Author Topic: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race  (Read 195593 times)

Alsadius

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 926
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #840 on: 03 September 2018, 21:59:23 »
Turn 5 is finished.

What are your feelings on the shorter battle reports?

I'm going to sleep now, and look at this discussion tomorrow.

marcussmythe

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1204
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #841 on: 03 September 2018, 22:18:00 »
Do not mind the shorter batreps.  Suggest players may choose to write more detailed versions.

Would love to keep some of the detailed ones - Id hate to lose them!  But a compromise must be drawn between glorious batreps and keeping the game going.

Proposition - consider a 2 week standard turnaround.  Write ‘short overview’ report.  Then if time permits, have fun with the parts you find interesting to write more about?

Marsden lives!  Butterflies abound.  I wonder - will we end up with a Marsden married to a Steiner?
« Last Edit: 03 September 2018, 22:23:43 by marcussmythe »

Smegish

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 447
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #842 on: 03 September 2018, 23:12:59 »
Well that kind of ruined a 'Birth of the Black Dragon Society' fluff piece I was working on.

Other than that, let the games begin!

EDIT: Figured I would get the show on the round, quick game is a good game and all that.

Draconis Combine Turn 2400-2409

Akagi-Class Carrier

Code: [Select]
Class/Model/Name: Akagi
Tech: Inner Sphere
Ship Cost: $9,045,300,000.00
Magazine Cost: $10,600,000.00
BV2: 47,717

Mass: 750,000
K-F Drive System: Compact
Power Plant: Maneuvering Drive
Safe Thrust: 3
Maximum Thrust: 5
Armor Type: Standard
Armament:
32 Naval Laser 35
160 AC 5
120 Machine Gun (IS)
32 Capital Launcher Killer Whale

Designed in response to the Steiner Walkurie-class and Davion Kentares IV, the Akagi is intended to carry a large contingent of fighters -as well as anti-fighter weaponry- in order to control the space around the fleet, and prevent the larger air wings of those craft from being a lethal threat to it's sister ships.

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

Equipment: Mass
Drive: 135,000.00
Thrust
Safe: 3
Maximum: 4.5
Controls: 1,875.00
K-F Hyperdrive: Compact (16 Integrity) 339,375.00
Jump Sail: (5 Integrity) 68.00
Structural Integrity: 130 97,500.00
Total Heat Sinks: 2464 Single 1,900.00
Fuel & Fuel Pumps: 20000 points 8,160.00
Fire Control Computers: 1,477.15
Armor: 760 pts Standard 1,900.00
Fore: 120
Fore-Left/Right: 130/130
Aft-Left/Right: 130/130
Aft: 120

Dropship Capacity: 2 2,000.00
Grav Decks:
Small: 2 100.00
Medium: 0.00
Large: 0.00
Escape Pods: 50 350.00
Life Boats: 50 350.00

Crew And Passengers:
54 Officers in 1st Class Quarters 540.00
141 Crew in 2nd Class Quarters 987.00
123 Gunners and Others in 2nd Class Quarters 861.00
420 Bay Personnel 0.00
1st Class Passengers 0.00
2nd Class Passengers 0.00
100 Steerage Passengers 500.00

Bay #1 - Fighters (36) - 4 Doors (Nose)
Bay #2 - Fighters (72) - 4 Doors (LBS)
Bay #3 - Fighters (72) - 4 Doors (RBS)
Bay #4 - Small Craft (12) - 2 Doors (Aft)
Bay #5 - Cargo (80,877 Tons) - 2 Doors (Aft)

Large NCSS

Armed with 16 Twin-NL/35 turrets and 16 Twin Killer Whale launchers, along with its substantial array of AC/5s and machine guns, the Akagi is capable of defending itself against small craft even without its fighter group, however against all but the smallest WarShips, it must rely on its battlegroup of Atagos and Minekazes to convince the enemy to stay clear.

Code: [Select]
# Weapons Loc Heat Damage Range Mass
8 Naval Laser 35 Nose 416 280 (28-C) 5,600.00
20 AC 5 Nose 20 100 (10-C) 160.00
20 Machine Gun (IS) Nose 40 (4-C) 10.00
8 Killer Whale FR 160 320 (32-C) 1,200.00
20 AC 5 FR 20 100 (10-C) 160.00
20 Machine Gun (IS) FR 40 (4-C) 10.00
8 Killer Whale FL 160 320 (32-C) 1,200.00
20 AC 5 FL 20 100 (10-C) 160.00
20 Machine Gun (IS) FL 40 (4-C) 10.00
8 Naval Laser 35 LBS 416 280 (28-C) 5,600.00
20 AC 5 LBS 20 100 (10-C) 160.00
8 Naval Laser 35 RBS 416 280 (28-C) 5,600.00
20 AC 5 RBS 20 100 (10-C) 160.00
8 Killer Whale AR 160 320 (32-C) 1,200.00
20 AC 5 AR 20 100 (10-C) 160.00
20 Machine Gun (IS) AR 40 (4-C) 10.00
8 Killer Whale AL 160 320 (32-C) 1,200.00
20 AC 5 AL 20 100 (10-C) 160.00
20 Machine Gun (IS) AL 40 (4-C) 10.00
8 Naval Laser 35 Aft 416 280 (28-C) 5,600.00
20 AC 5 Aft 20 100 (10-C) 160.00
20 Machine Gun (IS) Aft 40 (4-C) 10.00

Killer Whale Ammo 320
AC 5 Ammo 16000
MG Ammo 120000

And the Budget:

Code: [Select]
Year: 2400 Value in Millions
Money Available 114,000
Remaining from Last Turn
Available Shipyards

Luthien 3/2/2/1
New Samarkand 5/1
Midway 1

Repairs

Maintanence Warships 219465 12% 26335.8
The Rest 64420 10% 6442

Prototype Tenshi 1 388 388
Akagi 1 9,045 4,523
Refits

Construction Unit Price
Shipyards New Sam 1>2 10,000 10,000

Stations Onsen 0 451 0
Tenshi 10 388 3,880
Warships Nagato 0 13,640 0
Atago 0 9,339 0
Akagi 3 9,045 27,135
Fubuki 0 7,241 0
Minekaze 0 6,102 0
Tate 6 4,734 28,404
Kutai 0 6,092 0
Trojan 0 4,031 0
Jumpships 2 500 1000
Dropships 6 300 1,800
Fighters 540 5 2,700
Small Craft 36 10 360
Research 2,032 1 2032
Loan
Total Spent 114999.8

Income
Marian Loan 1 1000 1000

Remaining 0


Code: [Select]
Start Turn In Service Value BV
Warships Atago 9 84051 83558
Akagi 0 0 47717
Fubuki 3 21723 57421
Minekaze 9 54918 66478
Tate 6 28404 26605
Kutai 3 18276 15629
Trojan 3 12093 15229
Total 33 219465
Maintanence 12% 26335.8

Stations Onsen 20 9020
Tenshi 0 0
Jumpships 38 19000
Dropships Small 32 9600

Fighters 3820 19100
Small Craft 770 7700
Total 64420
Maintanence 10% 6442

Total Maintanence 32777.8

Fighter Complement Whole Fleet 1332
DS Complement Whole Fleet 24

End Turn In Service
Warships Atago 9 84051
Akagi 3 27135
Fubuki 3 21723
Minekaze 9 54918
Tate 12 56808
Kutai 3 18276
Trojan 3 12093
Total 42 275004
Maintanence 12% 33000.48

Stations Onsen 20 9020
Tenshi 10 3890
Jumpships 40 20000
Dropships Small 38 11400

