Author Topic: Federal Navy Draconis Expeditionary Force  (Read 428 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Steelpoint (OP)

  • Leading Rate
  • *
  • S
  • Posts: 13
  • Thanked: 6 times
Federal Navy Draconis Expeditionary Force
« on: May 20, 2020, 01:19:35 PM »
In the course of playing my first long term, conventional start, game of Aurora 4x, my exploration of the local systems by the Sol system was waylaid upon the discovery of hostile space forces in the system of Sigma Draconis in the year 2079 (start date 2025) (see attached image for state of the galaxy half a year after the conflict).  The Draconis occupied the core area of the system upon the third planet.  A 450 ton recon fighter made first contact, as its SOP to launch a recon fighter at any planets that show signs of life, and was promptly destroyed by a 32km/s missile barrage without warning.  The Draconis never reciprocated any communication attempts. 

I'm 99% sure these were precursors, no communication attempts, rejected them when made, no escape pods, never expanded past their system.  First time seeing precursors however.

The fight had two major concerns, a possible hostile foreign power was on Earth's doorstep, and Humanities exploration of the stars was shut off so long as the system was occupied.   As such my only hope was a desperate expansion of my light military fleet, which only consisted of a few Laser Destroyers, into a fully fledged expeditionary fleet. 

After around fifteen years of industrial expansion and construction the 1st Expeditionary Fleet went to their destiny. 

---------------------------------------------------------

I'll start from the bottom up regarding my ship design as it was throughout the war.  I'll also detail my missile design at the end.

The first ship I designed, the DeLong is a Point Defence Frigate designed to provide anti-missile support.  I had to hastily retrofit a newer generation Gauss turret and fire control when I realised it had very poor tracking speed. 

Code: [Select]
DeLong class Frigate      4,000 tons       102 Crew       559.7 BP       TCS 80    TH 300    EM 0
3750 km/s      Armour 2-22       Shields 0-0       HTK 35      Sensors 0/0/0/0      DCR 3      PPV 32.42
Maint Life 4.57 Years     MSP 306    AFR 37%    IFR 0.5%    1YR 24    5YR 358    Max Repair 96.8 MSP
Commander    Control Rating 1   BRG   
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months    Morale Check Required   

Quartersize Military 150 (Ion) (2)    Power 300    Fuel Use 82.16%    Signature 150    Explosion 10%
Fuel Capacity 304,000 Litres    Range 16.7 billion km (51 days at full power)

Mk2 Twin Gauss Cannon R300-100 Turret (2x6)    Range 30,000km     TS: 16000 km/s     Power 0-0     RM 30,000 km    ROF 5       
Gauss Fire Control R48-TS16000 (1)     Max Range: 48,000 km   TS: 16,000 km/s     79 58 38 17 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mk1 Frigate Wide Array Sensor (1)     GPS 1600     Range 25.7m km    Resolution 100
Mk1 Frigate Narrow Array Sensor (1)     GPS 2     Range 2m km    MCR 175.9k km    Resolution 1

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes

During combat, the DeLong distinguished itself as being easily capable of destroying entire barrages of 32km/s missile strikes.  My fleet consisted of 12 DeLong's.

----------

The Lincoln Beam Destroyer.  It was originally designed as a system defence ship, but was quickly retrofitted with a bigger fuel tank for the expedition.  The slow speed of this beam ship does seem a major flaw, but the ship was designed to operate as a defensive fleet in case my fleet was forced into a CQC engagement, otherwise it could provide some minor point defence support. 

Code: [Select]
Lincoln class Destroyer      8,000 tons       248 Crew       981.9 BP       TCS 160    TH 600    EM 0
3750 km/s      Armour 3-35       Shields 0-0       HTK 59      Sensors 16/12/0/0      DCR 4      PPV 54
Maint Life 3.85 Years     MSP 706    AFR 128%    IFR 1.8%    1YR 75    5YR 1,129    Max Repair 150 MSP
Commander    Control Rating 1   BRG   
Intended Deployment Time: 24 months    Morale Check Required   

Halfsize Military 300 (Ion) (2)    Power 600    Fuel Use 58.09%    Signature 300    Explosion 10%
Fuel Capacity 650,000 Litres    Range 25.2 billion km (77 days at full power)

15.0cm C2 Near Ultraviolet Laser (6)    Range 128,000km     TS: 5,000 km/s     Power 6-2     RM 30,000 km    ROF 15       
Twin 10cm C2 Near Ultraviolet Laser Turret (3x2)    Range 90,000km     TS: 14800 km/s     Power 6-4     RM 30,000 km    ROF 10       
Beam Fire Control R32-TS12000 (1)     Max Range: 32,000 km   TS: 12,000 km/s     69 38 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Beam Fire Control R128-TS3000 (1)     Max Range: 128,000 km   TS: 3,000 km/s     69 63 57 52 46 40 34 28 22 16
Gas-Cooled Fast Reactor R6-PB20 (4)     Total Power Output 24    Exp 10%

Mk1 Destroyer Narror Array Sensor (1)     GPS 16     Range 5.5m km    MCR 497.5k km    Resolution 1
Mk1 Destroyer Wide Array Sensor (1)     GPS 1600     Range 25.7m km    Resolution 100
EM Sensor EM2-12 (1)     Sensitivity 12     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  27.4m km
Thermal Sensor TH2-16 (1)     Sensitivity 16     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  31.6m km

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes

This ship saw very little action, it was adequate but inferior in shooting down missiles, but it nonetheless contributed in that regard.  The ship did get to contribute during one engagement where three enemy warships ambushed my fleet at the jump point during the second engagement, but the fight was over too fast for me to check the contribution of the ship.  The fleet consisted of 8 Lincoln's.

