Aurora 4x
C# Aurora => C# Bureau of Design => Topic started by: liveware on May 13, 2020, 04:18:12 PM
-
I wanted to share some of my successful early game survey carrier designs. These designs were inspired by other posts to this forum.
First, the almighty geo-survey fighter:
Lewis class Geological Survey Craft 500 tons 18 Crew 131.5 BP TCS 10 TH 1 EM 0
100 km/s Armour 1-5 Shields 0-0 HTK 4 Sensors 0/0/0/1 DCR 0 PPV 0
Maint Life 16.67 Years MSP 139 AFR 2% IFR 0.0% 1YR 1 5YR 14 Max Repair 100 MSP
Lieutenant Commander Control Rating 1
Intended Deployment Time: 6 months Morale Check Required
Hamburger-Armintrout Lewis Conventional Engine EP0.50 (2) Power 1.0 Fuel Use 55.90% Signature 0.5 Explosion 5%
Fuel Capacity 2,000 Litres Range 1.3 billion km (149 days at full power)
Geological Survey Sensors (1) 1 Survey Points Per Hour
This design is classed as a Fighter for production, combat and planetary interaction
Next, the grav-survey fighter:
Clark class Gravitational Survey Craft 500 tons 18 Crew 131.5 BP TCS 10 TH 1 EM 0
100 km/s Armour 1-5 Shields 0-0 HTK 4 Sensors 0/0/1/0 DCR 0 PPV 0
Maint Life 16.67 Years MSP 139 AFR 2% IFR 0.0% 1YR 1 5YR 14 Max Repair 100 MSP
Lieutenant Commander Control Rating 1
Intended Deployment Time: 6 months Morale Check Required
Hamburger-Armintrout Lewis Conventional Engine EP0.50 (2) Power 1.0 Fuel Use 55.90% Signature 0.5 Explosion 5%
Fuel Capacity 2,000 Litres Range 1.3 billion km (149 days at full power)
Gravitational Survey Sensors (1) 1 Survey Points Per Hour
This design is classed as a Fighter for production, combat and planetary interaction
And finally, the glue that brings it all together. The scout carrier:
Amerigo class Scout Carrier 10,000 tons 190 Crew 945.9 BP TCS 200 TH 36 EM 0
180 km/s Armour 1-41 Shields 0-0 HTK 81 Sensors 10/10/0/0 DCR 17 PPV 0
Maint Life 30.23 Years MSP 3,005 AFR 47% IFR 0.7% 1YR 6 5YR 95 Max Repair 50 MSP
Hangar Deck Capacity 2,000 tons
Commander Control Rating 2 BRG SCI
Intended Deployment Time: 120 months Flight Crew Berths 160 Morale Check Required
Morelle-Udo Amerigo Conventional Engine EP12.0 (3) Power 36 Fuel Use 11.41% Signature 12 Explosion 5%
Fuel Capacity 203,000 Litres Range 32 billion km (2059 days at full power)
Scollard & Tedesko Amerigo Active Search Sensor AS32-R200 (1) GPS 4000 Range 33m km Resolution 200
Aarons Warning & Control Amerigo EM Sensor EM2-10 (1) Sensitivity 10 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 25m km
Aarons Warning & Control Amerigo Thermal Sensor TH2-10 (1) Sensitivity 10 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 25m km
This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
The Aegis Corporation has successfully used these designs to survey the Sol system.
-
This seems like a pretty good idea actually, since surveying systems with my battle carriers comes with lots of annoying problems like fuel consumption, making dedicated survey fighters and extremely efficient carriers to go on long journeys unarmed and escorted where needed seems like a way less micro management intensive way to play.
