Warship Race Redux

[truetanker]

What do you guys think this is? Honorverse with the Grayson Navy...

lol...

TT

[UnLimiTeD]

Afraid to out myself as an uncultured barbarian, but ... I never read any Honorverse. I assume I can read something about it? Or would it be watch.

What do you mean, though? I have minelayers on nearly all my ships.
Though for all their tactical applications, their strategic implications are ... limited. Certainly, it's impossible to prevent an enemy from reaching a specific system, and discouraging an approach only works if you place them very close to the object of attraction, which is generally were you don't want them because you have to be there yourself.

[Daryk]

David Drake's RCN books had a pretty good take on minefields, I think.

[Jester Motley]

Afraid to out myself as an uncultured barbarian, but ... I never read any Honorverse. I assume I can read something about it? Or would it be watch.

What do you mean, though? I have minelayers on nearly all my ships.
Though for all their tactical applications, their strategic implications are ... limited. Certainly, it's impossible to prevent an enemy from reaching a specific system, and discouraging an approach only works if you place them very close to the object of attraction, which is generally were you don't want them because you have to be there yourself.

No one knows it all.  In this case, Honorverse refers to David Weber's series of Space Opera novels that are essentially Hornblower in Spaaaaaaace.  MC is named Honor Harrington, and its very very crunchy space combat.  Books build from ship v. ship combat through to multiple feet engagements, though the later series goes very political with LOADS of it between action scenes.

Because of the realism, and attention to detail, Honorverse (There are more books now than just her's, so honorverse is applicable, but the space combat is all hers) is a big reference for a lot of these kinds of space warship sims.  Oh, first 1-3 books are legit free and available in ebook form on baen.com's free library (On Basilisk Station is the first), so if you want to dip your toe, its not going to break the bank.  (Technically nearly all the books can be gotten free, legit, if you get the CDs, but... please support the author, he does great work)

As to mines...  You can usually predict, within reason, the volume of space an entry will occur, and the target, and with some preparation, you can narrow down the "lanes" they'll go through, even from pirate points.    Whether that volume is reasonable for mining or not, is a different question.  And again, I point to the fact that mines are much more useful in dictating your enemies choices and actions, and controlling the initiative.  But... that's my take on them.

[Jester Motley]

David Drake's RCN books had a pretty good take on minefields, I think.

Another good series, though a bit more character adventure and less warship/space opera, so the examples/parallels aren't as in your face as Honorverse stuff.

[marcussmythe]

Are the space mines deployed by space mine-layers defined anywhere in the rules?  I cannot find them.

[Jester Motley]

Are the space mines deployed by space mine-layers defined anywhere in the rules?  I cannot find them.

As always, sarna saves the day:  https://www.sarna.net/wiki/Space_Mine

"Space mines typically consist of small bomblets equipped with short-range passive sensors and chemical thrusters, allowing the mines to maintain their position, lock onto passing spacecraft and maneuver into them. They are normally deployed via canister, whether fired from a screen launcher, from a dedicated space mine dispenser or positioned by zero-G engineers, with each canister filling an area 15 to 18 kilometers across with around two thousand space mines.[1][2]

Space mines placed too close to a planetary body risk being pulled in by gravitational effects, while those located inside the K-F field generated by incoming JumpShips are automatically destroyed before they have the chance to inflict damage"

[1] Combat Equipment, pp. 22-23, "Sea Mine"
[2] Tactical Operations, p. 366, "Space Mines (Space)"

[marcussmythe]

Cool.  Will check those references tomorrow.

[UnLimiTeD]

They are pretty nifty.

As to actual minefields - yes, I know where ships usually appear. But there's a few problems there.
A, an enemy will probably try not to appear there. And any point far enough from a star is valid, and I don't feel like mining the entire outer bounds of a system with sufficient explosives to block a Warship fleet. That's Terra-Caspar levels of investment.
B, the points ships usually appear are the points trade and resources come in through. I can place a station bristling with guns there, but not a minefield.
C, while I could reasonably mine pirate points, chances are, if I'm defending a system I'll know them better and be able to use them more than the attacker.
I can not effective block an attacker from actually arriving in system, I'll have to beat them there.
It could potentially be possible to invoke Kessler Syndrome on a planet you want off the map.

