Author Topic: Carrier fleet doctrine questions?  (Read 3188 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline SwordLord10

  • Professional Noob
  • Drgong - Russian
  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • *
  • Posts: 65
  • Thanked: 1 times
  • How many missiles? ALL THE MISSILES!
    • View Profile
Carrier fleet doctrine questions?
« on: April 15, 2016, 02:02:56 PM »
I was wondering how the professionals use carrier based fleets.  Do you use 1 type of fighter per squadron, do you use multiple, do you bring heavier ships to accompany your carriers(like battlecruisers or battleships), or something else entirely? Posting designs for your ships would be useful, I'm a total nub.
Aurora II should only use jump gates and fleet jumpships
http://www.popsci.com/article/technology/will-wormhole-travel-ever-be-possible
 

Offline byron

  • Rear Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 849
  • Thanked: 27 times
    • View Profile
Re: Carrier fleet doctrine questions?
« Reply #1 on: April 15, 2016, 02:30:06 PM »
I tend not to use carriers that much, but when I do, I definitely specialize.  It's much better to offload active sensors and (sometimes) fuel for long-range missions onto specialized fighters, and you don't have to worry about shipyard tooling.  Escorts are vital for missile defense, if nothing else, and I'd probably want some heavy firepower in case I can't keep the enemy at range.
This is Excel-in-Space, not Wing Commander - Rastaman
 

Offline SwordLord10

  • Professional Noob
  • Drgong - Russian
  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • *
  • Posts: 65
  • Thanked: 1 times
  • How many missiles? ALL THE MISSILES!
    • View Profile
Re: Carrier fleet doctrine questions?
« Reply #2 on: April 15, 2016, 02:47:59 PM »
Quote from: byron link=topic=8556. msg89678#msg89678 date=1460748606
I tend not to use carriers that much, but when I do, I definitely specialize.   It's much better to offload active sensors and (sometimes) fuel for long-range missions onto specialized fighters, and you don't have to worry about shipyard tooling.   Escorts are vital for missile defense, if nothing else, and I'd probably want some heavy firepower in case I can't keep the enemy at range.
Thanks for the advice.  I can assume it is better for newbs to use non-carrier missile ships because of less micro-managment?
Aurora II should only use jump gates and fleet jumpships
http://www.popsci.com/article/technology/will-wormhole-travel-ever-be-possible
 

Offline byron

  • Rear Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 849
  • Thanked: 27 times
    • View Profile
Re: Carrier fleet doctrine questions?
« Reply #3 on: April 15, 2016, 03:04:42 PM »
Thanks for the advice.  I can assume it is better for newbs to use non-carrier missile ships because of less micro-managment?
For missile defense?  Two reasons.  First, you want a decent-sized radar, which you can't fit on a fighter.  Second, you would otherwise have to build specialized missile-defense fighters, which you then can't deploy.  And doing that is just wasteful if you use AMMs.  I suppose if you rely on beam weapons, it might work, although there are scale issues there, too.
This is Excel-in-Space, not Wing Commander - Rastaman
 

Offline Vandermeer

  • Rear Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 801
  • Thanked: 23 times
    • View Profile
Re: Carrier fleet doctrine questions?
« Reply #4 on: April 15, 2016, 03:50:23 PM »
Effectively, you would use fighters mostly to deploy missiles at longer range. In case of small strike fighters then, you normally don't need to mix the squadron up with anything else, because even a sensor fighter might not be good enough to mirror the large missile ranges they sport. These then usually rely on the sensors of the central fleet or carrier to target their enemies.
As soon as you send escorts with them or use size-1 missile fighters, it is must to bring with you a sensor fighter who can spot missiles, since you will never be able to cover that with just a powerful central one in the main fleet. I have been separating into 150t active resolution-1 and 100t thermal sensor on a 500t fighter-scout. (you need thermal to spot missiles in advance, as Aurora does not properly interrupt when they fly into just the active sensor radius. Also helps while flying in silent running mode of course.)

Other than that you may design additional fighters for other purposes that can accompany a squad. I had one that was essentially just fuel tanks next to the standard engine for example, because adding one or two of those to a squadron of 10 standard fighters doubled their action radius, which is otherwise severely limited. I would just add them to a team when I needed a bit more range as the situation demanded it, and they also provided useful in retrieving life-pods or fueling up some distant flights that had gone a bit over their range. (..normally you can only retrieve those by flying the carrier himself over)
More dedicated scouts for ship- instead of missile-spotting may also find their use, though I personally never really needed them.