Fighters 4360 21800
Small Craft 806 8060
Total 74170
Rest Maintanence 10% 7417
Total Maintanence 40417.48

Code: [Select]
Deployment

Steiner Front Kutai-class Kutai, Rasalhague, Trondheim
Trojan-class Sinister

Hegemony Front Akagi-class Akagi
Atago-class Takao, Furutaka, Myoko
Minekaze-class Hayate, Hakaze, Mikazuki
Tate-class New Samarkand, Galedon, Proserpina, Baldur
Trojan-class Insidious

Davion Front Akagi-class Kaga,
Atago-class Atago, Kashima, Chokai,
Minekaze-class Minekaze, Yukikaze, Okikaze
Tate-class Luthien, Benjamin, Xinyang, Tinaca
Trojan-class Iga

Reserve Akagi-class Soryu
Atago-class Maya, Aoba, Nachi
Minekaze-class Yayoi, Shikinami, Satsuki
Tate-class Pesht, Dieron, Ashio, Oshika

Internal Patrol Fubuki-class Fubuki, Ibuki, Yudachi

EDIT #2: I forgot the Tenshi defense satellite...

Tenshi-class Weapon Satellite

Code: [Select]
Class/Model/Name: Tenshi
Tech: Inner Sphere
Ship Cost: $387,505,000.00
Magazine Cost: $8,280,000.00
BV2: 21,148

Mass: 90,000
K-F Drive System: None
Power Plant: Station-Keeping Drive
Safe Thrust: 0
Maximum Thrust: 1
Armor Type: Standard
Armament:
6 Naval PPC Heavy
48 Capital Launcher Barracuda
120 Machine Gun (IS)

Intended to guard the shipyards and major worlds of the Combine, the Tenshi mounts Heavy Naval PPCs for long range firepower, as well as nearly 50 Barracuda launchers for anti-fighter duty. While not the match of a Warship by itself, they are far cheaper allowing them to be deployed en masse.

Code: [Select]
Class/Model/Name: Tenshi
Mass: 90,000

Equipment: Mass
Drive: 1,080
Thrust
Safe: 0.1
Maximum: 1
Controls: 90
K-F Hyperdrive: None (0 Integrity) 0
Jump Sail: (0 Integrity) 0
Structural Integrity: 1 900
Total Heat Sinks: 1828 Single 1,737
Fuel & Fuel Pumps: 20000 points 2,040
Fire Control Computers: 3,235
Armor: 288 pts Standard 360
Fore: 48
Fore-Left/Right: 48/48
Aft-Left/Right: 48/48
Aft: 48

Dropship Capacity: 0 0
Grav Decks:
Small: 1 50
Medium: 0
Large: 0
Escape Pods: 10 70
Life Boats: 10 70

Crew And Passengers:
24 Officers in 2nd Class Quarters 168
39 Crew in Steerage Quarters 195
74 Gunners and Others in Steerage Quarters 370
0 Bay Personnel 0
0 1st Class Passengers 0
50 2nd Class Passengers 350
0 Steerage Passengers 0

Bay #1 - Cargo (26304 Tons) - 2 Doors
Bay #2 - Small Craft (6) - 2 Doors


Code: [Select]
# Weapons Loc Heat Damage Range Mass
6 Naval PPC Heavy Nose 1350 900 (90-C) Extreme-C 18,000
8 Capital Launcher Barracuda Nose 80 160 (16-C) Extreme-C 720
20 Machine Gun (IS) Nose 40 (4-C) Short-PDS 10
8 Capital Launcher Barracuda FR 80 160 (16-C) Extreme-C 720
20 Machine Gun (IS) FR 40 (4-C) Short-PDS 10
8 Capital Launcher Barracuda FL 80 160 (16-C) Extreme-C 720
20 Machine Gun (IS) FL 40 (4-C) Short-PDS 10
8 Capital Launcher Barracuda AR 80 160 (16-C) Extreme-C 720
20 Machine Gun (IS) AR 40 (4-C) Short-PDS 10
8 Capital Launcher Barracuda AL 80 160 (16-C) Extreme-C 720
20 Machine Gun (IS) AL 40 (4-C) Short-PDS 10
8 Capital Launcher Barracuda Aft 80 160 (16-C) Extreme-C 720
20 Machine Gun (IS) Aft 40 (4-C) Short-PDS 10

Barracuda Ammo 960
MG Ammo 120000
« Last Edit: 04 September 2018, 14:57:08 by Smegish »

marcussmythe

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1204
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #843 on: 04 September 2018, 08:27:21 »
Updated the 'Running Income Totals' to include Turn 5 and Starting Yards:

1.)  FWL:   727B
2.)  DC:     697B
3.)  LC:     655B
4.)  FS:     635B
5.)  CC:     566B

Including the starting yards throws the totals a bit from where they were before... LC and FWL got full up 3x3 3x1 layouts.  DC and FS were a bit behind, and the CC rather behind that.

Will be interesting to see over time to what degree starting economics is destiny.

Turn to follow.

Alsadius

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 926
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #844 on: 04 September 2018, 08:42:07 »
Most battles thus far have been based on canonical fights, so I've been using those as inspiration. But since we're drifting away from canon now, there's more scope for you to make your mark on the setting. NPCs are still in charge of whether you fight, generally speaking, but the navy has significant say in how you fight. Feel free to make use of that freedom in operational planning. In particular, one of your number is PM-ing me battle plans for use if he gets into a war with one of his neighbours, and the rest of you should feel free to do the same. I'll break them out whenever it's practical to do so. This is not a requirement - your planning staff can put together ops plans just fine - but it's an option, and I want to ensure you're all aware of it.

SC in-game are fairly poor at attacking ASF due to always or mostly losing initiative (varying with ruleset) but fairly good at attacking other SC and particularly good at attacking heavier elements.  Notably, they have weapons bays which gives them a potential to threshold against significantly heavier units than ASF can manage.

Can a smallcraft carry missiles like an ASF as well?

So far, SC have not been able to carry missiles like ASF, which has relegated them to secondary roles(shuttles of various sorts, mostly).

The spreadsheet allows you to choose a maneuvering drive without a core, but doing so implies that SI is calculated as per a warship (.1%/SI rather than 1%) with prices as per a space station (x5 instead of x2) and SI variable like a warship.  Is this intentional?  I've avoided this in the past in the spirit of core battletech rules, but the rules changes are making me rethink this.  More generally, is the intention to allow maneuvering drives on a space station?  Is the intention to allow SI larger than 1 on a space station?  And if the latter, should the tonnage cost of SI be .1%/SI or 1%/SI?  (If you tell me what is preferred, I can make a spreadsheet that does it.)
If you want a clean interpolation to space station rules, then you would probably go with 1%/SI making 300 SI nonviable.

If you want to avoid the headaches of the armor implied, then simply allowing maneuvering drives but keeping SI to 1 seems reasonable since you would never make a maneuvering drive with thrust larger than 1.

And, of course, if we want to keep things rules-legal in the base game, then it seems fine to use the Tick.

The spreadsheet is not intended to handle monitors, so the treatment of them is haphazardly based on formulas used to calculate other things. I could probably whip up a good set of rules for monitors without too much trouble, but I don't think I could do so in a way that wasn't simply a ground-up re-write of a good part of the rules and setting. I don't want to do that, so please keep your ships within legal limits even if the spreadsheet doesn't actively enforce those limits.

