|
I'll finish up the voting this evening, to give everybody who wants a chance to participate to do so. That said, I think the intent to trade for new computers and hold a new design contest is clear enough that I'll play through the first four years to set the design contest up now.
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 17:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 00:04 |
|
|
2444 Space Fleet Design Competition With new technological developments, the Defense Department is interested in developing new standard designs for space control cruisers and escort/scout frigates to update the aging Davy Crockett and Huscarl designs current in Space Fleet, with the replacement cruiser to serve a standard space control role and the frigate to serve an escort role with potential scouting duties.   A bare cruiser hull and drive costs 38 trillion credits, with 912.5 tons displacement available for mission equipment; a bare frigate hull and drive costs 20 trillion credits, with 575 tons displacement available for mission equipment.   Installing computerised fire control for ship's weapons would cost 12 trillion credits on a frigate or 14 trillion on a cruiser, with no significant displacement cost, as existing mechanical fire control systems can be reworked for displacement savings.   Installing shields would cost 12 trillion credits and take 100 tons of displacement on a frigate, or 18 trillion credits and 250 tons on a cruiser, and would significantly strengthen the defenses of the ship either way.   Installing heavy-duty electronic warfare equipment to baffle enemy missile fire would cost 24 trillion credits on a frigate, taking 150 tons of displacement, or 36 trillion credits on a cruiser, taking 225 tons of displacement. Reworking the drive systems for improved output and better tactical and strategic maneuverability is considerably more cost-effective on a frigate, costing 20 trillion credits and 125 tons of displacement, as compared with a similar modification on a cruiser costing 50 trillion credits and taking 312.5 tons of displacement.  A wide array of weapons is available for installation on the new designs. The Defense Department does not require any bombs for surface attack on these designs. Cost per weapon may vary somewhat, and the Defense Department will issue final cost estimates of any proposed design. Frigates are limited to three distinct weapons systems, and cruisers to four. Laser Cannon Laser cannon are largely obsolete, but extremely cheap to manufacture. Depending on the state of Bulrathi missile technology, laser point defense still might retain some niche- advancements in Bulrathi missiles will render lasers hard-pressed to knock out inbound missiles in a timely fashion. Point defense laser cannon: ~2 trillion credits, 18.4 tons. Range 10, damage 2.5, 2.25 second ROF, 25% accuracy bonus. Fires automatically against missiles in range. Neutron Cannon Neutron cannon are time-tested, reliable weapons systems with an effective punch, still potentially useful as shipborne weapons. They can now be modified to more effectively overload shields for a similar cannon power output. Standard neutron cannon: ~8 trillion credits, 72 tons forward or rear mounts, ~12 trillion credits, 90 tons side mounts, ~18 trillion credits, 108 tons full-coverage dorsal or ventral turret mount. Range 50, damage 9, 3 second ROF. Heavy neutron cannon: ~18 trillion credits, 108 tons forward or rear mounts, ~24 trillion credits, 135 tons side mounts, ~36 trillion credits, 162 tons full-coverage dorsal or ventral turret mount. Range 75, damage 18, 3.75 second ROF. Autofire neutron cannon: ~12 trillion credits, 108 tons forward or rear mounts, ~18 trillion credits, 135 tons side mounts, ~26 trillion credits, 162 tons full-coverage dorsal or ventral turret mount. Range 50, damage 9, 1.5 second ROF, 20% accuracy penalty. Neutron cannon, shield overload variant: ~10 trillion credits, 90 tons forward or rear mounts, ~14 trillion credits, 112.5 tons side mounts, ~22 trillion credits, 135 tons full-coverage dorsal or ventral turret mount. Range 50, damage 9 (effectively 13 against shields), 3 second ROF. Autofire neutron cannon, shield overload variant: ~14 trillion credits, 126 tons forward or rear mounts, ~20 trillion credits, 187.5 tons side mounts, ~30 trillion credits, 189 tons full-coverage dorsal or ventral turret