Author Topic: scout design and doctrine  (Read 970 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Michael Sandy

  • Captain
  • **********
  • Posts: 437
  • Thanked: 7 times
    • View Profile
scout design and doctrine
« on: October 16, 2016, 05:45:21 AM »
To begin with, what ARE the various scouting missions, and how important are they?

1)  locating enemy fleet on offense

2)  early warning of enemy fleet for strategic or tactical defense

3)  shadowing enemy vessels to direct fleet assets, or to find enemy entry/exit points

4)  monitoring jump points/gates.  Requirements, the resolution to detect anything that can make transit.  Must be able to detect transit over the range a jump ship about 2 tech levels higher could jump in.

5)  probing jump points

6)  probing inhabitable planets

7)  early warning of missile attack, to allow fleet time to turn away or forward deploy anti-missile escort

8)  recon by fire.  Sometimes the only way to find out what range the enemy can detect or destroy missiles, fighters, ships is to probe.  Against a faster fleet, especially precursors, you have to have this information early enough to disengage.

9)  providing targeting information vs missiles, fighters and/or ships for other ships whose weapon ranges would otherwise vastly exceed their onboard sensor range.

Scouts can be anything from missiles with sensors on them, drones, fighters, lacs, all the way up to capital ships with a quarter or more of their tonnage devoted to sensors.  So what keeps them alive?

1)  speed.  They can outrun anything that is armed
2)  small size, they can detect anything big enough to harm them outside of their opponent's own sensor range
3)  range, they have sensors of such size that they can sit comfortably outside of the enemy's range while directing the fight
4)  they are a deliberate target, with lots of armor and shields
5)  alive?  They are cheap and disposable and built in ordnance factories or fighter factories
6)  not as fast as possible, or as small as possible, but armed to take out or force back their opposite numbers, or part of a squadron where the design of the hitters is tied to the speed and size of the sensor equipped ship.

Some scouting doctrine ideas:

Every jump point should have a sensor on it, preferably both sides, in every system with assets that are not considered to be "disposable".  Every system worth protecting should at least have a patrol capable of shadowing an enemy fleet, so in the event of a surprise attack through an undiscovered jump point, the attack can be traced back.

So, some questions:

Approximately what percentage of your fleet build is devoted to scouting?  How specialized are your scouts?  If your scouts are small, like missile to LAC sized, specialization seems the way to go.  But for capital ship scouts, you may not have enough of a production run to justify an EM specialized capital ship and a thermal specialized capital ship etc...
 

Offline baconholic

  • Warrant Officer, Class 2
  • ****
  • Posts: 61
  • Thanked: 2 times
    • View Profile
Re: scout design and doctrine
« Reply #1 on: October 16, 2016, 12:11:19 PM »
I prefer ground base passive sensor for monitoring most things. Each one of them is a giant size 50 EM/Th sensor and you can stack them up for more power. With some tech investment, they can detect fighters at billions of km away. They only cost 300 to produce, so I just put 1 at every system, more at strategic locations like wormholes.

For the main offensive scouting, I'll put big sensors around 500-1000 tons each on a destroyer hull of 10,000 tons. There are usually three of them at 150, 20, and 1 resolution.
 

Offline 83athom

  • Big Ship Commander
  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1190
  • Thanked: 79 times
    • View Profile
Re: scout design and doctrine
« Reply #2 on: October 16, 2016, 05:05:38 PM »
1-3)Either a ship with large passive sensors and engines turned off, or a colony with a few Deep Space Tracking Station buildings on it (they don't require workers).

4)Buoys.

5)Small ship with stealthing (ECM, cloak, thermal reduction on engines).

6)General survey ship.

7)Active sensor.

8.) Not usually an issue unless you would never win either way.

9)Dedicated Sensor ships/fighters.