-
I used to make dedicated survey ships but eventually realized that carriers offer a significant range advantage. Also, if one of my scout carriers runs out of fuel (which is annoying as F), I can dispatch another carrier with one of these guys in the hangar bay to rescue it:
Kentuck class Tanker 1,000 tons 31 Crew 67.8 BP TCS 20 TH 2 EM 0
96 km/s Armour 1-8 Shields 0-0 HTK 9 Sensors 1/1/0/0 DCR 1 PPV 0
Maint Life 14.09 Years MSP 46 AFR 7% IFR 0.1% 1YR 0 5YR 6 Max Repair 10 MSP
Lieutenant Commander Control Rating 1
Intended Deployment Time: 6 months Morale Check Required
Steenbergen-Jaggers Drive Systems Shakleton Improved Nuclear Thermal Engine EP0.96 (2) Power 1.9 Fuel Use 15.43% Signature 0.96 Explosion 3%
Fuel Capacity 215,000 Litres Range 250.8 billion km (30234 days at full power)
Refuelling Capability: 50,000 litres per hour Complete Refuel 4 hours
Steenbergen-Jaggers Drive Systems Shakleton Active Search Sensor AS13-R200 (1) GPS 600 Range 14m km Resolution 200
Steenbergen-Jaggers Drive Systems Shakleton EM Sensor EM0.3-1.8 (1) Sensitivity 1.8 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 10.6m km
Steenbergen-Jaggers Drive Systems Shakleton Thermal Sensor TH0.3-1.8 (1) Sensitivity 1.8 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 10.6m km
This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
I should probably note the Kentuck was developed about 125 years after the Amerigo class. So it has significantly better equipment. However the Amerigo is still in service in my current campaign. Also, the Kentuck can be docked on an Amerigo.
-
This looks to be an interesting design choice for survey ships, I'll have to try it out. Thanks.
-
I used to make dedicated survey ships but eventually realized that carriers offer a significant range advantage. Also, if one of my scout carriers runs out of fuel (which is annoying as F), I can dispatch another carrier with one of these guys in the hangar bay to rescue it:
Kentuck class Tanker 1,000 tons 31 Crew 67.8 BP TCS 20 TH 2 EM 0
96 km/s Armour 1-8 Shields 0-0 HTK 9 Sensors 1/1/0/0 DCR 1 PPV 0
Maint Life 14.09 Years MSP 46 AFR 7% IFR 0.1% 1YR 0 5YR 6 Max Repair 10 MSP
Lieutenant Commander Control Rating 1
Intended Deployment Time: 6 months Morale Check Required
Steenbergen-Jaggers Drive Systems Shakleton Improved Nuclear Thermal Engine EP0.96 (2) Power 1.9 Fuel Use 15.43% Signature 0.96 Explosion 3%
Fuel Capacity 215,000 Litres Range 250.8 billion km (30234 days at full power)
Refuelling Capability: 50,000 litres per hour Complete Refuel 4 hours
Steenbergen-Jaggers Drive Systems Shakleton Active Search Sensor AS13-R200 (1) GPS 600 Range 14m km Resolution 200
Steenbergen-Jaggers Drive Systems Shakleton EM Sensor EM0.3-1.8 (1) Sensitivity 1.8 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 10.6m km
Steenbergen-Jaggers Drive Systems Shakleton Thermal Sensor TH0.3-1.8 (1) Sensitivity 1.8 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 10.6m km
This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
I should probably note the Kentuck was developed about 125 years after the Amerigo class. So it has significantly better equipment. However the Amerigo is still in service in my current campaign. Also, the Kentuck can be docked on an Amerigo.
125 years? That's insane. And still only Improved Nuclear Thermal?
-
Some of us like a slower game.
I think Mr. Garfunkel would appreciate this sentiment, based on some of his posted fiction. I find his WW1-in-space universe rather interesting.
FWIW, I started in year 1865 AD. I also started with a 0.2 research rate malus. Also, I started using a conventional (non-TN) empire because that is more fun for me.
Here's the sparknotes version of my own RP universe if anyone is interested: http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=11100.45
-
I like the concept ... Now I would be reluctant to devote a 10.000 tons military shipyard in the early game to build what is essentially (no offense intended) a lousy light carrier that only transport 20% of its size.
ps: I like the mini tanker that can dock in the light carrier though!
-
Yeah, it's definitely not the greatest carrier. It was built with haste at low tech... but it does work.
I should probably take a harder look at the design and try to come up with something faster and more spacious.