mount. Range 50, damage 9 (effectively 13 against shields), 1.5 second ROF, 20% accuracy penalty. Heavy autofire neutron cannon: ~22 trillion credits, 144 tons forward or rear mounts, ~30 trillion credits, 180 tons side mounts, ~44 trillion credits, 216 tons full-coverage dorsal or ventral turret mount. Range 75, damage 18, 1.88 second ROF, 20% accuracy penalty. Heavy neutron cannon, shield overload variant: ~20 trillion credits, 126 tons forward or rear mounts, ~26 trillion credits, 157.5 tons side mounts, ~40 trillion credits, 189 tons full-coverage dorsal or ventral turret mount. Range 75, damage 18 (effectively 27 against shields), 3.75 second ROF. Heavy autofire neutron cannon, shield overload variant: ~24 trillion credits, 182 tons forward or rear mounts, ~32 trillion credits, 202.5 tons side mounts, ~48 trillion credits, 243 tons full-coverage dorsal or ventral turret mount. Range 75, damage 18 (effectively 27 against shields), 1.88 second ROF, 20% accuracy penalty. Mass Drivers Although the basic concept of magnetically-accelerated kinetic weapons is a centuries-old technology, the ability to launch a pure kinetic weapon at speeds sufficient to reliably make a contact intercept at space combat ranges is not. A ferromagnetic slug launched at non-relativistic but still very high speeds using modern refinements of magnetic acceleration can deal devastating damage at any range it is accurate at, and the slug launched is sufficiently massive that it would suffer negligible degradation in impact velocity from any shields mounted on the target. The necessary magnetic accelerators are still sufficiently delicate and experimental to render efforts to scale them up or improve their output beyond the abilities of current engineers, but smaller versions optimised for point defense can be mounted. Point defense mass driver: 10 trillion credits, 34 tons. Range 10, damage 6, 3 second ROF, 25% accuracy bonus. No range dropoff for damage, ignores shields. Fires automatically at missiles in range. Standard mass driver: 20 trillion credits, 100 tons front or rear mounts, 30 trillion credits, 125 tons side mounts, 40 trillion credits, 150 tons full-coverage dorsal or ventral turret mount. Range 50, damage 12, 4 second ROF. No range dropoff for damage, ignores shields. Guided Missiles Defensive guided kinetic kill vehicles remain a highly-effective and cost-effective means of defeating enemy guided missile fire, both highly accurate and packing enough punch to knock out any current missile system. Offensive shipkiller missiles are highly accurate and damaging, but vulnerable to hostile point defense and electronic warfare, and the need to make proximity detonations rather than contact intercepts renders their effects subject to shield protection. Defensive KKV: 4 trillion credits, 30 tons. Range 10, damage 5, 2 second ROF, very high accuracy. Fires automatically at missiles in range, only effective against missiles. Standard nuclear missile: ~6 trillion credits, 90 tons. Range 60, damage 20, 11 second ROF, 2 missile HP. 'Hermes' fast-reaction nuclear missile: 12 trillion credits, 100 tons. Range 60, damage 25, 10 second ROF, 3.5 missile HP.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 18:57
|
|
|
A TYW rep will probably be dropping by later to present their entry for the design competition, but in the meantime I'd recommend to everyone else that we focus on mass drivers, seeing as they've got the range of missiles, the fire rate of neutron cannons, and acceptable accuracy now that we've got computers - especially since we sold the Bulrathi our shield tech.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 19:03
|
|
|
MD Design Bureau wishes to point out that some degree of arms specialization is required. Plans are being developed as we speak, but general guidelines are as follows: Main offensive capabilities of the fleet should all be of the same general types.
Mixing weapons with different categories results in a loss of offensive capability. For example, bringing mass drivers and missiles in equal amounts means that your damage output is still vulnerable to defensive maneuvers, enemy point defence is much more effective against you, and you still have to chew through enemy shields first for your missiles to start damaging the enemy hull. Point defense weapons have one major and one minor point of decision to be made.