I appreciate the offer to build the sheet, but it won't be necessary. I'm much more comfortable with spreadsheets than I am with fiction writing ;)

And yes, you can have your Tick :)

Well that kind of ruined a 'Birth of the Black Dragon Society' fluff piece I was working on.

Oh? Not sure what that is, tbh, unless you're referring to the 4SW-era one mentioned on Sarna.

Do not mind the shorter batreps.  Suggest players may choose to write more detailed versions.

Would love to keep some of the detailed ones - Id hate to lose them!  But a compromise must be drawn between glorious batreps and keeping the game going.

Proposition - consider a 2 week standard turnaround.  Write ‘short overview’ report.  Then if time permits, have fun with the parts you find interesting to write more about?

In principle I like it, but going back to edit in more detail might be difficult. I'll give it a try for this turn, though, and see how it feels.

marcussmythe

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1204
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #845 on: 04 September 2018, 09:15:48 »
Lyran Commonwealth, Turn VI:  2400-2409


Code: [Select]
Lyran Commonwealth, Turn Beginning 2400
Physical Assets:
Starting  Shipyards: Alarion: 4/4  New Kyoto: 3/1  Tamar 1  Gibbs 1
Staring  Warships:  Heimdaller II FF x 9 45.567
Tyr CA x 9 66.45
Walkure CV x 9 62.523
Staring Stations: Ribe Recharge Station x120 21
Staring Jumpships:  30 15
Staring Dropships:  0
Staring Small Craft: 600 6
Staring Fighters: 11K 55
Maintenance Value 271.54 (27.15)
Cash: 8.419
Income:         107
115.419


Expenses:
Maintenance: 32.485
100% Baseline, 120% Warships, 150% Naval Fighters
Alarion 4-> 5 50
Alarion 4-> 5 25
Ribe Recharge Stations x 10                                                1.75
Total: 109.235
Remainder 6.184


Lyran Commonwealth, Turn Ending 2409
Physical Assets:
Ending Shipyards: Alarion: 5/5  New Kyoto: 3/1  Tamar 1  Gibbs 1
Ending Warships:  Heimdaller II FF x 9 45.567
Tyr CA x 9 66.45
Walkure CV x 9 62.523
Ending Stations:         Ribe Recharge Station x130 22.75
Ending Jumpships:  30 15
Ending Dropships:  0
Ending Small Craft: 600 6
Ending Fighters: 11K 55
Maintenance Value 273.29 (27.33)
Cash: 6.184

Code: [Select]
DEPLOYMENTS
Deployments are by Squadron, each Squadron consisting of 3xFF, 3xCA, 3xCV
Given the conflict on the FWL Border, and the likely FWL need to recapture territory, along with the relative quiet on the DC border (and the lack of a major carrier warship on the DC Border), operational areas are redefined as follows:

1st Battle Squadron, Homeport TAMAR, Operational Area:  DC Border
2nd Battle Squadron, Homeport NEW KYOTO, Operational Area:  FWL Border East, TH Border
3rd Battle Squadron, Homeport (Temporary) PROMISED LAND Operational Area:  FWL Border West

Given the lack of yard facilities at PROMISED LAND, and the damaged done to the world in capture, several Ribe class recharge stations are being redeployed to support rebuilding efforts, support the fleet presence, and over a few under/uninhabited worlds to provide a clean line of movement across the Marik salient into FWL Territory (Note that Bolan in this era is a FWL world).

This is not intended as a permanent threat posture against the FWL, but it is hoped that by having a full battle squadron forward deployed, coupled with a second squadron at New Kyoto within easy threat distance of Irian, the FWL will be encouraged to let bygones (and plasma-torched vineyards) be bygones.  Lighter deployments along the DC Border are primarily in service of monitoring the mirroring DC deployments.
« Last Edit: 05 September 2018, 18:37:34 by marcussmythe »

marcussmythe

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1204
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #846 on: 04 September 2018, 09:57:08 »
Sanity check on an idea bouncing around in my head:

Cheap Jumpship Pony Express.

Build some number of minimum cost jumpships (nocollar, im thinking around 280m), sitting in dedicated command circuits to move, not people or troops, but orders and information.  It looks like you could get a permanent circuit between home and a forward base for not all -that- many ships... and if their kept sitting at designated places, ready to recieve transmission and jump as soon as the next one jumps in, you could get orders/information from front to home and back very quickly.

Obviously as in all such things theres diminishing returns... a line to both borders and up and down each border and the number of jumpers required starts climbing alarmingly, and the full monty of 2 for each world in the LC starts getting questionably expensive.

Lagrange

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1419
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #847 on: 04 September 2018, 13:02:41 »
Cheap Jumpship Pony Express.

Build some number of minimum cost jumpships (nocollar, im thinking around 280m), sitting in dedicated command circuits to move, not people or troops, but orders and information.  It looks like you could get a permanent circuit between home and a forward base for not all -that- many ships... and if their kept sitting at designated places, ready to recieve transmission and jump as soon as the next one jumps in, you could get orders/information from front to home and back very quickly.

Obviously as in all such things theres diminishing returns... a line to both borders and up and down each border and the number of jumpers required starts climbing alarmingly, and the full monty of 2 for each world in the LC starts getting questionably expensive.
I'm planning to introduce something like this for TC this turn.   It is however necessary to either batch communications for a weekly jump cadence or have the network be in active and used on-demand.   Mixing the two modes seems to invite significant problems.

marcussmythe

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1204
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #848 on: 04 September 2018, 13:06:50 »
I'm planning to introduce something like this for TC this turn.   It is however necessary to either batch communications for a weekly jump cadence or have the network be in active and used on-demand.   Mixing the two modes seems to invite significant problems.

Its going to be easier for small periphery realms.  For all that they are (relatively) cash poor compared to great houses, they are actually VERY cash rich per unit area in this game - either as a result of budgets much more slewed to naval matters, or a result of a higher mean level of development.

Alsadius

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 926
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #849 on: 04 September 2018, 13:29:38 »
Command circuits have value, but they need to be used sensibly - it's really hard to justify the expense unless it's experiencing major usage, or it has an important strategic purpose. The RWR command circuit is really pushing the limits of what makes sense, IMO - if the nation was less one-dimensional(astrographically speaking), they wouldn't have done it. And at the time they launched the service, they were both fairly rich and very peaceful, which gave them more room to do it than most other nations have.

Also, be aware that there are a lot of merchant ships around at any given time. Even with no special intervention on your part, information moves much faster than one week per jump. I haven't set exact times (and it'll vary based on organization, luck, and local merchant density), but you can expect a critical-priority message to move at a speed somewhere in the ballpark of 1-2 days per jump. A true command circuit will move a message(or a VIP) far faster - on the order of one hour per jump, assuming everyone is charged and ready - but I expect that there's a limit on how much faster information is worth to you when your fleet's strategic speed is still limited to a week per jump.

To put numbers on it, a typical DropShip of this era can carry roughly one company of ground troops, similarly to how it can carry a "company" of fighters(i.e., 12 units). That means you're looking at ~10 DS per regiment, minimum. For the 2398 fight, the FWL scared up nine regiments(one that defended the first planet, eight that got used in the counterattack), plus another 408 fighters = 34 carrier-fit DS. That's 124 DS at the low end, which requires 42 or more JS to carry them. That was a scratch-built force assembled from local resources in response to an attack, within the space of a few weeks. They dug very deep to do it, of course, but it was possible to do. Use that as a guideline for the density of merchant shipping in typical populated space.

