Aurora 4x
New Players => The Academy => Topic started by: borisoff on August 14, 2014, 03:49:59 PM
-
I'm trying to design my first military vessel, and I wonder if this thing is going to fly and shoot properly. Don't mind the engines and speed, just focus on weapon systems, fire control, active sensors and maintenance. After a few years of resarch and improvement, I designed missiles that go 20kkm/s, have barely 50% acc at 5km/s of target's speed and are size 7 (MSP). I don't know if I did right thing designing missile launcher of size 7 to match the missile (not sure if it checks for MSP or HS of the missile)
Urgent Fury class Destroyer 3 000 tons 108 Crew 751.6 BP TCS 60 TH 60 EM 0
1000 km/s Armour 1-18 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 1 PPV 7
Maint Life 1.5 Years MSP 157 AFR 72% IFR 1% 1YR 78 5YR 1174 Max Repair 273 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months Spare Berths 1
Magazine 7
60 EP Ion Drive (1) Power 60 Fuel Use 85.5% Signature 60 Exp 10%
Fuel Capacity 250 000 Litres Range 17.5 billion km (203 days at full power)
Size 7 Missile Launcher (1) Missile Size 7 Rate of Fire 70
Missile Fire Control FC113-R100 (1) Range 113.4m km Resolution 100
Active Search Sensor MR0-R1 (1) GPS 16 Range 960k km MCR 105k km Resolution 1
Active Search Sensor MR113-R100 (1) GPS 18900 Range 113.4m km Resolution 100
Active Search Sensor MR115-R50 (1) GPS 13650 Range 115.8m km Resolution 50
ECCM-1 (1) ECM 10
This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
Also: do I have to design/research some kind of missile cargo system to hold more missiles ?
The MR0-R1 sensor is for point defence purposes which i didn't include yet.
-
The launcher and fire control look fine, but you'll need a magazine to store more than one missile. And you'll probably want more than one launcher, 1 missile every 70 seconds won't break through any PD systems without a lot of help.
The MR113-R100 sensor is redundant, the MR115-R50 sensor outranges it and can spot smaller targets. As well, the MR0-R1 won't give you much of chance spot missiles, as anything faster than 21k km/s can fly through it in a single increment (ie: before you can see it). An MCR of about 500k km would be much better.
-
A few points, a missile detection sensor is only useful if you have something to shoot the missile down with. Also you might want to armor your ship, a single layer is really, really thin. Magazines hold reloads for missiles you will want a few, as well as additional launchers. Your ship will end up larger than 3000t, this is small for a full ship. Can you post the full stats of the missile? If you add them as default ordnance in the appropriate tab, it will show up in the ship overview
-
What's the designated role of the ship? Is it to shoot ships or shoot missiles down?
If it's shooting ships, then drop the res 1 sensor.
If it's shooting missiles, drop the other 2 and beef up the range on the Res 1.
More magazine space = more goodness.
Aurora lends itself to creating ships that are single or dual role (at best). Multi-role ships end up taking tonnage away from all roles to account for the extra tasks the ship is designed to do. I call this the Navy vs. Star Trek build philosophy. Star Trek ships can do it all. Navy ships are specialized. Single role ships can (usually) out-class an equal tonnage of multi-role ships.
You might sit down and work out your fleet doctrine. How many ships in a task group? What percentage of them are escorts and what percentage are mission? Or do you have dedicated escort TGs and mission TGs? What is their range? And what is the maintenance life? And the deployment time?
-
Ok so I modified the model a bit according to your hints:
Urgent Fury class Destroyer 6 450 tons 182 Crew 1041.6 BP TCS 129 TH 360 EM 0
2790 km/s Armour 4-30 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 2 PPV 28
Maint Life 1.48 Years MSP 202 AFR 166% IFR 2.3% 1YR 103 5YR 1547 Max Repair 273 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months Spare Berths 1
Magazine 58
60 EP Ion Drive mk II (6) Power 60 Fuel Use 66.5% Signature 60 Exp 10%
Fuel Capacity 750 000 Litres Range 31.5 billion km (130 days at full power)
Size 7 Missile Launcher (4) Missile Size 7 Rate of Fire 70
Missile Fire Control FC113-R100 (1) Range 113.4m km Resolution 100
Active Search Sensor MR115-R50 (1) GPS 13650 Range 115.8m km Resolution 50
ECCM-1 (1) ECM 10
This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
IMHO now it's a bit too heavy, slow and I don't know if the fire control will match the search sensor ? (diffirent resolutions). I may add some engines, but I want to stay at over 100 days of fuel reserve, and it would need some more fuel capacity, which will rise the weight too much.
