Project Starshield class Gunboat 3,000 tons 82 Crew 237.6 BP TCS 60 TH 150 EM 0
2500 km/s Armour 3-18 Shields 0-0 HTK 19 Sensors 1/1/0/0 DCR 1 PPV 7
Maint Life 5.10 Years MSP 246 AFR 41% IFR 0.6% 1YR 16 5YR 237 Max Repair 75 MSP
Commander Control Rating 1 BRG
Intended Deployment Time: 2 months Morale Check Required
Aliiance Drives NCET-150/1250 (1) Power 150 Fuel Use 79.81% Signature 150 Explosion 12%
Fuel Capacity 175,000 Litres Range 13.2 billion km (60 days at full power)
PSS-E1/Laser (120mm) (1) Range 40,000km TS: 2,500 km/s Power 4-2 RM 10,000 km ROF 10
PSS-E1/Railgun (100mm) (1x4) Range 20,000km TS: 2,500 km/s Power 3-3 Accuracy Modifier 100% RM 20,000 km ROF 5
PSS-E1/FCS (PRIMARY) (1) Max Range: 40,000 km TS: 2,500 km/s 47 31 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PSS-E1/FCS (PD/AUX) (1) Max Range: 20,000 km TS: 2,500 km/s 31 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PSS-E1/PW Reactor System (1) Total Power Output 5 Exp 5%
Mk. I Experimental GravScope (Active Detection Module) (1) GPS 1 Range 1.3m km MCR 137.4k km Resolution 1
Mk. I Experimental GravScope (TH Calibration Module) (1) Sensitivity 1 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 7.9m km
Mk. I Experimental GravScope (EM Calibration Module) (1) Sensitivity 1 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 7.9m km
This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
Project Starlance class Gunboat 3,000 tons 80 Crew 241.4 BP TCS 60 TH 150 EM 0
2500 km/s Armour 3-18 Shields 0-0 HTK 19 Sensors 1/1/0/0 DCR 2 PPV 8
Maint Life 5.54 Years MSP 260 AFR 36% IFR 0.5% 1YR 14 5YR 214 Max Repair 75 MSP
Commander Control Rating 1 BRG
Intended Deployment Time: 2 months Morale Check Required
Aliiance Drives NCET-150/1250 (1) Power 150 Fuel Use 79.81% Signature 150 Explosion 12%
Fuel Capacity 175,000 Litres Range 13.2 billion km (60 days at full power)
PSS-E1/Laser (120mm) (1) Range 40,000km TS: 2,500 km/s Power 4-2 RM 10,000 km ROF 10
PSL-E1/HPM (120mm) (1) Range 40,000km TS: 2,500 km/s Power 4-2 RM 40,000 km ROF 10
Guardian Fire Control System (PRIMARY) (1) Max Range: 40,000 km TS: 2,500 km/s 47 31 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
PSL-E1/PW Reactor System (1) Total Power Output 4 Exp 5%
Mk. II Experimental GravScope (Active Detection Module) (1) GPS 1 Range 1.3m km MCR 137.4k km Resolution 1
Mk. II Experimental GravScope (TH Calibration Module) (1) Sensitivity 1 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 7.9m km
Mk. II Experimental GravScope (EM Calibration Module) (1) Sensitivity 1 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 7.9m km
This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
Dylan class Frigate 5,995 tons 151 Crew 587.9 BP TCS 120 TH 400 EM 0
3336 km/s Armour 4-29 Shields 0-0 HTK 42 Sensors 5/5/0/0 DCR 1 PPV 21
Maint Life 2.01 Years MSP 461 AFR 288% IFR 4.0% 1YR 153 5YR 2,292 Max Repair 100 MSP
Commander Control Rating 1 BRG
Intended Deployment Time: 9 months Morale Check Required
Kraus MNP200-25 Engine (2) Power 400 Fuel Use 63.25% Signature 200 Explosion 10%
Fuel Capacity 400,000 Litres Range 19 billion km (65 days at full power)
Woodward & Evans 3" QF Close-in Railgun (7x4) Range 10,000km TS: 5,000 km/s Power 3-3 RM 10,000 km ROF 5
Trawinski-Maczka T4 Close-in Gun Fire Control (2) Max Range: 20,000 km TS: 4,000 km/s 50 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Bazaine-Preher Pebble Bed Reactor R9 (3) Total Power Output 27.3 Exp 5%
Bergström Electronics Industries Active Sensor R18-100 (1) GPS 1000 Range 18.5m km Resolution 100
Bergström Electronics Industries R4-50 Missile Detection Array (1) GPS 10 Range 4m km MCR 359k km Resolution 1
Bergström Electronics Industries EM Sensor EM1.0-5.0 (1) Sensitivity 5 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 17.7m km
Bergström Electronics Industries Thermal Sensor TH1.0-5.0 (1) Sensitivity 5 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 17.7m km
This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
stuff
Your 10cm Railgun is mated to an 80,000 km Beam FCS, while having a 10,000 km range. On the one hand that's gonna be one hell of an accurate gun, on the other hand... most of that accuracy is wasted.
