Post by: Hyfrydle on April 12, 2010, 03:58:50 PM
The AAR will be hosted on a blog page but I intend to use this post to ask questions and discuss the game. So far the introduction is complete and the game has been created the next step is deciding on starting techs and designing some systems and ships so any help in this area would be much appreciated.
The link to the blog is http://auroranewbieaar.blogspot.com/ (http://auroranewbieaar.blogspot.com/)
Please let me have your comments good or bad and if you want to see the game go in a certain direction please let me know.
Well that's all for now thanks for reading.
Post by: Xithias47 on April 12, 2010, 07:43:49 PM
Post by: randal7 on April 12, 2010, 09:14:17 PM
Question: are you deliberately not spending the starting points to buy techs, or are you unaware of that function?
Comment: excellent planetary governor for Earth. I don't know if I've ever seen a 20% factory bonus; that is very good to have.
Suggestions: build 5 military academies with 15-20% of your industry. They churn out officers, admins, and scientists. By the time all five are done, or soon after, you will likely have scientists with a bonus for every field of research.
Start a survey team now and dump them on some useless rocks to build their skills. When the team gets up to 150+, start surveying planets you will use.
I would recommend continually building factories, mines, and automines with about 10-15% of your industry each. At least as far into the game as I've gotten, you never have enough of these.
Looking forward to the next installment.
Post by: Hyfrydle on April 13, 2010, 02:12:36 AM
Quote from: "randal7"
Question: are you deliberately not spending the starting points to buy techs, or are you unaware of that function?
I have decided to do it this way to explain how research works I may use the starting points later on but I think it's more realistic actually taking the time to do the research.
Quote from: "randal7"
Comment: excellent planetary governor for Earth. I don't know if I've ever seen a 20% factory bonus; that is very good to have.
Yes out of the choice I had she was the best candidate I presume the 20% factory bonus helps in all installation construction.
Quote from: "randal7"
Suggestions: build 5 military academies with 15-20% of your industry. They churn out officers, admins, and scientists. By the time all five are done, or soon after, you will likely have scientists with a bonus for every field of research.
Start a survey team now and dump them on some useless rocks to build their skills. When the team gets up to 150+, start surveying planets you will use.
I would recommend continually building factories, mines, and automines with about 10-15% of your industry each. At least as far into the game as I've gotten, you never have enough of these.
I will start building academies as soon as I can thanks for the tip it will be useful to have scientists with bonuses in all fields. Also thanks for the survey team tip I wasn't sure how teams work. Do I need to have a ship to transport them?
I'm trying to base my installation builds on my free population but this is part of the game where I'm still learning so again thanks for the tips.
Post by: AndonSage on April 13, 2010, 02:55:34 AM
Quote from: "Hyfrydle"
Thanks for your interest guys I'm hoping to get another installment up tonight.Just saw this, and I'll be following your AAR also :)
Quote from: "Hyfrydle"
Sorry that your name isn't mentioned in the quotes I'm not sure how to do thisAfter the quote, put ="name", e.g.
Code: [Select]
[quote="Hyfrydle"]This is Hyfrydle's text[/quote]
Post by: Hyfrydle on April 13, 2010, 03:13:47 AM
Quote from: "AndonSage"
After the quote, put ="name", e.g.
That's great now I won't seem so rude.
Post by: AndonSage on April 13, 2010, 03:46:48 AM
Post by: sloanjh on April 13, 2010, 07:59:26 AM
Quote from: "AndonSage"
Quote from: "Hyfrydle"Sorry that your name isn't mentioned in the quotes I'm not sure how to do this :-)
John
Post by: StratPlayer on April 13, 2010, 09:27:29 AM
As another newbie still inching up the learning-cliff, I'm very interested in following this.
As an aside -- So far, to me, it seems clear that a big part of the fun of the game is the role-playing aspect of the game. The more immersive you make the AAR, the more fun you'll have with it, I think.
At the tutorial level, I really appreciate the detailed, "go to this screen and click this button to do whatsit and such." But I also enjoy the deeper POV aspect of fictionalizing the experience, too.
I also know that it's hard to blend the two, especially as a newbie:
Tutorial Version:
Quote
According to the colony summary the governor needs to be level A3 and checking the Leaders screen four civilian administrators are qualified.
Kate Wallace: Shipbuilding 5% Factory Production 20% Mining 5% Population Growth 10% and Logistical 10%
Based on this choice I have decided to go with Kate Wallace this is mainly due to the shipbuilding bonus as I hope to start building ships very soon.
So Kate Wallace becomes the first planetary governor of Earth.
Role-Playing Fictionalized Version:
Quote
Earth was in turmoil following the adoption of a new planetary government. Old rivalries threatened to break the tenuous new union, and the smoke of nationalism continued to flare from the smouldering embers of the old order. In this time of radical change, it would require a unique and special person to take on the challenge of holding the infant world coalition together. The representatives from the various global regions debated for weeks before finally uniting behind Kate Wallace. The former CEO of the large multinational Essex corporation, the vibrant Wallace had a hard-earned expertise in production and business that would help bring the diverse population together, give them a common goal, and focus their energies toward building a stronger world.
...or whatever...
But I'm definitely on-board and look forward to seeing how it goes for you.
Post by: Steve Walmsley on April 13, 2010, 12:01:23 PM
Steve
Post by: Hyfrydle on April 13, 2010, 04:16:28 PM
Quote from: "StratPlayer"
At the tutorial level, I really appreciate the detailed, "go to this screen and click this button to do whatsit and such." But I also enjoy the deeper POV aspect of fictionalizing the experience, too.
I think at the moment I need to stick with one method to keep any confusion to a minimum. After some time as passed I may try some fiction but it's not my strong point. Thought your fictionalized version was very good maybe you should start a fiction AAR. The more there is to read the better.
Post by: Hyfrydle on April 13, 2010, 05:45:44 PM
Also any tips from the experienced players are much appreciated.
Post by: Maximillian on April 13, 2010, 08:20:15 PM
Quote from: "Hyfrydle"
The next installment is up please let me know what you think and also of any changes that might be useful. Things are moving quite slowly but I'm enjoying the steady pace it gives me time to really see how various things are affected.
Also any tips from the experienced players are much appreciated.
most players have their geology teams gain a lot of experience before bringing them to earth. It turns out that using a low skilled team means that there will be fewer minerals available to find! Note that you can disband teams or load them onto ships if you want to move them around. That would have works with your geo team.
Looks like you are off to a good start. Thanks for writing the game up.
Max
Post by: AndonSage on April 13, 2010, 08:31:45 PM
Maybe StratPlayer could turn your AAR into fiction. Looks to me like he's good at fiction, just based on the paragraph he wrote
Post by: randal7 on April 13, 2010, 08:59:07 PM
When surveying, the game makes rolls against the team's skill level (the exact mechanics are in the wiki somewhere). The first roll determines if a find is made for the given time period. This is why low skill teams can take years to find a deposit, and high skill teams may find one two months in a row. A second roll is made to determine if the team can find any more minerals. If this roll is failed, no survey team can ever again find new deposits on that planet. Low skill teams will almost always take a long time and only find one deposit; that is why it is best to start them on an uninhabitable and otherwise useless rock. When their skill level hits 150+, use them on places you will colonize or will place mines anyway.
Anyway, to summarize, I would counsel against sending your team to Mars or any other potentially habitable planet, or any place that already has useful mineral deposits, until you get their skill built up. Like you, I learned this the hard way.
Post by: StratPlayer on April 14, 2010, 07:50:09 AM
And I totally understand and appreciate the approach you're taking with this first AAR. In my earlier post, I was mainly making a point about one of the things I like about this game -- the richness and depth which allows a player to get deeper into the role-playing and story-telling aspects if they want to.
And some excellent tips and info regarding the geo survey teams. I think it helps makes a case for using some of the starting research points at the begining of a campaign, at least to get enough tech to give a rudimentary level of space flight and ships right from the get-go -- You don't want to hurt your initial home-world's mineral position by using a green survey team there, but you can't ("realistically") put them anywhere else if you don't have any ships or space-flight technology.
And thanks for the kind words regarding the fictionalizing, AndonSage. I probably will do a campaign and try my hand at a fictionalized AAR at some point, but right now my schedule is just too chaotic to put the time into it -- I'd rather spend my available time getting up to speed on just the mechanics of how to play the game at this point.
And this newbie tutorial / AAR helps. Thanks again!
Post by: Hyfrydle on April 14, 2010, 04:49:45 PM
Post by: Andrew on April 14, 2010, 05:23:42 PM
Post by: sloanjh on April 14, 2010, 06:04:36 PM
Quote from: "Hyfrydle"
Another update and know I need some help I want to build some missile PDC's on Earth but I'm not sure where to start can anyone point me in the right direction? Kate Wallace and her team would really appreciate the help :-) And that you can only shoot at active (not passive) sensor contacts (unless you shoot at a waypoint and your missiles have on-board guidance). I usually make a separate PDC design that's just a big active sensor and lots of armor.
John
Post by: Brian Neumann on April 14, 2010, 09:37:25 PM
The second major kind of base are the really huge ones that only the biggest planets will have the capacity to build. I still tend to split the missile and beam bases apart, and will have one or two bases with really huge sensors. The largest I can afford to prototype. I have even put in a size 50, resolution 1 active sensor. Even at early techs it can detect ships or missiles at huge ranges, back it up with a size 10 resolution 150 and you are seeing anything that could possibly be a threat to the planet. These bases also have lots of armour on them, up to 100 points in one game. They will have 10-20 missile launcers sized 12-24, and 10 more that fire the standard anti-ship missile. The beam base will have 3-5 turrets of the biggest mesons/lasers I have and another 3-5 of smaller 5 second cycle time for point defense.
Hope this helps you figure out what you want.