The reason the Periphery realms are wealthy is that we're only looking at three of them. The Taurians and Rim Worlds are both called out repeatedly in canon as being extremely high-development realms, and both routinely turn in extremely strong performances in fleet combat any time one happens in canon. Likewise, the Marians have ludicrous mineral wealth(which also happens to be in a form needed for K-F drive construction, which means they'll naturally have a naval bent). All three are wealthy, but all three are also atypical. There's a lot of other Periphery nations in the background, and very few have two coins to rub together. (Also, it'd be no fun at all to play a realm that could only afford fighters, so I want to be sure they're all playable)
« Last Edit: 04 September 2018, 13:37:52 by Alsadius »

marcussmythe

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1204
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #850 on: 04 September 2018, 13:39:24 »
Command circuits have value, but they need to be used sensibly - it's really hard to justify the expense unless it's experiencing major usage, or it has an important strategic purpose. The RWR command circuit is really pushing the limits of what makes sense, IMO - if the nation was less one-dimensional(astrographically speaking), they wouldn't have done it. And at the time they launched the service, they were both fairly rich and very peaceful, which gave them more room to do it than most other nations have.

Also, be aware that there are a lot of merchant ships around at any given time. Even with no special intervention on your part, information moves much faster than one week per jump. I haven't set exact times (and it'll vary based on organization, luck, and local merchant density), but you can expect a critical-priority message to move at a speed somewhere in the ballpark of 1-2 days per jump. A true command circuit will move a message(or a VIP) far faster - on the order of one hour per jump, assuming everyone is charged and ready - but I expect that there's a limit on how much faster information is worth to you when your fleet's strategic speed is still limited to a week per jump.

To put numbers on it, a typical DropShip of this era can carry roughly one company of ground troops, similarly to how it can carry a "company" of fighters(i.e., 12 units). That means you're looking at ~10 DS per regiment, minimum. For the 2398 fight, the FWL scared up nine regiments(one that defended the first planet, eight that got used in the counterattack), plus another 408 fighters = 34 carrier-fit DS. That's 124 DS at the low end, which requires 42 or more JS to carry them. That was a scratch-built force assembled from local resources in response to an attack, within the space of a few weeks. They dug very deep to do it, of course, but it was possible to do. Use that as a guideline for the density of merchant shipping in typical populated space.

The reason the Periphery realms are wealthy is that we're only looking at three of them. The Taurians and Rim Worlds are both called out repeatedly in canon as being extremely high-development realms, and both routinely turn in extremely strong performances in fleet combat any time one happens in canon. Likewise, the Marians have ludicrous mineral wealth(which also happens to be in a form needed for K-F drive construction, which means they'll naturally have a naval bent). All three are wealthy, but all three are also atypical. There's a lot of other Periphery nations in the background, and very few have two coins to rub together.

So in essence the rich inner sphere worlds and the poor ones are bundled up into larger political organizations, whereas in the periphery the richer worlds get the press, and the poorer ones dont get noticed, not being in a nation with the richer ones - much like the Fed Suns 'Outback', which would go pretty much unremarked were it not fedsuns.

Lagrange

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1419
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #851 on: 04 September 2018, 17:41:44 »
...several Ribe class recharge stations are being redeployed ...
How do you redeploy?

marcussmythe

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1204
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #852 on: 04 September 2018, 17:57:00 »
Big ole cargo ships, most likely.  Heck, stations show up in unihabited systems.

We arent talking tactical or operational timescales, bt strategic.  If Alsadius is concerned, Ill just build some new ones there

Lagrange

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1419
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #853 on: 04 September 2018, 18:45:31 »
Big ole cargo ships, most likely.  Heck, stations show up in unihabited systems.

We arent talking tactical or operational timescales, bt strategic.  If Alsadius is concerned, Ill just build some new ones there
My understanding is that 500kton transports don't exist outside of a megaton scale warship.  I don't expect that capacity can be hired from the civilian market, so it's probably worth creating.

truetanker

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 9952
  • Clan Hells Horses 666th Mech. Assualt Cluster
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #854 on: 04 September 2018, 19:36:59 »
Stations are just parts that you put together to form larger ones. Doesn't matter what final weight is, all parts come in different sizes.

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

Alsadius

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 926
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #855 on: 04 September 2018, 19:54:11 »
The more complex bits of a station are pre-fab (guns, reactor, station-keeping drive, etc.), but most of the structural bits will be built in place from materials shipped in, if the system lacks sufficient industry to produce it locally. Moving an engine that weighs 6000 tons is fairly doable with standard civilian transports. Moving the 500,000 ton station it fits into? Not so much.

You could, in principle, disassemble a station and move it like oversized Ikea furniture. In practice, it'd probably cost more than a new station unless we're talking about very expensive stations. The Ribe is $175m, which is dirt cheap for a station. Probably better to just build a new one in place, realistically - you're planning to keep the planet, I assume, so it's not like a couple stations will even be wasted. (You can keep them together for now and redeploy one from zenith to nadir in the space of a few months, if you like - station-keeping drives are weak by BT standards, but still ludicrously efficient by RL rocketry standards)

Also, I just noticed that I forgot to post support unit losses for the Capellans in 2399. The post has been edited accordingly.
« Last Edit: 04 September 2018, 20:11:56 by Alsadius »

marcussmythe

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1204
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #856 on: 04 September 2018, 20:05:28 »
Ill juggle my turn. A few Ribe class rechage stations is budget dust.


truetanker

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 9952
  • Clan Hells Horses 666th Mech. Assualt Cluster
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #857 on: 04 September 2018, 23:36:36 »

Ending Balance Turn 5: 7 Billion, 791 million
TAXES and Loot: 14 Billion
Budget Turn 6: 21 Billion, 791 Million

DCA Loan ( Yard ):                   1 Billion
Periphery Aid Package:              .500 Million, helping the Lothian League, continue support for more gains
Maintenance:                             3.900 Billion ~ 120% ( or close to that )
Buying, Ala x 10 ( 10 asf each )   .500 Million ( 100 fighters )
Buying, Kutai from TC:              5 Billion
Buying, Ribe Station, Steiner:      .175 Million ( x1 total ) Alphard
Buying, Onsen Station, Kurita:     .551 Million ( x1 total ) Lothario
Buying, Tenshi Station, Kurita:   2.628 Billion ( x6 total ) 4 Alphard, 2 Lothario
Buying, Small Craft:                     .300 Million ( 30 Small craft )
Buying, Jumpship:                      2 Billion ( x4 total )
Buying, Dropship:                       3.600 Billion ( x12 total )

End Turn 6 Budget: 1 Billion, 637 Million

Story arc:

Marian Action News Network ( MANN )
Nova Roma, Alphard
Palace of Imperator Pi

MANN Reporter: " His excellency has stated he would like to incorporate more planetary systems into the Hegemony. As such, he authorized the Navis to seek out new planets to peacefully acquisition them, in an attempt to amount more into the coffers of his realm. Having barley acquired a DCA-made, ex-Taurian Concordat Kutai before the Kurtians implicated an embargo on the " illegal " sale of their ship to a " third party ". To attempt at appeasing the Coordinator, the MHAF recently bought, with considerable markup, an Onsen Station and several of the newer Tenshi-class Defense Satellites. Not to be outbided, a Steiner Social General passing thru offered his realms Ribe-class Recharge station in exchange for more tins of Alphard Mudskipper, a sought after delicacy on Skye, his home planet. Several tons are currently being delivered to insure continued relations, even when war is rumored to be soon.

