Page 14 of 17

Re: ship design encyclopedia

PostPosted: Fri 05 Oct 2012 04:50
by AlexeiTimoshenko
I agree with Procyon on the Redbeard (N). In a mixed squadron they will be picked out due to their shield down status.

Re: ship design encyclopedia

PostPosted: Sun 07 Oct 2012 15:17
by Club
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Raider II-class FG AM1 4-XOe 22 HS/13 TS
[5] S1x7A2x4Ze(Je)(Je)Ht(Je)Dcza(Je)Qb(Je)(Je)Dcza [9/3]
Trg:1 PV=24 Cost= 453/68 SL10 {ULTRA}
22 HTK S1x7 A2x4 Dczax2 Zex1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Raider III-class FG AM1 4-XOe 22 HS/13 TS
[5] S1x4A2x4Ze(Je)(Je)Ht(Je)(Je)QbDca(Je)Dca(Je)Dcza [9/3]
Trg:1 PV=24 Cost= 455/68.3 SL10 {ULTRA}
20 HTK S1x4 A2x4 Dczax1 Dcax2 Zex1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
I'm likely to keep existing Raiders how they are, but agree that the design as I originally made it is sub-optimal, especially for how the Redbeard is supposed to operate. The II design focuses on being survivable. The III design wants to kill smallcraft, to the point of reducing it's escort capability.


----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Redbeard(N)-class CTb AM1 3-XOe 19 HS/14 TS
[4] S1A2x9ZeMgt(jeJe)Ht(Je)Qb(Je)Ye(Je)Pte [9/2.5]
Trg:1 PV=22 Cost= 437/65.6 SL9 {ULTRA}
21 HTK S1x1 A2x9 Ptex1 Yex1 Zex1
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Redbeard(N) is supposed to be system patrol ships to a couple of nebula systems I have with inhabited planets. Having shields installed makes it less powerful in the environment it is supposed to operate in, since shields don't work in nebula. And the standard Redbeard doesn't need the extra range of a (N) in the link to make full use of it's Pte - Ya does just fine for that in deep space. Barely, and only if J engine is reducing maximum range, but it's good enough. It's probably worth adding a single (N) to every link anyway, just as insurance.

As for who these ships are supposed to go after - they're supposed to swarm capital ships. If something has a turn mode of 7, these little monsters will gleefully rip it to shreds. It doesn't want to play with other small designs, it is far less likely to hit them.

Re: ship design encyclopedia

PostPosted: Sun 07 Oct 2012 15:25
by AlexeiTimoshenko
I agree with the premise that operating in it's intended environment, having S is not relevant. Outside of a nebula it's critical to prevent the Redbeard(N) from being singled out.

Re: ship design encyclopedia

PostPosted: Tue 09 Oct 2012 00:47
by procyon
Club wrote:The Redbeard(N) is supposed to be system patrol ships to a couple of nebula systems I have with inhabited planets. Having shields installed makes it less powerful in the environment it is supposed to operate in, since shields don't work in nebula. And the standard Redbeard doesn't need the extra range of a (N) in the link to make full use of it's Pte - Ya does just fine for that in deep space. Barely, and only if J engine is reducing maximum range, but it's good enough. It's probably worth adding a single (N) to every link anyway, just as insurance.


The additional sensor range may not make a major difference in deep space combat once the festivities are joined - but could make a world of difference in just finding the targets - when it comes to ships.

Sqns are the problem.

With the Redbeard and Raider group having no sensors better than a Ya - it will need to have a sensor ship come along just to get the group to the 'bad guys'. And that sensor ship would likely be the first target for my sqns if I can pick it out. With the sensor range of Ya's - the follow on strikes from small craft will likely hit you before you can get to battle stations.
That was my major issue. You may have a sensor vessel at a great distance to guide you towards the carriers - but your CTs and FGs won't see the sqns until they are right on top of you unless the sensor ship sticks with the CT/FG group. This makes the sensor vessel a target. Keep the sensor vessel back and it won't see the sqns as they close on the CT/FGs.

If the carriers saw you coming - you are likely to get hit with several long range sorties before you ever reach the target - with little time to do much about it.

That was my biggest point about the sqns and seeing them coming. Guess I could have been more clear.

Re: ship design encyclopedia

PostPosted: Tue 09 Oct 2012 10:16
by TerryTigre
One counter to the squadrons, would be to stick to the sensor ships for 16 hrs, then spend the 8 hrs away at general quarters. This gives 8 hrs to reach the target, fight, and return...

Re: ship design encyclopedia

PostPosted: Tue 09 Oct 2012 19:44
by AlexeiTimoshenko
What happens if you move beyond communications range of the sensor ships? You need them close enough to be able to guide you to your target.

Re: ship design encyclopedia

PostPosted: Fri 12 Oct 2012 00:34
by procyon
TerryTigre wrote:One counter to the squadrons, would be to stick to the sensor ships for 16 hrs, then spend the 8 hrs away at general quarters. This gives 8 hrs to reach the target, fight, and return...


The major issue I see with this is playing Russian Roulette with your sensor ship...

The CTs and FGs will be fairly safe.

But what about the 8 hours the sensor ship is by itself? Either your fast group will have to get very slow so the Yc ship can keep pace while running in LOD, or you take a risk that the sortie will target the sensor ship's DF signature and not the combat ships...

A lone sensor ship against several sqns = a real bad day for your side...

AlexeiTimoshenko wrote:What happens if you move beyond communications range of the sensor ships?


Not likely. Unless you have very high SL Yc, your commo range will still be better than the Yc sensor range.


I suppose if you didn't want to risk an expensive Yc ship, you could build a purpose made ship with Ye or such. The medium range would give you adequate time to come to battle stations against sqns.
But if you are going to have a ship with Ye, why not make it a combat ship instead of extra MCs tagging along?

Re: ship design encyclopedia

PostPosted: Fri 12 Oct 2012 06:32
by AlexeiTimoshenko
I'm not thinking of physical range. I'm talking about practical range due to time lag from using light speed communications.

I may be a bit off base as I'm still used to the speed and distance scales from 3rd ed. Even assuming the current speeds, towards the end of an outbound attack run, you could be looking at a 10 minute round trip comm loop. In my days of playing back in the late stone age (when speed 6 was 0.1c), there could have been a 30 minute+ comm loop.

What I'm getting at is that the sensor readings transmitted to the strike units will be several minutes old by the time that they arrive.

Re: ship design encyclopedia

PostPosted: Fri 12 Oct 2012 23:36
by procyon
AlexeiTimoshenko wrote:I'm not thinking of physical range. I'm talking about practical range due to time lag from using light speed communications.


I guess I'm not sure how far out you are wanting to position this sensor ship.

And unless the target/contact is manuevering eratically, it usually isn't difficult to plot an intercept.

Re: ship design encyclopedia

PostPosted: Sat 13 Oct 2012 05:18
by AlexeiTimoshenko
Lets put this into some real terms. Your ships and the enemies are moving at about .003c. Three hours into the strike you've covered the distance from Earth to Mars at closest approach. Your comm systems are still limited to light speed (no better than what we have now). What happens if something changes? Assuming the enemy has sensor ships of his own, he's tracking and feeding data to his defenses effectively in real time, whereas your strike is using data that's several minutes old.