Author Topic: MInefield useless towards 100+ FAC Precursors  (Read 3330 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

Offline waresky (OP)

  • Registered
  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1487
  • Thanked: 9 times
  • Alpine Mountaineer..ohh Yeah!
MInefield useless towards 100+ FAC Precursors
« on: July 22, 2010, 01:53:36 AM »
Warfront.
Exit to an Jumpoint in a Precursors System guarded.

Ive been setup an extensive Minefield (up to 50 RGC3A MIRV Mine +4 CGR3A missile inside each v-fast 4warhead Active sensor package)

157 Precursors FAC's coming to scanning my operations around the Jumppoint (ive set my ships High speed for "call in" enemy sensors and try to ambush with Minefields)

mine launch the MIRV and all going done..but with more than 50x4 Missile,only 4 FAC where destroyed.

last FAC take the 90% of missiles.

Probable am missing some sensors tech or tactic..
 

Offline Steve Walmsley

  • Aurora Designer
  • Star Marshal
  • S
  • Posts: 11954
  • Thanked: 22170 times
Re: MInefield useless towards 100+ FAC Precursors
« Reply #1 on: July 22, 2010, 10:13:42 AM »
Quote from: "waresky"
Warfront.
Exit to an Jumpoint in a Precursors System guarded.

Ive been setup an extensive Minefield (up to 50 RGC3A MIRV Mine +4 CGR3A missile inside each v-fast 4warhead Active sensor package)

157 Precursors FAC's coming to scanning my operations around the Jumppoint (ive set my ships High speed for "call in" enemy sensors and try to ambush with Minefields)

mine launch the MIRV and all going done..but with more than 50x4 Missile,only 4 FAC where destroyed.

last FAC take the 90% of missiles.

Probable am missing some sensors tech or tactic..
When you create a minefield, your best option is to spread the mines out a little so that they are only activated in small groups as ships enter the field. In real life, minefield are spread over a wide area so that one ship doesn't activate all the mines.

Steve
 

Offline waresky (OP)

  • Registered
  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1487
  • Thanked: 9 times
  • Alpine Mountaineer..ohh Yeah!
Re: MInefield useless towards 100+ FAC Precursors
« Reply #2 on: July 22, 2010, 10:52:21 AM »
OH My!
u have centered the lack of strategy of mine "Beginners Naval doctrine"...:D

Ty
 

Offline Erik L

  • Administrator
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • *****
  • Posts: 5670
  • Thanked: 390 times
  • Forum Admin
  • Discord Username: icehawke
Re: MInefield useless towards 100+ FAC Precursors
« Reply #3 on: July 22, 2010, 06:53:25 PM »
The biggest issue I had with captor mines is that multiple defensive rings would trigger on the same ship, whether I wanted them to or not.

I put a 150,000 km "trigger" area and sensors that would cover that much on the mines. I set 8 waypoints around a JP, at a distance of ~300,000 km. So no more than one or 2 patterns should trigger on any one ship.

I had all 8 patterns trigger in the closest ring on one ship. Something like 400 missiles. Nice salvo, but way entirely too much overkill for the lone ship.

Offline waresky (OP)

  • Registered
  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1487
  • Thanked: 9 times
  • Alpine Mountaineer..ohh Yeah!
Re: MInefield useless towards 100+ FAC Precursors
« Reply #4 on: July 23, 2010, 04:59:10 AM »
ya.
But a single "Squadroon" of 157 FAC ships r hard to manage with Minefield?
Are a "lack" on minefield capability game code?
because am not found another way to fill up the JP..
 

Offline dooots

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • d
  • Posts: 129
Re: MInefield useless towards 100+ FAC Precursors
« Reply #5 on: July 23, 2010, 07:06:00 PM »
If I am understanding you correctly, the missiles had active sensors so they could get a new target if their first target was destroyed.

If that is the case and all of the facs hit the minefield at the same time it sounds like there is a bug.

From the sounds of it the facs hit the minefield, the missiles killed one fac, then changed targets and killed a 2nd fac, then changed targets and killed another a 3rd fac, then changed targets and killed a 4th fac, and failed to pick up a 5th target.
 