Brian
Post by: sloanjh on April 14, 2010, 11:51:08 PM
Quote from: "Brian"
I have even put in a size 50, resolution 1 active sensor.
Dang!!! Isn't the research cost on this huge (e.g. a level or two on all the active sensor techs)?
John
PS - 50 or 51?
I try to make my active sensor sizes a multiple of 3, so the fire control range matches....
Post by: Hyfrydle on April 15, 2010, 03:02:48 AM
Quote from: "Brian"
By the time that my empire is getting out into space I try to have a few different designs of pdc's. The first set is for small pdc's that are easy to assemble from prefab components. One will be a sensor base with several active sensors, usually comparable to a cruisers sensors and a lot of armour. The second is a point defense base with a single quad turret, usually meson so it ignores atmospere and the fire controls. It will also have an active sensor that covers its fire control range at resolution 1. The third and fourth are missile bases with either 5 size one launchers, or 5 launchers for my standard anti-ship missile and enough magazine space for at least 20 salvo's of asm and 100 of anti-missile missiles. All of these are small enough for the freighters to move easily, generally two, sometimes 3 sections,or 10-15 cargo holds. These are all designed to give a developing colony some active defenses. Once I have gunboats and fighters I will usually include a design for fighters also.
The second major kind of base are the really huge ones that only the biggest planets will have the capacity to build. I still tend to split the missile and beam bases apart, and will have one or two bases with really huge sensors. The largest I can afford to prototype. I have even put in a size 50, resolution 1 active sensor. Even at early techs it can detect ships or missiles at huge ranges, back it up with a size 10 resolution 150 and you are seeing anything that could possibly be a threat to the planet. These bases also have lots of armour on them, up to 100 points in one game. They will have 10-20 missile launcers sized 12-24, and 10 more that fire the standard anti-ship missile. The beam base will have 3-5 turrets of the biggest mesons/lasers I have and another 3-5 of smaller 5 second cycle time for point defense.
Hope this helps you figure out what you want.
Brian
Wow thanks for all this fantastic info I gather from this that the most powerful sensor possible is required along with firecontrols to match. Is it also correct that numerous installations can be linked to one firecontrol?
Also what kind of range should I be looking at for planet based defences?
When it comes to magazines I'm still trying to get my head around them is the following correct?
A magazine of 50 can store 50 size 1 missiles or 10 size 5 missiles?
Also I presume the turrets are treated slightly differently as they are not affected by ship speed.
One final question when I select to build a PDC in the class screen the default design comes with fuel storage which I suppose is not required but when I remove it I get an error message. The game continues fine after that as far as I can tell.
Sorry for all the questions but I want to document this in my AAR so I need to make sure I understand it first.
Post by: UnLimiTeD on April 15, 2010, 04:21:16 AM
Your assumption on magazines is correct.
The range on your PDCs honestly depends on available tech, to put it that simple.
On ships, the maximum weapon tracking speed is either the speed of the ship it's mounted on, or your highest Fire Control Tracking speed level, whichever is higher.
Now of course you can make firecontrols up to 4x the size for faster tracking speed, and this is where turrets make the real difference.
If a weapon is mounted on a turret, the turret tracking speed is used instead of the ship speed to calculate the tracking speed of the weapon.
The turret tech you research is the turret tracking speed for 10% gear, meaning the turret's size is 10% of the mounted weapons.
You can increase that similar to firecontrols to match your target, by inserting the desired tracking speed.
Post by: Brian Neumann on April 15, 2010, 07:46:26 AM
Quote from: "Hyfrydle"
Wow thanks for all this fantastic info I gather from this that the most powerful sensor possible is required along with firecontrols to match. Is it also correct that numerous installations can be linked to one firecontrol?
Also what kind of range should I be looking at for planet based defences?
When it comes to magazines I'm still trying to get my head around them is the following correct?
A magazine of 50 can store 50 size 1 missiles or 10 size 5 missiles?
Also I presume the turrets are treated slightly differently as they are not affected by ship speed.
One final question when I select to build a PDC in the class screen the default design comes with fuel storage which I suppose is not required but when I remove it I get an error message. The game continues fine after that as far as I can tell.
Sorry for all the questions but I want to document this in my AAR so I need to make sure I understand it first.
You have the magazine capacity right. On planets there is currently no delay for reloading the magazine from the planetary stockpile. This means that you do not need to have a huge magazine for the pdc. I still prefer to have a large enough magazine for a decent fight.
If you want your pdc's energy weapons to be effective against missiles you will need to put them in turrets. Currently only lasers, mesons, and gauss cannon can be in a turret. Gauss cannon are a poor weapon for pdc's as they will be blocked by even the tiniest atmospere will block them. In general I prefer mesons as they end up being effective from any colony they are placed on, and they ignore armour on the receiving end. While in theory they are shorter ranged than an equal tech laser would be, in effect if there is much atmosphere they have an equivilent range. I do tend to put even the biggest mesons/lasers in turrets so they can benifit from future fire control upgrades more. It is another place to pay a little extra to start, and save in the long run. They can also act as additional point defense for the planet. For a small base that is primarily for point defense my preferense is the 10cm meson as it is small, ignores the atmosphere, and if any assult landings are attempted they will chew up the ships landing.
Bring on the questions. I usually check the board two or three times a day (eastern standard time USA). I am always happy to help, or you can send me a pm if you want to.
Brian
Each pdc is effectivly a seperate ship. Each will need it's own fire control. They do not however need seperate active sensors. As long as one active sensor (grav) is operating and detecting what you want to shoot at all of your ships/pdc's will be able to target it.
As for the weapon ranges from pdcs. The lighter missile bases usually have the same ranges as my shipboard weapons. If I have reasearched pdc specific beam fire control I will use that on the pdc's. It has a 50% greater range IIRC than normal fire control. One thing to be aware of with pdc's is if there is an atmosphere as the change to beam weapon damage is [damage -(damagex(atmospheric pressure/1 atmospheric pressure)]. Anything over 1 atmospheric pressure means that beam weapons will do no damage. The one exeption to this is Mesons. They totally ignore the atmospheric modifiers. For most beam weapons the change to damage will also affect the range as it is based on the damage the weapon does. Torpedo's do ignore this effect, and as they also have a constand damage for their range they are affected less than rest of the beam weapons. They do still need to do at least one point of damage after the atmospheric modifier is applied or they are blocked by the atmosphere.
An atmospheric pressure of .8 atmosphere means that all non meson weapons will do 1/5 normal damage (80/100)% If they are not doing 5 points of damage at the range the target is at they are blocked by the atmosphere. (all damage is rounded down to a whole number).
With the big missile bases I want their firecontroll to be at least twice the range of my longest range missile. This does two two things, it counters enemy ecm that is better than my eccm, and it allows for the base to still be usefull after my missiles have been upgraded a couple of times. As upgradeing pdc's is a hassle, and seems to have a intermittent bug as well it just makes life simpler.
All bases need some basic active sensors that cover thier normal engagement range in case the big sensor pdc is taken out. The advantage of the big base sensor base is it canhave a lot of armour in comparison to the other bases, and it will be the only thing they can spot if their missiles are using em sensors and fired from really long range. A range where the attackers do not have an actual sensor lock for the bases.
Post by: Hyfrydle on April 15, 2010, 05:21:30 PM
The info from everyone who is participating is really helping me out the next info I need is help with missile designs for both planet based installations and ships. I'm hoping to start work on a military protection force for Earth once the planet based defences are complete.
Post by: UnLimiTeD on April 15, 2010, 06:21:09 PM
You insert you tech levels, desired warhead, range and speed of the target and it gives you the ideal configuration for those specifications.
A word on tech levels: Missiles gain a tremendous % bonus in performance with early tech levels, Wh 2->3 = 50%, and the like.
Fuel efficiency helps range, not only on missiles.
PDC Missile Launchers reload double as fast, so you generally go for somewhat larger sizes on ASMs.
Once you researched a few levels of sensor tech, which you should better do sooner than later, you can put a bit of Sensor on the really big missiles, just in case.
Ship based ASMs are generally between size 3 and 6, depending on your requirements.
Larger warheads allow deeper armor penetration, but are weaker in face of enemy Anti Missile Fire, and once you find an enemy with sufficient armor to shrug off your biggest missile, you have to sandpaper him anyways.
You got some good finds on the minerals, generally not that much, but good availabilities, especially duranium.
Post by: AndonSage on April 15, 2010, 09:34:42 PM
Be aware that if you upgrade to 5.10, you'll have to start over.
Post by: Hyfrydle on April 16, 2010, 02:20:33 AM
Quote from: "AndonSage"
Steve released version 5.10 tonight, btw
Not sure what to do I want to upgrade but it involves restarting which is annoying. I presume the new version has bug fixes and new features are these documented anywhere?
Post by: AndonSage on April 16, 2010, 03:30:42 AM
Quote from: "Hyfrydle"
I presume the new version has bug fixes and new features are these documented anywhere?The Tutorial is still on version 4.77. What do you think? :) ) are still figuring out the base game
Post by: Hyfrydle on April 16, 2010, 03:54:07 AM
Post by: Brian Neumann on April 16, 2010, 05:40:44 AM
A pdc does not need the passive sensors usually. There is a deep space tracking system that can be built my industry that does this for you, and is a lot harder to put out of action. If the range is not good enough for you a little reasearch can help, or you can build extra dss units. They are not completely cumulative, but I think it is the range of the first plus half the range of all the others so it is still worthwhile to do. If you ever want to see what your sensor reach is you can on the System Map (F3) screen. Under display there are some options for showing what sensors can see what.
Active sensors are detected by the passive em sensor, not other active sensors.
Brian
Post by: Hyfrydle on April 16, 2010, 05:47:32 AM
Quote from: "Brian"
A couple of notes for you.
A pdc does not need the passive sensors usually. There is a deep space tracking system that can be built my industry that does this for you, and is a lot harder to put out of action. If the range is not good enough for you a little reasearch can help, or you can build extra dss units. They are not completely cumulative, but I think it is the range of the first plus half the range of all the others so it is still worthwhile to do. If you ever want to see what your sensor reach is you can on the System Map (F3) screen. Under display there are some options for showing what sensors can see what.
Active sensors are detected by the passive em sensor, not other active sensors.
Brian
Thanks for that you just answered one of my next questions I was wondering what the deep space tracking station did as it upgrades I presume the range improves. Also good to know about the sensors I misunderstood this.
Post by: ZimRathbone on April 16, 2010, 07:55:22 AM
Quote from: "Hyfrydle"
Gonna stick with 5.02 and continue the campaign I'm enjoying writing it up and starting again would be hard work. Also in the next installment the jump points are going to be explored which should keep me busy.
An entirely valid strategy - many old hands (particularly the fiction writers, like Kurt and Charlie) have a tendancy to resist moving to a new version if they have an interestong campaign on the go. Back in the days when steve was writing Starfire Assistant, there was an update program (SAUpgrade - created by someone else - not Steve) that could make a fairly good attempt at modifying the database from one version to the next, but it had a tendancy to get somewhat erratic as each new version came along.
I dont believe that anyone has produced a similar utility for Aurora, and I suspect that it would be far harder to develop than the SAUpgrade was due to the added complexity of Aurora
Post by: randal7 on April 16, 2010, 08:00:08 AM
Question for anybody: do PDCs need fuel? I have finally got far enough into a game to need them, and on the ones I designed I deleted the fuel bunkers. Should I fix that?
Post by: ZimRathbone on April 16, 2010, 08:12:38 AM
Quote from: "randal7"
Question for anybody: do PDCs need fuel? I have finally got far enough into a game to need them, and on the ones I designed I deleted the fuel bunkers. Should I fix that?
PDCs generally dont need fuel - I have seen some include it for parasite craft stationed there, and by default the design includes 1 fuel storage, which I often leave in from laziness rather than anyrthing else.
Mind you I have a vague memory of being spammed by "out of fuel" messages when I eliminated the 1 fuel bunker on sheildless missile bases (which should never use fuel) a long while back - if i get a chance in the next weeks I'll check that
Post by: StratPlayer on April 16, 2010, 08:13:50 AM
:thumbs-up:
Post by: Hyfrydle on April 16, 2010, 08:49:32 AM
Quote from: "ZimRathbone"
Quote from: "randal7"Mind you I have a vague memory of being spammed by "out of fuel" messages when I eliminated the 1 fuel bunker on sheildless missile bases (which should never use fuel) a long while back - if i get a chance in the next weeks I'll check that
I found I got spammed with out of fuel messages until I removed the fuel tanks.
Post by: Steve Walmsley on April 16, 2010, 09:07:16 AM
Quote from: "AndonSage"
Folks are already finding bugs in the new stuff. 5.02 was pretty stable, so you might want to keep with that, and switch to 5.1x after that campaign. A side benefit of that is not having to figure out the new stuff just yet, since you (and me, and others I think :mrgreen:Good advice
Steve
Post by: Steve Walmsley on April 16, 2010, 09:09:31 AM
Quote from: "ZimRathbone"
If you do that, select each PDC of that class in the Ship window so the ship records get updated to the class records.Quote from: "randal7"Question for anybody: do PDCs need fuel? I have finally got far enough into a game to need them, and on the ones I designed I deleted the fuel bunkers. Should I fix that?
PDCs generally dont need fuel - I have seen some include it for parasite craft stationed there, and by default the design includes 1 fuel storage, which I often leave in from laziness rather than anyrthing else.
Mind you I have a vague memory of being spammed by "out of fuel" messages when I eliminated the 1 fuel bunker on sheildless missile bases (which should never use fuel) a long while back - if i get a chance in the next weeks I'll check that
Steve
Post by: Hyfrydle on April 16, 2010, 05:51:12 PM
Here are my components:
Missile:
Missile Size: 4 MSP (0.2 HS) Warhead: 2 Armour: 0 Manoeuvre Rating: 15
Speed: 15500 km/s Endurance: 24 minutes Range: 22.5m km
Cost Per Missile: 1.6583
Chance to Hit: 1k km/s 232.5% 3k km/s 75% 5k km/s 46.5% 10k km/s 23.2%
Materials Required: 0.5x Tritanium 1.2833x Gallicite Fuel x1125
Development Cost for Project: 166RP
Missile Fire Control:
Active Sensor Strength: 10 Sensitivity Modifier: 50%
Sensor Size: 1 HS Sensor HTK: 1
Primary Mode: Resolution: 140 Maximum Range: 21,000,000 km
Chance of destruction by electronic damage: 100%
Cost: 10 Crew: 5
Materials Required: 2.5x Duranium 7.5x Uridium
Development Cost for Project: 100RP
Magazine:
Capacity: 300 Internal Armour: 0 HS Explosion Chance: 30
Magazine Size: 20 HS Magazine HTK: 1
Cost: 100 Crew: 30
Materials Required: 25x Duranium 0x Neutronium 75x Tritanium
Development Cost for Project: 1000RP
Size 4 Missile Launcher:
Maximum Missile Size: 4 Rate of Fire: 20 seconds
Launcher Size: 4 HS Launcher HTK: 2
Cost Per Launcher: 24 Crew Per Launcher: 40
PDC Only
Materials Required: 6x Duranium 18x Tritanium
Development Cost for Project: 240RP
Do these designs look okay? If not what do I need to do to improve them?
The problem I'm having with the Meson cannon is the tracking speed which I can't seem to get higher than 5000 km/s which is not fast enough for point defense duties.
Hope someone can help with this.
Post by: Brian Neumann on April 16, 2010, 06:40:13 PM
You will probably never have your fire control able to give you more than about a 50% chance per shot against incomming missiles. 30% is more normal for comparable tech systems. If you look at the missiles you will be launching, you have about a 30% chance of shooting them down.
Brian
Post by: UnLimiTeD on April 16, 2010, 07:22:37 PM
Do you expect being attacked soon?
Otherwise, I would wait a few months, research some tracking speed and turret, and then build a PDC, because, this ain't stopping anyone.
Well, atleast not anymore in 2 years.
Keep in mind PDCs can always reload from Planetary stockpiles, so you don't need that big magazines.
Against Missiles, you can also get a tracking speed bonus, though you have to research that aswell.
Post by: Brian Neumann on April 16, 2010, 08:21:28 PM
Brian
Post by: UnLimiTeD on April 17, 2010, 06:19:34 AM
Post by: Hyfrydle on April 17, 2010, 04:10:26 PM
Doing this I will be able to see what if any threats are out there and be better equipped to counter any future attacks. This I feel makes sense so that's my plan.
Post by: Brian Neumann on April 17, 2010, 04:21:34 PM
By having just a few fixed defenses, you make small raiding squadrons hitting you an expensive proposition. Without them you are reliant on your mobile forces.
You can also over engineer your ships to take advantage of upcoming tech in the missile field but it is more difficult as you have to watch the space and cost more. They make a bigger impact on how long a ship takes to build than how long your home planet takes to build a pdc with all of its industry.
Brian
Post by: Hyfrydle on April 17, 2010, 06:11:58 PM
I think some kind of defense is a priority still working on tech but will hopefully have something put together by the next post.
Post by: waresky on April 17, 2010, 06:51:00 PM
am follower..
Post by: Hyfrydle on April 20, 2010, 03:46:51 AM
http://auroranewbieaar.blogspot.com/ (http://auroranewbieaar.blogspot.com/)
Post by: Treebiter on April 20, 2010, 03:48:13 PM
If you're lucky you'll have a profitable trading partner and ally! If not... Well, your research plans are on track.
Post by: Hyfrydle on April 20, 2010, 04:07:47 PM
Communication has broken down with the Tau Ceti aliens so it's now a quick military buildup and preparation for hostile action. All tips are much appreciated and who knows I might even survive
Post by: UnLimiTeD on April 20, 2010, 04:39:56 PM
If they have around your level, defense is quite important.
If they are far superior, and don't follow you, you can rather quietly build up, but be sure to make it count.
If you use AMMs or Beams, always make sure the turrets can hit targets of 30k+ speed, because that seems to be a good average speed of medium tech missiles.
And make sure to armor your important ship, everything big with sensors, which could be a target of priority.
Post by: Treebiter on April 20, 2010, 05:27:39 PM
http://aurorawiki.pentarch.org/index.ph ... =Diplomacy (http://aurorawiki.pentarch.org/index.php?title=Diplomacy)
Post by: Maximillian on April 20, 2010, 07:25:27 PM
Quote from: "Hyfrydle"
Communication has broken down with the Tau Ceti aliens so it's now a quick military buildup and preparation for hostile action. All tips are much appreciated and who knows I might even survive
Does the Tactical Intelligence screen have any info on their ships or tech?
If they've blown up a survey or contact ship you might know what type of weapons they used and this will give some idea of how to prepare for them.
Post by: Hyfrydle on April 22, 2010, 05:45:45 AM
http://auroranewbieaar.blogspot.com/ (http://auroranewbieaar.blogspot.com/)
Post by: Hyfrydle on April 24, 2010, 05:39:25 PM
http://auroranewbieaar.blogspot.com/ (http://auroranewbieaar.blogspot.com/)
Post by: Hawkeye on April 25, 2010, 03:01:46 AM
Throwing together a 24.000t ship, I see it will be covered by about 70 pts of armor per armor-level.
Assuming the enemy to have at least 3 levels of armor seems reasonable.
Your missiles should have a chance to hit the enemy of about 70%
This, in turn means, you´ll need about 270 missiles to destroy all the armor on one of the enemies ships. Of course, the first internal hits will take place sooner, but still...
And this leaves PD fire completely out of the equation.
What I am trying to say here is: Strength 1 warheads are realy too small, IMO. I would try to up the warhead tech, so I could squeeze a strength 4 warhead in, which will at least penetrate the second layer of armor
The advantage of small missiles is, you can mount a lot of them on your warships, which is good to overwhelm enemy PD, but your cruisers only mount 4 launchers each which is a rather small salvo. With 4 cruisers planned for your squadron, total throw weight is 16 missiles every 20 seconds (not enough). I´d assume at least half of those will be taken out by enemy point-blank PD-fire (I don´t think AMMs are a huge concern, because, given the large magazines you mount, you can probably outlast the enemy in that regard simply on ammo (or at least hope for that))
To make the damage thing clear:
4-point missile hit
[attachment=1:kzdpaf2s]4-pt-missile.JPG[/attachment:kzdpaf2s]
8-point missile hit
[attachment=0:kzdpaf2s]8-pt-missile.JPG[/attachment:kzdpaf2s]
Post by: Hyfrydle on April 25, 2010, 04:31:27 AM
Also for a size 4 warhead I guess I need a larger missile than size 4 would that be correct?
Post by: sloanjh on April 25, 2010, 05:04:49 AM
Quote from: "Hyfrydle"
Do I research warhead tech under energy weapons?No. It's under missile tech. IIRC each level has a different name, but the number is in parentheses.
Quote
Also for a size 4 warhead I guess I need a larger missile than size 4 would that be correct?The correct term is strength-4 warhead. The strength is the size*tech_multiplier. If your tech level is 4x, then a strength-4 warhead will only require size-1; at a tech level of 3x a strength-4 warhead would require size-1.334. The missile design screen will tell you how strong the warhead is btw.
For ship-based ASM, I think people usually use size 4-6 missiles (I use size-6). I typically put no more than ~25% of the size into warhead, and I typically tune my warhead sizes to be the square of an integer (to get that extra level of penetration) e.g. 1, 4, 9, ....
John
Post by: Hyfrydle on April 25, 2010, 05:21:01 AM
No. It's under missile tech. IIRC each level has a different name, but the number is in parentheses.
Quote
I must be blind because I can't see this tech the only warhead strength tech is under energy weapons.
Found the tech it's implosion warhead the name confused me.
Post by: sloanjh on April 25, 2010, 05:28:28 AM
Quote from: "Hyfrydle"
Quote from: "sloanjh"No. It's under missile tech. IIRC each level has a different name, but the number is in parentheses.
I must be blind because I can't see this tech the only warhead strength tech is under energy weapons.
It's NOT called "warhead tech". It's called something like "implosion warhead" - I can't tell you the exact name 'cuz I'm on a laptop that's cutting off the bottom of the F2 screen and I'm on a conventional start. Just go to the missiles/kinetic research topic and look for the tech that doesn't make any other sense.
Warhead tech in energy weapons is for torpedoes (which are renamed in 5.1).
John
PS - It's easiest to quote by using the "quote" button.
Post by: randal7 on April 25, 2010, 08:42:12 AM
Post by: Hyfrydle on April 25, 2010, 01:01:29 PM
Quote from: "randal7"
You've found quite a few systems to not have a potential colony. Other than Mars, have you not found a planet in the 2.00 to 3.00 colony cost range (light blue on the system creation screen and galactic map)? These are often, despite the colony cost difference, easier to colonize than dark blue planets, because of the colony cost rules. Not enough oxygen is always 2.00, whether there is none at all or only .001 pressure short of breathable. Similarly, toxic gases are always 3.00, whether the whole atmosphere is chlorine or just a tiny amount. I have found a 3.00 colony cost planet that only took 2 terraformer/years to be fully habitable.
So far potential colonies have been few and far between and Mars has no minerals I'm aiming to colonise Luyten 726-8 A II which has a colony cost of 4.04 which is a bit high but is the best I've found so far. The only other good planets where in the Tau Ceti system and I've not ventured there since the first contact.
Post by: Hyfrydle on April 25, 2010, 04:29:50 PM
http://auroranewbieaar.blogspot.com/ (http://auroranewbieaar.blogspot.com/)
Post by: Maximillian on April 28, 2010, 01:09:48 PM
is greater than their mass. Don't forget that a jump ship's effective capacity is thel
lesser of it's drive capacity and it's own mass.
Many people pad out their designs with fuel tankage, spares or magazines to get the most efficiency.
Max
Post by: Hyfrydle on April 28, 2010, 01:21:59 PM
Quote from: "Maximillian"
It appears that the jump drive capacity of your jump ships
is greater than their mass. Don't forget that a jump ship's effective capacity is thel
lesser of it's drive capacity and it's own mass.
Many people pad out their designs with fuel tankage, spares or magazines to get the most efficiency.
Max
Yeah realised this too late but in tonights update we'll finally find out what the Tau Ceti aliens are upto.
Post by: Nikolaj on April 28, 2010, 05:42:37 PM
Post by: Hyfrydle on April 28, 2010, 07:22:15 PM
Something else that didn't help was there Ecm which decreased my missile range by nearly half.
Combat was confusing but exciting with more knowledge I can see it been very strategic and great fun.
Post by: Brian Neumann on April 28, 2010, 09:24:11 PM
Quote from: "Hyfrydle"
Another update and the Tau Ceti aliens are just as nasty as ever. Took a fleet of 4 craft 1 missile launcher, 1 command ship, 1 ant-missiles and the Gateway jump tender. I never stood a chance they started by taking out the Gateway so we had no escape. The missile speed was 32,000 and they sent salvos of 20. I have no idea how to target incoming missiles help much appreciated.To get your point defense working you need to set the modes in the Battle Control Window (F8). Select the launchers you want with the fire control you want them to use. then hit the assign button. Then in the middle there is a box of assign missiles to launchers. Select the missile you want them to fire and hit the assign button. Finally you will need to set the fire control to point defense, on the far right is a small box that will say how many missiles to assign per incomming missile. Figure out what your chance of hitting the incomming missiles is and set the point defense to that number. (It will probably be 5 for each incomming missile). Hit the Set Mode button and your point defense is now configured. This step is probably why your point defense didn't work as the default mode is "none", which means that no missiles will be launced on the incomming missiles. Also once you have done this for one ship, hit the button on the far right to copy to all ships of the same class. I routinely do this whenever I am sending a fleet out. This way all of my ships have their point defense set up and on automatic. Do the same for all of your beam weapons, even those that are not good for point defense. If you are being hit by missiles the chances are the beam weapons are out of range of any enemy at the time, so you might as well use them to thicken up your missile defenses. If you do this then having an enemy fleet open up from long range when you don't know they are there won't be as dangerous to you.
Something else that didn't help was there Ecm which decreased my missile range by nearly half.
Combat was confusing but exciting with more knowledge I can see it been very strategic and great fun.
Brian
Post by: Hyfrydle on April 29, 2010, 03:30:25 AM
Fly Swatter class Area Defence Cruiser 4700 tons 536 Crew 462.2 BP TCS 94 TH 160 EM 0
1702 km/s Armour 1-24 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 3 PPV 48
Annual Failure Rate: 58% IFR: 0.8% Maint Capacity 184 MSP Max Repair 30 MSP Est Time: 4.08 Years
Nuclear Pulse Engine E9 Military (4) Power 40 Fuel Use 90% Signature 40 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 100,000 Litres Range 42.6 billion km (289 days at full power)
Twin R4/C3 Meson Cannon Turret (4x2) Range 20,000km TS: 15000 km/s Power 8-6 RM 4 ROF 10 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Fire Control S04 10-16000 Anti-Missile Mesons (1) Max Range: 20,000 km TS: 16000 km/s 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Gas-Cooled Fast Reactor Technology PB-1 AR-0 (4) Total Power Output 36 Armour 0 Exp 5%
This design is classed as a military vessel for maintenance purposes
Maybe the problem was the speed of the missiles which were 32,000 km/s so by the time they where in range it was too late would this be correct?
Also the PD list for beam weapons has different options than the missile PD what are the options I think the top one was area or something.
Again all help greatly received.
Also if your reading my blog it would be great if you became a follower so I can see the popularity. This would keep me updating regularly.
Post by: UnLimiTeD on April 29, 2010, 06:06:23 AM
50k range is a must if you actually intend on hurting someone with them aside from missiles.
For Beam-Weapons the options are:
Area Defense
Final Defensive Fire
Final Defensive Fire (Self only)
What they do:
1. "Area Defense" works like regular weapons, in the fire phase, if not assigned another task, the weapons will target missiles in the set range and fire on them.
This works best with weapons with a reasonable range, to actually hit something 5 seconds before it can reach you.
It works nicely when having your Missile Defense fly in front of your fleet.
2."Final Defensive Fire" fires the weapons in the movement phase, when the missiles move, and can thus be used on far shortar ranges.
The average CIWS has a range between 1000 and 60000 km, and will operate in that mode.
It is basically a point black defense and should be used with Gauss cannons and Missile defenses within the fleet.
3. Self only explains it all, the ship will only defend itself.
Feedback for your ships:
I would try to get the firecontrols have double the range of your weapons, at 50% range, they also have 50% accuracy, and thus, having a higher fire control range increases your hitchance.
As you will get only one shot, you can of course set the FDF range to 1 (10k km) and be happy with 50% accuracy.
As your obviously fighting high tech enemies, presumable [spoiler:2709qujf]Precursors[/spoiler:2709qujf], A level of Gauss technology might be a good investment aswell, as those weapons make a formidable Antimissile Defense.
I'd wait to the next engagement, research Ion Engines and a level of Armor and Meson range, and overhaul your Cruisers to be a little more speedy.
