Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
C# Aurora / Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Last post by Hazard on Today at 09:18:30 AM »
Good question :)

At the moment no, although you could do it in a shipyard that was large enough.

In the same vein, could you decommission a space station without a shipyard?

And shipyards large enough to build a space station, even a civilian yard, would be rather expensive, might as well use it to build space stations. Retooling won't be cheap either, if you need to swap between terraformers, miners and fuel stations.
2
C# Aurora / Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Last post by Steve Walmsley on Today at 08:37:19 AM »
Will it be possible to refit a Space Station if it is at a population center that has construction capacity?

An example would be if you wanted to refit one after making improvements in CIWS technology.

Good question :)

At the moment no, although you could do it in a shipyard that was large enough.
3
C# Aurora / Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Last post by clement on Today at 08:26:40 AM »
Will it be possible to refit a Space Station if it is at a population center that has construction capacity?

An example would be if you wanted to refit one after making improvements in CIWS technology.
4
Bureau of Ship Design / Re: Terran Imperial Navy
« Last post by Iranon on Today at 08:08:19 AM »
This looks familiar, I might have commented on this elsewhere.
If I read this correctly, the Wellington Mk.IV has 293HS of fuel and 200HS of engines. That is quite wasteful, and individually larger engines would also improve efficiency.

9 Engines of 50HS and 0.8 power multiplier would give you better speed and range, while reducing fuel consumption by almost 90%.
8 engines of 50HS and 1.2 power multiplier would give you 60% more speed at comparable range, at less than a third of the original fuel consumption.
7 engines of 50HS and 1.4 power multiplier would be even faster, but imo gain too little for the additional fuel consumption.

The Gauss armament also doesn't seem quite right. 10cm railguns would be better against everything, faster-tracking Gauss turrets (preferably in quads turrets to save on turret gear) are an alternative if missiles are the main consideration.
5
C# Aurora / Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Last post by TMaekler on Today at 07:42:37 AM »
A way to edit "Plotted Moves" would be nice. Don't know how much effort it would be in C# but having to redo a whole move-chain because you missed something is quite tedious. Another idea would be some kind of automation system for repetitive jobs (moving AMs, MDs etc. from A to B when doing it yourself) and having to "handclick through all the necessary steps" could be done easier with "general templates". You select a general template and then have to select only source and target destination as well as to what should be transported. Then you select how many cycles and the "plotted moves" are then automatically generated by the program.
Also a change in cycle move might be nice - something in the line of marking several steps and define "repeat those three times" - and the once before and after are not "cycled". Just a thought...
6
C# Aurora / Re: C# Aurora Changes Discussion
« Last post by Steve Walmsley on Today at 05:07:56 AM »
Good enough for me! Though I suspect if I build fleet bases I'll probably still do it in civilian shipyards so they can have a bit of armor, it's definitely a nice change for fuel harvesters and terraformers.

Yes, will be interesting to see in which direction people go. I always like to have an engine on my asteroid miners, terraformers and harvesters so they can be self-mobile if needed. With the potential construction factory route they will be cheaper and easier to build, but immobile and very fragile.
7
C# Aurora / Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Last post by Steve Walmsley on Today at 05:05:08 AM »
Improving the way you set up and edit ship formations plus attendant FACS and fighters would be great. With the sensor changes I’m expecting more us of pickets etc but at present it is quite a lot of effort to set up and then edit. Some flex on deciding which elements will detach from the main TG at any particular point in time would be helpful.

I haven't written the formation code yet but I will make improvements on the VB6 version.
8
C# Aurora / Re: C# Aurora v0.x Suggestions
« Last post by chrislocke2000 on Today at 03:13:25 AM »
Improving the way you set up and edit ship formations plus attendant FACS and fighters would be great. With the sensor changes I’m expecting more us of pickets etc but at present it is quite a lot of effort to set up and then edit. Some flex on deciding which elements will detach from the main TG at any particular point in time would be helpful.
9
Bureau of Ship Design / Re: Ships
« Last post by Starmantle on Today at 01:44:20 AM »
In my current TN game, I'm building up a training fleet of 80 Frogfoot class Trainers, and headed towards 4 Rigor class Training Carriers.  The former are for training up officers, while the latter are for training wings of fighters either without racking up wear and tear on their "real" carriers" or for getting PDC-based fighter wings some taskforce training time.  The carriers also help me overhaul fighters, which can otherwise be tricky.  In past games, something like the Rigor has also been helpful in staging jump point assaults or helping to move captured enemy ships around (that are otherwise prone to explosion).

Plus, it's all fun to roleplay, the ships are super efficient, etc. and I tend to more or less leave them on taskforce training (well, the Frogfoots, anyway).