For the carrier fleet itself; I don't know whether you really need escorts or not. When I use them they are either huge (300kt+) and able to fight for themself, or they appear at TL6 when I can afford to have on them supreme stealth ability (for fun, because at that time you have won anyway), in which case they are as small as 25kt. The only escort the last one needed were fast and also cloaked sensor ships on the flanks that would illuminate the enemy for the fighters without giving away the slow carriers' position.
playing Aurora as swarm fleet: Zen Nomadic Hive Fantasy
 

Offline SwordLord10

  • Professional Noob
  • Drgong - Russian
  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • *
  • Posts: 65
  • Thanked: 1 times
  • How many missiles? ALL THE MISSILES!
    • View Profile
Re: Carrier fleet doctrine questions?
« Reply #5 on: April 15, 2016, 04:00:56 PM »
Quote from: Vandermeer link=topic=8556. msg89681#msg89681 date=1460753423
Effectively, you would use fighters mostly to deploy missiles at longer range.  In case of small strike fighters then, you normally don't need to mix the squadron up with anything else, because even a sensor fighter might not be good enough to mirror the large missile ranges they sport.  These then usually rely on the sensors of the central fleet or carrier to target their enemies.
As soon as you send escorts with them or use size-1 missile fighters, it is must to bring with you a sensor fighter who can spot missiles, since you will never be able to cover that with just a powerful central one in the main fleet.  I have been separating into 150t active resolution-1 and 100t thermal sensor on a 500t fighter-scout.  (you need thermal to spot missiles in advance, as Aurora does not properly interrupt when they fly into just the active sensor radius.  Also helps while flying in silent running mode of course. )

Other than that you may design additional fighters for other purposes that can accompany a squad.  I had one that was essentially just fuel tanks next to the standard engine for example, because adding one or two of those to a squadron of 10 standard fighters doubled their action radius, which is otherwise severely limited.  I would just add them to a team when I needed a bit more range as the situation demanded it, and they also provided useful in retrieving life-pods or fueling up some distant flights that had gone a bit over their range.  (. . normally you can only retrieve those by flying the carrier himself over)
More dedicated scouts for ship- instead of missile-spotting may also find their use, though I personally never really needed them.



For the carrier fleet itself; I don't know whether you really need escorts or not.  When I use them they are either huge (300kt+) and able to fight for themself, or they appear at TL6 when I can afford to have on them supreme stealth ability (for fun, because at that time you have won anyway), in which case they are as small as 25kt.  The only escort the last one needed were fast and also cloaked sensor ships on the flanks that would illuminate the enemy for the fighters without giving away the slow carriers' position.
Remember that I am a noob and will probably screw my tactics up and let my enemy close into missile range, in which case I would need escorts.


I might prefer to use a destroyer and cruiser based laser fleet anyways.
How is this for a fleet?
A few point defense frigates/corvettes, using Gauss rifles(double turrets), 4-5 destroyers also mainly employing Gauss rifles, but with a smaller spineback laser.  5-6 cruisers with one double turret Gauss, and a powerful spineback laser, 1 battlecruiser, armed with the largest possible spineback laser, a command cruiser with as good of sensors as I need, armed exclusively with AMM's and Gauss, and a couple escort carriers with laser and meson fighters.
Aurora II should only use jump gates and fleet jumpships
http://www.popsci.com/article/technology/will-wormhole-travel-ever-be-possible
 

Offline Cassaralla

  • Warrant Officer, Class 1
  • *****
  • Posts: 97
  • Thanked: 1 times
    • View Profile
Re: Carrier fleet doctrine questions?
« Reply #6 on: April 16, 2016, 05:21:58 PM »
I find having a couple of a Jump capable fighter on board my carriers is extremely useful during exploration and for checking suspected JP blockades.

Just a minimum size jump engine and a compact yet useful sensor, no need for any weapons on it.
 

