Author Topic: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race  (Read 190316 times)

truetanker

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 9902
  • Clan Hells Horses 666th Mech. Assualt Cluster
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #270 on: 18 June 2018, 22:05:59 »
I fear we may get distracted from the point of the exercise - warship design - by our desire to play GalCiv/MOO.

Trying to get more military fundings, my economy is shot, hell I don't have much in the way of funds to begin with.

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 #271 on: 18 June 2018, 22:18:36 »
Well, then Id spend my budget on jumpships and dropships so your army can conquer stuff, jumpships also support trade, and maybe a recharge station or two.

Also?  Let time pass.  Its just now 2360.  Id aim for slow, long growth, and trying to dodge the reuinfication war (somehow) and the deveststion of the succession wars (somehow).  Your in for the very, very long game.

Smegish

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 445
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #272 on: 19 June 2018, 03:42:01 »
Well, guess I'll start us off for this turn.

This is assuming maintenance on everything, 5% loss rate on fighters (rounded casualties up to nearest 36-fighter wing for own sanity and to represent losses in Rasalhague) and paying an extra 10% maintenance on DCS Kutai for repairs.

Code: [Select]
Year: 2360 Value in Millions
Money Available 100,000
Remaining from Last Turn 577
Income Trojan Lease 2 to Marians 1000 2000

Available Shipyards
Luthien 3/2/2
New Samarkand 3/1
Midway 1

Repairs DCS Kutai 609

Maintenance 62350 12% 7482

Prototype Cost Trojan 4,031
Atago 9,339

Construction Unit Price
Shipyards New Samarkand New Lvl 1 5000 5000
Warships Kutai 2 6,092 12,184
Fubuki 1 7,241 7,241
Trojan 2 4,031 8,062
Atago 3 9,339 33,012
Jumpships 10 500 5000
Dropships 22 300 6,600
Fighters 25 x 36 900 5 4,500
Small Craft 72 10 720
Research 3,792 1 3,792

Total Spent 102577


Remaining 0

Next Turn Maintenance 12% 15,193

Start Turn In Service NumberValue BV
Warships Atago 0 0 83558
Fubuki 2 14482 57421
Kutai 4 24368 15629
Trojan 0 0 15229

Jumpships 20 10000
Dropships 12 3600

Fighters 1692 8460 47 Wings
Small Craft 144 1440
Total 62350
Maintanence 12% 7482

End Turn In Service

Warships Atago 3 28017
Fubuki 3 21723
Kutai 6 36552
Trojan 0 0

Jumpships 30 15000
Dropships 34 10200

Fighters 2592 12960 72 Wings of 36
Small Craft 216 2160

And the new ships. First off the Trojan-class spy/Q-ship/corvette


Code: [Select]
Class/Model/Name: Trojan
Tech: Inner Sphere
Ship Cost: $4,031,166,000.00
Magazine Cost: $3,560,000.00
BV2: 15,229

Mass: 100,000
K-F Drive System: Compact
Power Plant: Maneuvering Drive
Safe Thrust: 3
Maximum Thrust: 5
Armor Type: Standard
Armament:
1 Naval AC 40
72 AC 5
32 Machine Gun (IS)
16 Naval Laser 35

Designed as a covert operations ship at first, the Trojan is designed to look exactly like an Aquila-class to enable to to blend into civilian traffic as it spies on the Combines enemies. The ship even acts as a standard cargo hauler to maintain its cover, though crew are careful to never allow anyone else aboard. While they looks like copies of old rust buckets, the internals are entirely modern; with a compact core; upgraded defenses against small craft and missiles; and naval lasers hidden behind carefully designed retractable covers in each quarter. But the big surprise for this ship is the massive naval autocannon hidden in the nose of the ship in the centre of the now superfluous ram-scoop.


While stronger and better armoured than the old Aquila, this ship is not intended to see action against a true warship, though the BFG in the nose does give a cunning captain a chance if they can get close before striking. Crew quarters are relatively spartan for a DCA vessel, with the space saved used to add space for up to a 60-man group of special agents, to be delivered wherever they are needed.

DCA captains, as well as the rest of the senior officers on board are aware that they must remain undetected, and their true origin must be kept a secret at all costs. To that end there are scuttling charges positioned against both the fuel tank and NAC magazine, to ensure that if an enemy tries to seize the ship, they will gain nothing from the ship or crew.

Code: [Select]
Class/Model/Name: Trojan
Mass: 100,000

Equipment: Mass
Drive: 18,000.00
Thrust
Safe: 3
Maximum: 5
Controls: 250.00
K-F Hyperdrive: Compact (4 Integrity) 45,250.00
Jump Sail: (3 Integrity) 35.00
Structural Integrity: 30 3,000.00
Total Heat Sinks: 1039 Single 805.00
Fuel & Fuel Pumps: 40000 points 4,080.00
Fire Control Computers: 0.00
Armor: 48 pts Standard 60.00
Fore: 12
Fore-Left/Right: 11/11
Aft-Left/Right: 11/11
Aft: 10

Dropship Capacity: 0 0.00
Grav Decks:
Small: 1 50.00
Life Boats: 22 154.00

Bay #1: Fighters (12) - 1 Door
Bay #2: Small Craft (12) - 1 Door
Bay #3: Cargo (6288 Tons) - 2 Doors

Crew And Passengers:
18 Officers in 2nd Class Quarters 126.00
47 Crew in Steerage Quarters 235.00
41 Gunners and Others in Steerage Quarters 205.00
84 Bay Personnel 0.00
1st Class Passengers 0.00
60 2nd Class Special Ops 420.00
50 Steerage Marines 250.00



Code: [Select]
# Weapons Loc Heat Damage Range Mass
1 Naval AC 40 Nose 135 400 (40-C) Medium-C 4,500.00
8 AC 5 Nose 8 40 (4-C) 64.00
4 MGs Nose 8 (0.8-C) 2.00
4 Naval Laser 35 FR 208 140 (14-C) 2,800.00
8 AC 5 FR 8 40 (4-C) 64.00
4 MGs FR 8 (0.8-C) 2.00
4 Naval Laser 35 FL 208 140 (14-C) 2,800.00
8 AC 5 FL 8 40 (4-C) 64.00
4 MGs FL 8 (0.8-C) 2.00
12 AC 5 LBS 12 60 (6-C) 96.00
4 MGs LBS 8 (0.8-C) 2.00
12 AC 5 RBS 12 60 (6-C) 96.00
4 MGs RBS 8 (0.8-C) 2.00
4 Naval Laser 35 AR 208 140 (14-C) 2,800.00
8 AC 5 AR 8 40 (4-C) 64.00
4 MGs AR 8 (0.8-C) 2.00
4 Naval Laser 35 AL 208 140 (14-C) 2,800.00
8 AC 5 AL 8 40 (4-C) 64.00
4 MGs AL 8 (0.8-C) 2.00
8 AC 5 Aft 8 40 (4-C) 64.00
4 MGs Aft 8 (0.8-C) 2.00

Ammo Rounds Mass
Naval AC 40 Ammo 20 24.00
AC 5 Ammo 2880 144.00
Machine Gun (IS) Ammo 6400 32.00

NCSS (Small) 100.00

Due to a deal reached with the Marian Hegemony, who were desperate for any ship they could get, both of the brand new Trojans have been leased to the Hegemony for 60 years.

