Sensor Buoys and Mines

[Steve Walmsley (OP)]

Sandy's post got me thinking about using a bus with submunitions for anti-missile work.  Is there any code currently to keep a missile from being effectivily overflown by it's target.  In this instance I am thinking that a bus would fire it's submunitions, but because the range is fairly close the missiles that were the target of the submunition then overfly the submunitions.  After that the submunitions now have a stern chase to actually catch thier targets, assuming that thier seeker is good enough for the job.

Missiles move after ships and they move in ascending order of speed. So it is possible that a ship (or a slower missile) could move past a missile and then the faster missile would chase it. In the case of sub-munitions, it would be best to set the second stage to separate before it reaches the target so that the sub-munitions will deploy ahead of the incoming missile.

Second question that just came to mind.  If the bus and submunitions do not have any sensors of their own, but are using the fire control of the firing ship, would this make any difference in the equation.

It wouldn't make any difference to the order of movement although ship fire control systems are generally much more powerful so it would allow longer tracking and engagement ranges.

Steve

[Brian Neumann]

Missiles move after ships and they move in ascending order of speed. So it is possible that a ship (or a slower missile) could move past a missile and then the faster missile would chase it. In the case of sub-munitions, it would be best to set the second stage to separate before it reaches the target so that the sub-munitions will deploy ahead of the incoming missile.
Steve

The problem I am thinking of is that a missile or bouy is going to have fairly short range to actually detect a missile.  The submunitions will probably have an even shorter range is it has to be fitted into a missile.  This means that the release range is probably going to be less than the distance that the missile moves in 5 seconds.  In some cases it may not make a difference, in others though the target missile will be past the counter missile without being engaged.  Can you code something to detect when a counter missile is overflown and have the impact be scorred then.

Brian

[Steve Walmsley (OP)]

Missiles move after ships and they move in ascending order of speed. So it is possible that a ship (or a slower missile) could move past a missile and then the faster missile would chase it. In the case of sub-munitions, it would be best to set the second stage to separate before it reaches the target so that the sub-munitions will deploy ahead of the incoming missile.
Steve

The problem I am thinking of is that a missile or bouy is going to have fairly short range to actually detect a missile.  The submunitions will probably have an even shorter range is it has to be fitted into a missile.  This means that the release range is probably going to be less than the distance that the missile moves in 5 seconds.  In some cases it may not make a difference, in others though the target missile will be past the counter missile without being engaged.  Can you code something to detect when a counter missile is overflown and have the impact be scorred then.

Not easily. This would have to apply to all intercepts, which means when anything moved I would have to check any objects trying to intercept it and check if any part of the trajectory of the moving object moved within the distance that the intercepting object could move in the same amount of time and presumably I would have to resolve this in order of which multiple intercepting objects would arrive, not to mention checking if any of the intercepting objects would themselves be intercepted by something else prior to their interception of the original object, and so on. It would just get too complex.

I do agree that the sensors that you can put into a buoy and sub-munitions would make it difficult to construct an effective anti-missile mine but I don't want to change the rules to make this easier because it probably should be very difficult.

Steve

[Brian Neumann]

I do agree that the sensors that you can put into a buoy and sub-munitions would make it difficult to construct an effective anti-missile mine but I don't want to change the rules to make this easier because it probably should be very difficult.

Steve

I was afraid that might be the answer.

Brian

[Michael Sandy]

I was thinking about anti-missile ship designs, one had lots of box launchers to deliver a huge number of anti-missiles at once, if needed.  But then I thought, how about anti-missile mines?

Have the start stage with the reactor and sensors, and because you might need fairly big stage for the sensors, have it have several counter missiles in its second stage.

You could then have the capacity to quickly deploy enough anti-missile capacity to soak a large volley, if you are talking about protecting a planet from a small mobile force.

That's an interesting idea. I don't see any reason why it wouldn't work, although you would need a large first stage to accomodate a powerful enough resolution zero active sensor to spot the missiles far enough away to launch and intercept in time.

Steve

One of my thoughts was how to do a "quantity has a quality all its own" philosophy.  A fleet design with rather large magazines could prefire a lot of missiles.  In a confrontation that they arranged and prepped for, they would have an outsized punch.  Of course, once they launched all those missiles they were sort of committed, because it would be rather expensive.

