Author Topic: Plausible Anti-Carrier Doctrines (Read 3305 times)

Froggiest1982 · « **Reply #15 on:** December 02, 2020, 12:51:19 AM »

Quote from: TheTalkingMeowth on December 01, 2020, 04:35:12 PM

I'm setting up a multi-faction game that will pivot around Earth as the Sol system superpower. Earth uses carrier launched missile fighters, backed by large railgun cruisers (plus high rate of fire missile destroyers to try and kill enemy fighters).

Since Earth is the dominant power, the other factions need to shape their doctrines to counter it. There are two factions I'm still working out, and I'd like some advice. Note that the doctrines chosen don't ACTUALLY need to work; they just need to make sense and be distinctive.

The first faction is the Jovian Alliance, claiming the four large moons of Jupiter along with Jupiter's sorium reserves. Since they have such good fuel access, they are going with small fast ships using heavy engine boost. ECM on FACs and corvettes to ruin the fighters engagement range; their plan, such as it is, is to avoid the fighters and try to snipe the carrier with ECM cruise missiles launched from FACs. Then run in with microwave+plasma carronades to melt the railgun cruisers. I think this doctrine is ok, and certainly thematic, but I'd welcome some feedback.

The second faction, which I am less sure about, is Mars. They have a larger population and more industry than the Alliance, but poor access to fuel. So I'm thinking they should go with big ships so they can use efficient engines. The issue is that with the allotted tech level (INPE, but pretty much everything else is <4000RP), it is really hard to stop mass missile strikes. They can barely make a worthwhile AMM (and I had to give them more missile tech than I really wanted...missiles are supposed to be Earth's thing), so they are pretty much stuck with railguns which are really inefficient. I'm thinking they might try to use their large ships to mount big actives and try to shoot down the fighters before they can launch, but I'm not sure what they should do in terms of offense. I already have another faction running big shielded ships with particle beams, so the only remaining offensive option seems to be lasers. But that doesn't feel all that different from the particle beam doctrine, TBH.

Carriers have 2 big weak points and 2 strong points. In my opinion, when you are trying to defeat an enemy you don't need to exploit the weaknesses but use their strength at your advantage.

One of the advantages of the Carriers is range: they can attack you before you can attack them. The second advantage is detection. Due to long-range capability, they usually have long-range sensors.

Just to complete the topic I reckon that the weaknesses are Limited Defensive Capabilities and Fighters that due to rearm from time to time leave the Carrier exposed to counter-attack.

To turn the advantage of the Carrier in your favour you must invest in electronic countermeasures and cloaking. Finally, you must have fast ships. Your mark is not the fighters but the big slow beast. Limiting their range of detection and attack will expose the carrier to close range operations which could be deadly for it. Your ships must be able to act individually if required because losses are to be expected when the first wave hits, but if you survive that then it's pretty much game over for your Earth faction. An open formation with groups of 2 or 3 ships in classic wolf packs style.

Of course, then the weaknesses will turn the fight at your advantage but your enemy knows his weaknesses so he can plan around it.

An interesting strategy could be boarding...the Cylons tried that with the Galactica and based on the information in the episode "Valley of Darkness" the situation was already faced in the first Cylon war, making it look like an actual strategy against heavily-armed carriers.

liveware · « **Reply #16 on:** December 02, 2020, 01:40:40 AM »

Boarding could definitely be an interesting option. Boarding craft can be built small and fast and thus hard to detect and evade. Carriers tend to be slow which makes them good boarding targets, however they also tend to be large so you will need lots of boarders. Boarders also make for an interesting first-strike option as you will gain substantial information about the captured ship and relevant empire technology with each successful capture. In fact, I equip my scout carriers with boarding craft specifically so that I can capture ships during first contact scenarios. It's very useful to know what you are up against.

Boarding also goes well with the use of ground troops and STO weapons. STOs are hard to hit from orbit and can make use of, for example, powerful spinal lasers (or whatever you like). Luring the carrier fleet into range of a STO occupied comet or asteroid could be an interesting scenario, and heavy STO use might help diversify your factions if that is your goal.

EDIT: After re-reading your original post, I think a heavy ground troop component (with boarding and STO formations) would be really interesting for your Mars faction. You could use STO railguns for planetary PD and stealthy boarding craft for offensive operations. With sneaky troop transports, Mars could set up STO platforms throughout the solar system and make transportation a real headache for the other factions.

Michael Sandy · « **Reply #17 on:** December 02, 2020, 02:11:52 PM »

A lot depends on the fire controls of the fighters in question. If they are anti-ship missiles fire controls, say, res 80 or so, you can have 1000 ton antifighter screen with fire controls tweaked to match that of the size of the Earth fighters. That screen can forward deploy, ensuring that they can launch before the enemy fighters can, or at least ensure those fighters can't make it home to rearm.