Lastly, I've been pondering the Dropship situation.
I don't really want to make things complicated, but... just as a thought experiment.
What if the capital/standard conversion was just 20/1 and fighters had a /5 damage penalty against Warships?
Actually, not lastly.
I've kinda been avoiding corner-posting too much, because that just feels like exploiting badly thought out rules by people who might not even live anymore.
Do you think I'm unnecessarily gimping my designs? Not like that'd stop me.

[marcussmythe]

Remember a corner posted design is going to have blind spots fore and aft.  While corner posting is both a logical response to the very terrible fire control rule and likely the equivalent in naval technology terms of the Dreadnought revolution, those blind spots can get a ship in trouble, especially if alone and/or against a more agile opponent.  Now, corner posting will probably still be the Way To Go if you want a big ship with massive AAA and PDS as well as capital guns, but it isnt without some cost.

Consider also that it may be worthwhile to move your AAA and PDS off your dreadnought hulls onto escorts and/or a mix of fighters and small craft.

[Smegish]

The only unnecessary gimping you may have done was keeping the gimping I did to the DCA when they were a NPC faction. I've self-imposed an SI limit for the NPC stuff: 30 + (tonnage/10kt) or there abouts, though that will be increasing with better armour.

But the Kutai and Fubuki were quite deliberately built sub-par. Sure Fubuki has guns but not enough armour to withstand the attention that many guns attracts.

[UnLimiTeD]

Well, you told me earlier, and I mostly kept that because...  well, it gives them flavour. Though now you mention it I agree, I've boarded the gimp train long before this.
I think it's quite the pity that "ideal" designs are so obviously herded into just a few niches.

[marcussmythe]

Well, you told me earlier, and I mostly kept that because...  well, it gives them flavour. Though now you mention it I agree, I've boarded the gimp train long before this.
I think it's quite the pity that "ideal" designs are so obviously herded into just a few niches.

I think theres a bit more room than that.  3/5 vs 4/6 is an honest question, and I can see 5/8 or even 6/9 for specialized roles.

HNPPCs are a great weapon, but super-pricy compared to NLs and NACs.  NACs have fantastic damage per ton, but less range - but maybe you go 4/6 and NACs, and figure you can use your drives to get your NACs in range?  Also, if you make some ships fast, do you make them ALL fast?  Whats the up/down on that?  Unified fleet speed is a thing, but having SOMEONE who can run down a fleeing opponent/force an engagement has value.

Missiles are kinda iffy, BUT Off-Bore Firing, and later Bearings Only, give them concentration out of multiple arcs and unparalleled range.  And hey, crit chance EVERY SINGLE HIT.  Thats a thing.

Cornerposting is GREAT, until a more agile opponent parks on your nose or tail and wont get off.  And if you are a classic cornerpost, your blind off your nose and tail.  What price Firecon Effciency?  Maybe you move your AAA and PDS onto fighters and PDS Smallcraft?

NGauss are inefficient in damage per ton, and worse in cost per ton.  However, at least at this table, they share the armor-piercing performance of missiles, and unlike missiles, they cant be shot down and you can ladle on ammo forever.  Maybe you want to hold the range open and keep shooting till the golden BB pops your enemy's CIC?  Might be sportin.

Cargo is always an issue, as well.  Even a 5% Cargo Fraction HURTS, but without it, your either staying near home or relying on fleet train.  And maybe you want to jack it up to 10% or a bit more, slap on 5/8 drives and a LNCSS so you never ever get in a fight you didn't choose, and go on a 5 year mission to visit EVERY RECHARGE STATION IN ENEMY SPACE.  Or maybe you just want the range.. and not even much speed or SI... because your a 1/2 boat intended to come in on a high speed ballistic pass and fire off 50,000 tons of missile ammo bearings-only on your enemies high value infrastructure.