So a defender might think, "Oh, they are at 7.5 million km.  They might launch some missiles, but anything with this much range they would only be able to large a small volley size."  But the attacker has a long range, fairly slow, stage, allowing all the volleys to meet up at a waypoint.  So all the 2 stage missiles meet up at say 2 million km, and then go to their higher speed stage.

Similarly, a defender with that design philosophy would be tracking the attackers with colonial sensors for a long range.  They might have ships move slowly into position, tossing out pods, er, 2 stage missiles.  Of course, if the attackers detect the missile launch and run, the defenders have shot their bolt.  So having a stealthy scout with sensors that can spot missiles a long way off would be kind of useful, to provide warning of oversized missile volleys.

[Michael Sandy]

I was thinking about anti-missile ship designs, one had lots of box launchers to deliver a huge number of anti-missiles at once, if needed.  But then I thought, how about anti-missile mines?

Have the start stage with the reactor and sensors, and because you might need fairly big stage for the sensors, have it have several counter missiles in its second stage.

You could then have the capacity to quickly deploy enough anti-missile capacity to soak a large volley, if you are talking about protecting a planet from a small mobile force.

That's an interesting idea. I don't see any reason why it wouldn't work, although you would need a large first stage to accomodate a powerful enough resolution zero active sensor to spot the missiles far enough away to launch and intercept in time.

Steve

How about arrange them in layers?  Suppose the sensors you can pack have an effective range of 10,000 km.  A missile travels 75,000 km in 5 seconds.  Assuming spacing every 20,000km, you have 4 shells of anti-missile mines.  An incoming volley is sure to end close enough for one shell to fire.

A lot depends on how rapidly you can deploy and redeploy these shells.  And being confident about from which direction the missiles will do their final attack run.

[Michael Sandy]

You could have very short duration buoys, maybe only a week's endurance, designed to be launched by fixed point defenses as an enemy enters long range missile range.

A lot of these ideas I see for use by the poorer star nations, the ones who want to inflict a heavy cost on would-be raiders, or just to buy time to find allies or to find a diplomatic solution.  It is easier to stockpile munitions than expensive to maintain ships.  On the other hand, with a strategy that involves very heavy munitions use, it just is very expensive to engage in gunboat diplomacy of any kind.

[jfelten]

I am now looking at implementations of the opposite idea. A missiles with a buoy as the second stage. This will allow you to create long-range missiles that deliver a sensor buoy that can remain on station for months or years. It will be a great way to scout out your opponents in a stealthy way. You get the stealthy advantages of recon probes and the long term staying power of ships. I am also looking at putting geological sensors on missiles so you could create a geological sensor buoy, put it on a large first stage missile and fire it at a distant planet to carry out a geological survey. This would also give you the option to provide geological survey probes to non-survey ships and give them a limited surveying capability. I'll post more on these last two ideas once I have done some play-testing.

Steve

Steve, have you done any more with recon probes?  You know the enemy fleet is out there somewhere but are not picking them up on sensors so you fire a spread of recon probes in the direction you think they may be.

[Steve Walmsley (OP)]

I am now looking at implementations of the opposite idea. A missiles with a buoy as the second stage. This will allow you to create long-range missiles that deliver a sensor buoy that can remain on station for months or years. It will be a great way to scout out your opponents in a stealthy way. You get the stealthy advantages of recon probes and the long term staying power of ships. I am also looking at putting geological sensors on missiles so you could create a geological sensor buoy, put it on a large first stage missile and fire it at a distant planet to carry out a geological survey. This would also give you the option to provide geological survey probes to non-survey ships and give them a limited surveying capability. I'll post more on these last two ideas once I have done some play-testing.

Steve, have you done any more with recon probes?  You know the enemy fleet is out there somewhere but are not picking them up on sensors so you fire a spread of recon probes in the direction you think they may be.

You can create recon probes (but not survey probes) with the existing version (v3.2). Create missiles with sensors instead of warheads and fire them at either sensor contacts or waypoints.

Steve

[jfelten]

You can create recon probes (but not survey probes) with the existing version (v3.2). Create missiles with sensors instead of warheads and fire them at either sensor contacts or waypoints.