-
Here's my more modernized scout carrier and survey ship designs. These are currently in service surveying systems 'near' Sol. I'm currently limited to max 25 ktons construction capacity at my naval shipyards, though I am probably going to upgrade to 50 kton soon and design a new carrier. The new carrier will probably be more of a battleworthy carrier than my existing scout carrier.
Scout Carrier:
Columbus II class Scout Carrier 25,000 tons 874 Crew 3,852.1 BP TCS 500 TH 211 EM 0
422 km/s JR 3-50 Armour 2-76 Shields 0-0 HTK 222 Sensors 30/30/0/0 DCR 97 PPV 0
Maint Life 8.93 Years MSP 10,450 AFR 57% IFR 0.8% 1YR 236 5YR 3,534 Max Repair 1487.2 MSP
Hangar Deck Capacity 2,000 tons
Commander Control Rating 2 BRG SCI
Intended Deployment Time: 40 months Flight Crew Berths 40 Morale Check Required
Campisi Marine Columbus J25000(3-50) Military Jump Drive Max Ship Size 25000 tons Distance 50k km Squadron Size 3
Berkovitz & Morillo Columbus II Improved Nuclear Thermal Engine EP211.20 (1) Power 211.2 Fuel Use 6.41% Signature 211.2 Explosion 5%
Fuel Capacity 400,000 Litres Range 44.9 billion km (1230 days at full power)
Eustis-Sentinella Armaments Company Columbus CIWS-80 (8x4) Range 1000 km TS: 8,000 km/s ROF 5
Eustis-Sentinella Armaments Company Columbus Active Search Sensor AS57-R200 (1) GPS 10000 Range 57.1m km Resolution 200
Eustis-Sentinella Armaments Company Columbus EM Sensor EM5-30 (1) Sensitivity 30 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 43.3m km
Eustis-Sentinella Armaments Company Columbus Thermal Sensor TH5-30 (1) Sensitivity 30 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 43.3m km
This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
Geo Survey Fighter:
Armstrong class Geological Survey Craft 500 tons 21 Crew 139.1 BP TCS 10 TH 2 EM 0
192 km/s Armour 1-5 Shields 0-0 HTK 4 Sensors 1/1/0/1 DCR 0 PPV 0
Maint Life 18.44 Years MSP 147 AFR 2% IFR 0.0% 1YR 1 5YR 12 Max Repair 100 MSP
Lieutenant Commander Control Rating 1
Intended Deployment Time: 6 months Morale Check Required
Steenbergen-Jaggers Drive Systems Shakleton Improved Nuclear Thermal Engine EP0.96 (2) Power 1.9 Fuel Use 15.43% Signature 0.96 Explosion 3%
Fuel Capacity 2,000 Litres Range 4.7 billion km (281 days at full power)
Steenbergen-Jaggers Drive Systems Shakleton Active Search Sensor AS13-R200 (1) GPS 600 Range 14m km Resolution 200
Steenbergen-Jaggers Drive Systems Shakleton EM Sensor EM0.3-1.8 (1) Sensitivity 1.8 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 10.6m km
Steenbergen-Jaggers Drive Systems Shakleton Thermal Sensor TH0.3-1.8 (1) Sensitivity 1.8 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 10.6m km
Geological Survey Sensors (1) 1 Survey Points Per Hour
This design is classed as a Fighter for production, combat and planetary interaction
Grav Survey Fighter:
Aldrin class Gravitational Survey Craft 500 tons 21 Crew 139.1 BP TCS 10 TH 2 EM 0
192 km/s Armour 1-5 Shields 0-0 HTK 4 Sensors 1/1/1/0 DCR 0 PPV 0
Maint Life 18.44 Years MSP 147 AFR 2% IFR 0.0% 1YR 1 5YR 12 Max Repair 100 MSP
Lieutenant Commander Control Rating 1
Intended Deployment Time: 6 months Morale Check Required
Steenbergen-Jaggers Drive Systems Shakleton Improved Nuclear Thermal Engine EP0.96 (2) Power 1.9 Fuel Use 15.43% Signature 0.96 Explosion 3%
Fuel Capacity 2,000 Litres Range 4.7 billion km (281 days at full power)
Steenbergen-Jaggers Drive Systems Shakleton Active Search Sensor AS13-R200 (1) GPS 600 Range 14m km Resolution 200
Steenbergen-Jaggers Drive Systems Shakleton EM Sensor EM0.3-1.8 (1) Sensitivity 1.8 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 10.6m km
Steenbergen-Jaggers Drive Systems Shakleton Thermal Sensor TH0.3-1.8 (1) Sensitivity 1.8 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 10.6m km
Gravitational Survey Sensors (1) 1 Survey Points Per Hour
This design is classed as a Fighter for production, combat and planetary interaction
-
Those designs are glacially slow - what benefit are you actually getting out of using survey fighters, if it means you're taking five or ten times as long to get to places to survey?