----------

The Warrior class Destroyer Escort, equipped with a suite of hastily constructed AMM's.  The ultimate theory is the AMM capabilities of the Warrior should provide the fleet with another layer of anti-missile defence.  Sadly, the limits of our technology, at the time, limited the speed of the missiles, as discussed later in the missile section.

Code: [Select]
Warrior class Destroyer Escort      8,000 tons       184 Crew       1,437.3 BP       TCS 160    TH 600    EM 0
3750 km/s      Armour 3-35       Shields 0-0       HTK 60      Sensors 0/0/0/0      DCR 2      PPV 20
Maint Life 2.09 Years     MSP 624    AFR 256%    IFR 3.6%    1YR 191    5YR 2,871    Max Repair 150 MSP
Magazine 615   
Commander    Control Rating 1   BRG   
Intended Deployment Time: 24 months    Morale Check Required   

Halfsize Military 300 (Ion) (2)    Power 600    Fuel Use 58.09%    Signature 300    Explosion 10%
Fuel Capacity 535,000 Litres    Range 20.7 billion km (63 days at full power)

Size 1 Missile Launcher (20)     Missile Size: 1    Rate of Fire 10
AMM Missile Fire Control FC39-R1 (4)     Range 39.6m km    Resolution 1
Ranger AMM (615)    Speed: 25,000 km/s    End: 2.1m     Range: 3.2m km    WH: 1    Size: 1    TH: 250/150/75

Mk2 Destroyer Wide Array Sensor (1)     GPS 8400     Range 58.8m km    Resolution 100
Mk1 Destroyer Narror Array Sensor (1)     GPS 16     Range 5.5m km    MCR 497.5k km    Resolution 1

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

For a AMM ship I felt it functioned adequately, the missiles clearly were less effective than they could be, having only a rough 33% intercept chance on enemy missile strikes, and the ship itself would expend its ammo after around two enemy barrages.  A newer generation of AMM's I feel would breath new life into it.  The fleet consisted of 6 Warriors. 

----------

The Ironside, the pride of the UFN fleet.  It is a Missile Destroyer.  Designed with the goal of engaging the enemy fleet outside of their missile strike range.  Designed to fire size 6 missiles, with an expected firing range of 250 mkm through the Archer missiles.  Evidently, the ship simply did not have the room to mount a large enough active sensor to detect at such a long range, as such that duty was delegated to another ship, however the Ironside retained a 58 mkm range sensor as a backup. 

Code: [Select]
Ironsides class Missile Destroyer      8,000 tons       204 Crew       1,418.3 BP       TCS 160    TH 600    EM 0
3750 km/s      Armour 3-35       Shields 0-0       HTK 48      Sensors 16/12/0/0      DCR 3      PPV 24
Maint Life 2.62 Years     MSP 732    AFR 171%    IFR 2.4%    1YR 150    5YR 2,254    Max Repair 224 MSP
Magazine 449   
Commander    Control Rating 1   BRG   
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months    Morale Check Required   

Halfsize Military 300 (Ion) (2)    Power 600    Fuel Use 58.09%    Signature 300    Explosion 10%
Fuel Capacity 645,000 Litres    Range 25 billion km (77 days at full power)

Size 6.00 Missile Launcher (4)     Missile Size: 6    Rate of Fire 25
ASM Fire Control FC259-R100 (2)     Range 260m km    Resolution 100
Archer - IV - Anti-Ship Missile (72)    Speed: 19,600 km/s    End: 212.7m     Range: 250.2m km    WH: 9    Size: 6    TH: 196/117/58

Mk2 Destroyer Wide Array Sensor (1)     GPS 8400     Range 58.8m km    Resolution 100
Mk1 Destroyer Narror Array Sensor (1)     GPS 16     Range 5.5m km    MCR 497.5k km    Resolution 1
EM Sensor EM2-12 (1)     Sensitivity 12     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  27.4m km
Thermal Sensor TH2-16 (1)     Sensitivity 16     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  31.6m 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

The Ironside showcased itself as the pride of the fleet.  After improving over the Archer missile design the ship was able to easily overwhelm enemy point defence systems and eventually led the way to winning the conflict.  The main drawback was the Federation was constantly exhausting its Tritanium supplies to construct more missiles. 

The killer drawback to this ship is its reliance on other ships for its active sensor detection, if that ship were destroyed or knocked out the Ironsides would be at a major disadvantage.  The fleet consisted of 12 Ironsides with an additional 18 Ironsides organised in a Auxiliary fleet later in the conflict. 

----------

The Berguent Missile Cruiser was intended as the heavy hitter of the fleet.  Designed around four size 20 missile launchers.  The Bolt missile, with its warhead strength of 21, was intended to punch through heavy armour. 

