Aurora 4x
New Players => The Academy => Topic started by: blue emu on June 17, 2011, 01:28:38 PM
-
Do you tow them to non-colonizable worlds, and set up a colony in orbit? What can be put in them> Anything that a colony can hold?
-
As I understand it, the habitats provide a workforce for planetary installations. For example, you could have some manned-mines on a planet, operated by the folks living in orbital habitats. I havn't started building them yet, though.
-
Do you tow them to non-colonizable worlds, and set up a colony in orbit? What can be put in them> Anything that a colony can hold?
Search is your friend! The information is out there. ;)
http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php/topic,2631.0.html (http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php/topic,2631.0.html)
-
The mechanics are not really what he is asking about - he wants to know what people actually use them for. I have used them in my previous game but decided they weren't worth the effort - but I was only using them to allow me to use ordinary mines on a not very colonizable world.
AS with Carriers I am not sure of the cost effectiveness and would be very happy to hear of good ways of using them.
-
... As with Carriers I am not sure of the cost effectiveness and would be very happy to hear of good ways of using them.
If you mean Aircraft (Fighter) Carriers, I find them hellishly effective if used in mass (say, enough to carry 250-300 Fighters). The main problem is finding enough Officers to run all those Fighters.
-
The main problem is finding enough Officers to run all those Fighters.
Well, perhaps you just need to start, ah, conscripting some Paxtonites to fly them? Rather than just using the volunteers? I say start with the devs... :winkwink:
-
Aren't fighters very vulnerable to AMM's ??
I can see an average fighter at about 20-25mk (should double that on my new generation of sensor ships) and my current AMMs have 35mk range at 50k speed - obviously if the fighters ahve a missile that is longer ranged than I can see them that is ok - but once I find the Carriers (My ship senssors are going from 610k to over 1mk shortly) and close with them, it then becomes problematical for carrier based forces I believe. AMMs (even 50k 35mk range ones) cost so much less than fighters...
Input welcome from Carrier 'jocks' ...
-
Fighters are extremely vulnerable to all missiles, this is why people go for the missile style fighter instead of the laser fighter, it about getting in and ut of the engagement area as quick as possible and limit exposure to the enemies missiles.
-
Aren't fighters very vulnerable to AMM's ??
I can see an average fighter at about 20-25mk (should double that on my new generation of sensor ships) and my current AMMs have 35mk range at 50k speed - obviously if the fighters ahve a missile that is longer ranged than I can see them that is ok - but once I find the Carriers (My ship senssors are going from 610k to over 1mk shortly) and close with them, it then becomes problematical for carrier based forces I believe. AMMs (even 50k 35mk range ones) cost so much less than fighters...
Input welcome from Carrier 'jocks' ...
I deliberately created an enemy that has AMMs with a longer range than my fighter missile. In the first engagement against them I lost about 50 fighters but fragged the enemy. Fighters are attrition units so I work on the assumption that I need enough of them to survive enemy fire so that their missile salvo is still overwhelming in size. My large carrier groups can put more than 150 fighters into space at once. I'm just about to bring some AMM armed fighters into service, the idea is defend the 'bombers' on approach from enemy missile fire. I'll let you know how it goes.
-
Orbital hubs i use for GM-Settlers. I produce say 25 million of Moonpeople (made for ridicoulous low grav and temperature) which wouldnt survive on earth. thanks to the Orbital habs ability to simulate "any" gravity and atmosphere i can use them to house my Moonies.
I also have a military variant of a hab as mobile shipyard/maintaince system. It houses 1000 Asteroid miners, some maintaince-mods 500k people a tug for the shipyard and a couple of factories for ordonance and other stuff i might need is in a collection of cargo bays. Its freaking slow (and uses commercial engines) and cant jump yet on itself (got some 100K researchpoints for a fitting ef 20 jumpengine to do) and took 20 years to build but it works as advancing basefor my taskgroups.
-
Aren't fighters very vulnerable to AMM's ??
I can see an average fighter at about 20-25mk (should double that on my new generation of sensor ships) and my current AMMs have 35mk range at 50k speed - obviously if the fighters ahve a missile that is longer ranged than I can see them that is ok - but once I find the Carriers (My ship senssors are going from 610k to over 1mk shortly) and close with them, it then becomes problematical for carrier based forces I believe. AMMs (even 50k 35mk range ones) cost so much less than fighters...
Input welcome from Carrier 'jocks' ...
We can use my current game on the Paradox Forum as an example.
The year is currently 2057, but I've had substantially the same fleet set-up for nearly 10 years. I have two battle fleets (plus a third fleet that holds my "siege train" for attacking defended planets).
Each of the battle fleets has three 20,000-ton Fleet Carriers and a 15,000-ton Light Carrier, plus a dozen or so other ships... battle-management ships, Gauss PD vessels, anti-Fighter and anti-FAC escorts, multi-role Cruisers, etc.