For comparison, here's one of my very early geosurvey ships (Improved Nuclear Thermal Engine, like yours) with an appropriately early Jump Drive (Efficiency 5, a 4K RP tech) added to it, along with upping the maint/engineering spaces to match the range. (The original version of this was pre-jump, and displaced 8.9Kt.)
Aachen-B - Copy class Geosurvey Ship (P) 13,316 tons 141 Crew 813.6 BP TCS 266 TH 320 EM 0
1201 km/s JR 1-25(C) Armour 1-50 Shields 0-0 HTK 49 Sensors 0/0/2/2 DCR 4 PPV 0
Maint Life 7.12 Years MSP 2,152 AFR 355% IFR 4.9% 1YR 74 5YR 1,115 Max Repair 100 MSP
Capitaine de vaisseau Control Rating 2 BRG SCI
Intended Deployment Time: 72 months Morale Check Required
DERPZILLA JC15K Commercial Jump Drive Max Ship Size 15000 tons Distance 25k km Squadron Size 1
Refóios Drive Systems NTE Mk2 Extended Burn 1.25Kt EP80.00 (4) Power 320 Fuel Use 8.94% Signature 80 Explosion 5%
Fuel Capacity 1,500,000 Litres Range 226.6 billion km (2183 days at full power)
Geological Survey Sensors (2) 2 Survey Points Per Hour
Gravitational Survey Sensors (2) 2 Survey Points Per Hour
This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
It's 18.4% of the BP of a Columbus II + four of your survey fighters. It's six times the speed of the survey ships, three times the speed of the carrier, has a six year deployment, maintenance and fuel burn time, and can be built in a smaller shipyard.
Building five of these for the same BP cost as one carrier + 4 survey fighters gets you faster surveying, in more places, with longer deployment times and more range.
Even with your early tech, those are unsuitable for the task you've set them to - small survey craft only make sense if you can get enough of a speed boost out of them that they can provide you with a real increase in survey speed, and those that you have there cannot.
EDIT: I would also have to agree with macks - taking 125 years to get to NTE tech is insane. I'm playing on 25% research speed, and 100 years into the game (2175, started in 2075) I'm at Magneto Plasma tech.
DOUBLE EDIT: If you'd be willing to share what your best PP techs are (along with your latest armor tech), I'd be more than happy to see about putting together a better design using just the capabilities you have on hand.
TRIPLE EDIT: I have fixed my original DERP of putting military jump drives on these, which, it turns out, results in them being even better in comparison to your survey carriers. Welp. And I just noticed that I oversized the jump drive by 2K jump capacity, so the Aachen-B based design should be 50km/s faster and 3.9 BP cheaper, but that's not really a big deal for the point I'm making.
-
The concept of a carrier survey ship has always been a interesting concept for me to explore, sadly I usually get discouraged since the process is far more micro-intensive than creating a standard survey craft and giving it conditional orders.
Taking the rough technology constraints of Improved NucTherm I'd settle on the below Fighter Geological design.
