Post reply

Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.

Note: this post will not display until it's been approved by a moderator.

Name:
Email:
Subject:
Message icon:

shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview

Please read the rules before you post!


Topic Summary

Posted by: Ashery
« on: September 15, 2011, 05:25:00 PM »

Heh, guess I misread your post, not the other way around.

And no doubt that the tracking bonus would be a huge improvement in terms of PD effectiveness. Would be rather exhausting to go through and calculate exactly how much each tech would benefit sicksock, though.
Posted by: Charlie Beeler
« on: September 15, 2011, 03:50:38 PM »

smeg, I think some misunderstandings developed because of my understatement of the tech situation.
Quote
At the initial 10k range, an 8HS BFC with a twin turret will have a 50% hit rate with four shots (2) while a 16HS BFC with a single turret will have a 75% hit rate with two shots (1.5). If the BFC had a 20k base range, you'd be looking at a 75% hit rate with four shots (3) versus an 87.5% with two (1.75).
The "four shots" comments here were referencing the fact that, with the RoF tech at two, two GCs will get off a combined total of four shots, *not* the requirement that he have researched RoF 4. The bit in parenthesis is simply the expected number of hits (I assumed that would've been fairly easy to deduce, but I figured I'd state it clearly just to make sure).
NSS.  I agreed with the difference between single and twin turrets.

Quote from: Ashery
Not sure where you got the 7% increase in HS use, as my numbers were significantly smaller (My numbers showed a 0.16HS increase using the 8HS BFC). Using a 40% gear figure (Standard if you're matching turret and BFC tracking techs), a single GC turret would be 8.4 and a twin would be 16.56. Take off the 8HS from the reduced BFC and you're left with a 0.16HS increase, or, in percentage terms, a 0.65% HS increase.
I stand corrected here, I was using a turret mass calculator that I had not updated with the new formula sans rounding. 

Quote from: Ashery
Largely agree with your closing paragraph, although BFC and turret tracking speeds are high on the list as well (The former a bit more than the latter as BFCs have a hard cap, unlike turrets).
Granted.  But, if Max Tracking Time Bonus 20% has not been researched yet it will provided a much greater PD improvement for the research investment.
Posted by: Ashery
« on: September 15, 2011, 02:07:24 PM »

smeg, I think some misunderstandings developed because of my understatement of the tech situation.

Quote
At the initial 10k range, an 8HS BFC with a twin turret will have a 50% hit rate with four shots (2) while a 16HS BFC with a single turret will have a 75% hit rate with two shots (1.5). If the BFC had a 20k base range, you'd be looking at a 75% hit rate with four shots (3) versus an 87.5% with two (1.75).

The "four shots" comments here were referencing the fact that, with the RoF tech at two, two GCs will get off a combined total of four shots, *not* the requirement that he have researched RoF 4. The bit in parenthesis is simply the expected number of hits (I assumed that would've been fairly easy to deduce, but I figured I'd state it clearly just to make sure).

Not sure where you got the 7% increase in HS use, as my numbers were significantly smaller (My numbers showed a 0.16HS increase using the 8HS BFC). Using a 40% gear figure (Standard if you're matching turret and BFC tracking techs), a single GC turret would be 8.4 and a twin would be 16.56. Take off the 8HS from the reduced BFC and you're left with a 0.16HS increase, or, in percentage terms, a 0.65% HS increase.

Largely agree with your closing paragraph, although BFC and turret tracking speeds are high on the list as well (The former a bit more than the latter as BFCs have a hard cap, unlike turrets).
Posted by: Charlie Beeler
« on: September 15, 2011, 01:25:01 PM »

Interesting.  For about 7% more hs usage there is actually about a 40% increased chance for a single suite to intercept a single missile. 

Twin turret w/4 shots (20hs) with 2x/4x BFC(8hs) vs single turret w/2 shots (10hs) with 4x/4x BFC(16hs).  The tracking speed is the same for both at 12k/kps which degrades to 34.3% of the BFC vs missiles traveling 35k/kps.  That gives the 2x/4x 25.725% accuracy and the 4x/4x 30.184%. 