And next, the Atago:

Atago-class (Cruiser)

Code: [Select]
Class/Model/Name: Atago
Tech: Inner Sphere
Ship Cost: $9,399,368,000.00
Magazine Cost: $27,816,000.00
BV2: 83,558

Mass: 750,000
K-F Drive System: Compact
Power Plant: Maneuvering Drive
Safe Thrust: 3
Maximum Thrust: 5
Armor Type: Standard
Armament:
38 Naval AC 20
48 AC 5
24 Machine Gun (IS)
28 Naval Laser 35

Designed as a cruiser and battlegroup command ship, the original plans called for the Atago to have a sizeable cargo bay to support ground assaults on foreign worlds, but the discovery of the Suns-built Galahad led to the Coordinator Gendo Kurita pushing for a redesign with heavier firepower to beat the Feddie design into submission should it be encountered. An impressive array of Naval Autocannon and Naval Lasers can unleash fire in all directions, while the thick armour and reinforced structure enable it to take a beating and remain fully operational. With a fully equipped suite for a fleet admiral and his staff and enhanced sensors to feed him all the information he needs to achieve victory. Two wings of fighters serve aboard, giving plenty of protection from the kind of trouble the Rasalhagians gave the DCS Kutai just a few years past.

The Coordinator was most pleased by the final design, even to the point of sending his son - Shinji - on a tour of the recently subjugated Rasalhague worlds abord the DCS Atago, to better show his more intellectually minded son the power he shall one day hold, and its costs and responsibilities.

Code: [Select]
Class/Model/Name: Atago
Mass: 750,000

Equipment: Mass
Drive: 135,000.00
Thrust
Safe: 3
Maximum: 5
Controls: 1,875.00
K-F Hyperdrive: Compact (16 Integrity) 339,375.00
Jump Sail: (5 Integrity) 68.00
Structural Integrity: 140 105,000.00
Total Heat Sinks: 3784 Single 3,220.00
Fuel & Fuel Pumps: 20000 points 8,160.00
Fire Control Computers: 0.00
Armor: 840 pts Standard 2,100.00
Fore: 154
Fore-Left/Right: 165/165
Aft-Left/Right: 165/165
Aft: 110

Dropship Capacity: 2 2,000.00
Grav Decks:
Small: 2 100.00
Escape Pods: 30 210.00
Life Boats: 30 210.00

Bay #1: Fighters (72) – 6 Doors
Bay #2: Small Craft (12) – 2 Doors
Bay #3: Cargo (20151 Tons) – 2 Doors

Crew And Passengers:
48 Officers in 1st Class Quarters 480.00
147 Crew in 2nd Class Quarters 1,029.00
90 Gunners and Others in 2nd Class Quarters 630.00
204 Bay Personnel 0.00
20 1st Class Passengers 200.00
60 2nd Class Passengers 420.00
100 Steerage Marines 500.00



Code: [Select]
# Weapons Loc Heat Damage Range Mass
6 Naval AC 20 Nose 360 1200 (120-C) Long-C 15,000.00
8 AC 5 Nose 8 40 (4-C) 64.00
4 Machine Gun (IS)Nose 8 (0.8-C) 2.00
4 Naval AC 20 FR 240 800 (80-C) 10,000.00
8 AC 5 FR 8 40 (4-C) 64.00
4 Naval Laser 35 FR 208 140 (14-C) 2,800.00
4 Machine Gun (IS)FR 8 (0.8-C) 2.00
4 Naval AC 20 FL 240 800 (80-C) 10,000.00
8 AC 5 FL 8 40 (4-C) 64.00
4 Naval Laser 35 FL 208 140 (14-C) 2,800.00
4 Machine Gun (IS)FL 8 (0.8-C) 2.00
8 Naval AC 20 LBS 480 1600 (160-C) 20,000.00
6 Naval Laser 35 LBS 312 210 (21-C) 4,200.00
8 Naval AC 20 RBS 480 1600 (160-C) 20,000.00
6 Naval Laser 35 RBS 312 210 (21-C) 4,200.00
4 Naval AC 20 AR 240 800 (80-C) 10,000.00
8 AC 5 AR 8 40 (4-C) 64.00
2 Naval Laser 35 AR 104 70 (7-C) 1,400.00
4 Machine Gun (IS)AR 8 (0.8-C) 2.00
4 Naval AC 20 AL 240 800 (80-C) 10,000.00
8 AC 5 AL 8 40 (4-C) 64.00
2 Naval Laser 35 AL 104 70 (7-C) 1,400.00
4 Machine Gun (IS)AL 8 (0.8-C) 2.00
4 Naval Laser 35 Aft 208 140 (14-C) 2,800.00
8 AC 5 Aft 8 40 (4-C) 64.00
4 Machine Gun (IS)Aft 8 (0.8-C) 2.00

Ammo Rounds Mass
Naval AC 20 Ammo 1140 456.00
AC 5 Ammo 1920 96.00
Machine Gun (IS) Ammo 4800 24.00
NCSS (Large)   500.00

Code: [Select]
Fleet Deployment

Galedon Prefecture (Davion Front)
Atago-class Kashima
Fubuki-class Yudachi
Kutai-class Pesht, Arkab

Benjamin Prefecture (Steiner Front)
Atago-class Takao
Fubuki-class Fubuki
Kutai-class Galedon, Benjamin

Pesht Prefecture (Rasalhague Front)
Atago-class Atago
Fubuki-class Ibuki
Kutai-class Kutai, Luthien

Each of the Atago and Fubuki class are escorted by a Kutai at all times, after the near disaster in Trondheim, no ship travels alone.
If this slows the subjugation of the Rasalhague people, so be it.

*OOC: If you want to run the NAC/40 as a spinal mount -working like a mass driver- due to its location I am cool with that. Also, while I have bunched all the identical guns in one location into one listing to clean things up, assume all capital guns are in twin turrets, ACs and MGs in quad turrets. NAC/20s have 30 rounds per gun, AC/5s have 40 rounds/gun, MGs have 200 rounds/gun.

Yes, the Coordinators son is going to be on a ship in a warzone, feel free to have fun with that if you like Mr GM.