I usually don't have a "dedicated" sensor ship. However, most of my ships carry a small percentage of their mass as sensors as I build large ships, but I do have some scout designs with a larger percentage to sensors (larger sensors, more kinds, etc). They are usually equipped with light defenses (box launcher/.33 size launchers for anti-ship, a CIWS or two for anti-missile), big and efficient engines (with thermal reduction), ECM, and a cloak if I can fit it.
Give a man a fire and he's warm for a day, but set fire to him and he's warm for the rest of his life.
 

Offline Bremen

  • Lt. Commander
  • ********
  • Posts: 266
  • Thanked: 11 times
    • View Profile
Re: scout design and doctrine
« Reply #3 on: October 16, 2016, 06:24:05 PM »
Like others in this thread, I usually put a few (around 10 if I can afford it) deep space tracking arrays on whatever body is closest to the jump point(s) back towards my inhabited systems for every system on my jumpgate network. This isn't perfect since it can miss small and stealthy ships, but it generally lets me know if there are any alien armadas heading for my colonies. It's also cheap and low maintenance.

I also usually have some sort of jump scout (ideally something fighter or FAC sized kept in a hangar bay, either on a carrier or a large ship with a small utility bay) just because a jump point ambush can be so horribly damaging. For the rest I usually just rely on the onboard sensors my warships carry. My survey ships also have size 1 passive sensors to hopefully detect inhabited worlds at range.
 

Offline AbuDhabi

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • Posts: 104
  • Thanked: 2 times
    • View Profile
Re: scout design and doctrine
« Reply #4 on: October 17, 2016, 06:08:18 AM »
Quote
1)  locating enemy fleet on offense

Adequate sensors on all combat ships.

Quote
2)  early warning of enemy fleet for strategic or tactical defense

DSTS.

Quote
3)  shadowing enemy vessels to direct fleet assets, or to find enemy entry/exit points

Never tried.

Quote
4)  monitoring jump points/gates.  Requirements, the resolution to detect anything that can make transit.  Must be able to detect transit over the range a jump ship about 2 tech levels higher could jump in.

Don't do that much, but would put a recreation station with sensors on it. Maybe two, given the bugs surrounding recreation module.

Quote
5)  probing jump points

7-10k scoutship. Active and gravitational sensors. CIWS for defense. Big commercial engine. Lots of fuel. Military jump drive.

Quote
6)  probing inhabitable planets

Small geo scoutship. Some commercial engine, moderate amounts of fuel, geosurvey sensors. No jump engine.

Quote
7)  early warning of missile attack, to allow fleet time to turn away or forward deploy anti-missile escort

Never tried.

Quote
8)  recon by fire.  Sometimes the only way to find out what range the enemy can detect or destroy missiles, fighters, ships is to probe.  Against a faster fleet, especially precursors, you have to have this information early enough to disengage.

Don't use missiles much.

Quote
9)  providing targeting information vs missiles, fighters and/or ships for other ships whose weapon ranges would otherwise vastly exceed their onboard sensor range.

I put sensors on combat ships to enable them to shoot out to their entire range.
 

Offline Jorgen_CAB

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • Posts: 667
  • Thanked: 1 times
    • View Profile
Re: scout design and doctrine
« Reply #5 on: January 03, 2017, 07:31:58 PM »
To begin with, what ARE the various scouting missions, and how important are they?

1)  locating enemy fleet on offense

2)  early warning of enemy fleet for strategic or tactical defense

3)  shadowing enemy vessels to direct fleet assets, or to find enemy entry/exit points

4)  monitoring jump points/gates.  Requirements, the resolution to detect anything that can make transit.  Must be able to detect transit over the range a jump ship about 2 tech levels higher could jump in.

5)  probing jump points

6)  probing inhabitable planets

7)  early warning of missile attack, to allow fleet time to turn away or forward deploy anti-missile escort

8)  recon by fire.  Sometimes the only way to find out what range the enemy can detect or destroy missiles, fighters, ships is to probe.  Against a faster fleet, especially precursors, you have to have this information early enough to disengage.