Really, the only two variables that aren't covered are crew grade and missile ecm.  Crew grade is dependent on the trained crew pool and available officers.  Missile ecm won't be known until an actual intercept is attempted.  If space is available, and the tech has been researched, ECCM can be added.

BFC Accuracy at 10,000km with sicksock's current range tech.
RangeMod
STD
2X
3X
4X
Accuracy
50%
75%
83%
88%

My suggestions revolve around using sicksock's current tech since individual components can usually be quickly researched.  As has been stated upthread, BFC range and launcher reload rates are in critical need of improvement.  It shouldn't take too long to get BFC range 32k/km and reload rate 4.  It wouldn't hurt to go for gauss rof of 3 as well.  Those three area's will most likely have the greatest combat improvement for the research effort invested.
Posted by: Ashery
« on: September 15, 2011, 11:29:53 AM »

I'd disagree on the point that his current GCs should be put in single turrets. Once you get up to around the midpoint for GC RoF (~4) they do very well in single turrets, but dual would be best at this point (Especially as his final to-hit will be pretty poor overall).

I'll also stand by my statement that he shouldn't go for a 16HS BFC for his GC turrets. Yea, you need a 16HS BFC if you want to squeeze every drop out of the weapons you have, but realize that an 8HS BFC will still have a solid hit rate at 10k and will give you enough space to put an extra full sized GC into each of your turrets. Also, dropping the BFC size gets more effective as your base BFC range increases. At the initial 10k range, an 8HS BFC with a twin turret will have a 50% hit rate with four shots (2) while a 16HS BFC with a single turret will have a 75% hit rate with two shots (1.5). If the BFC had a 20k base range, you'd be looking at a 75% hit rate with four shots (3) versus an 87.5% with two (1.75).

Note that these calculations do NOT factor in every single variable that exists. A higher crew grade will favor the 8HS while things like ECM will favor the 16HS to name just two of the other factors, so take these numbers as a starting point only.
Posted by: Charlie Beeler
« on: September 15, 2011, 10:37:54 AM »

Don't forget that 40 ECM is going to degrade his offenses a crapton.
Which is why I suggested an offensive MFC with a range of 80m km for missiles with range of 50m km.
Posted by: Erik L
« on: September 15, 2011, 10:18:09 AM »

Don't forget that 40 ECM is going to degrade his offenses a crapton.
Posted by: Charlie Beeler
« on: September 15, 2011, 09:34:35 AM »

Interesting.  You can take these guys.  With your tech it won't be cheap, but it is doable.

As I understand it this is roughly the tech you have to work with(at least what's relevant to combat ship design):
  • Ion engines with 50% fuel efficiency
  • Fighter engines
  • Jump engines w/squadron radius 50k, squadron size 3, efficiency 3, minimum size 15
  • ECM-1
  • base beam fire control range(50%-10k/km)
  • beam FC tracking speed 4k/kps
  • Gauss ROF 2 and range 2
  • base missile reload rate (1)
  • reduced missile launcher (hs 75%/2x reload time)
  • Ion Missile Drive
  • Fusion boosted warhead(5 damage per msp)
  • Missile agility 48

First using standard transit for a jump point assault is functionally suicide, I think you've already learned that one.  The reasons two fold, 1) your jumpblind for up to 30 minutes,  2) your right on top of the jump point which is a predictable location.  You can only use standard transit with a jumpgate, so you need a jump engine equipped ship for squadron transit.  With squadron transit each task group (max of 3 ships per TG including the jumpship) will only be jumpblind a max of 30 seconds and 50,000km from the jump point.
  
With the limitations of you jump tech a carrier is a poor choice for the assault.  If you really want too you can, but it will be much more expensive with your current tech.

You’re better off with planning a missile dual.
  
