Let's Rule the Stars: An Aurora 4x Participation Let's Play

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Video Games > Let's Play! > Let's Rule the Stars: An Aurora 4x Participation Let's Play

«‹›31 »

GunnerJ: Aug 1, 2005; Do you think this is funny?

You just gotta jump on them and they pop out of their shells.

# ? Aug 1, 2020 12:02

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 7, 2024 18:25

Zanzibar Ham: Mar 17, 2009; You giving me the cold shoulder? How cruel.; Grimey Drawer

You gotta be careful though, some turn into bombs when you jump on them.

# ? Aug 1, 2020 12:59

GunnerJ: Aug 1, 2005; Do you think this is funny?

Yeah good point, this could be a remnant of Sarasaland.

# ? Aug 1, 2020 15:21

LLSix: Jan 20, 2010; The real power behind countless overlords

Excited to see what happens next!

# ? Aug 1, 2020 16:00

Virtual Russian: Sep 15, 2008

Ship Production Vote

We need to decide what ships we will be producing to attempt to close the naval capability gap between us and the Kookans. There were a ton of entries, I�m really impressed with the response. I�m going to divide the options up between shipyards and fighters. Note though, the carrier suite will override whatever is picked as a fighter if the carrier suite wins. A couple items weren't included, either because they were too far outside parameters, I designed them, or I've already decided to use the design(I'll often do this for useful one-off designs we need).

What we know: Seven ships travelling 4,000km/s with a thermal signature of 640 fired 16 strength 4 beams at us from point blank range.

We can speculate quite a bit, but that is all we know concretely.

Contenders for our shipyard production

A - Gnoman�s Firebat class Light Cruiser

Gnoman posted:

code:

Firebat class Light Cruiser (P)      8,998 tons       261 Crew       1,082.7 BP       TCS 180    TH 1,344    EM 0
7468 km/s      Armour 2-38       Shields 0-0       HTK 40      Sensors 0/0/0/0      DCR 6      PPV 11
Maint Life 1.36 Years     MSP 451    AFR 108%    IFR 1.5%    1YR 261    5YR 3,915    Max Repair 336 MSP
Commander    Control Rating 1   BRG   
Intended Deployment Time: 3 months    Morale Check Required    

Kim-Park Eternal Flame (2)    Power 1344    Fuel Use 75.74%    Signature 672    Explosion 14%
Fuel Capacity 500,000 Litres    Range 13.2 billion km (20 days at full power)

Korolenko Armaments Particle Beam-2 (1)    Range 96,000km     TS: 7,468 km/s     Power 5-2    ROF 15       
Dagtekin Kinetics Gauss Cannon R100-25.00 (4x3)    Range 10,000km     TS: 7,468 km/s     Accuracy Modifier 25.00%     RM 10,000 km    ROF 5       
Mabena Warning & Control Point Defence Fire Control R32-TS8000 (1)     Max Range: 32,000 km   TS: 8,000 km/s     69 38 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Silongo-Hlanganani Electronics Beam Fire Control R96-TS3000 (1)     Max Range: 96,000 km   TS: 3,000 km/s     67 59 52 44 36 28 20 12 5 0
Kaun & Brink Improved Pressurised Water Reactor R10-PB20 (1)     Total Power Output 10.1    Exp 10%

Foxfire Electronics Active Search Sensor AS26-R20 (1)     GPS 1200     Range 26.5m km    Resolution 20

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes

This ship is almost twice as fast as the ships they've shown us, and will prove incredibly difficult to target with missiles due to sheer speed and the gauss cannon, which will be only slightly less effective than the turreted versions due to this ship's sheer speed. The only downside is the same as that of the Victory - the engine will need a lot of RP, and build times will be slow.

B - Gnoman�s Avenger class War Cruiser (I have omitted the 110 box launcher version, it is still a producible variant, but I will avoid making it due to how much micro all those launchers require.)