9)  providing targeting information vs missiles, fighters and/or ships for other ships whose weapon ranges would otherwise vastly exceed their onboard sensor range.

Scouts can be anything from missiles with sensors on them, drones, fighters, lacs, all the way up to capital ships with a quarter or more of their tonnage devoted to sensors.  So what keeps them alive?

1)  speed.  They can outrun anything that is armed
2)  small size, they can detect anything big enough to harm them outside of their opponent's own sensor range
3)  range, they have sensors of such size that they can sit comfortably outside of the enemy's range while directing the fight
4)  they are a deliberate target, with lots of armor and shields
5)  alive?  They are cheap and disposable and built in ordnance factories or fighter factories
6)  not as fast as possible, or as small as possible, but armed to take out or force back their opposite numbers, or part of a squadron where the design of the hitters is tied to the speed and size of the sensor equipped ship.

Some scouting doctrine ideas:

Every jump point should have a sensor on it, preferably both sides, in every system with assets that are not considered to be "disposable".  Every system worth protecting should at least have a patrol capable of shadowing an enemy fleet, so in the event of a surprise attack through an undiscovered jump point, the attack can be traced back.

So, some questions:

Approximately what percentage of your fleet build is devoted to scouting?  How specialized are your scouts?  If your scouts are small, like missile to LAC sized, specialization seems the way to go.  But for capital ship scouts, you may not have enough of a production run to justify an EM specialized capital ship and a thermal specialized capital ship etc...

Ok... I'm late responding to this thread but this is one of my favourite part of Aurora... the scout, hunt and stealth part.

I see this as the MOST important part of my defenses, period. Being able to know the position, strength and quality of the enemy is key to mounting any type of defence or offence.

Since the best defense is a good offense it is important to know where your enemy is so you can strike at them before they strike at you.

My own systems would of course be monitored with Tracking Stations. Although I have some house rules for them since the can be a bit abusive with higher levels and the fact they are freely upgraded with research... so I restrict them with five levels for regularly populated worlds, level three for smaller colonies and military outposts and level one if completely unmanned outposts.

In addition to tracking stations every Jump Point that I discovered will be marked with passive buoys on both sides so I can monitor any traffic going through them. If they are blown up I know something is wrong and I will have to send ships to investigate. For this purpose my main explorer vessels are equipped with launchers to place these buoys.

I take loss of life to be one of the most important thing to prevent even though there are no direct mechanic in the game to represent overall moral, it is more of a RP thing. This has great impact on the risk I'm willing to take with ships in general so any scout ship must have some means of defending themselves be it by stealth, speed or armament. In general once missiles are being used then capital ships first line if defence is stealth or simply never being detected, this put a high emphasis on smaller scout ships performing the probing of enemy territory.

The first thing you need to do when you enter into enemy territory it to search for enemy ground bases what might have any tracking stations and either destroy them or take them by ground assault with marines. This has been very important in my campaign where I played more than one side, against the AI this is not as important.

Second thing I do is to send out scout frigate or destroyer groups who each carry many different scout and reconnaissance crafts. Their purpose is to find and locate the main enemy force and neutralize and fighter/FAC launched to try and intercept the scout ships.

Once the enemy main force have been found it would be time to send in the fleet of either missile cruisers or carriers with strike fighters to deal with them.

If everything goes according to plan the enemy would never have spotted any of my ships except some of my scouts and recon elements and been neutralized from my initial strike.

This would be in ideal conditions.

The main task for scouting is basically to find out the capability of the enemy, their strength and composition of their forces. This will give me a good understanding of my chances to either defeat them or if I will need to retreat and regroup.

My capital ships only use active sensors for personal protection and they usually are relatively short in comparison to the range of their main missile batteries. My tactics are that missiles need to have a good range advantage so they can be fired in safety of being detected while a few scouts paints the target. It becomes easier with carriers since fighters usually have great range and can have much less range on their missiles.