Just thinking about that last one gives me the shivers.

Now, for 'death duels at a given C-Bill Budget in a box', 3/5 150 SI is probably the way to go.  But what I keep hoping this exercise drives home is how much 'Fight to the death in a box' is really.. not often a thing a real military faces, however so much wargaming makes us focus on it.

I will say this.  Every ship I've designed for NPCs is, in my opinion, as optimized as I know how to make it for the situation facing the nation that built them at the time they built them.  The CC 4/6 Cruiser is a 'leave me alone' threat, designed to buy them time to build a real navy.  The Quan Yins are jack of all trades ships that will be the battle-line for now and the backbone in the future.  And the TH Cruisers are designed to try to replace multiple TH ship classes with a single, cost-controlled design, so the TH can spare enough money for R&D.  More even than the other two, its a 'peace' ship, as the TH is unlikely to get in a real shooting war with anyone, and their navy has a lot of work to do that isn't Jutland.

Now, if I were designing ships for a nation in an every-turn-death-match for its survival, that are expected to sail off, fight to the death, and be replaced, turn after turn - IE the 'Wargamers Navy' - Id still have questions.  Am I playing offense or defense (goes to cargo fraction, troops carried)?  One big fight or lots of little ones more probable (goes to sensors and speed, also hull count vs hull size)?  Whats the enemy armed with?  How much armor (Can I outrange him and hold it?  Can I charge under his guns and make him hate life with point blank NAC/40s?  If his armor is thin, can I boom-and-zoom with a NAC -Nose Overrun monster?  Or will he fall to fighter swarms cause his SI is low and armor thin?)

So... yeah.  I expect we will still see a lot of variability for a long time, and all it takes is a change in the galactic political situation, much less technology, to change what the 'ideal' answer is.

If anything I'm doing as a GM is making you think there are only a handful of 'ideal' approaches, either I'm sending the wrong signals, or those signals are being misinterpreted.

[UnLimiTeD]

Oh, I have actually been planning for a fast, long ranged design for a while now. Just, it keeps growing, because it needs to be more capable, and then I have neither the yard nor the money for it...  :-X
Cost doesn't actually factor into it much, unless you build an L-F Battery design with N-Gauss *cough*.
Mostly, though, that's not even what I meant.
It's that every design will have the maximum amount of armour it can carry, exactly as many heatsinks as are required to fire all it's weapons, and unless you need every ton to reach a specific cargo fraction or hangar space where every ton counts, as much SI as the engine allows until you reach around 100.
So, when I keep designs with less SI, or way more than that, I think I might also have that in mind.

Really, in the same way that double heatsinks on mechs kind of killed a part of the decision making, to be replaced 15 years later by advanced electronic warfare.
Now, in this kind of RP environment, I don't mind as much (though I still pity dropships), but if I were to try and just optimise a ship to the best of my ability, I think I'd feel bad about myself.
I try to keep some fluff in there. Internal politics. All the fun stuff.   ;D

[marcussmythe]

Oh, I have actually been planning for a fast, long ranged design for a while now. Just, it keeps growing, because it needs to be more capable, and then I have neither the yard nor the money for it...  :-X
Cost doesn't actually factor into it much, unless you build an L-F Battery design with N-Gauss *cough*.
Mostly, though, that's not even what I meant.
It's that every design will have the maximum amount of armour it can carry, exactly as many heatsinks as are required to fire all it's weapons, and unless you need every ton to reach a specific cargo fraction or hangar space where every ton counts, as much SI as the engine allows until you reach around 100.
So, when I keep designs with less SI, or way more than that, I think I might also have that in mind.

Really, in the same way that double heatsinks on mechs kind of killed a part of the decision making, to be replaced 15 years later by advanced electronic warfare.
Now, in this kind of RP environment, I don't mind as much (though I still pity dropships), but if I were to try and just optimise a ship to the best of my ability, I think I'd feel bad about myself.
I try to keep some fluff in there. Internal politics. All the fun stuff.   ;D

Amusingly, Ive designed energy intensive ships with only enough HS for one broadside - because by the time youve got a 40HNPPC Broadside and a few hundred PPCs for AAA work, only firing half your weapons is a massive savings in heat sink mass.

