Recent Posts

Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10
11
Aurora / Re: Opposed survey
« Last post by lennson on April 06, 2017, 03:28:39 PM »
For the scenario do both sides know that the system will be contested?

If so I probably wouldn't even bother trying to do a survey until the system is secured, so the font 'survey' fleet wouldn't have any grav survey sensors and rather would be equipped with high power box launched missiles and tasked with securing and picketing the enemy jump point while waiting for other forces to arrive.


If my side didn't expect the system to be contested I would probably just immediately withdraw from the system, having a cheap survey fleet (moving BP to a stronger response fleet), and wait for reinforcements. The point being I don't see the enemy accomplishing any meaningful amount of surveying before a proper battle fleet can show up, which can then take care of securing and sweeping the system of threats.

12
Aurora / Re: Opposed survey
« Last post by Michael Sandy on April 06, 2017, 02:41:05 PM »
I began this exercise as a fan of bare bones survey ships.  But early on, you can't fit 5 HS of grav sensor on to a fighter that has more than 2 HS in engines, so a commercial engined grav survey ship is likely to be faster than a grav survey fighter, at least if the fighter has any operating range.

The commercial engined survey ship will be bigger, easier to hit, and a bit more expensive... except that it doesn't require the overhead of a carrier.

Unlike almost any other ship class, the grav survey class has to operate independently.  It can't rely on a squadron mate for sensor coverage or point defense, it has to have that on its own, or be completely expendable.

Geo survey fleets can choose to use survey drones on planets, moons, asteroids, but that isn't an option for grav survey.

This has really gotten me thinking about whether or not to arm my initial grav survey fleet.  I am kind of inclined to, partly to conserve shipyard retooling time.  The purpose wouldn't be to win wars with them, but to get more information back if they met something hostile.
13
Aurora / Re: Opposed survey
« Last post by Michael Sandy on April 06, 2017, 01:04:24 PM »
I would like some feedback on mine strategy.

I figure a size 6 missile, with 1.5 MSP drive, .5 msp fuel, a 2 MSP second stage sensor head, and a 2 MSP missile with a size 4 warhead would make for a harassment build.

The goal is not to destroy enemy survey craft so much as to attempt mission kills with a point of structure damage taking out fuel tank or engine or even the expensive sensor system.  Resolution 10 active sensors, to be able to target even the smallest survey craft.

The other idea would be to go with resolution 60 sensors, which would allow for much longer range on the mines, assuming the targets to be survey ships with commercial engines.  Again, deploying enough mines to get a kill, especially on survey ships that have 25 HTK on just their engines seems impractical, but it would severely hamper someone who went for barebones cheap survey craft, and nothing like a 4 megaton warhead to signal the location of a target for potential followup.

So the strategy would be to have a couple of minelayers with the survey fleet, they launch on the ring of survey points closest to the enemy jump point first, and move out.  At 15 MSP a magazine or so, at that tech, 20 magazines is 50 size 6 missiles, enough to cover all the survey points.  Then the minelayers head to the nodal base for more missiles, which can also be used to buff up the jump point security if the enemy has an aggressive survey fleet.

But such a cheap minelaying strategy could be fairly easily countered, with a AMM missile launcher and sensor on each survey ship.  That bumps up the per survey ship cost a bit, but makes it substantially harder to cheaply kill them.  And in a main fleet engagement, they can help thin out missile attacks and soak damage.

The question is, how big an anti-missile sensor do you go for on your survey ships?  Anything larger than 1 HS, you may as well turn your survey ships into real escorts, with 2-4 launchers and 1-2 magazines per launcher.
14
Aurora / Re: Opposed survey
« Last post by Michael Sandy on April 04, 2017, 07:41:19 PM »
And yeah, I am a bit stumped on the setup as well.  Considerations of one-off fleet vs fleet are a lot easier to quantify.  "Can I carry enough missiles to destroy the enemy?"  "Can I force an engagement or disengage effectively?"

But this is more about managing a small war, about the difficulties in anticipating what missiles or other resupply will be needed.  You could have a scout fleet designed to try to make the enemy maneuver a lot, and waste fuel.  Useless vs the AI, but can cause a potential headache for players.

I have seen a number of interesting designs for large carrier borne boosted ships, which are very fuel intensive and short ranged.  Those can be great for one-offs, but are a logistical pain in the butt if you have an expectation of a succession of high intensity and low intensity engagements.  It is easily the sort of thing that would bite me, I know.  I don't know if would be a FUN complication to manage.
15
Aurora / Re: Opposed survey
« Last post by Michael Sandy on April 04, 2017, 07:33:40 PM »
Basically, the frontier system being contested is far enough away from the Homeworlds for logistics to matter.  And the initial contact is going to be between a small fraction of the available fleets, but can still gain a valuable advantage as both sides put more of their forces to bear.

As the survey fleet is kind of small, I didn't want a concept to be unnecessarily stifled trying to fit it into an exact number of build points, but I wanted a cost to going over.  And it is a sort of abstract representation of different deployment strategies, whether it focuses on nodal defense, or somewhat better equipped survey fleets.