EDIT: Due to the exorbitant price, some last minute adjustments were made to Atago's design, removing two dropship collars in favour of more cargo space. Information above has been corrected to suit, including budget.
« Last Edit: 20 June 2018, 04:06:22 by Smegish »

marcussmythe

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1204
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #273 on: 20 June 2018, 07:48:34 »
You may take it as a complement that I have been trying, and have failed, to design something on the same displacement as Atago that could fight her 1:1.  NAC 20 may be my favourite gun for firepower to weight, solid armor, etc. 

As for cargo and deployment times - I think we may be assuming more supply requirement than makes sense.  You need gas... but at most 40tons/day.  So 8000 tons of fuel is 200 days at a 1 G burn.  Unless the warship is jumping in system and immediatley lighting off its drives, 200 burn days seem good for a year unrefueled - if ships casually and constantly made 1 g burns, we could save money on grav decks.  :)  And fuel is hydrogen, right?  As long as the ship is over a friendly world, just buy it.

Ditto food.  With the recycling characterstics of actual shipboard quarters, its pretty easy to put a year or more of food on these things.  Its easy to forget how insanely huge warships are, and how equally tiny their crews.

Whats left?  Spare parts?  Unless your rebuilding major structural elements, it seems that most of what you need is spares - and that most broken things would get recycled/repaired, not thrown out.  I dont know what % of her mass a modern warship deploys with in spare parts, but if the answer is more than 1 or 2, i would be quite surprised.

Now - Ammo and Fighters might get you there.  Ammo is hard to figure out how to budget.   Historically, ships often shot themselves dry in an engagement or two.  With NACs, this is not a concern.  Its trivial to load enough ammo that the ship will never run out in any reasonable scenario.  And hey, mount some lasers for when you really need to fire for free.  Missiles are a different story - a missile armed ship is going to need resupply after an engagement or two.  But how much of its life is a ship firing in anger?  And again, after a real engagement, your probably wanting to get back to the barn anyway to bang out the dents.

Fighters may be another story - espc if your usng them to drop bombs/capital missiles on targets that cant fight back.  You could blow through 5 tons of fuel and 20 tons of ammo or more for every strike bird every day.  That will empty even a McKenna’s cargo bays pretty quickly. 

To which it seems the answer is ‘dont use warships to move air-to-ground munitons across space.  Do your naval support of ground operations with orbital laser fire’.  Youll still need to suppress enemy fighters or engage in anti-shipping work, but thats gonna be less bad on supplies.

TLDR - I think that we are overestimating supply requirements.  Perhaps as an attempt to justify star league designs and disdain the ‘munchkin ships’ with 2000 tons of cargo with out brilliant understanding of logistics.  Now, Mijolnir and her ilk go too far the other way - but I think once you go past about maybe 4/5% ‘generic cargo’ after food and fuel, your probably building an invasion support ship, or some kind of generstion ship.  Which is fine, if that is your mission.  But if the mission of a warship is to go on patrol for say 6 months and win a fight against a peer if it happens and project force/control space where she is, I think that we are high-balling the supply required.
« Last Edit: 20 June 2018, 08:41:42 by marcussmythe »

Alsadius

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 926
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #274 on: 20 June 2018, 09:39:20 »
A few thoughts:

1) You're right that recharge stations having free maintenance is too easy to max-min. They'll cost maintenance, but a good network of recharge stations will help your economy and thus your budget, so they'll generally pay for themselves indirectly. That should prevent munchkin-ing. (As a side note, I'll adjust the budgets for economic growth next turn. It was too much to worry about all at once when I needed to do all the first-turn setup stuff as well.)

2) The more I think about it, the more that I think a policy of free maintenance on the things we're supposed to be treating as secondary, and very expensive maintenance for things we're treating as primary, is leading to perverse incentives. I expect maintenance should exist for everything, in one form or another(whether it's attrition or a cost). No details yet - it's been a busy couple days.

3) Ammo is a huge investment in mass for any form of carrier(fighters can easily shoot off roughly their own mass in one strike if they want to, and you want the ability to launch at least a few strikes), and remember that strategic fuel use isn't the only fuel use - on a tactical level, it gets burned far faster. You also need spare parts, and on ships where some items weigh in the hundreds of thousands of tons, spare parts will be seriously heavy. You can also use the mass for crew amenities, support for ground troops, and so on. It's not essential, but it's useful, particularly for ships that'll be out and about for a very long time. If you're just sitting at your base all the time and only sortie defensively, then it'll be much less of a concern.

marcussmythe

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1204
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #275 on: 20 June 2018, 09:52:08 »
A few thoughts:

1) You're right that recharge stations having free maintenance is too easy to max-min. They'll cost maintenance, but a good network of recharge stations will help your economy and thus your budget, so they'll generally pay for themselves indirectly. That should prevent munchkin-ing. (As a side note, I'll adjust the budgets for economic growth next turn. It was too much to worry about all at once when I needed to do all the first-turn setup stuff as well.)

2) The more I think about it, the more that I think a policy of free maintenance on the things we're supposed to be treating as secondary, and very expensive maintenance for things we're treating as primary, is leading to perverse incentives. I expect maintenance should exist for everything, in one form or another(whether it's attrition or a cost). No details yet - it's been a busy couple days.

3) Ammo is a huge investment in mass for any form of carrier(fighters can easily shoot off roughly their own mass in one strike if they want to, and you want the ability to launch at least a few strikes), and remember that strategic fuel use isn't the only fuel use - on a tactical level, it gets burned far faster. You also need spare parts, and on ships where some items weigh in the hundreds of thousands of tons, spare parts will be seriously heavy. You can also use the mass for crew amenities, support for ground troops, and so on. It's not essential, but it's useful, particularly for ships that'll be out and about for a very long time. If you're just sitting at your base all the time and only sortie defensively, then it'll be much less of a concern.

Until I hear otherwise from you, I will budget as if all things  which are not shipyards carry the same 10% maintenance as warships, and I will presume that 10% covers non-campaign-posting losses.  To this end I will keep a running total of the production cost of all eauipment in use at end of turn so next turns maintenance may be planned appropriately.

I think Im okay with shipyards not costing maintenance, due to the massive outlay.  Also, theres no real way to ‘game’ them.  I do not believe a perverse incentive to build shipyards exists - theres a very practical incentive (big ships gud!) and an OMG cost to doing so.

Alsadius

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 926
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #276 on: 20 June 2018, 10:33:08 »
Right - I was thinking "everything except yard space", but I guess I never actually mentioned that above. Your maintenance on the yards is the cost of constructing ships.

marcussmythe

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1204
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #277 on: 20 June 2018, 11:01:34 »
Endurance:  Cause I care about these things.

Fuel and Food we know.  We can solve for that really simple.  I like 200 burn days and a year of food... thats a year without ever seeing a friend.

Ammo is easy.  Load what you think you need.  Figure out how many fights you want to have before you RTB.  Ammo is trivial for anything but missiles - I tend to budget about 5 rounds of max rate fire per tube, for 10 rounds of combat.  This may get me in trouble if my captains empty bays on bad shots - but once you start nearing 10 rounds per launcher, missiles start to become bad systems. 

