Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

Continue

7 (33.3%)

Continue, but with different system (Suggestions?)

1 (4.8%)

Restart with different system

3 (14.3%)

Other

1 (4.8%)

I watch/read this.

9 (42.9%)

Total Members Voted: 13

[Zako]

Dude, we NEED more generators working. Badly. How are we going to power the main engines without the proper power sources? Forget repairing the main engines and buying the pulse reactor and battery, just repair 2 reactors instead. Also, sell those medical supplies for big bucks near the infected zone and we can then repair the main engines. Also, save money by not converting a docking bay and using that money to repair an aux engine instead. Maybe if we have enough money left over, we can repair another.

[GreatWyrmGold]

A mix of Ukrainian's and Zako's plans sounds good to me.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

Dude, we NEED more generators working. Badly.

For what? Seriously why do we need two more reactors if we'll have no  main engine to use those energy? If we buy 2 reactors we'll have 6 power, while our current max consumption is only 5... With turrets and aux engines it will be at most 5.8. We'll have a wasted power
I see no reason to buy 2 reactors

How are we going to power the main engines without the proper power sources?

You don't need to use all systems at once... It's not a problem to not fire lasers sometimes. Remember the last battle, had we main engine working, we would get to that beacon much sooner. And please, reread about advantage of pulse + battery. if we use 0.5 energy per turn for battery we need 10 combat rounds to lose the same 0.5 we could get from the repaired reactor. For 5 battle turns we may use battery in +1 regime, getting more energy, than we would if we used.

In my plan we'll have 4.5 power generation per turn + 5 power stored
Our consumption
Lasers 2 power
Rail guns 1 power
Plasma turret 0.5 power
Two Quad turrets... I don't know, I assume something between 0.25-0.5 power. Railguns Should be very power hungry
Life support 1 power
Main engine 1 power
Aux engines 0.5 power
6.25-6.5  power total. With batteries we can run   all systems for 2 combat rounds. Life support can always get turned off for round or two, it's not that dangerous
Point defense is not always active, we may shut down main engine and dodge by using only aux engines, we may not fire some power hungry lasers. We just should be flexible in our power usage, not go "let's have more energy than we can use" route

Also, save money by not converting a docking bay and using that money to repair an aux engine instead.

I'd rather not travel without decent amount of cargo space, it may lead to missed opportunities And why do you want to repair aux engines so badly? Those will not add us any speed, only some maneuverability

[Aseaheru]

Im with UR on this one.

[GreatWyrmGold]

I also agree, but why are we converting a docking bay to anything?

[Ukrainian Ranger]

Because cargo space is useful and versatile resource. Especially considering the fact that it is likely better defended than regular cargo bays. We can survive on 800 cargo total, but we'll miss opportunities for sure

In fact there are several ways to save some money for fixing reactor\adding fourth turret

a) don't converting the dock bay...  (500 credits) just use it for bulk cargoes that will not spoil much in harsh conditions (metal, raw materials, hull plating, railgun ammo and so on. ) disadvantage - we will have some problems with loading\unloading that cargo, especially using it mid combat. and we'll have only 800 easily damageable cargo space for things that can't tolerate bad conditions
b) Don't arming fighter and selling them both instead... It gives us 1800 more credits, but disadvantage is huge - we lose fighter support
c) Don't use tedaline to replace LQ patches, use duranim instead, that will save 600 credits. Minus - not only it'll make our armor weaker, we'll lose the opportunity to buy aeracapability later
d) Changing one or two quad railgun turret to flak guns. Save 300 per a piece. Minus: We have easier access to proper fighter railgun ammo than to flak ammo(in fact we can load same things in fighters\main guns\turrets, good logistical advantage ) Railguns have longer range, great against enemy fighters and more versatile + I hope for small discount for buying 12 in one run. In fact if we can't negotiate any discount, taking two different turrets (flak +10 ammo for it  and quad railgun) looks better. Turrets is a very important part of our ship and one of the hardest decision to make, IMO

Questions to GM
What is recharge rate of the battery?
What is maximum discharge rate of the battery
What amount of power quad railgun turret, chemical laser and flak cannon use?
Can we see stats of the escape pod? (hits\armor\cargo space) ?
What is expected selling price of antibiotics? I mean if we keep anything that needed to treat injuries and sell rest of the med supplies away?
Can we repeat the trick with salvaging reactor parts and convert 4 badly damaged and salvaged reactors into 1 working reactor  and 3 piles of totally unrepairable scrap? 
Can we spend one disassembled broken reactor to make repair of another reactor cheaper?
And what is selling price of the plasma? (I really like it and very-very reluctant to sell   but it's power hungry (same as one main gun laser! ), short ranged and more suited to use against highly armored threats, not typical point defense targets. Only if we get close to another big ship, plasma will shine.  If we can sell it for a right price, than we may consider selling it and arming the turret with something cheaper and less power hungry

[Thecard]

As long as we get a real medbay, I'm gonna have to vote UK.

[GreatWyrmGold]

If we're getting rid of one of the small craft, why not save money and put the cargo in the docking bay?

[Ukrainian Ranger]

If we're getting rid of one of the small craft, why not save money and put the cargo in the docking bay?

Because there are no right conditions for storing the cargo (temperature\atmospheric control)
For example: If we go civilian reactor+battery combo, we need 200 space to store one disassembled reactor and current dock is clearly unsuitable for that

[GreatWyrmGold]

If we're getting rid of one of the small craft, why not save money and put the cargo in the docking bay?

Because there are no right conditions for storing the cargo (temperature\atmospheric control)
For example: If we go civilian reactor+battery combo, we need 200 space to store one disassembled reactor and current dock is clearly unsuitable for that

Alright, which craft are we getting rid of and why?

[Ukrainian Ranger]

Well, we are selling the cargo shuttle, it's in the plan above. 1250 credits from that, and after converting dock place we'll have a net 750 credits and 250 cargo space gain. The only problem - trading with planets, but aerocapability of Salvation is not that expensive, we will do it later, structural fixes should be done sooner or later anyway

BTW currently we have 4\5 dock spaces, after the sell and conversion we'll have 3\4 dock places. Empty dock place is useful, too because it may allow us to accept someone in(remember pirate fighters, had we no free space, we couldn't get them in.)

IMO, Pirate fighters are pretty crappy and I would suggest to sell them, (that's save us 1800 credits) If I wasn't sure that majority will be against it . Am I wrong and someone agree that turrets\reactor\engine\aerocapability\whatever else  are more important than two crappy vessels?
Further bonus is that then we may sell\disassemble those crappy hand made missiles (warheads can go to those stealth missiles, fuel to fuel tanks, metal used for other things) , because i'd not risk putting that crap in our missile launchers

[GreatWyrmGold]

I'd rather sell a fighter than our only cargo shuttle.

[Ukrainian Ranger]

Fighter costs 600 credits, shuttle 1250 credits

And what uses of the cargo shuttle do we have? I see NONE

[GreatWyrmGold]

Getting planetside?

[Ukrainian Ranger]

If that is  important for you, let's spend  1300 credits (50 more than cost of the shuttle) and make make Salvation aerocapable. We need structural fixes anyway

But I  think it can wait until the next wave of upgrades, it's not like we need to go in atmosphere right now

This shuttle was totally useless right from the moment we left the scrapyard and I suspect that it will stay that way forever