Author Topic: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race  (Read 190138 times)

truetanker

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 9901
  • Clan Hells Horses 666th Mech. Assualt Cluster
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #210 on: 15 June 2018, 15:18:28 »
Well instigate it!

And yes I have... the Heimdaller. I'm thinking dirty here.

Cheap one shot Bays, on the fly.

Like 1 hex range so very, very short legs. Rocket Launcher -10 has same range as AC/5, weighs in @ .5 tons...say a minimum of 5 tons, or 100 rockets per bay to be useful. You ca go up to the 70 Cap limit if you want.

TT
Khan, Clan Iron Dolphin
Azeroth Pocketverse
That is, if true tanker doesn't beat me to it. He makes truly evil units.Col.Hengist on 31 May 2013
TT, we know you are the master of nasty  O0 ~ Fletch on 22 June 2013
If I'm attacking you, conventional wisom says to bring 3x your force.  I want extra insurance, so I'll bring 4 for every 1 of what you have :D ~ Tai Dai Cultist on 21 April 2016
Me: Would you rather fight my Epithymía Thanátou from the Whispers of Blake?
Nav_Alpha: That THING... that is horrid
~ Nav_Alpha on 10 October 2016

marcussmythe

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1204
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #211 on: 15 June 2018, 15:25:54 »
Funny story - I have a much more thorough capital rules re-work that's half-finished, and MLRS systems feature as one of the options for anti-small-unit work. For example, what would you think of a LRM-600? It'd be 30x one-shot LRM-20s, all stapled together, weighing maybe 100 tons. Any or all of those LRM-20s can be fired at a time, so you can use it to thicken up anti-fighter defences for a while, or barf it all out at once if you think you're about to die. Sounds like a fun little installation for WarShip self-defence, no?  >:D

Id be tempted to try it out, but I'm always leery of point defense that runs dry.  OTOH, if offense runs dry, you might be better off able to fire all your ponit defense at ONCE, rather than fire less bullets forever.

Alsadius

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 926
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #212 on: 15 June 2018, 15:30:56 »
Id be tempted to try it out, but I'm always leery of point defense that runs dry.  OTOH, if offense runs dry, you might be better off able to fire all your ponit defense at ONCE, rather than fire less bullets forever.

Traditional PD systems would also exist. But remember the rule about how fighters carry capital missiles as "torpedo bombers"? That idea came from this re-work, and it sure sounds like it'd encourage attacks to come in discrete waves, not in steady streams. An equal mass of PPCs is better against a steady stream of fighters, but having a PD system that can shoot back in waves is the sort of thing that could be pretty useful too. Despite the lower theoretical long-term damage potential, it can use it all at the moment when the fighters are actually nearby. (Or at least, that was my thinking)

marcussmythe

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1204
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #213 on: 15 June 2018, 15:38:30 »
Right.  If incoming attacks come in crushing salvos of limited number, you just need to defeat enough of enough salvos to buy your own weapons time to win.  The purpose of defense is to buy time for offense to work, after all, not to allow you to cruise back and forth indefinitely, with impunity, in threatened space.  Nothing does that.

Smegish

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 445
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #214 on: 15 June 2018, 17:45:09 »
I had thought about some changes I may have made if I was in charge of the Warship rule changes in the past.
My first thought was to dump the Fire Control tonnage and just limit of capital guns per arc from a fixed 20 to an amount that varied on ship tonnage, with say 5 standard guns counting as 1 capital, And also limiting how many guns could be in a bay based on that tonnage - a 1.5MT ship can mount bigger turrets then a 200kt one after all.

Just my $2,000ZWD

Starfox1701

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 521
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #215 on: 16 June 2018, 00:30:18 »
I'm a perponet of using turrets on capital ships personally. Yes I know it complicates construction and firing arcs but its the next logical evolution of capital weapons.

On point defense I think that AMS range and engagement ability needs to be hit by the need hammer hard. They can't realisticly engage beyond 1 or 2 km and any single mount engaging more than 6 or 7 missiles in a 60sec turn is ludicrous in the extreme.

I had a bit of an idea while at work. The solution to mech weapon spam is simple dropships and warships can't use them. Instead there needs to be specific capital and sub capital mounts like the quad boffors 40mm AA mounts from ww2. Your lrm 600 is a good example too. spaceships get their own guns that fighters can't use and vice versa. Now to read your article

marcussmythe

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1204
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #216 on: 16 June 2018, 08:37:45 »
Proposition:
Recommend tying maintenance fraction to ship mass, rather than ship cost. 
Suggest 1-3 Milliard per Megaton of hull.

Rationale(1):  Maintenance represents training and repairs at least as much as it does 'parts and labor'.  Hull size is a strong indicator of crew and training requirements.  KF Drives/Docking Collars/LF Batteries seem less intimately tied to those costs, despite large impact on ship costs.

Rationale(2):  Greater size flexibility.  Big ships are -cheap- compared to small ships, so we currently want to build them as large as possible.  If the big ship is cheaper to build, at least let it be proportionately expensive to maintain.  Encourages relevance of smaller hulls - I fear economic pressures are going to turn it into Nelsonian '3rd Rates and 5th Rates and nothing else' - which admitted fits what the SLN ended up building.

Rationale (3):  Justifies use of docking collars, and later LF-Batteries.  If the docking collar and batteries are (essentially) 1-time costs, rather than continual costs, they are a sensible investment for a fleet that expects to not be replacing ships often, such as the SLN.  (Fleets that expect continuous heavy losses will still want to build cheap ships).