Fighters:  If we assume 3 strikes in combat without any attriton, thats 150 tons per fighter.  Youll probably lose some so that goes further, but better safe.  Say another 50 tons per fighter to cover spares and randomly lost birds on deployment.  100 tons avgas for each?  The math here is nice because a fighter bay weighs 150 tons.  If you then budget twice your bay weight in cargo, is that enough to consider it good and go on?

After all of the above, and assuming our mission is NOT to transport or feed troops, just to sail and patrol and show flag and yadda, whats a reasonable mass fraction for cargo for 6 month deployment?  For a year?

Edit:  I know these are messy questions.  If my design enginners ‘guess wrong’, then we can always do things like sail ships with less than full fighter carriage, etc. for peacetime patrols, design colliers, etc. (Since most of ship cost is in KF drive, colliers are strange).  Dont feel pressures to give a perfect answer, just a ballpark gut guess.  I know IRL busy and has priority, and I think i speak for all in saying how much we appreciate the time your spending on this.
« Last Edit: 20 June 2018, 11:11:16 by marcussmythe »

Alsadius

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 926
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #278 on: 20 June 2018, 11:35:57 »
I don't have a hard-and-fast number in mind - as with all things, there are diminishing returns. The SLDF builds their ships to be a jack-of-all-trades fleet that can go very long distances with minimal support, if needed, so consider that to be the high end. Canonical non-SLDF ships, particularly in the invasion era, have extremely small bays - the extreme of this is probably the Leviathan II, which has less than 25,000 tons of cargo for a 2,500,000 ton ship with 300 fighters and even a few capital missile tubes. That'd be a monster in the Clan homeworlds, because distances are so short, but in the Inner Sphere it's profoundly short-legged(doubly so when you're using up a lot of that cargo for anti-shipping fighter missiles, which canon doesn't do). Even the less roomy of the House ships tend to do 2-5% cargo.

TBH, I don't know what sort of mountain of spare parts would use up that much mass on a ship, if you're not transporting ground forces or acting as a collier. But based on maxims like "amateurs study tactics, professionals study logistics", I assume there's something. You can optimize your WarShips by offloading that cargo need onto a fleet train, and using DS/JS to haul it for you instead of parking it inside your WS. That's far cheaper, and probably more effective in a vacuum. The risk you're running there is that your train could get blown up, but if you avoid that fate it leaves you with ships more powerful than those of someone who carries the cargo inside (very expensive) thick armour plate.

As a rule of thumb, I'd say that a ship that plans to stay fairly close to its bases will use perhaps 5% of its mass for spare parts and food, and a ship that plans to roam long distances(say, the length of a border, with some wandering along the way or sticking around for patrol duty) will need more like 10% of its mass for spare parts and food. Extra ammunition, ground troops, spare fighters, and so on will all be in addition to that. You can carry that in your hull, on your collars, or in your fleet train as you see fit.

marcussmythe

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1204
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #279 on: 20 June 2018, 11:42:10 »
I don't have a hard-and-fast number in mind - as with all things, there are diminishing returns. The SLDF builds their ships to be a jack-of-all-trades fleet that can go very long distances with minimal support, if needed, so consider that to be the high end. Canonical non-SLDF ships, particularly in the invasion era, have extremely small bays - the extreme of this is probably the Leviathan II, which has less than 25,000 tons of cargo for a 2,500,000 ton ship with 300 fighters and even a few capital missile tubes. That'd be a monster in the Clan homeworlds, because distances are so short, but in the Inner Sphere it's profoundly short-legged(doubly so when you're using up a lot of that cargo for anti-shipping fighter missiles, which canon doesn't do). Even the less roomy of the House ships tend to do 2-5% cargo.

TBH, I don't know what sort of mountain of spare parts would use up that much mass on a ship, if you're not transporting ground forces or acting as a collier. But based on maxims like "amateurs study tactics, professionals study logistics", I assume there's something. You can optimize your WarShips by offloading that cargo need onto a fleet train, and using DS/JS to haul it for you instead of parking it inside your WS. That's far cheaper, and probably more effective in a vacuum. The risk you're running there is that your train could get blown up, but if you avoid that fate it leaves you with ships more powerful than those of someone who carries the cargo inside (very expensive) thick armour plate.

As a rule of thumb, I'd say that a ship that plans to stay fairly close to its bases will use perhaps 5% of its mass for spare parts and food, and a ship that plans to roam long distances(say, the length of a border, with some wandering along the way or sticking around for patrol duty) will need more like 10% of its mass for spare parts and food. Extra ammunition, ground troops, spare fighters, and so on will all be in addition to that. You can carry that in your hull, on your collars, or in your fleet train as you see fit.

Okay! Thats a number we can work with. 

For the record its going to be almost ALL spare parts.  Food is a tiny mass fraction, espc if you budget space to put your bay crews into quarters rather than leaving them in the bays ('Quarters' apparently have really cool recycling that 'Bay' lacks.)

Ill have to look at what this does to the design space/spare cubage at various masses and thrusts.  Its not quite the Tyranny of the Rocket Equation, but between the size of the KF Drive and the size of main drives, things get cramped really, really quick.

Starfox1701

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 521
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #280 on: 20 June 2018, 12:33:11 »
The Merc source books usually go very heavy into mantaince stuff. I would suggest that carriers not pay separate cost for the airing however. Ill look around and see how far back you want me to go?

Maingunnery

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7156
  • Pirates and C3 masters are on the hitlist
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #281 on: 20 June 2018, 12:59:08 »

Switching to more fighter production and banking excess for the future.
Also I am assuming just 10% maintenance for all assets (even fighters), for sanity sake.

Code: [Select]
Turn 2350 2360

Available Shipyards
Atreus (3-1*) (3-2*)
Irian (3-1) (3-1)
Loyalty (3-1) (3-1)

Current Assets Qty Total Qty Total
Fighters 0 0 288 1.440
Small Craft 0 0 90 900
Dropships 0 0 27 8.100
Jumpships 0 0 5 2.500
Phalanx (4631) 0 0 2 9.262
Heracles (8874) 0 0 6 53.244
[Insert] (0) 0 0 0 0
[Insert] (0) 0 0 0 0

(All Costs in Millions)
Banked 0 0
Budget 100.000 100.000

Maintenance Costs 0 7.545
Prototype Costs 13.505 0
Shipyard Upgrades* 1 10.000 1 15.000
Research 1.049 0

Construction
Fighters 288 1.440 648 3.240
Small Craft 90 900 84 840
Dropships 27 8.100 12 3.600
Jumpships 5 2.500 0 0
Phalanx (4631) 2 9.262 2 9.262
Heracles (8874) 6 53.244 6 53.244

Total Spent 100.000 92.731
Remaining 0 7.269



Herb: "Well, now I guess we'll HAVE to print it. Sounds almost like the apocalypse I've been working for...."

