Author Topic: Max-Tech Dakka Battlecruiser  (Read 764 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline bdub1 (OP)

  • Petty Officer
  • **
  • Posts: 21
  • Thanked: 2 times
Max-Tech Dakka Battlecruiser
« on: October 14, 2021, 11:53:25 PM »
Thinking about things, I decided to try and make a vessel capable of as much dps as I could produce.
So, I made up a maximum-tech game and started playing around.
I settled on some 50k ton ships because I wanted something big, and so i designed these 2 battlecruisers, one that produces an unholy AMM spam, and another that focuses on kinetic dps.
Thoughts comments and anything else are ofc welcome,


The absolute unit of some kinetic spam.

Code: [Select]
Lexington class Kinetic Battlecruiser      50,000 tons       1,491 Crew       65,564.5 BP       TCS 1,000    TH 32,000    EM 100,620
32000 km/s      Armour 25-120       Shields 3354-670       HTK 698      Sensors 0/0/0/0      DCR 125      PPV 243.6
Maint Life 4.08 Years     MSP 66,181    AFR 305%    IFR 4.2%    1YR 6,365    5YR 95,475    Max Repair 6210 MSP
Captain    Control Rating 4   BRG   AUX   ENG   CIC   
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months    Morale Check Required   

Jensen & Tweed Photonic Drive  EP8000.00 (4)    Power 32000.0    Fuel Use 3.54%    Signature 8000.00    Explosion 10%
Fuel Capacity 526,000 Litres    Range 53.6 billion km (19 days at full power)
Pietsch-Mcvaigh Defence Industries Omega S1677 / R670 Shields (2)     Recharge Time 670 seconds (5 per second)

Wallschlaeger Armaments Company 30cm Railgun V90/C25 (10x4)    Range 630,000km     TS: 32,000 km/s     Power 21-25     RM 90,000 km    ROF 5       
Quad Hoefle Armaments Company Gauss Cannon R600-100 Turret (4x32)    Range 60,000km     TS: 100000 km/s     Power 0-0     RM 60,000 km    ROF 5       
Chianese Electronics Beam Fire Control R140-TS100000 (70%) (2)     Max Range: 140,000 km   TS: 100,000 km/s     93 86 79 71 64 57 50 43 36 29
Deperro Sensor Systems Beam Fire Control R1050-TS40000 (SW) (70%) (10)     Max Range: 1,050,000 km   TS: 40,000 km/s     99 98 97 96 95 94 93 92 91 90
Scholer Engines Limited Vacuum Energy Power Plant R251 (2)     Total Power Output 501.5    Exp 5%

Hagin & Stiefel Warning & Control Active Search Sensor AS1666-R100 (70%) (1)     GPS 540000     Range 1,666.6m km    Resolution 100

ECCM-10 (12)         ECM 100



The missile dakka machine.

Code: [Select]
Congress class Battlecruiser      50,000 tons       1,159 Crew       36,237.7 BP       TCS 1,000    TH 24,000    EM 100,620
24000 km/s      Armour 25-120       Shields 3354-670       HTK 270      Sensors 375/0/0/0      DCR 123      PPV 45
Maint Life 3.52 Years     MSP 41,037    AFR 317%    IFR 4.4%    1YR 5,069    5YR 76,038    Max Repair 5400 MSP
Magazine 6,090   
Captain    Control Rating 4   BRG   AUX   ENG   CIC   
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months    Morale Check Required   

Jensen & Tweed Photonic Drive  EP8000.00 (3)    Power 24000.0    Fuel Use 3.54%    Signature 8000.00    Explosion 10%
Fuel Capacity 541,000 Litres    Range 55.1 billion km (26 days at full power)
Pietsch-Mcvaigh Defence Industries Omega S1677 / R670 Shields (2)     Recharge Time 670 seconds (5 per second)