Before designing any new components or ships let’s establish what it appears you’re facing.  OPFOR is 3 ships at 7150ton with a speed of 4475kps and 3 size 5 launchers (unknown cyclic rate) firing missiles with warheads of strength 5 and a speed of 35,000kps.  
Your current BFC for point defense is 50% range 10k(std size) with tracking of 12,000kps (4X size) giving you a range 10k accuracy of 50%.  Change this to range 4X and speed 4X and your 10k accuracy jumps to 88%.  The missiles you need to intercept are still faster, but this just means that your accuracy is degraded to 29% (tracking speed / missile speed).  This just means you need to plan for 3-4 shots to get a single hit on any missile your shooting at.

Gauss Cannon’s are a usable choice with the ROF of 2 that you have.  The range 2 isn’t needed but we can work with that.  The turrets tracking at 15k is a little heavy but we can work with that as well.  But I would suggest a new turret, single instead of twin with tracking of 12k to match your BFC.  Put one on each ship and one of the new BFC’s as well.
  
If you selected max tracking time bonus then you need an active sensor at resolution 1 that can see a missile at about 2m/km.  At a minimum each ship that has a PD suite should have your current res 1 active sensor.

An anti-missile missile (AMM) is needed.  It only needs a wh1 and needs a range of at least 1.8m km, speed of around 30k/kps and the rest in agility.  This should give you hit chance against the observed missiles of about 20%.  Your need an MFC with a res 1 range of 3.9m km to allow max range intercepts, assuming the missiles being intercepted don’t have ECM.  Your escort should have a suite of 5 launchers/1 MFC and an active res 1 sensor that sees a missile at the same range as the MFC.

Your current anti-shipping missile (ASM) is too slow.  You want to stick with sz5 then jump the engine to 2.5 msp, agility to 1 msp and the rest in fuel.  This should give you a speed of 30k/kps, to-hit of around 135% against a speed 4475kps target, and a range of around 50m km.  Against ECM4 your going to need an MFC range of around 80m km to engage at max missile range.
 
Build task groups of 1 jumpship, 1 missile ship and 1 escort.  Once built set them to task force training.  Don’t even think about another assault until you have at least 3 TG’s trained to 100%.

Keep in mind that these are only suggestions of how I would proceed with your appearent current tech. 
Posted by: sicksock
« on: September 15, 2011, 08:41:30 AM »

Cheers for the reply.

[quote author]
Various thoughts:
Your R1 sensor is incredibly small and explains why you had so little time to intercept the missiles.  Here's the info for a 1HS R1 sensor using Grav16, EM8 tech (I should note that this is *far* too small to be using as a primary anti-missile sensor.  I tend to put one of these on every ship simply to serve as a backup in case the primary sensors go out):
[/quote]
I realized that after going through my designs, Now I'm thinking I'm going to build at least 2 dedicated sensor ships with thick armour with much larger ranges.  Plus now I know exactly what tonnage to scan for I should be able to push my scanner range out a lot.

[quote author]
And, lastly, you appear to have no engineering spaces at all. [/quote]
I know I'm sorry I'm playing with no maintenance :'( because there's only so much micro I can handle and this is my first game.

Posted by: Ashery
« on: September 15, 2011, 08:12:53 AM »

Various thoughts:

Your R1 sensor is incredibly small and explains why you had so little time to intercept the missiles. Here's the info for a 1HS R1 sensor using Grav16, EM8 tech (I should note that this is *far* too small to be using as a primary anti-missile sensor. I tend to put one of these on every ship simply to serve as a backup in case the primary sensors go out):

Code: [Select]
Active Sensor Strength: 16   Sensitivity Modifier: 80%
Sensor Size: 1 HS    Sensor HTK: 1
Resolution: 1    Maximum Range vs 50 ton object (or larger): 1,280,000 km
Range vs Size 6 Missile (or smaller): 139,392 km
Range vs Size 8 Missile: 204,800 km
Range vs Size 12 Missile: 460,800 km

