Print

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

[Lightningfalcon]

Error in mnuAddTheme_Click

Error 3420 was generated by DAO.recordset
Object Invalid or no longer set






Are there any good tutorials I can use for getting started then?

[Flying Dice]

Ah, now I remember. Error 3420 is something of a generic error that can refer to a number of different things. The context text doesn't return any results from the Aurora forums, but it would seem to indicate that the problem might be related to missing files for the empire or commander theme. If the error appeared when you created a new game, it is probably related to the themes you chose for your empire. If it came up at some point during gameplay, I'd hazard a guess that it has something to do with the theme assigned to an NPR or one of the special races. Error 424 is also related to missing database objects. I'd suggest seeing if restarting the game fixes the issue before doing anything else.


Lavender did a decent set of video tutorials, though like Steve's they are incomplete (and now out of date). Honestly, once you run out of ground on the tutorials, just wing it and pose questions here. Same thing as I did, same thing as I've told everyone else. 

[Lightningfalcon]

Thanks for the help.
Since it's video tutorials, I'll wait until I finish this essay I have due Thursday that I have yet to start.  And until I finish playing the new Assassins Creed. 

[andrea]

since people have been posting ship designs... may I have an opinion on this?

Code: [Select]

Ark Royal II class Destroyer    36,800 tons     999 Crew     10781.9 BP      TCS 736  TH 3200  EM 0
4347 km/s     Armour 20-98     Shields 0-0     Sensors 1/550/0/0     Damage Control Rating 42     PPV 88
Maint Life 3.3 Years     MSP 7860    AFR 338%    IFR 4.7%    1YR 1092    5YR 16377    Max Repair 1050 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 24 months    Spare Berths 1   

800 EP IF -50*080 (4)    Power 800    Fuel Use 14.31%    Signature 800    Exp 8%
Fuel Capacity 1,700,000 Litres    Range 58.1 billion km   (154 days at full power)

CIWS-320 (4x8)    Range 1000 km     TS: 32000 km/s     ROF 5       Base 50% To Hit
12cm Railgun V7/C6 (8x4)    Range 140,000km     TS: 8000 km/s     Power 6-6     RM 7    ROF 5        2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1
25cm Railgun V5/C5 (15s) (6x4)    Range 250,000km     TS: 8000 km/s     Power 15-5     RM 5    ROF 15        5 5 5 5 5 4 3 3 2 2
Fire Control S16 160-32000 (2)    Max Range: 320,000 km   TS: 32000 km/s     97 94 91 88 84 81 78 75 72 69
Fire Control S04 160-8000 (2)    Max Range: 320,000 km   TS: 8000 km/s     97 94 91 88 84 81 78 75 72 69
Magnetic Confinement Fusion Reactor Technology PB-1 (8)     Total Power Output 80    Armour 0    Exp 5%

Active Search Sensor MR117-R1-PD (1)     GPS 840     Range 117.6m km    Resolution 1
Active Search Sensor MR730-R40 (mainship) (1)     GPS 42000     Range 730.5m km    Resolution 40
EM Detection Sensor EM50-550 (1)     Sensitivity 550     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  550m km

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes


[Karlito]

You'll probably want to replace the EM passive sensor with a much more useful thermal sensor. Also, it seems a little slow for a beam warship. The ship needs to be significantly faster than it's target to close to beam weapon range and I think that ship would probably have a lot of trouble catching most precursor designs.

[revo]

since people have been posting ship designs... may I have an opinion on this?

Code: [Select]

Ark Royal II class Destroyer    36,800 tons     999 Crew     10781.9 BP      TCS 736  TH 3200  EM 0
4347 km/s     Armour 20-98     Shields 0-0     Sensors 1/550/0/0     Damage Control Rating 42     PPV 88
Maint Life 3.3 Years     MSP 7860    AFR 338%    IFR 4.7%    1YR 1092    5YR 16377    Max Repair 1050 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 24 months    Spare Berths 1   

800 EP IF -50*080 (4)    Power 800    Fuel Use 14.31%    Signature 800    Exp 8%
Fuel Capacity 1,700,000 Litres    Range 58.1 billion km   (154 days at full power)

CIWS-320 (4x8)    Range 1000 km     TS: 32000 km/s     ROF 5       Base 50% To Hit
12cm Railgun V7/C6 (8x4)    Range 140,000km     TS: 8000 km/s     Power 6-6     RM 7    ROF 5        2 2 2 2 2 2 2 1 1 1
25cm Railgun V5/C5 (15s) (6x4)    Range 250,000km     TS: 8000 km/s     Power 15-5     RM 5    ROF 15        5 5 5 5 5 4 3 3 2 2
Fire Control S16 160-32000 (2)    Max Range: 320,000 km   TS: 32000 km/s     97 94 91 88 84 81 78 75 72 69
Fire Control S04 160-8000 (2)    Max Range: 320,000 km   TS: 8000 km/s     97 94 91 88 84 81 78 75 72 69
Magnetic Confinement Fusion Reactor Technology PB-1 (8)     Total Power Output 80    Armour 0    Exp 5%

Active Search Sensor MR117-R1-PD (1)     GPS 840     Range 117.6m km    Resolution 1
Active Search Sensor MR730-R40 (mainship) (1)     GPS 42000     Range 730.5m km    Resolution 40
EM Detection Sensor EM50-550 (1)     Sensitivity 550     Detect Sig Strength 1000:  550m km

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes


Pretty good but man that is a massive AFR. I'm pretty new so may i ask the point in turreting the 25cm's?