Also grants the access to missile engine tech.
What Warhead strenght did they have?
Missiles Crater Armor, so a 4 point strength missile creates this Damage template:
0XXX0
00X00
00000
More armor on your ships would make them tremedously more durable^^
If all else fails, and you really want that system rather now than tomorrow, you could build a commercial freighter (lots of outer hull) and plaster it with 10 levels of armor, just send it in and try to deplete their missile Storage.
Of course, shooting missiles down is cheaper.
Post by: Hyfrydle on April 29, 2010, 06:49:19 AM
Quote from: "Nikolaj"
I just wanted to say how much I'm enjoying reading both your blog and this thread. It's both informative and entertaining. Thanks. :D
Do you play Solium Infernum at all? I played a Email game and I'm sure one player was called Flop.
Post by: Hyfrydle on April 29, 2010, 06:57:13 AM
Quote from: "UnLimiTeD"
What Warhead strength did they have?
On the system map it said 20 X 16 does that mean 20 missiles with a warhead strength of 16 for a total of 320 damage?
Also what is a standard armor level for military ships?
I now have lots of info on there missiles and ships so the next plan should be designing ships and missiles that counter there current tech. The Tau Ceti aliens have colonies? Do [spoiler:1e5icfnm]precursors[/spoiler:1e5icfnm] have colonies?
Post by: StratPlayer on April 29, 2010, 07:17:41 AM
Quote from: "Hyfrydle"
The point defense craft I was using was as follows:
Fly Swatter class Area Defence Cruiser 4700 tons 536 Crew 462.2 BP TCS 94 TH 160 EM 0
1702 km/s Armour 1-24 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 3 PPV 48
Annual Failure Rate: 58% IFR: 0.8% Maint Capacity 184 MSP Max Repair 30 MSP Est Time: 4.08 Years
Nuclear Pulse Engine E9 Military (4) Power 40 Fuel Use 90% Signature 40 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 100,000 Litres Range 42.6 billion km (289 days at full power)
Twin R4/C3 Meson Cannon Turret (4x2) Range 20,000km TS: 15000 km/s Power 8-6 RM 4 ROF 10 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Fire Control S04 10-16000 Anti-Missile Mesons (1) Max Range: 20,000 km TS: 16000 km/s 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Gas-Cooled Fast Reactor Technology PB-1 AR-0 (4) Total Power Output 36 Armour 0 Exp 5%
This design is classed as a military vessel for maintenance purposes
Maybe the problem was the speed of the missiles which were 32,000 km/s so by the time they where in range it was too late would this be correct?
Also the PD list for beam weapons has different options than the missile PD what are the options I think the top one was area or something.
Again all help greatly received.
Also if your reading my blog it would be great if you became a follower so I can see the popularity. This would keep me updating regularly.
Hey Hyfrydle,
I don't see any active sensors on your ship. That could be the problem.
From Steve's Tutorial on designing a beam-weapon ship:
Quote
Although the beam weapons are short-ranged compared to missiles, the ship will need to find and target its enemies so we need one or more active sensors. We already designed an active sensor with a twenty million kilometer range for our geological survey ship so lets add one of those. That sensor won't be suitable for detecting missiles though so we will need a second sensor with a resolution of zero.
Post by: Hyfrydle on April 29, 2010, 07:30:43 AM
Quote
I don't see any active sensors on your ship. That could be the problem.
I had the following command ship providing sensor cover:
Sunstrike class Command Ship 4950 tons 376 Crew 705.4 BP TCS 99 TH 320 EM 0
3232 km/s Armour 6-25 Shields 0-0 Sensors 25/25/0/0 Damage Control Rating 3 PPV 0
Annual Failure Rate: 65% IFR: 0.9% Maint Capacity 267 MSP Max Repair 150 MSP Est Time: 1.86 Years
Flag Bridge
Nuclear Pulse Engine E9 Military (8) Power 40 Fuel Use 90% Signature 40 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 100,000 Litres Range 40.4 billion km (144 days at full power)
Active Search Sensor MR75-R150 (1) GPS 15000 Range 75.0m km Resolution 150
Thermal Sensor TH5-25 (1) Sensitivity 25 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 25m km
EM Detection Sensor EM5-25 (1) Sensitivity 25 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 25m km
After re-reading your post I think your right the active sensor on the Sunstrike would not detect missiles although they did show up on the system map. Need to make a resolution zero sensor and add that to the Fly Swatter design. Wow the number of mistakes I make when playing Aurora are so annoying. The other big mistake was not leaving my jump tender by the jump gate!!!!!
This design is classed as a military vessel for maintenance purposes
Post by: StratPlayer on April 29, 2010, 07:35:40 AM
Quote from: "Hyfrydle"
QuoteI don't see any active sensors on your ship. That could be the problem.
I had the following command ship providing sensor cover:
Sunstrike class Command Ship 4950 tons 376 Crew 705.4 BP TCS 99 TH 320 EM 0
3232 km/s Armour 6-25 Shields 0-0 Sensors 25/25/0/0 Damage Control Rating 3 PPV 0
Annual Failure Rate: 65% IFR: 0.9% Maint Capacity 267 MSP Max Repair 150 MSP Est Time: 1.86 Years
Flag Bridge
Nuclear Pulse Engine E9 Military (8) Power 40 Fuel Use 90% Signature 40 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 100,000 Litres Range 40.4 billion km (144 days at full power)
Active Search Sensor MR75-R150 (1) GPS 15000 Range 75.0m km Resolution 150
Thermal Sensor TH5-25 (1) Sensitivity 25 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 25m km
EM Detection Sensor EM5-25 (1) Sensitivity 25 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 25m km
This design is classed as a military vessel for maintenance purposes
The MR75-R150 is geared to sense a ship at a distance, but doesn't have the resolution to see small missles for your Anti-missle defense. I'm pretty sure you also need a small resolution 0 active sensor to see them. But I'll have to ask the veteran Aurora players for confirmation.
Also, for a small resolution anti-missle active sensor, I'd put it on each ship that's dedicated to anti-missle defense -- if you only have it on your command ship and it gets knocked out, then all your AM weapons on every ship are blind. Not a good situation.
Post by: Brian Neumann on April 29, 2010, 07:45:17 AM
Quote from: "StratPlayer"
The MR75-R150 is geared to sense a ship at a distance, but doesn't have the resolution to see small missles for your Anti-missle defense. I'm pretty sure you also need a small resolution 0 active sensor to see them. But I'll have to ask the veteran Aurora players for confirmation.You do need an active sensor with a resolution of 1 to see the missiles. With a resolution of 2 you will see the missiles at half the range that the resolution 1 will see them. If your sensor is designed for larger targets it can detect smaller ones than it is designed for. The problem is that the reduction in range is the square of the ration between the target size and designed resolution (((Target size/sensor resolution)sqared)x designed range). So having a resolution 20 sensor will detect missiles at 1/400th of the range it is designed for. Obviously this will not work well for most sensors desinged to detect ships.
Also, for a small resolution anti-missle active sensor, I'd put it on each ship that's dedicated to anti-missle defense -- if you only have it on your command ship and it gets knocked out, then all your AM weapons on every ship are blind. Not a good situation.
My preference is to have sensors that can see about 1 million km's on the point defense ships and to have a bigger sensor on the scouts to see 2-3 million km's. This way you can make full use of your anti-missile range in a fleet, but even if the dedicated scout is nocked out all of your point defense ships still are capable of defending the fleet. It also allows them to be detached more without the scout.
A word of warning this game has the computer oponents of all types fire on the biggest sensor target in range. Sometimes it is good to build a big ship that is almost nothing but shields and armour. That way it takes the fire while your armed ships get to shoot back without taking damage.
brian
Post by: UnLimiTeD on April 29, 2010, 07:57:34 AM
[spoiler:2zs08g04]Precursors are automated Guard ships, the closest to a colony you will find are automated deep space tracking stations and ammunition storages.
However, if you research scavenge tools, you might be able to leech of some of their tech from the wrecks.[/spoiler:2zs08g04]
You saw the missiles because they are reasonable fast, and thus have a high thermal signature.
Your Active sensor will still pick them up, but the range will probably be too short for your weapons to target them, aside from CiWS.
Keep in mind you can research a tracking speed bonus versus missiles the longer they are in target range.
Seeing how your AM range is rather short, and I strongly recommend increasing it as soon as possible, your AM sensors don't need a lot of range, but I'd pack a half million just in case, and as said, increase the range of your firecontrol a little.
The missiles you fought against, with 16 WH strength, will be able to penetrate 4 layers of Armor;
0xxxxxxx0
00xxxxx00
000xxx000
0000x0000
They won't however, deal any damage to the layer below, or the internals, so 4 Layers of armor would protect you from those missiles. A salvo of that size would still obliterate your targets, so that is obviously no solution, but if you have your main fleet scout, with big sensors and armor and stuff (make it the same size as your jump ship), you could possible make it last longer by applying a dozen layers or so.
Also, installing a CIWS on your fleet scouts can quite help.
Post by: Nikolaj on April 29, 2010, 09:39:37 AM
Quote from: "Hyfrydle"
Quote from: "Nikolaj"I just wanted to say how much I'm enjoying reading both your blog and this thread. It's both informative and entertaining. Thanks. :D
Do you play Solium Infernum at all? I played a Email game and I'm sure one player was called Flop.
Yeah, that's it. Was that the game with Vic? Too bad that one kind of vaporized, I was doing pretty well.