Wiktor-Mines Size 1 Missile Launcher (75.00% Reduction) (60)     Missile Size: 1    Rate of Fire 5
Chiarello & Furey Missile Fire Control FC1138-R100 (70%) (1)     Range 1,138.5m km    Resolution 100
Bockover-Piatkowski Missile Fire Control FC293-R1 (4)     Range 293.2m km    Resolution 1
AMM-1 Shield (6090)    Speed: 270,000 km/s    End: 0.7m     Range: 11.2m km    WH: 1    Size: 1.0000    TH: 17460/10476/5238

Tong-Granata Electronic Systems Active Search Sensor AS359-R1 (1)     GPS 5400     Range 359m km    MCR 32.3m km    Resolution 1
Wachowiak Electronics Industries Thermal Sensor TH5-375 (1)     Sensitivity 375     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  153.1m km

ECCM-10 (4)         ECM 100

Missile to hit chances are vs targets moving at 3000 km/s, 5000 km/s and 10,000 km/s


Im almost certain the AMM Ship is more effective, but this is mostly jus for fun, anyway.
 
The following users thanked this post: Warer

Offline kilo

  • Lieutenant
  • *******
  • k
  • Posts: 159
  • Thanked: 20 times
Re: Max-Tech Dakka Battlecruiser
« Reply #1 on: October 15, 2021, 07:58:32 AM »
I do not want to bust your bubble, but your ships are not very good. They are very slow when it comes to photonic tech level and their beam weapons range is incredibly short. In combination this creates very vulnerable ships. Here is my suggestion for your kinetic BC:

Djävulen class Battlecruiser      49,999 tons       2,247 Crew       100,576.5 BP       TCS 1,000    TH 100,200    EM 100,620
100203 km/s      Armour 25-120       Shields 3354-670       HTK 316      Sensors 0/0/0/0      DCR 82      PPV 203
Maint Life 2.48 Years     MSP 103,094    AFR 244%    IFR 3.4%    1YR 23,198    5YR 347,972    Max Repair 25050.00 MSP
Navarch    Control Rating 4   BRG   AUX   ENG   CIC   
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months    Morale Check Required   

Photonic Drive  EP50100.00 (2)    Power 100200.0    Fuel Use 38.15%    Signature 50100.00    Explosion 30%
Fuel Capacity 4,000,000 Litres    Range 37.8 billion km (4 days at full power)
Omega S1677 / R670 Shields (2)     Recharge Time 670 seconds (5 per second)

45cm Railgun V90/C25/S2 (20x2)    Range 1,400,000km     TS: 100,203 km/s     Power 24.0-25     RM 90,000 km    ROF 5        16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 16 14
10cm Railgun V90/C3 (20x4)    Range 90,000km     TS: 100,203 km/s     Power 3-3     RM 90,000 km    ROF 5        1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0
Beam Fire Control R1400-TS100000 (2)     Max Range: 1,400,000 km   TS: 100,000 km/s     99 99 98 97 96 96 95 94 94 93
Vacuum Energy Power Plant R569-PB100 (1)     Total Power Output 569.4    Exp 50%

Active Search Sensor AS29-R1 (1)     GPS 36     Range 29.3m km    MCR 2.6m km    Resolution 1

Compact ECCM-10 (2)         ECM 100

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
This design is classed as a c for auto-assignment purposes


It requires some more refinements though. It's maintenance cost could be reduced by using smaller but less fuel efficient engines for example. Single shot 50cm rails could be an option. Sensors are pretty weak and only for self defense and anti missile right now. I like the protection of your ship though. It has a useful amount of shields and armor.
« Last Edit: October 15, 2021, 08:00:04 AM by kilo »
 

Offline misanthropope

  • Lt. Commander
  • ********
  • m
  • Posts: 239
  • Thanked: 60 times
Re: Max-Tech Dakka Battlecruiser
« Reply #2 on: October 15, 2021, 07:29:12 PM »
unless my back-of-envelope is shoddier than usual, the missiles have like 170% chance to hit any conceivable target in the game?  it feels morally wrong for a maxtech missile to not have an eye-opening warhead strength, "amm" or no.

don't smaller railguns deliver more pure dps?  they certainly deliver more pure projectile count, which may be important :).

and although it isn't dps, a maxtech advanced spinal advanced laser death thing would be delightful.
 