My missile design (I don't know how to include this in ship's design like Whitecold suggested):
Missile Size: 7 MSP (0.35 HS) Warhead: 6 Armour: 0 Manoeuvre Rating: 15
Speed: 20600 km/s Engine Endurance: 93 minutes Range: 114.9m km
Cost Per Missile: 3.94
Chance to Hit: 1k km/s 309% 3k km/s 90% 5k km/s 61.8% 10k km/s 30.9%
Materials Required: 1.5x Tritanium 2.44x Gallicite Fuel x3750
Also my magazine size has increased with more launchers, is there any other way to increase it?
EDIT: More magazine and maintenance
-
6 Warhead seems a bit little for a 7 MSP missile. For adding missiles, there is a tab after the design tab where you can select your ordnance.
Still, your design lacks magazines, so those four shots are all you have at the moment. Magazines need to be designed, in the design window under magazines.
Your maintenance is now really low with half a year, it should be at least higher than deployment time.
-
6 Warhead seems a bit little for a 7 MSP missile. For adding missiles, there is a tab after the design tab where you can select your ordnance.
Still, your design lacks magazines, so those four shots are all you have at the moment. Magazines need to be designed, in the design window under magazines.
Your maintenance is now really low with half a year, it should be at least higher than deployment time.
I will need to sacrifice the range or chance to hit for increased warhead.
example of wh 8 missile with less cth:
Missile Size: 7 MSP (0.35 HS) Warhead: 8 Armour: 0 Manoeuvre Rating: 12
Speed: 20600 km/s Engine Endurance: 93 minutes Range: 114.9m km
Cost Per Missile: 4.12
Chance to Hit: 1k km/s 247.2% 3k km/s 72% 5k km/s 49.4% 10k km/s 24.7%
Materials Required: 2x Tritanium 2.12x Gallicite Fuel x3750
or less range:
Missile Size: 7 MSP (0.35 HS) Warhead: 8 Armour: 0 Manoeuvre Rating: 15
Speed: 20600 km/s Engine Endurance: 62 minutes Range: 76.6m km
Cost Per Missile: 4.44
Chance to Hit: 1k km/s 309% 3k km/s 90% 5k km/s 61.8% 10k km/s 30.9%
Materials Required: 2x Tritanium 2.44x Gallicite Fuel x2500
OR just increase the MSP which isn't smart I guess.
-
Also my magazine size has increased with more launchers, is there any other way to increase it?
The magazine in your early designs is only the actual missiles that fit in the launch tubes.
( 1 size 7 launcher = 7 magazine )
( 4 size 7 launcher = 28 magazine ).
So your current total magazine of 58 can only hold 8 missiles (4 in the tubes) or a single reload.
When you go into the ordnance tab of the design and assign missiles this will become more clear.
-
Here is my upgraded, probably working design:
Urgent Fury class Cruiser 7 750 tons 204 Crew 1195.3 BP TCS 155 TH 360 EM 0
2322 km/s Armour 4-34 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 3 PPV 28
Maint Life 2.02 Years MSP 289 AFR 160% IFR 2.2% 1YR 94 5YR 1413 Max Repair 273 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months Spare Berths 1
Magazine 208
60 EP Ion Drive mk II (6) Power 60 Fuel Use 66.5% Signature 60 Exp 10%
Fuel Capacity 750 000 Litres Range 26.2 billion km (130 days at full power)
CIWS-120 (1x6) Range 1000 km TS: 12000 km/s ROF 5 Base 50% To Hit
Size 7 Missile Launcher (4) Missile Size 7 Rate of Fire 70
Missile Fire Control FC113-R50 (1) Range 113.6m km Resolution 50
Size 7 Anti-ship Missile mk II (16) Speed: 20 600 km/s End: 92.9m Range: 114.9m km WH: 6 Size: 7 TH: 103/61/30
Size 7 Anti-ship Missile SR mk II (12) Speed: 20 600 km/s End: 62m Range: 76.6m km WH: 8 Size: 7 TH: 103/61/30
Active Search Sensor MR115-R50 (1) GPS 13650 Range 115.8m km Resolution 50
ECCM-1 (1) ECM 10
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
It is packed with 16 long range missiles and 12 shorter range, more powerful ones. It will be accompanied with radar, tanker, PD and beam weapon type ships in the future, hopefully smaller than this one.
