Print

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

A) Open Warfare: Shoot them as soon as we can.

15 (48.4%)

B) Cold War: Establish borders, and try to out-grow them.

16 (51.6%)

C) No War: Let's share the solar system.... For now.

0 (0%)

Total Members Voted: 31

[Daltesh]

A missile ban would make things.. Interesting. Starswarm would murder us unless we could outrange and outrun them, and Precursers would likely be nasty too depending on what sort of tech level they're starting with. NPRs would either obliterate humanity at a whim, or massively unbalance things if one side allied them.

With this in mind my opinion is rather split. If Sheb turned off NPR generation in the game's start I would support jump technology after we have ion engines, but NPRs are on then the risks outweigh the benefits It would take quite a lot of luck to find a nice, close, habitable planet, but that same luck could backfire if it was inhabited by alien infidels that proceed to destroy us.

That said, only using beams open up some interesting tactics that should be probably be addressed. Carriers can make very good escorts, and freighters are very vulnerable against an enemy with unlimited ammo, so should we send all our transports in large bulk convoys with carrier escorts, or would that reduce the protection of Titan too much? And we might want to look into what sort of weapon technology we want for the long term. Mesons can be very useful, but if we overuse them the enemy is bound to catch on and make lighter armored ships with reinforced components, which would drastically reduce the effectiveness of our main fleet, but more importantly that of our PDCs. Splitting tech on weaponry might be a pain but the flexibility it provides could be useful, and as such I recommend we keep a mind towards switching our space assets over to lasers or corronades, perhaps even railguns if we get a ballistic scientist.

[a1s]

Oh, definitely lasers. whether we'll be faster or slower than the heathens (in the missile-less game), we'll want to outrange them.

Ok, new idea for a missile  handicap: how about if you are not allowed to spend more than 1% on fuel?

[Daltesh]

If we want handicaps for missiles, how about saying they're highly inefficient. They need to have 50% or so of their mass in fuel, and can only be fired at X% of their max range? Larger, slower, more expensive, and shorter ranged. It would certainly change how anti-missiles work.

Edit:
Oh yeah, or geosensors. That would be much better.

[Boksi]

Well, let's go over the various benefits of various weapons:

Lasers: Long range
Meson Cannons: Skip shields and armor
Plasma Carronades: High damage
Particle Beams: No damage attenuation
Railguns: Multiple shots
Gauss Guns: Multiple 1-damage shots, can be made smaller for less accuracy

Lasers have the longest range, but particle beams are also pretty long-ranged and don't suffer damage attenuation like lasers, so they'll do full damage at maximum range.

[Sheb]

I always tough that particle beam had longer range, but less acurracy (since they cannot be turreted). Also, I've read a proposition I like in the other Aurora game. Forcing people to put some%ag of their missiles in geo sensors, thus making them much less efficient. I'm thinking of a massive penalties, of around 50%

[Bremen]

Oh, definitely lasers. whether we'll be faster or slower than the heathens (in the missile-less game), we'll want to outrange them.

Ok, new idea for a missile  handicap: how about if you are not allowed to spend more than 1% on fuel?

Well, even with 1% fuel missiles greatly outrange beam weapons, and they'll be very capable otherwise with all the weight for engines and warhead.

Well, let's go over the various benefits of various weapons:

Lasers: Long range
Meson Cannons: Skip shields and armor
Plasma Carronades: High damage
Particle Beams: No damage attenuation
Railguns: Multiple shots
Gauss Guns: Multiple 1-damage shots, can be made smaller for less accuracy

Lasers have the longest range, but particle beams are also pretty long-ranged and don't suffer damage attenuation like lasers, so they'll do full damage at maximum range.

Particle beams also have the same range regardless of size, which opens the possibility of sniper FACs/fighters (Large size lasers have longer range than equal tech particle beams, but small lasers have shorter range).

[a1s]

Well, let's go over the various benefits of various weapons:

Lasers: Long range
Meson Cannons: Skip shields and armor
Plasma Carronades: High damage
Particle Beams: No damage attenuation
Railguns: Multiple shots
Gauss Guns: Multiple 1-damage shots, can be made smaller for less accuracy

Lasers have the longest range, but particle beams are also pretty long-ranged and don't suffer damage attenuation like lasers, so they'll do full damage at maximum range.

Spoiler: longer range+at least equal speed=win (click to show/hide)

Oh, definitely lasers. whether we'll be faster or slower than the heathens (in the missile-less game), we'll want to outrange them.

Ok, new idea for a missile  handicap: how about if you are not allowed to spend more than 1% on fuel?

Well, even with 1% fuel missiles greatly outrange beam weapons, and they'll be very capable otherwise with all the weight for engines and warhead.

That's the idea- they would outrange lasers by 10 times (less so with more tech- missile range grows linearly and laser's grows quadraticaly), but they would be finite( and expensive), while the laser is not. It's a very nice trade off. you can make that 0.25% instead (to outrange lasers 2-3 times, and potentially, with a better laser not at all)

[Daltesh]

Remember the primary drawback to missiles is long reload and very limited supplies. Just because you have longer range doesn't mean the enemy can't absorb them and leave your magazines empty.

[Boksi]

Well, let's go over the various benefits of various weapons:

Lasers: Long range
Meson Cannons: Skip shields and armor
Plasma Carronades: High damage
Particle Beams: No damage attenuation
Railguns: Multiple shots
Gauss Guns: Multiple 1-damage shots, can be made smaller for less accuracy

Lasers have the longest range, but particle beams are also pretty long-ranged and don't suffer damage attenuation like lasers, so they'll do full damage at maximum range.

