Print

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

[coleslaw35]

Maybe a 2nd AMM fire control.

I assume for redundancy?

You're probably going to want to rotate AMM coverage between ships, since you won't get many counter-salvos out of any one.

I'm not sure what you mean?

[Rince Wind]

Also to be able to target more than one salvo at once. If you are shot by 4 salvos of 2 missiles each (let's say by FACs), you can only target one at a time.

8 AMM launchers isn't much, and 150 missile is not much at all. I guess that is what FD meant.

[Flying Dice]

8 AMM launchers. 19 salvos of AMMs stored in the launchers and magazines. One FC. IOW each of those can fire a full salvo at up to 19 enemy salvos of ASMs. If you're using anything more than 1-1 targeting (which you should, if you don't have massive technological superiority and don't want leakers), you're going to need multiple ships even against relatively thin ASM attacks. If you're dealing with enemy AMMs used offensively, we're talking about hundreds or thousands of missiles in dozens of salvos.

Basically any one of those ships is going to be saturated by even fairly small salvos, and you're going to run dry on AMMs pretty quickly. There's a reason AMM platforms tend to be specialized: you want a shitload of launchers, a shitload of FCs, and a shitload of magazine space if you're going to put up a solid, high-endurance AMM defense, and a small-ish multirole warship can't dedicate that sort of volume if it's still going to perform adequately in other roles.

[coleslaw35]

Alright, I upped the AMM launchers to 16, added another AMM fire control, and increased the amount of AMMs to 402. How is that?

[Rince Wind]

For 16 launchers I would use 4 firecontrols.

I wouldn't put ASMs and AMMs on one ship though. And sensors. I have at least 3 different ships in a fleet: sensor (command) ships, PD or AMM ships and the actual attack ships. It also helps to keep the maintenance requirements down, it doesn't hurt (as) much if a ship goes down and the ships don't take as long to produce. You do need more slipways and preferably three yards as well.

[Insanegame27]

Code: [Select]

Death Star Prototype class Base    107 500 tons     1503 Crew     16466.4 BP      TCS 2150  TH 6000  EM 1260
2790 km/s     Armour 14-201     Shields 42-450     Sensors 1/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 60     PPV 55
Maint Life 0.18 Years     MSP 1915    AFR 4622%    IFR 64.2%    1YR 10376    5YR 155638    Max Repair 540 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 480 months    Flight Crew Berths 0   
Flag Bridge    Hangar Deck Capacity 10000 tons     Troop Capacity: 6 Battalions    Cryogenic Berths 12000    Cargo Handling Multiplier 10   


NanoTrasen Prototype Death Star Engine (6)    Power 1000    Fuel Use 45%    Signature 1000    Exp 10%
Fuel Capacity 8 000 000 Litres    Range 29.8 billion km   (123 days at full power)
Epsilon R450/648 Shields (14)   Total Fuel Cost  378 Litres per hour  (9 072 per day)


40cm C2 Soft X-ray Laser (3)    Range 24 000km     TS: 3000 km/s     Power 42-2     RM 6    ROF 105        42 42 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
60cm Death Star Laser (1)    Range 24 000km     TS: 3000 km/s     Power 94-1     RM 6    ROF 470        94 94 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
NanoTrasen Fire Control S00.5 2.5-5000 (6)    Max Range: 5 000 km   TS: 5000 km/s     0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Death Star Prototype Fire Control (1)    Max Range: 24 000 km   TS: 12000 km/s     58 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
NanoTrasen NT Stellarator Fusion Reactor Technology PB-1 (10)     Total Power Output 1800    Armour 0    Exp 5%Is this good?

[Rince Wind]

It will probably never shoot those weapons as most ships can stay out of range as they are faster.

Your fire control range is pretty horrible, have you used the 4x size to increase the range to the max? I think fire controls also need a minimum range of 10000km, as that is the closest range for engagements (only exception to this rule is the internal fc of a CIWS).

[Metalax]

Alright, finally got my tech updated, so I'm redesigning my military. Here's my missile cruiser so far. Can I get some honest opinions?

Spoiler (click to show/hide)

Those missiles look like they have much too much fuel. The AMM's have twelve and a half times the range that you are able to actually track incoming missiles, which means that there is space being wasted on the missiles that can either be used for a larger engine for a higher speed, or for more agility to improve your hit chance.

Similarly just shy of 500 million km is very long range for ASM of that speed. I'd suggest cutting half the fuel and increasing the engine size to fill the space.