Abdiel class Geological Survey Craft (P) 500 tons 13 Crew 121.3 BP TCS 10 TH 10 EM 0
960 km/s Armour 1-5 Shields 0-0 HTK 2 Sensors 0/0/1/0 DCR 0 PPV 0
Maint Life 5.08 Years MSP 115 AFR 20% IFR 0.3% 1YR 7 5YR 111 Max Repair 100 MSP
Lieutenant Commander Control Rating 1
Intended Deployment Time: 6 months Morale Check Required
Improved Nuclear Thermal Engine EP9.60 (1) Power 9.6 Fuel Use 19.36% Signature 9.60 Explosion 5%
Fuel Capacity 29,000 Litres Range 53.9 billion km (649 days at full power)
Gravitational Survey Sensors (1) 1 Survey Points Per Hour
This design is classed as a Fighter for production, combat and planetary interaction
If I was doing this for real I'd likely design a FAC sized Geo Survey craft and set it up as below, I feel it then gets decent speed, good range and some EM sensors for better scouting.
Bigger Abdiel class Geological Survey Craft (P) 800 tons 24 Crew 158 BP TCS 16 TH 19 EM 0
1200 km/s Armour 1-7 Shields 0-0 HTK 6 Sensors 0/6/1/0 DCR 0 PPV 0
Maint Life 9.23 Years MSP 114 AFR 9% IFR 0.1% 1YR 2 5YR 36 Max Repair 100 MSP
Lieutenant Commander Control Rating 1 BRG
Intended Deployment Time: 6 months Morale Check Required
Improved Nuclear Thermal Engine EP19.20 (1) Power 19.2 Fuel Use 13.69% Signature 19.20 Explosion 5%
Fuel Capacity 31,000 Litres Range 50.9 billion km (491 days at full power)
EM Sensor EM1.0-6.0 (1) Sensitivity 6.0 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 19.4m km
Gravitational Survey Sensors (1) 1 Survey Points Per Hour
This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
Putting the micro aside, I think the advantage of setting a carrier ship with, say, four of these ships (or three + one grav survey FAC, OR when your engine tech is better then sizing it down and putting both a grav and geo on the FAC) is that you can survey a system significantly faster than a single Survey ship could.
But again, the micro.
-
Well, I've encountered my first hostile NPR, so now I really need to get a more capable fleet put together. The Columbus II class is definitely way too slow and one of them just got blown away by a couple of NPR ships near the jump point (attached is the aftermath of the battle). Seems the NPR is running ships at about 5000 - 7000 km/s speed, with missiles at about 35000 km/s closing speed.
I was able to see them from outside their missile range, so at least my existing sensors are not totally useless. However I am definitely going to need faster ships going forward.
I'm currently up to nuclear pulse engines with improved pebble bed reactors. Looks like I'm at composite armor tech. I'll post some new designs once I've created them, would appreciate any insight others can provide.
Some other pertinent information: missiles were launched by 2 hostile ships closing at about 5000 km/s. Total of 60 missiles launched, all seem to be in the same volley. CIWS shot down about 20 missiles before impact. Columbus II D survived the initial volley and was limping back to the jump point when the hostile ships closed with energy weapons and finished the job.
-
Alright, so after considering my options I am thinking that getting a small fleet of missile destroyers deployed will be my most realistic option given my existing resource and technological limitations. My first design goal will be to design a missile capable of hitting one of the observed NPR ships. Here is my current candidate missile design:
Falcon Anti-Ship Missile
Missile Size: 20.00 MSP (50.000 Tons) Warhead: 12 Radiation Damage: 12 Manoeuvre Rating: 22
Speed: 15,400 km/s Fuel: 1,000 Flight Time: 11 minutes Range: 10.53m km
ECM Modifier: 10% ECCM Modifier: 10%
Cost Per Missile: 16.596 Development Cost: 1,660
Chance to Hit: 1k km/s 338.8% 3k km/s 112.9% 5k km/s 67.8% 10k km/s 33.9%
Materials Required
Corbomite 1
Tritanium 3
Gallicite 12.596
Fuel: 1000
Anyone have any suggestions on this design? If my estimation methods are accurate, in a salvo of 10 of these, about 6-7 should hit a 5000 km/s target. So my missile destroyers will need to be able to launch 10 missiles per volley to be effective.