I'm still worried about few things: the ship's and missiles range, missile size, speed and chance to hit, launcher's rate of fire, amount of armour, ecm/eccm, the amount of missiles aboard, failure rate.
EDIT: More engineering space, now MSP covers max repairs, thanks Erik. Also CIWS and the weight grew to 7750. The bad thing is it took me about 20 years in game, to get here. I wonder what NPR ships will look like after this amount of time.
-
If you look, your max repair is 279. Your total supplies are 199. So if the biggest thing on your ship breaks, you cannot fix it.
-
The missile designs seem okay, and 50-100m km is also okay. The details here will only start to matter if you know your opponent.
ROF is less important than salvo density, with 70 seconds you won't defeat active defenses with successive salvos anyway, so if you have reduced size launchers, I'd use them to maximize throw weight. 4 armor is acceptable, for ECM, one of the best available is okay for a ship that size, stacking only gives redundancy.
Personally I don't use CIWS on warships, and instead add PD batteries to the ship or build PD escorts, but that is a matter of personal taste.
-
-snip-
Okay, in next generation I will throw away CIWS for sake of more launchers and/or mount 75%/50% sized launchers. Probably 75% because 5x reload time is too low IMO. PD focused ships shall escort these fat mobile launchers in near future.
-
Make missile reload tech a priority. This will aid in cycle times.
-
If you want your ship to have more range consider replacing your 6 power 60 engines with 1 power 360 or 2 power 120 engines, you'll get vastly better efficiency with one engine, however maintenance will be higher with larger engines.
-
@Erik: Level 4 reload rate based launchers are now a priority. ETA nov 2042 just before the construction of 3 first generation cruisers.
@Marc: Do you mean changing the power/efficiency modifier to x2 ? It increases fuel consumption like 11 times.
-
@Marc: Do you mean changing the power/efficiency modifier to x2 ? It increases fuel consumption like 11 times.
No bigger engines are more fuel efficient. So if you have a ship design with one or two engines instead of 6 smaller ( with same total tonnage ) they will be a bit more efficient.
-
No bigger engines are more fuel efficient. So if you have a ship design with one or two engines instead of 6 smaller ( with same total tonnage ) they will be a bit more efficient.
One thing to think about with the engines and shock damage is how vulnerable do you want to be to a single lucky hit taking out all of your ability to move. In addition the bigger engines will do a lot more damage if they explode. Think of the classic "Golden BB" shot which took out the Hood during WWII. Larger engines are more efficient, and having just a couple instead of 6 would still make a noticeable difference on your fuel efficiency.
Brian
-
@Erik: Level 4 reload rate based launchers are now a priority. ETA nov 2042 just before the construction of 3 first generation cruisers.
@Marc: Do you mean changing the power/efficiency modifier to x2 ? It increases fuel consumption like 11 times.
With Reload tech, the level of tech = 30second reload for the same size missile. So reload 3 means you have 30s reload on size 3 missiles. Each size past that adds 10s reload. Just FYI :)
-
@Erik: Level 4 reload rate based launchers are now a priority. ETA nov 2042 just before the construction of 3 first generation cruisers.
@Marc: Do you mean changing the power/efficiency modifier to x2 ? It increases fuel consumption like 11 times.
Larger engines are more fuel efficient than smaller ones.
On the other hand, if you go for a single, huge engine, all it takes is one unlucky hit and your ship is dead in space.
The 6 engines on your design are great for keeping your ship going under fire, but are wasting lots of fuel. Going with 2 x 180 power or 3 x 120 power engines might be advisable.
-
Oh sorry my mistake, I didn't make it clear that I meant tyou should replace the 6 engines with 1 or 2 larger engines with the same total power, actually since they will be more efficient you could bump the multiplier up a little too and get some extra speed....
And Brian, as I recall the hood and Bismark were basically equally matched the both had the same 15 inch guns and were teh same size and displacement, with around the same power. However the hood had slightly less of her displacement as armour than the bismark, but still around a third of her weight was armour protection, so it's kind of laughable to call that ship a battle cruiser when it couldn't possibly have been any better protected...
Well, regardless It was a magazine explosion which took her out which was probably either bad luck, poor safety measures, or poor design.
-
snip
Well, regardless It was a magazine explosion which took her out which was probably either bad luck, poor safety measures, or poor design.