Steve

Do they loiter or self destruct once they reach their target?  I guess I could find out in game but it would take awhile.  Of course in the event of an enemy they could try to shoot down the sensor missiles/drones before they got close.

[Brian Neumann]

The drones will loiter if you aim them at a waypoint and not an actual ship target.  This works well if you have also built the drone with less engines and more fuel.  I have designed a few drones that had a decent passive sensor package, and endurance of a couple of hours and a speed that was 4-5 times faster than my scout ships.  About twice as fast as a gunboat would be.

Brian

[jfelten]

You just allocate some of the missile's space to the sensor boxes?  IIRC there are more than on sensor type you can allocate space to.  Which do you normally use?

[Brian Neumann]

Usually I will put in thermal sensors.  As long as the contact is moving they are going to have a thermal signature.  I also usually mix in a few em sensors as well.  A typical search pattern would have several ships in a fleet sending two thermal, followed by one with em sensors.  Each ship will send the drone to different waypoints.  This way I can comb a larger area with a good chance of spotting anything in the area.  The em sensors will tell me if anyone in the target area has a low powered anti-missile radar going for defense reasons, or if the ships are larger, fully charged shields.  Another thing to point out is that at times I will send all of the drones to a waypoint that is not in line with the target area, and then have them come in on a different bearing.  This can be quite usefull if you are trying to draw the escort ships out of position.

Brian

[jfelten]

Do you send the 2 EM drones to different points or do you send them in pairs?  Is there any advantage to having more than one sensor drone of the same type at a given point in space?  

Don't you need your own missile active fire control running to guide these sensor drones to their target waypoint?  Doesn't that give your location away to the enemy?

Does your ships need a separate missile fire control to control each sensor drone if they are targeted at different points?  Or are they fire and forget due to their innate sensors?  

I hadn't really considered enemy ships that only had relatively short range anti missile fire control active.  

I really need to set up a sandbox to play with these myself, but your experience is welcome.  

I'm thinking if you could make the sensor drones small enough yet still effective so you could afford to carry a large quantity, you could cover a fairly large area with a wall of sensor coverage.  Ideally size 1 so they could be carried by any ship mounting an anti missile missile launcher, but I doubt they could be given enough fuel and endurance to be useful at that size, even without a warhead.  Can the sensors be a fraction of a space or 1 space minimum?  

Thanks for your help

[Brian Neumann]

Do you send the 2 EM drones to different points or do you send them in pairs?  Is there any advantage to having more than one sensor drone of the same type at a given point in space?

 I usually use 2 thermal drones with about 30 seconds between firings.  This lets me see what starts moving if they shoot the first one down.  The em drone is about 30 seconds behind as this will give me more info on radar types of they bring everything up.

Don't you need your own missile active fire control running to guide these sensor drones to their target waypoint?  Doesn't that give your location away to the enemy?

You do not need to have fire control active.  If you look at the f6 ship screen there is a missile launch button.  Load a tube and fire it at a waypoint it will work.

Does your ships need a separate missile fire control to control each sensor drone if they are targeted at different points?  Or are they fire and forget due to their innate sensors?  

If you want them to be manuvered and under guidance then yes you will need fire control active.  If however you are sending them on a balistic course the answer is no.

I hadn't really considered enemy ships that only had relatively short range anti missile fire control active.  
I really need to set up a sandbox to play with these myself, but your experience is welcome.  

The search radar for a pd energy weapons is usually only a strength 5-10 at the most.  This makes it a very hard to detect system.  It is also a good idea to keep it up so you have a chance to shoot at missiles before they hit you even if you were supprised by the attack.  Also a search radar for short range pd weapons will still be able to detect a ship that comes in to close range (about half energy range is typical for me)  This keeps an enemy from getting to pointblank range without you realizing it. (This also assumes that the attackers are moving slow enough that your thermal sensors are not seeing them.

I'm thinking if you could make the sensor drones small enough yet still effective so you could afford to carry a large quantity, you could cover a fairly large area with a wall of sensor coverage.  Ideally size 1 so they could be carried by any ship mounting an anti missile missile launcher, but I doubt they could be given enough fuel and endurance to be useful at that size, even without a warhead.  Can the sensors be a fraction of a space or 1 space minimum?  

Thanks for your help

You are welcome

Brian