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: Shininglight
« on: July 02, 2012, 11:30:01 PM »

it's funny, since i started playing i've lost a total of 1 battle. every other time i've lost about 1-2 ships in an ymajor engagement against the a.i, even against technological equals, the a.i's ships tend to suck, gaus cannons vs lasrs is a bad thing for the gauss ton for ton. though my tac doc works well against spoilers, 8 9kton destroyers: 1DL with fbridge, 3 DE's , & 4 DDG's respectively. 3 sqaudrons of those screening for 2 cruiser sqaudrons of similar organisation is quite the handful, in short my ad vice is that quantity has its own quality.
Posted by: xeryon
« on: July 02, 2012, 10:45:27 PM »

It's not gaming the system, it's adjusting to the requirements of your military.  It won't be long before you find another race that your overpowered FC doesn't help you out much...
Posted by: Redshirt
« on: July 02, 2012, 07:55:55 PM »

Quote from: xeryon on July 02, 2012, 03:12:28 PM
A little late, I was out of town.

Failing miserably is a great learning tool.  If you haven't already, don't give up on this game yet.  You may make many more devastating mistakes yet before you are annihilated.  Might as well make your trial and error mistakes on one tainted game rather then playing through a brand new game only to make another debilitating mistake.

When playing I tend to fictionalize my mistakes and play on as though the mistakes were a normal part of the life of my simulated world:  The failure of your craft to account for enemy ECM would be a "normal" military issue when (they) encounter a new and unknown foe.  Until you would encounter such military technologies your scientists and military had never "known" about how could they have prepared for such an encounter?   ....just playing along....
Don't worry, I haven't given up at all. In fact, I came back (after researching missile control that was vastly outranged to counter the ECM... yeah, gaming the system a bit but oh well...) and blew the ships to pieces before they were even in range to fire.

I then finally found what I assumed was their home system, and launched a full on assault, completely annihilating their fleet, and landing troops to take the planet.

It was only later I realized the "Wolfies" were actually Precursors.
Posted by: Erik L
« on: July 02, 2012, 05:03:53 PM »

Quote from: xeryon on July 02, 2012, 03:12:28 PM
When playing I tend to fictionalize my mistakes and play on as though the mistakes were a normal part of the life of my simulated world:  The failure of your craft to account for enemy ECM would be a "normal" military issue when (they) encounter a new and unknown foe.  Until you would encounter such military technologies your scientists and military had never "known" about how could they have prepared for such an encounter?   ....just playing along....

That's what I do. After all, my empire is the pinnacle of scientific achievement, isn't it? At least until someone proves to have higher tech.
Posted by: xeryon
« on: July 02, 2012, 03:12:28 PM »

A little late, I was out of town. 

You can make small missile craft with a single engine and a few tubes without developing any new technologies.  Use one fire control and a separate craft housing your active sensor.  If you break a 6000t cruiser down into 4 1500t craft you may be able to approach considerably closer to your enemies before they are able to target you.

Failing miserably is a great learning tool.  If you haven't already, don't give up on this game yet.  You may make many more devastating mistakes yet before you are annihilated.  Might as well make your trial and error mistakes on one tainted game rather then playing through a brand new game only to make another debilitating mistake.

When playing I tend to fictionalize my mistakes and play on as though the mistakes were a normal part of the life of my simulated world:  The failure of your craft to account for enemy ECM would be a "normal" military issue when (they) encounter a new and unknown foe.  Until you would encounter such military technologies your scientists and military had never "known" about how could they have prepared for such an encounter?   ....just playing along....
Posted by: Redshirt
« on: June 22, 2012, 03:46:58 PM »

True, but I need to put a lot of resources into research for every one of those- and it's all tied up in better reactor/engine tech now (which will lead to an eventual speed advantage.) It's also annoying to lose an entire fleet without inflicting a single point of damage. The ECM was a nasty surprise that completely negated my range advantage... Live and learn. (Or get crushed horribly and start a new game.)
Posted by: xeryon
« on: June 22, 2012, 03:36:36 PM »

...or design faster ships to outrun them and close the range anyway, or stealthier ships so you can approach closer before enabling your active sensors and then be within their ECM limit, or develop fighters you can launch and while the enemy is pursuing your main ships they are unknowingly closing in on the fighters who lay in ambush

