Transport Size: 14,923 tons
Build Cost: 606.3 BP
5x Placeholder STO [Anti-Ship]
5x Placeholder STO [Point Defense]
20x Heavy MG Emplacement
20x AT Emplacement
40x MG Position
40x AT Gun Position
60x AA Gun Position
600x PW Infantry
30x General Purpose Light Tank
10x Logistics Vehicle
1x Headquarters Unit
Weequay class Troop Transport 262,335 tons 1,770 Crew 12,393.7 BP TCS 5,247 TH 12,500 EM 0
2382 km/s Armour 16-365 Shields 0-0 HTK 574 Sensors 0/0/0/0 DCR 1 PPV 0
MSP 29 Max Repair 156.250 MSP
Troop Capacity 100,000 tons Cargo Shuttle Multiplier 10
Lieutenant Commander Control Rating 1 BRG
Intended Deployment Time: 3.1 months
Commercial Ion Drive EP625.00 (20) Power 12500.0 Fuel Use 5.59% Signature 625.00 Explosion 5%
Fuel Capacity 1,550,000 Litres Range 19 billion km (92 days at full power)
CIWS-50 (40x4) Range 1000 km TS: 5,000 km/s ROF 5
This design is classed as a Commercial Vessel for maintenance purposes
Weequay II class Troop Transport 279,176 tons 1,970 Crew 14,900.1 BP TCS 5,584 TH 12,500 EM 0
2238 km/s Armour 16-380 Shields 0-0 HTK 610 Sensors 0/0/0/0 DCR 1 PPV 0
MSP 33 Max Repair 200 MSP
Troop Capacity 100,000 tons Drop Capable
Lieutenant Commander Control Rating 1 BRG
Intended Deployment Time: 3.1 months
Commercial Ion Drive EP625.00 (20) Power 12500.0 Fuel Use 5.59% Signature 625.00 Explosion 5%
Fuel Capacity 1,550,000 Litres Range 17.9 billion km (92 days at full power)
CIWS-50 (40x4) Range 1000 km TS: 5,000 km/s ROF 5
This design is classed as a Commercial Vessel for maintenance purposes
^Just realized you were talking about enemy Orbital Bombardment... lol. I've heard the to hit chances are terrible for that, but I've yet to test out Orbital Bombardment for myself. And the NPRs haven't shelled me to hell yet either, so I got nothing on that.
I just designed a new very heavy STO emplacement. It's going to cost nearly 7000 RP to develop the unit. (45cm UV laser, it'll leave a mark. Or write your name on the moon.)
It could cost a third as much, to research, to build, and to maintain. (Though negligibly less in TN minerals.) But I decided to splash out on giving it heavy static armor.
Does anyone have strong opinions or solid arguments on whether it's worth paying for that kind of protection? Whether STOs should go cheap and rely on fortification making them hard to hit, or expensive and have a better shot at surviving if bombarded?
I might lean to cheap for point defense sites, which probably should be deployed in large numbers...
STOs are likely to be extremely large units, bigger than most if not all heavy vehicles (though maybe not the superheavy ones.)I just designed a new very heavy STO emplacement. It's going to cost nearly 7000 RP to develop the unit. (45cm UV laser, it'll leave a mark. Or write your name on the moon.)
It could cost a third as much, to research, to build, and to maintain. (Though negligibly less in TN minerals.) But I decided to splash out on giving it heavy static armor.
Does anyone have strong opinions or solid arguments on whether it's worth paying for that kind of protection? Whether STOs should go cheap and rely on fortification making them hard to hit, or expensive and have a better shot at surviving if bombarded?
I might lean to cheap for point defense sites, which probably should be deployed in large numbers...
It's worth considering that STO emplacements seem to get targeted preferentially during invasions. I'm not completely sure what the game mechanic is but whenever I invade a planet the STO's are always the first enemy units that get destroyed, and usually within the first couple of rounds of combat. So there might be an argument for having a huge number of them in order to use them as cannon fodder while your ground forces take out the invaders.
On the other hand... it might be kind of awesome to make some sort of Minas Tirith type of fortified city around each STO, and make huge heavily armored and heavily defended STOs instead.
I myself would probably go with the swarm of ants instead of the fortified city approach, but I could see both working if properly executed.