Offline AL

  • Captain
  • **********
  • Posts: 560
  • Thanked: 18 times
    • View Profile
Re: Carrier fleet doctrine questions?
« Reply #7 on: April 16, 2016, 06:08:12 PM »
Well, here are the current fleet components of my latest game - a heavily fighter-oriented game at that. Note that my designs may be slightly unconventional however.

Standard carrier, placed on mass production for several years:
Code: [Select]
C-1-M2 class Carrier    10 000 tons     125 Crew     868.6 BP      TCS 200  TH 800  EM 0
4000 km/s     Armour 1-41     Shields 0-0     Sensors 55/90/0/0     Damage Control Rating 3     PPV 0
Maint Life 0.84 Years     MSP 163    AFR 266%    IFR 3.7%    1YR 194    5YR 2908    Max Repair 90 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months    Flight Crew Berths 27   
Hangar Deck Capacity 3000 tons     

C40-S50 Internal Fusion Drive (2)    Power 400    Fuel Use 2.53%    Signature 400    Exp 4%
Fuel Capacity 540 000 Litres    Range 384.2 billion km   (1111 days at full power)

Thermal Sensor TH5-55 (1)     Sensitivity 55     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  55m km
EM Detection Sensor EM5-90 (1)     Sensitivity 90     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  90m km

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes

This has space for exactly 6x500 ton fighters, which is what I used for a "fighter wing". Current fighter designs:
Space Superiority Fighter:
Code: [Select]
SSF-3 class Fighter    497 tons     4 Crew     213.4 BP      TCS 9.94  TH 300  EM 0
30181 km/s     Armour 1-5     Shields 0-0     Sensors 1/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 0     PPV 3
Maint Life 0 Years     MSP 0    AFR 99%    IFR 1.4%    1YR 17    5YR 259    Max Repair 37.5 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 0.1 months    Spare Berths 0   

F300-S1 Magnetic Fusion Drive (4)    Power 75    Fuel Use 771.63%    Signature 75    Exp 30%
Fuel Capacity 80 000 Litres    Range 3.8 billion km   (34 hours at full power)

Thermal Lance (1)    Range 30 000km     TS: 30181 km/s     Power 3-3     RM 1    ROF 5        3 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
FC-F48/20 (1)    Max Range: 48 000 km   TS: 20000 km/s     79 58 38 17 0 0 0 0 0 0
MagFusion Power Cell (1)     Total Power Output 3    Armour 0    Exp 5%

M3 Compact Scanner (1)     GPS 6     Range 1 000k km    MCR 109k km    Resolution 1

This design is classed as a Fighter for production, combat and maintenance purposes

Microwave fighter-bomber:
Code: [Select]
EFB-2 class Fighter-bomber    497 tons     4 Crew     228.4 BP      TCS 9.94  TH 300  EM 0
30181 km/s     Armour 1-5     Shields 0-0     Sensors 1/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 0     PPV 3
Maint Life 0 Years     MSP 0    AFR 99%    IFR 1.4%    1YR 18    5YR 268    Max Repair 37.5 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 0.1 months    Spare Berths 0   

F300-S1 Magnetic Fusion Drive (4)    Power 75    Fuel Use 771.63%    Signature 75    Exp 30%
Fuel Capacity 80 000 Litres    Range 3.8 billion km   (34 hours at full power)

EMP Emitter (1)    Range 30 000km     TS: 30181 km/s     Power 3-3     RM 3    ROF 5        1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
FC-F48/20 (1)    Max Range: 48 000 km   TS: 20000 km/s     79 58 38 17 0 0 0 0 0 0
MagFusion Power Cell (1)     Total Power Output 3    Armour 0    Exp 5%

M2 Compact Scanner (1)     GPS 6     Range 780k km    MCR 85k km    Resolution 1

This design is classed as a Fighter for production, combat and maintenance purposes

Recon/Scout Fighter:
Code: [Select]
RF-2 class Recon Fighter    497 tons     4 Crew     284.4 BP      TCS 9.94  TH 300  EM 0
30181 km/s     Armour 1-5     Shields 0-0     Sensors 1/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 0     PPV 0
Maint Life 0 Years     MSP 0    AFR 99%    IFR 1.4%    1YR 31    5YR 465    Max Repair 56 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 0.1 months    Spare Berths 0   

