facilities handy then they will start putting time on the maintenance clock.  This is when having a ship with an est time of 2-3 years makes a big difference.  After a couple of years you will still only need to bring up a full shiploads worth of maintenance supplies every 6-8 months.  If your est time was 1 year then you would probably be bringing that same amount of supplies every 3 months.

Brian

[Cavgunner (OP)]

Ok, how about this?  I would like to keep the dual CIWS for purely aesthetic reasons.



Aegis Block II class Heavy Cruiser    18,200 tons     1671 Crew     2942.44 BP      TCS 364  TH 810  EM 240
2967 km/s     Armour 5-61     Shields 8-400     Sensors 32/44/0/0     Damage Control Rating 26     PPV 117
Annual Failure Rate: 165%    IFR: 2.3%    Maint Capacity 1617 MSP    Max Repair 147 MSP    Est Time: 3.16 Years
Magazine 498    

Ion Engine E6 (18)    Power 60    Fuel Use 60%    Signature 45    Armour 0    Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 400,000 Litres    Range 65.9 billion km   (257 days at full power)
Gamma R400/12 Shields (4)   Total Fuel Cost  48 Litres per day

Twin 10cm C3 Visible Light Laser Turret (3x2)    Range 60,000km     TS: 15000 km/s     Power 6-6     RM 2    ROF 5        3 3 2 1 1 1 0 0 0 0
CIWS-240 Goalkeeper (2x6)    Range 1000 km     TS: 12000 km/s     ROF 5       Base 50% To Hit
Fire Control S04 32-12000 H70 (1)    Max Range: 64,000 km   TS: 12000 km/s     84 69 53 37 22 6 0 0 0 0
Gas-Cooled Fast Reactor Technology PB-1 AR-1 9 (2)     Total Power Output 18    Armour 1    Exp 5%

Archer II (Size 8) (6)    Missile Size 8    Rate of Fire 60
Missile Fire Control FC69-R100 (70%) (1)     Range 69.3m km    Resolution 100

Active Search Sensor MR115-R100 (70%) (1)     GPS 10500     Range 115.5m km    Resolution 100
Active Search Sensor MR2-R1 (70%) (1)     GPS 21     Range 2.3m km    Resolution 1
Thermal Sensor TH4-32 (70%) (1)     Sensitivity 32     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  32m km
EM Detection Sensor EM4-44 (70%) (1)     Sensitivity 44     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  44m km

ECCM-1 (1)         ECM 10

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes

[Thiosk]

I think its flyable!

[Andrew]

If you want to keep the CIWS I would probably take out the 10cm lasers and add more missile launchers at the moment this ship is very large and largely ineffectual salvo's of 6 missiles a minute apart are just going to get shot down by any defenses. Given your large missiles and slow rate of fire reduced sized launchers to give bigger salvo's are probably a good idea.
I would probably have a lot less maintenance facilities than you have but that is not a clear thing.
It seems you have shielded your sensors against microwave weapons this is probably a waste of money and space as you are very unlikely to have anyone close to microwave range and have microwave weapons they will probably have lasers or something instead and blow your ship up.