Author Topic: Jump Tenders - A Different Approach  (Read 1897 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline liveware (OP)

  • Bug Moderators
  • Captain
  • ***
  • Posts: 578
  • Thanked: 36 times
Jump Tenders - A Different Approach
« on: June 02, 2020, 06:31:41 PM »
I became frustrated by the enormous amount of micromanagement required to maintain my previous carrier fleets, so I came up with a new concept that should reduce this problem considerably.

Behold, the mighty Pegasus:
Code: [Select]
Pegasus B class Jump Tender      199,311 tons       1,473 Crew       12,158.5 BP       TCS 3,986    TH 4,000    EM 0
1003 km/s    JR 2-25(C)      Armour 7-303       Shields 0-0       HTK 243      Sensors 11/11/0/0      DCR 11      PPV 0
MSP 2,038    Max Repair 806.9 MSP
Hangar Deck Capacity 70,000 tons     Cryogenic Berths 3,000   
Admiral    Control Rating 3   BRG   AUX   ENG   
Intended Deployment Time: 3 months    Flight Crew Berths 1,400   

Chaimberlin-Sherman JC200K Commercial Jump Drive     Max Ship Size 200000 tons    Distance 25k km     Squadron Size 2

Chaimberlin-Sherman Commercial Internal Fusion Drive  EP1000.00 (4)    Power 4000.0    Fuel Use 3.35%    Signature 1000.00    Explosion 5%
Fuel Capacity 8,000,000 Litres    Range 215.3 billion km (2484 days at full power)

Chaimberlin-Sherman Active Search Sensor AS39-R100 (50%) (1)     GPS 2100     Range 39.8m km    Resolution 100
Chaimberlin-Sherman Active Search Sensor AS68-R500 (50%) (1)     GPS 10500     Range 68.1m km    Resolution 500
Chaimberlin-Sherman Thermal Sensor TH1.0-11.0 (50%) (1)     Sensitivity 11.0     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  26.2m km
Chaimberlin-Sherman EM Sensor EM1.0-11.0 (50%) (1)     Sensitivity 11.0     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  26.2m km

This design is classed as a Commercial Vessel for maintenance purposes

The Pegasus herself is rather lackluster, but within her ample hangar bays she can carry a Cetan:
Code: [Select]
Cetan class Escort Carrier      70,000 tons       1,475 Crew       12,061.9 BP       TCS 1,400    TH 12,000    EM 0
8571 km/s      Armour 10-151       Shields 0-0       HTK 352      Sensors 0/0/0/0      DCR 80      PPV 68.14
Maint Life 2.10 Years     MSP 9,538    AFR 560%    IFR 7.8%    1YR 2,895    5YR 43,428    Max Repair 2000 MSP
Hangar Deck Capacity 18,000 tons     Cryogenic Berths 2,000   
Captain    Control Rating 4   BRG   AUX   ENG   FLG   
Intended Deployment Time: 2 months    Flight Crew Berths 360    Morale Check Required   

Chaimberlin-Sherman Internal Fusion Drive  EP4000.00 (3)    Power 12000    Fuel Use 107.33%    Signature 4000    Explosion 20%
Fuel Capacity 15,381,000 Litres    Range 36.8 billion km (49 days at full power)

Single Chaimberlin-Sherman Gauss Cannon R300-100 Turret (1x4)    Range 30,000km     TS: 16000 km/s     Power 0-0     RM 30,000 km    ROF 5        1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Quad Chaimberlin-Sherman Gauss Cannon R300-85.00 Turret (2x16)    Range 30,000km     TS: 16000 km/s     Power 0-0     RM 30,000 km    ROF 5        1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1
Chaimberlin-Sherman CIWS-160 (8x8)    Range 1000 km     TS: 16,000 km/s     ROF 5       Base 50% to hit
Chaimberlin-Sherman Beam Fire Control R32-TS16000 (50%) (3)     Max Range: 32,000 km   TS: 16,000 km/s     94 88 81 75 69 62 56 50 44 38

Chaimberlin-Sherman Active Search Sensor AS39-R100 (50%) (1)     GPS 2100     Range 39.8m km    Resolution 100
Chaimberlin-Sherman Active Search Sensor AS68-R500 (50%) (1)     GPS 10500     Range 68.1m km    Resolution 500
Chaimberlin-Sherman Active Search Sensor AS8-R1 (50%) (1)     GPS 21     Range 8.6m km    MCR 771.7k km    Resolution 1

ECCM-1 (3)         ECM 10

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes

The overall fleet concept is that the Pegasus can ferry a Cetan to a hostile system and drop it there. The Cetan can then deploy 18k ton worth of close-range military craft to bring the fight to the enemy. The Pegasus is a commercial vessel and thus benefits from improved fuel efficiency and maintenance efficiency. The Cetan is a military vessel and has a considerable speed advantage at the cost of range and maintenance life.

