Post reply

Warning - while you were reading 194 new replies have been posted. You may wish to review your post.

Note: this post will not display until it's been approved by a moderator.

Name:
Email:
Subject:
Message icon:

shortcuts: hit alt+s to submit/post or alt+p to preview

Please read the rules before you post!


Topic Summary

Posted by: nakorkren
« on: Today at 09:30:30 AM »

Two 80k-ton "Ruin" class battleships steamrolled 1.4M tons of enemy fleet in the area around their homeworld. The enemy was one generation behind behind in engine tech but otherwise reasonably at parity. One of the two battleships took significant armor damage and some minor internal damage toward the end of the fight because I was too impatient to retreat and allow shields to recharge from the sanding of Size 1 AMMs.

Some takeaways: The enemy fleet did not use shields, which made our particle lances devastating. Our shields easily tanked significant volleys of ASMs, which the railguns and our own AMMs helped pare down. Ran out of AMMs pretty quickly despite having a 5kt magazine full of Size 1 AMMs, so in the future I might reduce the qty of AMMs and increase the qty of railguns, and/or add some small turreted lasers to add FAC/fighter defense and defend against laser-warhead ASMs. Having my civilian tugs bring these ships to the system enables the use of high-power low-efficiency engines, making these battleships easily outpace any tech-parity foes, which in turn enables us to control the range for beam engagement and, using particle lances/beams, out-hit them in DPS at range or stay entirely outside their effective range.

The next phase is ground assault of the homeworld, which is going to suck. I can "see" a quarter million tons of troops, and it's a forested rift valley, which means a TON more troops are in there. I'm going to need many millions of tons of troops to take this world, specialized infantry and lots and lots of logistics.

DN Pegasus  (Ruin class Dreadnought)      79,935 tons       2,856 Crew       20,069 BP       TCS 1,599    TH 15,000    EM 32,130
9382 km/s      Armour 10-165       Shields 1071-476       HTK 479      Sensors 22/16/0/0      DCR 90-11      PPV 310
Maint Life 1.38 Years     MSP 13,776    AFR 1278%    IFR 17.7%    1YR 7,864    5YR 117,964    Max Repair 1,875 MSP
Troop Capacity 1,000 tons     Magazine 1,740 / 0   
Rear Admiral (Lower Half)    Control Rating 5   BRG   AUX   ENG   CIC   FLG   
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months    Morale Check Required   

Ion Drive  EP3750.00 (4)    Power 15000.0    Fuel Use 246.48%    Signature 3750.00    Explosion 30%
Fuel Capacity 7,000,000 Litres    Range 6.4 billion km (7 days at full power)
Epsilon S119 / R476 Shields (9)     Recharge Time 476 seconds (2.3 per second)

Particle Lance-12-40s (10)    Range 240,000km     TS: 9,382 km/s     Power 37-5    ROF 40       
Particle Beam-6-15s (20)    Range 240,000km     TS: 9,382 km/s     Power 15-5    ROF 15       
10cm Railgun V20/C3 (10x4)    Range 20,000km     TS: 9,382 km/s     Power 3-3     RM 20,000 km    ROF 5       
BFC R256-TS8800 (2)     Max Range: 256,000 km   TS: 8,800 km/s    ECCM-2     96 92 88 84 80 77 73 69 65 61
BFC R256-TS7600 (SW) (3)     Max Range: 256,000 km   TS: 7,600 km/s    ECCM-2     96 92 88 84 80 77 73 69 65 61
Magnetic Mirror Fusion Reactor R76-PB10 (2)     Total Power Output 151.7    Exp 7%
Magnetic Mirror Fusion Reactor R42 (1)     Total Power Output 42.3    Exp 5%

S1 Missile Launcher (40)     Missile Size: 1    Rate of Fire 10
MFC FC6-R5 (20)     Range 6.9m km    Resolution 5   ECCM-1

MD1284k-250t (1)     GPS 80     Range 14.3m km    MCR 1.3m km    Resolution 1
EM2-16 (1)     Sensitivity 16     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  31.6m km
Thermal Sensor TH2-22 (1)     Sensitivity 22     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  37.1m km

Electronic Warfare Jammers:   Fire Control 2    Missile 3   
Posted by: serger
« on: May 29, 2024, 05:58:11 AM »

Hal Clement's Cycle of Fire, cool. :)
Posted by: Kaiser
« on: May 27, 2024, 11:33:43 AM »

Quote from: Steve Walmsley on May 27, 2024, 09:52:07 AM
Yes, I have a similar one in my current campaign. I can't decide whether to just exclude very eccentric planets as potential home worlds, or leave it alone for flavour. The NPR is likely to correct the problem anyway by building lots of infrastructure.

Do not remove it then, especially if the NPR can handle it.
Posted by: Steve Walmsley
« on: May 27, 2024, 09:52:07 AM »

Yes, I have a similar one in my current campaign. I can't decide whether to just exclude very eccentric planets as potential home worlds, or leave it alone for flavour. The NPR is likely to correct the problem anyway by building lots of infrastructure.
Posted by: Kiero
« on: May 27, 2024, 09:15:17 AM »

Quote from: Steve Walmsley on May 27, 2024, 07:16:54 AM
I assume their home world has a very eccentric orbit?