One of the tricks for dealing with box launchers was base tech rail gun barges. Build a slow ship that literally costs more to destroy than it costs to build. Then slowly advance to the enemy. If the fighters launch their missiles, you sic some way over engined parasite beam ships to hunt them down. Otherwise you slowly plod in range of the objective. You can't get the enemy carrier that way, because the carrier will stay out of range, but if your goals are policy rather than destruction you can achieve it.

A lot of tricks can work IF Earth doesn't know they are coming. Which means they wouldn't be useful for the border skirmishing, minor conflicts, demonstrations of force because revealing your secret strategy for a minor conflict would be devastating. Which yields the question, do the other powers want to defeat and displace Earth, or just be able to resist Earth's bullying and be able to use Earth as a counter to their other rivals.

Michael Sandy · « **Reply #18 on:** December 02, 2020, 02:25:06 PM »

As a means of getting Earth to leave you alone, a doctrine of having a core of slow, cheap, PD ships, if an Earth carrier group runs out or even low on missiles, they can to either return home or resupply. And ultralong range 2-stage missiles that can only target large ships would make it harder for the Earth force to resupply without escorting the resupply ships.

I would argue that actually killing their carriers might be a mistake, as that makes you an existential threat, as distinct from merely expensive to bully. A mistake that somebody is likely to actually make, of course.

Norm49 · « **Reply #19 on:** December 02, 2020, 05:32:41 PM »

If you want to role play it what i would do is a defensive doctrine. Build station and/or satellite using small laser but tonne of them. It is mostly stationary so no need of mass fuel as you requested, longer weapon range that the Terran cruiser and since you are using small laser you can put a lot of them it should be sufficient as a point defence. Mars fleet wont be able to attack earth, the Terran fleet can probably make a successful attack but the cost would be to high. It is a similar tactic that Vietnam/middle-est country have use again the USA. They know they can't win so they make plan to not lose until the political cost an money cost become to high for the USA.

In that doctrine I didn't use missile since apparently you don't want Mars fleet to use them but I guest you can build some launch platform with only one HUGE missile like size 50 or more with interplanetary range. Practically useless but it would be a deterrent the same ways nuclear missile were "use" during the cold wars. Mars can probably hide those launch platform in sol deep space so the Terran fleet wont know were they are and how many there out are. If the tension go high the Terran fleet will be force to keep fleet with point defence on all of it colony in sol, harvester and other civilian ship can also be targeted. Also note that the Terran fleet doctrine is not good to deal with this. Even if the Terran fleet is bigger it will have to devote so much resource to protect the civilian that the amount of ship available for a assault on Mars will not be sufficient or it will have to live target undefended and assume the lost. If you roll play it the population will want the head to the president after the incident.

Last thing I see that Mars can do in respect with the doctrine will be fast long range laser frigate (missile will be better but I am trying to respect your apparent desire to not use missile) to do hit and run on fuel Harvester and tanker. The fuel it will require won't allow to make lot of attack but it will force the Terran fleet do devote lot of resource and fuel to protect it operation.

T.L.D.R
Mars would make a wars with them so costly that there adversary just wont consider a attack because it would be to much trouble and the gain compare to the lost/cost, by making use of heavy point defence and Terror weapon. Tactic is base on Vietnam/middle-est country tactic of we can't win so we focus on not losing. Also base on cold wars tactic.

Vasious · « **Reply #20 on:** December 02, 2020, 06:44:25 PM »

Just my 2 cents

Not sure if this would work but for Mars, thinking on the SSBNs someone mentioned.

Mars could have a number of Long range Long Deployment time ships armed with large 2 stage MIRV missiles.
They are not that fast, and don't have much in the way of fire control and actives

They hang out in deep space hiding from Earth and in the event of hostilities would launch the missiles at a way point :Earth.

The first stage being a long range transit stage that then releases a heap of small missiles in the hopes some would hit Earth

The premise being that anyone who to allow Earth to be nuked under their would be political suicide, thus limited the eagerness for Earth to enter into conflict with Mars even if it was a walk over, unless they could first take out all the SSBN equivalents.

Throw in a few more such ships armed with similar two stages, but perhaps with thermal passives, that would be aimed at Earths Fuel refineries at Saturn, to add another strategic aspect.

Now investing in these ships might limit Mars' ability to field other ships but might provide enough of an RP political deterrent whilst Mars seeks her own advantage (perhaps being the first to go for jump point theory).

