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: CharonJr
« on: September 24, 2015, 06:25:00 PM »

Just used this vs. lots of small enemy FACs and it worked nicely with hardly any of the usual micro needed.

Put your FACs on auto+sync fire once in range and force as many turns as needed to run out of ammo, reload at collier and repeat till either all enemies are down or they got close enough to force you to jump out of the system.
Posted by: Iranon
« on: September 22, 2015, 12:45:14 PM »

Assume I'm launching a single coordnated strike of size-1 missiles from 10 FACs.

910 missiles in 910 salvos, speed 16k, WH2, MR19. 61% to hit a 5k target
720 missiles in 10 salvos of 72, speed 32k, WH1, MR22. 141% to hit a 5k target.

The first is my design from the first post.
The second represents the best I can do with fast missiles from box launchers, comparable effective range (~45m) , from platforms half as fast (8k).

The first looks much, much, better to me.

*

If we use two-stage missiles with size-1 payloads, we get rid of the speed restriction for the final stage... but slow cruising stage introduces its own problems.
On 8km/s craft launching 8km/s two-stage missiles, I could get
740 missiles in 740 salvos (Size 2 launcher)
980 missiles in 490 salvos of 2 (Size 3 launcher)

Final stages with a range requirement of about 6m could be
25600 km/s, WH2, MR22, 112% for a 5k target.
32000 km/s, WH1, MR28, 179% for a 5k target.
38400 km/s, WH1, MR22, 169% for a 5k target.

Larger launchers are unnecessary tonnage overhead and reduce dispersion if we just want to drown our target in size-1 missiles, but become interesting when we want larger final stages. 10 FACs could also deliver 160 of the following in single-missile salvos:

Total size 6, 6km/s, 75m cruising range, releasing a size 4.861 second stage:
26300 km/s, WH9, Range 7.2m, MR24, 126.2% to hit a 5km/s target

My two-stage missiles currently suffer from insufficient engine power multipliers, and the bigger one above should probably carry a sensor.
Posted by: linkxsc
« on: September 22, 2015, 10:00:03 AM »

Joker read up about fire controls vs number of salvos.
Posted by: JOKER
« on: September 21, 2015, 04:18:29 PM »

Apparently it won't work. Slower missiles means enemy have much more AMM salvos to intercept them and have much higher chance to hit.
Posted by: Iranon
« on: September 21, 2015, 06:40:51 AM »

SUCCESS!
After sorting out my (touchscreen-related) technical difficulties, the original design is now officially battle-tested.

2 FACs accompanied by a spotting variant engaged a fleet totalling about 120kt (1x27kt, 3x18kt,4x10kt) known to have 1-damage beam and AMM defence, moving at about 2.8k.
Offensively, they were known to use small-ish particle beams at considerable range, and slow but high-yield missiles (size 4, 12k, 11 damage, unknown range but sensor coverage extending out to 112m at R78).

The map display showed a small spread, but two volleys of 90 and 91 missiles remained close enough together to intercept their targets in the same tick (one missile was given a head start to alert the enemy, after all the main goal is trolling point defence operators). 4 losses to point defence, 10k target destroyed, 27k target crippled (mostly thanks to secondary explosions).
The system performed exactly as designed and exceeded expectations, even considering the weak targets.
Unfortunately, I didn't have 200+ box launchers at hand to test enemy PD vs. conventional missile spam, but I believe there would have been some interceptions.

Frigates with a more reasonable speed and 2-stage missiles will be considered when tech permits: current engine multiplier tech is sufficient for slow high-yield missiles, not so much for short-ranged sprinters like dedicated AMMs or final ASM stages. Faster missile reload speed is also welcome for larger launchers.

Something similar to the current system will be kept for a fast response option, and to have an alterntive to slow cruise missiles when their limitations become a problem.
However, it may be scaled down to 400-600t in future generations for a smaller sensor footprint.
Alternatively, scaling up the armament also looks reasonable once a satisfactory (single stage) size-3 missile can be made with WH9 and a minimal sensor.
Posted by: Iranon
« on: September 18, 2015, 04:47:09 PM »

Quote from: amimai on September 16, 2015, 11:44:19 AM
an idea!

make a slow size 2 MIRV missile (4000-8000km/s)
load it with a pathetic 0,4missile engine and 0,1fuel
set its trigger range to the max detection range you predict for the FAC

then load the MIRV's with blinding fast 1.5 size missiles

Would be nice if it was possible, but no missile stage may be below 1MSP. Since more than ~1/4 for the first stage is excessive, a size 3 or 4 missile launcher seems right for a FAC. I think I still prefer a single-stage approach for a FAC: The overhead for engines isn't without its benefits, and anything that's problematic for a 4xstandard speed missile (against most targets, the large warhead more than compensates for the to-hit rate) poses even bigger problems for a 2-stage cruise missile.

I like a two-stage approach for larger ships though.
Posted by: sneer
« on: September 17, 2015, 01:31:05 AM »

missile fc should be a bit higher as any ecm on target will prevent from using max missile range
Posted by: MarcAFK
« on: September 17, 2015, 12:14:08 AM »

That's basically what I'm thinking of using for saturation attacks.
Posted by: CharonJr
« on: September 16, 2015, 06:35:25 PM »

I like the idea, and the MIRV even more, here is a example for a slow MIRV-bomber:

Ju-87 class Fast Attack Craft    1 000 tons     6 Crew     198 BP      TCS 20  TH 128  EM 0
6400 km/s     Armour 1-8     Shields 0-0     Sensors 1/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 0     PPV 6
Maint Life 0 Years     MSP 0    AFR 200%    IFR 2.8%    1YR 65    5YR 976    Max Repair 52 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 0.1 months    Spare Berths 4   
Magazine 102   