Quote
First and Second Fleets are on patrol attempting to acquire more planets... if attacking a planet is the only way... both fleets hit same target(s). Prefer to just brush aside defenses and land bodies dirt side. The 4 Jumpers I bought are for resupply and colonization attempts at peace as well. First Jumpers, then WS in that order per system I attempt to control, Alsadius.

Pi
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: 447
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #858 on: 05 September 2018, 02:07:09 »
I have just realised that I had planned my budget last week, without the 2B increase to my budget, so I have that money spare, on top of the 400M in license fees from the Marians.

Will just save it for next turn.

marcussmythe

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1204
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #859 on: 05 September 2018, 18:38:57 »
Modified turn to include purchase of 10 additional Ribe class stations.  2 over the new planet, other 8 cover growth in number of worlds - extras if any out of the current 130 total assigned as trading posts in low/uninhabited (but well located) systems.


Lagrange

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1419
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #860 on: 06 September 2018, 07:58:40 »
I wanted to say 'thank you' to Alsadius---that was clearly quite an effort.  I've been working on my turn in the background (it's complex) and expect to finish this weekend.

Alsadius

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 926
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #861 on: 06 September 2018, 08:14:35 »
So in essence the rich inner sphere worlds and the poor ones are bundled up into larger political organizations, whereas in the periphery the richer worlds get the press, and the poorer ones dont get noticed, not being in a nation with the richer ones - much like the Fed Suns 'Outback', which would go pretty much unremarked were it not fedsuns.

Yeah, that's a good way to think of it.

I wanted to say 'thank you' to Alsadius---that was clearly quite an effort.  I've been working on my turn in the background (it's complex) and expect to finish this weekend.

Thank you :)

I'm giving some thought to future turns now, digging into history for stuff that might be fitting. (And seriously, I have got to give the DC and LC some real combat already - I don't think either of you has lost a ship yet.) I'll try to do NPC turns this weekend, and write up the turn next week.

Lagrange

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1419
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #862 on: 06 September 2018, 21:24:06 »
Lena Wilhight finds Shannon Bream's assumed aggressive fighter posture appealing and cultivates it by encouraging her to build an 'appropriately aggressive doctrine' for a wartime tactics together with studies and policy changes necessary to make it happen. 

Test Results
The results of the tests are somewhat puzzling, but perhaps that simply represents the natural variation to be expected in combat situations.  Test 1 results are consistent with about a 30% chance of a kill/MG.   In test 2, the Crestbreaker crews proved significantly less effective than onboard MGs, by approximately a factor of 4 and yet after accounting for this reduced effectiveness, the onboard MG equivalents (approximately 200) had about an 85% chance of a kill, substantially higher than test 1.  From all the tests, we discover that:
  • The number of missiles on-target can be approximately tripled via very short range attacks.  This strongly supports the existing doctrine of close range attacks.
  • Offboard MGs are approximately a factor of 4 less effective than onboard MGs.  Coupled with the overwhelming quantities of missiles used in the TH coup, this implies a need for a new kind of antimissile defense.

ASF
The new doctrine is pervasive antimissile defense, as exhibited by the first Taurian-designed and made heavy strike fighter, a second product of the earlier generation's design war.   The Rager draws inspiration from the Shu heavy fighter except bigger and meaner with a heavy intrinsic antimissile defense.
Code: [Select]
90 ton Rager Base Tech Level: Standard (IS)
Tech Rating: D/C-E-D-D 
Weight: 90 tons
BV: 1,576
Cost: 5,425,030 C-bills 
Movement: 6/9
Engine: 360
Heat Sinks: 10
Fuel Points: 400 (5.0 tons) 
Structural Integrity: 9
Armor: 400
Nose: 120
Left/Right Wing: 100
Aft: 80

Weapons Loc Heat
2x Machine Gun NOS
2x SRM 6 NOS 8
AC/5 NOS 1
5x Machine Gun RW
5x Machine Gun LW
 
Ammo Shots

SRM 6 Ammo (30 shots)
Machine Gun Ammo (200 shots)
AC/5 Ammo (20 shots)
The Rager is designed as a missile delivery vehicle, sporting 5 tons of fuel and a massive engine allowing it to carry up to 3 Barracudas or a Killer Whale and a White Shark while accelerating at 2.25g.  Against faster targets, it can carry a single Killer Whale with 2.9g acceleration or a single Barracuda with 3.4g.  In the missile-heavy environments typical of the modern battlefield, the Rager has substantial built-in defense provided by 12 machine guns making it capable of both self-defense and potentially defending allies.   With missiles away, the Rager's massive engine turns it into a powerful dogfighter capable of routinely pulling 4.5g maneuvers and a more armor than any other fighter in the inner sphere.  The Rager's AC-5 provide a significant punch at medium range against the scout ASFs which are capable of eluding it while the new twin SRM-6's  machine guns pull double-duty as a dogfighting buzzsaw. 
Fleet upgrades
The admiralty remains somewhat split on the decision to go with a Rube Goldberg Warship.  Although those against have not yet developed an effective doctrine given budgetary constraints, two criticisms appear both imminently valid and addressable:
  • The decision to go with smaller lasers than the Marathon's out of monetary concerns appears short-sighted as the larger lasers have more range, which certainly matters given the glacial speed of the Taurus I.
  • The army is displeased by a lack of support for deployment operations.  "At least the Kutai have DROPSHIPS!"
To address these criticisms a new variant of the Taurus I is created and all are converted into the new variant.
Code: [Select]
Class/Model/Name: Taurus I, block II
Tech: Inner Sphere
Ship Cost: $346,280,000.00
Magazine Cost: $61,000.00
BV2: 13,456

Mass: 100,000
K-F Drive System: None
Power Plant: Station-Keeping Drive
Safe Thrust: 0
Maximum Thrust: 1
Armor Type: Standard
Armament:
12 Naval Laser 55
608 Machine Gun (IS)

Class/Model/Name: Taurus I, block II
Mass: 100,000

Equipment: Mass
Drive: 1,200
Thrust
Safe: 0.2
Maximum: 1
Controls: 100
Structural Integrity: 1 1,000
Total Heat Sinks: 1020 Single 927
Fuel & Fuel Pumps: 40000 points 4,080
Fire Control Computers: 18
Armor: 315 pts Standard 393
Fore: 65
Fore-Left/Right: 60/60
Aft-Left/Right: 45/45
Aft: 40

Dropship Capacity: 1 1,000
Grav Decks:
Medium: 1 100
Life Boats: 328 2,296

Crew And Passengers:
30 Officers in 1st Class Quarters 300
35 Crew in 2nd Class Quarters 245
114 Gunners and Others in 2nd Class Quarters 798
744 Bay Personnel 0
2172 Steerage Passengers 10,600

# Weapons Loc Heat Damage Range Mass Ammo Rounds Mass
12 Naval Laser 55 Nose 1020 660 (66-C) Extreme-C 13,200 Machine Gun (IS) Ammo 2400 12.00
120 Machine Gun (IS) Aft 240 (24-C) Short-PDS 60 Machine Gun (IS) Ammo 2400 12.00
120 Machine Gun (IS) FR 240 (24-C) Short-PDS 60 Machine Gun (IS) Ammo 2400 12.00
120 Machine Gun (IS) FL 240 (24-C) Short-PDS 60 Machine Gun (IS) Ammo 2400 12.00
120 Machine Gun (IS) AR 240 (24-C) Short-PDS 60 Machine Gun (IS) Ammo 2400 12.00
120 Machine Gun (IS) AL 240 (24-C) Short-PDS 60 Machine Gun (IS) Ammo 200 1.00
8 Machine Gun (IS) Nose 16 (1.6-C) Short-PDS 4