There are many ways to skin a cat.
Posted by: Redshirt
« on: June 22, 2012, 03:21:23 PM »

Note to self- AMMs work much better when you don't forget to add thermal sensors...
Edit: Also time to start researching ECCM. I can't even get in range to fire LR missiles because of the enemy's ECM. (Grumble grumble, there go all those resources spent building ships.)
Posted by: Gyrfalcon
« on: June 20, 2012, 05:04:07 PM »

A suggestion - make the current Crusader II design a jump ship and design a new variant that doesn't have a jump drive. You're losing an incredible amount of space to an early-technology jump drive on each AMM ship. That space can better be used to hold ~500 AMM per ship.

Lion - it looks heavily under-gunned for its size. Without trying to design one from scratch as a guess, can you reduce its maintenance space usage? It doesn't really need a 6 year maintenance life. It does need the ability to do more then 2 damage every 15 seconds if it wants to punch its way through shields... unless you can bring a large swarm of these to the fight.
Posted by: Theokrat
« on: June 20, 2012, 02:00:24 PM »

Quote from: Redshirt on June 20, 2012, 12:12:38 PM
Thanks for all the advice- I'm really new to missile design and combat, as you can tell.

Okay- how fast should AMM be able to go? I've redesigned about the best one I can given my tech (nine months out from ion missile drive tech, at which point there will be a Talon III. )
Code: [Select]
Missile Size: 1 MSP  (0.05 HS)     Warhead: 1    Armour: 0     Manoeuvre Rating: 20
Speed: 13600 km/s    Endurance: 2 minutes   Range: 2.0m km
Cost Per Missile: 0.7273
Chance to Hit: 1k km/s 272%   3k km/s 80%   5k km/s 54.4%   10k km/s 27.2%
Materials Required:    0.25x Tritanium   0.2253x Gallicite   Fuel x22.5
Also, new sensor, but the research cost is 2560; that'll take some time once I free up labs.  I think my scientists got put into my Diplomacy team- now that it's failed, I can probably put them back to work on research.
Code: [Select]
Active Sensor Strength: 256   Sensitivity Modifier: 60%
Sensor Size: 16 HS    Sensor HTK: 1
Resolution: 1    Maximum Range vs 50 ton object (or larger): 15,360,000 km
Range vs Size 6 Missile (or smaller): 1,672,704 km
Range vs Size 8 Missile: 2,457,600 km
Range vs Size 12 Missile: 5,529,600 km
How large a magazine should I be planning on using?
Also, what sensitivity should I be shooting for on my EM and Thermal sensors? The range doesn't seem to be displayed on the design view.

I'll work on the Lion II once I get Beam Fire Control range up.  For now, a secondary missile destroyer may be a more effective proposition; I can leave the jump engine off and have them perform the same basic role as the Lion- though speed is less of a consideration when using long range ASMs, I would guess.

At this technology and range, use a missile that results in circa 15 agility.
Passive sensors are a matter of taste. Usually I use actives in combat and only rudimentary thermal and EM to be not totally blind what is out there.
Magazine capacity is a very crucial point about AMM ships. Just make them very very big or have tenders come along.
Posted by: xeryon
« on: June 20, 2012, 12:54:44 PM »

If it were me, I would reduce the maneuverability and put more into the missile engines to increase speed.  For an AMM 13k is still pretty slow. 

I just wrote, and deleted, a sizable reply.  When I got done I realized spelling out how to build a ship the "best" way spoils half the fun.  Instead I want to point out what path I think you should look into and let the annihilation of your ships do the teaching for me.

For your technology, when everything is large, slow and under-powered, the best course is ship specialization.  If you can't do everything well then have your ships do one thing well and build several of them.
Posted by: Redshirt
« on: June 20, 2012, 12:12:38 PM »

Thanks for all the advice- I'm really new to missile design and combat, as you can tell.