The Society:Fan XTRO & Field Manual
Nebula California: HyperTube Xtreme
Nebula Confederation Ships

marcussmythe

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1204
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #282 on: 20 June 2018, 19:41:23 »
(As a side note, I'll adjust the budgets for economic growth next turn. It was too much to worry about all at once when I needed to do all the first-turn setup stuff as well.)

Thank you.  I was feeling rather stupid for buying a huge pile of jumpers on turn one, for economic reasons, and then maintaining them, instead of just building wallers.  :)

marcussmythe

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1204
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #283 on: 21 June 2018, 13:30:44 »
Lyran Commonwealth, Turn 2

First Lord Jaqueline Angler had had, she was certain, less enjoyable mornings.  Maybe sometime in her middy year, involving tequila.  But she could not remember those mornings clearly.  This one was going to be painfully clear for a long time.

"Could you give me the Hegemony numbers again?"

Earmon Dalinger took an unnecessary look down at his notes.  “4 Battlecruisers, 10 Cruisers, 12 Missile Frigates, 12 Destroyers, 16 Corvettes, and 8 Scouts, Mam…” 

 “Thank you, Earmon.  That’s what I thought you said.  And the other two?”

“Six Battlecruisers for the Free Worlds League.  Probably better than the Hegemony Version, though I won’t tell them that if you don’t.  I wouldn’t go near one of them without three of our Frigates under my command.  Lots of heavy cannon, good cruising range, serious fighter complement.  Ive forwarded the details to your noteputer.  Looks like they are expanding their heavy yards – expect that number to climb as soon as the secondary yards come online.  Also a few commerce raiders, but nothing that has any business sharing space with a real warship”

“The Sna… the Combine is being a bit less ambitious.  Kutai is a bit on the agile side, but shes only notionally armed.  8 Naval Lasers and 4 Heavy Capital Missiles on the broadside, and her armor is mainly made of hopes and prayers.  Fubuki is another story… Destroyer class, 12 Class 20 NACs on the broadside – a good choice, I think.  I want some of those guns… backed up by some more light naval lasers.  She would probably take a Heimdaller, though she wouldn’t like it.  Still, all told, with only 4 Kutai and 2 Fubuki, we could probably match them in a stand up fight.”

Angler shook her head.  “The Combine isn’t the problem.  They are busy subjugating Rasalhauge.  I doubt they will stop there, but I think it’ll be something for my sucessor to worry about.  I’m not going to lose sleep over the Hegemony any more than a dinosaur loses sleep over asteroids.  Cant change it.  Why worry.”

“The pressing naval problem is the League.  They know they can’t match the Hegemony any more than we can – than all of us can, together.  Their other neighbor is in a warring states period.. hnh... and if they wanted to bite off pieces of Sian or Sarna, they don’t need six Battlecruisers to do that – they need troop transports.  Jumpships.  Dropships.  Are they building those?”

“No Mam.”  Baron Dalinger watched his old friend with some concern.  She wasn’t a young woman when they first starting working together ten years ago, and the office was aging her fast.  She looked.. tired.  Still, part of his job was to be her sounding board – she was always at her best talking aloud, talking through, a problem in front of an audience – an audience she could trust to speak up if necessary, but which would mostly let her vocalize the problem.

“No, they are not.  So those BCs have to be pointed north.  DAMN the Office of Naval Intelligence for not telling us what they were doing.  We’re a full yard cycle behind and there is no catch-up… not unless the Archons suddenly decide that they want to start paying for parity.  Who was it that said there’s nothing more expensive than a second-best navy?  Nevermind.  It doesn’t matter.”

“And so?”

“We go with proposal 3.  One is off the table… I wanted Kvasir’s as much as the next woman, but she cant overmatch Heracles 1:1, and were going to have to.  We cant afford the time to build up the yards for 4, so the Buri design proposal will have to wait.”
“What about the Kvasir V?”  Dalinger had long been a leading advocate of naval aerospace power, and Angler had wanted to be convinced, but…

“I know the simulations look good.  But those poor brave stupid Rashalhauge patriots couldn’t kill ONE Kutai with TWO HUNDRED fighters, whatever the simulations say.  And Kutai is as you said protected by wishes and optimism.  Heracles actually has armor.”

“But the -drives-, Mam…”

“Again, I know.  But ‘Speed, firepower, armor, pick two’.  And if our girls and boys are fighting, their fighting over either our own civilians, or over some enemy real estate that Command says is worth dying for.  Give me half again our budget and a few decades to catch up, and we can have nice things.  But we don’t have the budget.  Or the decades.  Or, apparently, nice things.  So we build hammers.”

“And the other proposals?”

“Were going to need the recharge stations.  Strategic speed matters more than tactical speed anyway, and if we are outnumbered, we need an edge in strategic agility.  Start production.”

“What about Project Nauglamir?”

“Not yet.  If we build Nauglamir the era of squadrons and sparring is over.  Its all going to be entire navies and death rides and all or nothing.  I don’t want to go there unless we're forced to.”

“Very good, Mam.”

Code: [Select]
Lyran Commonwealth, Turn Beginning 2360
Starting Funds:  0
Starting Shipyards: Alarion: 3/3  New Kyoto: 3/1  Tamar 1  Gibbs 1
Starting Warships:  Heimdaller FF x6 30.438B
Starting Jumpships:  30 15B
Starting Dropships:  0
Starting Small Craft 240 (4 Regiments) 2.4B
Starting Fighters: 4,800 (80 Regiments) 24B
Assets: 71.838


Expenditure Cost (Billions)
Maintenance 7.183 (100%)   
Prototype CA Tyr 7.405
Prototype Station Ribe .175
ProductionTyr x 6 44.3
Production Station Ribe x60 10.5
Jumpship Production: 0
Dropship Production: 0
Small Craft: 0
Fighters: 0
Research:  0
Total: 69.562
Remainder: 10.437


Lyran Commonwealth, Turn Ending 2370
Ending Funds: (with 1B from Marian Hegemony)                                    11.437
Ending Shipyards: Alarion: 3/3  New Kyoto: 3/1  Tamar 1  Gibbs 1
Ending Warships:  Heimdaller FFx6 30.438
Tyr CAx 6 44.3
Ending Stations:                        Ribe Recharge Station x60 10.5
Ending Jumpships:  30 15
Ending Dropships:  0
Ending Small Craft: 240 2.4
Ending Fighters:         4800 24
Asset Value 126.638

Tyr (Heavy Cruiser)

“A good gun causes victory, armor only postpones defeat”
   -Vice Admiral Stephan Osipovic Makarov (Terran, 1849-1904)   

By as early as 2360, the Lyran Admiralty realized it had a problem.  While its general-purpose frigates were able to fill almost any role that could be required of them, one of the roles they were not well suited for was ‘heavy ship of the wall’.  And the Lyran’s neighbors were mass producing heavy warships.