No argument about the what actually destroyed the Hood. Just saying that sometimes a lucky hit can do these things. With only 1 engine on a ship if that lucky hit takes out the engine, your ship is in a world of hurt. If the engine explodes then most ships are going to be crippled, or just killed outright. With more engines the size of the explosion will be less (assuming the same total space devoted to engines), and if any engines survive you will still have the option of pulling back. Plus in this game a stationary target is pretty much dead unless it was designed from the start to be stationary (pdc's or orbital defense bases)
Brian
-
My new generation fleet should look something like this, please take a look and give me some advise. Let's say the default setting will look like 2 cruisers, 6 light cruisers, 4 PD destroyer escort, 1 supply ship, 1-2 colliers, 1-2 tankers, 1 radar ship(not included yet).
Warrior Knight class Missile Cruiser 11 100 tons 341 Crew 1540 BP TCS 222 TH 480 EM 0
2162 km/s Armour 4-44 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 6 PPV 70
Maint Life 3.69 Years MSP 520 AFR 164% IFR 2.3% 1YR 59 5YR 889 Max Repair 168 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months Spare Berths 1
Magazine 490
120 EP Ion Drive (4) Power 120 Fuel Use 63% Signature 120 Exp 10%
Fuel Capacity 750 000 Litres Range 19.3 billion km (103 days at full power)
Size 7 Missile Launcher (10) Missile Size 7 Rate of Fire 70
Missile Fire Control FC73-R50 (1) Range 73.5m km Resolution 50
Size 7 Anti-ship Missile SR mk II (60) Speed: 20 600 km/s End: 62m Range: 76.6m km WH: 8 Size: 7 TH: 103/61/30
Active Search Sensor MR71-R50 (1) GPS 8400 Range 71.3m km Resolution 50
ECCM-1 (1) ECM 10
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
Harbringer class Destroyer Escort 5 650 tons 105 Crew 778.8 BP TCS 113 TH 240 EM 0
2123 km/s Armour 4-28 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 2 PPV 47.94
Maint Life 1.23 Years MSP 172 AFR 127% IFR 1.8% 1YR 118 5YR 1769 Max Repair 132 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months Spare Berths 4
120 EP Ion Drive (2) Power 120 Fuel Use 63% Signature 120 Exp 10%
Fuel Capacity 500 000 Litres Range 25.3 billion km (137 days at full power)
Twin Gauss Cannon R3-100 Turret (2x6) Range 30 000km TS: 21000 km/s Power 0-0 RM 3 ROF 5 1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Fire Control S04 32-12000 (1) Max Range: 64 000 km TS: 12000 km/s 84 69 53 37 22 6 0 0 0 0
Active Search Sensor MR5-R1 antimissile 500kkm (1) GPS 84 Range 5.0m km MCR 549k km Resolution 1
This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
Narcatil class Maintenance Vessel 6 000 tons 82 Crew 562.7 BP TCS 120 TH 240 EM 0
2000 km/s Armour 3-29 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 3 PPV 0
Maint Life 32.67 Years MSP 11176 AFR 96% IFR 1.3% 1YR 20 5YR 305 Max Repair 60 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months Spare Berths 0
Cargo Handling Multiplier 5
120 EP Ion Drive (2) Power 120 Fuel Use 63% Signature 120 Exp 10%
Fuel Capacity 500 000 Litres Range 23.8 billion km (137 days at full power)
CIWS-120 (1x6) Range 1000 km TS: 12000 km/s ROF 5 Base 50% To Hit
This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
Incepteris class Tanker 18 450 tons 100 Crew 1180.1 BP TCS 369 TH 750 EM 0
2032 km/s Armour 3-62 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 3 PPV 0
MSP 120 Max Repair 37.5 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months Spare Berths 0
Cargo Handling Multiplier 10
150 EP Commercial Ion Drive (5) Power 150 Fuel Use 11.93% Signature 150 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 10 000 000 Litres Range 817.6 billion km (4656 days at full power)
This design is classed as a Commercial Vessel for maintenance purposes
Iron Duke class Collier 6 250 tons 89 Crew 701.6 BP TCS 125 TH 240 EM 0
1920 km/s Armour 3-30 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 2 PPV 0
Maint Life 2.63 Years MSP 140 AFR 156% IFR 2.2% 1YR 29 5YR 430 Max Repair 60 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months Spare Berths 0
Magazine 1020 Cargo Handling Multiplier 10
120 EP Ion Drive (2) Power 120 Fuel Use 63% Signature 120 Exp 10%
Fuel Capacity 500 000 Litres Range 22.9 billion km (137 days at full power)
Size 7 Anti-ship Missile SR mk II (140) Speed: 20 600 km/s End: 62m Range: 76.6m km WH: 8 Size: 7 TH: 103/61/30
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
My PD destroyer escort class needs to be redesigned, because the tracking speed of turret and fire control doesn't match. I don't know if I should somehow make fire control reach over 20k tracking speed or lower the turret's TS. Also is 30k (64k ?) range enough to protect my fleet ? The main concern, which I recognize for now is the weight of these models. It will take ages to build them all.
