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: MarcAFK
« on: November 05, 2013, 07:17:02 AM »

I would imagine that only a very large ship would have enough crew to require more than a company or 2, but i guess if you're trying to board something that's still moving your losses might be high enough to justify landing more marines.
Posted by: Nibelung44
« on: November 04, 2013, 03:56:50 PM »

An impressive list of design that is helping me too, thanks!

About combat drop, is it realistic to board enemy ship with entire battalion or should I stick with marines companies?
Posted by: Starmantle
« on: September 19, 2013, 05:01:14 PM »

I redesigned this fleet after a critical crash bug (grumble).   

The biggest shift was managing to equalize the speed of my size 4 missile (carried by cruisers) and my size 2 missile (carried by fighters and corvettes) at just over 30,000 km/s.   

Now I can send overwhelming offensive missile waves against enemies with superior anti-missile defenses, so long as I'm comfortable getting within 70 million KM.    That's been a pretty big deal.   

Sidewinder II  Speed: 30,300 km/s   End: 40. 4m    Range: 73. 5m km   WH: 4    Size: 2    TH: 262 / 157 / 78

Gargoyle ASM  Speed: 30,300 km/s   End: 56. 1m    Range: 102m km   WH: 9    Size: 6    TH: 252 / 151 / 75
Posted by: Charlie Beeler
« on: June 13, 2013, 10:11:30 AM »

But the senior in the parent formation TG(the one with the carrier), not the fighter squadron (which is its own temporary TG?)
Whether a TG is subordinate to another has no factor in initiative.  Only the population of the specific TG is factored.
Posted by: SteelChicken
« on: June 13, 2013, 08:46:14 AM »

Whoever is senior in the TG only.

But the senior in the parent formation TG(the one with the carrier), not the fighter squadron (which is its own temporary TG?)
Posted by: Charlie Beeler
« on: June 12, 2013, 02:26:20 PM »

This happened to me before and it was VERY frustrating.   Now I have an idea of how to avoid it.  In the case of fighters in squadron, does it use the parent TG's commander for this calculation?

Whoever is senior in the TG only.
Posted by: SteelChicken
« on: June 12, 2013, 12:47:57 PM »


If your TG with the Kodiacs has a lower initiative than the opponent, it might never get into range, even if in reality it would have the speed to easily close with the enemy.
...
Morale:
Make sure the senior commander of your Kodiac TG has a _very_ high fleet movement initiative rating.
Make sure you change the default initiative of your TG (which is 100) to the rating of your senior commander.
This happened to me before and it was VERY frustrating.   Now I have an idea of how to avoid it.  In the case of fighters in squadron, does it use the parent TG's commander for this calculation?
Posted by: Hawkeye
« on: June 12, 2013, 11:31:13 AM »

On the Kodiac:

Make sure you set the TG initiative as high as you can (TG commander´s Fleet Movement Initiative), because TG movement in Aurora basicly runs: you go - I go, whereas I and you is defined by the corresponding TG initiative, i.e. the TG with the lower initiative moves first, then the TG with the higher initiative.
If your TG with the Kodiacs has a lower initiative than the opponent, it might never get into range, even if in reality it would have the speed to easily close with the enemy.

Say the enemy TG moves at 7.000 km/s, your Kodiac TG moves at 10.500 km/s.

You set your Kodiak TG to follow the enemy TG at 10.000 km

You hit the 5 second time increment

Because your Kodiak TG has the lower initiative, it moves first and closes to 10.000 km

Because the enemy TG has a higher initiative, it moves _after_ your Kodiak TG and moves 35.000 km away from your TG to a range of 45.000 km and thus out of range.

Morale:
Make sure the senior commander of your Kodiac TG has a _very_ high fleet movement initiative rating.
Make sure you change the default initiative of your TG (which is 100) to the rating of your senior commander.
Posted by: coco146
« on: June 12, 2013, 08:41:56 AM »

The Kodiak is interesting, I don't think that I have ever seen a ship that took that approach before, have you put it into a combat situation yet?
Posted by: Black
« on: June 11, 2013, 11:44:32 AM »



Does that really work?  I had no idea you could do that in this game!