   Long term plans were set aside in the name of immediate answers to a large, and growing, gap in heavy ships of the wall.  A long series of designs was proposed, and discarded.  Giant warships were proposed, a million tons or more.  But the yards to build them did not exist and would not exist for the foreseeable future – the Lyran Navy was charged with defending the Commonwealth with the budget it had, not given the budget it needed to defend the commonwealth.   Carriers were suggested and serious considered, but the inability of 200 Rasalhague fighters to finish off a single, ill-armed and armored light cruiser did not instill First Lord Angler with confidence.  Speed and extreme range firepower was considered – excellent for attritional battle, but useless if a larger navy came to a Lyran world willing to fight.

    This final point carried the day.  Drives only increase tactical mobility.  Operational mobility, throughout a system, is limited by the human body – no warship can burn at more than 1G for long without crippling its crew.   Strategic mobility is limited by the KF-Drive, by onboard supplies, and by the presence or absence of quick charging facilities.  Supplies can be laid on, and quick-charging stations can be built.

   This left tactical mobility.  It had been assumed that 2.5G’s emergency thrust was the minimum required for ‘comfortable’ tactical mobility for modern warships.  But was it?  Navies do not drive into black space looking for one another to fight for the honor of claiming that black space.  Navies fight over objectives.  Jumppoints.  Planets.  Shipyards.  An attacker need only make their way to the target, and the defender should already be there.  These are the product of operational and strategic mobility.  Tactical mobility was useful only for controlling the range of the engagement, and allow a weaker force to defer engagement.  And tactical mobility was exceptionally expensive.  Every half-G of standard thrust consumed about 6% of the raw mass of a vessel.  But after installing a KF Drive and sufficient bunkerage to be useful for more than hanging over a friendly jumppoint or on top of a vulnerable fleet train, that 6% of mass grew to represent a huge proportion of what was left for weapons.

   And the purpose of a warship is to deliver fire, and to protect that fire long enough to accomplish its goal.

   Unburdened from the need for advantageous tactical mobility, and backed up by recharge-resupply stations and significant onboard stowage, the Tyr focuses on  that firepower.   Mobility is poor by modern warship standards – capable of no more than 1.5Gs of sustained thrust.  Resilience is no better than average for a ship of her mass.  All of this is in service of weapons bays that stagger anything in production when she left the slipways.  80 point-defense machine gun mounts are scattered across the nose and side aspects of the ship.  Anti-fighter work is performed by 80 Barracuda missile tubes – chosen for the role for their ability to accurately destroy enemy fighters from the edge of those own fighters launch envelope (forcing enemy fighters to shoot at long range and poor accuracy, or weather an incoming missile storm while burdened with attack munitions.  When not used in that role, those same launchers serve to supplement the broadside fire that is the Tyr’s reason for existence.

   Each side mounts 16 Heavy Naval Lasers, chosen for their ability to match range with any other weapon in space, and to ensure that Tyr is not left unable to reply against a more agile foe.  Backing those lasers up in that role are 20 tubes each for Killer Whale and White Shark Missiles, supported by the Barracuda tubes.  This allows Tyr to match the extended-range firepower of any vessel in space, before its heavy guns come into play. 

   The main broadside weight comes from three triple NAC/20 mounts on each corner.  While slightly less weight efficient than the more commonly chosen NAC/30, the Tyr’s designers had mass to burn, and accuracy of fire is at least as important as its weight.  Any opponent attempting to duck ‘under’ the Tyr’s missile and laser firepower to deliver its own Naval Autocannon hammer blows will find itself facing 18-NAC broadsides, each likely with more range and accuracy than its own… and the missiles and lasers are still firing, and still hitting…

   She is not without her detractors.   Fighter and small craft carriage is light, sacrificed in honor of gunpower and long deployment times.  Armor could be heavier if the more robust 2.5G design had been chosen.  And more than one commander expressed a desire for far greater tactical agility.  But time had run out, and the Commonwealth needed something.

   Only time would tell if she got what she needed.

Code: [Select]
Tyr (CA)
Tech: Inner Sphere
Introduced: 2360
Mass: 750,000 tons
Length: 1243 meters
Width:  321 meters
Height:  220 meters
Sail Diameter: 1245 meters
Fuel: 4,000 tons (10,000)
Tons/Burn-day: 39.52
Safe Thrust: 2
Maximum Thrust: 3
Sail Integrity: 5
KF Drive Integrity: 16
Heat Sinks: 7,080 (100%)
Structural Integrity: 90
BV2: 274,103
Cost:  $7.405B  (Loaded)

Armor
Fore: 87
Fore-Sides: 105
Aft-Sides: 105
Aft: 87

Cargo
Bay 1 (Nose): 84 Marines
Bay 2 (RBS):  10 Fighters, 3 Small Craft (6 Doors)
Bay 3 (LBS):  10 Fighters, 3 Small Craft (6 Doors)
Bay 4 (Aft):  50,121 Tons Cargo (2 Doors)


DropShip Capacity: 0
Grav Decks: 2 (180 meters diameter)
Escape Pods: 50
Life Boats: 50

Crew:  488
Marines:    84

All Crew, Marines in 1st/2nd Class Quarters

Ammunition: 400 Barracuda Missiles
  200 White Shark Missiles
  200 Killer Whale Missiles
8000 MG Rounds

Notes:
Small NCSS
Mounts 1,350 tons of Standard armor. 
100% of required heat sinks
Quirks:  Easy to Maintain, Improved Communications, Poor Performance

Weapons:

Nose: Damage
20 Barracuda (100 Rnds)         40
20 MG (2000 Rnds)

Fore Left/Right:
8 NL/55 44
9 NAC/20 (900 Rnds) 180

Broadside:
20 Barracuda (100 Rnds)         40
20 White Shark (100 Rnds) 60
20 Killer Whale (100 Rnds) 80
20 MG (2000 Rnds)

Aft Left/Right:
8 NL/55 44
9 NAC/20 (900 Rnds) 180


Rear:
20 Barracuda (100 Rnds)         40
20 MG (2000 Rnds)

Ribe (Recharge Station)

“Amateurs study tactics.  Armchair generals study strategy.  Professionals study logistics”
   -Author Unknown

   The humble recharge station is likely well known to the modern reader, as is their near-ubqitous nature throughout Lyran space.  What may be less well known is why.

   The first recharge stations mass produced outside the Terran Hegemony were the Chongzhi stations developed by the St. Ives Mercantile League.  Billed as a ‘purely civilian station’, the Chongzhi was still admirably well armed, armored, and carried a number of small craft to aid in loading and unloading. 