Each Fleet Carrier holds 51 Strike Fighters, each armed with one size-6/strength-9 missile in a box launcher, and each Light Carrier holds 28 Air Superiority Fighters, each armed with three size-2/strength-4 missiles in box launchers. Typical engagement ranges are 54 m-km for the strike Fighters (against an ECM-40 opponent... that would be 90 m-km with no ECM) and 18 m-km for the Air Superiority Fighters (again, vs an ECM-40 opponent; it would be 30 m-km against an opponent without ECM). The Strike Fighters have res-100 fire controls, and the Air Superiority Fighters have res-4 fire controls.
These Fighters are so effective that my other ships rarely get a chance to take part in the battle... the opponent is nearly always destroyed by Fighter strikes long before he comes within range of my main battle fleet. Similarly, no opposing Fighters or FAC has ever (ever!) gotten close enough to launch a missile at me. My Air Superiority Fighters intercept and destroy them well beyond engagement range.
Regarding your 35 m-km AMM question... my strike fighters can launch a time-on-target fleet salvo of 103 one-missile salvos from well beyond that range.
-
That's the thing - you can launch a 105 missile salvo - my 13 AMM Corvettes can launch 78 AMMs every 10 seconds - and even the Mk II version with only 4mk missile vision range means they can launch 20 what..? 20 salvos or so before your missiles reach - if any survive 1500 odd counter missiles.... and then there is my Frigates and Battleships who have AMMs and gauss cannon turrets.....
I can see your point but you can understand mine? and my frigates and battleships will do horrible things to your carriers if we get in range ... my current anti-ship missile has a range of 118mK and that will be going up to around 150mK I believe with then next engine development...
It is interesting
would like to face off versus carriers one day and compare doctrines...
-
How many seperate Fire Controls on those PD Corvettes?
You can only target one incoming missile salvo with each fire control... and my 153 incoming missiles (three Carriers with 51 Fighters per Carrier and one missile per Fighter) are all in seperate salvos, with one missile in each; meaning that you need to target each individual incoming missile with a seperate fire control and a seperate launch... not with a missile that's part of a PD salvo.
... in other words, a defensive salvo of 78 AMMs fired with a single Fire Control will take out ONE of my incoming missiles, leaving 152 still bearing down on your fleet. One of the main ideas of a Fighter-based, missile-armed fleet is to overload the enemy's PD by overloading his ability to simultaneously engage so many SEPERATE incoming salvos.
Note that my 153-missile spread requires only three ships (three Constellation-class Carriers). How many ships does your anti-missile defense require?
The proper basis for comparison is two opposing fleets built from roughly equal resources, in roughly equal time, at roughly equal tech levels... so if you are claiming 118 m-km missiles, you must allow them to me, as well; although I would probably trade some of that range for MIRVed warheads instead. Similarly, if your defense is based on 13 AMM Corvettes plus Frigates and Battleships, why are we assuming that my attack is going to be launched with only three ships?
-
yes - all true - actually there are 3 FCs on each Corvette meaning I can fire at 39 salvos each 10 seconds...
Your point about resources is valid also - your 3 ships total 75,000 tons my 13 total 78,000 tons
I think the biggest operational problem with the carrier/fighter combo is the reload time - but all the same I can see advantages too
I have just opted for a missile doctrine in this game after not being entirely happy with the carriers and fighters I had in the last game.
-
How about this doctrine:
All ships are cloaked.
They carry a giant fire con and use 33% reduction size 20 launchers to fire 900mkm range drones that have a 10mkm MIRV of 3x size 3 missiles. ASMs which don't need fuel for long ranges can be insanely fast...
Drone:
Missile Size: 20 MSP (1 HS) Warhead: 0 Armour: 0 Manoeuvre Rating: 5
Speed: 12000 km/s Endurance: 1500 minutes Range: 1080.0m km9 MSP in MIRV
Separation at 9mkm
MIRV:
Missile Size: 3 MSP (0.15 HS) Warhead: 3 Armour: 0 Manoeuvre Rating: 10
Speed: 100600 km/s Endurance: 2 minutes Range: 10.3m kmLet's see you catch that one!
Launched at the range of 450mkm of course, to account for travelling time.
A command ship carries the 50HS active sensor to spot ships that far out. (my res 16 active sensor has a 1 billion km range at size 50)
XD
When your enemy shoots at you from hundreds of mkm away... What do you do?
Sure, they have a reload time of 2000 seconds, but the drones take 750 minutes to get there anyway. Of course, I haven't researched drone engines, they could around 3x faster if I had them at my missile tech level.
-
How about this doctrine: ...
It would certainly work, since the MIRVed warheads will be almost impossible to intercept at that speed... unless the enemy can spot the size-20 drones in time to knock them out before they seperate.
It's a pity that you can't pack a bigger punch into your warheads, though... strength-3 only penetrates one layer of armor.
I've been having some success with size-24 planetary bombardment monitors, for knocking out enemy PDCs at very long range. I use two different types of MIRV missiles, with different speeds and travel times. Since my launchers are not heavily miniaturized, I can fire a salvo of the slower MIRVs, reload, then fire a salvo of the faster MIRVs. If my range-to-target and second-salvo firing delay are calculated properly, the faster MIRVs overtake the slower MIRVs just as they reach the proper range to deploy their warheads. This puts two full salvos of MIRVed warheads into a single time-on-target barrage, saturating the opponent's point defense and guaranteeing that plenty of warheads get through the PD screen, no matter how tight it is.