Unless you expect the enemy to solely rely on missile weapons, heaving both PD boats and heavy ship-by-ship PD capabilities is a waste of space, so these shouldn't be mixed. A mix of different kinds of non-obsolete point defence per ship is generally beneficial since it results in reliable anti-missile capabilities, regardless of the quirks of the incoming missiles. However, dedicated PD boats should consider wheter the space taken up by a targeting computer would be better spent on having KKVs. If they are intended to posess offensive capabilities of their own, then mixing in all kinds of PD is encouraged. MD Design Bureau favors 360 fire capable kinetic barrage ships, with heavily specialized PD escort ships.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 19:42
|
|
|
We definitely should have specialized PD boats I think. Well, at least I personally enjoy highly specialized units. And as much as I like MASSIVE MISSILE BARRAGES, my dad makes mass drivers sound like the boring and stable option and who am I to question him. And since I'd rather see this to the end game I think our military should take the boring but stable route. Thus: Just do what my dad says
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 19:53
|
|
|
We shouldn't specialize the PD boats TOO much, though, to the point where they're completely useless for anything but screening. At least slap a mass driver on so it can plink away with the big boys.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 19:59
|
|
|
my dad posted:However, dedicated PD boats should consider wheter the space taken up by a targeting computer would be better spent on having KKVs. I wish to remind people that mounting a targeting computer will have a manufacturing cost, but will not take up any effective displacement.
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 20:19
|
|
|
MD Design Bureau wishes to point out that, given limited resources, additional manufactoring costs for a class of ships designed for cost-effectiveness result in a lesser number of them being produced in our shipyards, de facto reducing the amount of tonnage of KKVs we can get into orbit. yeah, that was a bit of a derp on my part, but actually fits in nicely with my gimmick, so I'm keeping it there
|
|
#
?
Oct 24, 2016 20:28
|
|
|
Generally specialized ships work better, at least for escorts.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 05:25
|
|
|
As things stand, we have a narrow lead in favor of friendly relations with the Bulrathi, will research Genetic Engineering, followed by Advanced Engineering, will work on collecting basic data on Bulrathi colonies with Team Alpha, and will name our new colony world Sunrise. If relations break down again we will definitely push for a more decisive resolution. All I'm waiting on now is ship design submissions, but if I don't get anything today, I'll just whip up something myself.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 17:11
|
|
|
Well, the war's over. Too bad those peaceniks in the senate want to kiss and make up - can you imagine what another war would have done for sales? Oh that reminds me, make sure corporate expresses our... displeasure with Sen. Walker's per- wait is this on? *ahem* Excuse me. Ladies and gentlemen of the Chiefs of Staff, our long war is over at last. But we cannot afford to rest on our laurels, meager as they are. Humanity must never again find itself at the mercy of an alien threat, and that requires a strong, cutting edge military to protect ourselves. As such, Teyer-Young Weltraumwerke is proud to present their entries for the 2444 Design Competition. X-02 "Striker" Space Control Cruiser -1x Rivera Dynamics 'Aegis' Class I Electromagnetic Deflector System (cruiser sized) (250 tons) -1x Teyer Electronics "Sharpshooter" 3-Dimensional Digital Fire Control System (capital ship version) -4x Nové Škoda Works 275mm "Blesk" mass drivers, mounted in 360 degree turrets, 2 dorsal 2 ventral (600 tons) -2x launch tubes and magazine space designed for use with VIM-19 'Sparrow III' Anti-Missile KKV system (60 tons) Total free displacement usage: 910 tons Project 953 "Paladin" Point-Defense/Picket Frigate -1x Rivera Dynamics 'Aegis' Class I Electromagnetic Deflector System (frigate sized) (100 tons) -1x Teyer Electronics "Sharpshooter" 3-Dimensional Digital Fire Control System (picket ship version) -1x Nové Škoda Works 250mm "Mini-Blesk" mass driver, mounted in 360 degree dorsal ball turret (150 tons) -10x launch tubes and magazine space designed for use with VIM-19 'Sparrow III' Anti-Missile KKV system (300 tons) -1x TYW 'Thunderbolt' Point Defense Laser system (18.4 tons) Total free displacement usage: 568.4 tons The newest TYW fleet composition focuses on keeping the