Gnoman posted:

code:
Avenger class War Cruiser (P)      21,976 tons       379 Crew       2,600.2 BP       TCS 440    TH 1,344    EM 0
3057 km/s      Armour 16-69       Shields 0-0       HTK 67      Sensors 0/0/0/0      DCR 4      PPV 60.84
Maint Life 1.20 Years     MSP 2,295    AFR 966%    IFR 13.4%    1YR 1,635    5YR 24,522    Max Repair 336 MSP
Magazine 300    
Captain    Control Rating 3   BRG   AUX   ENG   
Intended Deployment Time: 6 months    Morale Check Required    

Kim-Park Eternal Flame (2)    Power 1344    Fuel Use 75.74%    Signature 672    Explosion 14%
Fuel Capacity 1,000,000 Litres    Range 10.8 billion km (40 days at full power)

Quad Gauss Cannon R100-25.00 Turret (2x12)    Range 10,000km     TS: 8000 km/s     Power 0-0     RM 10,000 km    ROF 5       
Mabena Warning & Control Point Defence Fire Control R32-TS8000 (1)     Max Range: 32,000 km   TS: 8,000 km/s     34 19 3 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Toker Armaments Size 4.0 Missile Launcher (75.00% Reduction) (15)     Missile Size: 4.0    Rate of Fire 60
Foxfire Electronics Missile Fire Control FC27-R20 (1)     Range 27.1m km    Resolution 20
Vulpes Anti-Ship Missile (75)    Speed: 12,000 km/s    End: 37.1m     Range: 26.7m km    WH: 4    Size: 4    TH: 40/24/12

Lackner-Ebner Active Search Sensor AS1-R1 (1)     GPS 3     Range 2m km    MCR 175.9k km    Resolution 1
Foxfire Electronics Active Search Sensor AS26-R20 (1)     GPS 1200     Range 26.5m km    Resolution 20

Missile to hit chances are vs targets moving at 3000 km/s, 5000 km/s and 10,000 km/s

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
The Vengeance-class cruiser will be highly resistant to the firepower thus demonstrated by the alien menace. Piercing her armor with the weapons we have seen would require four direct hits in the same location, which is unlikely to happen from a single salvo. Meanwhile the ship is nearly as fast as her foes, and the proposed Macrotis missiles offer an excellent chance of hitting even a target as fleet as these are. Two variants are proposed - one with a conventional battery of 15 missile tubes, fed from internal magazines, one with 110 box launchers. The box launcher variant has the virtue of more capacity and heavier salvos, but the magazine variant can be rearmed much more quickly and easily as needed.

Both variants require a new engine design
code:
Kim-Park Eternal Flame
Engine Power 672    Fuel Use Per Hour 509 litres    Fuel per EPH 0.76
Thermal Signature 672    Explosion Chance 14%
Military Engine
Cost 336   Size 3,000 tons   Crew 84   HTK 7
Base Chance to hit 100%
Materials Required: Gallicite  336
The magazine-fed version will additionally require a new missile launcher.
code:
Toker Armaments Size 4.0 Missile Launcher (75.00% Reduction)
Missile Size: 4.0    Rate of Fire 60
Cost 15.0   Size 150 tons   Crew 8   HTK 1
Base Chance to hit 100%
Materials Required: Duranium  3.75    Tritanium  11.25    
While the proposed design is capable of firing the existing Vulpes missile, this weapon is less than ideal for engaging such fast targets - we expect no more than one in three to hit. Applying the new drive technology to missiles produces a much faster variant, allowing a hit chance of nearly one in two.

C - Foxfire_�s obligatory Wyvern Knockoff, Wyvern Class missile Frigate, which requires no retooling.

Foxfire_ posted:

Obligatory Wyern Knockoff

- No-retool
- 2 years per ship build time
- 4 salvos of 20 missiles, has time to get off all 4 vs a 4000km/s enemy (enemy closes 17mkm)
- 60RP for missile launcher
- Uses too much fuel to reposition
- Boring

D - Foxfire_�s Dwayne Class Missile Base, which will require a tug.

Foxfire_ posted:

A rock with missiles

If researching new engines takes too long, skip it! Tool one of the commercial yards for a tug and build a couple to also use for hauling terraforming stations.
Drop a missile base a few million km off of the jump point and have it just sit there with active on watching for anything entering. Use thick armor to absorb any return missile fire (since it can't dodge anything) plus some shields to prevent chip damage.

