Wait, that's not a fighter - Parasite Warships

[Bremen (OP)]

In Aurora, carriers usually hold fighters or FACs, and I've always liked experimenting with heavy beam fighters that bordered on tiny warships of their own. However, I was thinking about the Battle Riders in Sword of the Stars, and it occurred to me that after the engine change there's no reason you couldn't build a capital ship sized "fighter" that cuts out all the non-combat support for increased performance.

Take this beam warship design from one of my current games:

Code: [Select]

Dauntless class Heavy Cruiser    32 000 tons     906 Crew     9586.2 BP      TCS 640  TH 5000  EM 9000
7812 km/s     Armour 12-89     Shields 300-300     Sensors 1/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 34     PPV 126
Maint Life 4.04 Years     MSP 6366    AFR 240%    IFR 3.3%    1YR 623    5YR 9342    Max Repair 625 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months    Spare Berths 0   

Military Magnetic Fusion Drive (4)    Power 1250    Fuel Use 15%    Signature 1250    Exp 10%
Fuel Capacity 3 650 000 Litres    Range 136.9 billion km   (202 days at full power)
Theta R300/384 Shields (75)   Total Fuel Cost  1 200 Litres per hour  (28 800 per day)

15cm Secondary Laser Cannon (29)    Range 300 000km     TS: 7812 km/s     Power 6-6     RM 5    ROF 5        6 6 6 6 6 5 4 3 3 3
31cm Spinal Laser Artillery (1)    Range 384 000km     TS: 7812 km/s     Power 25-6     RM 5    ROF 25        25 25 25 25 25 20 17 15 13 12
Laser Fire Control (4)    Max Range: 384 000 km   TS: 7812 km/s     97 95 92 90 87 84 82 79 77 74
Magnetic Confinement Fusion Reactor (6)     Total Power Output 180    Armour 0    Exp 5%

Active Search Sensor MR6-R1 (1)     GPS 36     Range 6.5m km    MCR 706k km    Resolution 1

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
I'm fairly happy with it, but over 30% of the tonnage is engines, and a combined 21% is devoted to the support systems of engineering spaces, fuel storage, and crew quarters. If I aggressively rip that out, I end up with a much smaller warship that still has effectively the same combat potential:

Code: [Select]

Dauntless (BR) class Battle Rider    17 000 tons     107 Crew     7088 BP      TCS 340  TH 2500  EM 9000
7352 km/s     Armour 13-58     Shields 300-300     Sensors 1/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 1     PPV 126
Maint Life 0.04 Years     MSP 261    AFR 2312%    IFR 32.1%    1YR 6095    5YR 91421    Max Repair 1250 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 0.1 months    Spare Berths 0   

Turbo Magnetic Fusion Drive (1)    Power 2500    Fuel Use 84.85%    Signature 2500    Exp 20%
Fuel Capacity 700 000 Litres    Range 8.7 billion km   (13 days at full power)
Theta R300/384 Shields (75)   Total Fuel Cost  1 200 Litres per hour  (28 800 per day)

15cm Secondary Laser Cannon (29)    Range 300 000km     TS: 7352 km/s     Power 6-6     RM 5    ROF 5        6 6 6 6 6 5 4 3 3 3
31cm Spinal Laser Artillery (1)    Range 384 000km     TS: 7352 km/s     Power 25-6     RM 5    ROF 25        25 25 25 25 25 20 17 15 13 12
Laser Fire Control (4)    Max Range: 384 000 km   TS: 7812 km/s     97 95 92 90 87 84 82 79 77 74
Magnetic Confinement Fusion Reactor (6)     Total Power Output 180    Armour 0    Exp 5%

Active Search Sensor MR6-R1 (1)     GPS 36     Range 6.5m km    MCR 706k km    Resolution 1

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
Just a sliver over half the size. Of course, that also means a carrier is needed for it:

Code: [Select]

Nimitz class Carrier    33 300 tons     605 Crew     4676.8 BP      TCS 666  TH 3750  EM 0
5630 km/s     Armour 1-92     Shields 0-0     Sensors 1/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 39     PPV 0
Maint Life 4.12 Years     MSP 3423    AFR 227%    IFR 3.2%    1YR 323    5YR 4847    Max Repair 625 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months    Flight Crew Berths 115   
Hangar Deck Capacity 17000 tons     

Military Magnetic Fusion Drive (3)    Power 1250    Fuel Use 15%    Signature 1250    Exp 10%
Fuel Capacity 4 000 000 Litres    Range 144.1 billion km   (296 days at full power)

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
I admit it's not a clear improvement. The combined cost is higher; 11,754 for the combined package vs 9586 for the standalone warship. The smaller warship has less total armor (though the armor is thicker) and is slightly slower. The carrier itself is an eggshell and extremely vulnerable to attack, though the long range of the parasite warships means it's less likely to be in a combat situation. It also sacrifices strategic speed, since the standalone warship can move around faster than the carrier can.