Replacing that 10cm Railgun with a 12cm Railgun with 20,000 km range and Capacitor 2 would give you 50% faster Rate of Fire, 400% more range and could still be run on a reactor that has half the output of them one you currently have mounted.
She'll take 12cm Railgun / laser fire and Strength 3 Warheads without venting atmo...
or just drop some deployment time. You have 120 days of deployment, but only 58 days of fuel.
Code: [Select]Dylan class Frigate 5,995 tons
stuff
Just to point out, the OP's ship has 4x4 railguns, not 1x4, which makes many of your comments incorrect - notably, the Starshield gunboat does not have 3x the firepower (actually about 3/4, which is in line with the tonnage difference), and the R4 reactor is the correct power output for the class.QuoteYour 10cm Railgun is mated to an 80,000 km Beam FCS, while having a 10,000 km range. On the one hand that's gonna be one hell of an accurate gun, on the other hand... most of that accuracy is wasted.
Hardly wasted. Since minimum range is 10k km, the 80k km BFC range ensures 88% base accuracy, while a 20k km BFC gives only 50% accuracy. Given that OP's ship has four railguns I'd say the extra tonnage is very much worth it in terms of effective fire volume especially for PD purposes.
I usually try to get around 80k to 100k range for a PD fire control to get close to 90% base accuracy. Trying to push to 95% is not economical, but the difference between 90% and 50% (for 20k km range) is well worth it.QuoteReplacing that 10cm Railgun with a 12cm Railgun with 20,000 km range and Capacitor 2 would give you 50% faster Rate of Fire, 400% more range and could still be run on a reactor that has half the output of them one you currently have mounted.
Besides the reactor bit already mentioned, this is not how railguns work. A 12 cm railgun requires 6 power, not 4, so Cap 2 would only give ROF 15 which is the same as what the given railgun has.QuoteShe'll take 12cm Railgun / laser fire and Strength 3 Warheads without venting atmo...
Four armor layers are actually proof against penetration by a 15 cm laser and any missile warhead below 24 damage, of course assuming no prior armor damage as enough effective DPS will shred any armor. It's a pretty good armor breakpoint if you want a durable ship especially for a railgun fleet which relies on armor to win beam engagements.Quoteor just drop some deployment time. You have 120 days of deployment, but only 58 days of fuel.
I constantly see people say to drop deployment time to match fuel consumption and I don't understand this. Do people not ever keep ships on station for an extended period away from a recreational center/colony? I think the deployment time is fine as it is to give you a buffer for picketing JPs, escort missions for slower commercial ships, etc. Cutting it to 60 days will only net about 35 tons anyways due to the cube-root dependence of the crew quarters requirement.
I apologize as I'm not meaning to pick too hard on your post, but there's a lot of misinformation that could confuse OP or others.Code: [Select]Dylan class Frigate 5,995 tons
This is a lovely ship but it could be far more beautiful with another 5,000 litres of fuel. ;)
Quoteor just drop some deployment time. You have 120 days of deployment, but only 58 days of fuel.
I constantly see people say to drop deployment time to match fuel consumption and I don't understand this. Do people not ever keep ships on station for an extended period away from a recreational center/colony? I think the deployment time is fine as it is to give you a buffer for picketing JPs, escort missions for slower commercial ships, etc. Cutting it to 60 days will only net about 35 tons anyways due to the cube-root dependence of the crew quarters requirement.
Code: [Select]Dylan class Frigate 5,995 tons
This is a lovely ship but it could be far more beautiful with another 5,000 litres of fuel. ;)
I've never understood the desire to have the same deployment time as fuel days, except to ensure that deployment is more than fuel days.
I always worry about needing to camp a jump point for extended periods when I think about reducing deployment time, so I normally go with 12 months for warships and up to a few days to a month for fighters.
That said for a small ship with low tech, and the mission goal of shooting down missiles I think 4 months is fine.
I've never understood the desire to have the same deployment time as fuel days, except to ensure that deployment is more than fuel days.
I always worry about needing to camp a jump point for extended periods when I think about reducing deployment time, so I normally go with 12 months for warships and up to a few days to a month for fighters.
That said for a small ship with low tech, and the mission goal of shooting down missiles I think 4 months is fine.
- I'll be honest, the idea of using my ships for impromptu Jump Point camping never occurred to me, as I so seldom guard my Jump Points at all. In VB6, I used PDCs with super long range missiles and a combination of DSTS and Picket Ships to defend large swaths of territory... Jump Points often included. In C#, I've switched over to a combination of STOs, fighter garrisons, and rapid response ships for the same purpose. With DSTSs and "Relay" Stations to go with it.