You've actually gone overboard on the engineering spaces for the design. Cut back and aim for a two-three year maintenance life and use the freed space for more magazines.

Is this design intended to operate independently? If not, that is a lot of space going to sensors that could be used for magazines. I'd retain the AMM sensor though so as to ensure that you don't lose your PD capability if your primary sensor ship is lost.

I'd suggest that you are carrying too many ASM's compared to AMM's. At your current magazine size I'd drop down to 80 ASM's and use the recovered space for AMM's.

You may have noticed a lot of focus on magazine capacity. This is because in any real engagement you are going to chew through a ton of AMM's trying to shoot down incoming missiles. As an example given the missiles shown on average it will take 20 AMM's to shoot down a single salvo of your ASM's.

You are probably OK with a single firecontrol for your AMM's, as they can only fire every 15 seconds. To deal with multiple incoming salvoes, link only four of the AMM tubes to the firecontrol, target and fire on the first incoming salvo then link the remaining tubes to the fire control and target and fire on the next salvo. You can then leave them all linked and as long as you fire as the tubes get reloaded it will remain divided into sets of four, switching targets as needed.

Code: [Select]

Death Star Prototype class Base    107 500 tons     1503 Crew     16466.4 BP      TCS 2150  TH 6000  EM 1260
2790 km/s     Armour 14-201     Shields 42-450     Sensors 1/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 60     PPV 55
Maint Life 0.18 Years     MSP 1915    AFR 4622%    IFR 64.2%    1YR 10376    5YR 155638    Max Repair 540 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 480 months    Flight Crew Berths 0   
Flag Bridge    Hangar Deck Capacity 10000 tons     Troop Capacity: 6 Battalions    Cryogenic Berths 12000    Cargo Handling Multiplier 10   


NanoTrasen Prototype Death Star Engine (6)    Power 1000    Fuel Use 45%    Signature 1000    Exp 10%
Fuel Capacity 8 000 000 Litres    Range 29.8 billion km   (123 days at full power)
Epsilon R450/648 Shields (14)   Total Fuel Cost  378 Litres per hour  (9 072 per day)


40cm C2 Soft X-ray Laser (3)    Range 24 000km     TS: 3000 km/s     Power 42-2     RM 6    ROF 105        42 42 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
60cm Death Star Laser (1)    Range 24 000km     TS: 3000 km/s     Power 94-1     RM 6    ROF 470        94 94 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
NanoTrasen Fire Control S00.5 2.5-5000 (6)    Max Range: 5 000 km   TS: 5000 km/s     0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Death Star Prototype Fire Control (1)    Max Range: 24 000 km   TS: 12000 km/s     58 17 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
NanoTrasen NT Stellarator Fusion Reactor Technology PB-1 (10)     Total Power Output 1800    Armour 0    Exp 5%Is this good?

You lack flight crew berths for the fighters you are presumably going to be landing in your hangar bay. check the keep excess crew quarters check-box on the top right and add some additional crew quarters to create the berths. I'd allow 2-5 berths per 500 tons of hangar space, so 40-100 for this design. If you design your fighters first, you can obviously be more precise.

You've also lack sufficient engineering spaces. You are going to run out of supplies in about two months.

Your fire controls have much too high tracking speed for the weapons mounted. Put the weapons in turrets, and when designing the turret specify the tracking speed to match the firecontrol. Also you have twice the number your smaller firecontrols than needed for some reason. Have you used the increased range on those firecontrols at all? 24,000 km is literally point blank range.

Really too few engines for the tonnage of the ship. Aim for around 25% of the total tonnage to comprise of engines if you want anything like a reasonable speed.

Also, you have no active sensor. The ship will be unable to target enemies to fire upon on it's own, it will be entirely reliant on the sensors of other ships.

[Insanegame27]

For my fighter:

Code: [Select]

TIE 1 class Fighter    442 tons     3 Crew     88.9 BP      TCS 8.84  TH 75  EM 0
11312 km/s     Armour 1-5     Shields 0-0     Sensors 1/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 0     PPV 4
Maint Life 0 Years     MSP 0    AFR 88%    IFR 1.2%    1YR 14    5YR 206    Max Repair 31.25 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 0.1 months    Spare Berths 1   

TIE Engine (2)    Power 50    Fuel Use 154.08%    Signature 37.5    Exp 12%
Fuel Capacity 5 000 Litres    Range 1.3 billion km   (32 hours at full power)

Hephaistos 15cm C1 Soft X-ray Laser (1)    Range 30 000km     TS: 11312 km/s     Power 6-1     RM 6    ROF 30        6 6 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
TIE Fire Control (1)    Max Range: 30 000 km   TS: 6000 km/s     67 33 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
NanoTrasen NT Stellarator Fusion tiny (1)     Total Power Output 0.6    Armour 0    Exp 5%

This design is classed as a Fighter for production, combat and maintenance purposesIs this good? I plan on mass producing them and using them as meatshields. Are engineering spaces necessary on fighters?