[Flying Dice]

Other than swapping the EM sensor for a thermal sensor, there aren't really any glaring issues. It's a tad slow, but has enough armor and PD to handle a fair amount of fire. One note: are you planning on using the 12cm railguns as additional PD? The high tracking speed for their FC indicates yes. You don't really need the FC to track that fast, as railguns can't be turreted. One thing to consider would be to drop one pair of the FCs, as they both have the same range, and can be used for either set of weapons. Removing the ones with 32000km/s tracking speed would drop a decent chunk of tonnage, which would in turn give you a bit more speed.

@revo: Railguns can't be turreted. That's one of their two disadvantages (the other being slightly shorter ranged than lasers at equivalent tech).

[Karlito]

Pretty good but man that is a massive AFR. I'm pretty new so may i ask the point in turreting the 25cm's?

A few people went over this above, but the only number that matters with regards to engineering spaces is the estimated Maintenance Life. On a large and complicated ship you might have one component (out of thousands) break per day, but it doesn't matter as long as you have the supplies to repair it.

[andrea]

they aren't turreted. railguns just shoot 4 projectiles.
 and AFR isn't a problem. what you should look at is maintenance life. At some point it is more efficent to just bring more maintenance supplies. as long I can get it to last 3 years, I am happy.

I think I'll take the advice on the sensor. originally, I went for EM since it doubled as active sensor multiplier, but now I am fully able to research both lines of sensors.

about speed... well, that is what I can do with current tech, without sacrificing firepower or armor.that is a rather big ship. luckily for me, all precursors I have met so far were slower.
honestly, at this point I am fine with enemies depleting their magazines while trying to get through armor and the cloud of point defense railgun projectiles. but I suppose that will still be a problem in the future.

pre-post edit: oh, you are right. I thik I forgot how fire speed control works reducing speed will save space. however, the reason why I have 4 FC is to allow multi targeting. I may have to fight the swarm in the near future, and while this design is TERRIBLE for that, might as well take as many of them as I can.

12 cm railguns are point defense, yes. that is the largest I can make while keeping recharge time down to 5 seconds.

[Flying Dice]

There's not too much point in using E/KW larger than 10cm for PD. All you need is a hit, it doesn't matter how much damage is done. Sure you lose a little bit of range, but with the range you're working at below ~TL7, you usually aren't going to get more than one round of fire off at enemy missiles in any case. Smaller PD weapons means you can either cram more in or gain a bit more speed, which in turn helps reduce enemy chances of a hit.

[revo]

Other than swapping the EM sensor for a thermal sensor, there aren't really any glaring issues. It's a tad slow, but has enough armor and PD to handle a fair amount of fire. One note: are you planning on using the 12cm railguns as additional PD? The high tracking speed for their FC indicates yes. You don't really need the FC to track that fast, as railguns can't be turreted. One thing to consider would be to drop one pair of the FCs, as they both have the same range, and can be used for either set of weapons. Removing the ones with 32000km/s tracking speed would drop a decent chunk of tonnage, which would in turn give you a bit more speed.

@revo: Railguns can't be turreted. That's one of their two disadvantages (the other being slightly shorter ranged than lasers at equivalent tech).

i read that as lasers....ugh sorry been a long day

[Metalax]

There's not too much point in using E/KW larger than 10cm for PD. All you need is a hit, it doesn't matter how much damage is done.

Except when dealing with invaders special gift dispensers, then the extra damage comes in very handy.

[Jacob/Lee]

PDC are a lot cheaper and incur no maintenance.  They're extremely convenient for system defense.

If your ship is sitting over a colony and it's going to play local defense, then a year is all you really need.  Plan your maintenance life, crew berths, and fuel accordingly.  Also remember that fighters with less than 15 days of intended deployment will use the carrier's crew berths - yours have 3 months of deployment, so they'll use 3 months.

Parasite craft, regardless of deployment time, will use the mothership's spare berths. The time since last shore leave and the time since the last launch are compared against each other to determine morale.

http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php/topic,4835.msg49116.html#msg49116
Below the first image.

E: Also, ships with under 15 days of deployment time have crew requirements halved.

[Flying Dice]

There's not too much point in using E/KW larger than 10cm for PD. All you need is a hit, it doesn't matter how much damage is done.

Except when dealing with invaders special gift dispensers, then the extra damage comes in very handy.

Silly me, thinking that "Invaders: On" automatically equated to "Lasers must be researched, we cannot waste a single research tick on RP!". 

I seem to recall Steve mentioning in the old Eridani/Space Race campaign AAR that lasers are markedly more effective than other forms of PD against special surprises. But in any case the best ways to deal with Invaders don't involve getting warships anywhere near their effective range.

[Girlinhat]

Artillery missiles seem the "most efficient" way to deal with any threat.  However, as that one image is awesome, there's just something about driving your tank close enough to hit them with your sword that makes the Invaders into a laughing stock.