I think there are a bunch of variants regarding the exact distance to the nodal defense and ratios of defense force to survey force that could be fun.

I like the 100,000 RP budget contests more than the 'get everything under 5k cost' contests, because it more reflects how players would develop their technology from a conventional start.  I wanted a scenario that would capture some of the strategic considerations players encounter early in their expansion, to give ideas for what a good survey force/nodal force/heavy response force should look like.

I don't know if having a 'capture and salvage' bonus adds anything to the scenario, but it is a consideration that players would have, especially with their early expansion.
16
Aurora / Re: Opposed survey
« Last post by MarcAFK on April 04, 2017, 06:49:24 PM »
I like it, I have trouble visualizing the setup though but that's just me.
17
Aurora / Re: Opposed survey
« Last post by Michael Sandy on April 04, 2017, 11:30:41 AM »
So I am expecting all sorts of crazy strategies.

Like dumping recon drones on all the grav survey points.  Like having the nodal base initial BP be mostly missile stocks.  Like truly long ranged missiles for the purpose of constraining the enemy survey, forcing it to stay concentrated within a point defense envelope.  Like fighters waiting with engines off, waiting for an enemy and englobing them.
18
Aurora / Re: Opposed survey
« Last post by Michael Sandy on April 04, 2017, 11:19:51 AM »
Something important here, the victory condition doesn't require any combat.  But turtling just isn't going to be enough.  Stealthed survey ships would be able to get at least a partial victory by surveying the contested system, but that isn't going to be enough if the enemy surveys the contested system and forces or blockades the jump point, and completes their survey of the newly discovered systems as well.

And yes, one side could go with a 3000 point survey force and rush to interdict the enemy jump point, but their enemy would not be obligated to jump in with dribs and drabs, they could have the nodal and capital response fleets hit it together.  They can't wait too long, as a front loaded force might complete the surveys and probes if not pressured.
19
Aurora / Opposed survey
« Last post by Michael Sandy on April 04, 2017, 11:03:34 AM »
Inspired by the Alpha Centauri Arena and the other links here:

http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?topic=9484.0

A mix of strategy, tactics, and priorities.

Similar to the Alpha Centauri Arena, the two sides enter through jump gates about 1 billion km apart, and they have 100 k or so research points available.

But the objective is to survey the intervening space, probe the jump point leading out, and if things haven't been resolved by then, to survey the discovered system(s).

There is at least one jump point out, and it may lead to an El Dorado system, a junction system that shortens the distance to both empires, or some other interesting strategic goal.

Players start with a survey fleet that has used 7 billion km worth of fuel and a year on their morale and maintenance clocks, and 1000 BP.

7 billion km back, they have a nodal response fleet and maintenance base, (fleets there are fueled up and full morale with no time on their clocks), comprising of 3000 BP.

7 billion km further back is the capital, with 6000 BP worth of response force.

Unlike in previous set ups, production technologies won't increase the size of the initial fleets.  It WILL affect the monthly builds from the capital.  Players can try to plan for a long or a short war, rather than the choice being between a larger, low tech fleet and a smaller, higher tech one.

I figure the economy of both sides will be 2000 BP x the square root of the mining, construction, and wealth technology multipliers.

Production will be discounted by the production techs available, like ordnance, fighters and shipyard tech.

Certain technologies will be discounted, at least 50%.

Emergency Cryo, Salvage, Cargo Handling, grav survey, construction brigades and possibly jump engine tech.

There won't be explicit fuel requirements, other than all new production will have traveled 14 billion km, and you have to pay for the fuel.  So fuel efficiency tech isn't a bad idea.  I am toying with the idea of having various small asteroids available, both in the contested systems and in the systems leading to them.

Players will have the option of increasing their survey fleet size, at a cost to the size of their response fleets.  Each BP would cost 3 BP from the nodal response fleet, or 6 from the capital response fleet.  So players can go with larger initial fleets at the expense of immediate reinforcements.  This makes scouting and probing a lot more important. Similarly, the nodal response fleet can be made bigger at the expense of the capital fleet, and vice versa.

I would like to explore what people would arm their survey fleets with if they were competing against players instead of the AI.  And do they go with small expendable, low signature survey craft, or with concentrated survey power, including multiple survey instruments together with an escort.  Do they hunt enemy surveyors, or focus more on completing their own goal?

Some tie breaking conditions:
Capturing enemy ships, crew
Crew losses (which can be reduced if crew pods can be rescued
Surveying beyond the contested system, bonus points if you can find the jump point to the enemy nodal base.
Salvaging enemy technology. Figure that salvaged enemy ships are worth about x10 as much as destroyed enemy ships.

Some caveats, I have little experience, and would not be able to run this, nor would my computer be able to handle it.  This is as much the seed for a campaign as for a one off extended scenario.
20
Starfire / Empires Campaign Scenario Comments
« Last post by Serviceowg on March 28, 2016, 01:46:36 AM »
Hey there.   I havnt looked it over yet, but im all for more campaign ideas.   Is this for the typical 'we all start with worlds and try to build empires' type of campaign?
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 ... 10
SMF spam blocked by CleanTalk