Maybe then just defense platforms, fighters, and boarding pods, and STOS to make any fight against Mars bloody and again politically costly knowing the SSBNs will have fired by that point.

The SSBNs need not be that heavy an investment compared to a proper warships

They might have efficient engines that you run at low power to cut the thermal signature.
Fuel, Deployment time, and passive sensors enough to see a patrol out far enough to know to begin moving away.
The rest could be Box Launchers and a MFC that allows the aiming at way points.

A RP counter strike options rather than a head to head counter to Carriers.

TheTalkingMeowth · « **Reply #21 on:** December 02, 2020, 07:18:29 PM »

I like this idea! Unfortunately, all the powers are aware of this and have lots of railgun PD on their planets...too bad Mars doesn't have ECM.

That said, it's probably workable if Mars dedicates a significant portion of of its tonnage to this. Here's what I'm thinking.

Mars accepts that they cannot win an all out fleet engagement against Earth. So, they maintain only enough of a conventional force to handle a single carrier battle group (Earth has 3, so they wouldn't expect to see much more than that in a "skirmish level" force). Doable, with the AMM+AMM combo discussed earlier. The rest of their tonnage goes into long endurance box launcher ships. They can handle skirmishes with the main force, and if Earth forces the issue Luna or Terra get nuked.

I should probably have posted Earth's actual forces at some point. Would have made some of the discussion more grounded.

EDIT: Giant pile of ship designs incoming! These are Earth's military vessels. I left the tankers and colliers out. Cruisers and carrier are VERY long legged so they can get to Minerva, where a ruin is located. Destroyers are envisioned as local defense forces and so don't need the same range. Redundancy is fairly lacking b/c Earth is overconfident.

Missile Fighter

Off-Topic: show

Sensor fighter

Off-Topic: show

Carrier

Off-Topic: show

Cruiser

Off-Topic: show

Guided Missile Destroyer

Off-Topic: show

83athom · « **Reply #22 on:** December 14, 2020, 02:09:33 AM »

Honestly the route I'd go is something a lot of countries are starting to do IRL as a counter to Carriers; relatively large missiles that are all about speed and range. For designing a missile against that carrier I'd abuse the fact it only has an armor layer of 2, meaning any missile that does 5 damage or more will do internal damage to it. I'd design it with like 50% engine and 10% fuel, ECCM (if you can), a small thermal sensor (smallest you can go is 0.25 IIRC, and that is plenty), and filling the rest of it with warhead. My recommendation would be like a size 7 to 8 (decimals in between work just fine, and for some reason I have a soft spot of missiles of size 7.5 for my heavy ASMs). Fired from a warship with a *couple* dozen 0.4 or box launchers (I generally don't bother with 0.3 launchers) among it's other defensive weapons you can pretty much punch through the limited AMM defenses and cripple the carrier outright. Or you could fit them to small defensive satellites or mines if intended for a more defensive posture.

Alternatively you would stack defensive systems (CIWS, mass railgun batteries, and shields) to weather the barrage of missiles then close in afterword. It's more than feasable if you make sure to well armor the ship (6 or 8 ) as realistically the shields are going to take the brunt of the damage and by the time the next wave arrives it will have recharged, the guns will thin out the remnants, and the armor can soak up a lot of hits thanks to damage 4 missiles having very little damage depth.

Quote from: TheTalkingMeowth on December 01, 2020, 05:28:34 PM

I'm not sure how the third option would translate in Aurora. I guess it's arguably what Earth is doing, except the missiles are mounted on destroyers?

How it would translate based on your designs; Take the Ark Royal and uparmor it to 4 or 5, give it 12 reduced size missile launchers (with 3-4 reloads each, they don't need deep magazines for their role), give it some close range defenses (AMMs and/or a couple guns), give it its own sensors, and reduce the hangar down to like 7,000 or so. Preferably your ship mounted missiles aren't the same as the ones you use on any strike fighters, as otherwise it would be better to just fit more missiles onto a ship instead of inefficiently using space for hangars.

Author Topic: Plausible Anti-Carrier Doctrines (Read 3305 times)

Froggiest1982

Re: Plausible Anti-Carrier Doctrines

liveware

Re: Plausible Anti-Carrier Doctrines

Michael Sandy

Re: Plausible Anti-Carrier Doctrines

Michael Sandy

Re: Plausible Anti-Carrier Doctrines

Norm49

Re: Plausible Anti-Carrier Doctrines

Vasious

Re: Plausible Anti-Carrier Doctrines

TheTalkingMeowth (OP)

Re: Plausible Anti-Carrier Doctrines

83athom

Re: Plausible Anti-Carrier Doctrines