Code: [Select]
Berguent class Missile Cruiser      16,000 tons       461 Crew       2,554.7 BP       TCS 320    TH 1,200    EM 0
3750 km/s      Armour 4-56       Shields 0-0       HTK 107      Sensors 16/12/0/0      DCR 18      PPV 80
Maint Life 1.84 Years     MSP 1,198    AFR 256%    IFR 3.6%    1YR 448    5YR 6,716    Max Repair 300 MSP
Magazine 930   
Commander    Control Rating 1   BRG   
Intended Deployment Time: 24 months    Morale Check Required   

Fullsize Military Engine 600 (Ion) (2)    Power 1200    Fuel Use 22.82%    Signature 600    Explosion 10%
Fuel Capacity 488,000 Litres    Range 24.1 billion km (74 days at full power)

Size 20 Missile Launcher (4)     Missile Size: 20    Rate of Fire 35
ASM Fire Control FC259-R100 (2)     Range 260m km    Resolution 100
Bolt Anti-Ship Missile (46)    Speed: 17,250 km/s    End: 243.4m     Range: 251.9m km    WH: 21    Size: 20    TH: 184/110/55

Mk1 Destroyer Narror Array Sensor (1)     GPS 16     Range 5.5m km    MCR 497.5k km    Resolution 1
Mk1 Destroyer Wide Array Sensor (1)     GPS 1600     Range 25.7m km    Resolution 100
EM Sensor EM2-12 (1)     Sensitivity 12     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  27.4m km
Thermal Sensor TH2-16 (1)     Sensitivity 16     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  31.6m 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

During engagements against solo or small groups of enemy forces its missiles proved to be exceptional in destroying ships with very few warheads needed, but against heavy concentrations of enemy PD it faltered. 

I feel the ship will improve once better missile technologies come around.  Nonetheless it proved very effective in destroying ships when given the chance.  The fleet had 4 Berguents. 

----------

A humble recon carrier.  The Horizon was simply slapped with the biggest and best EM, TH and ELINT modules the Federation Navy had.  Its designed to give the fleet the ability to operate with active sensors off and gain a better tactical advantage before engaging the enemy. 

Code: [Select]
Horizon class Recon Craft      16,000 tons       431 Crew       2,769.9 BP       TCS 320    TH 1,200    EM 0
3750 km/s      Armour 3-56       Shields 0-0       HTK 73      Sensors 400/400/0/0      DCR 11      PPV 0
Maint Life 2.03 Years     MSP 1,190    AFR 186%    IFR 2.6%    1YR 384    5YR 5,757    Max Repair 400 MSP
Lieutenant Commander    Control Rating 1   BRG   
Intended Deployment Time: 24 months    Morale Check Required   

Halfsize Military 300 (Ion) (4)    Power 1200    Fuel Use 58.09%    Signature 300    Explosion 10%
Fuel Capacity 1,006,000 Litres    Range 19.5 billion km (60 days at full power)

Thermal Sensor TH50-400 (1)     Sensitivity 400     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  158.1m km
EM Sensor EM50-400 (1)     Sensitivity 400     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  158.1m km
ELINT Module (5)     Sensitivity 40     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  50m km

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes

It proved effective in this role, almost every engagement conducted was on my terms.  The fleet had two of these.

----------

The unintended lynchpin of the fleet.  The Vision Surveillance Cruiser, above average armour, a personal CIWS system, and the biggest active sensors available.  It has extra defences as its expected it'll be easily detected by enemy ships once its sensors are online. 

Code: [Select]
Vision class Surveillance Cruiser      16,000 tons       409 Crew       4,332.6 BP       TCS 320    TH 1,200    EM 0
3750 km/s      Armour 6-56       Shields 0-0       HTK 64      Sensors 0/0/0/0      DCR 12      PPV 0
Maint Life 1.51 Years     MSP 2,030    AFR 171%    IFR 2.4%    1YR 1,008    5YR 15,119    Max Repair 1400 MSP
Lieutenant Commander    Control Rating 1   BRG   
Intended Deployment Time: 24 months    Morale Check Required   

Fullsize Military Engine 600 (Ion) (2)    Power 1200    Fuel Use 22.82%    Signature 600    Explosion 10%
Fuel Capacity 534,000 Litres    Range 26.3 billion km (81 days at full power)

CIWS-160 (6x6)    Range 1000 km     TS: 16,000 km/s     ROF 5       
R-Cruiser Narrow Array Active Sensor (1)     GPS 1400     Range 70m km    MCR 6.3m km    Resolution 1
R-Cruiser Wide Array Active Sensor (1)     GPS 140000     Range 325m km    Resolution 100

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes

It proved vital in tracking enemy forces to allow my ASM ships to actually engage targets.  One of my attacks had to be called off after an ambush damaged a Vision's Wide Array Sensor, with the second Vision back in drydock for repairs.  The fleet had two of these. 

--

My fleet also consisted of 8 Colliers, which were uninteresting and just consisted of a 16000 ton ship with 2,550 mag size.

My fleet composition was
2x Vision Surveillance Cruisers
2x Horizons Recon Cruisers
4x Berguents Missile Cruisers
8x Lincolns Beam Destroyers
12x Ironsides Missile Destroyers
6x Warriors Anti-Missile Destroyers
12x DeLongs Gauss PD Destroyers

My second Auxiliary Fleet had 18 Ironsides.

------------------------------

A examination of the missiles I designed.

----------

Code: [Select]
Archer Mk2 Anti-Ship Missile    Speed: 13,967 km/s    End: 302.4m     Range: 253.4m km    WH: 6    Size: 6    TH: 130/78/39
Code: [Select]
Archer Mk3 Anti-Ship Missile    Speed: 16,800 km/s    End: 248.3m     Range: 250.3m km    WH: 9    Size: 6    TH: 179/107/53
Code: [Select]
Archer - IV - Anti-Ship Missile  Speed: 19,600 km/s    End: 212.7m     Range: 250.2m km    WH: 9    Size: 6    TH: 196/117/58
The Archer ASM line was designed to engage the enemy at the extreme range of 250 mkm.  The first generation of the Archer missile had a engagement range of only 38 mkm, but this was discarded before the first engagement. 