« Last Edit: 16 June 2018, 08:55:25 by marcussmythe »

Smegish

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 445
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #217 on: 16 June 2018, 09:02:37 »
But alot of that fancy, expensive electronics are also finicky and in need of constant, expensive maintenance. Regardless of the ship you put it in.

Perhaps split it down the middle, paying 5% of the ships cost plus some amount based purely on size? Bit of a headache to figure out though

Personally I'm good how it is
« Last Edit: 16 June 2018, 09:05:00 by Smegish »

Starfox1701

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 521
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #218 on: 16 June 2018, 09:23:29 »
After reading twice I think it's an idea that sounds good to start but in execution quickly becomes very cumbersome. Personally I found B5 Wars to be one of the best pen and paper spaceship damage setups. Is simple yet robust. And pretty flexible. The systems record sheets aren't as construction friendly though.
« Last Edit: 16 June 2018, 10:26:54 by Starfox1701 »

marcussmythe

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1204
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #219 on: 16 June 2018, 10:05:52 »
But alot of that fancy, expensive electronics are also finicky and in need of constant, expensive maintenance. Regardless of the ship you put it in.

Perhaps split it down the middle, paying 5% of the ships cost plus some amount based purely on size? Bit of a headache to figure out though

Personally I'm good how it is

No for splitting it.  Thats more complexity, which we dont need. 

Honestly, if your fine the way it is, so am I.  My long term plans are already based on the current rules.  Im just over here trying to upset my own applecart.  :)

Alsadius

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 926
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #220 on: 16 June 2018, 19:28:40 »
I'd rather just keep it as-is, tbh. Yes, big ships are cheaper, but you need to factor in shipyard costs. The ability to build a Leviathan costs $550B in this system, and that gets you two a turn. Even if those two are each $10B cheaper than the equivalent power of smaller ships, you need 28 turns to break even on construction, or 16 turns to break even on construction+maintenance. The game only goes 33 turns before the Succession Wars start. A player who drops the money needed to produce large battleships will profit from it over the long run(especially if they're as big as the Terrans and can build and run multiple lines to get a discount), but you don't necessarily need to go big in order to be competitive.

Also, I have my internet back. Therefore, it's Super Happy Terran Hegemony Will Crush You All Fun Time!  ;D

It was more of a task than I expected to get the THN ships out into the spreadsheet. Not because there was a lot to enter, but because the numbers I had available simply do not match StratOps rules. Most of the time I could just modify the cargo bay a bit to match, but the Cruiser is a particular offender here - it claims to have a 10,000 ton DropShuttle bay and 94,000 tons of cargo, but the total mass available for those things is under 7,000 tons. I gave it 2 collars and a bit under 5k tons of cargo - if it'd been just a bit lighter, I'd have started stripping guns. I also gave the Bonaventure a LNCSS, because its sensors are praised and the ship would be utter trash without something like that to give it a role.

The THN is listed as having 7 Dreadnoughts as a total production run, and to simplify the rest of its standing fleet, I gave it 10 of every other ship except the Lola(which is only a few years old, and thus is assumed to have only 4). This gives a total base maintenance cost of $43.487B, and as previously stated the THN will always pay exactly 100%. I've also assumed that the existing ships have a full complement of support craft, so 80 DropShips, 416 small craft, and 144 fighters.

(ahem)

The Terran Hegemony has taken note of the increased militarization of the outer colonies. In accordance with its long-standing policy of maintaining military superiority over any plausible combination of opponents, the Director-General has approved a major new construction program for the Terran Hegemony Navy.

The major shipyard complexes at Terra and Keid have been upgraded significantly. All class-4 yards have been upgraded, as well as two class-3 yards at Terra and one class-2 yard at each planet. This initiative has been budgeted at $170B.

Two new ship classes are entering service - the Quixote missile frigate, and the Essex destroyer. Prototype costs for these ships are estimated at $17.749B.

The 2350 Naval Bill outlines a total of $441.284B in new construction. The following ships are projected to enter service within the decade planned:
- 12x Quixote missile frigate
- 4x Black Lion battlecruiser
- 6x Lola destroyer
- 4x Dart cruiser
- 6x Essex destroyer
- 6x Cruiser cruiser
- 8x Bonaventure scout
- 16x Vigilant corvette

Numerous support craft have also been ordered, both to stock the new ships and to provide system defences for major systems. A total of 150 DropShips, 600 small craft, and 3,000 fighters will be purchased, for a total of $66B.

The balance of the THN's budget, $11.48B, has been allocated to research and development efforts, to ensure that it remains the peer of any rival nation.


Seriously, it is simply ridiculous what you can do with the THN's budget. For my NPC minor nations, I'm trying to keep them in line with their canon personas and roles, but I'm trying to play them smart so that they'll be capable opponents. For the Hegemony, writing up this list makes me want to play them stupid. I won't make new designs, specifically so that they're stuck with their grossly suboptimal canon designs. If they were playing as smart as you guys or the CC/FS, you wouldn't be able to win even any tactical victories, let alone strategic ones.

Smegish

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 445
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #221 on: 16 June 2018, 20:03:44 »
So gentlemen, I suggest we form the Star League early, with all of us ganging up on the Hegemony before they're COMPLETELY untouchable...

But you could slowly play them less stupid as time went on, but give us a hope by enforcing certain minimum %'s of ship tonnage spent on cargo, bigger engines than really needed and so on :)

marcussmythe

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1204
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #222 on: 16 June 2018, 20:13:47 »
If they were playing as smart as you guys or the CC/FS, you wouldn't be able to win even any tactical victories, let alone strategic ones.

