Author Topic: Lurk Jumpship  (Read 441 times)

Lagrange

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1435
Lurk Jumpship
« on: 14 April 2024, 21:20:37 »
The Lurk is designed for a high risk mission: wait until a jump by an adversary is detected within 30 light years, calculate a solution to the same coordinates, and jump in with a carrier to capture or destroy the adversary's Jumpships.  The process of calculating a new jump typically takes hours, but the specifics of when exactly to make a counterjump will vary with circumstances but typically happen inside the expected recharge time of the adversary jumpship.   For example, if the adversarial jump was to a Zenith/Nadir with an invasion force, then waiting about 4.5 days until the invasion force is near turn over would leave the majority of adversarial forces out of position to respond within the envelope of a jump recharge window. 

The mission is high risk because the Lurk is jumping into a warzone.  Given the thin armor of a jumpship victory may very well include the destruction of the Lurk.  This high cost outcome is minimized by simply reducing the cost of the Lurk to a bare minimum.  The only "frills" in the design are a fuel tank large enough to support a jump charge, maximizing the meager armor available, and adding minimal point defense, all of which appear worth the associated ~1/3 of a percent increase in price.

The upside of this mission profile is that it has the potential to both paralyze a more powerful adversary and be massively profitable.  Typically the carrier also provides smallcraft capable of supporting boarding actions and a prize crew capable of taking over an adversary's jumpship. 

Survivability of the attached dropship is essential to the mission profile, so a high survivability carrier capable of escaping opposing ASF like the Ultra, Brood, or Nest is recommended.   

There are a couple canon designs you might consider as alternatives.  The Scout costs 50M more and lacks the onboard fuel necessary for a jump charge but is otherwise adequate.  The Quetzalcoatl is 50M + dropship (~= 200M?) cheaper but it has several significant drawbacks:
  • There is no high-survivability component, so the entire force is potentially subject to destruction by a couple adversary ASF.
  • There is no capacity to scale up.  A Dropship implies the ability to potentially bring to bear a full order of magnitude (100+ ASF) more force than the Quetzalcoatl can haul should it be needed.
  • There is no capacity to chase an adversary.  An adversary could use the station keeping drive's acceleration over a day to reach a distance of ~41k space hexes from the original jump point with a velocity of 288 space hexes/minute.  Dropships are essential to counter this since they have the speed (which a Jumpship does not) and the sensor range (which a Small Craft does not) to effectively chase down a run away Jumpship.


Code: [Select]
Lurk Jumpship
Mass: 50,000 tons
Technology Base: Inner Sphere (Advanced)
Introduced: 3025
Mass: 50,000
Battle Value: 576
Tech Rating/Availability: D/X-E-D-F
Cost: 338,470,542 C-bills

Fuel: 150 tons (1,500)
Safe Thrust: 0
Maximum Thrust: 0
Sail Integrity: 3
KF Drive Integrity: 2
Heat Sinks: 79
Structural Integrity: 1

Armor
    Nose: 4
    Fore Sides: 3/3
    Aft Sides: 4/4
    Aft: 4

Cargo
    Bay 1:  Cargo (80.0 tons)       1 Door   

Ammunition:
None

Dropship Capacity: 1
Grav Decks: 0
Escape Pods: 3
Life Boats: 0
Crew:  3 officers, 6 enlisted/non-rated, 9 gunners

Notes: Mounts 27.5 tons of standard aerospace armor.

Weapons:           Capital Attack Values (Standard)
Arc (Heat)     Heat  SRV     MRV     LRV      ERV    Class       
Nose (12 Heat)
2 Small Laser   2    1(6)    0(0)    0(0)     0(0)   Point Defense
2 Small Laser   2    1(6)    0(0)    0(0)     0(0)   Point Defense
2 Small Laser   2    1(6)    0(0)    0(0)     0(0)   Point Defense
2 Small Laser   2    1(6)    0(0)    0(0)     0(0)   Point Defense
2 Small Laser   2    1(6)    0(0)    0(0)     0(0)   Point Defense
2 Small Laser   2    1(6)    0(0)    0(0)     0(0)   Point Defense
FRS/FLS (8 Heat)
2 Small Laser   2    1(6)    0(0)    0(0)     0(0)   Point Defense
2 Small Laser   2    1(6)    0(0)    0(0)     0(0)   Point Defense
2 Small Laser   2    1(6)    0(0)    0(0)     0(0)   Point Defense
2 Small Laser   2    1(6)    0(0)    0(0)     0(0)   Point Defense
ARS/ALS (8 Heat)
2 Small Laser   2    1(6)    0(0)    0(0)     0(0)   Point Defense
2 Small Laser   2    1(6)    0(0)    0(0)     0(0)   Point Defense
2 Small Laser   2    1(6)    0(0)    0(0)     0(0)   Point Defense
2 Small Laser   2    1(6)    0(0)    0(0)     0(0)   Point Defense
Aft (10 Heat)
2 Small Laser   2    1(6)    0(0)    0(0)     0(0)   Point Defense
2 Small Laser   2    1(6)    0(0)    0(0)     0(0)   Point Defense
2 Small Laser   2    1(6)    0(0)    0(0)     0(0)   Point Defense
2 Small Laser   2    1(6)    0(0)    0(0)     0(0)   Point Defense
2 Small Laser   2    1(6)    0(0)    0(0)     0(0)   Point Defense

Interestingly, Lurk deployments can protect multiple systems connected by HPGs since all jump points within 30 light years are equally accessible.  The ability to thus provide a form of insurance policy for multiple systems helps defray the cost.

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 38237
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: Lurk Jumpship
« Reply #1 on: 15 April 2024, 18:48:27 »
I think minimal Point Defense would be worth installing too... :)

Lagrange

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1435
Re: Lurk Jumpship
« Reply #2 on: 15 April 2024, 21:19:29 »
I think minimal Point Defense would be worth installing too... :)
Good point. 

It does bring up the question: how much point defense?  I ended up concluding 4 bays of 2x SLs.  These deal 1 capital damage each.  When used defensively, they deal .5 capital damage to missiles which rounds up to 1.  Hence, it can provide protection from missiles similar in scale to the armor itself making other methods of attack far more likely to be the Lurk killer.

This does reduce cargo to 51 tons, but that's enough for 6 months worth of supplies, which seems reasonable.

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 38237
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: Lurk Jumpship
« Reply #3 on: 16 April 2024, 03:15:47 »
Oh, you meant per arc!  That should more than do! :)

Lagrange

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1435
Re: Lurk Jumpship
« Reply #4 on: 16 April 2024, 07:19:00 »
Oh, you meant per arc!  That should more than do! :)
Yeah, Jumpships can't really control their orientation vs. ASF very well.  Nevertheless, I tweaked the nose arc to have 6 point defense bays (and one more gunner) just in case.

It's difficult to estimate how much the point defense bays increase survivability but the first point defense bay in each arc almost certainly increases survivability by more than 0.05% cost.  Restated, in all the situations where 'naked' version is destroyed the version with one point defense bay per arc may survives at least 1-in-2000 times.  The 4th bay may increase survivability by the .2% cost (i.e. 1-in-500).  After that point, the tonnage cost starts becoming the primary concern since you'd like enough supplies to be able to run around a system and survive for a half-year+ on your own should that end up necessary.

Daryk

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 38237
  • The Double Deuce II/II-σ
Re: Lurk Jumpship
« Reply #5 on: 16 April 2024, 17:46:54 »
Sounds like solid math to me! :)