I plan on having my DS be in a battlegroup with 2 star destroyers and all three hold lots of these things

[QuakeIV]

May as well leave the lasers off of the death star most likely is I think what people are saying.  They arent (in their current form) contributing all that much to its combat abilities.  Hordes of point defense lasers sure, that would do plenty, but 1atm of pressure would mean planets can totally ignore that laser and nothing else will in general be in range.

As to the tie fighters themselves, that looks like it would be decently effective to me.

[Insanegame27]

The Death Star (or at least the prototype) is designed to take out ships, not PDCs or planets. I may scrap the three complementary lasers and keep the adv spinal mount laser. As this is my first run in Aurora, I'm not too worried about getting absolutely destroyed by NPRs. It's all testing, but I do want effective shipkilling ships.

[QuakeIV]

Yeah there's no way, at least in its current form.  Only way to make lasers work is to either get them to come to you or to be really fast and catch them before they can wreck you with missiles or whatever. 

e: It could concievably work as a jump point base, but the lasers are so short range that almost anything would be out of range one tick after getting power back.

e2:  Wait there is no way that can be right, how is it that short range?  It looks pretty high tech...

[Insanegame27]

I done fucked up with the size/range thing when designing it. I went straight to the bottom of the list without reading , thinking that the bottom option was the biggest and longest range.

Code: [Select]

Death Star Prototype class Base    409 800 tons     13215 Crew     76460.2 BP      TCS 8196  TH 15000  EM 1260
1830 km/s     Armour 14-491     Shields 42-450     Sensors 1/1/0/0     Damage Control Rating 2040     PPV 433.16
Maint Life 18.65 Years     MSP 233253    AFR 671%    IFR 9.3%    1YR 1273    5YR 19090    Max Repair 1050 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 240 months    Flight Crew Berths 2618   
Flag Bridge    Hangar Deck Capacity 10000 tons     Troop Capacity: 6 Battalions    Drop Capacity: 6 Battalions    Cryogenic Berths 12000    Cargo Handling Multiplier 10   

NanoTrasen Prototype Death Star Engine (15)    Power 1000    Fuel Use 45%    Signature 1000    Exp 10%
Fuel Capacity 20 000 000 Litres    Range 19.5 billion km   (123 days at full power)
Epsilon R450/648 Shields (14)   Total Fuel Cost  378 Litres per hour  (9 072 per day)

60cm Death Star Laser (1)    Range 480 000km     TS: 3000 km/s     Power 94-1     RM 6    ROF 470        94 94 94 94 94 94 80 70 62 56
Quad Gauss Cannon R1-100 Turret (8x4)    Range 10 000km     TS: 40000 km/s     Power 0-0     RM 1    ROF 5        1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Death Star Prototype Fire Control (4)    Max Range: 480 000 km   TS: 12000 km/s     98 96 94 92 90 88 85 83 81 79
NanoTrasen NT Stellarator Fusion Reactor Technology PB-1 (10)     Total Power Output 1800    Armour 0    Exp 5%

Active Search Sensor MR1173-R500 (5)     GPS 525000     Range 1 173.9m km    Resolution 500
Active Search Sensor MR525-R100 (5)     GPS 105000     Range 525.0m km    Resolution 100

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
Revised version of DS. How 'good' or 'effective' will these shields be? Mainly against missiles.

EDIT: Just added a 360-day jump gate thingy, cant be bothered to repost stats.

Would you say this thing is effective enough to be built right now. What else does it need?

[QuakeIV]

I'm not hugely experienced with shields so I don't know the recharge rate, but you have quite a lot of shielding.  Should be extremely effective.

e:  Laser is considerably better in terms of range.  You still need to catch people in most fleet fights but it should work fine defensively, especially if you order it to begin pursuit as soon as the hostiles start moving.

[Insanegame27]

I built a purely troop transport (with 20 transport bays and 20 drop modules) and every couple of months I get a pausing effect about maitenance. Is there any way to make those events not pause the game? (stop the looping)