Im not sure my first turn qualifies as smart.

Alsadius

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 926
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #223 on: 16 June 2018, 20:32:47 »
Most of the planets you guys own were unseen by human eyes 200 years ago, and a lot of them still have populations in the single-digit millions. The TH is comprised mostly of economically developed planets - note which planet has as much shipyard capacity as the rest of the known universe combined, for example. Your economies will grow a heck of a lot faster than the Terran economy will, because there's a lot fewer limits on your growth.

The Star League was a fairly stable force because it's united, but once that stability broke down, Kerensky felt the need to Brave Sir Robin his way out of there despite being noticeably stronger than any of the other houses. Once the Star League broke, there was no putting it back together, because the necessary dominance of the Terran Hegemony was lost. And that wasn't just battle damage, either - the 200 years of the Star League had been better for the successor states than the Terrans, and even on an economic basis they were not nearly so dominant as they'd previously been when it was formed. Compare the US in 1946 to the US today, for example - still the strongest nation around, but it has real economic competition in a way that it didn't previously.

Also, it helps that they were a very passive force, all things considered. The Star League was formed as part of a peace treaty between Marik and Liao, remember - the Terrans had been thinking of the idea, but they weren't really the ones who got the ball rolling. After James McKenna's reconquest of the inner worlds, the THN was almost entirely idle as far as I can tell. It's a Sword of Damocles hanging over everyone's heads, but it's not likely to swing much.

Smegish

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 445
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #224 on: 16 June 2018, 21:11:37 »
does a 2350 map of the sphere exist? best I can find is the various faction maps at their creation, and then 2571 when the Reunification War kicks off. Nothing in between

I'm currently basing any future plans on the fact the 2571 map is more or less correct, minus the fact I don't own those dirty Norsemen yet ;)

marcussmythe

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1204
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #225 on: 16 June 2018, 21:26:57 »
does a 2350 map of the sphere exist? best I can find is the various faction maps at their creation, and then 2571 when the Reunification War kicks off. Nothing in between

I'm currently basing any future plans on the fact the 2571 map is more or less correct, minus the fact I don't own those dirty Norsemen yet ;)

Well, we know out of character that thise maps are in large part correct.  The people in universe dont.  This has some knock on effects -

I -know- that those Heracles Class Battlecruisers are not going to show up over Tharkad on Turn 2 and annex the Commonwealth.  (And it would be silly if they did - my caljtal isnt there yet!). 

But in universe, my 1st Lord is dealing with Archons using words like ‘Battlecruiser Gap’ and ‘Existential Threat’.  Of course, shes also hearing words like ‘overpriced’ ‘useless’ ‘showboat’. While surrounded by stronger powers with much less head-up-ass than the current LC leadership.

So we split the baby, build something to appease the scared politicians who cant tell one warship from another, to show the army guys how useful an all in one multi-brigaide assault ship is arent they nice shouldnt the govt give us more money to build more for you guys did we mention every private gets his own bunk, and then we build a pile of jumpers and put them on long term loan to whichever megacartel is making us happiest.

We write doctrine to deal with larger/stronger enemy fleets and hope it works, we appease the competing government interests while laying down ships well aware thst -noone- knows what the conflict paradigm looks like in 20 years - or for that matter right now! 

So if the LC turns look wierd, thats why.

If a 2350 map exists, I have not found it, though it would please me to do so.

Smegish

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 445
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #226 on: 16 June 2018, 21:31:02 »
And you suddenly producing a BC is likely to lead to the Coordinator forcing me to do the same... fortunately Fubukis big sister is already in the planning office.

She's rich(ly oppointed), she's beautiful, she's got huuuugggeee.... tracts of land...

marcussmythe

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1204
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #227 on: 16 June 2018, 21:34:35 »
And you suddenly producing a BC is likely to lead to the Coordinator forcing me to do the same... fortunately Fubukis big sister is already in the planning office.

She's rich(ly oppointed), she's beautiful, she's got huuuugggeee.... tracts of land...

Honestly, if I already had Fubuki, Id have to wonder if its worth prototyping a 750, or serial producing more of her while upping my yard size to build something that can overmatch heracles, rather than merely fighting her.

It is a little wierd inasmuch as the DC will never -see- a Heracles.  But you -do- have to assume that I’ll build in response to her.  On the flip side... your current in universe problem is Rasalhaugian Patriots.  Does the Coordinator think that Battlecruisers will help with that problem?

Hmm.  Now that I think on it, a 750 KT version of Potemkin might be exactly what the doctor ordered.  Invade all the things, in safety and comfort.  Tweak collar load up or down depending on budget and how happy you want to make the army.  Make the coordinator happy.  Make the army happy.  Make your deep and burning love for Naval Autocannon happy.
« Last Edit: 16 June 2018, 21:39:02 by marcussmythe »

Smegish

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 445
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #228 on: 16 June 2018, 22:09:14 »
As you said, I know it can probably do the job if built in sufficient numbers, but Mr Kurita may very well want a Big Ship to equal the Big Ship you're building in response to Marik's Big Ship :P

And that's assuming he doesn't want the DCA to somehow match the Terrans within his lifetime   ::)

Alsadius

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 926
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #229 on: 16 June 2018, 22:15:29 »
does a 2350 map of the sphere exist? best I can find is the various faction maps at their creation, and then 2571 when the Reunification War kicks off. Nothing in between

I'm currently basing any future plans on the fact the 2571 map is more or less correct, minus the fact I don't own those dirty Norsemen yet ;)

I have no better map than those. If you want to confirm any particulars, load up the planet on Sarna - they seem to all have pretty good timelines of ownership, and that'll give you a sense of how any given border may have moved. But yes, that assumption matches what I've been using for general purposes.

---

The Capellan Commonality has, after a substantial analysis of their naval situation, decided to eschew the concept of building a true black-water navy as being beyond their means. Capella simply does not have the industrial muscle to build a true navy from scratch, nor can it easily change that fact. Instead, the Capellans have decided to fall back on a traditional technique for asymmetrical naval warfare - commerce raiding. The Qinru Zhe is one of the fastest ships in production, and while its armament is relatively light, it is more than sufficient to destroy any civilian craft or infrastructure that it may be sent against, or to challenge smaller WarShips. It also mounts a state-of-the-art sensor suite, designed to allow it to choose its battles as effectively as possible. The ship is designed for lengthy deployments, with a generous fuel reserve, a larger cargo bay than many of its peers, and eschewing capital missiles to ensure that its guns do not run dry before it can return to base. Two squads of marines and two shuttle bays also allow the ship to capture enemies intact and return them home under a prize crew, in some circumstances.

Code: [Select]
Class/Model/Name: Qinru Zhe
Tech: Inner Sphere
Ship Cost: $7,946,314,000.00
Magazine Cost: $11,757,600.00
BV2: 54,753

Mass: 480,000
K-F Drive System: Compact
Power Plant: Maneuvering Drive
Safe Thrust: 5
Maximum Thrust: 8
Armor Type: Standard
Armament:
4 Naval AC 30
16 Naval Laser 55
120 AC 2

Class/Model/Name: Qinru Zhe
Mass: 480,000

Equipment: Mass
Drive: 144,000
Thrust
Safe: 5
Maximum: 8
Controls: 1,200
K-F Hyperdrive: Compact (11 Integrity) 217,200
Jump Sail: (4 Integrity) 54
Structural Integrity: 80 38,400
Total Heat Sinks: 1021 Single 440
Fuel & Fuel Pumps: 12500 points 5,100
Fire Control Computers: 0
Armor: 308 pts Standard 768
Fore: 70
Fore-Left/Right: 60/60
Aft-Left/Right: 60/60
Aft: 46

Dropship Capacity: 2 2,000
Grav Decks:
Small: 2 100
Medium: 0
Large: 0
Escape Pods: 20 140
Life Boats: 20 140

Crew And Passengers:
33 Officers in 1st Class Quarters 330
108 Crew in 2nd Class Quarters 756
52 Gunners and Others in 2nd Class Quarters 364
10 Bay Personnel 0
60 2nd Class Passengers 420

# Weapons Loc Heat Damage Range Mass
4 Naval AC 30 Nose 400 1200 (120-C) Long-C 14,000
4 Naval Laser 55 FL 340 220 (22-C) Extreme-C 4,400
4 Naval Laser 55 FR 340 220 (22-C) Extreme-C 4,400
4 Naval Laser 55 AL 340 220 (22-C) Extreme-C 4,400
4 Naval Laser 55 AR 340 220 (22-C) Extreme-C 4,400
15 AC 2 Nose 15 30 (3-C) Long 90
15 AC 2 Aft 15 30 (3-C) Long 90
15 AC 2 RBS 15 30 (3-C) Long 90
15 AC 2 LBS 15 30 (3-C) Long 90
15 AC 2 FR 15 30 (3-C) Long 90
15 AC 2 FL 15 30 (3-C) Long 90
15 AC 2 AR 15 30 (3-C) Long 90
15 AC 2 AL 15 30 (3-C) Long 90

Ammo Rounds Mass
Naval AC 30 Ammo 160 128.00
AC 2 Ammo 10800 240.00

Number Equipment and Bays Mass Doors
35,000 Cargo, Standard 35,000 2
1 NCSS Large 500
2 Bay Small Craft 400 2

The Capellans have chosen to build two Qinru Zhe raiders, as well as publicizing them heavily in order to warn off other nations who might be interested in attacking. They have also invested in blueprints for a Chongzhi recharge station, with the intent of developing a network to allow faster redeployment of their raiders in wartime.

Prototype cost = $7.946B
2x Qinru Zhe = $15.893B
40x small craft = $400m
Chongzhi license = $169m (transferred to SIML)
Chongzhi = $338m
Research = $254m

---

The Sarna Supremacy has taken an interest in the chaos in Tikonov, and wishes to assist its neighbours...directly, shall we say. Since the campaign is planned for the near future, the long lead time needed for a new WarShip design is deemed to be uneconomical by the Premier. Instead, a large order of DropShips equipped to carry heavy vehicles is placed with various suppliers, as well as a small number equipped for fighter operations, and Sarna-flagged merchant ships are subject to many random inspections to ascertain their readiness for military operations(as required in an obscure provision of the Sarna Maritime Regulations).

72x DropShip = $21.6B
100x small craft = $1B
300x fighter = $1.5B
Research = $900m
« Last Edit: 16 June 2018, 22:18:18 by Alsadius »

marcussmythe

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1204
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #230 on: 16 June 2018, 22:32:59 »
I like Quinrue Zee.  Thats a classic response for a completely overmatched naval power.  Guerre de course.  Jejune Ecole.  She cant win a fight with a ‘real’ warship, hell, she’ll have problems with a beefy corvette.  But she should almost never have to be on a fight she didnt pick.