The Mk2 was the mainstay of the fleet for the first engagement, the Mk3 became standarad issue for most of the conflict, with the Mk4 being introduced before the final engagement.   Ultimantly the Archers did what they did, they out ranged the enemy fleets and decimated them. 

----------

Code: [Select]
Ranger AMM    Speed: 25,000 km/s    End: 2.1m     Range: 3.2m km    WH: 1    Size: 1    TH: 250/150/75
The Ranger never saw any changes in its design during the conflict, it was moderately effective in use, but as we were able to engage most of the enemy fleets before they fired their missiles, it saw little use.  At best it had a 33% interception chance against the enemy missiles.  I've already designed a newer gen AMM with a speed of 45,000 km/s which I hope will be more effective. 

----------

Code: [Select]
Bolt Anti-Ship Missile    Speed: 17,250 km/s    End: 243.4m     Range: 251.9m km    WH: 21    Size: 20    TH: 184/110/55
When first introduced the Bolt would easily destroy the alien ships if given the chance, its main weakness was that if it encountered heavy PD defence then they could not get through it. 

The Bolt saw little use in the latter stages of the conflict. 

------------------------------

When in direct combat with the enemy fleet they moved at 5700 km/s, while our fleet only had a top speed of 3750 km/s.  Nonetheless, we out ranged the enemy fleet.  Whenever the enemy forces departed their home base we had no issues decimating the fleet.

The majority of enemy ships were either 7300 or 14,750 tons. 

The primary issue was their home base, the planet was surrounded by a ring of 15, 59000 ton ships of unknown design, that never left the planet, that evidently had effective PD systems that intercepted the majority of my fleets Mk2 Archer missile strike in the first engagement.  After withdrawing, upgrading to the Mk3 Archer and adding an additional 18 Missile Destroyers in an auxiliary fleet, my fleet was able to overwhelm the enemy forces over the course of two engagements. 

After winning the space conflict.  I've begun planning retrofit plans, mostly upgrading to MagPlas engines which give me speeds of 6000 km/s, and upgrading my equipment as able. 

------------------------------

I'd be very keen on any thoughts and feedback on the designs I've mustered.

Thanks for reading. 
 

Online Ulzgoroth

  • Warrant Officer, Class 1
  • *****
  • U
  • Posts: 88
  • Thanked: 7 times
Re: Federal Navy Draconis Expeditionary Force
« Reply #1 on: May 20, 2020, 03:36:17 PM »
I'm surprised the Bolt missiles were effective, fired in merely 16-missile salvos against an apparently advanced enemy. But from your report I guess they were in some cases?

You've got a few oddly engineered components, like the AMM fire control with around 19 times the range of the missiles it directs, though it sounds like the Warriors didn't matter much in the balance anyhow.

While nitpicking, I'd note that some of these ships have 24 month crew endurance but less than (or barely over) 2 years maintenance endurance. That seems a non-ideal combination, though the cost of the extra deployment time probably isn't too high.
 

Offline Steelpoint (OP)

  • Leading Rate
  • *
  • S
  • Posts: 13
  • Thanked: 6 times
Re: Federal Navy Draconis Expeditionary Force
« Reply #2 on: May 20, 2020, 11:01:58 PM »
The Bolt missiles were effective against isolated enemy ships, more effective in conserving Archer ammo.  I think a redesign is warranted for the future if only to get more of them fired per salvo as they were not effective against clumps of enemy ships. 

I think I forgot to set the AMM fire control back to something closer range since I was originally debating how much range my AMM's should have, I eventually figured they should have a small range so I could increase their speed. 

I still need to figure out a good maintenance ratio, my only consideration was reducing the AFR to around 100 to 150 percent and having enough MSP to repair the biggest component. 
 

Offline Steelpoint (OP)

  • Leading Rate
  • *
  • S
  • Posts: 13
  • Thanked: 6 times
Re: Federal Navy Draconis Expeditionary Force
« Reply #3 on: May 21, 2020, 12:40:03 PM »
I've eventually settled on my first Carrier design for my fleet.  I feel its quite bare bones as I restricted my tonnage to 32,000.  Once my military expands I might go up to a 64,000 ton Carrier to fully flex my air wings.

Its designed to be fully supported by my fleet, carrying 22 missile strikefighters and 12 railgun interceptors, it has some extra CIWS for self defence but I had to compromise on its armour.

Code: [Select]
Constellation class Carrier      32,000 tons       583 Crew       4,584.6 BP       TCS 640    TH 3,840    EM 0
6000 km/s      Armour 2-89       Shields 0-0       HTK 145      Sensors 0/0/0/0      DCR 15      PPV 0
Maint Life 2.19 Years     MSP 6,943    AFR 546%    IFR 7.6%    1YR 1,952    5YR 29,281    Max Repair 960 MSP
Hangar Deck Capacity 10,000 tons     Magazine 1,785   
Captain    Control Rating 4   BRG   AUX   CIC   PFC   
Intended Deployment Time: 24 months    Flight Crew Berths 200    Morale Check Required   

Doublesize Military Engine 1920 (MagPlas) (2)    Power 3840    Fuel Use 28.19%    Signature 1920    Explosion 12%
Fuel Capacity 1,024,000 Litres    Range 20.4 billion km (39 days at full power)

CIWS-200 (2x8)    Range 1000 km     TS: 20,000 km/s     ROF 5       
Sidewinder Anti-Ship Missile (440)    Speed: 23,750 km/s    End: 42.2m     Range: 60.1m km    WH: 6    Size: 4    TH: 245/147/73

Strike Group
22x F-100 Viper Strikefighter   Speed: 9610 km/s    Size: 4.99
12x F-200 Panther Interceptor   Speed: 13737 km/s    Size: 6.99

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

The very original/generic sounding fighter craft are as follows. 