64 EP Magneto-plasma Drive 2.0 (2)    Power 64    Fuel Use 443.5%    Signature 64    Exp 20%
Fuel Capacity 20 000 Litres    Range 0.8 billion km   (35 hours at full power)

Size 6 Missile Launcher (1)    Missile Size 6    Rate of Fire 60
Missile Fire Control FC77-R20 (1)     Range 77.5m km    Resolution 20
Size 6 Missile Stage (16)  Speed: 6 400 km/s   End: 200.8m    Range: 81.6m km   WH: 0    Size: 6    TH: 21/12/6
Size 1 2nd Stage ASM (6)  Speed: 25 600 km/s   End: 3.3m    Range: 5m km   WH: 2    Size: 1    TH: 111/66/33

Missile to hit chances are vs targets moving at 3000 km/s, 5000 km/s and 10,000 km/s

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes

Missile tech is fairly low since I have no missile specialists in my current game, but still. 68 missiles with 33%-to-hit 10k speed enemies does not look that bad at this tech level. And a range of 75mkm should be enough to avoid detection except vs. high tech races and a separation range of 4.5mkm should be enough to avoid detection of the size 6 bus.
Posted by: Prince of Space
« on: September 16, 2015, 02:46:01 PM »

Quote from: Lossmar on September 16, 2015, 02:21:31 PM
How in the name of god Magneto Plasma missile can be only 16k km/s ?? This is literally nuclear pulse level ...

They are in the name of god that slow because they were designed to be that slow. As clearly stated in the first post.

The question that remains is whether or not the volley segmentation confounds defensive fire controls enough to justify both the to-hit penalty and the increased vulnerability that comes with the slower speed.
Posted by: GodEmperor
« on: September 16, 2015, 02:21:31 PM »

How in the name of god Magneto Plasma missile can be only 16k km/s ?? This is literally nuclear pulse level ...
Posted by: amimai
« on: September 16, 2015, 11:44:19 AM »

an idea!

make a slow size 2 MIRV missile (4000-8000km/s)
load it with a pathetic 0,4missile engine and 0,1fuel
set its trigger range to the max detection range you predict for the FAC

then load the MIRV's with blinding fast 1.5 size missiles

FAC (or even your main boat) unloads a wave of these missiles at more reasonable speeds (so you can fit twice as much ammo) at just outside their trigger range
once this wall of missiles gets in range, all the MIRV trigger at the same time, and BOOM you have a wall of 9001 separate salvos traveling at max speed fired from a single boat

admittedly this is nothing new to me, as ive always assumed that's how you used bombers because of a PvP space FPS/RTS game i once played that used this exact strategy to glass entire planets.
although that was taking it to the extremes since the bomber actually dive bombed the planet while doing this to shield the missiles from ams fire
Posted by: sneer
« on: September 16, 2015, 11:02:50 AM »

ok now I understand the concept
it seems like I missed the point previously
PD will take few of the missiles only
hit ratio will be moderate
but there will be initial stack of 91 so 40-50 hits out of 1 FAC is within theory range
it looks good at this point and vs some slower enemies like some NPRs that tend to go slow number will go significantly higher
it seems for a magneto era vs 20kt military ship with armor 4-6  about 6-8 such FACs will be needed to score kill
good idea as system defence

Posted by: Nightstar
« on: September 16, 2015, 03:40:06 AM »

Yeah, it should work pretty well. I came up with the same tactic some time back: http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=5806.msg59633#msg59633
You even have pretty good designs. The problem, I've found, is mostly one of cost. The engines on your design cost 160 BP. A carrier also costs about that for 1 kton of package. Compare that to ~80 BP of other systems on your design, and ~80 BP of missiles.

Halve the engine size and power modifier, allocate a HS each to engineering and crew quarters, ditch the launcher and magazine, replace the remaining space with 0.33 size launchers (only 6k RP, compare to 5k RP for hangar decks)...and you get 30 launchers for a boat that's 1/3 the cost. Plus you can use faster missiles. 0.25 or box launcher tech and you get even better results. It won't overwhelm fire controls, but when you're firing like 900 missiles a salvo that's not generally important.

It's a very cool trick, but it doesn't break missile combat. Practical application is mostly limited to MIRVs, which still have the slow first stage problems, and homeworld defense, where you don't need a carrier. Or if you desperately need to break a much bigger fleet's missile defense.

Fair warning: I'm mostly a theorycrafter, and I'm not sure I ever actually tested this design. But it should work.
Posted by: DIT_grue
« on: September 16, 2015, 02:07:24 AM »

(I trust that sitting on my initial reaction for a couple of hours has simmered it down from '1-man instant flame war' to 'stinging sarcasm'.)

Quote from: sneer on September 16, 2015, 01:12:09 AM
so is it 91 FACs with 91 magazine size  ?
what do you mean simultanous as they are not simultanous within 1 ship fire ability

 ::) So you don't bother reading the thread, even when you're forced to admit you've missed the entire point. Quoting the OP:

Quote from: Iranon on September 14, 2015, 07:11:55 PM
But there is something better than large salvos: An even larger number of missiles (on the same tonnage) in single salvos, arriving in the same increment.

I hope to achieve this by matching missile and platform speed - very slow missiles fired by a fast ship. This one may take 15 minutes to empty its magazines during an attack run (over a distance of 13.5m km, cutting significantly into its effective range)... but they should all arrive on target at the same time, in single missile salvos, rendering most defences comically ineffective.

To repeat it one more time, in the futile hope it will stick: the missiles are not launched in the same tick. They do (hopefully) end up running in together in a single clump. (Because every missile, as it is fired, runs alongside the ship at the same speed.)