-
The concept of a carrier survey ship has always been a interesting concept for me to explore, sadly I usually get discouraged since the process is far more micro-intensive than creating a standard survey craft and giving it conditional orders.
I discovered that you can issue survey commands to the carrier as long as it has a survey fighter docked. That's how I avoid most of the annoying micro. Same thing applies for troop transport fighters (and I suspect other craft with specialized abilities).
-
What I dislike about pricey ships doing survey is that they can get blown to piece and you lose big. An advantage of the survey carrier is that you don't put much BP in danger, except if you get a surprise party on the other side of a WH, but even that, you can make a fighter transit before the carrier ...
-
I am very interested in how youll deal with a threat moving 5000-7000km/s at your current tech. Keep us updated. You could mine the jump points to your home system as well, thats something high tech disparity fleets can do because it requires no missile tech.
-
Are ships with only a couple hundred km/s worth of speed common in early C# tech?
I remember my earliest VB6 ships having speeds exceeding 1,000 km/s with nuclear pulse engines. Not sure if the tech tree has changed substantially in C# as far as engines are concerned.
-
In C# there is new low-end pre-trans Newtonian "conventional" engine tech which has worse performance than anything I remember from VB6. That's what I was using on my early designs in this thread.
If I do another conventional start like this, I think I'm going go with a dedicated geo/grav survey vessel first and save the scout carrier concept for later in the game when I have better engine technology. While my early carrier did technically work, it was very slow and probably not as resource efficient as an equivalent performance geo/grav survey ship would have been.
However, it was my first foray into carrier ops in C# and it was a useful learning experience. Now, for example, I know that I should expect to encounter extremely fast NPR ships and should design my own ships accordingly.
-
I am very interested in how youll deal with a threat moving 5000-7000km/s at your current tech. Keep us updated. You could mine the jump points to your home system as well, thats something high tech disparity fleets can do because it requires no missile tech.
I'm taking a mental break for now while I think about what my best options are. The Falcon missile previously posted is my current best hope, but after looking through some other forum posts I think I can design a smaller missile with equivalent performance, so I will probably spend some time min-maxing missile designs.
I doubt I can build a ship fast enough to keep up with this NPR using my existing tech. Maybe a fighter, but even that is a stretch. I think the fastest fighter I could field would be under 3-4 km/s, and it would be little more than an engine with a fuel tank attached. So probably what I will do is design a heavily armored missile cruiser/destroyer and use a squadron of those to establish a beachhead at the jump point, then try to push in towards the NPR home planet.
I note from reviewing my event log that my CIWS seems to work well, I just didn't have enough of them to deal with 60 incoming missiles. So CIWS with heavier armor might buy me enough time to launch all of my missiles and run away before my ships are destroyed.
Mines are probably worth developing in the meantime while I develop the missile destroyers.
My biggest concerns with the Falcon missile I posted before are:
1. Price too high
2. Chance to hit too low
3. Size too large
I think the range is good as-is and I could probably drop the speed down to about 10k km/s and still be able to hit the enemy ships. With that in mind I want to try and get the size down to 10 or less... size 5 would be great. That should drop the missile cost substantially and also allow me to build cheaper launchers, and also cram more launchers onto each ship. More launchers means larger salvos, so if I can keep the chance to hit for the new missile in the same ballpark as the previous design, I might stand a chance.
Another advantage of smaller launchers is that I could put them on fighters and build a new carrier (or 4) and try to swarm the NPR. Not sure if this would be more cost effective than the missile destroyers or not, because it seems like I should be able to design a 2 stage missile that would give performance equivalent to a fighter launched missile. However with the carrier I could theoretically field multiple fighter types at once, and there might be some benefits to that also.
Decisions decisions...
-
So I tried loading an older game save (initial contact) in order to try and save my ship, but alas, it is too slow and her fate is truly sealed.
I was able to get some additional sensor contact this time as I launched my survey fighters as a decoy to try and buy the carrier time to escape through the JP. However, the situation was hopeless.