- My problem with non-matching Deployment / Fuel is that I have tonnage that is "wasted" on Deployment range that I can't "use". Fuel Tankers have this odd issue whereby they can get shot at and die. My warships already have that same issue, which stems from the whole problem of "going into a war zone". I've done plenty of thinking on this, but a thread titled "Re: Early defence." doesn't seem an appropriate place to put it. I'll post my thoughts elsewhere upon request, if anyone wants to read them. :) Long & Short of it though: I'm not against Tankers, relying on Tankers isn't "wrong" or "worse" or "bad", I just don't like using 'em for the most part.
Isnt it easier to use fighters&missles for Sol system protection early in game?
As far as i understand - main goal is to secure everything inside Saturn orbit, since Earth & Luna & Mars are first colonies and Jupiter & Saturn are primary fuel sources early in game.
So:
Fighters with deployment time ~3-6 days based on Earth / Luna / Mars.
~4 asteroid colonies in Asteroid Belt to cover all directions with DSTs and 1 Cargo + 1 Refueling + 1 Ordinance transfer stations with some fuel and ordinance supply for refueling and 2nd, 3rd, 4th strike capability - fighters return to those colonies for refueling and ordinance pickup after mission.
After some time same scheme repeats and extends using Jupiter and Saturn Moons.
In the end:
Earth / Mars / Venus / Ganymede / Callisto / Titan / Ceres with fighter bases + resupply colonies in Asteroid Belt + resupply colonies on Jupiter-Saturn orbit.
Isnt it easier to use fighters&missles for Sol system protection early in game?
As far as i understand - main goal is to secure everything inside Saturn orbit, since Earth & Luna & Mars are first colonies and Jupiter & Saturn are primary fuel sources early in game.
So:
Fighters with deployment time ~3-6 days based on Earth / Luna / Mars.
~4 asteroid colonies in Asteroid Belt to cover all directions with DSTs and 1 Cargo + 1 Refueling + 1 Ordinance transfer stations with some fuel and ordinance supply for refueling and 2nd, 3rd, 4th strike capability - fighters return to those colonies for refueling and ordinance pickup after mission.
After some time same scheme repeats and extends using Jupiter and Saturn Moons.
In the end:
Earth / Mars / Venus / Ganymede / Callisto / Titan / Ceres with fighter bases + resupply colonies in Asteroid Belt + resupply colonies on Jupiter-Saturn orbit.
Yes... I agree that for defensive purposes you can be way more efficient.
My Patrol Ships/Crafts usually also are way smaller and only carry a single weapons system. Early on that is usually a 12cm Rail-gun for some extra range. These are NOT combat ships... they are there to patrol and mostly intercept any non military enemy assets that stumble into the system or any adjacent system they are stationed at. Their main role is scouting and patrolling and they rarely are above 3000t usually closer to 2000t depending on the system I want to have on them. A patrol ship is as I said not built for engaging enemy military ships unless they are scouts or something.
Other system defence assets are better in the form of fighters or FAC in some form using the bases themselves as a carrier with heavy PD and Beam defences that are way more efficient than what any ship can bring.
As the OP said though... their missile technology is not good enough to use missiles so the ship they got is pretty much it for them in terms of ship design. I would guess that investigating a bit more into missile design or better beam weapons should be a priority if there is any threat to Earth or Sol system.
I think that we as players often over engineer our design because they seem cool instead of what we actually need, nothing wrong in that in general... just a reflection on what I often see.
Gals G9 class Patrol Ship 2 494 tons 88 Crew 2 891.9 BP TCS 50 TH 38 EM 0
25062 km/s Armour 5-16 Shields 0-0 HTK 21 Sensors 0/0/0/0 DCR 3 PPV 18
Maint Life 6.25 Years MSP 2 174 AFR 17% IFR 0.2% 1YR 96 5YR 1 433 Max Repair 2187.5 MSP
Troop Capacity 250 tons Boarding Capable
Commander Control Rating 1 BRG
Intended Deployment Time: 1 months Morale Check Required
Gas Core AM Drive 200% EP1250.00 (1) Power 1250 Fuel Use 50.60% Signature 37.50 Explosion 20%
Fuel Capacity 250 000 Litres Range 35.7 billion km (16 days at full power)
Gauss Cannon R600-100 (3x8) Range 60 000km TS: 25 062 km/s Power 0-0 RM 60 000 km ROF 5
Beam Fire Control R125-TS30000 (1) Max Range: 125 000 km TS: 30 000 km/s 92 84 76 68 60 52 44 36 28 20
Active Search Sensor AS12-R1 (5%) (1) GPS 10 Range 12.6m km MCR 1.1m km Resolution 1
Active Search Sensor AS34-R20 (5%) (1) GPS 200 Range 34.2m km Resolution 20
Active Search Sensor AS58-R100 (5%) (1) GPS 1000 Range 58.6m km Resolution 100
This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
You do realize though that deployment time take much less space on a ship and you can't extend deployment unless you have a base or recreation facility where you also need to stay for an extended period. Fuel you can at any time just replenish in a few hours.
it is way more common to need far more deployment than you need range... when doing battle manoeuvring you often even move ships very slowly to avoid detection by IR signature as another example.