   The Lyran Navy looked on the Chongzhi, and saw a solution to a burgeoning problem.  They were flanked on all sides by superior forces.  Building ships with enough stowage to cruise those long borders and still remain combat worthy was difficult, and needing to reshuffle limited vessels from one border to another demanded more speed than the K-F drive could deliver.  Also, trade was the lifeblood of the nation, and competition between various competing mercantile interstellar for the lucrative recharge business was serving no purpose but to drive further wedges between the three founding nations of our great commonwealth.

   The Ribe, named for a northern port on old Terra, adopts a slightly different approach than her parent Chongzhi.  More focused on commercial than military pursuits, she is more lightly armored, and trades the array of autocannon for bays for up to 60 fighters intended to deter and defeat raids on the station from a safe distance.  Such fighters are usually distributed based on local threat assessments, and on quieter worlds deep in friendly space only a squadron may be present.   These are supplemented by bays for an equal number of small craft, either cargo shuttles or in some cases heavy attack boats, intended to supplement the fighters. 

Like the small craft, the cargo storage is also dual purpose.  In protected space, it serves as support to mercantile efforts, and is available to merchants at well below cost, as are the recharging facilities themselves.  On hostile borders or over high military traffic worlds, the Ribe’s 60,000 tons of storage is reserved for military supplies, making each one a miniature resupply base to allow the vessels of the Lyran Navy to cruise at length without drawing down their own internal supplies, leaving them fully loaded and ‘agile’ in response to any developing situation.

As is typical of Lyran military projects, berthing for all crew is to a high standard, with the cost in space and weight associated being considered worth it to provide better long term efficiency and morale.  The extensive quarters set aside for combat pilots are often repurposed as hotel space, and the large grav deck as entertainment/recreation areas, on Ribe class stations far from hostile space.

Code: [Select]
Ribe (Recharge Station)
Tech: Inner Sphere
Introduced: 2360
Mass: 500,000 tons
Diameter:  410M (Sphere)
Fuel: 1,200 tons (300 points)
Tons/Burn-day: 3.95
Safe Thrust: .02
Heat Sinks: 154 (Unused)
Structural Integrity: 1
BV2: 2,199
Cost:  $175 Million

Armor
Fore: 20
Fore-Sides: 20
Aft-Sides: 20
Aft: 20

Cargo
Bay 1 (Nose): 60 Fighters, (4 Doors)
Bay 2 (Aft):  60 Small Craft, 61,213 Tons Cargo (6 Doors)

DropShip Capacity: 0
Grav Decks: 1 (250 meters diameter)
Escape Pods: 40
Life Boats: 40

Crew:  515
(All first or second class quarters)


Ammunition:  6000 MG Rounds

Notes:
4 Energy Storage Batteries

Weapons:
60 Machine Guns (10 per facing)


Notes on Deployment:
Ships will usually function in 3 squadrons of 4, 2 CA and 2 FF.  One FF may be detached from the squadron to address secondary objectives, but a minimum force of 2 Heavy Cruisers with one Frigate for support should remain concentrated at all times.  In general service, one squadron is associated with each of the border shipyards, patrolling from there. 

Recharge stations currently cover half of the Lyran flagged worlds, focused on high traffic/trade worlds, borders, and 'least time' bridges between areas of interest.  Forward recharge stations keep their fighter bays full, and if a war warning is issued, all will be brought up to full deployment.
« Last Edit: 30 June 2018, 19:49:44 by marcussmythe »

Alsadius

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 926
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #284 on: 21 June 2018, 14:56:47 »
Okay, I seriously love that fluff. Very well written.

Also, how is the Ribe that cheap? It's a quarter the price of a Chongzi, and I didn't think AC/2s were that expensive(looks like about $33M for the full set on a Chongzi, even with the station cost multiplier).

Maingunnery

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7156
  • Pirates and C3 masters are on the hitlist
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #285 on: 21 June 2018, 15:17:51 »

Yes, indeed great fluff, it really sets the standard for my next turn.
Herb: "Well, now I guess we'll HAVE to print it. Sounds almost like the apocalypse I've been working for...."

The Society:Fan XTRO & Field Manual
Nebula California: HyperTube Xtreme
Nebula Confederation Ships

marcussmythe

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1204
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #286 on: 21 June 2018, 15:18:02 »
Deleted duplicate
« Last Edit: 21 June 2018, 16:43:07 by marcussmythe »

marcussmythe

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1204
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #287 on: 21 June 2018, 15:30:38 »
Let me run Ribe and Chongzi through my spreadsheet again.  I think I found that stripping out things like guns and armor made all the difference, because the station cost mulitplier is painful, but I'll double check.  In the laternate, put Ribe through your spreadsheet?

I cant use your spreadsheet cause work.

PS:  Thanks on the fluff.  Its.. a bad imitation of several authors styles.

When I run Chongzhi through my spreadsheet, my cost is close to the same as yours.. w/in about 10%.

Its guns, and armor, that make up most of the difference.  As does the second grav deck.

Alsadius

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 926
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #288 on: 21 June 2018, 15:37:31 »
Amusingly, I also can't Google Sheets because work - I do all my designs at home. And yeah, it seems a bit Weber-ish, but unlike Weber I'm not sick of your style yet ;)

It seems like two things happened here. One, the actual difference in costs, but two, I changed how I wrote up turns halfway through. I saw $677M for the prototype Chongzi and forgot that I used to post the doubled cost, instead of breaking the R&D costs off to a separate line. So the unit cost is actually $338M, which is much closer to yours.

I must say, while the armour and defences make sense for a weird little group of communists, I didn't expect they were that expensive when I made the design. Even with it being cheaper than I thought, clearly I may need to pay more attention to the cost trade-offs.

Maingunnery

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 7156
  • Pirates and C3 masters are on the hitlist
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #289 on: 21 June 2018, 15:41:08 »

Should there be an unified style in which we track turns in excel?

This would make it far easier for you to track everything.
Herb: "Well, now I guess we'll HAVE to print it. Sounds almost like the apocalypse I've been working for...."

The Society:Fan XTRO & Field Manual
Nebula California: HyperTube Xtreme
Nebula Confederation Ships

marcussmythe

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1204
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #290 on: 21 June 2018, 15:55:09 »
Amusingly, I also can't Google Sheets because work - I do all my designs at home. And yeah, it seems a bit Weber-ish, but unlike Weber I'm not sick of your style yet ;)

It seems like two things happened here. One, the actual difference in costs, but two, I changed how I wrote up turns halfway through. I saw $677M for the prototype Chongzi and forgot that I used to post the doubled cost, instead of breaking the R&D costs off to a separate line. So the unit cost is actually $338M, which is much closer to yours.

I must say, while the armour and defences make sense for a weird little group of communists, I didn't expect they were that expensive when I made the design. Even with it being cheaper than I thought, clearly I may need to pay more attention to the cost trade-offs.