F300-S1 Magnetic Fusion Drive (4)    Power 75    Fuel Use 771.63%    Signature 75    Exp 30%
Fuel Capacity 70 000 Litres    Range 3.3 billion km   (30 hours at full power)

AS-R100-S2 (1)     GPS 5600     Range 78.4m km    Resolution 100
AS-R1-S2 (1)     GPS 56     Range 7.8m km    MCR 854k km    Resolution 1

This design is classed as a Fighter for production, combat and maintenance purposes

And the update-pending missile bomber:
Code: [Select]
MFB-1 class Fighter-bomber    500 tons     3 Crew     156.6 BP      TCS 10  TH 192  EM 0
19200 km/s     Armour 1-5     Shields 0-0     Sensors 1/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 0     PPV 3
Maint Life 0 Years     MSP 0    AFR 100%    IFR 1.4%    1YR 5    5YR 76    Max Repair 24 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 0.1 months    Spare Berths 7   
Magazine 20   

F300-S1 Magneto-Plasma Drive (4)    Power 48    Fuel Use 1080.28%    Signature 48    Exp 30%
Fuel Capacity 65 000 Litres    Range 2.2 billion km   (31 hours at full power)

BL-1 (20)    Missile Size 1    Hangar Reload 7.5 minutes    MF Reload 1.2 hours
FC-M8/1 (1)     Range 8.2m km    Resolution 1
A-4 (20)  Speed: 45 000 km/s   End: 3.8m    Range: 10.2m km   WH: 4    Size: 1    TH: 240/144/72

M2 Compact Scanner (1)     GPS 6     Range 780k km    MCR 85k km    Resolution 1

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 maintenance purposes

Fighter wings are composed of one recon fighter and 5 of one of the other fighter types. A common tactic would be to use a wing of missile bombers to take out a target's shields, followed by a wing or two of microwave bombers to blind the enemy, at which point a final wing of the laser-armed fighters can take apart the enemies at leisure.

I also have this Experimental super-carrier design:
Code: [Select]
C-2 class Carrier    20 000 tons     255 Crew     2262.5 BP      TCS 400  TH 1250  EM 0
3125 km/s     Armour 1-65     Shields 0-0     Sensors 55/90/0/0     Damage Control Rating 6     PPV 0
Maint Life 1.07 Years     MSP 424    AFR 533%    IFR 7.4%    1YR 372    5YR 5580    Max Repair 156.25 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months    Flight Crew Berths 367   
Hangar Deck Capacity 10000 tons     

C50-S50 Magnetic Fusion Drive (2)    Power 625    Fuel Use 4.42%    Signature 625    Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 1 895 000 Litres    Range 385.9 billion km   (1429 days at full power)

Thermal Sensor TH5-55 (1)     Sensitivity 55     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  55m km
EM Detection Sensor EM5-90 (1)     Sensitivity 90     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  90m km

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
And while it can hold a whole load of fighters, I have that space reserved for a 10kt destroyer at the moment.
I also have a few auxiliary ships like tankers, colliers, etc. but I'm trying to stick to just the carrier elements that are the topic of discussion.

So general fleet doctrine:
-ability to respond to threats anywhere in the known galaxy, hence the respectable range on the carrier;
-expendable fleet elements (ie fighters) tank the damage while non-expendable elements (the carriers) stay out of enemy engagement range, which allows me to use minimal armour and defenses on carriers;
-if a beam fighter engagement doesn't look like it will work, nuke them with size-1 missile spam - a single wing of bombers can output 5x20 missiles @ 4 damage a piece for a 400 damage alpha strike. Most of my current carrier groups have at least 3 wings of missile bombers which should be capable of dealing with most threats.
 

Offline Barkhorn

  • Commander
  • *********
  • Posts: 328
  • Thanked: 45 times
    • View Profile
Re: Carrier fleet doctrine questions?
« Reply #8 on: April 16, 2016, 07:11:14 PM »
I have used carriers some.  I play basically just like the US navy.  The carrier and it's fighters do all the heavy lifting, with a few escorts to deal with anything that gets passed the fighter wings.

I go with 15k tons of hangar space, so I can have 30 fighters, consisting of 3 wings of 10 each.  Each wing contains 9 combat fighters and one sensor fighter.  The carrier carries two anti-fighter wings, and one anti-ship wing.  The anti-fighter either get 1msp missiles, or beam weapons.  The bombers have 5-6msp missiles.  The carrier has enough magazine space to load each wing 3 times.