Post by: Hawkeye on April 29, 2010, 11:01:49 AM
Also, defending against 20-missile-salvos with point defense only is going to be damn hard. I´d suggest to start researching/building anti-missile missiles
I generaly put a twin meson or gauss turret on any warship (I am a big believer in "fleet defense") with a fleet of 6 to 8+ ships, the turrets add up a lot and provide decent point-defense, even against missiles much faster than their tracking speed (not enough against large salvos, but those are expected to be thinned out by my AMMs)
To counter the enemy ECM, there are two possiblilties
1. research Electronic Warfare --> ECCM
2. design a new Missile-Fire_Control with a larger range. Enemy ECM-3 will reduce your MFC-range by 30%. I usually put a MFC with 150 to 200% the max range of my missiles on (this also allows me to later on use more advanced missiles to their full capacity without a refit)
4 ships (one of which basicly a non-combatant) are not nearly enough to fight 20.000+t enemies (as you have noticed :)
Another thing I noticed, the ROF for your meson turrest is 10 seconds. This is odd, as with capacitor 3, 10cm mesons fire every 5 seconds. Are you using larger ones? If yes, scale them down. You gain in ROF and at the same time save some space, maybe enough to put some armor on the ships. If you use the turrets in final defense, the shorter range should not make much of a difference.
Oh, and you have one power plant too much. Yes, redundancy is nice, but (in my book at least) with small warships, and lets face it, a 5.000t warship isn´t exactely a dreadnought, once the internal hits start to, well, hit, it´s pretty much all over anyway. Better to put that mass into armor/shields and prevent those hits from damaging the internals in the first place.
Post by: UnLimiTeD on April 29, 2010, 01:56:12 PM
Ok, Hy...*whatever*, you NEED better firecontrols for those weapons. Instead, go for 10cm Mesons, the range doesn't make much of a difference in Final Defensive fire.
This will allow you to have 20k range, while fireing every 5 seconds. It also saves space.
As Meson range is rather short, Area Defense isn't going to happen for a while, so no need to go for bigger weapons.
As Hawkeye said, you also need more ships.
Try to atleast equal their tonnage, and Multiply if based on techlevel.
I'd say, 80+k tons would be a reasonable fleet for a start.
12 Layers of Armor on Command ships, and Fleet scouts, the big ships that are important and have to take it, allow you to take three successive hits on the same spot without internal damage, which will allow you to outlast them if your AM Defense is up.
Post by: StratPlayer on April 29, 2010, 02:42:40 PM
Quote from: "Hyfrydle"
Wow the number of mistakes I make when playing Aurora are so annoying. The other big mistake was not leaving my jump tender by the jump gate!!!!!
Just wanted to make a few comments about this:
First off and most importantly, don't worry too much about making mistakes. This is a very complicated game to learn all at one go, and your first run-through is going to be a learning experience -- there is no way to be perfect at this the first time out of the gate, so don't judge yourself too harshly or let yourself get annoyed. You're learning as you go -- that's the main goal.
Secondly, there are added benefits to this beyond simply learning yourself. Your AAR and this thread is helping many other newbies learn, too! So for one, I appreciate what you're doing, and I also appreciate the mistakes -- seeing what goes wrong and reading through all the excellent feedback here is really helping me, too. And thank you for that.
So if a few innocent computer bits get slaughtered mercilessly in some far-away star system, try not to let it annoy you: Their tragic deaths are for a greater cause!
Post by: Hyfrydle on April 29, 2010, 03:47:22 PM
What size magazines for anti-ship and anti-missile do you reccomend?
Post by: Elouda on April 29, 2010, 04:05:32 PM
You can get away with less if you operate with a dedicated collier (ammo ship), or if you use your command cruisers or other ships (like jump cruisers) to carry spare ammo, but I like to keep my fleets capable of independant action. To that end I often prefer hybrid designs as someone else here noted, with atleast a beam weapon and ASMs on each ship, and possibly also AMMs as tech increases. Admittedly when using this approach I favour box launches as unless you mount 7 or more reloads, box launchers are more space efficient, not to mention capable of awesome alpha strikes.
Post by: Hyfrydle on April 29, 2010, 04:21:30 PM
Post by: UnLimiTeD on April 29, 2010, 04:28:19 PM
For ASMs, depending on your tactics, you can go for varying sizes, some pack for up to 20 salvos, I generally thing that 5 are enough, but as said ahead, this requires munition carriers.
AMMs should always have enough ammo to protect your fleet from whatever may come, so for 10 AMM launchers firing every 10 seconds, I'd say minimum 200 shots.
If you ever run low on AMMs, a good tactic is probably to set it to one or two AMMs per incoming missile, depending on enemy tech, and let the rest be taken care of by Beam weapons; though this would require Gauss.
Post by: Hyfrydle on April 29, 2010, 05:15:08 PM
http://auroranewbieaar.blogspot.com/ (http://auroranewbieaar.blogspot.com/)
Post by: Hawkeye on April 29, 2010, 11:13:50 PM
Post by: Hyfrydle on April 30, 2010, 02:12:22 AM
Quote from: "Hawkeye"
Don´t forget to design a Missile-Fire-Control for anti-missile work (res-1) too.
This design is included in the blog is it ok?
Active Sensor Strength: 210 Sensitivity Modifier: 50%
Sensor Size: 10 HS Sensor HTK: 1
Primary Mode: Resolution: 1 Maximum Range: 1,050,000 km
Chance of destruction by electronic damage: 100%
Cost: 210 Crew: 50
Materials Required: 52.5x Duranium 157.5x Uridium
Development Cost for Project: 2100RP
Post by: Andrew on April 30, 2010, 04:00:21 AM
Quote from: "Hyfrydle"
Yes it has the right sort of performance, but it is appallingly large for its performance. It looks like you need to research EM Sensitivity as you currently have that at a very low level (5) while you have active sensor strength at a reasonable level of 21 and the effectivness of your sensors is effectively 21*5/10 , so increasing EM Sensitivity will allow you to build smaller sensors for simialr effectiveness . I ususlly get EM Sensitivity to 11 allowing me comparable performance with a Size 5 or 6 sensor.Quote from: "Hawkeye"Don´t forget to design a Missile-Fire-Control for anti-missile work (res-1) too.
This design is included in the blog is it ok?
Active Sensor Strength: 210 Sensitivity Modifier: 50%
Sensor Size: 10 HS Sensor HTK: 1
Primary Mode: Resolution: 1 Maximum Range: 1,050,000 km
Chance of destruction by electronic damage: 100%
Cost: 210 Crew: 50
Materials Required: 52.5x Duranium 157.5x Uridium
Development Cost for Project: 2100RP
You will also need resolution 1 FC for any antimissiles with a similar range to the search sensor, if you are not using AMM's then you can manage with a smaller active sensor scaled to the range of the Fire control and defensive beam weapons
Post by: Hyfrydle on April 30, 2010, 06:58:14 AM
Quote from: "Andrew"
Yes it has the right sort of performance, but it is appallingly large for its performance. It looks like you need to research EM Sensitivity as you currently have that at a very low level (5) while you have active sensor strength at a reasonable level of 21 and the effectivness of your sensors is effectively 21*5/10 , so increasing EM Sensitivity will allow you to build smaller sensors for simialr effectiveness . I ususlly get EM Sensitivity to 11 allowing me comparable performance with a Size 5 or 6 sensor.
You will also need resolution 1 FC for any antimissiles with a similar range to the search sensor, if you are not using AMM's then you can manage with a smaller active sensor scaled to the range of the Fire control and defensive beam weapons
What effect do EM sensors have on active sensors I thought they where a seperate thing? I thought by upgrading the active sensor strength that would be enough just another misunderstanding on my part thanks for pointing it out.
Post by: Hawkeye on April 30, 2010, 09:34:22 AM
Quote from: "Hyfrydle"
What effect do EM sensors have on active sensors I thought they where a seperate thing? I thought by upgrading the active sensor strength that would be enough just another misunderstanding on my part thanks for pointing it out.
EM sensors now affect efficiency of active sensors too. If you look at the design screen for your actives, you´ll notice in the second line "EM Sensor Sensitivity 5" or 6 or 8, whatever your best is at the moment. The better EM Sensor Sensitivity, the more efficient your actives become.
Quote from: "Hyfrydle"
Quote from: "Hawkeye"Don´t forget to design a Missile-Fire-Control for anti-missile work (res-1) too.
This design is included in the blog is it ok?
Active Sensor Strength: 210 Sensitivity Modifier: 50%
Sensor Size: 10 HS Sensor HTK: 1
Primary Mode: Resolution: 1 Maximum Range: 1,050,000 km
Chance of destruction by electronic damage: 100%
Cost: 210 Crew: 50
Materials Required: 52.5x Duranium 157.5x Uridium
Development Cost for Project: 2100RP
Hm, isn´t this an active sensor? You need a dedicated anti-missile firecontrol for your AMMs, because the rules for resolutions on active sensors are the same as for MFCs. (if target is smaller than resolution, then max. range = range X ((Target size / resolution) x (Target size / resolution))
This means, your anti-ship MFC can target a size 1 target (i.e. a missile) at 126.000.000km x 1/200 x 1/200 = 3150km.
As you might guess, this will do you no good
Post by: Hyfrydle on May 01, 2010, 04:10:01 PM
Capacity: 255 Internal Armour: 4.01 HS Explosion Chance: 20
Magazine Size: 20 HS Magazine HTK: 10
Cost: 132.08 Crew: 30
Materials Required: 53.07x Duranium 4.01x Neutronium 75x Tritanium
Development Cost for Project: 1321RP
Or is this design fine. I would need four of these on my AMM ships with size 1 missiles which gives me 1020 missiles.