There are advantages, though; the battle rider is cheaper to replace, and since ships in hangars have no maintenance cost the combined carrier and battlerider have less than half the maintenance of the standalone. Additionally, the battle rider version works wonders for system defense; a planet with maintenance and recreation facilities essentially serves as a free carrier with infinite hangar space.

However, just cutting down an existing warship is probably the wrong way to go about it, since it wastes the efficiency advantages of not having to haul all the support tonnage around with you. Instead one could use the saved space for a higher performance warship of around the same tonnage:

Code: [Select]

Dauntless (BR2) class Battle Rider    30 000 tons     186 Crew     12818.6 BP      TCS 600  TH 7500  EM 14640
12500 km/s     Armour 15-86     Shields 488-300     Sensors 1/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 2     PPV 186
Maint Life 0.04 Years     MSP 534    AFR 3600%    IFR 50%    1YR 14865    5YR 222982    Max Repair 1250 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 0.1 months    Spare Berths 7   

Turbo Magnetic Fusion Drive (3)    Power 2500    Fuel Use 84.85%    Signature 2500    Exp 20%
Fuel Capacity 1 050 000 Litres    Range 7.4 billion km   (6 days at full power)
Theta R300/384 Shields (122)   Total Fuel Cost  1 952 Litres per hour  (46 848 per day)

15cm Secondary Laser Cannon (44)    Range 300 000km     TS: 12500 km/s     Power 6-6     RM 5    ROF 5        6 6 6 6 6 5 4 3 3 3
31cm Spinal Laser Artillery (1)    Range 384 000km     TS: 12500 km/s     Power 25-6     RM 5    ROF 25        25 25 25 25 25 20 17 15 13 12
High Speed Laser Fire Control (4)    Max Range: 384 000 km   TS: 12500 km/s     97 95 92 90 87 84 82 79 77 74
Magnetic Confinement Fusion Reactor (9)     Total Power Output 270    Armour 0    Exp 5%

Active Search Sensor MR6-R1 (1)     GPS 36     Range 6.5m km    MCR 706k km    Resolution 1

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
This monster of a ship manages to pack about 50% more defenses, firepower, speed, and tracking, all in a slightly smaller frame. I didn't run a sim, but I'd say it's probably a match for two or maybe three of the standalone version all on its own, and with far more tactical options due to its speed. It also strikes me as a great way for matching a higher tech enemy, as in all aspects except weapon range it's basically the equivalent of a ship with a large tech advantage.

The downside, of course, is that it manages to cost even more than the standalone version, and requires an absolute behemoth of a carrier to get it anywhere.

I think I might give this tactic a try in my current game, at least for my beam warships where it seems the most useful. In the meantime, anyone ever tried something similar? I'm also interested in suggestions for improvements; I'm considering switching some of the lasers for railguns, for instance, since with its high speed they would probably make decent point defense.

[Iranon]

I've tried the concept in a game where I focused on disposable pods (service life in the decades without overhaul) hauled by commercial tugboats.
Split between missile pods with box launchers and hangar pods, most holding a single beam warship not unlike the ones you describe (high performance, 0.1 month deployment).

It worked out quite well.

[CharonJr]

Not on the scale you are using, but I have build a couple of heavy fighters/small destroyers in the 3-4kt range, essentially a fast single spinal laser with decent armor and they have performed fairly well.

[linkxsc]

Always a doable thing. Gets a little annoying to do with extremely large ships (dat fuel usage), but there's nothing mechanically wrong with it.

Personally what I've done most like this, is ships with a dedicated "travel" section. (basically a large carrier with fuel, low powermod engines for cruising, some ammo reloads, msp, and long endurance) with a 30kt "Brig". High powermod engines, fuel supply for about 2-3billion km, with a week or so of endurance (since they do sit around sometimes)
I personally give age of sail terms for naming of ships classes that are intended for extremely short range and endurance, such that they don't overlap with "fleet" warships. Battleships and cruisers that have built in endurance, and are generally used far away from supporting elements.