Therefore from a logistical and strategic perspective most ships have a deployment requirement and a tactical range requirement and they often don't align all that well. They can... but quite often they don't.
Let's say that Ship A has enough fuel for 6 Months worth of Burn Time and enough Deployment for 6 Months worth of operations.
Now let's say Ship B has enough fuel for 3 Months worth of Burn Time and enough Deployment for 6 Months worth of operations.
Finally, let's say Ship C is a Commercial Tanker for Ship B, due to it being Commercial it only needs 3 Months worth of Deployment Time and carries 3 Months worth of fuel for Ship B.
Example B:Let's say Ship A and Ship B have the same amount of fuel and Deployment as before, but now we have no Ship C in the equation.
Ship B is designed to spend 1 Month at reduced power, enabling it to travel for 6 Months at that speed. It then can use it's remaining fuel for high-speed maneuvers.
So while Ship A can go the full 6 Months at full speed, Ship B cannot and does not, instead dividing it's consumption between a strategic "Cruise Speed" and a tactical "Combat Speed"
--- So in Example A, Ship A and Ship B both carry an amount of Fuel equal to their Deployment, but Ship B offloads some of the fuel to Ship C. In Example B on the other hand, Ship A and Ship B are still carrying an amount of Fuel equal to their Deployment, but Ship B allocates it in such a way that it carries less Fuel to achieve the same endurance at the cost of having less speed available to it overall. In either Example, an overage of either Fuel OR Deployment would result in wasted tonnage, with the exception of redundancy with regards to Battle Damage or time spent loitering on station. Both of these, however, are deliberate design choices rather than some natural or normal thing. Exceptions, rather than the rule, so to speak.
--- Allow me to explain, and please bear with me as I'm quite bad at doing so. Dyscalculia is a bitch and half and then some. :P I'm going to ignore the Range as a function of distance because while relevant in practice it is irrelevant for the purposes of expressing this concept. Range in terms of distance is still governed by how long it takes to get there and is thus arbitrary with respect to Deployment Times and Burn Times, AKA "X Days at Full Power" The following examples are but two of the possibilities that I know of.
Example A:Code: [Select]Let's say that Ship A has enough fuel for 6 Months worth of Burn Time and enough Deployment for 6 Months worth of operations.
Example B:
Now let's say Ship B has enough fuel for 3 Months worth of Burn Time and enough Deployment for 6 Months worth of operations.
Finally, let's say Ship C is a Commercial Tanker for Ship B, due to it being Commercial it only needs 3 Months worth of Deployment Time and carries 3 Months worth of fuel for Ship B.Code: [Select]Let's say Ship A and Ship B have the same amount of fuel and Deployment as before, but now we have no Ship C in the equation.
--- So in Example A, Ship A and Ship B both carry an amount of Fuel equal to their Deployment, but Ship B offloads some of the fuel to Ship C. In Example B on the other hand, Ship A and Ship B are still carrying an amount of Fuel equal to their Deployment, but Ship B allocates it in such a way that it carries less Fuel to achieve the same endurance at the cost of having less speed available to it overall. In either Example, an overage of either Fuel OR Deployment would result in wasted tonnage, with the exception of redundancy with regards to Battle Damage or time spent loitering on station. Both of these, however, are deliberate design choices rather than some natural or normal thing. Exceptions, rather than the rule, so to speak.
Ship B is designed to spend 1 Month at reduced power, enabling it to travel for 6 Months at that speed. It then can use it's remaining fuel for high-speed maneuvers.
So while Ship A can go the full 6 Months at full speed, Ship B cannot and does not, instead dividing it's consumption between a strategic "Cruise Speed" and a tactical "Combat Speed"
Here is the revision. Many of you are right it`s nearly a moot point building it but I still want some protection. I`ll do the STO and jump point defence as well.Looks much better. I'd still recommend dropping the armour to 1. It takes up a lot of tonnage that could be used for more weapons and sensors, or to make the craft cheaper and faster to build.
Did any of you actually discover low level aliens that are for example at Nuclear Thermal capacity.It is possible, just bit rare. I'll spoiler the explanation in case you don't want to know the details: