Aurora 4x
C# Aurora => C# Mechanics => Topic started by: ExChairman on April 29, 2020, 02:14:59 AM
-
Mmm, having 4 fleets of 25 ships each, each month I have to repair 4-6 ships, some have a lot of maintenance supplies left, some are almost dry. Not moving around or doing special training. Strangely enough all ships except the command cruiser are "breaking" down... Ver 1.7.3
Stockholm CC
CC HMS Kungälv (Stockholm MkII class Command Cruiser) 29 749 tons 778 Crew 7 568.1 BP TCS 595 TH 1 365 EM 0
6554 km/s Armour 8-85 Shields 0-0 HTK 172 Sensors 0/48/0/0 DCR 38 PPV 167.04
Maint Life 1.57 Years MSP 3 271 AFR 885% IFR 12.3% 1YR 1 521 5YR 22 822 Max Repair 568.75 MSP
Hangar Deck Capacity 125 tons
Flottiljamiral Control Rating 5 BRG AUX ENG CIC FLG
Intended Deployment Time: 18 months Flight Crew Berths 20 Morale Check Required
SAAB MFD 650MW (6) Power 3900 Fuel Use 81.75% Signature 227.50 Explosion 13%
Fuel Capacity 6 000 000 Litres Range 44.4 billion km (78 days at full power)
Bofors 25cm Elektromagnetsik Kanon (12x4) Range 250 000km TS: 6 554 km/s Power 15-5 Accuracy Modifier 100% RM 50 000 km ROF 15
Twin Gauss Cannon R300-100 Turret (4x8) Range 30 000km TS: 16000 km/s Power 0-0 RM 30 000 km ROF 5
CIWS-160 (2x8) Range 1000 km TS: 16 000 km/s ROF 5
Beam Fire Control R64-TS16000 (2) Max Range: 64 000 km TS: 16 000 km/s 84 69 53 38 22 6 0 0 0 0
Beam Fire Control R256-TS4000 (4) Max Range: 256 000 km TS: 4 000 km/s 96 92 88 84 80 77 73 69 65 61
Bofors FC Point Defence (1) Max Range: 32 640 km TS: 25 000 km/s 69 39 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Vattenfall MCF Reactor 10MW (6) Total Power Output 60 Exp 5%
Active Search Sensor AS19-R1 (1) GPS 144 Range 19.1m km MCR 2.1m km Resolution 1
EM Sensor EM6-48 (1) Sensitivity 48 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 54.8m km
ECCM-1 (1) ECM 10
This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
Missile cruiser
Sparre MkIII class Missile Cruiser 27 643 tons 623 Crew 6 279.7 BP TCS 553 TH 1 365 EM 0
7054 km/s Armour 4-81 Shields 0-0 HTK 137 Sensors 0/0/0/0 DCR 39 PPV 97.76
Maint Life 0.85 Years MSP 1 277 AFR 679% IFR 9.4% 1YR 1 504 5YR 22 553 Max Repair 568.75 MSP
Magazine 2 370
Kommendör Control Rating 3 BRG AUX ENG
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months Morale Check Required
SAAB MFD 650MW (6) Power 3900 Fuel Use 81.75% Signature 227.50 Explosion 13%
Fuel Capacity 5 000 000 Litres Range 39.8 billion km (65 days at full power)
Twin Gauss Cannon R300-100 Turret (1x8) Range 30 000km TS: 16000 km/s Power 0-0 RM 30 000 km ROF 5
CIWS-160 (1x8) Range 1000 km TS: 16 000 km/s ROF 5
Bofors FC Point Defence (1) Max Range: 32 640 km TS: 25 000 km/s 69 39 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Size 4 Missile Launcher (20) Missile Size: 4 Rate of Fire 15
Missile Fire Control FC81-R91 (5) Range 81.2m km Resolution 91
Avhustyn Anti-Ship Missile (592) Speed: 30 100 km/s End: 36.2m Range: 65.4m km WH: 6 Size: 4 TH: 100/60/30
Active Search Sensor AS86-R91 (1) GPS 13104 Range 86.1m km Resolution 91
ECCM-4 (1) ECM 40
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
Light cruiser
Elefanten MkII class Light Cruiser 17 904 tons 540 Crew 4 953 BP TCS 358 TH 910 EM 0
7261 km/s Armour 5-60 Shields 0-0 HTK 124 Sensors 16/8/0/0 DCR 6 PPV 105
Maint Life 1.20 Years MSP 1 037 AFR 427% IFR 5.9% 1YR 741 5YR 11 116 Max Repair 568.75 MSP
Kommendör Control Rating 3 BRG AUX ENG
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months Morale Check Required
SAAB MFD 650MW (4) Power 2600 Fuel Use 81.75% Signature 227.50 Explosion 13%
Fuel Capacity 3 950 000 Litres Range 48.6 billion km (77 days at full power)
Bofors 20cm Elektromagnetisk Kanon (15x4) Range 200 000km TS: 7 261 km/s Power 12-5 Accuracy Modifier 100% RM 50 000 km ROF 15
Beam Fire Control R256-TS4000 (2) Max Range: 256 000 km TS: 4 000 km/s 96 92 88 84 80 77 73 69 65 61
Bofors FC Point Defence (1) Max Range: 32 640 km TS: 25 000 km/s 69 39 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Vattenfall Tokamak Fusion Reactor R12 (6) Total Power Output 75 Exp 5%
Active Search Sensor AS70-R91 (1) GPS 8736 Range 70.3m km Resolution 91
Thermal Sensor TH2-16 (1) Sensitivity 16 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 31.6m km
EM Sensor EM1-8 (1) Sensitivity 8 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 22.4m km
ECCM-4 (1) ECM 40
This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
Missile destroyer
Flower MkII class Missile Destroyer 8 746 tons 115 Crew 1 964.7 BP TCS 175 TH 455 EM 0
7432 km/s Armour 4-37 Shields 0-0 HTK 29 Sensors 8/0/0/0 DCR 33 PPV 400
Maint Life 1.19 Years MSP 421 AFR 204% IFR 2.8% 1YR 303 5YR 4 547 Max Repair 568.75 MSP
Magazine 400
Kommendörkapten Control Rating 2 BRG AUX
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months Morale Check Required
SAAB MFD 650MW (2) Power 1300 Fuel Use 81.75% Signature 227.50 Explosion 13%
Fuel Capacity 1 750 000 Litres Range 44.1 billion km (68 days at full power)
SAAB Box Launcher (100) Missile Size: 4 Hangar Reload 100 minutes MF Reload 16 hours
Missile Fire Control FC81-R91 (2) Range 81.2m km Resolution 91
Avhustyn Anti-Ship Missile (112) Speed: 30 100 km/s End: 36.2m Range: 65.4m km WH: 6 Size: 4 TH: 100/60/30
Active Search Sensor AS42-R20 (1) GPS 1920 Range 42.4m km Resolution 20
Thermal Sensor TH1-8 (1) Sensitivity 8 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 22.4m km
ECM 40
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
-
With maintenance lives of ~1 year I'm not surprised. They also have many big, expensive-to-repair systems so a couple of bad rolls for maintenance failures can drain their supplies quick.
-
Yes... way to few engineering sections on those ships... you should always aim to have about 2-3 times the Maintenance life value of the intended deployment value of your ship. When you go to give the crew some needed shore leave you usually also do overhaul but you don't have to if there is a reason not to.
-
Aha, still make them as vb6 ships. A new update is being done. Thanks guys!
-
Look at your colony that your fleets are orbiting and ensure your maintenance facility capacity is larger than the total tonnage of military ships being maintained. If not, all orbiting military ships will accrue maintenance time.
-
IFR 12.3% Max Repair 568.75 MSP
IFR 9.4% Max Repair 568.75 MSP
IFR 5.9% Max Repair 568.75 MSP
IFR 2.8% Max Repair 568.75 MSP
So every production cycle your ships have these percentage changes of something breaking down and if you're unlucky, repairing that component might take the second number of MSP. Your ships need more engineering spaces to avoid malfunctions in the first place and they need more MSP to deal with breakages if they happen. You should have twice the "max repair" amount in MSP to ensure that your ship remains mission capable.
-
So if I shorten the production cycle then that should increase the likelihood of need repairs?
-
So if I shorten the production cycle then that should increase the likelihood of need repairs?
No... the right term is every 5-day cycle and not actual production cycles... I think we just say that because standard production cycle is every 5 days.
-
So if I shorten the production cycle then that should increase the likelihood of need repairs?
No... the right term is every 5-day cycle and not actual production cycles... I think we just say that because standard production cycle is every 5 days.
No, Aurora 'rolls' for maintenance failure when a production cycle passes and does so using the the actual number of elapsed seconds since the last one. Since it also only ever causes one maintenance failure per unit per roll, changing the prodcution cycle to be shorter does slightly increase the total breakdowns (since with one-day prodcution five things can break in five days) but the math per-breakdown is still the same and based on actual seconds, not production-cycle-seconds.
-
Hmm, does this mean that, for example, a ship with an engine block made of many small engines will be cheaper to maintain than a single big engine, in general, given that a maintenance failure hitting the engine's DAC will cost much less?
-
Hmm, does this mean that, for example, a ship with an engine block made of many small engines will be cheaper to maintain than a single big engine, in general, given that a maintenance failure hitting the engine's DAC will cost much less?
Purely looking at MSPs expended, yes, but such an engine block will also burn considerably more fuel and be far more expensive in overall terms (and thus also while in orbit of Maintenance Facilities). . . and if the small engines are small enough to drop below 1 HTK, then they will all blow up together very quickly.
Comparisons are posted in the Engineering and Maintenance thread.
-
Hmm, does this mean that, for example, a ship with an engine block made of many small engines will be cheaper to maintain than a single big engine, in general, given that a maintenance failure hitting the engine's DAC will cost much less?
Purely looking at MSPs expended, yes, but such an engine block will also burn considerably more fuel and be far more expensive in overall terms (and thus also while in orbit of Maintenance Facilities). . . and if the small engines are small enough to drop below 1 HTK, then they will all blow up together very quickly.
Comparisons are posted in the Engineering and Maintenance thread.
Do smaller engines cost more for their size? I thought the increase of cost was based on EP, so all you lose is fuel efficiency.
-
Hmm, does this mean that, for example, a ship with an engine block made of many small engines will be cheaper to maintain than a single big engine, in general, given that a maintenance failure hitting the engine's DAC will cost much less?
Purely looking at MSPs expended, yes, but such an engine block will also burn considerably more fuel and be far more expensive in overall terms (and thus also while in orbit of Maintenance Facilities). . . and if the small engines are small enough to drop below 1 HTK, then they will all blow up together very quickly.
Comparisons are posted in the Engineering and Maintenance thread.
Do smaller engines cost more for their size? I thought the increase of cost was based on EP, so all you lose is fuel efficiency.
Engine cost is directly proportional to size.
The maintenance savings occurs because you aren't increasing the chance that the engines will be hit by the DAC roll, but you are decreasing the cost when it does.
For example:
With one big engine, you might have a DAC chance of 30% and a repair cost of 300.
If you replace that engine with six engines that are all 1/6 the size, they each have a DAC chance of 5% and a repair cost of 50.
So there's still a 30% chance that an engine will be hit. But when it happens, you pay 50 to repair it instead of 300.