enemy at a safe distance while destroying him with accurately directed mass driver fire. A single Paladin-class frigate has the point defense capability to defend against an entire Bulrathi fleet detachment (comparable to those fought in the last war) on its own, as well as a mass driver to supplement the offensive capabilities of its charges. The core of the fleet will be formed by Striker-class cruisers, carrying 4 large mass drivers capable of piercing enemy shields and inflicting grievous structural damage, as well as 2 KKV tubes that allow for either attempting operations independent of a Paladin screen or supplementing the fleet's PD capabilities in the face of large amounts of enemy missiles. OOC question: if you have the motivation Nweiss could you write something up explaining either how 360 degree turret arrangements work in a 3-dimensional space or why everyone fights on a 2-D plane? Really, just a fluff post on space combat tactics and how they deal with the immense ranges and the presumable lack of FTL within systems would be great. Crazycryodude fucked around with this message at 18:21 on Oct 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 18:15
|
|
|
My general take on it is that the 2D plane is an abstraction for purposes of gameplay, but that dorsal or ventral turrets with full rotation are capable of being placed on target on targets anywhere in a sphere with just a bit of roll by the ship mounting them, as opposed to turrets with only limited rotation that require you actually mostly point the ship at your target. That informative enough, or would you prefer I try and expand this into a real lorepost? E: I also say that I like your designs, and, in the absence of any competing designs showing up today, will adopt them without reservation. nweismuller fucked around with this message at 18:48 on Oct 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 18:28
|
|
|
Nah, that's good enough for me (for now, at least). I was imagining all these crazy schemes with ball turrets and staggered wing turrets that look like something out of an early 20th century naval designer's fevered dreams of hell-dreadnaughts but you make so much more sense. That said, if at some point you end up with the inspiration to write a full lore post about all the challenges and lessons of fighting in 3-D at millions of miles while zipping about at orbital velocities I won't complain (please don't take that as me pressuring you for one RIGHT NOW OR ELSE, though, maybe whenever we get in our next war).
Crazycryodude fucked around with this message at 19:23 on Oct 25, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 19:21
|
|
|
Yeah, I think the key thing is that roll is likely to be a bit 'easier' than having to reorient the whole ship, and can maintain existing thrust directions even while rolling. And a roll can ensure that you orient things so that the bulk of the ship doesn't interpose between dorsal and ventral turrets and their target.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 19:24
|
|
|
In the interests of Halberdier Space Control Cruiser -1x Marconi-Thales 'Bulwark' Mk1 Electromagnetic Deflector (250 tonnes) -1x Atlas Electronics 'Dauntless' Mk1 Targeting Computer -4x Rheinteichlen 'Mordaxt' Mk2b Heavy Automatic Neutron Cannon in fixed forward mount (576 tonnes) -2x KBP 'Yenisei' Mk1 Point Defence KKV launchers (60 tonnes) -1x Yamashiro 'Type 1028' Mk1 Point Defence Laser (18.4 tonnes) Total subsystems displacement 904.4 tonnes Longbow Escort Frigate -1x Marconi-Thales 'Redoubt' Mk1 Electromagnetic Deflector (100 tonnes) -1x Atlas Electronics 'Indomitable' Mk1 Targeting Computer -1x General Electromagnetics 'Warden' Mk1 ECM Jammer (150 tonnes) -1x Rheinteichlen 'Streitaxt' Mk2 Heavy Neutron Cannon in fixed forward mount (108 tonnes) -7x KBP 'Yenisei' Mk1 Point Defence KKV launchers (210 tonnes) Total subsystems displacement 568 tonnes The Longbow-class frigates were designed as fleet escorts, with a combination of hard- and soft-kill methods giving a fleet near-invulnerability from missile attack, but their pinpoint-accurate neutron cannon makes them capable of independent action against lesser threats. The Halberdier, departing from conventional warship design philosophy, is intended to close rapidly with the enemy and deliver a devastating weight of fire. KTT engineers and naval architects are working tirelessly to design a high-performance sublight drive that wouldn't require stripping out half the ship's armament to fit the thing. Friend Commuter fucked around with this message at 10:41 on Oct 26, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 21:41
|
|
|
Konsolidoitu Tähtien Teollisuuden- what language is that, and how does it translate? I'm curious.
