Author Topic: Deactivating and mothballing warships  (Read 451 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline kilo (OP)

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • k
  • Posts: 107
  • Thanked: 12 times
Deactivating and mothballing warships
« on: July 22, 2021, 05:07:00 AM »
Hi lads,

I started playing my first 1.13 campaign, which is at 20% research speed and that got me thinking. Low research speed means that ships and their components stay competitive for a couple of decades without significant upgrades. This puts Aurora's space warships more in line with current naval vessels, as these take a lot of resources and time to build and sometimes serve for a generation or two. There is just a minor problem with it, when it comes to Aurora. Unlike real navies, there are no levels of readiness. What does that mean?
In Aurora, every warship is active and combat ready at all times at full maintenance cost. There are no reserve or mothballed ships, which can be reactivated in times of tension. Until reactivation, these ships would require significantly less mineral upkeep and maintenance capacity.
The disadvantage of the reserved or mothballed status would be a significant delay until the vessel is reactivated and ready for operations, during which the vessel can be engaged and surprised by enemy forces.
In terms of game mechanics, I would keep the current status and call it active service with full maintenance requirements and ready for immediate action. Ships in reserve status would have half the cost and half the crew on board, full ammunition and fuel, but would require one month for adding crew and shakedown. Ships that were in mothballed status start with 10% crew, no fuel, ammunition and MSP on board and require at least a year before being combat ready. To counter this, the maintenance would be reduced by 66%.
 

Offline froggiest1982

  • Gold Supporter
  • Vice Admiral
  • *****
  • f
  • Posts: 1116
  • Thanked: 396 times
  • Gold Supporter Gold Supporter : Support the forums with a Gold subscription
    2021 Supporter 2021 Supporter : Donate for 2021
Re: Deactivating and mothballing warships
« Reply #1 on: July 22, 2021, 05:31:37 AM »
Since its conception Aurora has been with no mothballing. Steve does not like the concept and after so much time I guess many players are okay with that.

Furthermore, there was once a mechanic with PDC which were able through a series of Hangars to moathball ships.

Steve went extra lenghts by removing PDCs, changing the hangar usage and now changing also the maintenance rules to ensure ships are costly.

Might be a wild guess, but I don't see moathballing coming to Aurora, ever.

Offline kilo (OP)

  • Sub-Lieutenant
  • ******
  • k
  • Posts: 107
  • Thanked: 12 times
Re: Deactivating and mothballing warships
« Reply #2 on: July 22, 2021, 06:46:12 AM »
You are probably right with that. Steve might not like it or it is not high up on the list. The PDC mechanic was a broken when it came to putting combat ships inside of them. My goal was not to circumvent maintenance mechanics, but to create a system for naval forces during peace times.
 

Offline Jorgen_CAB

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • J
  • Posts: 2431
  • Thanked: 470 times
Re: Deactivating and mothballing warships
« Reply #3 on: July 22, 2021, 06:30:06 PM »
In my opinion a readiness mechanic would serve the game some considerations to be honest.

I would increase the cost for actively maintain ships and then introduce a reserve status, not the same as mothballing a ship.

In real life it is quite rare for any navy to have all if it's ship fully ready and fit for operational status under "normal" circumstances. If a major war breaks out then some if not all reserve status ships will return to service if possible. Ships also often alternate between active and reserve as well.

The downside of "reserve" status would be that the ship loose half of its accumulated crew and fleet training instantly and then 5% for each year it remains in the reserves, this represent that when the ship is reactivated it will have replaced allot of the crew. When the ships are brought back into service it should then reactivate in the same manner as a ship undergoing overhaul, it also have lost half or more of its crew and fleet training. A ship in reserve only pay 25% of the MSP cost for the maintenance clock to be paused if at a maintenance facility or the clock runs at 25% of the pace if not at a location with enough maintenance capacity.

MSP cost should then be increased by twice the cost as active ships are more expensive.