Number Equipment and Bays Mass Doors
40 Small Craft+24 ASF 11,600 3
40 Small Craft+24 ASF 11,600 3
40 Small Craft+24 ASF 11,600 3
28,100 Cargo, Standard 28,100 1
Taking advantage of an overhaul, the Taurus I also has onboard MGs doubled as suggested by test results and adds a docking collar for easy cargo transport to and from  existing dropships.  The net result is a design that is better defended from missiles, with more range, and with much more operational flexibility.   For example, the new Taurus I can quarter and transport two regiments of vehicles with one ready to land from the new Skyfall combat drop shuttle and the other transported as cargo.
Code: [Select]
200 ton Smallcraft Skyfall Combat Drop Shuttle Base Tech Level: Standard (IS)
Tech Rating: D/D-E-D-D 
Weight: 200 tons BV: 776
Cost: 7,135,560 C-bills 
Movement: 3/5
Heat Sinks: 0
Fuel Points: 240 (3.0 tons)
Tons Per Burn Day: 1.84 
Structural Integrity: 5

Armor: 300
Nose: 90
Left/Right Wing: 75
Aft: 60

Weapons Loc Heat
6x Machine Gun NOS 0
Machine Gun Ammo (100 shots)

Carrying Capacity
Heavy Vehicle Bay (1 door) - 1 unit // the Light variant carries two light vehicle bays.
Cargo Space (1 door) - 10 tons 

Crew
Officers 1
Enlisted/Non-rated 2
Gunners 1
Bay Personnel 8
The Taurus I block II loaded for space combat (the default) has 12 Crestbreaker missile defense shuttles, 12 David Marine shuttles with 2 reinforced Regiments of marines (1800), and 7 Air Divisions (168 ASF) with 120 tons of Capital Missiles/ASF. 

For ground combat, the load is 12 Crestbreaker missile defense shuttles and 5 air divisions (108) of Skyfall combat dropshuttles loaded with a regiment of combat vehicles (a heavy battalion and 2 light battalions).  A second regiment is carried as cargo with each regiment quartered on the Taurus I and an extra 10 tons of cargo space for reloads & repair associated with each vehicle.   In addition, 3 Air divisions (72 ASF) provide air support for the ground forces supported by 100 tons of cargo space/ASF for missiles, bombs, etc...

In either configuration, the Taurus I has fuel to support 20 jumps and provisions for a half year as well as a kiloton of extras for reload & repair.

The Taurus I still has a gaping hole in it's missile defense around it's primary laser battery.  To address this, a block II design for the Tick was created which mounts 120 Machine guns in a single arc allowing it to plug the missile defense hole. 
Code: [Select]
5000 ton Tick Dropship block II Base
Tech Level: Standard (IS)
Tech Rating: D/E-E-E-E 
Weight: 5000 tons
BV: 4,691
Cost: 235,303,600 C-bills 
Movement: 11/17
Heat Sinks: 155
Fuel Points: 5400 (175.0 tons)
Tons Per Burn Day: 1.84 
Structural Integrity: 20
Armor: 1232

Armor
Nose 308
Left Side 308
Right Side 308
Aft 308

Weapons Loc Heat
120x Machine Gun  AFT 0
Machine Gun Ammo AFT 1800

   Carrying Capacity Cargo Space (1 door) - 29.5 tons 
Equipment: Naval Tug---600 tons
Crew
Officers 5
Enlisted/Non-rated 0
Gunners 20
With the upgraded onboard machine guns, Crestbreaker smallcraft, and Rager ASF, almost 3 thousand machine guns can potentially be brought to bear against a missile wave.

Transport Infrastructure & Intelligence
Lena is also concerned with improving the reaction time of TC forces.  Although many merchants operate in the TC, as a matter of profit they try to always jump to and from inhabited systems causing the TC to be broken into several weakly-connected archipelagos of merchant traffic.  To improve the rate and reliability of communication, a plan to create several 'rest stops' along 'highways' assisting merchant travel is developed.  Several of these, use stars without habitable planets to bridge these archipelagos.  Doing this requires a Mother-transportable design for a station which necessitates a depot approach instead of more standard recharge batteries.
Code: [Select]
Class/Model/Name: Siesta
Tech: Inner Sphere
Ship Cost: $131,430,000.00
Magazine Cost: $12,000.00
BV2: 6,570

Mass: 100,000
K-F Drive System: None
Power Plant: Station-Keeping Drive
Safe Thrust: 0
Maximum Thrust: 1
Armor Type: Standard
Armament:
108 Machine Gun (IS)
3 Naval Laser 55

Class/Model/Name: Siesta
Mass: 100,000

Equipment: Mass
Drive: 1,200
Thrust
Safe: 0.2
Maximum: 1
Controls: 100
Structural Integrity: 1 1,000
Total Heat Sinks: 255 Single 162
Fuel & Fuel Pumps: 240000 points 24,480
Fire Control Computers: 0
Armor: 315 pts Standard 393
Fore: 53
Fore-Left/Right: 53/53
Aft-Left/Right: 52/52
Aft: 52

Dropship Capacity: 2 2,000
Grav Decks:
Small: 1 50
Life Boats: 36 252

Crew And Passengers:
15 Officers in 1st Class Quarters 150
50 Crew in 2nd Class Quarters 350
21 Gunners and Others in 2nd Class Quarters 147
182 Bay Personnel 0
164 Steerage Passengers 820

# Weapons Loc Heat Damage Range Mass Ammo Rounds Mass
18 Machine Gun (IS) Nose 36 (3.6-C) Short-PDS 9 Machine Gun (IS) Ammo 400 2.00
18 Machine Gun (IS) Aft 36 (3.6-C) Short-PDS 9 Machine Gun (IS) Ammo 400 2.00
18 Machine Gun (IS) FR 36 (3.6-C) Short-PDS 9 Machine Gun (IS) Ammo 400 2.00
18 Machine Gun (IS) FL 36 (3.6-C) Short-PDS 9 Machine Gun (IS) Ammo 400 2.00
18 Machine Gun (IS) AR 36 (3.6-C) Short-PDS 9 Machine Gun (IS) Ammo 400 2.00
18 Machine Gun (IS) AL 36 (3.6-C) Short-PDS 9 Machine Gun (IS) Ammo 400 2.00
1 Naval Laser 55 Nose 85 55 (5.5-C) Extreme-C 1,100
1 Naval Laser 55 AL 85 55 (5.5-C) Extreme-C 1,100
1 Naval Laser 55 AR 85 55 (5.5-C) Extreme-C 1,100

Number Equipment and Bays Mass Doors
6 Bay Small Craft 1,200 3 (1 Crestbreaker AMS craft, 1 David Marine Shuttle, 4 utilitarian)
62,945 Cargo, Standard 62,945 1
400 Cargo, Insulated 460 1
6 Bay Fighter 900 3
5 Bay Conventional Infantry (IS), Foot 25
The Siesta station is capable of fueling well over 120 jumpship charges before resupply, has ample space for transshipment storage, and it can simultaneously refuel 3 jumpships via 2 docking collars and a refueling drogue with a ready load.  The design sports substantial antimeteor defenses that can also be used in a missile defense role, as well as a few powerful capital lasers to enforce security non-capital craft in it's immediate environment.  The heavy armor and ASF bays provide significant security against small scale pirates and a company of marines provide security within the station itself.   All civilian vessels using the Siesta fuel stations are expected to carry and retransmit encrypted military messages as a matter of course.  Furthermore, interviews with jumpship crew members about news they've seen while they charge the jump drive are a common part of Siesta use.   The transshipment facilities are capacious and available for reasonable rental rates as long as cargo passes safety inspections.  In effect, the Siesta stations both create and conduct TC intelligence.