Offline Erik L

  • Administrator
  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • *****
  • Posts: 5670
  • Thanked: 390 times
  • Forum Admin
  • Discord Username: icehawke
Re: MInefield useless towards 100+ FAC Precursors
« Reply #6 on: July 24, 2010, 02:20:23 AM »
I think the biggest issue with mines (captor mines) is that the salvo intercepts the current target in the same impulse. So 40, 50, 100, whatever missiles are all expended in one shot, even if there is only a need for 30 to kill the intruder. Now your mines are expended, and 1 of however many intruders is gone.

Now if the missiles are far enough apart that they form discrete salvos, it should work like you say. Kill 1, move to 2, kill 2, move to 3, etc.

Offline waresky (OP)

  • Registered
  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1487
  • Thanked: 9 times
  • Alpine Mountaineer..ohh Yeah!
Re: MInefield useless towards 100+ FAC Precursors
« Reply #7 on: July 24, 2010, 07:12:46 AM »
My Naval Engineer design another Ship Concept: an AreaDefence ship modified design into a Anti-FAC Launcher Frigate,with more than 10 Size-2 Launchers armed with v-fast v-agility missile (Warhead minimum 6).

And next decades am try to erase all Precursors around.

edit: just for fun.Because the "Method" for erase Precursors FAC are substantial 2: FAST Attack Craft armed with better Beam weapons or missile Barrage from good distance.
 

Offline dooots

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • d
  • Posts: 129
Re: MInefield useless towards 100+ FAC Precursors
« Reply #8 on: July 24, 2010, 08:30:57 PM »
Quote from: "Erik Luken"
I think the biggest issue with mines (captor mines) is that the salvo intercepts the current target in the same impulse. So 40, 50, 100, whatever missiles are all expended in one shot, even if there is only a need for 30 to kill the intruder. Now your mines are expended, and 1 of however many intruders is gone.

Now if the missiles are far enough apart that they form discrete salvos, it should work like you say. Kill 1, move to 2, kill 2, move to 3, etc.

Ah, I have never tested missiles with sensors before but that does seems like how it would work instead of how I thought they worked.
 

Offline waresky (OP)

  • Registered
  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1487
  • Thanked: 9 times
  • Alpine Mountaineer..ohh Yeah!
Re: MInefield useless towards 100+ FAC Precursors
« Reply #9 on: July 25, 2010, 10:36:21 AM »
Quote from: "dooots"
Quote from: "Erik Luken"
I think the biggest issue with mines (captor mines) is that the salvo intercepts the current target in the same impulse. So 40, 50, 100, whatever missiles are all expended in one shot, even if there is only a need for 30 to kill the intruder. Now your mines are expended, and 1 of however many intruders is gone.

Now if the missiles are far enough apart that they form discrete salvos, it should work like you say. Kill 1, move to 2, kill 2, move to 3, etc.

Ah, I have never tested missiles with sensors before but that does seems like how it would work instead of how I thought they worked.

Right..

better build a very specialized Launcher Frigates with multi-launchers and max Size-2 missiles,for FAC hulls r big enough.
Minefield for me r very useless and extremely EXPENSIVE in minerals.

(but probable r some people who love play in SM Minerals mod game)
 

Offline waresky (OP)

  • Registered
  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 1487
  • Thanked: 9 times
  • Alpine Mountaineer..ohh Yeah!
Re: MInefield useless towards 100+ FAC Precursors
« Reply #10 on: July 26, 2010, 08:26:50 AM »
okay guys,ive VERY good news.

many Older players tell us about the effective the minefield.

True.

last battle a "ambush" minefield of mine,toward a dastardly 6 LaserFrigates Class-7500 tons are perfectly strike,save my "Early Warning Craft) and some support groups in flee from a big debacle frontline..enemys was caught and annihilated totally from our 3 waypoint minefields placed weeks ago from our minleayers cloak ships..

Hope the main argument are clear,my english not so good.

The minefield good r a Steve's design RCG.