Author Topic: Big ships v Smaller ships  (Read 5289 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline JacenHan

  • Captain
  • **********
  • Posts: 455
  • Thanked: 115 times
  • Discord Username: Jacenhan
Re: Big ships v Smaller ships
« Reply #15 on: April 21, 2020, 04:15:26 PM »
I think Father Tim's problem with the current system is that you cannot, for example, have a 10,000 tons survey ship use commercial engines if you ever want a military ship to escort it through a jump point (or vice versa). It feels like an arbitrary restriction that military ships cannot use larger, efficient engines.
 

Offline Jorgen_CAB

  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • J
  • Posts: 2839
  • Thanked: 674 times
Re: Big ships v Smaller ships
« Reply #16 on: April 21, 2020, 04:15:38 PM »
Ok... I rechecked how it is suppose to work now...

Military Jump drives does not count as a military component but is necessary to jump a ship with a military engine. So you can build a commercial station with a military jump engine and jump military ship with them so that is pretty neat. Military Jump Drives can't jump ships with a commercial engine though.

You can't have two jump drives on either a station or a ship in the newest patch so that ability is gone.

I agree that building jump drives is not really an issue... I was referring to them limiting the realistic size for jumping ships using early technology. An efficiency 4 jump drive capable of jumping a 10000t ship will cost nearly 3000rp while researching the next level of jump efficiency 5 cost 4000rp... so at some point it simply is not worth researching new jump drives rather then the next level of efficiency. This is only important for the few first levels though. That is why I mentioned that it is a limiting factor in the early technology age.

A ship at 10.000t is not really a large ship even at early technology. Expanding a few yards to above 10000t is not really very difficult to do early on.

At Magneto Plasma level of engine technology you probably could easily build ships in the range of 50.000t or so, at least for you biggest military ships without straining your research or yard spaces that much.

But large ships does not exclude smaller ship from being built at all as they both have benefits and drawbacks.

As I said... I view larger ships more capable as an offensive strategic tool while smaller ship are more important for defensive strategical considerations.

The larger a ship gets the less it make sense to specialise them too in general, there are always exceptions to the rules of course.

Whenever I design a ship I want to imagine what operational role it is to take and make sure there are not another ship that does the exact same thing. Criteria can be anything from speed, defences, weapons, range, deployment, hangar space, sensors etc...

In general I'm not too hung up on every ship needing to have the exact same speed for example, it entirely depend on their operational role.
 

Offline Jorgen_CAB

  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • J
  • Posts: 2839
  • Thanked: 674 times
Re: Big ships v Smaller ships
« Reply #17 on: April 21, 2020, 04:29:04 PM »
I think Father Tim's problem with the current system is that you cannot, for example, have a 10,000 tons survey ship use commercial engines if you ever want a military ship to escort it through a jump point (or vice versa). It feels like an arbitrary restriction that military ships cannot use larger, efficient engines.

But then again it probably is enough with a size 24 military engine with say a 25% power efficiency rate get a 0.02 fuel efficiency rate which is pretty damn good. You could also build say a size 100 at 55% power efficiency for a fuel efficiency at 0.07 fuel efficiency if you want to go that route instead.

Any of those choices should be good for a survey vessel.
 

Offline Pedroig

  • Lt. Commander
  • ********
  • P
  • Posts: 243
  • Thanked: 67 times
Re: Big ships v Smaller ships
« Reply #18 on: April 21, 2020, 04:30:51 PM »

You can't have two jump drives on either a station or a ship in the newest patch so that ability is gone.


That is unfortunate.  :(
si vis pacem, para bellum
 

Offline Father Tim

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 2162
  • Thanked: 531 times
Re: Big ships v Smaller ships
« Reply #19 on: April 21, 2020, 05:50:52 PM »
I think Father Tim's problem with the current system is that you cannot, for example, have a 10,000 tons survey ship use commercial engines if you ever want a military ship to escort it through a jump point (or vice versa). It feels like an arbitrary restriction that military ships cannot use larger, efficient engines.


That is exactly my problem.  With a conventional start, my first three generations of warships use civilian engines, because (one) engine models are expensive to research, so I generally just have one and (two) fuel efficiency is atrocious, so the one I have is the biggest, most fuel-efficient engine design I can manage.

Later on, I still use civilian engine for ships where range & fuel efficiency is more important than tactical speed.  I also don't use jump gates / stabilized wormholes, so it is hugely important to me that my fleets can all move and jump together.
 