Yup 0.41
Water Vapor is messing things up for them, periodically.
Posted by: Steve Walmsley
« on: May 27, 2024, 07:16:54 AM »

Quote from: Kiero on May 27, 2024, 02:13:26 AM
A bizarre race has been incorporated into the empire.

Temperature range: -16.47 to 128.66



I assume their home world has a very eccentric orbit?
Posted by: Kiero
« on: May 27, 2024, 02:13:26 AM »

A bizarre race has been incorporated into the empire.

Temperature range: -16.47 to 128.66

Posted by: ISN
« on: May 07, 2024, 07:51:21 AM »

Quote from: vorpal+5 on May 07, 2024, 03:34:21 AM
That's a cool design approach! But what about jump drives? Do you need one for each, of the appropriate category?
Do you regret not adding a few "sublight propellers" to the military section?

Yep, they both need their own jump drives. It's not a very efficient system! But the role-play is fun.
The military section does have its own engines, etc. It's fully self-sufficient besides the relatively short range. I just didn't want to try my chances against the giant Romulan fleet without backup -- although it turned out most of the ships were very old, so the fight ended up being a bit of a turkey shoot.
Posted by: vorpal+5
« on: May 07, 2024, 03:34:21 AM »

That's a cool design approach! But what about jump drives? Do you need one for each, of the appropriate category?
Do you regret not adding a few "sublight propellers" to the military section?
Posted by: ISN
« on: May 05, 2024, 08:34:50 PM »

Update on my Star Trek game: I've found a design that I really like for my exploration cruisers. I split the ship into two, a 40k ton commercial "saucer section" that tugs around a 26k ton secondary hull. In addition to the tug the saucer has hangars for survey craft and some fuel and maintenance reserves, while the secondary hull has military engines, a fairly short range, a long deployment time, and a battery of particle beamsphasers and photon torpedoes. During survey missions they normally stay attached, but if the ship gets into trouble the secondary hull can separate and fight at full speed.

This brings us to the story of the Horatio. USS Horatio, an Ambassador-class starship, was scouting Romulan space when it ran into some Romulan fuel harvesters with a light escort. The Federation and the Romulans are currently at war, so the Horatio attacked and destroyed all of them besides an escort cruiser that surrendered. The captured ship can't go anywhere under its own power -- in fact there aren't many undamaged components left -- but I wanted to try to recover it, so the Horatio's saucer tugged it to a safer system where a recovery vessel could pick it up. The secondary hull remained where it was while the ship's shuttles conducted survey operations. Meanwhile, though, a fleet of Romulan warships took up station at the jump point into the system, cutting off the Horatio's saucer from the rest of the ship! So now I'm assembling a fleet to retake the jump point so that I can reunite the Horatio's saucer and secondary hull.  8)
Posted by: Kaiser
« on: May 04, 2024, 02:22:46 PM »

The USS Endeavor, an old space shuttle converted to an assault ship, being launched by the Dreadnought USS California of the 1st attack fleet, tries to board the enemy raider Bonaventure at 8000Km/s, disabled years before during a space battle between carriers.

I knew it was somewhere there, floating out in the space, just waiting for my special forces.
Posted by: Garfunkel
« on: May 03, 2024, 09:10:44 AM »

Oh, he started a new one! I thought you were reposting the old one. Cheers, will read for sure.
Posted by: randakar
« on: May 03, 2024, 08:51:24 AM »

Just popping in to post a link to a long writeup of a game over on the Paradox forums, made by Blue Emu - https://forum.paradoxplaza.com/forum/threads/sirius-business-a-c-aurora-forum-game-v2-5.1621469

Perhaps some of you might find this interesting to read.   


Fixed the link
Posted by: Steve Walmsley
« on: May 03, 2024, 04:15:54 AM »

Quote from: skoormit on May 02, 2024, 08:15:37 AM
Quote from: AlStar on May 02, 2024, 07:18:21 AM
If you want to maximize your potential returns, scan the asteroids with the highest gravity - specifically, from what I've seen, asteroids that don't require LG infrastructure tend to be more likely to have minerals, and if they have minerals, they're more likely to have (very) high concentrations.

Hmm...this is intriguing. Now I'm going to have to do some correlation testing.

Then again, my primary use for asteroids is orbital mining, and that requires small asteroids.

Still, it would be interesting to find an optimizable survey pattern.

Higher mass means the RNG is weighted towards larger deposits, but lower accessibility. Lower mass means the opposite. This is why super-terrestrial worlds tends to have huge deposits but often minimal accessibility, whereas asteroids usually have very high accessibility, but small deposits. Higher mass asteroids will still tend to still have higher accessibilities, but a better chance of a larger deposit.

Systems with younger stars are weighted toward a higher chance of deposits being present.
Posted by: Andrew
« on: May 02, 2024, 09:43:19 AM »

My Terraformer teams are learning the difference between ammonia and aetesium, you should not be pumping one into the atmosphere of a nearly habitable planet