Post by: Andrew on May 01, 2010, 04:47:24 PM
I normall build size 2 or 3 magazines with 1 HTK , I also don't carry 1020 missiles on a small antimissile Ship
Code: [Select]
Agincourt mod 2 class Destroyer Escort 7950 tons 706 Crew 1614.6 BP TCS 159 TH 450 EM 0
3773 km/s Armour 5-35 Shields 0-0 Sensors 24/33/0/0 Damage Control Rating 6 PPV 18
Annual Failure Rate: 84% IFR: 1.2% Maint Capacity 762 MSP Max Repair 168 MSP Est Time: 2.79 Years
Magazine 630
Ion Engine E7 (10) Power 60 Fuel Use 70% Signature 45 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 400,000 Litres Range 129.4 billion km (396 days at full power)
Size 1 Missile Launcher (18) Missile Size 1 Rate of Fire 10
Missile Fire Control FC1-R1 (6) Range 1.8m km Resolution 1
Buckler I (456) Speed: 30,000 km/s End: 1.4m Range: 2.6m km WH: 1 Size: 1 TH: 290 / 174 / 87
Active Search Sensor MR1-R1 (1) GPS 168 Range 1.8m km Resolution 1
Thermal Sensor TH3-24 (1) Sensitivity 24 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 24m km
EM Detection Sensor EM3-33 (1) Sensitivity 33 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 33m km
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
I use Size 2 HTK 1 Magazines with a capacity of 36
Post by: Hyfrydle on May 02, 2010, 07:41:11 AM
Code: [Select]
Fly Swatter MK 2 - Copy class Area Defence Cruiser 7550 tons 476 Crew 1131.2 BP TCS 151 TH 480 EM 0
3178 km/s Armour 8-34 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 3 PPV 10
Annual Failure Rate: 152% IFR: 2.1% Maint Capacity 281 MSP Max Repair 210 MSP Est Time: 0.88 Years
Magazine 486
Ion Engine E8 Military (8) Power 60 Fuel Use 80% Signature 60 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 400,000 Litres Range 119.2 billion km (434 days at full power)
Size 1 Missile Launcher (10) Missile Size 1 Rate of Fire 10
Missile Fire Control FC1-R1 AMM MK 1 (1) Range 1.4m km Resolution 1
Active Search Sensor MR1-R1 MK 1 AMM (1) GPS 210 Range 1.7m km Resolution 1
This design is classed as a military vessel for maintenance purposesGoing to start work on my anti-ship attack craft next.
Post by: Andrew on May 02, 2010, 07:48:26 AM
Quote from: "Hyfrydle"
Here is my new Anti-Missile design all comments much appreciated:The only thing I would do is put in one or more extra FC systems as each system will only let you engage one salvo at a time and if enemy ships are launching several small salvo;s that could be a problem for youCode: [Select]Fly Swatter MK 2 - Copy class Area Defence Cruiser 7550 tons 476 Crew 1131.2 BP TCS 151 TH 480 EM 0
3178 km/s Armour 8-34 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 3 PPV 10
Annual Failure Rate: 152% IFR: 2.1% Maint Capacity 281 MSP Max Repair 210 MSP Est Time: 0.88 Years
Magazine 486
Ion Engine E8 Military (8) Power 60 Fuel Use 80% Signature 60 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 400,000 Litres Range 119.2 billion km (434 days at full power)
Size 1 Missile Launcher (10) Missile Size 1 Rate of Fire 10
Missile Fire Control FC1-R1 AMM MK 1 (1) Range 1.4m km Resolution 1
Active Search Sensor MR1-R1 MK 1 AMM (1) GPS 210 Range 1.7m km Resolution 1
This design is classed as a military vessel for maintenance purposes
Going to start work on my anti-ship attack craft next.
Post by: Hyfrydle on May 02, 2010, 08:05:39 AM
Code: [Select]
Broadsword ASM MK 2 - Copy class Missile Cruiser 9000 tons 688 Crew 1354.4 BP TCS 180 TH 720 EM 0
4000 km/s Armour 8-38 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 5 PPV 20
Annual Failure Rate: 129% IFR: 1.8% Maint Capacity 1470 MSP Max Repair 210 MSP Est Time: 2.8 Years
Magazine 258
Ion Engine E8 Military (12) Power 60 Fuel Use 80% Signature 60 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 200,000 Litres Range 50.0 billion km (144 days at full power)
Size 2 Missile Launcher ASM (10) Missile Size 2 Rate of Fire 20
Missile Fire Control FC166-R120 Anti-Ship MK 1 2052 (3) Range 166.3m km Resolution 120
Size 2 Anti-ship Missile Deathbringer MK 2 (304) Speed: 22,400 km/s End: 18.7m Range: 25.1m km WH: 4 Size: 2 TH: 82 / 49 / 24
Active Search Sensor MR336-R200 MK 1 (1) GPS 42000 Range 336.0m km Resolution 200
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 purposesI took notice of your post Andrew and added more FC's to this and my AMM design.
Post by: UnLimiTeD on May 02, 2010, 10:37:01 AM
You got pretty good missiles for still using Ion Engines.
Post by: Andrew on May 02, 2010, 11:58:25 AM
Quote from: "UnLimiTeD"
Well, Anti Ship doesn't necessarily need that many^^It depends if you are shooting at big ships then you only really need 1 FC, if you want to be able to deal with a swarm of Gunboats multiple FC are useful . I would probably have had more launchers and less magazine space as I think you need large salvo's to overwhelm defenses rather than sustained fire capacity but that is a matter of opinion
You got pretty good missiles for still using Ion Engines.
Post by: Hawkeye on May 02, 2010, 03:13:41 PM
Quote from: "Hyfrydle"
Here is my Anti-Ship design the missile showing is the old version the new version is much better:Code: [Select]Broadsword ASM MK 2 - Copy class Missile Cruiser 9000 tons 688 Crew 1354.4 BP TCS 180 TH 720 EM 0
4000 km/s Armour 8-38 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 5 PPV 20
Annual Failure Rate: 129% IFR: 1.8% Maint Capacity 1470 MSP Max Repair 210 MSP Est Time: 2.8 Years
Magazine 258
Ion Engine E8 Military (12) Power 60 Fuel Use 80% Signature 60 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 200,000 Litres Range 50.0 billion km (144 days at full power)
Size 2 Missile Launcher ASM (10) Missile Size 2 Rate of Fire 20
Missile Fire Control FC166-R120 Anti-Ship MK 1 2052 (3) Range 166.3m km Resolution 120
Size 2 Anti-ship Missile Deathbringer MK 2 (304) Speed: 22,400 km/s End: 18.7m Range: 25.1m km WH: 4 Size: 2 TH: 82 / 49 / 24
Active Search Sensor MR336-R200 MK 1 (1) GPS 42000 Range 336.0m km Resolution 200
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
I took notice of your post Andrew and added more FC's to this and my AMM design.
Hm, did you remove some magazines after you defined your ammo-layout, because there are sure a lot more missiles on board than the magazines can hold?
As Andrew, I think you should up the number of launchers.
Personally, I´d rip out two or three engines (usually, I aim for about 25% mass in engines) and use that space for launchers (10 size-2 launchers means, you are using a 9.000t ship to lug around 1.000t of weapons, not counting magazins and sensors/FCs, which doesn´t sound very efficient)
My current designs use those 25% for engines, 40% for weapons (incl. magazines/FCs) and 15% to 20% on defenses (armor/shields)
Code: [Select]
Hamburg class Missile Destroyer 7500 tons 707 Crew 1204.16 BP TCS 150 TH 240 EM 480
3200 km/s Armour 5-34 Shields 16-300 Sensors 1/8/0/0 Damage Control Rating 4 PPV 30
Annual Failure Rate: 99% IFR: 1.4% Maint Capacity 452 MSP Max Repair 108 MSP Est Time: 2.4 Years
Magazine 378
MTU Typ 60/50 Ionentriebwerk (8) Power 60 Fuel Use 80% Signature 30 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 200,000 Litres Range 60.0 billion km (217 days at full power)
Mannesmann Typ Gamma/2 Schutzschild (8) Total Fuel Cost 128 Litres per day
Speerwerfer II ASR-6 Raketenwerfer 69 (5) Missile Size 6 Rate of Fire 60
Telefunken Typ 97/85 Raketenleitsystem 68 (1) Range 97.9m km Resolution 85
Wurfspeer III ASR-6 (63) Speed: 24,000 km/s End: 35.1m Range: 50.6m km WH: 5 Size: 6 TH: 128 / 76 / 38
Telefunken Typ 86/100 Radarsystem 68 (1) GPS 10800 Range 86.4m km Resolution 100
Siemens Typ 8 EM-Sensor 68 (1) Sensitivity 8 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 8m km26.7% mass on engines
20% mass on missile launchers
16% mass on magazines
20 % mass on armor/shields
9% mass on FCS/sensors
Code: [Select]
Köln class Destroyer Escort 7500 tons 618 Crew 1315.8 BP TCS 150 TH 240 EM 300
3200 km/s Armour 4-34 Shields 10-300 Sensors 1/8/0/0 Damage Control Rating 7 PPV 8
Annual Failure Rate: 64% IFR: 0.9% Maint Capacity 768 MSP Max Repair 240 MSP Est Time: 2.66 Years
Magazine 458
MTU Typ 60/50 Ionentriebwerk (8) Power 60 Fuel Use 80% Signature 30 Armour 0 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 200,000 Litres Range 60.0 billion km (217 days at full power)
Mannesmann Typ Gamma/2 Schutzschild (5) Total Fuel Cost 80 Litres per day
Pfeilwerfer II ARR-1 Werfer 69 (8) Missile Size 1 Rate of Fire 10
Telefunken Typ 2/1 Raketenleitsystem 68 (2) Range 2.0m km Resolution 1
Pfeil II ARR-1 (458) Speed: 31,800 km/s End: 2.3m Range: 4.5m km WH: 1 Size: 1 TH: 212 / 127 / 63
Telefunken 1,9/1 Radarsystem 68 (1) GPS 240 Range 1.9m km Resolution 1
Siemens Typ 8 EM-Sensor 68 (1) Sensitivity 8 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 8m km26.7% mass on engines
20% mass on magazines
5% mass on missile launchers
23% mass on FCS/sensors (as an escort, this needs long range anti-missile sensors, which are large)
15 % mass on defenses (armor/shields)
BTW, I didn´t calculate those numbers. On the design screen, Component Summary tab, there are tables that list those them.