Hell, at the risk of Rule whatever it is, Im watching each of us do various different versions of IRL minor powers faced with the IRL Naval hegemon of their era.  Its really cool for a certain very narrow flavor of nerd.

Smegish

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 445
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #231 on: 17 June 2018, 02:54:02 »
No fighters... no AMS unless AC/2s count... good thing it has alot of engine, its going to do alot of running away.

Reckon a Heimdallrr will take it apart (eventually), nevermind the Leagues little beastie.

And unless we're ignoring the 70 point Bay limit, I assume those NAC/30s are in twin turrets, and just listed as one big bay because it was easier?

marcussmythe

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1204
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #232 on: 17 June 2018, 04:57:01 »
1.)  Bays are entirely artificial/management construct - id be aurprised if we are using them.l, other than as a handy counting tool.

2.)  She doesnt have to fight Heimdaller, or anyone, really.  Light that giant fusion torch and head for the hill.

marcussmythe

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1204
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #233 on: 17 June 2018, 07:44:28 »
I counted all the worlds big enough to bother putting on the maps.

Lyran Commonwealth Predecessor States, 2330:  ~120
Lyran Commonwealth, 2571 ~330

Gives me a sense of scale, expected growth, and also tells me how many recharge stations to buy. :)

Alsadius

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 926
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #234 on: 17 June 2018, 08:11:01 »
Hell, at the risk of Rule whatever it is, Im watching each of us do various different versions of IRL minor powers faced with the IRL Naval hegemon of their era. Its really cool for a certain very narrow flavor of nerd.

Which sums up this whole thread, really. And I'm not worried about rules of that sort. The game keeps us on topic over the long run, and a thread like this is pretty self-segregating, especially on a quiet board - I don't think we're polluting anyone else's feed, so I doubt the mods mind some amount of RL naval discussion on the side.

No fighters... no AMS unless AC/2s count... good thing it has alot of engine, its going to do alot of running away.

Reckon a Heimdallrr will take it apart (eventually), nevermind the Leagues little beastie.

And unless we're ignoring the 70 point Bay limit, I assume those NAC/30s are in twin turrets, and just listed as one big bay because it was easier?

Fighters eat up a lot of supply mass, and don't do much that this ship needs. It's designed to kill civilian ships or light combatants - one NAC/30 will scramble the eggs of a DropShip (given that they're all <5k tons at this point) or a JumpShip. They're actually four single turrets, just to increase your total chances of landing a hit - I don't bother breaking out the bays on my designs, because it's annoying with the spreadsheet, but that was how I thought of it. Even if you are facing real enemies, a single NAC/30 will be a threshold crit on any WarShip in this era, and the nose mount combined with the giant engines means she can do one heck of a high-speed closing engagement, so keeping them as singles is probably ideal(even if it'll be regretted in a century as defences get stronger).

So yeah, it'll lose badly to a ship designed for pitched battles, but what else would the Capellans do? They can't win those battles even if they optimize their designs for it, so they're just tossing the whole concept over one shoulder. You're seeing this in a lot of nations in the Capellan zone - they're all implementing strategies of desperation in one form or another, because they're small nations sandwiched together in a very dangerous part of the galaxy, and none of them have the resources to stand alone. They'll be merging in less than 20 years, because this is the sort of situation where merging with all your enemies just to make sure you can survive makes sense. The FWL attacked them recently, the FS is going to attack them this turn, and the TH is vomiting out more ships in a year than the whole zone is in a decade - this is full-on "If Hitler invaded Hell, I would make at least a favourable reference to the devil in the House of Commons" territory. And designs like this are part of the process of them consciously realizing it.

---

Marauder has re-considered his previous involvement in this due to personal commitments, and has told me that he's dropping out after all. He'll still be around, just not running a nation.

As such, I'll be drawing up the Taurian budget. It's basically in line with what I suggested to him before - one Independence($9.134B with prototype costs), the support craft to fill it out(one DropShip, 4 small craft, and 12 fighters for a total of $400m), 60 more fighters for system defence($300m), and $166m on research.

---

The Duchy of Liao believes that the only plausible solution to an inferior economic position is building the largest, most effective individual units possible, and accepting the resulting numerical inferiority in hopes of having a force that can defeat enemy detachments without suffering attritional losses. Unfortunately for the Duchy of Liao, they do not have shipyards suitable for the construction of such units, nor do they have the staggering sums needed to build such yards or the allies to borrow the yard space. As such their designs like the mighty Du Shi Wang will remain on the drawing board for the time being.

Instead, the Duchy has decided to invest in the most capable hull that they can build with current technology. The Quzhujian destroyer is short-legged, cramped, and contains few facilities for long-term occupation by its crew, and constructing it stretched the Duchy's finances and shipyards to their limits. However, it has six of the largest guns of any ship known, speed superior to most of its competitors, a powerful strike fighter force, and possibly the strongest set of active and passive defences of any ship in active service.