Code: [Select]
F-100 Viper class Strikefighter      250 tons       4 Crew       55.5 BP       TCS 5    TH 48    EM 0
9610 km/s      Armour 1-3       Shields 0-0       HTK 1      Sensors 0/0/0/0      DCR 0      PPV 2.4
Maint Life 0 Years     MSP 0    AFR 49%    IFR 0.7%    1YR 3    5YR 44    Max Repair 24 MSP
Magazine 16   
Lieutenant Commander    Control Rating 1   
Intended Deployment Time: 3 days    Morale Check Required   

Fightersize High Military Engine 48 (MagPlas) (1)    Power 48    Fuel Use 2464.75%    Signature 48    Explosion 30%
Fuel Capacity 38,000 Litres    Range 1.1 billion km (32 hours at full power)

Size 4.0 Box Launcher (4)     Missile Size: 4    Hangar Reload 100 minutes    MF Reload 16 hours
Fighter Missile Fire Control FC64-R100 (1)     Range 65m km    Resolution 100
Sidewinder Anti-Ship Missile (4)    Speed: 23,750 km/s    End: 42.2m     Range: 60.1m km    WH: 6    Size: 4    TH: 245/147/73

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 Fighter for production, combat and planetary interaction

Code: [Select]
F-200 Panther class Interceptor      350 tons       18 Crew       107.6 BP       TCS 7    TH 96    EM 0
13737 km/s      Armour 1-4       Shields 0-0       HTK 2      Sensors 0/0/0/0      DCR 0      PPV 3
Maint Life 0 Years     MSP 0    AFR 69%    IFR 1.0%    1YR 14    5YR 210    Max Repair 48 MSP
Lieutenant Commander    Control Rating 1   
Intended Deployment Time: 3 days    Morale Check Required   

Fightersize+ High Military Engine 96 (MagPlas) (1)    Power 96    Fuel Use 1742.84%    Signature 96    Explosion 30%
Fuel Capacity 37,000 Litres    Range 1.1 billion km (22 hours at full power)

10cm Railgun V50/C3 (1x4)    Range 40,000km     TS: 13,737 km/s     Power 3-3     Accuracy Modifier 100%     RM 50,000 km    ROF 5       
Railgun-F Fire Control R40-TS8000 (1)     Max Range: 40,000 km   TS: 8,000 km/s     75 50 25 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Tokamak Fusion Reactor R3-PB30 (1)     Total Power Output 3    Exp 15%

This design is classed as a Fighter for production, combat and planetary interaction

The F-100 is intended to give me more firepower to put down range further from my warship group, I can deploy the 22 fighter squadron and have them fly as far as 500 m/km, fire off a large wave of missiles and then fly back, and the carrier has enough missiles to allow me to do this for quite a while.

The F-200's are designed to assist in shooting down missile waves, intercept enemy missiles or harass enemy unarmed commercial or damaged ships.  I had to compromise their size to fit in a stronger engine and the Railgun systems.
 
The following users thanked this post: Warer

Online Ulzgoroth

  • Warrant Officer, Class 1
  • *****
  • U
  • Posts: 88
  • Thanked: 7 times
Re: Federal Navy Draconis Expeditionary Force
« Reply #4 on: May 21, 2020, 01:47:09 PM »
The Panther has a bit of a fire control problem. I guess you don't have the space and tech to give it tracking to match its actual potential?

Is CIC helpful on the carrier? I'm not exactly sure what Tactical skill does, but the in-game text suggests it's related to shooting, and this carrier doesn't really do that.

With the thin armor, it might be nice to have a small shield generator if you could get it in. To make first-hit internal damage less likely. Don't know if you use that tech at all though.
 
The following users thanked this post: Steelpoint

Offline liveware

  • Lt. Commander
  • ********
  • Posts: 260
  • Thanked: 12 times
Re: Federal Navy Draconis Expeditionary Force
« Reply #5 on: May 21, 2020, 08:33:50 PM »
The first ship I designed, the DeLong is a Point Defence Frigate designed to provide anti-missile support.  I had to hastily retrofit a newer generation Gauss turret and fire control when I realised it had very poor tracking speed. 

Code: [Select]
DeLong class Frigate      4,000 tons       102 Crew       559.7 BP       TCS 80    TH 300    EM 0
3750 km/s      Armour 2-22       Shields 0-0       HTK 35      Sensors 0/0/0/0      DCR 3      PPV 32.42
Maint Life 4.57 Years     MSP 306    AFR 37%    IFR 0.5%    1YR 24    5YR 358    Max Repair 96.8 MSP
Commander    Control Rating 1   BRG   
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months    Morale Check Required   

Quartersize Military 150 (Ion) (2)    Power 300    Fuel Use 82.16%    Signature 150    Explosion 10%
Fuel Capacity 304,000 Litres    Range 16.7 billion km (51 days at full power)

Mk2 Twin Gauss Cannon R300-100 Turret (2x6)    Range 30,000km     TS: 16000 km/s     Power 0-0     RM 30,000 km    ROF 5       
Gauss Fire Control R48-TS16000 (1)     Max Range: 48,000 km   TS: 16,000 km/s     79 58 38 17 0 0 0 0 0 0

Mk1 Frigate Wide Array Sensor (1)     GPS 1600     Range 25.7m km    Resolution 100
Mk1 Frigate Narrow Array Sensor (1)     GPS 2     Range 2m km    MCR 175.9k km    Resolution 1

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes

During combat, the DeLong distinguished itself as being easily capable of destroying entire barrages of 32km/s missile strikes.  My fleet consisted of 12 DeLong's.