Offline mergele

  • Leading Rate
  • *
  • m
  • Posts: 14
  • Thanked: 1 times
Re: Big ships v Smaller ships
« Reply #20 on: April 21, 2020, 06:05:17 PM »
Bigger ships put more raw power per tonnage or mineral cost than smaller ones.
Smaller ones are faster to iterate over, adapt to your enemy, faster to upgrade and therefore can stay closer to the current technological edge.
Both types have their value.
 

Offline Jorgen_CAB

  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • J
  • Posts: 2839
  • Thanked: 674 times
Re: Big ships v Smaller ships
« Reply #21 on: April 22, 2020, 02:06:13 AM »
I think Father Tim's problem with the current system is that you cannot, for example, have a 10,000 tons survey ship use commercial engines if you ever want a military ship to escort it through a jump point (or vice versa). It feels like an arbitrary restriction that military ships cannot use larger, efficient engines.


That is exactly my problem.  With a conventional start, my first three generations of warships use civilian engines, because (one) engine models are expensive to research, so I generally just have one and (two) fuel efficiency is atrocious, so the one I have is the biggest, most fuel-efficient engine design I can manage.

Later on, I still use civilian engine for ships where range & fuel efficiency is more important than tactical speed.  I also don't use jump gates / stabilized wormholes, so it is hugely important to me that my fleets can all move and jump together.

Fuel cost in general have also gone up a bit from VB6 to C# even for commercial engines. But a size 24 at engine power 50% have a power efficiency of 11.4% so it can't be that bad?!?

If you go down to 40% efficiency you get a fuel efficiency of 6.5%.

A size 40 at power efficiency 55% have a fuel efficiency of 11.2%.

And this is with a fuel consumption tech rate of 1.

I think we just have to accept that fuel costs in general have gone up a bit in C# over VB6... I don't think it is a huge issue to be honest.
« Last Edit: April 22, 2020, 04:16:47 PM by Jorgen_CAB »
 

Offline Person012345

  • Captain
  • **********
  • Posts: 539
  • Thanked: 29 times
Re: Big ships v Smaller ships
« Reply #22 on: April 29, 2020, 12:46:46 AM »
Lol, I think we have different definitions of large ships. Your "cruiser" there is in the entry-level weight category my current game race would be torn between calling a corvette or a destroyer. Your battlecruiser would be comfortably considered a light cruiser. And if anything in other games I have tended towards labelling things in a heavier direction (the curent game is based somewhat on modern ship weights, other games have assumed that ships would tend towads getting heavier).

I see no reason there can't be a place for multiple ship types in the fleet. I tend to go with small ships for things I want lots of and want the risk of destruction dispersed for such as PD for instance whilst heavier ships bring heavier firepower. My current race has a specific design philosophy for each. The corvettes are typically between 1,000 and 4,000 tons and mount PD weapons. Destroyers are between 4,000 and 10,000 tons and are the baseline ship-to-ship combat units. Light Cruisers are generally between 8,000 and 12,000 tons and are like Destroyer+. They have the same protection as destroyers and the same weapons systems, but more of them so they bring more firepower and whatever extra combat ability I might want to throw in (eg. more fire controls or whatever). Cruisers are between 12,000 and 20,000 tons, they typically step up the size and power of the weapons systems as well as the protection from the light cuisers. When I get to them, heavy cruisers will be 20,000 to 30,000 tons and will be to cruisers what light cruisers are to destroyers and 30,000 tons and up will be battleships, again a step up in terms of offensive and defensive capability. I haven't bothered with fighters as a general combat approach because its still on a patch that interrupts every time a fighter is built. Sensor ships are usually based on light cruisers with all their weapons stripped, replaced with a powerful sensor and a hanger bay containing 4 - 6 sensor fighters.

To be fair, this is more based on RP than raw design efficiency, but I think having a range of ships is useful so you can decide whether you want more, cheaper ships or less, more powerful ships or a mix in between.
 

Offline Jorgen_CAB

  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • J
  • Posts: 2839
  • Thanked: 674 times
Re: Big ships v Smaller ships
« Reply #23 on: April 29, 2020, 01:57:18 AM »
Lol, I think we have different definitions of large ships. Your "cruiser" there is in the entry-level weight category my current game race would be torn between calling a corvette or a destroyer. Your battlecruiser would be comfortably considered a light cruiser. And if anything in other games I have tended towards labelling things in a heavier direction (the curent game is based somewhat on modern ship weights, other games have assumed that ships would tend towads getting heavier).

