Looking for Feedback, MaxTech Beam Fighter

[xenoscepter (OP)]

Code: [Select]

New Class class Starfighter (P)      500 tons       25 Crew       4,288.7 BP       TCS 10    TH 10    EM 0
100053 km/s      Armour 1-5       Shields 0-0       HTK 5      Sensors 0/0/0/0      DCR 0      PPV 4
Maint Life 0.04 Years     MSP 35    AFR 100%    IFR 1.4%    1YR 789    5YR 11,834    Max Repair 2000.00 MSP
Lieutenant Commander    Control Rating 1   
Intended Deployment Time: 0.5 days    Morale Check Required   

Photonic Drive  EP1000.00 (1)    Power 1000.0    Fuel Use 156.25%    Signature 10.0000    Explosion 25%
Fuel Capacity 20,000 Litres    Range 4.61 billion km (12 hours at full power)

Twin 10cm C1.25 Far Gamma Ray Laser Turret (1x2)    Range 350,000km     TS: 100,053 km/s     Power 6-2.50     RM 120,000 km    ROF 15        2 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Beam Fire Control R350-TS100000 (SW) (5%) (1)     Max Range: 350,000 km   TS: 100,000 km/s     19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Vacuum Energy Power Plant R3-PB100 (1)     Total Power Output 2.5    Exp 50%

Active Search Sensor AS4-R1 (5%) (1)     GPS 1     Range 4.9m km    MCR 439.7k km    Resolution 1

This design is classed as a Fighter for production, combat and planetary interaction*Damage and To-Hit Numbers given for a target moving 250,150km/s at a range of 180,000km

 --- I'm doing a throwaway game with a MaxTech start until v2.0 hits, super excited for that btw, and I'm having a little trouble here. A quick bit of background information on my fighter doctrine here though, because that's gonna be necessary to make the kind of evaluation I'm looking for. I'm working with a doctrine that comprises three primary roles; Bomber, Interceptor, and Starfighter. Bombers would serve as a (relatively) slow and re-usable long range cruise stage from which to deploy Anti-Ship Missiles that trade away that range for a blend of speed, accuracy and raw firepower. Interceptors would be small, fast and lightly armed beam fighters tasked primarily with shooting down Bombers, or enemy craft acting in a similar role. Starfighters would primarily be tasked with engaging enemy interceptors.

 - Interceptors would trade away firepower and range to maintain their high-speed while mounting either a small shield generator, armor or ECM to help survive enemy ASMs or AFMs that might be deployed at them in the line of duty. They would also need to be somewhat smaller than most craft so that they can overwhelm enemy strike craft with sheer numbers as well.

 - Starfighters would be bigger, faster, and better armed. While Interceptors might mount reduced shot railguns or turreted gauss, and have short range weapons by default, Starfighters would focus on higher range weapons or larger caliber railguns to deal with enemy Interceptors. Their speed or defenses would allow them to function in an Anti-Bomber role, but their main targets would be enemy Interceptors and Starfighters, or whatever equivalent they might have.

 --- And so, to wit: this is my proposal for a Starfighter armed with a pair of 10cm Far Gamma Ray Lasers. It is a very expensive ship due to the engines sporting Thermal Reduction that affords them a Thermal Signature equivalent to 1% of their engine's output. The Level 6 Electronic Hardening is also a driving force behind the expenses, however I expect to employ HPM Interceptors for blinding enemy "Bombers" as a sort of planetary defense ship. That, and I've yet to explore anything in this game, so a Nebulae could bone me over... unless they're not in v1.13. Anyway, I have serious doubts about this design, namely the speed and the firepower. Replacing the 10cm Lasers with 15cm ones yields the same weight, crew and range, thanks to the B-FCS, but with double the damage per shot under the same conditions and with a 5 increment RoF instead of the 3 increment RoF of the 10cm ones. Meanwhile replacing them with 12cm models yields the same damage, but out to 250,000km instead of the 180,000km of the 10cm models, and with only a 4 increment RoF.

 --- So while I'm appealing for general feedback and criticism, I'd like to ask the following specifically. Is this under-gunned? Is it too slow for a Photonic Engine beam fighter designed to go after Bombers and chase away Interceptors? It doesn't need to kill enemy Interceptors, it just needs to be capable of killing them. If it can drive them away from my own Bombers, then it's done it's job as far as I'm concerned. It's not an escort though, so don't be confused. If the enemy fields "Interceptors" then the job of the Bombers is to turn tail and RTB, while the job of the Starfighters is to present a credible enough threat to dissuade pursuit and to also kill any Interceptors that are Hell bent on getting the Bombers in spite of casualties.

Code: [Select]

New Class class Interceptor (P)      250 tons       10 Crew       897.3 BP       TCS 5    TH 500    EM 0
100089 km/s      Armour 3-3       Shields 0-0       HTK 1      Sensors 0/0/0/0      DCR 0      PPV 1.2
Maint Life 1.12 Years     MSP 60    AFR 50%    IFR 0.7%    1YR 48    5YR 721    Max Repair 612.5 MSP
Lieutenant Commander    Control Rating 1   
Intended Deployment Time: 1.1 days    Morale Check Required   

T100-100T Photonic Drive, Class 500/250M (1)    Power 500.0    Fuel Use 220.97%    Signature 500.00    Explosion 25%
Fuel Capacity 28,000 Litres    Range 9.13 billion km (25 hours at full power)