EDIT: Partly Updated the list according to hints from Whitecold and Brian. This game consumes lots of my free time, so I'm a bit slow with updates. Lower range on cruiser, more salvos and tonnage, a bit more equalized speed for all ships, commercial tanker, the collier is still a bit smegty. The TG should look something like this: 4-6 cruisers, 2-3 PD escort, 1-2 colliers, tanker, supply, radar. I didn't know I could prefab ship components, it should make things easier in the future, thanks.
-
First your light and heavy cruiser seem redundant. Both are missile combatants, armed with the same missiles. I'd decide on one design and repeat build that.
Your collier has a missile launcher, why? On the same note, your tanker is military, any reason for that? The same the sensor on the maintenance vessel is superfluous, your escorts provide multiple ones already, and CIWS does not need sensor contact. For the Escort you can't do much more than use a 4x speed fire control, and build matching turrets. 12kkm/s seems to be your limit, so use that and make up with numbers what you lack in tracking speed.
The speed of your ships varies wildly, from 1.8k to 2.8k, meaning your faster ships waste fuel and mass on drives they don't use operating in a task group. I usually have a 'marching speed' for my fleet units. Also do you want to invest the resources and fuel for military drives on your supply train, but that of course depends on your logistics setup and the probable mission profile of your fleet.
-
A couple of other comments.
1.) The magazine space on your light cruisers is way to low. One salvo of your missiles is 42msp, and you can only hold 132msp, or about 3 salvo's total. Your heavy cruiser is almost as bad with a salvo using 70msp and the ship only holding 280msp which is 4 salvo's.
2.) The tracking speed is a limiter, so whichever is worse is what you will end up using. There can be one other consideration. Are you likely to be able to upgrade the tracking speed anytime during these ships useful lifespan? If you are then having the turrets already geared to take advantage of that makes the upgrade fairly quick and easy.
3.) To make the ships build faster, use your planet side industry to build as many of the ship components as possible. If you have components available on the planet making a ship they will be used immediately and count as already built towards the total time you need. Quick example if you pre-build the engines, turrets, fire control, sensors, etc. you will probably cut the total time to build the ship my more than half. I have built ships like this in under 1 year in similar games.
4.) For your point defense, have you researched railguns yet? If so then a bunch of 10cm railguns can actually provide more point defense than those gauss cannon. Each railgun is 1/2 the size of the gauss cannon and has a better rate of fire currently. Combine that with how much space the turret machinery is using and you probably can get more missiles shot down overall.
Brian
-
-snip-
4. ) For your point defense, have you researched railguns yet? If so then a bunch of 10cm railguns can actually provide more point defense than those gauss cannon. Each railgun is 1/2 the size of the gauss cannon and has a better rate of fire currently. Combine that with how much space the turret machinery is using and you probably can get more missiles shot down overall.
Brian
Railguns can't reach more tracking speed than 4000 km/s on my ships, so I wonder if they are of any use against missiles ? Or is there any other way to rise their TS.
-
You can make the ship faster. Unturreted weapons use either the base tracking speed (in your case 4000 km/s) or the ship's speed. You'll still need a fire control that can use that speed though.
-
Railguns can't reach more tracking speed than 4000 km/s on my ships, so I wonder if they are of any use against missiles ? Or is there any other way to rise their TS.
Tracking speed of a fixed gun (as the railgun) is capped at either the speed of the ship it is mounted on or the base tracking speed you have researched, whichever is larger.
The railgun has only 1/4 the tracking speed of a turret, but fires 4 "shots" each time it fires which pretty much cancels each other out.
If you can mount 2 times as many railguns than turreted gauss cannons, railguns are as good as gauss cannons with a ROF of 2. If you can mount 3 times as many rail guns, they are the equal to turreted gauss cannons with a ROF of 3.
And with one or two additional levels of launch velocity researched, they also make good secondary offensive armament.