I am still developing fighters to go along with the Cetan for my campaign against my current hostile NPR enemy. More to follow...
Open the pod-bay doors HAL...
 

Offline Ulzgoroth

  • Lt. Commander
  • ********
  • U
  • Posts: 268
  • Thanked: 36 times
Re: Jump Tenders - A Different Approach
« Reply #1 on: June 02, 2020, 06:46:20 PM »
Commercial hangar decks don't provide maintenance, so you might have some troubles with how long it takes the Pegasus to haul the Cetan to its appointment with the action.

Also, I think I remember a post about some kind of problems with docking a carrier with parasites aboard inside another carrier, but I'm not sure about that. That part ought to work.
 

Offline liveware (OP)

  • Bug Moderators
  • Captain
  • ***
  • Posts: 578
  • Thanked: 36 times
Re: Jump Tenders - A Different Approach
« Reply #2 on: June 02, 2020, 07:04:05 PM »
Commercial hangar decks don't provide maintenance, so you might have some troubles with how long it takes the Pegasus to haul the Cetan to its appointment with the action.

Also, I think I remember a post about some kind of problems with docking a carrier with parasites aboard inside another carrier, but I'm not sure about that. That part ought to work.

I intend to test these concepts with the previously posted designs. In particular I want to test my theory that commercial hangar decks do not reduce deployment time or maintenance clock, but do prevent both clocks from increasing. My intention is for the Pegasus to haul the Cetan to/from the combat zone and utilize the nearest colony for resupply and maintenance purposes.
Open the pod-bay doors HAL...
 

Offline Ulzgoroth

  • Lt. Commander
  • ********
  • U
  • Posts: 268
  • Thanked: 36 times
Re: Jump Tenders - A Different Approach
« Reply #3 on: June 02, 2020, 07:15:08 PM »
Commercial hangar decks don't provide maintenance, so you might have some troubles with how long it takes the Pegasus to haul the Cetan to its appointment with the action.

Also, I think I remember a post about some kind of problems with docking a carrier with parasites aboard inside another carrier, but I'm not sure about that. That part ought to work.

I intend to test these concepts with the previously posted designs. In particular I want to test my theory that commercial hangar decks do not reduce deployment time or maintenance clock, but do prevent both clocks from increasing. My intention is for the Pegasus to haul the Cetan to/from the combat zone and utilize the nearest colony for resupply and maintenance purposes.
I can tell you that commercial hangar decks do turn back deployment time. I've been operating out of them constantly for my last two games.

I'm almost entirely certain that they don't pause the maintenance clock, and they absolutely don't wind it back. EDIT: Actually, I'd say I'm absolutely certain - I remember surveying expeditions (a commercial jump-carrier with 2000 tons of hangar and four exploratory parasites) coming back with all four parasite craft at exactly the same maintenance clock

I have not tested landing a mothership in a hangar bay.
« Last Edit: June 02, 2020, 09:08:54 PM by Ulzgoroth »
 

Offline mergele

  • Leading Rate
  • *
  • m
  • Posts: 12
  • Thanked: 1 times
Re: Jump Tenders - A Different Approach
« Reply #4 on: June 02, 2020, 08:26:38 PM »
So, a 2-stage carrier approach? A transport carrier that get's the combat carrier to the battlefield. IIRC in VB parasites inside a parasite vanished so that would have taken excessive hangar space, but if it works in C# that seems like an interesting concept to open the books upon again.
 

Offline liveware (OP)

  • Bug Moderators
  • Captain
  • ***
  • Posts: 578
  • Thanked: 36 times
Re: Jump Tenders - A Different Approach
« Reply #5 on: June 02, 2020, 11:29:23 PM »
So, a 2-stage carrier approach? A transport carrier that get's the combat carrier to the battlefield. IIRC in VB parasites inside a parasite vanished so that would have taken excessive hangar space, but if it works in C# that seems like an interesting concept to open the books upon again.

That would be annoying if the Cetan cannot carry a useful fighter wing. However I am still interested in testing the nested carrier concept.
« Last Edit: June 02, 2020, 11:32:52 PM by liveware »
Open the pod-bay doors HAL...
 

Offline Second Foundationer

  • Warrant Officer, Class 1
  • *****
  • Posts: 85
  • Thanked: 31 times
Re: Jump Tenders - A Different Approach
« Reply #6 on: June 03, 2020, 12:39:07 AM »
Nice concept. Does putting ships with a filled hangar into a hangar work in C#? I assume it does, but haven't tested it yet.

If my memory serves me, doing so in VB6 would result in the second-tier hangar load entering parasite nirvana (=aurora equivalent of a dwarven atom smasher=). And if you had to unload them first, you'd need additional hangar space on the first-tier carrier, I think.
 