Okay- how fast should AMM be able to go? I've redesigned about the best one I can given my tech (nine months out from ion missile drive tech, at which point there will be a Talon III. )
Code: [Select]
Missile Size: 1 MSP  (0.05 HS)     Warhead: 1    Armour: 0     Manoeuvre Rating: 20
Speed: 13600 km/s    Endurance: 2 minutes   Range: 2.0m km
Cost Per Missile: 0.7273
Chance to Hit: 1k km/s 272%   3k km/s 80%   5k km/s 54.4%   10k km/s 27.2%
Materials Required:    0.25x Tritanium   0.2253x Gallicite   Fuel x22.5
Also, new sensor, but the research cost is 2560; that'll take some time once I free up labs.  I think my scientists got put into my Diplomacy team- now that it's failed, I can probably put them back to work on research.
Code: [Select]
Active Sensor Strength: 256   Sensitivity Modifier: 60%
Sensor Size: 16 HS    Sensor HTK: 1
Resolution: 1    Maximum Range vs 50 ton object (or larger): 15,360,000 km
Range vs Size 6 Missile (or smaller): 1,672,704 km
Range vs Size 8 Missile: 2,457,600 km
Range vs Size 12 Missile: 5,529,600 km
How large a magazine should I be planning on using?
Also, what sensitivity should I be shooting for on my EM and Thermal sensors? The range doesn't seem to be displayed on the design view.

I'll work on the Lion II once I get Beam Fire Control range up.  For now, a secondary missile destroyer may be a more effective proposition; I can leave the jump engine off and have them perform the same basic role as the Lion- though speed is less of a consideration when using long range ASMs, I would guess.
Posted by: Andrew
« on: June 20, 2012, 10:42:37 AM »

Their are some problems with your ship design
Your Crusader class vessel has a R-100 Active sensor, this will not spot missiles at all, you need a R-1 sensor to really spot missiles, it should have the same or greater range than the R-1 Missile fire control you have
Your AMM's are VERY slow, you have Ion drive engines for your ships do you have them for missiles if not research Ion missile drives. They also have a very long range , AMM's at this level need a range more like 2 million km not 22.5 , so driop that fuel and give them some agility and speed.
You also only have 50 of them and 1 FC that's probably a bad choice
Your Beam ships are slow as they have to chase down enemy ships and once they do get close they are not going to be very effective, the design may be more effetive with a GB engine, Less Fuel and carried in a carrier it also needs a faster FC f it gets its speed up

You also do not have any EM or Thermal passive sensors so spotting incoming missiles is hard
Most people would suggest for ships of this size , several specialised designs , A jump ship, a sensor ship with big active and passive sensors, and then some combat ships either AMM platforms , ships with ASM's or carriers, ships with defensive beam turrets , or active beam ships

Posted by: blue emu
« on: June 20, 2012, 10:33:56 AM »

You'll need a res-1 sensor to spot incoming missiles.

Your anti-missiles are WAY too slow and too long-ranged. Cut the range down to about two million km (ie: ten times less) and speed them up as much as possible. Check my "Missile Design for Noobs" thread.

Your res-1 sensor should have at least nine times the printed range of your missiles, since a size-6 (or smaller) missile is about nine times harder to detect than an actual res-1 target.

Eg: if your missiles have a printed range of 2 m-km, your res-1 sensor should reach at least 18 m-km.
Posted by: Theokrat
« on: June 20, 2012, 10:32:47 AM »

Well firstly you need an active sensor that can detect the incoming missiles. Even if you saw their thermal signature (for which you would need a thermal sensor), that would not help you. You do need active "target illumination". To do this add a resolution-1 active search sensor to you missile-defence ship.

Conversely the lions are always accompanied by crusaders, so they do not really need active sensors of their own. Even if they did, range 19,200,000 km seem excessive, seeing their weapon range is only 32,000 km.

At any rate, your ships are, by galactic standards, quite outclassed technologically. For example your crusaders sport only 50 AMMs that can intercept missiles going 7,500 km/s with only 20% probability, so overall you could down maybe 10 missiles. That is practically nothing. If the enemy brings missiles to the fight its almost certainly going to be much more than this.

So my advice: Avoid the hostiles for now and heavily invest in research. Until you have much better tech, keep your designs simple and focused. Use a common speed and ideally also a common size for your main ship designs. Until you can hope to beat the enemy in an open engagement, be defensive and use "terrain". By which I mean park your ships on top of or very close to jump points that the enemy might come through. The transit will cause his sensors to go blind for a while, which means you get some time to deal damage. Plus engagements start at close distance, which is good for your beam-armed ships. While we are at it, try to get intel on the range of the enemy missiles (maybe sacrifice a ship). Then design a missile that goes slightly further...