Another reason for trying to keep sensors small and on smaller ships is research and development costs and detection ability. It is far harder to detect several smaller active sensors on EM than on large that cover roughly the same area. You also rarely need to cover every angle of approach as vigorously.

EM sensors can usually be small since many active sensors have a really large power signature for Thermal sensors its not really the same thing. I usually put larger EM and thermal sensors on the actual scout ship such as corvettes, frigate leaders and destroyer leaders. Minor craft usually get enough EM so they can detect any hostile active sensors far enough before they become a threat to themselves.

Ships like Corvettes and Frigates are the ones who first get access to Stealth technology and they most if the time will have reduced thermal output of their engines. This way they can enjoy a higher cruising speed without the threat of being detected.

The most important part of a system defense fleet is to detect and assess any threat that enters into that system... preferably I like to keep a buffer zone of at least one system between any inhabited system and potential threats. So for me it is important to keep at least some presence in outlying system with scouts and patrol ships.
The first mission of system defence forces is therefore to gain intel of an enemy so I know what forces are needed to defeat them, their second goal is to engage the enemy if it is deemed possible to do so from the intel gathered.

Overall I do not keep any capital class scout ships, at least not until advanced Stealth technology is available and the use of smaller crafts are not as needed. If capital class ships are ever deployed they are always accompanied with destroyers and/or frigates who are specialized in the role of scouting and screening. Although all capital class ships will have hangars and will be able to act as scouts and usually contribute to the overall scouting capability of a fleet.

A Corvette are usually a really small ship without any major hangar, usually only a small one for rescue operations. They are meant for system defence patrol duties and are fast ships with decent passive sensors and some rudimentary active sensors. They also carry at least some sort of beam self defence system and in many occasions a small AMM system using box launchers. Corvettes would usually be 3000-4000t.

A Frigate comes in two configurations. The regular frigate and the frigate leader. Frigates are ships who operate in small groups of 2-5 ships and their main job is reconnaissance and they also have a small capability to engage enemy fighters and FAC crafts. The frigate leader usually have a slightly larger hangar and less weapons in addition to better passive sensors. A frigate is a small ship but big enough to operate alone under relatively long times and can be about 4000-6000t or so.

The Destroyer are the main picket ship for fleet task-forces and also are quite big and have enough weapons to engage and eliminate large amount of smaller enemy crafts. Destroyers are mainly and escort ship and don't carry weapons that are directly intended to be used against other capital ships or even other destroyer sized ships. Their weapons can be used that way but it is not their intention. A Destroyer are usually between 10 and 20.000t in size.
Destroyers deploy a screen of recon ship to search and hunt for enemy fighters and FAC type ships and engage them head on, mostly using missiles.

Smaller Recon crafts can be from 1000t and below, most recon crafts are at 500t and below. These comes in all shapes and configurations and ships can be equipped with whatever scout crafts are deemed necessary for any particular mission. Smaller scout crafts are easy to build and cheap to design.

I think this pretty much sums up my overall doctrines in regard to recon, scout and intelligence gathering in Aurora. I see this as the most important part of my fleet and worth putting serious resources and thinking into.
 

Offline Michael Sandy

  • Captain
  • **********
  • Posts: 437
  • Thanked: 7 times
    • View Profile
Re: scout design and doctrine
« Reply #6 on: January 03, 2017, 10:33:56 PM »
@Jorgen_CAB I like what you say about how scouting is the most significant part of the game for you.  But I am reminded of a Raymond Feist book, Servant of Empire, I think, where there is this noble house that had an awesome intelligence network, but got taken out by brute force.  They could see the blow coming, but couldn't do anything to stop it.

I like the Ideal of outranging one's enemy.  But if the enemy is putting 70-80% of their missile volume into engines and fuel (including multiple stages), the simpler counter is a lot of cheap(ish) point defense ships.