Offline vorpal+5

  • Commander
  • *********
  • Posts: 333
  • Thanked: 45 times
Re: Jump Tenders - A Different Approach
« Reply #7 on: June 03, 2020, 12:47:32 AM »
That would be faster to test that with a new game and some smaller ships
 

Offline Second Foundationer

  • Warrant Officer, Class 1
  • *****
  • Posts: 85
  • Thanked: 31 times
Re: Jump Tenders - A Different Approach
« Reply #8 on: June 03, 2020, 06:51:44 AM »
Found a few minutes to SMtest my own question. Basically OK from a bug/feature perspective. At least, VB6 parasite nirvana seems to have nirvanished in C#.
The Nirvana has com hangars and engines, the Clemenceau a mil hangar and engine, the Suffren is just an engine with sensors.

So, you can go ahead and test the functional viability of the concept.
 

Offline liveware (OP)

  • Bug Moderators
  • Captain
  • ***
  • Posts: 578
  • Thanked: 36 times
Re: Jump Tenders - A Different Approach
« Reply #9 on: June 03, 2020, 12:17:32 PM »
Found a few minutes to SMtest my own question. Basically OK from a bug/feature perspective. At least, VB6 parasite nirvana seems to have nirvanished in C#.
The Nirvana has com hangars and engines, the Clemenceau a mil hangar and engine, the Suffren is just an engine with sensors.

So, you can go ahead and test the functional viability of the concept.

Thanks for testing, I haven't built my ships yet as I am still on pause designing fighters. Did you happen to notice if your Clemenceau's maintenance clock ticks up whilst docked to the Nirvana?
Open the pod-bay doors HAL...
 

Offline liveware (OP)

  • Bug Moderators
  • Captain
  • ***
  • Posts: 578
  • Thanked: 36 times
Re: Jump Tenders - A Different Approach
« Reply #10 on: June 03, 2020, 12:44:33 PM »
My first fighter design is starting to take shape. The Piranha is a low cost, high speed, gauss equipped interceptor. It has horrible accuracy but reasonable speed and range and is intended to be used in large swarms. At only 108 tons, a Cetan can easily hold over 150 Pirhana's in it's hangar bays, with plenty of space left over for additional support craft, such as long range sensor scouts.

Code: [Select]
Piranha class Fighter      108 tons       6 Crew       41.8 BP       TCS 2    TH 35    EM 0
16296 km/s      Armour 1-2       Shields 0-0       HTK 1      Sensors 0/0/0/0      DCR 0      PPV 0.5
Maint Life 29.83 Years     MSP 24    AFR 1%    IFR 0.0%    1YR 0    5YR 1    Max Repair 17.50 MSP
Lieutenant    Control Rating 1   
Intended Deployment Time: 0.3 days    Morale Check Required   

Chaimberlin-Sherman Internal Fusion Drive  EP35.00 (1)    Power 35.0    Fuel Use 2241.05%    Signature 35.00    Explosion 25%
Fuel Capacity 7,000 Litres    Range 0.5 billion km (8 hours at full power)

Chaimberlin-Sherman Gauss Cannon R300-8.00 (1x4)    Range 16,000km     TS: 16,296 km/s     Accuracy Modifier 8.00%     RM 30,000 km    ROF 5        1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0
Chaimberlin-Sherman Beam Fire Control R16-TS16000 (50%) (1)     Max Range: 16,000 km   TS: 16,000 km/s     88 75 62 50 38 25 12 0 0 0

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

Range band increments are 2000m and target speed accuracies are for a 10k km/s target
Open the pod-bay doors HAL...
 

Offline liveware (OP)

  • Bug Moderators
  • Captain
  • ***
  • Posts: 578
  • Thanked: 36 times
Re: Jump Tenders - A Different Approach
« Reply #11 on: June 03, 2020, 12:51:27 PM »
Based on the Piranha gauss fighter, the Piranha-S forgoes any offensive weaponry in favor of a long-range active sensor. These fighters will serve as scout pickets for carrier strike groups, assisting with locating targets for other fighters to engage.

Code: [Select]
Piranha-S class Fighter      108 tons       5 Crew       48 BP       TCS 2    TH 35    EM 0
16296 km/s      Armour 1-2       Shields 0-0       HTK 2      Sensors 0/0/0/0      DCR 0      PPV 0
Maint Life 27.19 Years     MSP 27    AFR 1%    IFR 0.0%    1YR 0    5YR 1    Max Repair 26.2 MSP
Lieutenant    Control Rating 1   
Intended Deployment Time: 0.3 days    Morale Check Required   

Chaimberlin-Sherman Internal Fusion Drive  EP35.00 (1)    Power 35.0    Fuel Use 2241.05%    Signature 35.00    Explosion 25%
Fuel Capacity 7,000 Litres    Range 0.5 billion km (8 hours at full power)

Chaimberlin-Sherman Active Search Sensor AS68-R500 (50%) (1)     GPS 10500     Range 68.1m km    Resolution 500

This design is classed as a Fighter for production, combat and planetary interaction
Open the pod-bay doors HAL...
 