I see no reason there can't be a place for multiple ship types in the fleet. I tend to go with small ships for things I want lots of and want the risk of destruction dispersed for such as PD for instance whilst heavier ships bring heavier firepower. My current race has a specific design philosophy for each. The corvettes are typically between 1,000 and 4,000 tons and mount PD weapons. Destroyers are between 4,000 and 10,000 tons and are the baseline ship-to-ship combat units. Light Cruisers are generally between 8,000 and 12,000 tons and are like Destroyer+. They have the same protection as destroyers and the same weapons systems, but more of them so they bring more firepower and whatever extra combat ability I might want to throw in (eg. more fire controls or whatever). Cruisers are between 12,000 and 20,000 tons, they typically step up the size and power of the weapons systems as well as the protection from the light cuisers. When I get to them, heavy cruisers will be 20,000 to 30,000 tons and will be to cruisers what light cruisers are to destroyers and 30,000 tons and up will be battleships, again a step up in terms of offensive and defensive capability. I haven't bothered with fighters as a general combat approach because its still on a patch that interrupts every time a fighter is built. Sensor ships are usually based on light cruisers with all their weapons stripped, replaced with a powerful sensor and a hanger bay containing 4 - 6 sensor fighters.

To be fair, this is more based on RP than raw design efficiency, but I think having a range of ships is useful so you can decide whether you want more, cheaper ships or less, more powerful ships or a mix in between.

In my campaigns I tend to make the ships for their roles and the sizes tend to grow with time. So a destroyer that is 8000t in the early game might grow to become a 15-20.000t ship later on. The main thing is that their role in the fleet remain the same.

In a developed game then my fleet sizes and roles usually look like this...

Corvette 2000-4000 tons
These are specialized patrol, scout ships. They have rudimentary weapon systems if any at all, they are not meant to go into actual battle. Their means of defence are usually stealth and/or speed, depends on what they designed for.

Frigattes 6000-10.000 tons
They are either old destroyers or newer ships tasked with the role of escort for commercial ships or other slower ships. Their main armament is that of defence and especially point defence to defend support ships from missile attacks, but also some beam weapons for dissuading an enemy to close in.

Destroyer 15.000-20.000 tons
Destroyer roles is both fleet escort but also scouting, patrolling and engaging enemy ships at limited capacity. A destroyer are suppose to be able to act on their own or in smaller groups, depending on their mission, but destroyers are very rarely deployed to a system alone but in small flotilla forces. They need to have both offensive and defensive weapons with a focus on the defensive side and these ships tend to be the most numerous as single type of vessels in a fleet if you don't count FAC/Fighter crafts.

Cruiser more than 20.000 tons
This is a really large ship whose role are basically long range patrol, reconnaissance and projection of power. They are suppose to act both alone or in a small task-group of cruisers. They are basically very big heavily armed and armoured scout ships and have basically all types of systems included in addition to a decent hangar space for a plethora of parasites depending on their mission type.

Battle Carrier more than 20.000 tons
This is an armed and armoured ships with the main role of carrying strike crafts for its main offensive capacity, usually in the form of missile strike crafts. The ships always have some for of anti-missile defences and a strong beam defence. They are suppose to hit and destroy enemies from a distance but they also can engage in close beam combat action such as jump gates or defending a planet. These ships would be the main capital ship of any fleet and would be like marrying a battleship with a carrier.

There might also be allot of other types of ships with different roles such as light carriers, assault carriers, jump tenders, and many more...

But I think that size is generally a definition of how advanced and developed the economy and technology has become. Bigger ships might take more time to build but they can have quite effective systems and allot more staying power. Smaller ships are more versatile and can be spread out over a larger area and obviously does not sting as much of you do happen to loose them. But in general if you can afford three 20.000 ton ships to do a task that is generally more effective than six 10.000t ships doing the same thing as the components on the larger ship probably are more  efficient and the larger ships are more resilient in general. On the other hand six ships can be in six different locations where three ships can only be in three... so it is a give and take.

When it comes to offensive capacity then small ships can be built allot faster than the same tonnage of large ships... so if you want 30.000 ton of raw offensive power (say missile strike crafts) it is far quicker to build 30 1000t FAC than one 30.000 ton missile cruiser and the smaller ships are more efficient for doing overwhelming quick and surgical strikes. The big ship is more about presence, taking and holding space far way.

If all you need is defending yourself then concentrating on smaller ships is usually far more efficient... but if you want to project power over longer distances then the bigger you can make the ships the better in general.

But... at the same time... you should always try to maintain a good balance between different types of ships... so, small or large are both highly valuable no mater what.
« Last Edit: April 29, 2020, 08:37:02 AM by Jorgen_CAB »
 
The following users thanked this post: skoormit

Offline Marski

  • Commander
  • *********
  • Posts: 390
  • Thanked: 139 times
Re: Big ships v Smaller ships
« Reply #24 on: April 29, 2020, 05:09:33 AM »
these days I design ships as the need arises to make the game more challenging (and it's closer to how it is IRL).
 