Spoiler: longer range+at least equal speed=win (click to show/hide)

You forget to include stealth and ECM in your tactics, something we'll definitely want to use for meson gunboats. Long range is useless if you can't detect someone.

Also, even low-level shields would allow a ship to shrug off a few 1-strength hits, and unless you have a mammoth fire control you won't be getting in more than a few hits at that range. And if they use fast ships with enormous fire controls? Then we swarm them with gunboats. Planets are stationary targets and they'll either have to close the range(to attack one) or stay put(to defend one).

[Bremen]

As for beam weapons, its an interesting discussion. Lasers would probably be the best choice (and probably only choice, given the dangers of being outranged) if we wanted a fleet based around battleships and similar, with heavy duty long range weapons and lots of armor for slugfests. Mesons are the king of weapons for fighters, on the other hand, and work well for gunboats attacking large ships as well, but a meson armed gunboat force risks being destroyed by a longer range gunboat/fighter force. Mesons also have advantages for PDCs and jump point defense.

If missiles aren't a danger, railguns and gauss cannons are pretty much right out. Even against fighters, you need to hit them with enough damage for a kill, and the gauss/railgun multiple rounds is problematic for that. They also have low range.

If missiles are just heavily nerfed (by say, 50% tonnage wasted) I don't think we should use them. That means double cost, half damage, half accuracy (so, 25% damage), half range, half speed (so PD is doubly effective). They're not useless, and we'd still want to account for them though.

I think overall, I'd say either Laser if we go for a battlefleet style, or continue with Mesons if we go for a gunboat based fleet.

[Daltesh]

If we want to invest in lasers for awesome range we'll need to invest in sensor tech and very large fire control systems just to keep up with it. With disposable units like gunboats and  fighters it might be a better idea to strap on railguns (more shots means a higher percentage of hits, plus they have a higher damage output than lasers by either a third, or 50% IIRC) and then getting them into point blank range. This has plenty of drawbacks though, like getting your gunboats blown up, but ideally it'll still severely hurt the enemies actual warships. This is of course assuming we use actual warships instead of a fleet entirely comprised of gunboats.

I also have a question for Sheb. How many engineering bays does it have? I don't have the game in front of me so I can't check, but 700% seems like a high failure rate for a 14KT ship.

[Sheb]

Ni idea. The game is back home and I'm at my uni, so I won't be able to answer any of that kind of questions until Friday.

[a1s]

You forget to include stealth and ECM in your tactics, something we'll definitely want to use for meson gunboats. Long range is useless if you can't detect someone.

Also, even low-level shields would allow a ship to shrug off a few 1-strength hits, and unless you have a mammoth fire control you won't be getting in more than a few hits at that range. And if they use fast ships with enormous fire controls? Then we swarm them with gunboats. Planets are stationary targets and they'll either have to close the range(to attack one) or stay put(to defend one).

ECM can shave some 20-30% off the range (which is double the normal one for lasers), and stealth is balanced to allow stealthy launch of missiles, not for attacking up close.
The hits will not be strength one, but rather 1/3-1/2 of maximum, since you only need to hold your enemy more than half of the laser's range away.
And Turtling at a planet will mean that the enemy will first outmine us, then outgrow and finally completely outproduce (with both more labor and more resources).

[Bremen]

You forget to include stealth and ECM in your tactics, something we'll definitely want to use for meson gunboats. Long range is useless if you can't detect someone.

Also, even low-level shields would allow a ship to shrug off a few 1-strength hits, and unless you have a mammoth fire control you won't be getting in more than a few hits at that range. And if they use fast ships with enormous fire controls? Then we swarm them with gunboats. Planets are stationary targets and they'll either have to close the range(to attack one) or stay put(to defend one).

ECM can shave some 20-30% off the range (which is double the normal one for lasers), and stealth is balanced to allow stealthy launch of missiles, not for attacking up close.
The hits will not be strength one, but rather 1/3-1/2 of maximum, since you only need to hold your enemy more than half of the laser's range away.
And Turtling at a planet will mean that the enemy will first outmine us, then outgrow and finally completely outproduce (with both more labor and more resources).

Do lasers double the fire control range? I've never heard of that before.

[USEC_OFFICER]

You forget to include stealth and ECM in your tactics, something we'll definitely want to use for meson gunboats. Long range is useless if you can't detect someone.

Also, even low-level shields would allow a ship to shrug off a few 1-strength hits, and unless you have a mammoth fire control you won't be getting in more than a few hits at that range. And if they use fast ships with enormous fire controls? Then we swarm them with gunboats. Planets are stationary targets and they'll either have to close the range(to attack one) or stay put(to defend one).

ECM can shave some 20-30% off the range (which is double the normal one for lasers), and stealth is balanced to allow stealthy launch of missiles, not for attacking up close.
The hits will not be strength one, but rather 1/3-1/2 of maximum, since you only need to hold your enemy more than half of the laser's range away.
And Turtling at a planet will mean that the enemy will first outmine us, then outgrow and finally completely outproduce (with both more labor and more resources).

Do lasers double the fire control range? I've never heard of that before.

Because lasers don't double the fire control range. From what I can recall, the two are independent of each other.