-
I like the MIRVs except that at 9mk separation range even at 100,000k you are going to need a lot to get through estimated 16-18 AMM salvos - admitted ly my AMMs only have a speed of 50,000k but it's going to take a lot! They are nice but I think the fighters are a better bet - especially as my next generation of MFCs will be able to see the Size 20 jobbies at about 12mk.
Great thing about this game - lots of possibilities
-
One of the main drawbacks of Fighters is the number of Officers that they require, if you want them all commanded. Three Carriers loaded with Fighters require 156 Officers (instead of three!).
-
One of the main drawbacks of Fighters is the number of Officers that they require, if you want them all commanded. Three Carriers loaded with Fighters require 156 Officers (instead of three!).
I like this fact as I can use the fighter commands to season my officers a bit. Whilst they are commanding there is the random chancethat they can advance in useful stats like crew training rating. That makes them more useful for commanding the bigger ships later on.
-
Ok, my AMMs are 6mkm range with a speed of 69kkm/s so my missiles are a bit higher tech.
I find it gets a bit hard to up the range beyond that if I want to retain a decent to-hit chance at the same speed ASM.
Against a 100kkm/s ASM? I have a 19% to hit chance. Since the drone ships will easily flush all their drones at me by the time I get to them, chances are, I've run out of AMMs.
-
good points except the drones are size 20 so you have 20 AMMs for every drone in the same missile capacity.... or 6 per MIRV
Oh and my AMMs do 50k but have a range of 35mk - the best I can get is 58k with 9mk range - I will have to await the next engine upgrade.... :)
-
I like the MIRVs except that at 9mk separation range even at 100,000k you are going to need a lot to get through estimated 16-18 AMM salvos - admitted ly my AMMs only have a speed of 50,000k but it's going to take a lot! They are nice but I think the fighters are a better bet - especially as my next generation of MFCs will be able to see the Size 20 jobbies at about 12mk.
Great thing about this game - lots of possibilities
Do you mean to shorten the separation range?
I would rather have that range _increased_ to lower the risk of the bus getting shot down before separation. A size 20 missile will be seen quite some way out and even if the enemy doesn´t have long ranged AMMs he would quickly adapt to this (assuming a human enemy, of course)
This all depends on the state of the game, obviously. Early game, a separation range of 5 mkm will probably be suffice, mid game 9mkm looks ok, late game, I would go up to as much as 20 mkm
Note: I have encoutered Precursors with AMM-ranges of 15+ mkm
-
Do you mean to shorten the separation range?
I would rather have that range _increased_ to lower the risk of the bus getting shot down before separation. A size 20 missile will be seen quite some way out and even if the enemy doesn´t have long ranged AMMs he would quickly adapt to this (assuming a human enemy, of course)
This all depends on the state of the game, obviously. Early game, a separation range of 5 mkm will probably be suffice, mid game 9mkm looks ok, late game, I would go up to as much as 20 mkm
Note: I have encoutered Precursors with AMM-ranges of 15+ mkm
I've been playing tag with Precursors using 40mkm AMM's with speed a little over 40k kps.
-
I like this fact as I can use the fighter commands to season my officers a bit. Whilst they are commanding there is the random chancethat they can advance in useful stats like crew training rating. That makes them more useful for commanding the bigger ships later on.
Agreed. And to address the high junior officer requirements add more naval academies. For flavor add a new lowest officer range that is equivilant to lieutenant. It does require a lot of manual assignment, but well worth it in the long run.
-
Interesting - the Precursors in my game all have 23.5mk AMMs
-
Interesting - the Precursors in my game all have 23.5mk AMMs
I have a feeling they are spawned based on the tech the empire that explored the system they are in. Theres definatly multiple variations of the same roll within the precurser fleet.
-
I would rather have that range _increased_ to lower the risk of the bus getting shot down before separation. A size 20 missile will be seen quite some way out and even if the enemy doesn´t have long ranged AMMs he would quickly adapt to this (assuming a human enemy, of course)
This all depends on the state of the game, obviously. Early game, a separation range of 5 mkm will probably be suffice, mid game 9mkm looks ok, late game, I would go up to as much as 20 mkm
And of course, if the separation range don't work, you could always use a longer ranged submunition. Cuts into the speed but the submunition is always going to be better than a 60mkm ASM. I suppose I need a better drone engine if I want this to work though since drone engine power is 3 or 4 tech levels behind missile engine.
-
One of the main drawbacks of Fighters is the number of Officers that they require, if you want them all commanded. Three Carriers loaded with Fighters require 156 Officers (instead of three!).
No, three carriers require the exact same number of officers as 153 fighters: Zero.
No ship requires an officer in command. Thus, it is actually bonus that fighters & FACs give you all those extra officer slots.