Fighter wings are composed of one recon fighter and 5 of one of the other fighter types. A common tactic would be to use a wing of missile bombers to take out a target's shields, followed by a wing or two of microwave bombers to blind the enemy, at which point a final wing of the laser-armed fighters can take apart the enemies at leisure.
You should lead with the microwave bombers, microwaves do bonus damage to shields.
 

Offline AL

  • Captain
  • **********
  • Posts: 560
  • Thanked: 18 times
    • View Profile
Re: Carrier fleet doctrine questions?
« Reply #9 on: April 17, 2016, 06:07:01 AM »
Well, the bonus damage brings the total up to 3 per shot vs shields. If you think about it, that's equivalent to just a 10cm laser so you don't really gain anything by bringing in the microwaves just yet. It's when you can bypass armour and go straight for their vital electronics that microwaves really become useful.
 

Offline Iranon

  • Captain
  • **********
  • Posts: 460
  • Thanked: 31 times
    • View Profile
Re: Carrier fleet doctrine questions?
« Reply #10 on: April 17, 2016, 07:58:52 AM »
I favour small-ish carriers with single-purpose fighter groups.

Single-shot missile fighters, 150t or so. Fairly slow (1 size-1 engine) and fragile, aim is to deliver their payload without being detected due to their small size, hope is to have enough simultaneous salvos that point defence will be overloaded despite the modest number of missiles.
Support variants as needed, with sensors or fuel tanks.

Ripple-fire missile fighters. 400-500t, fast, one small (but full-size) missile launcher launching high-yield missiles exactly as fast as the fighters themselves.
Since all missiles travel in one clump while split into 1-missile-salvos, enemy point defence will be largely ineffecive. Not always used for outright kills, this is useful as a screen for fast craft that aim to get close and personal... like the following.
Support (sensor, fuel, collier) versions as needed.

Boarding strike group. Microwave fighters for suppression, boarding shuttles delivering a Marine Company each. These often operate together with full-sized beam warships, I've moved away from offensive/PD-oriented beam fighters. High-performance carrier-bound beam ships (with 3 days of deployment time and endurance) aren't out of the question, but I haven't built any recently.
 

Offline FrederickAlexander

  • Drgong - NAU
  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • *
  • Posts: 70
  • Thanked: 2 times
    • View Profile
Re: Carrier fleet doctrine questions?
« Reply #11 on: April 20, 2016, 01:41:27 PM »
I am currently using a single type of fighter that is meant to play a role as a Anti-fighter for my large Ships to picket for enemy fighters and scout out areas.  As for my carrier squadrons, I have two squadrons for each different role, two bomber squadrons and two Superiority in which i rotate to yield constant missile fire on ships or combine to overwhelm PD.  The carriers themselves are large and have lots of hanger space and missile space since they are meant to avoid direct combat but still have their own PD systems to protect themselves in the event they are attacked.  As for my Fighters, they are designed as either space superiority missile fighters, or anti-ship missile bombers, each having a guass cannon to defend themselves or be able to attack other ships after they fire their missiles.
 

Offline Noble713

  • Chief Petty Officer
  • ***
  • Posts: 34
  • Thanked: 1 times
    • View Profile
Re: Carrier fleet doctrine questions?
« Reply #12 on: April 24, 2016, 01:54:47 AM »
I have some older fleet carriers (48kT with 20kT hangar space). These ships needed jump gates to get to the fight so I'm planning to phase them out. But they were great for bringing overwhelming combat power when I stormed an NPR's home system. They carried 2 squadrons each with:

1x Recon Fighter (active sensor, passive thermal)
1x Squadron Leader (missile director, 4x box launchers)
19-20x Strikefighters (5x box launchers)

I have much smaller Jump Carriers that lead my mixed Expeditionary Strike Groups. These carry a single small squadron of only:

1x Recon Fighter
1x Squadron Leader
4x Strikefighters

They were meant to soften up or chase down Precursor ships for boarding, but I just had a squadron shot up by AMMs at a longer range than I expected, so I need to make some new missiles with longer-ranged fighter-size missile directors. Once I get new engine tech I'm going to design a carrier halfway between these two: probably ~30kT with space for 2x 10-fighter squadrons. I've designed an interceptor/space superiority fighter but I have yet to need them, so I haven't built any.
 