Code: [Select]
Class/Model/Name: Quzhujian
Tech: Inner Sphere
Ship Cost: $5,997,876,000.00
Magazine Cost: $31,720,000.00
BV2: 54,012

Mass: 500,000
K-F Drive System: Compact
Power Plant: Maneuvering Drive
Safe Thrust: 4
Maximum Thrust: 6
Armor Type: Standard
Armament:
6 Naval AC 40
24 Capital Launcher AR-10
16 Naval Laser 55
80 Machine Gun (IS)
32 AC 5

Class/Model/Name: Quzhujian
Mass: 500,000

Equipment: Mass
Drive: 120,000
Thrust
Safe: 4
Maximum: 6
Controls: 1,250
K-F Hyperdrive: Compact (12 Integrity) 226,250
Jump Sail: (4 Integrity) 55
Structural Integrity: 120 60,000
Total Heat Sinks: 1225 Single 691
Fuel & Fuel Pumps: 5000 points 2,040
Fire Control Computers: 0
Armor: 480 pts Standard 1,200
Fore: 100
Fore-Left/Right: 100/100
Aft-Left/Right: 90/90
Aft: 72

Dropship Capacity: 0
Grav Decks:
Small: 0
Medium: 0
Large: 0
Escape Pods: 20 140
Life Boats: 20 140

Crew And Passengers:
36 Officers in 2nd Class Quarters 252
109 Crew in Steerage Quarters 545
65 Gunners and Others in Steerage Quarters 325
126 Bay Personnel 0

# Weapons Loc Heat Damage Range Mass
2 Naval AC 40 Nose 270 800 (80-C) Medium-C 9,000
2 Naval AC 40 LBS 270 800 (80-C) Medium-C 9,000
2 Naval AC 40 RBS 270 800 (80-C) Medium-C 9,000
6 Capital Launcher AR-10 FL Extreme-C 1,500
6 Capital Launcher AR-10 FR Extreme-C 1,500
6 Capital Launcher AR-10 AL Extreme-C 1,500
6 Capital Launcher AR-10 AR Extreme-C 1,500
4 Naval Laser 55 Nose 340 220 (22-C) Extreme-C 4,400
4 Naval Laser 55 LBS 340 220 (22-C) Extreme-C 4,400
4 Naval Laser 55 RBS 340 220 (22-C) Extreme-C 4,400
4 Naval Laser 55 Aft 340 220 (22-C) Extreme-C 4,400
10 Machine Gun (IS) Nose 20 (2-C) Short-PDS 5
10 Machine Gun (IS) LBS 20 (2-C) Short-PDS 5
10 Machine Gun (IS) RBS 20 (2-C) Short-PDS 5
10 Machine Gun (IS) Aft 20 (2-C) Short-PDS 5
10 Machine Gun (IS) FL 20 (2-C) Short-PDS 5
10 Machine Gun (IS) FR 20 (2-C) Short-PDS 5
10 Machine Gun (IS) AL 20 (2-C) Short-PDS 5
10 Machine Gun (IS) AR 20 (2-C) Short-PDS 5
4 AC 5 Nose 4 20 (2-C) Medium 32
4 AC 5 LBS 4 20 (2-C) Medium 32
4 AC 5 RBS 4 20 (2-C) Medium 32
4 AC 5 Aft 4 20 (2-C) Medium 32
4 AC 5 FL 4 20 (2-C) Medium 32
4 AC 5 FR 4 20 (2-C) Medium 32
4 AC 5 AL 4 20 (2-C) Medium 32
4 AC 5 AR 4 20 (2-C) Medium 32

Ammo Rounds Mass
Naval AC 40 Ammo 180 216.00
Capital Launcher Barracuda Ammo 120 3,600.00
Capital Launcher Killer Whale Ammo 120 6,000.00
Capital Launcher White Shark Ammo 120 4,800.00
Machine Gun (IS) Ammo 8000 40.00
AC 5 Ammo 3200 160.00

Number Equipment and Bays Mass Doors
13,000 Cargo, Standard 13,000 2
48 Bay Fighter 7,200 8
6 Bay Small Craft 1,200 2

In order to defray the fearsome cost of these ships, and to ensure some funds may be available for shipyard expansion in future, the Duchy has also secured an export agreement with the Sian Commonwealth for the second Quzhujian off their lines at a total cost of $8 billion, payable during the development process. While this rather unusual arrangement has attracted notice, both for the lower price than is typical in the export market and the unusual level of trust that the Commonwealth is placing in Liao designers, spokesmen for both nations assure the public that it is merely a financial arrangement that better suited the needs of the two realms than a typical cash-on-delivery agreement would, and that nothing more should be read into it except a desire for shared peace and prosperity in the Capellan zone.

Budget: $15B
Prototype expense: $5.998B
2x Quzhujian: $11.996B
(Export proceeds: $8B gain)
300 fighter: $1.5B
50 small craft: $500m
Research: $306m

Remaining: $2.7B

---

The Sian Commonwealth was struggling with its desire for a navy to defend against the threat of new Heracles construction for over a year with no plausible solutions being found. Discussions of licensing Pratham defence stations, or even of trying to build a new shipyard industry from scratch, foundered upon the impracticality of actually producing a useful defence with the Commonwealth's limited budget. However, upon reading of the extremely ambitious Liao ship-building plans, an emissary was dispatched to discuss the possibility of purchasing a ship from Liao shipyards. The Commonwealth's navy was unhappy with the design in some particulars, as their larger astrographic size makes the cramped quarters distinctly unpleasant for the ship's crews. However, no other navy was willing to offer shipyard space for a price that the Commonwealth could afford, and so a deal was almost inevitable. As a compromise, they have decided to begin building a dedicated fleet supply train, commencing with a single JumpShip carrying a DropShip designed for crew recreation and storage of additional supplies.

Budget: $10B
Quzhujian import: $8B
12 fighter: $600m
30 small craft: $300m
1x JumpShip: $500m
1x DropShip: $300m
Research: $300m

marcussmythe

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1204
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #235 on: 17 June 2018, 09:47:53 »
Quote
Fighters eat up a lot of supply mass, and don't do much that this ship needs. It's designed to kill civilian ships or light combatants - one NAC/30 will scramble the eggs of a DropShip (given that they're all <5k tons at this point) or a JumpShip.