Aside from transportability, which allows these stations to be easily installed in uninhabited systems or even the deep black, the Siesta design provides the ability to service surges of jumpship traffic unlike standard battery-based designs.  The significant drawback of this approach is the refuel requirements which will be dealt with by dedicating a Mother with a tanker variant of the Siesta to resupply.  Since hydrogen is easily available from cracking water, the cost of hydrogen is essentially all in the transport so this should keep the cost of fuel down. 
Code: [Select]
Class/Model/Name: Siesta Tanker
Tech: Inner Sphere
Ship Cost: $159,735,000.00
Magazine Cost: $3,000.00
BV2: 5,548

Mass: 100,000
K-F Drive System: None
Power Plant: Station-Keeping Drive
Safe Thrust: 0
Maximum Thrust: 1
Armor Type: Standard
Armament:
18 Machine Gun (IS)

Class/Model/Name: Siesta Tanker
Mass: 100,000

Equipment: Mass
Drive: 1,200
Thrust
Safe: 0.2
Maximum: 1
Controls: 100
K-F Hyperdrive: None (0 Integrity) 0
Jump Sail: (0 Integrity) 0
Structural Integrity: 1 1,000
Total Heat Sinks: 93 Single 0
Fuel & Fuel Pumps: 850000 points 86,700
Fire Control Computers: 0
Armor: 315 pts Standard 393
Fore: 53
Fore-Left/Right: 53/53
Aft-Left/Right: 52/52
Aft: 52

Dropship Capacity: 1 1,000
Grav Decks:
Small: 1 50
Life Boats: 18 126

Crew And Passengers:
12 Officers in 1st Class Quarters 120
53 Crew in 2nd Class Quarters 371
3 Gunners and Others in 2nd Class Quarters 21
70 Bay Personnel 0
52 Steerage Passengers 260

# Weapons Loc Heat Damage Range Mass Ammo Rounds Mass
3 Machine Gun (IS) Nose 6 (0.6-C) Short-PDS 2 Machine Gun (IS) Ammo 100 0.50
3 Machine Gun (IS) Aft 6 (0.6-C) Short-PDS 2 Machine Gun (IS) Ammo 100 0.50
3 Machine Gun (IS) FR 6 (0.6-C) Short-PDS 2 Machine Gun (IS) Ammo 100 0.50
3 Machine Gun (IS) FL 6 (0.6-C) Short-PDS 2 Machine Gun (IS) Ammo 100 0.50
3 Machine Gun (IS) AR 6 (0.6-C) Short-PDS 2 Machine Gun (IS) Ammo 100 0.50
3 Machine Gun (IS) AL 6 (0.6-C) Short-PDS 2 Machine Gun (IS) Ammo 100 0.50

Number Equipment and Bays Mass Doors
6 Bay Small Craft 1,200 3
6,082 Cargo, Standard 6,082 1
400 Cargo, Insulated 460 1
1 Bay Conventional Infantry (IS), Foot 5 1
6 Bay Fighter 900    3
The initial highways here are:
Taurus/Pleiades: Taurus<->Midale<->Fintoft<->Pleiades (4 jumps)
Zanzibar/Badlands: Zanzibar<->Corodiz<->deep<->Midale<->Brockway<->deep<->deep<->Warren<->deep<->Montour<->Verdigreis<->deep<->Badlands Cluster (12 jumps)
Malagrotta cutoff: Montour<->Cohagen<->Estuan<->black<->Malagrotta (4 jumps)
where 'black' indicates the use of an otherwise uninhabited intermediately located star and 'deep' indicates the use of a deep space station sheltered inside a more minor object capable of generating a hyper limit.  Typically, these stations are posted just inside the hyper limit, about 10 minutes away.  (OOC, I'm combining information about distance from this map: http://battletech.rpg.hu/dynmech/planets/ismap_standalone.php?era_id=0&id=1943 with the Capellan/TC border from this map http://www.sarna.net/wiki/File:Taurian_Concordat_partial_2366.png and the overall structure of this map http://cfw.sarna.net/wiki/images/2/24/TC_2571.png.) 

These highways leave virtually all TC stars at most a single jump from the highway and offer more direct transit routes between distant stars. As an example of this, Verdigreis<->Taurus is 11 jumps by conventional routes, and a border must be crossed into FedSuns territory.  Using the highway system, this is only 8 jumps entirely within the TC.  Given standard merchant traffic, this should leave all parts of the TC informed of important events in about a 2 week or smaller timeframe while reducing response time to a near-minimum.

Budget
The budget breaks down as:
Code: [Select]
              Cost/unit #active Maintenance
Kutai                    6092 2         1218
Marathon              621 7         435
Independence    4567   (1 mothball) 0
Fighters                 5 1325         663
Smallcraft                10 96          96
Mother              933 4         373
Taurus I              552 4         221
Light DS              300 8         240
Total Maintenance 3246

Prototyping costs, total 501
Siesta                 131
Siesta Tanker variant   80
Tick I block II variant 118
Taurus I block II variant 173

Refits #done
Refit, Taurus I Block II 4 80
Refit, Tick 1 block II 4 36 Assuming this can be done without taking up yard space.

New Construction
Mother         2     1866 One refuels the highways with a Siesta Tanker while the other does special missions.
Taurus I, block II 1 346
Tick, block II         1 235 
Fighters              360 1800 Ragers, posted on 2 Taurus I's by default.
Smallcraft              216 2160 Skyfall combat dropshuttles that can drop or lift a regiment from or to a Taurus I.
Siesta              20 2620
Siesta Tanker        1 160

Research                 130
Savings from last turn -183
Savings for next turn 2

Policy
To minimize reaction time, the Taurus I fleet will be moved to the Midale crossroads system.  This fleet is meant to be kept concentrated although up to 1 RGW may be detached for other duties if it is deemed a clearly sufficient force.  In the event of an overwhelming invasion, the policy is to fall back to Taurus and link up with the orbital forts for maximal force concentration.  The Taurus I may be used for regimental transport of land forces, but by default they remain ASF carriers with the new Rager ASFs carrying missile loads of Killer Whales, Barracudas, or a mixture depending on the mission.  The general doctrine is to prefer attacking capital ships over ASF, although it's entirely plausible to use a Killer Whale+Barracuda load, salvo the Barracudas to eliminate ASF defenders, then salvo the Killer Whales to eliminate the capital ships.

Kutai Alpha patrols the Midale/Badlands and Montour/Malagrotta highways using 2 ASF heavy dropships for support.  Kutai Beta patrols the Pleiades/Taurus and Midale/Zanzibar highways using 2 ASF heavy dropships for support.  If ground support is needed, the Kutai can interdict a planet and call in a Taurus I with ground forces.

Planetary airwings will consist of a minimum of 2 squadrons (~600 ASF in total) with much more for important worlds.  Defense doctrine has the ASF primarily attacking invaders in atmosphere to maximize the advantage of ASF over other spaceborn assets.

Each deployed Siesta will have a squadron of ASF used for defense.

Edit: an Addendum
Edit: Fixed fire control tonnage on Taurus I v2
Edit: added links

marcussmythe

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1204
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #863 on: 06 September 2018, 21:32:36 »
1.)  Love the turn and the detail, as well as the report on test findings.  Like the idea of stations over useful unihabited systems - may steal.