Armor - Ill be honest, in my brain, SI -is- your 'armor fraction', with the actual armor you actually pay for simply being the shiny layer on top that your GOING to pay for.  The hard decision (for warships) is how much SI to mount.  (On Stations, Armor is a real decision, because of the massive final multiplier)

SI.. *looks at a design I'm fiddling with right now*  I'm kicking around something that masses 750kt and only has 40 SI with only 30 points of capital firepower, because it doesnt need (much) capital firepower or SI to do its job.  OTOH, its 6/9 with a 10% Cargo Fraction AND 20kt of fuel AND a LNCSS.    Ive also got a low SI Carrier design, and a very low SI Missile Cruiser.


RANDOM NOTE:
I was thinking about Caspers - RAW, they cant jump, or cant jump without at least some crew and major drama.  This turns them (mostly) into Monitors, and we all know why Monitors are kinda a bad idea. 

Does anyone have any objections to letting the computer-powered warships with jump drives jump?

[kindalas]

Does anyone have any objections to letting the computer-powered warships with jump drives jump?

I don't, I've been starting to push my IC fiction in that direction.

I'd also be ok with letting Casper systems to be enhanced with an actual crew which is something that I've already set up with the Marsden fighters.

Where I gave them SARCs and a command console to reflect pilot controls.

[truetanker]

multiple feet engagements,

Wow, a space battle shuffle by Dr. Seuss!

How many feet will you meet?

TT

[UnLimiTeD]

Well, they can't jump much because it kills the AI, but jumping them somewhere with a skeleton crew and then turning on to work as a defensive asset, + no need for a big cargo hold seems like a workable solution.
As long as they aren't a viable offensive tool, I don't see the problem. FASA, after all, never had to contend with actual sense and economic realities.
Would make them an interesting alternative to station spam.

[marcussmythe]

Well, they can't jump much because it kills the AI, but jumping them somewhere with a skeleton crew and then turning on to work as a defensive asset, + no need for a big cargo hold seems like a workable solution.
As long as they aren't a viable offensive tool, I don't see the problem. FASA, after all, never had to contend with actual sense and economic realities.
Would make them an interesting alternative to station spam.

As I was apparently unclear...

Are there objections to *changing the rule* about jumping killing the AI? 

Rationale:
1.)  AI Warships are cool, and this allows them to actually exist in a meaningful fashion.
2.)  Caspers are.. not game breakers, in the rules as written.  Potentially good, but not game breakers, IMHO.
3.)  We can already turn off the AI, Human hits Jump Button, AI turns back on.  If we replace 'Human' with 'Bog Standard Non-AI-Computer' or 'Mechanical Computer with Gears' or even 'heavy weight and timer', then we can take the human out of the equation.  'AI' part goes to sleep, its automatic lower level system handles the actual jump, it boots itself back up.

Soliciting feedback at this juncture.

[truetanker]

Well I don't have a problem jumping, but I'd cover the cost for them with a need for a longer logistic trail.

TT

[marcussmythe]

Separate Note - Ive updated the 'collected data' section for the 5 houses.  Let me know if this is useful to anyone.  Im currently calculating dropships as if they were all carrying mech regiments.  They wont be, but its a ballpark.

Note that Armor*Firepower is a very dirty calculation of the raw fighting power of the hypothetical fleet.  Its very swingy, since its a square function, so if your just a bit of weight behind it will show that nations combat power as TINY by comparison, IE dont freak out if your numbers are lower... but also, but dont forget that fleet on fleet continuous fire situations (which most but not all naval combat will be in this universe) are strongly impacted by Lanchester's equations.

A note on firepower - Ive aggregated missiles, ballistics, and energy here, to give a 10,000 foot view.  In a specific force on force situation, the particular guns, and how they are mounted, will matter.

[kindalas]

As I was apparently unclear...

Are there objections to *changing the rule* about jumping killing the AI? 