Offline Arwyn

  • Lt. Commander
  • ********
  • Posts: 230
  • Thanked: 3 times
    • View Profile
Re: Carrier fleet doctrine questions?
« Reply #13 on: April 29, 2016, 04:31:14 PM »
I mix carrier types around, but I build my squadrons in similar fashion to modern fighter ops.

I usually run with 4x fighters, and 1x Command/Sensor ship per flight, 2x flights is a squadron. So, 8 fighters and 2 Command/Sensor fighters

I build my carriers around squadrons, like so;

CVE (Escort)
 1-2 squadrons, escorts are generally older light carriers, or system defense carriers. They are cheap, slow, but can carry current fighters.
CVL (Light)
1-2 squadrons, these are modern and fast carriers, I use them to accompany scouting forces, cruiser squadrons, or kinetic battle squadrons
CVK (Scout)
1-2 squadrons, plus additional hanger space for other craft. I dont build many of these, if at all. They are specialized, and meant to go in with surveyors, and usually have marines and landing craft as well.
CV 
2-4 squadrons, my stock carrier platform for battle squadrons, along with battleships, they tend to be big and expensive, so they tend to get refitted as long as practical, or scrapped.
CVA (Heavy)
4 to 8 squadrons, I only really build these for really big offensive operations, they are huge, and cost a fortune, and take forever to build, but can take a pile of abuse.
CVS (Strike)
4 to 8 squadrons, things are BAD if I am building these. They are carriers, but build like battleships, very tough, very heavy missile/fighter defense, and self defense. Cost a freaking fortune and take forever to build.

I usually build equal numbers of CVL/CV. I build CVE for areas that may get hostile traffic to supplement the FAC and frigate/destroyer squadrons I leave in important systems. The other types only get built on special circumstances or really heavy combat.
 

Offline Thanatos

  • Warrant Officer, Class 1
  • *****
  • Posts: 96
  • Thanked: 2 times
    • View Profile
Re: Carrier fleet doctrine questions?
« Reply #14 on: May 03, 2016, 03:32:16 AM »
I tend to follow the modern approach as well, in my current campaign, as well as the material it was inspired by.

My carrier fleet usually operates very short range, is very fast, has good redundancy, and is only equipped with what it needs for it's mission. Usually this means 1x CV, 3x FF, 3x DE.

The fast frigates are mainly for point defense, the destroyers, especially with the lack of the G in there, do not use missiles, but instead rely on speed and bringing railgun hurt to the enemy, while outfitted with tons of armor. Literally.

It is kind of a wasteful approach, as I have to get the Destroyers back to home base to refit their armor, but it works out. The Destroyers as a group are faster than my fighters as a group, but when I separate the fighters, I got quite a few very fast ones, twice as fast as the Destroyers, but armed to the teeth.

My fighters usually, regardless of material, follow similar doctrine to how I build my carrier fleets. Strong armor, a bit slower speed, and they are usually outfitted for the missions they take part in. This means:

Long Range Scout: It is a fighter, <= 500 tons, that can operate on billion kilometer ranges, has a very small TCS and emits no EM radiation. It doubles as a spy, and when that is done, I usually put it on EMCON and run it a lot slower than it can go. It usually detects by passives, or a large active which I only turn on when in combat.

Chaser/Interceptor: A fighter, <= 500, equipped to go short ranges, very fast, hit hard and take names. It is the type of fighter I usually end up replacing because in the absence of other fighters to fight, I send it against Destroyers, and it can deal a lot of damage before it has to limp back home.

Brawler non-specialist: A FAC, <= 1000, usually 800 tons; Goes fast, has PD, has a big railgun/laser, equipped with all sorts of sensor equipment, very low range. These guys usually defend my Carriers when I have to send the Frigates forward. They can also take on a Destroyer, and when coordinated with the other types, they can even win that fight.

I know these types are a bit too ambiguous and general, but that is usually the thought process involved when I design my fleet. These are usually the three components that I need for successful carrier operations. Long Range Patrols, Fast Intercept and something that can brawl.
 

 

Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51