Offline Earthrise

  • 33014th Penal Battalion - Potwasher 4th Class
  • Leading Rate
  • *
  • E
  • Posts: 8
  • Thanked: 1 times
Re: Big ships v Smaller ships
« Reply #25 on: April 29, 2020, 06:14:52 AM »
From a role-playing perspective, I like the 'prestige' of larger ships (I also try to avoid using missiles so as to not 'waste' resources).   Here's my intended military ship classes for the C# version:

Corvette           7,500T     Survey ships
Frigate            15,000T     Light anti-ship jump point defence pickets (non-turreted lasers)
Destroyer        30,000T     Light anti-missile assault ships (small turreted lasers & large non-turreted lasers). 
Escort Carrier  30,000T     Light fighter/FAC support
Cruiser            45,000T     Medium long-range defence ships
Carrier            45,000T     Medium fighter/FAC support
Battlecruiser    60,000T     Heavy long-range assault ships
Fleet Carrier     60,000T     Heavy fighter/FAC support
Battleship        90,000T     Super-heavy general purpose ships
Supercarrier     90,000T     Super-heavy fighter/FAC support
Dreadnought  120,000T    Does what it says on the tin  :)
« Last Edit: April 29, 2020, 06:22:37 AM by Earthrise »
Old soldiers never die, they just play Aurora
 
The following users thanked this post: skoormit

Offline xenoscepter

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1159
  • Thanked: 320 times
Re: Big ships v Smaller ships
« Reply #26 on: April 29, 2020, 07:27:15 AM »
I typically field a navy with a focus on small ships. My class breakdown is as follows:

Below 3,125 Tons - Miscellaneous craft, little standardization; Gun Boats, Missile Boats, etc.

3,125 Tons - Corvettes
The lower end of my flotilla, operate in squadrons, typically escort ships or specialized units, not typically Jump Capable.

6,250 Tons - Frigates
The upper end of my flotilla, also operate in squadrons, considered a "Sub-Capital".

12,500 Tons - Cruisers, Light Cruisers, Carriers, Destroyers
My commonplace Capital Ships, the low end of my Capital Ships.

 - Cruisers are independent action vessels with a generalist load out and a Jump Drive. Cruisers are considered Capital Ships.
 - Destroyers are specialized vessels built for Anti-Capital Ship duty, they typically mount no Jump Drive. Destroyers are considered Capital Ships.
 - Carriers are used for all manner of duties, but typically have no Jump Drive at this tonnage. They are considered a "Sub-Capital" at this tonnage.
 - Light Cruisers are focused on supporting Cruisers, typically in the fire support or intelligence role. They mount no Jump Drive, but are still considered Capital Ships.

25,000 Tons - Capital Ships
Typically just larger versions of their 12,500 Ton counterparts, these vessels are much less common, but far from rare.

50,000 Tons - Super Capital Ships
The pre-eminent vessels of of my common fleet, these ships are few and built to anchor the fight.

150,000 to 250,000 Tons - Dreadnoughts
The mightiest vessels, built as shows of force and for the commanding of war fleets. They are massive, and deadly. These are rare as they are built for Admirals and other high ranking officers.
« Last Edit: April 29, 2020, 07:31:01 AM by xenoscepter »
 

Offline Dawa1147

  • Chief Petty Officer
  • ***
  • D
  • Posts: 49
  • Thanked: 11 times
Re: Big ships v Smaller ships
« Reply #27 on: April 30, 2020, 05:02:42 PM »
I really Like(d) multiples of 7500 tons as it would get me one size 50 engine per  Shipsize, and made for reasonable designs.

Usually around Magneto-Plasma or later, I divide them into

7. 500 Frigates: Small, quick and short deployments, act as cheap and plentyful defense/short range attacks. 

15. 000 Escorts: Support ships for the main fleet (like Sensors, Point Defence, Screening/Anti Fighter).  Less dps bc they feel to small to have lots of armor and utility, but too big to be cheap.

30. 000 Cruisers: Bread and Butter, and start to be more diverse in their potential.  Offensive ships, often can last 1, maybe 2 years for loitering

45. 000 Battleships/60. 000 Dreadnaughts: Until later tech I rarely build them bc they become outdated too quickly, though sometimes a small squad of them becomes my elite wunderwaffe.

Anything bigger than that I find overkill, at that point the benefit of more ships in different places are too great for me too ignore.