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 23:31
|
|
|
nweismuller posted:Konsolidoitu Tähtien Teollisuuden- what language is that, and how does it translate? I'm curious. It's Finnish, and it's Stellar Industrial Consolidated, if I'm reading it right. Stellar Industries?
|
|
#
?
Oct 25, 2016 23:39
|
|
|
Ah, thanks. I'm going to give about three more hours for any more designs to be submitted, then take votes between the designs that have been submitted.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 00:49
|
|
|
Prism posted:It's Finnish, and it's Stellar Industrial Consolidated, if I'm reading it right. Stellar Industries? The idea was Consolidated Stellar Industries, and Google Translate probably mangled it. If you (or anyone else) want to correct me, I'll happily edit it.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 00:59
|
|
|
Since we're almost 200 years into the future you could argue that Finnish has simply morphed more into its google translated version!
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 01:07
|
|
|
I have no sense of Finnish grammar; I just recognized the language and checked the words I didn't know (most of them, though Konsolidoitu is easy to eyeball and I'd seen Teollisuuden in TVO). Yours is as likely to be right as mine - presumably more, if that's the order Google Translate gave, though given Google Translate you can never be sure.
Prism fucked around with this message at 01:26 on Oct 26, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 01:21
|
|
|
So unless there's a Finn reading, gently caress it, good enough!
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 01:31
|
|
|
Friend Commuter posted:So unless there's a Finn reading, gently caress it, good enough! You wrote "Konsolidoitu Tähtien Teollisuuden" when "teollisuus" would make more grammatical sense; "teollisuuden" is "industry's", the uh possessive form of "teollisuus" (=industry).
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 03:28
|
|
|
OK, I'm going to poll for support between the TYW and KTT designs now, since it looks like nobody else has stepped forward. I'll just take the original designers as votes for their own designs.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 03:54
|
|
|
MD Design Bureau supports the Paladin and the Striker for the Republic's new waship designs.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 03:57
|
|
|
my dad posted:waship designs. Yeah, but what about the warships? 
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 04:04
|
|
|
my dad posted:MD Design Bureau supports the Paladin and the Striker for the Republic's new warship designs. I second these designs.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 04:56
|
|
|
I vote for the Halberdier and Longbow, oddly enough.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 10:43
|
|
|
Let's appease both companies. Striker and Longbow
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 13:25
|
|
|
Halberdier and Longbow I have no idea what is the optimal choice here.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 14:00
|
|
|
AJ as much as I appreciate your attempt to make us both happy, TYW and KTT have fundamentally different design philosophies, and mixing their designs would mean a less effective fleet overall. Mixing a neutron cannon escort with a mass driver cruiser or vice versa means mixing effective ranges, either splitting the fleet for max damage (so the escorts are no longer near the cruisers, obviously bad) or not being able to fully utilize one class or the other. As to which company's designs are better, I'd obviously say TYW's but I think my reasons are valid beyond personal interest. We just sold the Bulrathi our shield tech so you can bet every Republic Credit you have that it'll start appearing in their new designs. Yes, the neutron cannons on the KTT designs are tuned to overload shields but the TYW mass drivers can ignore them completely, and from a much longer range at that. If the Bulrathi are still using missiles, the long range gives us plenty of time to detect and destroy them. If they start using beam weapons, we have the advantage as we can keep them at range while doing full damage and taking very little in return. If they start using mass drivers we're equally matched. In other words, in all imaginable situations mass drivers either give us an advantage or level the playing field, while neutron cannons put us at a disadvantage 2/3 times.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 15:52