Rationale:
1.)  AI Warships are cool, and this allows them to actually exist in a meaningful fashion.
2.)  Caspers are.. not game breakers, in the rules as written.  Potentially good, but not game breakers, IMHO.
3.)  We can already turn off the AI, Human hits Jump Button, AI turns back on.  If we replace 'Human' with 'Bog Standard Non-AI-Computer' or 'Mechanical Computer with Gears' or even 'heavy weight and timer', then we can take the human out of the equation.  'AI' part goes to sleep, its automatic lower level system handles the actual jump, it boots itself back up.

Soliciting feedback at this juncture.

I'm 100% in favor of these changes especially since the tech is at a minimum of six turns away.

Are you interested in pitches for new technologies that we can research? Because I have some ideas that might make for interesting story without being a game changer mandatory system.

[marcussmythe]

I'm more interested in 'tweaks to ways existing things behave' than 'new thing that a player who isnt in this exercise wouldnt recognize'.

IE, Im taking 'whatever comes out the back has to work in the core RAW, even if some of the choices are headscratchers' as my pole star.

[kindalas]

I'm more interested in 'tweaks to ways existing things behave' than 'new thing that a player who isnt in this exercise wouldnt recognize'.

IE, Im taking 'whatever comes out the back has to work in the core RAW, even if some of the choices are headscratchers' as my pole star.

The two things I was thinking about were blackbox devices. Since in the game those things have been getting better and better since their re-discovery. And they make for a "locally" instant communication and an alternative to HPGs and their virtually instant long range communication.

And improved jump calculation research.

Something similar to what Daryk posted in the house rule area that shows each faction figuring out that TDS is a "good" thing when plotting jumps.

[truetanker]

You mean like the WoB superjump?

@Marcus

I like the idea of the upgrade you did, any chance we can see the others done like that?

And under the current MAP link, think we can have the next one posted in order, but just under it? That way we can see the progress...

TT

*** Wait : Line 28 under Tech heading *** Explain, the limit to update the yards is no longer limited to 1 per turn?

[marcussmythe]

*** Wait : Line 28 under Tech heading *** Explain, the limit to update the yards is no longer limited to 1 per turn?

Once a player researches the technology microconstruction, the cost to upgrade a yard is halved (that is to say, to go from lvl 1 to level 2 would cost 10 Billion for the first one in a system, and 5 Billion for the second and subsequent), and further, the limitation of 'one upgrade per turn' is lifted, such that one could, theoretically, go from 'no yard' in a system to a full up lvl 10 yard in one turn, assuming you had the 275 Billion to throw at it.

The intention is to allow for larger ships - as cost calculations on the current yards suggest a cap on return on investment somewhere in the 4 to 6 range (beyond which the cost savings just dont get there anytime soon).  Even with this, my number crunching suggests that going past size 8 is more about vanity and showing off than a sensible return on investment.

[marcussmythe]

That said, I AM soliciting suggestions for what to do with the blank slot between Double Heat Sinks and Large Dropships.  Any recommendations?

If nothing fits, I'll just move the blank spot to the end of the chart.

[truetanker]

You know what?

We don't have Extended Ranged weapons!

We have Pulses and the ER PPC / Clan ER PPC, but no ER weapons. I suggest IS-ER Weapons and replace that Clan ER PPC with just Clan Weapons below Clan Structures.

TT

[UnLimiTeD]

Still no Battle Armour tech.
And we're probably running around with primitive ground forces, too.

[marcussmythe]

You know what?

We don't have Extended Ranged weapons!

We have Pulses and the ER PPC / Clan ER PPC, but no ER weapons. I suggest IS-ER Weapons and replace that Clan ER PPC with just Clan Weapons below Clan Structures.

TT

The only ER weapons in the game (as such) are ER Lasers and ER PPCs.  ER PPCs are at O 15, and ER Lasers are at AC 11

For now, gonna scoot stuff down to cover the blank space, and drop Power Armor in between ERPPCs and Ultra Autocannons.  Thats temporary, barring better ideas or an objection from Smegish.