STOs are likely to be extremely large units, bigger than most if not all heavy vehicles (though maybe not the superheavy ones.)I just designed a new very heavy STO emplacement. It's going to cost nearly 7000 RP to develop the unit. (45cm UV laser, it'll leave a mark. Or write your name on the moon.)
It could cost a third as much, to research, to build, and to maintain. (Though negligibly less in TN minerals.) But I decided to splash out on giving it heavy static armor.
Does anyone have strong opinions or solid arguments on whether it's worth paying for that kind of protection? Whether STOs should go cheap and rely on fortification making them hard to hit, or expensive and have a better shot at surviving if bombarded?
I might lean to cheap for point defense sites, which probably should be deployed in large numbers...
It's worth considering that STO emplacements seem to get targeted preferentially during invasions. I'm not completely sure what the game mechanic is but whenever I invade a planet the STO's are always the first enemy units that get destroyed, and usually within the first couple of rounds of combat. So there might be an argument for having a huge number of them in order to use them as cannon fodder while your ground forces take out the invaders.
On the other hand... it might be kind of awesome to make some sort of Minas Tirith type of fortified city around each STO, and make huge heavily armored and heavily defended STOs instead.
I myself would probably go with the swarm of ants instead of the fortified city approach, but I could see both working if properly executed.
On the other hand as static units they can be highly fortified, and should always be located in rear-echelon formations. Even a big one like mine should be only slightly more likely to get hit than any given front-line CAP infantry unit, and they have more HP than infantry and can have more armor as well.
I just designed a new very heavy STO emplacement. It's going to cost nearly 7000 RP to develop the unit. (45cm UV laser, it'll leave a mark. Or write your name on the moon.)
It could cost a third as much, to research, to build, and to maintain. (Though negligibly less in TN minerals.) But I decided to splash out on giving it heavy static armor.
Does anyone have strong opinions or solid arguments on whether it's worth paying for that kind of protection? Whether STOs should go cheap and rely on fortification making them hard to hit, or expensive and have a better shot at surviving if bombarded?
I might lean to cheap for point defense sites, which probably should be deployed in large numbers...
Also... ultra-heavy vehicles are a thing. Maybe that would be a better STO platform than a static platform? I'm not sure how that would shake out in terms of fortification and armor and whatnot.Are ultraheavy vehicles allowed to have STO weapons?
they might be hit in an artillery duel with bombardment ships.
STOs shouldn't expect to be hit a lot in ground combat, unless the battle is pretty well lost, but they might be hit in an artillery duel with bombardment ships.
I'm somewhat unsure how much the wealth cost actually matters. I haven't built enough ground forces to worry about their impact on the budget, but maybe I should...Also... ultra-heavy vehicles are a thing. Maybe that would be a better STO platform than a static platform? I'm not sure how that would shake out in terms of fortification and armor and whatnot.Are ultraheavy vehicles allowed to have STO weapons?
Ultraheavy vehicles have very poor fortification, so they'd be something like four times as likely to be hit. On the other hand they can probably have something like four times as much armor? Which does add up to better survival chances against most threats, I think.
they might be hit in an artillery duel with bombardment ships.
"Might" is the critical word you use - in order for orbital bombardment to explicitly target STOs, you need to forego the bonus of having FFD support, which means that OBS hit rate is going to be worse than pathetic. The primary defense of your static STOs against OBS is not armour, ironically its evasion. High fortification combined with piss poor OBS accuracy means that your STOs are going to be getting a lot of hits while not getting hit back.
Besides, static heavy armour is not strong enough to handle the usual bombardment suspects since people should be using high caliber weapons anyways for OBS duty. Additionally light static armour is more than good enough to handle 1 damage weapons like gauss spam reliably so IMO not worth armouring.
Why should they be using high caliber weapons anyway, exactly? Beam weapons don't do splash damage against units, so lots of relatively small weapons will give better results than a few huge ones except when you happen to hit a very hard target...and when that happens, big weapons may not cut it. At Compressed Carbon Armor level heavy vehicle armor is 90 points, which would resist anything short of a 60cm (!!) laser. I'm not saying go Gauss, but numerous 10-15cm lasers or slightly larger railguns might be more helpful in clearing the board of troops than my 45cm advanced spinal deathray.they might be hit in an artillery duel with bombardment ships.