Even against your own MS5 missile, you'd be relying on luck to even get a chance to get off an interception volley (Well, with a few assumptions of mine on how the sequence of play works, but meh). Admittedly, you aren't currently using AMMs, but that actually brings me to another point:

Your BFCs need to have a substantially higher max range. I'm not saying you need to go all out and always use a 16HS BFC, but by limiting your BFCs' max range to that of your GCs, you're dramatically decreasing the GCs' effectiveness (By half, in this case). If you simply doubled the range of your BFCs, you'd be able to cut out two full turrets and still maintain the same hit rate (Barring the more complex modifiers like crew grade, of course) as that'd bring your 10k accuracy up to 75% from your current 50%. Also, be sure to change the PD mode/range in the F8 screen. You want the range to be 10k to ensure the best accuracy (In this case, at least).

I'll second chrislocke's comment that, without box launchers, carrier designs don't have much going for them. In fact, a carrier's primary purpose is to serve as the reloading platform for the box launchers.

A few last quick comments: Your base rate of fire on your missiles definitely needs some improvement as it looks like you're still at the original tech level. Your carrier is rather lightly armored and shields aren't terribly effective at your current tech level (You'd be better off dumping the research into better armor and using the saved space for another layer). And, lastly, you appear to have no engineering spaces at all.
Posted by: chrislocke2000
« on: September 15, 2011, 05:09:36 AM »

Personally I would say that your tech is a little low for you to be able to effectively use fighters. You really want far greater reduced size launchers to minimise the size of the fighter. It may be better to spend your hard earned minerals on just combat ships at this stage.

Early game, anti missile missile ships seem to be a lot more effective than beam defences. You need to design size 1 missles with good agility to hit hostile missiles.

As said above, for your offensive missiles I would reduce the warhead size and increase the speed and range instead. I would also go for a larger ships that can spit out a larger volley of missiles, your enemy is likely to have anti missile defenses as well...

It's probably worth having a trawl through the bureau of ship design section to get some ideas on good offensive and defensive ships.
Posted by: sicksock
« on: September 15, 2011, 01:36:48 AM »

Quote
Please post the designs you used in your failed assault and how many of each.

Quote
Samantha class Carrier (Samantha was the name of the first commander to die from the aliens :( )   21,350 tons     984 Crew     2246. 6 BP      TCS 427  TH 780  EM 120
1826 km/s     Armour 3-68     Shields 4-300     Sensors 18/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 0     PPV 97. 62
Maint Life 0 Years     MSP 0    AFR 4270%    IFR 59. 3%    1YR 2512    5YR 37674    Max Repair 69 MSP
Hangar Deck Capacity 10000 tons   
 
Ion Engine E5 Milt (13)    Power 60    Fuel Use 50%    Signature 60    Armour 0    Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 200,000 Litres    Range 33. 7 billion km   (213 days at full power)
Gamma R300/10 Shields (2)   Total Fuel Cost  20 Litres per day

Twin Gauss Cannon R2-100 Point Defence Turret (6x4)    Range 20,000km     TS: 15000 km/s     Power 0-0     RM 2    ROF 5        1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Fire Control S04 10-12000 H70 (2)    Max Range: 20,000 km   TS: 12000 km/s     50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Active Search Sensor MR0-R1 Missile Scanner (1)     GPS 12     Range 720k km    Resolution 1
Active Search Sensor MR10-R100 (1)     GPS 2000     Range 10. 0m km    Resolution 100
Thermal Sensor TH3-18 (70%) (1)     Sensitivity 18     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  18m km
ECM 10

Quote
Missile Frigate class Cruiser    3,750 tons     383 Crew     478. 32 BP      TCS 75  TH 180  EM 120
2400 km/s     Armour 3-21     Shields 4-300     Sensors 18/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 0     PPV 20
Maint Life 0 Years     MSP 0    AFR 750%    IFR 10. 4%    1YR 152    5YR 2286    Max Repair 30 MSP
Magazine 222   