P.S. Yes, shipdesign is not so much a since but an art, with personel preferences thrown in for good
Post by: mavikfelna on May 02, 2010, 04:48:02 PM
Scouts, fighters and gunboats should all be as fast as you can make them and operate independent of the fleet. Supply ships, jump tenders and other support units can be slower if they're not intended to keep up with the main fleet.
--Mav
Post by: Hyfrydle on May 18, 2010, 06:48:42 AM
In my last game before my hols I did almost hold my own against the Tau Ceti but the whole missile salvo thing confuses me. Can anyone explain how it works and and strategies for using missiles both AMM and ASM in battles.
Thanks also please let me know if you have thoughts on my decision to conclude the AAR.
Post by: Hawkeye on May 18, 2010, 10:14:43 AM
Quote from: "Hyfrydle"
Arrived back from my hols and now can't decide if I should continue this AAR or start a new one with the lessons I've learned using the latest version. The Tau Ceti aliens are much too tough for my current tech and also the organisation of my empire leaves alot to be desired.
In my last game before my hols I did almost hold my own against the Tau Ceti but the whole missile salvo thing confuses me. Can anyone explain how it works and and strategies for using missiles both AMM and ASM in battles.
Thanks also please let me know if you have thoughts on my decision to conclude the AAR.
Ok, regarding missile salvos:
A single salvo is the number of missiles fired from a number of missile launchers, which are all assigned to a single missile-fire-control
Then there is, what I like to call volley. This is the total amount of missiles, a fleet can launch at the enemy.
There are pros and cons to the size of salvos:
If your enemy has a lot of AMM-launchers, but very few AMM-Missile-Fire-Controls, lots of small salvos are your friend, as he probably won´t have time enough to launch against all of your salvos.
Example:
Your missile-cruiser mounts 8 launchers and 4 MFCs. Your fleet has 3 cruisers.
This means, you can lauch a total of 12 salvos of 2 missiles each --> volley size: 24.
If your enemy can launch a total of 20 AMMs per 10 seconds, but only has 2 MFCs for them, he can only engage two of your salvos per 10 sec.
If your salvos have to face his AMMs for, say 40 seconds, this means he can only engage 8 of your salvos, the other 4 will go in without being targeted by AMMs.
In addition, while the enemy is targeting salvo 7 and 8, your next volley may allready be inside his AMM envelope, thus even more salvos will go in unengaged in your second voley.
The drawback of this tactic is, of course, you need a lot of Missile-Fire-Controls yourself, which means space, that could be used for more launchers, if you used larger-but-less salvos.
In the example above, removing two of the MFCs could enable you to put two additonal launchers on your cruisers, giving you 6 salvos of 5 missiles each --> volley size: 30
I don´t think there is much debate about voley-size. The bigger the better (up to a point, where wastage/overkill sets in)
Re. continuing or starting new:
I´d say continue. Your AAR was/is about what mistakes to avoid and making those mistakes and showing their consequences is probably the best way of doing this.
Oh, and fighting against impossible odds can be fun
Post by: Hyfrydle on May 18, 2010, 03:17:10 PM
Post by: Beersatron on May 18, 2010, 03:51:22 PM
Quote from: "Hyfrydle"
Going to stick with the AAR can anyone tell me how to load missiles on a ship so I can transport them to the frontline.
Have you made a Class and given it the flag of Colier?
I generally take a Cruiser hull, remove the launchers and fire control and maybe a layer of armor or two and then cram in as many magazines as possible. Set the default missile loadout as you would for a fighting vessel. When you are giving the ship orders you will extra options to 'reload' a fleet. If the Colier and the ship(s) it is going to reload have the same missile loadout then it will transfer then over.
You can also manually transfer missiles on the Ship List screen (cant remember correct name or shortcut).
Post by: Hyfrydle on May 18, 2010, 06:28:37 PM
http://auroranewbieaar.blogspot.com/ (http://auroranewbieaar.blogspot.com/)
Hope you all enjoy.
Post by: Hyfrydle on May 19, 2010, 03:07:49 AM
In combat I get missile info and details of there sensor ranges but after combat this is not stored.
Also I sometimes find in combat that the enemy contacts disappear from the system map then when I increment time they reappear is there a reason for this.?
Post by: Hawkeye on May 19, 2010, 10:26:56 AM
Your Cerberus has a horrible failure rate, despite having 1073 MSP. I am assuming, those parts are in the form of Maintenance Storage Bays? If yes, converting some of those into Engineering Spaces might be sensible, or your collier will use up most of the spares to repair its own systems.
re. intel:
Yes, the intelligence screen is the one you should be looking at.
Note that the sensor-range is only an estimate, based on your own technology, i.e. EM-sensor strength. I have made the (painfull) experience, that the actual range of hostile sensors is often a lot larger.
I don´t think info on enemy missiles is stored anywhere, except if your intelligence manages to steal the secret from the aliens, i.e. you capture enough crew/officers from enemy lifepods to get an intelligence event or a espionage team scores. This can reveal the secrets of an enemy missile, which you can build from that moment on, though you know nothing about the tech used in it (You can, for example get a missile, that uses an engine tech, you don´t have researched yet. You can build this missile, but will gain no knowledge of the engine tech)
As neither, missiles (which can be changed for the next round) nor sensor (range only a guestimate) are hard facts, they are not stored at the intel screen.
What I do is to type in stuff I noticed in the "Notes" space. I also rename the enemy ship type to what I think they are, for example, if I suspected the broadsword to be a PD ship, it will be named CE Broadsword, if I suspect it to be a missileboat, it would be named CG Broadsword and so on.
Any hard facts, you find out about the enemy ship will show in the "Weapon and Sensor Data" window.
Post by: Hyfrydle on May 20, 2010, 03:22:00 PM
Thanks for reading and also for all the help over the last month and a bit.
Post by: AndonSage on May 20, 2010, 06:00:25 PM
I enjoyed your AAR. Good luck on your next game! BTW, you might want to turn off Precursors, until you get a better feel for building ships, and combat. At least you'll only have to worry about NPR's, instead of Precursors and [spoiler:3j84oolp]Aliens coming out of wormholes[/spoiler:3j84oolp].
Post by: Hyfrydle on May 21, 2010, 02:13:36 AM
Post by: Hyfrydle on June 30, 2010, 04:57:19 AM
Another area I want to cover is combat which I'm still slowly getting to grips with also I want to include more pictures.
So as I said above any comments to help or things you would like covered please let me know.
Post by: MattyD on July 01, 2010, 12:23:49 PM
You tried a little in your first AAR - 'Kate Wallace sitting at a desk...', that was a nice short piece that set the mood for the rest of the post. I would recommend that you continue with something similar, although using a different font or colour would help distinguish it.
Not blowing my trumpet, but I've started to throw in a little scene in the start of my AAR to give a feel to the main body of the post. I was inspired by the little headers in Frank Herbert's Dune - quotes from the Orange-Catholic Bible or Letters from the Princess Irulan. It adds a little flavour before I detail my mistakes and current situation and goals.
It's funny that you are going to concentrate initially on mining and resources. I feel your pain there in my current game. The limited starting resources become a real wall if you are not prepared for them.
When you get to combat, go slow. It's about the only part of the game I am yet to experience and there is a real lack of detailed information for the newbie there (me).
Post by: Hyfrydle on July 01, 2010, 01:11:51 PM
Quote from: "MattyD"
In terms of fiction, it depends exactly what you want to achieve with the AAR. If you are seeking to educate, to lay out your choices and make mistakes like your first one then keep the fiction down somewhat.
You tried a little in your first AAR - 'Kate Wallace sitting at a desk...', that was a nice short piece that set the mood for the rest of the post. I would recommend that you continue with something similar, although using a different font or colour would help distinguish it.
Not blowing my trumpet, but I've started to throw in a little scene in the start of my AAR to give a feel to the main body of the post. I was inspired by the little headers in Frank Herbert's Dune - quotes from the Orange-Catholic Bible or Letters from the Princess Irulan. It adds a little flavour before I detail my mistakes and current situation and goals.
It's funny that you are going to concentrate initially on mining and resources. I feel your pain there in my current game. The limited starting resources become a real wall if you are not prepared for them.
When you get to combat, go slow. It's about the only part of the game I am yet to experience and there is a real lack of detailed information for the newbie there (me).
Fiction is not my strong point but educating is also not easy and mixing the two especially with a game like Aurora is doubly difficult. I'm enjoying your AAR it's good to see how different people play the game I wish more people would document there games and help lessen the learning curve.
I'm on my third proper game at the moment about 30 years in and as before I've learnt tons of stuff I didn't know the main thing been building a good network of supply for minerals as this can really slow things down. As far as combat goes this is one area that really needs an in depth tutorial with perhaps a saved game attached so practical experience can be achieved. My combat always ends in tears and lots of nuclear explosions.
All I can say is good luck for when you get involved with the aliens they will make you feel a real fool and you start to really understand the importance of good ship design.
Post by: Steve Walmsley on July 03, 2010, 06:05:27 AM
Quote from: "Hyfrydle"
The Tau Ceti aliens had a colony on a planet and also seemed to improve tech do Precursors do this? What are the differences between and NPR and Precursors?Precursors don't have populations and don't improve tech. They are robot-controlled ships that guard ruins and occasionally systems without ruins. NPRs are empires similar to your own. They will explore, found new colonies, bulid new ships and advance their technology.
Steve