Though at the same time, many people use FACs of 900-1000t, and fighters.
Beam fighters are generally required to be 500t max due to the advantages of "fighter beam fire controls", but missile armed ones do not have this luxury. Something may be said for keeping 500t missile fighters due to their separate production chain and not tying up a shipyard. But 550-600t heavy fighters, or strike fighters, certainly have their heavy usage in my forces.
They're still small enough to be massed and carried inmasse. Are free to work a bit more in design with sensors and armament. And finally, if oyu keep them under 600, can have planet based maint from 3 maint modules. (which a supporting tender for them is only a 20-30kt ship rather than the 40-50 of a FAC tender.

[Erik L]

Think the largest I've ever done was 8k ton parasites. Embarked something like 5-10 of them per ship. But this was also 3-4 versions ago.

[83athom]

I've carried around like 8 30k ton designs in a 2m ton carrier in a test game, but they were slated for around 3 months of deployment. Of course there were fighter/bombers/facs as well.

[mankyman]

Would it be possible to produce a functional Infinity-style warship that not only carries missile destroyers, fighters/bombers and land units but also functions as a heavy hitting dreadnought?

I thought about having a go at it, but I would think the logistical issues of maintaining fuel as well as ammo supply of both the parasites and mothership would make the whole thing impractical, especially for a deep-space variant (which I would prefer).

Has anyone been able to produce something like this?

[83athom]

Would it be possible to produce a functional Infinity-style warship that not only carries missile destroyers, fighters/bombers and land units but also functions as a heavy hitting dreadnought?

Has anyone been able to produce something like this?

Uuummm... "I've carried around like 8 30k ton designs in a 2m ton carrier in a test game" Yes.

[Erik L]

Would it be possible to produce a functional Infinity-style warship that not only carries missile destroyers, fighters/bombers and land units but also functions as a heavy hitting dreadnought?

I thought about having a go at it, but I would think the logistical issues of maintaining fuel as well as ammo supply of both the parasites and mothership would make the whole thing impractical, especially for a deep-space variant (which I would prefer).

Has anyone been able to produce something like this?

http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=1135.0

It's for version 5.14, so out of date, but the design philosophies should hold.

[83athom]

I even calculated the size/weight of many/most of the Halo universes ships in a post (I forget where). The Infinity class was around 2.1m tons while its complement of frigates weighed around 30k tons each. Hence the statement above Erik's where I did that (in a more recent version though). It as a pain, but it did work in the tests I did do. The carrier itself was very resilient and its escort of frigates could project their power quite a distance. It does work, and it has its uses cause you could give a ship 2m ton inefficiencies because of its size, while then maxing out the efficiency of its complement for great effect.

[mankyman]

Thank you both. 

[Bremen (OP)]

Would it be possible to produce a functional Infinity-style warship that not only carries missile destroyers, fighters/bombers and land units but also functions as a heavy hitting dreadnought?

I thought about having a go at it, but I would think the logistical issues of maintaining fuel as well as ammo supply of both the parasites and mothership would make the whole thing impractical, especially for a deep-space variant (which I would prefer).

Has anyone been able to produce something like this?

The problem with battle carriers/battlestars in Aurora is efficiency, I think. It's sort of the inverse of my reasoning for parasite warships; if you assume 50% of a warship's tonnage is devoted to support systems, then dedicating 25% of the remaining space to hangers will halve the space available for weapons and defenses. If you instead split the ships into separate carriers and warships, then you get a warship that's still as effective as the battle carrier would be for almost no additional cost.

The advantage, of course, is that they're really cool.


Back to parasite warships, while I think the idea was very effective, in the end it felt wrong to have a carrier with just one ship. So instead I settled on a 40kton carrier holding two 10kton battle riders. Probably less efficient than a single 20kton one, but it just felt right.

[83athom]

The problem with battle carriers/battlestars in Aurora is efficiency, I think. It's sort of the inverse of my reasoning for parasite warships; if you assume 50% of a warship's tonnage is devoted to support systems, then dedicating 25% of the remaining space to hangers will halve the space available for weapons and defenses. If you instead split the ships into separate carriers and warships, then you get a warship that's still as effective as the battle carrier would be for almost no additional cost.

But then again, with a 2m ton design (aforementioned several times) that is still 500,000 tons devoted to weapon systems.

[Bremen (OP)]

But then again, with a 2m ton design (aforementioned several times) that is still 500,000 tons devoted to weapon systems.

Well, 500,000 tons of weapons and defenses. Or you could have a 1m ton carrier with 500kton of hangar space and a 1m ton warship with 500ktons of weapons and defenses, which would mean thicker armor since it wasn't spread over a larger hull.

Back when Newtonian Aurora was being actively worked on, one idea I found interesting was that hangars would weigh less when empty. That might make battle carriers more practical, since they would gain considerable speed when they launched their ships.

[sneer]

not speed but acceleration only