Offline RougeNPS

  • Lt. Commander
  • ********
  • R
  • Posts: 216
  • Thanked: 38 times
Re: Max-Tech Dakka Battlecruiser
« Reply #3 on: October 15, 2021, 09:12:16 PM »
Is it just me or is there a distinct lack of passive sensors?

Also why wouldnt they have jump drives?
 

Offline kilo

  • Lieutenant
  • *******
  • k
  • Posts: 159
  • Thanked: 20 times
Re: Max-Tech Dakka Battlecruiser
« Reply #4 on: October 16, 2021, 06:51:13 AM »
unless my back-of-envelope is shoddier than usual, the missiles have like 170% chance to hit any conceivable target in the game?  it feels morally wrong for a maxtech missile to not have an eye-opening warhead strength, "amm" or no.

don't smaller railguns deliver more pure dps?  they certainly deliver more pure projectile count, which may be important :).

and although it isn't dps, a maxtech advanced spinal advanced laser death thing would be delightful.

The problem of advanced spinal lasers is that you can mount exactly one per ship and damage falloff is huge. This means lasers do not get you far against an enemy with late game shields and 25 hitpoints of shield regeneration per combat tick fighting at range. You need a lot of damage per increment per ton to down the shields and railguns with 5s reload time are extremely powerful close to medium range, but lacking in penetration and damage at longer ranges.
Even lasers are pretty bad when you look at them closely. Let us assume we are shooting at 1.2M km with 80cm lasers (non-spinal) first:
At 1.2m km a 80cm laser causes 18 damage per shot with a hit chance of 2 out of 7 shots for an expected damage of 5.1 points every 35 seconds requiring 25 HS for the weapon. A spinal is even worse off, as it hits for 41 points of damage with the same 2/7 chance to hit for 11.7 points of effective damage every 80 seconds, while requiring significant HS. You need to constantly fire 35 of these lasers at a single ship to grind down the shields, which comes to >40k tons of pure lasers unless you can kill a ship in one volley.
A 9 damage particle beam causes 2.6 damage every 5 seconds requiring only 9 HS. 10 of these could break the tank slowly requiring only 4.5k tons of weapons to do so. Coupled with a lance or two, they would be pretty strong.
My suggested 20 45cm railguns cannot break the shields either as they are expected to cause 14.8 points of damage every 5s vs 25 points of regeneration.
 

Offline misanthropope

  • Lt. Commander
  • ********
  • m
  • Posts: 239
  • Thanked: 60 times
Re: Max-Tech Dakka Battlecruiser
« Reply #5 on: October 16, 2021, 08:31:49 AM »
PRETty sure the damage falloff won't change the tactics of a rail gun boat all that much.  also a little weird to cite only being able to get one as a problem if they're not good? 

rail guns are ideal for knocking down shields (ideal among beams anyhow) and a big crater courtesy of the spinal makes a huge difference in the efficacy of the rails against the kind of armor thickness that is easily achievable in the "deep end". 

 

Offline kilo

  • Lieutenant
  • *******
  • k
  • Posts: 159
  • Thanked: 20 times
Re: Max-Tech Dakka Battlecruiser
« Reply #6 on: October 17, 2021, 02:51:24 AM »
PRETty sure the damage falloff won't change the tactics of a rail gun boat all that much.  also a little weird to cite only being able to get one as a problem if they're not good? 

rail guns are ideal for knocking down shields (ideal among beams anyhow) and a big crater courtesy of the spinal makes a huge difference in the efficacy of the rails against the kind of armor thickness that is easily achievable in the "deep end".

You are completely right, it should not be overly important. Railguns are an all in weapon and you have to close to the closest possible distance to get them fully going. This means you want to be even faster as the enemy will eat you at range. Break even point is something like 1.5 light seconds when it comes to combat range. Any further away the battle will go poorly for rails.
 