I am glad your DeLong class was successful. I recently developed a somewhat similar Patroclus class for a similar role:

Code: [Select]
Patroclus II class Fast Attack Craft - Gauss      1,000 tons       38 Crew       280.2 BP       TCS 20    TH 72    EM 0
10314 km/s      Armour 2-8       Shields 0-0       HTK 7      Sensors 0/0/0/0      DCR 1      PPV 5
Maint Life 11.90 Years     MSP 306    AFR 5%    IFR 0.1%    1YR 4    5YR 60    Max Repair 180.46875 MSP
Lieutenant Commander    Control Rating 1   
Intended Deployment Time: 1 days    Morale Check Required   

Aegis Ion Drive  EP206.25 (1)    Power 206.2    Fuel Use 209.83%    Signature 72.1875    Explosion 16%
Fuel Capacity 13,000 Litres    Range 1.1 billion km (30 hours at full power)

Levenstein-Heling Gauss Cannon R300-85.00 (1x3)    Range 30,000km     TS: 10,314 km/s     Accuracy Modifier 85.00%     RM 30,000 km    ROF 5        1 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Aegis Beam Fire Control R48-TS10000 (50%) (1)     Max Range: 48,000 km   TS: 10,000 km/s     79 58 38 17 0 0 0 0 0 0

Aegis Active Search Sensor AS2-R1 (50%) (1)     GPS 3     Range 2.7m km    MCR 244k km    Resolution 1

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes

The Patroclus is a carrier based ship, and therefore has inferior range to a corvette similar to your DeLong class. However, I note the following:

1. The Patroclus mounts a single gauss cannon at 1/4 the weight of a DeLong (the DeLong mounts a total of 4 gauss cannons if I am reading things correctly).

2. The Patroclus has about 3/5 the tracking speed of the DeLong at ion drive engine tech (the Patroclus does not use a turret, so her engines are important in this calculation). However the DeLong does not appear to have improved chance to hit compared to the Patroclus despite using faster turrets and faster BFCs. Their chance to hit statistics are equivalent.

3. The DeLong has superior sensors compared to the Patroclus.

4. The DeLong has 5x the HTK of the Patroclus at 4x the weight and equivalent armor rating.

I find these differences interesting, as they reflect different design trade-offs. I designed my ship in response to an enemy with observed missile speeds of 35k km/s and ship speeds of 5k - 7k km/s. I understand your enemy has missile speeds of 32k km/s. What are your enemies' ship speeds?

« Last Edit: May 21, 2020, 08:40:29 PM by liveware »
 

Online Ulzgoroth

  • Warrant Officer, Class 1
  • *****
  • U
  • Posts: 88
  • Thanked: 7 times
Re: Federal Navy Draconis Expeditionary Force
« Reply #6 on: May 21, 2020, 08:52:50 PM »
1. The Patroclus mounts a single gauss cannon at 1/4 the weight of a DeLong (the DeLong mounts a total of 4 gauss cannons if I am reading things correctly).
I think you're slightly mistaken here - it looks like the Patroclus II has a reduced-size gauss cannon, probably a 250 ton model, while the DeLong's 2x2 mounts appear to be full-performance 300 ton models.
2. The Patroclus has about 3/5 the tracking speed of the DeLong at ion drive engine tech (the Patroclus does not use a turret, so her engines are important in this calculation). However the DeLong does not appear to have improved chance to hit compared to the Patroclus despite using faster turrets and faster BFCs. Their chance to hit statistics are equivalent.
Those statistics are based on a specific set target speed, There's an editable field for it to the right side of the class design window. I can't say for sure what value was used in either design writeup, but I think the default is 4000 km/s, which is too slow for the tracking speed difference to have any impact. If you both set it to values greater than 10,000, you should see the DeLong's fire control pull ahead.

Also, those statistics are coming from the fire control only, so they don't factor in the modification for the Patroclus II's reduced-size weapon. (They also wouldn't factor in the effect of a weapon having lower tracking than the BFC does, though that doesn't apply to either of these designs.)
 

Offline liveware

  • Lt. Commander
  • ********
  • Posts: 260
  • Thanked: 12 times
Re: Federal Navy Draconis Expeditionary Force
« Reply #7 on: May 21, 2020, 08:58:08 PM »
The Patroclus does indeed feature a reduced (size 5 / 0.85 CTH) weapon.

So if I am understanding things correctly, the Patroclus has a lower chance to hit than what is indicated in the design window for a hypothetical 10k km/s target?
« Last Edit: May 21, 2020, 09:02:23 PM by liveware »
 

Online Ulzgoroth

  • Warrant Officer, Class 1
  • *****
  • U
  • Posts: 88
  • Thanked: 7 times
Re: Federal Navy Draconis Expeditionary Force
« Reply #8 on: May 21, 2020, 09:06:39 PM »
The Patroclus does indeed feature a reduced (size 5 / 0.85 CTH) weapon.