This would force some choices on the players if they want their ships ready and with high experience and fleet training or save cost on putting their ships in the reserve for the next possible conflict. This would be a pretty realistic choice to make.
« Last Edit: July 22, 2021, 06:34:05 PM by Jorgen_CAB »
 
The following users thanked this post: Warer

Offline froggiest1982

  • Gold Supporter
  • Vice Admiral
  • *****
  • f
  • Posts: 1116
  • Thanked: 396 times
  • Gold Supporter Gold Supporter : Support the forums with a Gold subscription
    2021 Supporter 2021 Supporter : Donate for 2021
Re: Deactivating and mothballing warships
« Reply #4 on: July 22, 2021, 08:14:44 PM »
In my opinion a readiness mechanic would serve the game some considerations to be honest.

True and agreed


I would increase the cost for actively maintain ships and then introduce a reserve status, not the same as mothballing a ship.

Correct, I find myself in agreement with Aurora mechanics as I don't like the mothballing concept. It allows you to overstretch your military power and allows you to replace ships on the go once they are lost without any penalty.


The downside of "reserve" status would be that the ship loose half of its accumulated crew and fleet training instantly and then 5% for each year it remains in the reserves, this represent that when the ship is reactivated it will have replaced allot of the crew.

I think that this is too harsh. A fleet in reserve should not be able to accumulate any crew experience and should lose its experience to a fixed amount altogether. That amount could be the average between the existing training grade and the standard crew grading to refill the crew. So if the crew is 100% and it is decided that half get lost in reserve mode when you will reactive the ship you'll get half crew at (depending on your level and commander bonuses) let's say 17%. You can do the math but this should result in roughly 58%.


When the ships are brought back into service it should then reactivate in the same manner as a ship undergoing overhaul, it also have lost half or more of its crew and fleet training. A ship in reserve only pay 25% of the MSP cost for the maintenance clock to be paused if at a maintenance facility or the clock runs at 25% of the pace if not at a location with enough maintenance capacity.

It is reasonable to think that a ship should take time to be reactivated.


MSP cost should then be increased by twice the cost as active ships are more expensive.

I think the above it's too arbitrary and partially untrue. I would actually work on the impact on the maintenance tonnage of the maintenance facilities. So if you have 50,000 tons you can serve 50,000 tons of ready ships or a certain amount of reserve ships + active ships. Eventually, each ship should have a reserve tonnage amount for maintenance purposes. For example, a 5,000 tons ship could count for 5,750 for tonnage maintenance while in reserve or any other amount that could be "fair". This should also result in more MSP usage without necessarily being utterly costly and will put enough pressure on maintenance locations and infrastructures. In terms of realism and balance, a ship or a plane costs way more while not running as it requires engine tests daily, oiling of components, engineering calibration, and more. We saw it with COVID and the number of Sailing ships being scrapped along with planes as they haven't been used for too long and they cost too much to maintain. The active ships have different costs as they consume fuel, ammunition, and manpower; they also may break and need repairs. these concepts are already in Aurora so the costs of an active ship compared to the ones of a reserve ship are already in for me.


This would force some choices on the players if they want their ships ready and with high experience and fleet training or save cost on putting their ships in the reserve for the next possible conflict. This would be a pretty realistic choice to make.

I agree that the readiness of the fleet should be a factor with more aspects that build and wait for training to go up.

Offline Jorgen_CAB

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • J
  • Posts: 2431
  • Thanked: 470 times
Re: Deactivating and mothballing warships
« Reply #5 on: July 23, 2021, 05:37:18 AM »
Yeah... the finer points in the implementation could probably be argued and discussed forever... ;)

I think the point basically is that ships in reserve should cost less and active a bit more. Perhaps so if you have 33% active and 66% reserve you end up with roughly the same cost as now. It also should impact fleet training and crew experience.

Keeping a fleet fully trained and in active status should be quite expensive in comparison to having a slightly larger fleet but most of it in reserve. But reserve does not mean they are mothballed, they still require some maintenance and probably have a registered skeleton crew in case the ship needs to be activated.
« Last Edit: July 23, 2021, 08:42:42 AM by Jorgen_CAB »