I was able to gain some valuable intel before the ship was destroyed this time. It appears that the missiles are being launched from some 30 kt curisers from about 40-60m km. So that is going to be a challenge because my Falcon design cannot travel that far. Also, my CIWS does not work as well as I previously thought... it has about a 10-13% chance to hit and faired much worse this time around. I think I got lucky originally when I was able to destroy 20 missiles.
If any are interested, attached is the tactical situation immediately prior to the loss of the carrier. Missiles are closing.
-
After messing around some more in the missile design window, I came up with this:
Falcon II Anti-ship Missile
Missile Size: 10.00 MSP (25.000 Tons) Warhead: 4 Radiation Damage: 4 Manoeuvre Rating: 20
Speed: 14,000 km/s Fuel: 3,750 Flight Time: 63 minutes Range: 53.22m km
ECM Modifier: 10% ECCM Modifier: 10%
Cost Per Missile: 7.42 Development Cost: 742
Chance to Hit: 1k km/s 280% 3k km/s 93.3% 5k km/s 56.0% 10k km/s 28.0%
Materials Required
Corbomite 1
Tritanium 1
Gallicite 5.42
Fuel: 3750
I think this is on the border of being acceptable. It has worse chance to hit than the Falcon but has much longer range and might be capable of outranging the NPR ships. If I were to fire two of these for every one of the Falcons, I would use less gallicite and should hit with more missiles than if I had used the Falcons. For example, if I fire 10 Falcons against a 5k km/s target, 6 - 7 would probably hit (neglecting enemy CIWS and ECM). If instead I fired 20 Falcon II's against the same target, about 10 - 11 should hit. However, the Falcon has a more powerful warhead and does more damage when it hits, so even with fewer hits it might still be a more capable missile... except the range is terrible. If my math is right, 10 Falcon II's would cause 4*10 = 40 damage total, and the Falcons would cause 6*12 = 48 damage total. So from a pure damage perspective the Falcon is probably superior, and it would also penetrate armor more reliably and deal more consistent damage.
Speaking of which, I have no idea how heavily armored the NPR ships are. I should probably fail conservative on that front, and assume they have at least 5-10 layers of armor. So in that case the Falcon II wouldn't even do internal damage and the Falcon would only do 7 - 2 damage, depending on armor.
Need to ponder this one some more it looks like.
-
First thing, before you start designing your missiles: What are the stats on your current missile fire control?
-
I was just about to start looking at that. Stand by.
-
Here's what I think seems reasonable for anti-ship purposes based on what I've observed of the NPR's ships. Best tech available:
Missile Fire Control FC108-R100 (50%)
Active Sensor Strength 72 Sensitivity Modifier: 60%
Sensor Size 6 HS (300 tons) HTK 1
Resolution 100 Maximum Range vs 5000 ton object (or larger): 108,858,687 km
Range vs 1000 ton object: 4,354,347 km
Range vs 250 ton object: 272,147 km
Chance of destruction by electronic damage 50%
Cost 90.0 Crew 12
Development Cost 900 RP
Materials Required
Uridium 90.0
I've not observed any NPR ships smaller than about 10k ton... yet. The sensors on my dead carrier should have detected anything down to 5k ton in the ranges involved in that encounter (I think).
-
After messing around some more in the missile design window, I came up with this:
Falcon II Anti-ship Missile
Missile Size: 10.00 MSP (25.000 Tons) Warhead: 4 Radiation Damage: 4 Manoeuvre Rating: 20
Speed: 14,000 km/s Fuel: 3,750 Flight Time: 63 minutes Range: 53.22m km
ECM Modifier: 10% ECCM Modifier: 10%
Cost Per Missile: 7.42 Development Cost: 742
Chance to Hit: 1k km/s 280% 3k km/s 93.3% 5k km/s 56.0% 10k km/s 28.0%
Materials Required
Corbomite 1
Tritanium 1
Gallicite 5.42
Fuel: 3750
I think this is on the border of being acceptable. It has worse chance to hit than the Falcon but has much longer range and might be capable of outranging the NPR ships. If I were to fire two of these for every one of the Falcons, I would use less gallicite and should hit with more missiles than if I had used the Falcons. For example, if I fire 10 Falcons against a 5k km/s target, 6 - 7 would probably hit (neglecting enemy CIWS and ECM). If instead I fired 20 Falcon II's against the same target, about 10 - 11 should hit. However, the Falcon has a more powerful warhead and does more damage when it hits, so even with fewer hits it might still be a more capable missile... except the range is terrible. If my math is right, 10 Falcon II's would cause 4*10 = 40 damage total, and the Falcons would cause 6*12 = 48 damage total. So from a pure damage perspective the Falcon is probably superior, and it would also penetrate armor more reliably and deal more consistent damage.