Offline xenoscepter

  • Rear Admiral
  • **********
  • Posts: 976
  • Thanked: 216 times
Re: Max-Tech Dakka Battlecruiser
« Reply #7 on: October 22, 2021, 01:19:42 AM »
 --- Since I'm on a MaxTech kick myself, I thought I'd weigh in on this one. Here's my take on your Railgun ship:

Lexington-Class Kinetic Battlecruiser:
Code: [Select]
Lexington class Kinetic Battlecruiser      50,000 tons       1,592 Crew       73,180.7 BP       TCS 1,000    TH 75,000    EM 100,620
75001 km/s      Armour 25-120       Shields 3354-670       HTK 254      Sensors 37/37/0/0      DCR 75      PPV 94.25
Maint Life 1.92 Years     MSP 78,943    AFR 267%    IFR 3.7%    1YR 27,754    5YR 416,315    Max Repair 18750.00 MSP
Captain    Control Rating 4   BRG   AUX   ENG   CIC   
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months    Morale Check Required   

T12500-100T Photonic Drive, Class 37500/150M (2)    Power 75000.0    Fuel Use 5.51%    Signature 37500.00    Explosion 15%
Fuel Capacity 2,000,000 Litres    Range 130.6 billion km (20 days at full power)
SR1677-670/T2500 Passive Defense Field Generator, Omega Class (2)     Recharge Time 670 seconds (5 per second)

Class 1 Naval Railgun, 50cm High-Velocity Type (15)    Range 1,400,000km     TS: 75,001 km/s     Power 15-15     RM 90,000 km    ROF 5       
Quad T50/17-60K Gauss Cannon, Class 8 Turret (4x32)    Range 60,000km     TS: 100000 km/s     Power 0-0     RM 60,000 km    ROF 5       
T300/1.4M-TS75K Beam FCS, Naval Grade (1)     Max Range: 1,400,000 km   TS: 75,000 km/s     99 99 98 97 96 96 95 94 94 93
T400/1.4M-TS100K Beam FCS, Naval Grade (1)     Max Range: 1,400,000 km   TS: 100,000 km/s     99 99 98 97 96 96 95 94 94 93
T100/226-27B100 Vacuum Energy Power Plant (1)     Total Power Output 226.3    Exp 50%

T100/10-75R1 Active Sensor Suite, Low Grade (1)     GPS 20     Range 21.9m km    MCR 2m km    Resolution 1
T25/37-5EM Passive Sensor Suite, High Grade (1)     Sensitivity 37.5     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  48.4m km
T25/37-5TH Passive Sensor Suite, High Grade (1)     Sensitivity 37.5     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  48.4m km

Compact ECCM-10 (2)         ECM 100

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
This design is classed as a c for auto-assignment purposes

 --- I tried to stay as faithful as possible to your original design while attempting to make improvements on it. The 50cm Railguns offer 300 DPS compared to your 30cm Railguns with 280 DPS, all while doing it at a further range. My version of your Quad Gauss Turret uses 50 Ton Gauss Cannons to lighten the load, but their accuracy suffers with 17% compared to your 300 Ton's 100%. A pair of bigger, faster, boosted engines drive this version to 75,000 km/s, over twice the speed of the original, however this comes at the cost of needing WAY more fuel. I matched the fuel to your max burn time rather than your range, and came out with more than double the range anyway. Maintenance Life is less than half, but the IFR is a little better and this version carries a bit more MSP anyway. The engines are... expensive, to say the least. >.>;

 --- I cut way back on the number of Beam Fire Controls, while also reducing the ECM/ECCM count down. One Compact ECM and two Compact ECCM modules weigh the same as one Standard module of either type, saving a good deal of weight. The Active Sensors and the Passive Sensors ensure that the ship can provide it's own Target Locks as well as not be snuck up on too easily. Armor, shields and Deployment time all remain the same, while the DCR is a bit lower overall... 50 points lower to be exact. Not great, but on the bright side in a one on one fight, this version would never even be fired upon by the old version anyway, so it's a moot point really.