Offline liveware (OP)

  • Bug Moderators
  • Captain
  • ***
  • Posts: 578
  • Thanked: 36 times
Re: Jump Tenders - A Different Approach
« Reply #12 on: June 03, 2020, 01:22:28 PM »
The Piranha-MF is a missile fighter variant of the Piranha, equipped with 7x size 1 missile launchers and 1x size 2 missile launcher. With it's missiles, the Piranha-MF can engage targets at ranges up to 685k with a reasonable chance to hit targets moving at 10k km/s or less.

Code: [Select]
Piranha-MF class Fighter      108 tons       3 Crew       28 BP       TCS 2    TH 35    EM 0
16296 km/s      Armour 1-2       Shields 0-0       HTK 1      Sensors 0/0/0/0      DCR 0      PPV 0.9
Maint Life 33.94 Years     MSP 16    AFR 1%    IFR 0.0%    1YR 0    5YR 0    Max Repair 17.50 MSP
Magazine 9   
Lieutenant    Control Rating 1   
Intended Deployment Time: 0.3 days    Morale Check Required   

Chaimberlin-Sherman Internal Fusion Drive  EP35.00 (1)    Power 35.0    Fuel Use 2241.05%    Signature 35.00    Explosion 25%
Fuel Capacity 7,000 Litres    Range 0.5 billion km (8 hours at full power)

Chaimberlin-Sherman Size 1 Box Launcher (7)     Missile Size: 1    Hangar Reload 50 minutes    MF Reload 8 hours
Chaimberlin-Sherman Size 2.0 Box Launcher (1)     Missile Size: 2.0    Hangar Reload 70 minutes    MF Reload 11 hours
Chaimberlin-Sherman Missile Fire Control FC5-R1 (50%) (1)     Range 5.4m km    Resolution 1

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

Code: [Select]
Chaimberlin-Sherman Size 1 Anti-Ship Missile
Missile Size: 1 MSP  (2.5 Tons)     Warhead: 1    Radiation Damage: 1    Manoeuvre Rating: 13
Speed: 50,000 km/s     Fuel: 20     Flight Time: 8.6 seconds     Range: 430,000 km
ECM Modifier: 10%     
Cost Per Missile: 2.0512     Development Cost: 205
Chance to Hit: 1k km/s 650%   3k km/s 216.7%   5k km/s 130%   10k km/s 65%

Materials Required
Corbomite  0.5
Tritanium  0.25
Gallicite  1.3012
Fuel:  20

Code: [Select]
Chaimberlin-Sherman Size 2 Anti-Ship Missile
Missile Size: 2.000 MSP  (5.0000 Tons)     Warhead: 3    Radiation Damage: 3    Manoeuvre Rating: 14
Speed: 50,000 km/s     Fuel: 45     Flight Time: 13.7 seconds     Range: 685,000 km
ECM Modifier: 10%     
Cost Per Missile: 3.91896     Development Cost: 392
Chance to Hit: 1k km/s 700%   3k km/s 233.3%   5k km/s 140%   10k km/s 70%

Materials Required
Corbomite  0.5
Tritanium  0.75
Gallicite  2.66896
Fuel:  45
Open the pod-bay doors HAL...
 

Offline Ulzgoroth

  • Lt. Commander
  • ********
  • U
  • Posts: 268
  • Thanked: 36 times
Re: Jump Tenders - A Different Approach
« Reply #13 on: June 03, 2020, 01:36:22 PM »
Do you have something planned with mobile active sensors that aren't super-big-resolution? Piranha-S is pretty terrible at detecting fighters, let alone missiles.
 

Offline liveware (OP)

  • Bug Moderators
  • Captain
  • ***
  • Posts: 578
  • Thanked: 36 times
Re: Jump Tenders - A Different Approach
« Reply #14 on: June 03, 2020, 01:45:11 PM »
I will also be designing a mine layer which will be responsible for deploying a network of sensor buoys throughout the engagement zone. Those buoys provide better missile and fighter detection coverage. The Piranha-S is intended to detect larger ships at longer range.

Additionally, since I plan on running away as soon as I detect a hostile missile launch, I can skimp somewhat on high resolution sensors because I can usually detect the missiles or the launching ship on thermal sensors from longer range than my active sensors permit anyway.

Also, the method I use for deploying sensor buoys in a potential combat zone before deploying the main carrier strike group is very effective at detecting enemy ships and missiles from outside my normal ship sensor detection range. This has saved a great many of my ships from hostile action.
« Last Edit: June 03, 2020, 02:04:56 PM by liveware »
Open the pod-bay doors HAL...
 

 

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