Of course, that is still Strategic scouting, where you know the general design philosophy and build or deploy to counter it.  Even if you are just using Bigger Hammer tactics, knowing when subtlety is useless can still be the result of scouting.
 

Offline Jorgen_CAB

  • Commodore
  • **********
  • Posts: 667
  • Thanked: 1 times
    • View Profile
Re: scout design and doctrine
« Reply #7 on: January 04, 2017, 03:51:52 AM »
That is obviously true but that is also why mainly using small craft for scouting are key, they are cheap, easy to develop in specific ways and you can keep them upgraded with latest technology for a low cost in both time and resources.

If we look at the real world then a large part of any military operations is about intelligence gathering. Fleets on the sea is all about not being detected while detect the enemy first.

I usually build my fleets as if I where playing a real opponent,  the AI are too easy to exploit weaknesses in so I try not to do that. I also often play multiple Earth nation campaigns and then the opposition to the factions are smarter than the AI. The dumbest thing any commander would do is blindly send forces into harms way without having a clue about the balance of power, that is only done when you are desperate or really pressured.

I also try to RP the political aspect of my empire. I usually like to play a modern version of a democratic unified Earth reaching into space and politics are what guide the development of the navy. There will allways be a huge difficulty of receiving money for development of new military ships, especially if they are expensive. If there are no direct hostile aliens close the chance to get resources for military expenditure are practically zero... ;)

I allways end up scrambling for a military navy once we stumble upon our first alien species. If that one is hostile I usually have a problem.

In any way I would not say that my main resources are devoted to scouting, just an appropriate part of it.

As I said in my opening statement, the best defence is a good offence and you can't perform a good offence if you don't have good Intel or any good offensive ships, it is all part of the package.

The era of the missile cruisers are usually quite short, fighters become viable rather quickly and are far superior as a tactical tool after that. So long range missiles are only used while engine power modifiers are not as advanced so range are not the problem.
« Last Edit: January 04, 2017, 04:34:28 AM by Jorgen_CAB »
 

Offline Michael Sandy

  • Captain
  • **********
  • Posts: 437
  • Thanked: 7 times
    • View Profile
Re: scout design and doctrine
« Reply #8 on: April 30, 2017, 06:03:19 PM »
I am now a big fan of pinnaces for early scouting.  Get efficiency 5 jump drives, get a 100 RP project to build a size 2 ship only Jump Drive.  With a size 2 engine, you can comfortably fit a size 3 sensor and have decent endurance.

Heck, you can put a full sized engineering section instead of a half, and basically park them out in space forever as an early warning system, or for the RP value of information actually getting back home.

The neat thing about fighters is how trivial it is to have custom fighters for every purpose, not having to worry about refitting or waiting for a ship to finish.

If you know or suspect a system has bad guys in it, you can even build a slow reload launcher system and a magazine on a pinnace, and launch a variety of sensor probes.  Design a 2 MSP 2 stage missile, and the crap sensors on the second stage should at least be able to tell what enters and leaves orbit.  I intend to probe to find out how the AI reacts to certain situations, so I can more reliably engage them.

Why a pinnace?  Why not build a carrier and have it launch a more efficient scout fighter?  Because building a carrier means retooling a shipyard, which adds a LOT to the expense, and scouting therefore also requires managing carriers, which I intend to find a video tutorial on carrier play some time, but in the meantime, still learning.

Sending two pinnaces to scout is an investment of 120 BP or so, a carrier would be 400 or so, not including either developing a military jump engine for the carrier, or committing a civilian jump ship to the carrier, however many jump points that is, and that civilian jump ship is cheap but slow, with a 7500 ton minimum for the civilian jump drive.

Had an example where it worked right, where I got a bunch of information because I scouted with a pinnace, and one where I did NOT scout, and not only did I lose a geo survey ship (and a very good survey commander), but I had to withdraw everything from the system, costing months of movement and it took a while to get my jump ship to a different jump point.
 

 

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