Most naval vessels don't have 'kill other naval vessels in a stand up fight' as their main job.  Ive the same concerns for her future that I do for any commerce raider - your one bad break from seeing her lost behind enemy lines - but she does the job shes intended to.  I might have gone smaller/cheaper, but thats horses for courses and all about what sort of defenses you expect to hit.

Quote
Marauder has re-considered his previous involvement in this due to personal commitments, and has told me that he's dropping out after all. He'll still be around, just not running a nation.

Damn.  *waves to Marauder*  Well, if your not playing, feel free to kibbutz publically or privately.  I may pick your brain.

Quote
The Duchy of Liao believes that the only plausible solution to an inferior economic position is building the largest, most effective individual units possible, and accepting the resulting numerical inferiority in hopes of having a force that can defeat enemy detachments without suffering attritional losses.
Hmm.  If the Duchy of Liao was Japanese rather than Chinese in extraction, they'd just about have to name her Yamato.

Quote
However, no other navy was willing to offer shipyard space for a price that the Commonwealth could afford, and so a deal was almost inevitable.

*sniff*  *sob*  They never even ASKED. 
~lol~  Srsly though, makes sense with the upcoming merger.


Side note:  I looked at what 1 Jumpship with 3x5000 ton dropships can haul.  Call it about 7.5KT of cargo, MSRP 1.4 Billion.  Im seriously considering setting aside yard space for full up freighters.

marcussmythe

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1204
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #236 on: 17 June 2018, 09:50:55 »
~deleted~
« Last Edit: 17 June 2018, 09:56:56 by marcussmythe »

Alsadius

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 926
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #237 on: 17 June 2018, 10:02:36 »
Hmm.  If the Duchy of Liao was Japanese rather than Chinese in extraction, they'd just about have to name her Yamato.

*sniff*  *sob*  They never even ASKED. 
~lol~  Srsly though, makes sense with the upcoming merger.


Side note:  I looked at what 1 Jumpship with 3x5000 ton dropships can haul.  Call it about 7.5KT of cargo, MSRP 1.4 Billion.  Im seriously considering setting aside yard space for full up freighters.

Yeah, the Yamato is what they want, but they can't build it. As a result, the Quzhujian is a typical hard-stats-only ship for secondary powers that want to look scary but don't expect to fight much, because that's what they can actually make.

And yes, the choice of licensing partners in the Capellan zone is largely metagame-based. It's a plausible deal, but they aren't going to start shopping the other realms for the time being.

Freighters are a reasonable choice in this era, for sure. They can't swap DropShips at the jump point to allow goods to fly towards the planets while they're charging, so their strategic movement speed will be much lower, but the raw goods per C-Bill isn't bad at all until there's larger DropShips to compete with them.

---

I've finally gotten around to publishing the master spreadsheet with amendments. Stations costs are properly calculated(no K-F and x5 multiplier, instead of K-F and x2 multiplier like before), the free armour per facing is included in the total armor point cap, and all post-2780 weapons have been removed from the list of options. You can find it here. I've never shared a Google Sheets doc like this before, so please make sure that the "Save a Copy" function works the same as it does on CryHavoc's sheet.

---

EDIT: This has been retconned away due to Kiviar taking over as Federated Suns player

The FedSuns pose a more interesting challenge than the other NPC realms. In-game because they have enough canon designs that I feel a need to work with what they have, but the designs are in some ways worse than the SLDF ships, and out-of-game because a couple people have mused about taking them over and so I was trying not to plan out too much of their turn until now. (You can still take over if you like, but you're stuck with this turn now. Muahaha, etc.)

In canon, the first FedSuns ship was the Defender, launched in 2360. Instead of filling that gap with a new ship, I've decided to move it up to 2350. (They only built six in canon, and had no new designs until 2510, so I'll be gap-filling down the line. But I'll start here.)

Code: [Select]
Class/Model/Name: Defender
Tech: Inner Sphere
Ship Cost: $11,661,986,000.00
Magazine Cost: $75,392,000.00
BV2: 102,348

Mass: 960,000
K-F Drive System: Compact
Power Plant: Maneuvering Drive
Safe Thrust: 5
Maximum Thrust: 8
Armor Type: Standard
Armament:
5 Naval AC 35
21 Naval AC 25
82 AC 5
47 Machine Gun (IS)

Class/Model/Name: Defender
Mass: 960,000

Equipment: Mass
Drive: 288,000
Thrust
Safe: 5
Maximum: 8
Controls: 2,400
K-F Hyperdrive: Compact (20 Integrity) 434,400
Jump Sail: (5 Integrity) 78
Structural Integrity: 40 38,400
Total Heat Sinks: 1703 Single 900
Fuel & Fuel Pumps: 7500 points 3,060
Fire Control Computers: 5
Armor: 330 pts Standard 765
Fore: 65
Fore-Left/Right: 60/60
Aft-Left/Right: 50/50
Aft: 45

Dropship Capacity: 4 4,000
Grav Decks:
Small: 0
Medium: 2 200
Large: 0
Escape Pods: 35 245
Life Boats: 35 245

Crew And Passengers:
48 Officers in 1st Class Quarters 480
189 Crew in 2nd Class Quarters 1,323
48 Gunners and Others in 2nd Class Quarters 336
100 Bay Personnel 0
12 1st Class Passengers 120
33 2nd Class Passengers 231

