Posted by: Jorgen_CAB
« on: April 07, 2014, 05:43:11 AM »Paul are very correct in his presentation of the numbers.
From a practical perspective it would almost be a waste of resources to put a bulky cloaking device on 20000 ton ship and reduce its TCS to 100. The reason is that resolution 100 are pretty common as the medium for most missile fire-controls (and search sensors) against main capital ships. Resolution 100 usually give a good middle ground between ship size and range.
Although, putting the same cloaking device on a 6-10000t (reducing the TCS to 30-50) scout ship could be worth while. And if you also could research miniaturization of the cloaking device itself it would become useful even for combat ships at that size.
From a practical perspective it would almost be a waste of resources to put a bulky cloaking device on 20000 ton ship and reduce its TCS to 100. The reason is that resolution 100 are pretty common as the medium for most missile fire-controls (and search sensors) against main capital ships. Resolution 100 usually give a good middle ground between ship size and range.
Although, putting the same cloaking device on a 6-10000t (reducing the TCS to 30-50) scout ship could be worth while. And if you also could research miniaturization of the cloaking device itself it would become useful even for combat ships at that size.