So if I am understanding things correctly, the Patroclus has a lower chance to hit than what is indicated in the design window for a hypothetical 10k km/s target?
Yeah, the fire control gives it the displayed chance to hit, but it's then multiplied by the 85% accuracy modifier.
 

Offline liveware

  • Lt. Commander
  • ********
  • Posts: 260
  • Thanked: 12 times
Re: Federal Navy Draconis Expeditionary Force
« Reply #9 on: May 22, 2020, 12:04:11 AM »
I suppose I should stop being surprised by the devil revealing himself in the details of my designs.

Back to the drawing board!
 

Offline Steelpoint (OP)

  • Leading Rate
  • *
  • S
  • Posts: 13
  • Thanked: 6 times
Re: Federal Navy Draconis Expeditionary Force
« Reply #10 on: May 22, 2020, 02:32:39 AM »
Quote from: Ulzgoroth link=topic=11486. msg134336#msg134336 date=1590086829
The Panther has a bit of a fire control problem.  I guess you don't have the space and tech to give it tracking to match its actual potential?

Is CIC helpful on the carrier? I'm not exactly sure what Tactical skill does, but the in-game text suggests it's related to shooting, and this carrier doesn't really do that.

With the thin armor, it might be nice to have a small shield generator if you could get it in.  To make first-hit internal damage less likely.  Don't know if you use that tech at all though.

I had to compromise the tracking speed of the Panther's fire control to keep it at 350 tons, if I redesigned it I'd have to reduce the engine size slightly to accommodate a better fire control system, its more a limitation of my technology than anything else.  At all else I wanted the Panther to be a very fast ship, it can't be a interceptor if its slow. 

I actually had finished designing a shield generator.  I intended to use it as an extra line of defence for my Command ship design, but I decided to try it out on the Carrier as well, and removing the CIC which I must've added by accident. 

Code: [Select]
Constellation - II class Carrier      32,000 tons       573 Crew       4,550.7 BP       TCS 640    TH 3,840    EM 900
6000 km/s      Armour 2-89       Shields 30-360       HTK 146      Sensors 0/0/0/0      DCR 14      PPV 0
Maint Life 2.10 Years     MSP 6,844    AFR 585%    IFR 8.1%    1YR 2,081    5YR 31,214    Max Repair 960 MSP
Hangar Deck Capacity 10,000 tons     Magazine 1,785   
Commander    Control Rating 3   BRG   AUX   PFC   
Intended Deployment Time: 24 months    Flight Crew Berths 200    Morale Check Required   

Doublesize Military Engine 1920 (MagPlas) (2)    Power 3840    Fuel Use 28.19%    Signature 1920    Explosion 12%
Fuel Capacity 904,000 Litres    Range 18 billion km (34 days at full power)
Epsilon S30 / R360 Shields (1)     Recharge Time 360 seconds (0.1 per second)

CIWS-200 (2x8)    Range 1000 km     TS: 20,000 km/s     ROF 5       
Sidewinder Anti-Ship Missile (440)    Speed: 23,750 km/s    End: 42.2m     Range: 60.1m km    WH: 6    Size: 4    TH: 245/147/73

Strike Group
22x F-100 Viper Strikefighter   Speed: 9610 km/s    Size: 4.99
12x F-200 Panther Interceptor   Speed: 13737 km/s    Size: 6.99

--------

In terms of my DeLong PD ship, I designed my Gauss turrets with the highest turn speed my fire controls could track at 16,000 km/s, this gave me a rough 50% chance to hit the enemy missiles which streamed at 32,000 km/s.  Again, this is a limitation of my technology of the time. 

I also designed the turrets and the Gauss cannons at its full size, I'm not well versed on the design methodology and figured I'd rather accept the weapons being heavier to mount but retaining 100% accuracy, and I needed all the accuracy I could get to counter the very fast missiles the enemy were using. 

My next generation DeLong ship has an increased turn speed control of 20,000 km/s.

Code: [Select]
DeLong - II class Frigate      4,000 tons       108 Crew       789.3 BP       TCS 80    TH 480    EM 0
6000 km/s      Armour 3-22       Shields 0-0       HTK 33      Sensors 0/0/0/0      DCR 3      PPV 29.4
Maint Life 4.88 Years     MSP 431    AFR 37%    IFR 0.5%    1YR 30    5YR 449    Max Repair 120 MSP
Commander    Control Rating 1   BRG   
Intended Deployment Time: 24 months    Morale Check Required   

Quartersize Military Engine 240 (MagPlas) (2)    Power 480    Fuel Use 79.74%    Signature 240    Explosion 12%
Fuel Capacity 319,000 Litres    Range 18 billion km (34 days at full power)

Twin Gauss Cannon R400-100 Turret (2x8)    Range 40,000km     TS: 20000 km/s     Power 0-0     RM 40,000 km    ROF 5       
Gauss Fire Control R80-TS20000 (1)     Max Range: 80,000 km   TS: 20,000 km/s     88 75 62 50 38 25 12 0 0 0

Mk2 Frigate Narrow Array Sensor (1)     GPS 6     Range 4.4m km    MCR 398.5k km    Resolution 1
Mk2 Frigate Wide Array Sensor (1)     GPS 4480     Range 58.1m km    Resolution 100

There is overkill with the Gauss Fire Control having double the range of the Gauss Turret, but I accepted the loss, and a change would only grant me an extra 50 tons of space which I did not believe warrant a full refit. 