|
|
|
Crazycryodude posted:AJ as much as I appreciate your attempt to make us both happy, TYW and KTT have fundamentally different design philosophies, and mixing their designs would mean a less effective fleet overall. Mixing a neutron cannon escort with a mass driver cruiser or vice versa means mixing effective ranges, either splitting the fleet for max damage (so the escorts are no longer near the cruisers, obviously bad) or not being able to fully utilize one class or the other. The KTT ships don't actually have shield overload cannons, I was going to give them some but decided to pack in more firepower instead. At close range they could probably outperform mass drivers with their ludicrous damage output, even against shielded ships, but that all depends on whether they can close to range fast enough. I obviously hope they can, but I've never played this game, so what do I know.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 16:17
|
|
|
nweismuller posted:
Evidently he's from Boston.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 16:36
|
|
|
Crazycryodude posted:AJ as much as I appreciate your attempt to make us both happy, TYW and KTT have fundamentally different design philosophies, and mixing their designs would mean a less effective fleet overall. Mixing a neutron cannon escort with a mass driver cruiser or vice versa means mixing effective ranges, either splitting the fleet for max damage (so the escorts are no longer near the cruisers, obviously bad) or not being able to fully utilize one class or the other. Since when has armament procurement been sensible or reasonable? Vote stands. 
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 17:13
|
|
|
AJ_Impy posted:Since when has armament procurement been sensible or reasonable? Vote stands. Your commitment to doing things for the hell of it is recognised and appreciated.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 17:36
|
|
|
Paladin and Striker.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 18:09
|
|
|
Looks like we're going with the Paladin and Striker, so let me just work through the rest of the update.
|
|
#
?
Oct 26, 2016 21:59
|
|
|
I'll work up the writing for both my LPs once I'm back after my weekend. I hope everybody is well, and please feel free to ask me anything in the interim.
|
|
#
?
Oct 28, 2016 00:46
|
|
|
Log Entry by Doctor Seth Green, recovered from Evergreen Biotechnologies Limited Headquarters, Silver City, West Eden Republic, Paradise, 2451 14 June 2449 I've confirmed the isolation breach on the retrovirals today and tested my own blood. I've been exposed, and must have been for at least two weeks- and I suspect that means everybody in the lab has too. We haven't gotten the growth inhibitors set up, which means we're looking at uncontrolled replication, which is likely to mean it will start attacking healthy tissue rather than just tumors. No estimates on when somebody exposed will be contagious and I'm not sure when things go symptomatic, but I don't like the odds. I'm officially calling this in to the civic authorities and requesting they start mandatory testing and quarantine procedures- this might be nothing, but better safe. Also will start calling up everybody who works here and asking them to quarantine themselves and their families. I pray to God that it's not too bad- or at least that we've caught it before it spreads too far amongst the general population. Records on the precise date of death of Doctor Green are not available, although it is confirmed that he, all his immediate family, and all the Evergreen Biotechnologies employees whose status is known died before the end of 2449. Silver City's population is estimated to have declined from 2.4 million to 1.3 million from both deaths and emigration over the time before records were recovered. Symptoms of the so-called 'Red Masque' virus include bloody cough, soft tissue necrosis, internal hemorrhage, and massive simultaneous organ failures. Worldwide population growth on Paradise has been effectively zero since late 2449. nweismuller fucked around with this message at 05:28 on Oct 30, 2016 |
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 04:40
|
|
|
|
| # ? May 14, 2024 00:04 |
|
|
nweismuller posted:Worldwide population growth on Paradise has been effectively zero since late 2469. Eep.
|
|
#
?
Oct 29, 2016 05:25
|
|