I am using those in my current game:

Quote
T-12 Ram class Assault Shuttle    500 tons     3 Crew     166.8 BP      TCS 10  TH 192  EM 0
19200 km/s     Armour 4-5     Shields 0-0     Sensors 1/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 0     PPV 0
Maint Life 5.28 Years     MSP 21    AFR 20%    IFR 0.3%    1YR 1    5YR 19    Max Repair 24 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 0.1 months    Spare Berths 7   
Drop Capacity: 1 Company   

General Motors MEF-48 Magneto-plasma Drive (4)    Power 48    Fuel Use 617.3%    Signature 48    Exp 30%
Fuel Capacity 95 000 Litres    Range 5.5 billion km   (3 days at full power)

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

Strike Carrier that transports those shuttles:
Quote
Striker class Strike Carrier    12 800 tons     250 Crew     1804.8 BP      TCS 256  TH 1280  EM 1200
5000 km/s     Armour 2-48     Shields 40-300     Sensors 1/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 31     PPV 0
Maint Life 5.56 Years     MSP 1969    AFR 119%    IFR 1.7%    1YR 107    5YR 1611    Max Repair 160 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 9 months    Flight Crew Berths 12   
Hangar Deck Capacity 2000 tons     Troop Capacity: 4 Companies    Cargo Handling Multiplier 20   

Rolls-Royce MES-320 Magneto-plasma Drive (4)    Power 320    Fuel Use 32%    Signature 320    Exp 10%
Fuel Capacity 1 000 000 Litres    Range 43.9 billion km   (101 days at full power)
Theta R300/384 Shield Generator (10)   Total Fuel Cost  160 Litres per hour  (3 840 per day)

Phalanx-250 CIWS (2x8)    Range 1000 km     TS: 25000 km/s     ROF 5       Base 50% To Hit
TF/SPN-1 Main Navigation Sensor (1)     GPS 4320     Range 100.4m km    Resolution 60

ECM 30

Strike Group
4x T-12 Ram Assault Shuttle   Speed: 19200 km/s    Size: 10

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes

I was able to get some Precursor ships with those.
Posted by: Drusus
« on: June 11, 2013, 11:31:58 AM »

Quote from: joeclark77 link=topic=6190. msg63376#msg63376 date=1370964658


Does that really work?  I had no idea you could do that in this game!

hxxp: aurora2. pentarch. org/index. php/topic,1680. 0. html

You just have to be quite a bit faster or risk a high volume of casualties.   So for many commercial vessels the above boarding craft has a good chance of reducing the casualties to, at least, under 100%.   The above design is fairly close to what I have been using in my current campaign.


Posted by: joeclark77
« on: June 11, 2013, 10:30:58 AM »

Quote
Battering Ram class Assault Shuttle 

A wildly experimental design, the Battering Ram class Assault Shuttle borrows the engine from a Gauntlet Heavy Fighter and attaches it to a company-sized drop module for marines to use and breach an enemy ship in motion. 

At 22,000 km/s, it's thought that the Battering Ram would be fast enough to intercept and capture enemy commercial ships. 

The Starmantle Alliance has not yet built a ship with a long-term troop transport and hangar bay able to bring this ship design into combat and usually gung-ho marine leadership is dubious about the effectiveness of the approach, but strategists are still looking for an opportunity to try the new design out in the field.   


Does that really work?  I had no idea you could do that in this game!
Posted by: Starfyre
« on: June 07, 2013, 06:41:02 PM »

There's a high chance of !!fun!! before it gets really boring if they get their missiles off before you spot them.
Posted by: Starmantle
« on: June 06, 2013, 10:39:18 PM »

Quote from: Starfyre link=topic=6190. msg63268#msg63268 date=1370488470
It's not just fighting against spoilers.   Some NPRs love FACs.   I mean, REALLY love FACs.   like you poke into a system, and they've put the venusians in space 1899 to shame.

Ha.   I would imagine that would be fun at first. . .  then really boring.   

I'll ponder it.
Posted by: Starfyre
« on: June 05, 2013, 10:14:30 PM »

It's not just fighting against spoilers.  Some NPRs love FACs.  I mean, REALLY love FACs.  like you poke into a system, and they've put the venusians in space 1899 to shame.