@liveware: The enemy ships had a max speed of 5750 km/s, my ships were definitely slower than the enemy, which is why I chose to instead design weapons to out range the enemy, with the hope I could destroy the enemy before they were able to fire on me.
« Last Edit: May 22, 2020, 02:35:12 AM by Steelpoint »
 

Offline liveware

  • Lt. Commander
  • ********
  • Posts: 260
  • Thanked: 12 times
Re: Federal Navy Draconis Expeditionary Force
« Reply #11 on: May 22, 2020, 10:04:52 AM »
Interesting.

I had designed my 1000 ton gauss FAC with the mentality that 1000 tons was the limit for what can be stored in a hangar bay. However I do not think this is actually how the game works and I will probably start using larger designs. I find that jump drives are horribly expensive to research and tend to be my most limiting single component in any given fleet from a research standpoint. My solution to that problem is use carriers to move around all of my smaller ships, and group carriers into squadrons with a jump ship capable of jumping the carrier squadron. This minimizes the number of individual jump drives I need to research and equip, and also frees up more space on my offensive ships for non-jump drive components.

With my gauss FAC, I was trying to squeeze a gauss cannon onto a 1000 ton ship. In my case I found that I could go with a turret or a conventional mount, but that I was able to get better tracking speed with a smaller 85% gauss cannon mounted directly on the ship than what I could achieve with a 100% accuracy turret.
 

Offline Jorgen_CAB

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • J
  • Posts: 1671
  • Thanked: 223 times
Re: Federal Navy Draconis Expeditionary Force
« Reply #12 on: May 22, 2020, 10:23:49 AM »
With my gauss FAC, I was trying to squeeze a gauss cannon onto a 1000 ton ship. In my case I found that I could go with a turret or a conventional mount, but that I was able to get better tracking speed with a smaller 85% gauss cannon mounted directly on the ship than what I could achieve with a 100% accuracy turret.

For RP purposes I limit my hangars to a predetermined size for each class by restricting using all the space... there must be room for proper launch and recover facilies on the ship. If I fit small boat bays or small hangars I do allow small designs of 125t to 250t to dock in them respectively but only one ship in each one.

A ship that have prope hangars must then dedicate at least the full size of one craft as space that I'm not allowed to use. SO if I have 4000t hangar space and I want 500t scouts to dock there I can only dock 3500t worth of crafts there and anything bigger than 500t can't dock at all. In the same spirit I only allow a maximum of 10 ships to dock without another restriction of the same size. So a ship with 10000t who have a size restriction of 500t need to set aside 1000t for launch and recovery facilities... if the size restriction was 250t it would be the same as the number of crafts is larger. So a minimum of 10% will always be dedicated to launch/recover facilities but never less than the size of the biggest ship that can dock with the ship.

This way those small boat bays and small hangars can be more valuable than a true hangar of I only wants a few small ship to dock as they get their own dedicated docking facility.
 

Offline liveware

  • Lt. Commander
  • ********
  • Posts: 260
  • Thanked: 12 times
Re: Federal Navy Draconis Expeditionary Force
« Reply #13 on: May 22, 2020, 07:12:28 PM »
With my gauss FAC, I was trying to squeeze a gauss cannon onto a 1000 ton ship. In my case I found that I could go with a turret or a conventional mount, but that I was able to get better tracking speed with a smaller 85% gauss cannon mounted directly on the ship than what I could achieve with a 100% accuracy turret.

For RP purposes I limit my hangars to a predetermined size for each class by restricting using all the space... there must be room for proper launch and recover facilies on the ship. If I fit small boat bays or small hangars I do allow small designs of 125t to 250t to dock in them respectively but only one ship in each one.

A ship that have prope hangars must then dedicate at least the full size of one craft as space that I'm not allowed to use. SO if I have 4000t hangar space and I want 500t scouts to dock there I can only dock 3500t worth of crafts there and anything bigger than 500t can't dock at all. In the same spirit I only allow a maximum of 10 ships to dock without another restriction of the same size. So a ship with 10000t who have a size restriction of 500t need to set aside 1000t for launch and recovery facilities... if the size restriction was 250t it would be the same as the number of crafts is larger. So a minimum of 10% will always be dedicated to launch/recover facilities but never less than the size of the biggest ship that can dock with the ship.

This way those small boat bays and small hangars can be more valuable than a true hangar of I only wants a few small ship to dock as they get their own dedicated docking facility.

Generally, I don't like to include hangers (or boat bays) on any ships except dedicated carriers. I don't like to mix my ship roles in that way. My rationale for this decision is based on the following argument:

For any given ship design, I have the option to include a hanger bay or not. If I do, I grant the ship the ability to deploy a second ship which can either enhance or diversify the capabilities of the parent ship. However, I could also chose to not include a hanger and instead use that hanger space for something else which more directly supports the intended mission of the ship.

This argument has led me to building large (relative to my other ship sizes), dedicated carriers capable of housing a variety of ships dedicated to separate specific mission types. For example, a single carrier might carry 4 (large) ships capable of fielding a respectable anti-missile defense. Another carrier might carry 4 particle beam destroyers. Another carrier might carry 16 missile fighters. This allows me to focus each of the smaller ship designs on better achieving it's intended combat mission (i.e. point defense, planetary bombardment, interception, etc...). It also allows me to mix and match ship capabilities in a way which I find easier to keep up-to-date with my latest technology.
« Last Edit: May 22, 2020, 07:15:56 PM by liveware »
 

 

Sitemap 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72