2.) In my head, Ranger is totally Shuu 2.0, or prounced Shoo-Point-O.  :)  Though the generalization of fighters keeps it from mattering in play (and I support this decision), when I get around to the Shuu refit, itll look a lot like that.

3.)  So, Im confused - Siesta is a gas station to carry hydrogen?
« Last Edit: 06 September 2018, 21:55:05 by marcussmythe »

Lagrange

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1419
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #864 on: 07 September 2018, 05:59:34 »
3.)  So, Im confused - Siesta is a gas station to carry hydrogen?
Yes---it supports fast and reliable turn-around for jumpships via the fuel necessary for a fusion plant based charge.  My understanding is that this method is atypical since the fuel carried by a jumpship is rather small but entirely feasible as per SO 87, 124, 125.

It has other roles as well, of course such as transshipment warehouse.

Lagrange

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1419
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #865 on: 07 September 2018, 07:16:55 »
1.)  Love the turn and the detail, as well as the report on test findings.  Like the idea of stations over useful unihabited systems - may steal.
Have fun.  The TC seems particularly well suited to this due to it's linear structure and Midale is an excellent crossrooads---it has a large number of inhabited systems right at the 30 light year limit.   One way to measure the quality of a highway is via the number of extra jumps required to get somewhere compared to a sequence of all-black stations spaced precisely 30 light years apart in deep space.  There is only one wasted jump on the Zanzibar/Badlands highway with none elsewhere.  The one wasted jump seems a worthwhile tradeoff against easier refueling, backup access to a star for recharging, and zero additional jumps to several systems.
2.) In my head, Ranger is totally Shuu 2.0, or prounced Shoo-Point-O.  :)  Though the generalization of fighters keeps it from mattering in play (and I support this decision), when I get around to the Shuu refit, itll look a lot like that.
Yeah, the Rager is probably closer to what you had in mind given the discussion about SI.  It also seems like the logical design given the combat situation.  I considered an SRM-heavy load which certainly has a higher damage ceiling, but missile defense likely inverts that relationship even in conventional battletech.  Also, the medium range of the AC-5 has some real value.

W.r.t. generalization of fighters the current plan for the TC is to replace all fighters over the coming decades making the generalized 2 MGs/fighter for the TH deeply unrealistic for the TC.  I think if we want to keep this all about warships, then abstracting fighters makes some sense, but on the other hand the Rager design indicates that the design of small units like ASF matters significantly in aggregate at the warship scale.

Alsadius

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 926
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #866 on: 07 September 2018, 07:50:18 »
A few notes:

1) Stations can be constructed in uninhabited systems, per my discussion here. I think the RWR command circuit contains one Renaissance "in the black", from what I recall of routes when I made it. As such, you're not limited to 100,000 tons. You might still prefer to keep them that small, but I wanted you to know the choice exists.

2) To keep the math simple, you can assume a proper site for a "black" station exists that will let you cover 25LY of linear distance per jump, so if you want to bridge a 75LY gap without hitting inhabited systems, you can use two in the middle instead of following the inhabited-planet route you'd get from a jump planner. (Stars aren't literally everywhere, but they're pretty common, so this seems reasonable).

3) Machine guns act as meaningful missile defences against capital missiles only. They might shoot down the odd SRM, but they won't be much easier to hit than a Killer Whale - less armour, but also smaller and with much less tracking time before impact. Given they do 1/20 the damage, that means the same MG battery prevents 1/20 as much damage at best, which rounds to zero. This may change when true AMS comes into the equation, but for now I wouldn't worry about SRM/LRM attacks being shot down en masse.

4) You can make designs for your own support craft, but I will not take them into account when resolving battles, other than to get a general sense of "most of their DS are carrier-fit" or "they use SC mostly as AMS defences" or the like. You can pick genres, but I can't possibly keep all the individual designs straight - it already takes about as much time for me to understand the setup for a battle as it does to write the thing, even ignoring all of those designs.

Lagrange

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1419
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #867 on: 07 September 2018, 09:25:16 »
1) Stations can be constructed in uninhabited systems, per my discussion here. I think the RWR command circuit contains one Renaissance "in the black", from what I recall of routes when I made it. As such, you're not limited to 100,000 tons. You might still prefer to keep them that small, but I wanted you to know the choice exists.
While it may be possible to construct a space station on location, it's likely easier to construct it at Taurus (for example) with yard support, then transport it so I'll stick with the a 100K ton design unless you see a functional flaw.   Consider this fluff.
2) To keep the math simple, you can assume a proper site for a "black" station exists that will let you cover 25LY of linear distance per jump, so if you want to bridge a 75LY gap without hitting inhabited systems, you can use two in the middle instead of following the inhabited-planet route you'd get from a jump planner. (Stars aren't literally everywhere, but they're pretty common, so this seems reasonable).
This causes issues for the TC highways as designed.  Would you go lower?

Extrapolating from here: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_nearest_stars_and_brown_dwarfs there are ~324 stellar systems within a 30 light year radius of Sol, roughly one star per 200 cubic light years.  Playing with trigonometry, it's possible to make 25LY of linear progress within the cap made by a 33 degree radius cone intersecting a sphere which seems to have about 2000 cubic light years suggesting the 5 LY gap is rather conservative.  The relationship between the volume available and the linear gap is cubic which suggests a 30-(2000/200)^0.333 = 27.85LY is a more typical average linear progress at Sol-neighborhood densities. 

Barring this, how do you feel about deep black stations? 
3) Machine guns act as meaningful missile defences against capital missiles only. They might shoot down the odd SRM, but they won't be much easier to hit than a Killer Whale - less armour, but also smaller and with much less tracking time before impact. Given they do 1/20 the damage, that means the same MG battery prevents 1/20 as much damage at best, which rounds to zero. This may change when true AMS comes into the equation, but for now I wouldn't worry about SRM/LRM attacks being shot down en masse.
Interesting---I might revisit the Rager design given this change.
4) You can make designs for your own support craft, but I will not take them into account when resolving battles, other than to get a general sense of "most of their DS are carrier-fit" or "they use SC mostly as AMS defences" or the like. You can pick genres, but I can't possibly keep all the individual designs straight - it already takes about as much time for me to understand the setup for a battle as it does to write the thing, even ignoring all of those designs.
Your part of this does seem like the limiting factor so we should not add to that.  Maybe we can agree on a baseline ASF design that you can just use as the default?  There have only been two proposed, and they are rather similar.

Alsadius

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 926
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #868 on: 07 September 2018, 09:32:27 »
What distances did you assume when making your jump routing? I picked 25 because it was easy, but 27-28 wouldn't bug me.

I was thinking of making "standard" designs over the weekend, to give us all a common benchmark. We'll see if I have the time.

Lagrange

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1419
Re: Group Design Challenge: WarShip Arms Race
« Reply #869 on: 07 September 2018, 09:53:45 »
What distances did you assume when making your jump routing? I picked 25 because it was easy, but 27-28 wouldn't bug me.
Honestly, I forgot to take this into account.  Looking through:
Midale<->Condiz is 55.84LY
Brockway<->Warren is 85.27LY (3 jumps)
Warren<->Montour is 51.12LY
Verdigreis<->Badlands is 56.6LY
Estuan<->Malagrotta is 47.83LY

Only Estuan<->Malagrotta succeeds with 25LY/jump.  Brockway<->Warren and Verdigreis<->Badlands requires slightly over 28LY/jump.

Having a standardized reference design does seem like it would be helpful.  You also don't necessarily need to do that yourself.