Well, it depends on how many you are building.  I have a a lot more worlds than the space commies, relative to my budget.  And I fully intend to drop a recharge station over the other 60 worlds next turn.  I just can't justify 60 or 120 very expensive, well defended stations.  The Chongzi may make perfect sense for the people who built them.

But I also have a lot more strategic depth than they do.  Most of my worlds are unlikely to ever even be raided - wandering 5 or 10 jumps from home port is a great way to lose commerce raiders.  So I build them to have ‘defenses if they need them’ - thus fighters that can deploy to stations in bad neighborhoods.  60 fighters wont stand off a real warship - but no station I can afford to mass produce will -anyway-, so I dont bother.  What 60 fighters will do is bloody murder a jumpship/carrier dropship raiding force, and present a lethal threat to any 'raider' style warship.

RE:  Weber - Its VERY hard to write 'space naval battle' without falling into a Weberesque voice.  Im hoping to aim for EARLY Weber rather than later.  (I say this while I write about a meeting - but I think an important meeting.  When the battle reports come in, I'll write space battles). 

Hopefully having an actual evolving universe with other players driving the action will help me avoid the cyclic escalation and 'suddenly, a new challenger appears!' of the Honorverse, as well as the semi-annual technical upgrades obviating everything that came before.

Actually, I am hoping to eventually develop my own voice, even if I am writing about similar things.  But some concepts (First Space Lord, I just love the title... 'Wall of Battle'.. again, fitting a 3D Line of Battle in Space) are going to stick.
« Last Edit: 21 June 2018, 16:43:50 by marcussmythe »

truetanker

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 9902
  • Clan Hells Horses 666th Mech. Assualt Cluster
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #291 on: 21 June 2018, 18:48:19 »
Marian Action News Network ( MANN )
Nova Roma, Alphard
Aerarium Marianes ( Marian Treasury )

" The Senate passed a late night bill last night, concerning the Marianes Navis. While the bill didn't mention much, it did define the actions of the Design Committee that oversees the construction of the Marian Fleet, currently considered anemic by some in the field.

In other news, the Marian Envoy that was sent to the Taurian Concordat to attempt a Technology Trade, who was rebutted and sent packing, is on her way back stopping by the  Lyran Commonwealth. Where she was wined and dined by the local " Social Generals ", who just wanted attention for themselves. Breaking a contract and gaining support with some liaisons from the Lyran Merchant Fleet, she wandered toward the Dragon. Before leaving she bartered some local technology with some " funsies " from home, to be shipped within the next decade, samples of tinned Alphard Mudskippers in Olive Oil* and a few hundred of Selkie pelts, a local seal that feels warmer than cashmere.

Entering the Draconis Combine to see if she could swing a hull or two, since the Coordinator was busy with his attempt of the Principality of Rasalhague assimilation, he sent his liaisons to meet and possible trade, as his realm was starved for metals, particularly the Terada Warship Yard. The Envoy convinced the Imperator that it was necessary to allow trade with such a powerful neighbor, Pi authorized the trade of three Billions-worth of precious Germanium to be transferred in exchanged for a lend-lease contract to the DCA.

Quoted earlier this month, the Imperator states that the Lothian League and Illyrian Palatinate needs to come ( air quotes ) under protections of the Hegemony. While the Naval Fleet is preforming shakedowns on their new vessels, the Imperator instigated the Aquilifer rank for his ground forces, though any naval personnel can carry it as well. "

                                                    ~ insert from Marian Fleet News

---------------------------------------------------
Current budget: $18 Billion 887 Million
Turn: 2

So I need to improve my fleet some...

Code: [Select]
Scapha I (Militarized Aquila Transport) has been retcon'd
Budget:
Donations : 4 Billion / Millard ( 3 to DCA, 1 to LC )
Building and Fitting costs : ( Including first design ) 2x Scapha ; 6 Billion and 958 Million
    - Includes 64 Fighters and 44 Small Craft needed to make each of the four ships operational.
School : 100 Million -Collegium Bellorum Imperium, Alphard Air Academy
Recruitment Drive : 100 Million


Ending Budget: $7 Billion and 729 Million
Imperator Pi

* Alphard Mudskipper : tastes just like oysters.
« Last Edit: 23 October 2018, 19:07:53 by truetanker »
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

Smegish

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 445
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #292 on: 21 June 2018, 23:36:02 »
Just gonna take a moment to congratulate our GM Alsadius for a great looking Master sheet, with tabs for each factions fleets and yard locations.

So far unfinished, but looks great :)

Alsadius

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 926
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #293 on: 22 June 2018, 06:40:33 »
Just gonna take a moment to congratulate our GM Alsadius for a great looking Master sheet, with tabs for each factions fleets and yard locations.

So far unfinished, but looks great :)

Yup, I want to get that done - it'll be way easier to track everything when I have all the designs in one place and one format. Once it's updated, I'll probably give you all write access, and that'll hopefully make processing turns easier for everyone.

marcussmythe

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1204
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #294 on: 22 June 2018, 11:43:16 »
Alsadius - can you like the spreadsheet in your first post on first page?

Alsadius

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 926
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #295 on: 22 June 2018, 12:14:47 »
Alsadius - can you like the spreadsheet in your first post on first page?

Whoops, thought I had. I will when I get home.

marcussmythe

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1204
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #296 on: 22 June 2018, 12:43:03 »
Just saw its got design summaries and ship counts, at least a place for them.  Could be a handy ‘instant reference’ tool, in terms of ‘hunh whats that thing do again’ withiut having to dig back through various turns being posted to look for the details of this ship or that.

Jester Motley

  • Corporal
  • *
  • Posts: 86
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #297 on: 22 June 2018, 15:24:00 »
Any room for another player?

Smegish

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 445
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #298 on: 22 June 2018, 17:22:46 »
One thing missed in the Atago listing on the Master page, probably because I forgot to mention it in her writeup : A Large NCSS

Alsadius

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 926
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #299 on: 22 June 2018, 17:35:26 »
The spreadsheet has been linked in the OP of this thread. I see a couple of you are on there right now. There's a few things missing - I don't have all nations up to date, and a few of the designs are incomplete, but it's close to finished. I'll try to post some NPC turns soon.

Any room for another player?

Yup! The Capellan Confederation isn't quite formed yet, but it will merge into a single unified power this turn, so if you want them then we can adjust that timeline to make it a bit easier. The Rim Worlds Republic and Taurian Concordat are also large enough nations to be interesting to play. Take a look at the spreadsheet if you want to see what their setups look like right now.

(The Principality of Rasalhague and the United Hindu Collective are also available, but I don't recommend either - the Rasalahguers are busy being annihilated, and the UHC never actually engages in any combat before they merge into the FedSuns. The Terran Hegemony is disallowed, because it's too powerful to put in a player's hands.)

One thing missed in the Atago listing on the Master page, probably because I forgot to mention it in her writeup : A Large NCSS

Ah, thanks. Added.