# Weapons Loc Heat Damage Range Mass
1 Naval AC 35 Nose 120 350 (35-C) Medium-C 4,000
2 Naval AC 35 RBS 240 700 (70-C) Medium-C 8,000
2 Naval AC 35 LBS 240 700 (70-C) Medium-C 8,000
9 Naval AC 25 Nose 765 2250 (225-C) Long-C 27,000
6 Naval AC 25 RBS 510 1500 (150-C) Long-C 18,000
6 Naval AC 25 LBS 510 1500 (150-C) Long-C 18,000
4 AC 5 Nose 4 20 (2-C) Medium 32
4 AC 5 RBS 4 20 (2-C) Medium 32
4 AC 5 LBS 4 20 (2-C) Medium 32
20 AC 5 Aft 20 100 (10-C) Medium 160
10 AC 5 FR 10 50 (5-C) Medium 80
10 AC 5 FL 10 50 (5-C) Medium 80
15 AC 5 AR 15 75 (7.5-C) Medium 120
15 AC 5 AL 15 75 (7.5-C) Medium 120
6 Machine Gun (IS) Nose 12 (1.2-C) Short-PDS 3
6 Machine Gun (IS) RBS 12 (1.2-C) Short-PDS 3
6 Machine Gun (IS) LBS 12 (1.2-C) Short-PDS 3
5 Machine Gun (IS) Aft 10 (1-C) Short-PDS 3
6 Machine Gun (IS) FR 12 (1.2-C) Short-PDS 3
6 Machine Gun (IS) FL 12 (1.2-C) Short-PDS 3
6 Machine Gun (IS) AR 12 (1.2-C) Short-PDS 3
6 Machine Gun (IS) AL 12 (1.2-C) Short-PDS 3

Ammo Rounds Mass
Naval AC 25 Ammo 1050 630.00
Naval AC 35 Ammo 250 250.00
AC 5 Ammo 8200 410.00
Machine Gun (IS) Ammo 9400 47.00

Number Equipment and Bays Mass Doors
20 Bay Small Craft 4,000 10
95,795 Cargo, Standard 95,795 6


Of course, this is a size 4 ship, and the FedSuns has no size 4 yards. As such, the yard at Delevan is being expanded to a size 4, which will allow two of these monsters to come off the lines.

Budget: $90B
Delevan upgrade (3>4): $40B
Defender R&D: $11.662B
2x Defender: $23.324B
12x DropShip: $3.6B
100x Small Craft: $1B
1800x fighter: $9B
Research: $1.414B

And that, finally, concludes design and budgeting for NPC nations. Next post: Actual combat results!
« Last Edit: 17 June 2018, 15:58:54 by Alsadius »

marcussmythe

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1204
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #238 on: 17 June 2018, 10:24:00 »
Freighters are a reasonable choice in this era, for sure. They can't swap DropShips at the jump point to allow goods to fly towards the planets while they're charging, so their strategic movement speed will be much lower, but the raw goods per C-Bill isn't bad at all until there's larger DropShips to compete with them.

Yes, but maybe I dont WANT my transport assets hanging around at the Jumppoint flapping in the breeze. :)

Beyond that.  May I assume that the Army is handling its OWN transport, just like the Merchants are handling THEIR OWN jumpships and dropships, and anything I build in that direction is essentially value added to those sectors of my nation.  And yes, the idea of a 'warfreighter' is done with malice aforethought.  It becomes a collier, or invasion transport, or fast fighter resupply, and all without leaving jumpships hanging lonely at the jumppoint.



Quote
I've finally gotten around to publishing the master spreadsheet with amendments. Stations costs are properly calculated(no K-F and x5 multiplier, instead of K-F and x2 multiplier like before), the free armour per facing is included in the total armor point cap, and all post-2780 weapons have been removed from the list of options. You can find it here. I've never shared a Google Sheets doc like this before, so please make sure that the "Save a Copy" function works the same as it does on CryHavoc's sheet.
 

Is there any way to turn that into a shareable excel spreadsheet?  No Google Docs for this boy.  :(

Quote
....but the designs are in some ways worse than the SLDF ships.


And that, finally, concludes design and budgeting for NPC nations. Next post: Actual combat results!

Well, Defender is a hellva commerce raider/battle-cruiser.  Run things down, nothing can run away... shes basically a giant version of the Capellan commerce raider next door.  Maybe she is just 'same, only more and better, cause Fedsuns and Freedom!'

Lyran observers are looking forward to reports of what actually happens (probalby not much, turn 1)
« Last Edit: 17 June 2018, 10:48:51 by marcussmythe »

Alsadius

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 926
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #239 on: 17 June 2018, 11:28:49 »
Next post: Actually not combat results!

The buddy of mine who was thinking of playing FedSuns has decided to jump in. So, the above FedSuns turn is retconned away, and I'll wait for his post to see what happens next. I'll get as much of the non-FS stuff as I can written up while he figures out his plans. There'll be a total of three battles to report, though mostly small ones.

Quote
Beyond that.  May I assume that the Army is handling its OWN transport, just like the Merchants are handling THEIR OWN jumpships and dropships, and anything I build in that direction is essentially value added to those sectors of my nation.

Merchants buy their own ships, and you do not need to help them(though you can, if desired). Army transport is part of your budget, though in practice most nations in this era just press civilian transports into service when needed. Wars are mostly short and sharp, so it hasn't cost anyone too much as of yet. Overly ambitious attempts to press civilian ships into service can have some consequences, but nobody's really been burned by them yet, and nobody has enough cash to replace it all with militarized ships yet.