Ion Engine E5 Milt (3)    Power 60    Fuel Use 50%    Signature 60    Armour 0    Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 100,000 Litres    Range 96. 0 billion km   (462 days at full power)
Gamma R300/10 Shields (2)   Total Fuel Cost  20 Litres per day

Size 5 Missile Launcher (4)    Missile Size 5    Rate of Fire 150
Missile Fire Control FC30-R100 (70%) (2)     Range 30. 2m km    Resolution 100
Size 5 Anti-ship Missile (44)  Speed: 20,400 km/s   End: 29. 4m    Range: 36m km   WH: 9    Size: 5    TH: 136 / 81 / 40

Active Search Sensor MR10-R100 (1)     GPS 2000     Range 10. 0m km    Resolution 100
Thermal Sensor TH3-18 (70%) (1)     Sensitivity 18     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  18m km

ECM 10

Quote
Strike fighter class Fighter    370 tons     11 Crew     56. 8 BP      TCS 7. 4  TH 18  EM 0
4864 km/s     Armour 2-4     Shields 0-0     Sensors 1/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 0     PPV 3
Maint Life 0 Years     MSP 0    AFR 74%    IFR 1%    1YR 4    5YR 59    Max Repair 15 MSP
Magazine 19   

Fighter Ion Engine E500 (1)    Power 36    Fuel Use 5000%    Signature 18    Armour 0    Exp 25%
Fuel Capacity 5,000 Litres    Range 0. 5 billion km   (27 hours at full power)

Size 2 Missile Launcher (75% Reduction) (2)    Missile Size 2    Rate of Fire 120
Missile Fire Control FC21-R100 (70%) (1)     Range 21. 6m km    Resolution 100
Size 2 Anti-ship Missile (11)  Speed: 15,000 km/s   End: 20m    Range: 18m km   WH: 5    Size: 2    TH: 100 / 60 / 30

1 carrier, 4 frigates and 27 strike fighters

Quote
Did you use standard or squadron transit?
I think I used standard transit.
Quote
What is your current tech look like? (engine , jump engines, weapons, sensor ratings, etc)

Ion engines, Only basic jump engines, Fair amount of missile tech and some gauss cannon upgrades, Sensors are at 16 grav, 8 EM, 8 Thermal.

Quote
Do you have the ability to build a jumpgate?
Yes
Quote
Do you have any tactical data on the opfor? (size, speed, thermal signature, electronics signature, etc)
Yes.  Luckily I gathered some intel I think will be very useful in designing a second offensive.  They are 7150 tonnes, 640 thermal sig, 4475 km/s movement, 40 ECM and tend to use long range, high speed 5 damage missile.  Even better each enemy contact only fires 3 at a time, meaning if I could reliably shoot down 9  of their missiles I would probably be invulnerable.  Plus I think their missiles must be fairly large dispite their advanced tech, therefore the aliens dont have 10000000 vollys to fire, probably only 40-50.
Quote

At what range did you detected the opfor ships?
Around 80m k but not entirely sure.
Posted by: ardem
« on: September 14, 2011, 07:10:12 PM »

This is not a slight on the new player.

But I love that new player feeling when you realise, jeez I got to learn a lot. Jeez this is like no other game I played before, I just got my arse handed to me.
Posted by: Thiosk
« on: September 14, 2011, 01:01:55 PM »

I think you are correct about being camped by spoileryspoilers ;)

This happened in my first game, but at least I could explore 3 or 4 star systems. 
Posted by: Charlie Beeler
« on: September 14, 2011, 12:36:53 PM »

sicksock you've got arguably the toughest battle type for your first one, the jumppoint assault. Erik and orfeusz have giving you some good general advice.  Before anyone can go into detailed advice we need more information.

Please post the designs you used in your failed assault and how many of each.

Did you use standard or squadron transit?

What is your current tech look like? (engine , jump engines, weapons, sensor ratings, etc)

Do you have the ability to build a jumpgate?

Do you have any tactical data on the opfor? (size, speed, thermal signature, electronics signature, etc)

At what range did you detected the opfor ships?