Speaking of which, I have no idea how heavily armored the NPR ships are. I should probably fail conservative on that front, and assume they have at least 5-10 layers of armor. So in that case the Falcon II wouldn't even do internal damage and the Falcon would only do 7 - 2 damage, depending on armor.
Need to ponder this one some more it looks like.
What's your missile tech looking like? A screenshot of the right side of the missile tech screen would be helpful. I don' think your missiles will do so well, they will get hit by PD 100 percent of the time at that speed so you will need a lot.
-
What's your missile tech looking like? A screenshot of the right side of the missile tech screen would be helpful. I don' think your missiles will do so well, they will get hit by PD 100 percent of the time at that speed so you will need a lot.
I think you're right. I'm struggling to make a small missile fast enough to be effective. See attached for existing tech.
-
This is about the fastest missile I think I can build, though it's gigantic:
Falcon III Anti-ship Missile
Missile Size: 65.00 MSP (162.500 Tons) Warhead: 12 Radiation Damage: 12 Manoeuvre Rating: 16
Speed: 21,539 km/s Fuel: 10,000 Flight Time: 53 minutes Range: 69.05m km
ECM Modifier: 10% ECCM Modifier: 10%
Cost Per Missile: 46.20 Development Cost: 4,620
Chance to Hit: 1k km/s 344.6% 3k km/s 114.9% 5k km/s 68.9% 10k km/s 34.5%
Materials Required
Corbomite 1
Tritanium 3
Gallicite 42.20
Fuel: 10000
I'm curious if anyone has any good pointers for an appropriate overall missile speed which is capable of penetrating hostile anti-missile fire?
-
With your engine tech there is no way to get through the PD so your best bet would be a lot of small cheap missiles to overwhelm them or to tech more.
-
These may be the waning days of the Aegis corporation in that case. I guess it depends on how hostile the NPR is. I've never encountered one in one of my own systems before, but I assume they are capable of navigating jump points?
Fortunately this particular NPR is not located adjacent to my home system, so I have some standoff capability.
I think it's time then to mine all of the intervening jump points and set up some ambushes. Might be able to catch them in the jump shock. It's going to be an uphill battle getting better tech online in order to mount a proper counterattack.
-
In terms of defences if your CIWS worked really well I would build some flak frigate escorts in you case. Research one x4 tracking beam fire-control and a twin 17% reduction in size Gauss turret matching the fire-controls tracking speed.
CIWS is good if your ships run around on their own... but a fleet need dedicated PD that can mutually support each other.
This way you should be able to concentrate missiles on attacking as you should be able to deal with their missiles using flak cannon fire and good enough armour.
Even at your low tech speed you should be able to make this work withing a reasonable time frame. An escort of this kind would perhaps be 5-6000t if you have a good naval yard available at that size.
-
Yeah, I will probably invest in some gauss and ciws defences. I spent the better part of last night reading through some of SpikeTheHobbitMage's experiments with gauss turrets. Gauss missile defense corvettes seem like they should be viable, and I did have the foresight to research a few of the relevant techs for those systems.
-
It seems, based on my research, possible to design gauss turrets with superior performance compared to CIWS. I will pursue that avenue.
Additionally, I will be mining all jump points between Sol and the hostile NPR system. I will post the designs shortly as I need to finish research on the warhead before the second stage can be developed.