T30/10-60K Gauss Cannon, Class 8 (Twin Linked Mount) (1x16)    Range 60,000km     TS: 100,089 km/s     Accuracy Modifier 10.0%     RM 60,000 km    ROF 5        1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
T35/245K-TS100K(SW) Beam FCS, Low Grade (1)     Max Range: 245,000 km   TS: 100,000 km/s     30 20 11 1 0 0 0 0 0 0

T5/10-75R1 Active Sensor Suite, Low Grade (1)     GPS 1     Range 4.9m km    MCR 439.7k km    Resolution 1

This design is classed as a Fighter for production, combat and planetary interaction
 --- For those wishing to know what sort of ship this craft is expected to fight; this is the sort of opponent. To avoid confusion, the To-Hit and Damage numbers given are assuming a target at 60,000km that is moving at 250,000km/s. The laser armed starfighter can expect a roughly 50/50 shot versus this Interceptor at a range of 180,000km.

[Kiero]

To Hit chance is a bit low:
Beam Fire Control R350-TS100000 (SW) (5%) (1)     Max Range: 350,000 km   TS: 100,000 km/s     19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
19% on a close range.

Your weapon max range is 350 000 but you won't hit a thing that far. You will need to get closer and you'll hit something every fifth shot.
With a ROF 15 that is every 75 seconds.

Also with that high speed, the turret is just dead weight.

I would drop a turret, make it a fixed laser with a shorter range (or Beam Fire Control Range longer) so the To Hit Chance would go up.

[xenoscepter (OP)]

To Hit chance is a bit low:
Beam Fire Control R350-TS100000 (SW) (5%) (1)     Max Range: 350,000 km   TS: 100,000 km/s     19 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
19% on a close range.

Your weapon max range is 350 000 but you won't hit a thing that far. You will need to get closer and you'll hit something every fifth shot.
With a ROF 15 that is every 75 seconds.

Also if you have a high speed the turret is just dead weight.

I Would drop a turret, make it a fixed laser with a shorter range (or Beam Fire Control Range longer) so the To Hit Chance would go up.

 --- Thanks, two things I think you might have missed though. First, the turret has no tracking speed. This means that it's the same weight as two of the lasers by themselves, but because it's in a twin turret it uses less crew. 11 Crew for the turret versus the 12 needed for just the two lasers by themselves. You can't split your fire of course, but that's really a non-issue. The main trade-off here is that you first need to research the gun, then the turret, but again that's kind of peanuts at this point. Secondly, the 19% chance to hit is when shooting at a target going 250% faster than my ship at a range of about 52% of my Beam FCS' max range. Those numbers are assuming a target moving at 250,150 km/s out to a range of 180,000km. I put that in small letters under the design, but perhaps I should have made it more prominent. My fault.

[Blogaugis]

500 ton; heavy fighter type, yet armor/shields are minimal...
I guess you don't really need to worry about that at such speeds, but I'd like to have at least 2 armor, on a thing as expensive as this... Even my own fighters, slow due to lack of engine boosting, still sported at least 2 armor.
MSP 35 and MaxRepair 2000 MSP gives me some concerns... Are You playing with maintenance off? If yes, you can ignore this, otherwise, you might need to rethink this design. It can be, if this fighter is intended as a single-use semi-suicide unit, but You already said it's expensive, so...
Are You sure you need 2 shots per 3 5 second intervals? I personally prefer to go with 1 shot but higher rate of fire 2 5 second intervals or less. If it is possible to reach shooting every 5 seconds and there is still space left - more firepower can be considered.

If you insist on leaving it armorless... perhaps it would be a good idea to add some ECM?
Also, with so low accuracy, I think You might need to mount a lower wavelenght laser, or improve the fire control - at least, what is the expected engagement range of this fighter?

[xenoscepter (OP)]

500 ton; heavy fighter type, yet armor/shields are minimal...
I guess you don't really need to worry about that at such speeds, but I'd like to have at least 2 armor, on a thing as expensive as this... Even my own fighters, slow due to lack of engine boosting, still sported at least 2 armor.
MSP 35 and MaxRepair 2000 MSP gives me some concerns... Are You playing with maintenance off? If yes, you can ignore this, otherwise, you might need to rethink this design. It can be, if this fighter is intended as a single-use semi-suicide unit, but You already said it's expensive, so...
Are You sure you need 2 shots per 3 5 second intervals? I personally prefer to go with 1 shot but higher rate of fire 2 5 second intervals or less. If it is possible to reach shooting every 5 seconds and there is still space left - more firepower can be considered.

If you insist on leaving it armorless... perhaps it would be a good idea to add some ECM?
Also, with so low accuracy, I think You might need to mount a lower wavelenght laser, or improve the fire control - at least, what is the expected engagement range of this fighter?

 --- Unless the rules have changed in v1.13, a fighter with a mere 12 hours of endurance will should never be out long enough to trip a maintenance check, ergo the MSP to Max Repair is largely moot. I tired fitting it with 3 layers of armor AND a 50 Ton shield generator, but the lasers are too darn massive to stay within the 500 Ton range. The engagement range given is 180,000km versus a target moving 250,150km/s. That means that the accuracy given is for shooting at an enemy craft that is 250% faster than the fighter in question. I'm going to try working with the design a bit more, probably will end up going with larger Single Shot railguns to be honest. A preliminary analysis with a Single Shot 50cm shows an increase in accuracy, firepower AND RoF across the board, for minimal increase in tonnage... a whopping 11 tons. More testing is clearly needed.