"Might" is the critical word you use - in order for orbital bombardment to explicitly target STOs, you need to forego the bonus of having FFD support, which means that OBS hit rate is going to be worse than pathetic. The primary defense of your static STOs against OBS is not armour, ironically its evasion. High fortification combined with piss poor OBS accuracy means that your STOs are going to be getting a lot of hits while not getting hit back.
Besides, static heavy armour is not strong enough to handle the usual bombardment suspects since people should be using high caliber weapons anyways for OBS duty. Additionally light static armour is more than good enough to handle 1 damage weapons like gauss spam reliably so IMO not worth armouring.
Why should they be using high caliber weapons anyway, exactly? Beam weapons don't do splash damage against units, so lots of relatively small weapons will give better results than a few huge ones except when you happen to hit a very hard target...and when that happens, big weapons may not cut it. At Compressed Carbon Armor level heavy vehicle armor is 90 points, which would resist anything short of a 60cm (!!) laser. I'm not saying go Gauss, but numerous 10-15cm lasers or slightly larger railguns might be more helpful in clearing the board of troops than my 45cm advanced spinal deathray.they might be hit in an artillery duel with bombardment ships.
"Might" is the critical word you use - in order for orbital bombardment to explicitly target STOs, you need to forego the bonus of having FFD support, which means that OBS hit rate is going to be worse than pathetic. The primary defense of your static STOs against OBS is not armour, ironically its evasion. High fortification combined with piss poor OBS accuracy means that your STOs are going to be getting a lot of hits while not getting hit back.
Besides, static heavy armour is not strong enough to handle the usual bombardment suspects since people should be using high caliber weapons anyways for OBS duty. Additionally light static armour is more than good enough to handle 1 damage weapons like gauss spam reliably so IMO not worth armouring.
Big weapons are, of course, helpful if what you're trying to do is peck away STOs from a standoff range rather than go in close and dare their full point-blank firepower...
I am going off of practical experience - I find that my heavier ships with the big guns to more damage to ground forces than my destroyers with the smaller guns.I'd need a lot more details to make any assessment of the significance of that.
Also ground armor is not the same as space armour. High armor simple reduces the chance of damage happening doesn't outright negate it, so although beam weapons can be resisted, bigger guns tend to kill with higher probability. Given how atrocious orbital accuracy is, I find it more important to make the few hits you have count as opposed to spray and pray.That's poor mathematics. However good or bad your hit rate is, twice as many shots yields twice as many hits.
My bombardment weapon of choice is the 50cm railgun, it is in essence a compromise between volume of fire and orbital anti-armour capability and so far it has worked well.Do you know what tech level and troop quality your targets are at?
As for anti-infantry my fleets point defence gauss weapons actually do quite well.
I am going off of practical experience - I find that my heavier ships with the big guns to more damage to ground forces than my destroyers with the smaller guns.I'd need a lot more details to make any assessment of the significance of that.Also ground armor is not the same as space armour. High armor simple reduces the chance of damage happening doesn't outright negate it, so although beam weapons can be resisted, bigger guns tend to kill with higher probability. Given how atrocious orbital accuracy is, I find it more important to make the few hits you have count as opposed to spray and pray.That's poor mathematics. However good or bad your hit rate is, twice as many shots yields twice as many hits.My bombardment weapon of choice is the 50cm railgun, it is in essence a compromise between volume of fire and orbital anti-armour capability and so far it has worked well.Do you know what tech level and troop quality your targets are at?
As for anti-infantry my fleets point defence gauss weapons actually do quite well.
My new-model power-armor infantry have armor 22.5, which means a the 10 AP of a 1-point space weapon hit yields less than 20% odds of actually killing them. (If the armor doesn't stop it it will kill them, since they have less than 20 HP.) Heavy power armor infantry, which I didn't want to foot the bill for, would take that down to 1-in-9. Even light infantry have better than even odds of survival. Well-developed Gauss still probably dominates lasers (not sure about railguns) for clearing light infantry, but against the crunchier types it probably loses out.
Tangentially, orbital fire support bombardment is a definite use case for miniaturized lasers, since the exigencies of ground combat rounds should make everything's effective RoF be 3 hours...