Does anyone else use ships like this?

(clipping from a recent game log)

_____
Fleet Command has also drawn up plans for the Frogfoot class Trainer, an ultra-light shuttle designed to train a group of 4 junior officers and a Lieutenant.  The ship is relatively fast and incredibly efficient in terms of fuel consumption, life support self-sufficiency, construction cost, and ability to effect repairs.  The ship has one small active sensor and room for a single passenger, often a more senior officer there to drill crews.  Eventually, Fleet Command wants a wing of 80 Trainers in Sol, but it might have to wait for that plan to be fully implemented.   

Quote
Frogfoot class Trainer    135 tons     4 Crew     23.4 BP      TCS 2.7  TH 4  EM 0
1481 km/s     Armour 1-2     Shields 0-0     Sensors 1/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 0     PPV 0
Maint Life 0 Years     MSP 54    AFR 0%    IFR 0%    1YR 0    5YR 0    Max Repair 8 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 64 months    Spare Berths 1   

4 EP Nuclear Pulse Engine (1)    Power 4    Fuel Use 14%    Signature 4    Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 20 000 Litres    Range 190.4 billion km   (1488 days at full power)

Active Search Sensor MR0-R10 (1)     GPS 10     Range 180k km    Resolution 10

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

To aid in the maintenance and training of shuttle and future faster fighter crews, Fleet Command orders construction of its first carrier.  The Rigor can carry 44 of armed shuttles or other strike craft.  The carrier is slow, efficient,  un-armored and isn't expected to ever leave the inner system.  The carrier is massive and is built around the largest, oldest shipyard in orbit.

The Rigor class Training Carrier is laid down for construction and is being built alongside the two Ogre class Troop Transports and three Apollo class Freighters. 

Quote
Rigor class Training Carrier    30 000 tons     460 Crew     3108 BP      TCS 600  TH 240  EM 0
400 km/s     Armour 1-86     Shields 0-0     Sensors 1/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 21     PPV 0
Maint Life 13.5 Years     MSP 1360    AFR 342%    IFR 4.8%    1YR 14    5YR 208    Max Repair 48 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 42 months    Flight Crew Berths 279   
Hangar Deck Capacity 22000 tons     

240 EP Commercial Ion Drive (1)    Power 240    Fuel Use 3.54%    Signature 240    Exp 4%
Fuel Capacity 300 000 Litres    Range 50.8 billion km   (1471 days at full power)

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes


Cross-Posted to /r/Aurora4x - https://www.reddit.com/r/aurora4x/comments/7u5ied/rigor_class_training_carrier_and_frogfoot_class/
10
This is a design that fits in a with the Kodiak Assault Wing - https://www.reddit.com/r/aurora4x/comments/7xm53v/combines_kodiak_assault_wing/ - but it's not directly part of the attack wing.

This is also a similar approach to the Crybaby probes and buoys used by the Shepherd class Escort Corvette - https://www.reddit.com/r/aurora4x/comments/7p1g3j/shepherd_class_escort_corvette/ - and other vessels.

_____________

The Crybaby Cub class Electronic Warfare Fighter is and unusual design built around a small but super high resolution sensor that belches EM waves throughout a solar system.  While most assault fighters have stealthy active sensors with a GPS of 30, the Crybaby is 500 times easier to detect with passive EM sensors.  It's also unusual in that it has a serviceable engine compartment and enough fuel to last for 3 days at full speed.  The Crybaby Cub never uses its sensor when near friendly ships.  Its meant as a distraction to divide enemy fleets and present tempting targets.  The fighter can swiftly move at full speed to a remote area, then reduce speed and turn on its sensor to attract an enemy response, later increasing back to full speed to avoid interception.  It's a dangerous mission which is why pilots for these fighters are always volunteers.

Quote
Crybaby Cub class Electronic Warfare  Fighter    122 tons     1 Crew     97.475 BP      TCS 2.44  TH 56.25  EM 0
30737 km/s     Armour 3-2     Shields 0-0     Sensors 1/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 0     PPV 0
Maint Life 29.07 Years     MSP 50    AFR 1%    IFR 0%    1YR 0    5YR 2    Max Repair 46.875 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 0.1 months    Spare Berths 3   

75 EP Magnetic Fusion Drive (1)    Power 75    Fuel Use 462.98%    Signature 56.25    Exp 30%
Fuel Capacity 30 000 Litres    Range 9.6 billion km   (3 days at full power)

Active Search Sensor MR160-R500 (1)     GPS 15000     Range 161.0m km    Resolution 500

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




Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10