- 182 shots to get through armor + 10 shots for shields
- 4 salvos of 60 missiles, then it needs a nonexistent collier to reload it
- 1 year tooling time, 2.5 years per ship build time
- 60RP for a reloadable mini launcher

E - Foxfire_�s Carrier Suite, which contains a carrier, fighter, and bomber. Selecting this option will override the fighter vote, as I can only produce so many fighter and research so many parts.

Foxfire_ posted:

Carrier option since no one else has thrown one up:

Carrier itself tries to hide a few hundred mkm away from any threats and relies on other ships or a scout fighter to get a general area for targets, then bombers go in and fire at 5mkm.

If everything works out, the enemy sees nothing until missiles pop up on their thermal sensors (we don't have any sensors that could see either the bombers or the carriers at those ranges). If everything doesn't work out, the bombers get shot down by antimissile missiles, the carrier is spotted and can't run away or defend itself.

16 fighter complement, we build about 14 fighters per year. Carrier is a 4 month retool, 21 month build time.

Research:
- 12RP active sensor for the bomber
- 12RP fire control for the bomber
- 176RP fighter engine
- 450RP carrier engine [75% efficiency, 20HS]
- 120RP if we want the scout
- A few hundred for a missile that trades range for either a bigger payload or better hit chances since most of the Vulpes range is wasted

F - LLSix�s Hunter Class Destroyer.

LLSix posted:

Like the Inspector Gadget class, the Hunter class is faster and armed with particle beams that outrange all known alien weapons. Each ships packs five times the throw weight of the Inspector Gadget and also comes with a redundant beam control in case of battle damage. In addition to having enough armor to survive four hits to the same spot of armor in a row, the Hunter comes equipped with multiple ablative fuel storages. In case the aliens do have missiles, the Hunter is also carrying an experimental strength 10 shield from Nadel Defence systems, but its primary defense remains its speed, which should cause more than half of equal tech missiles to miss outright. It uses the same engines as the Inspector Gadget, but its larger size means we wont be seeing these in the field for at least 2.5 years.

Both of these designs (Inspector Gadgets) need a new engine which will take <6 months to research using 6 of the 8 available research labs.
Both of these designs use a new Beam Fire Control which can actually track the Kookens at their observed speed of just under 4k, unlike existing designs which can only handle targets moving at 3k. Using the remaining 2 available research labs, this design can also be completed in <6 months.

G - The final version of LLSix�s Inspector Gadget class Corvette. Which uses our small shipyard and thus, will leave our large shipyard free to continue expanding in capacity.

LLSix posted:

The Inspector Gadget is armed with a single particle beam that wildly outranges all known alien weapons. It also has the speed and endurance to take the fight to the aliens. A single Inspector Gadget can successfully engage, kite, and destroy all known alien Pleasure Pit forces. The best part is that due to the ship's small size, and limited engine design, the first ships can be rolling out of the shipyards in just 18 months, using only currently available research labs. The ships are small enough that they can be built out of the Han International Shipbuilding yards, allowing the larger Blohm yards to complete their expansion. (rationale from an earlier post)

You've convinced me. Here's the uparmored IG. With a deployment time slashed to 2 months and a ranged of 11.6 billion km it is now a FAC with delusions of grandeur. I think it has the range to get there and back, but I'm having a hard time finding exact numbers.

On the plus side, it now has 4 times the survivability which means a 5 ship fleet will be able to punch through a light missile attack. It lost 300 km/s of speed though, so if the alien beamships end up just slightly faster than us, I'm going to say I told you so.

Final version of the armoured IG drops the thermal sensor (who needs passive when the plan is to fly fast and die hard? We'll just leave the actives on all the time!) for a fifth fuel tank. That brings the range back up to 14bkm and stays within our tonnage budget. It also brings the speed back up to 4.2k which makes me happier.

[timg] https://i.imgur.com/50m9USF.png [/timg]

H - Also from LLSix is a yet to be named Fast Attack Craft

LLSix posted:

Here's a particle beam armed FAC. I vastly prefer the Inspector Gadgets, and since we don't have a FAC yard, they compete for the same shipyard.

I could not figure out how to fit a particle beam into 500 tons for a fighter design.

Next, we have a pair of fighter to pick from.

A - Kodo666 represents the army well with his Army Air Aviation Fighter. He also included a nifty fighter base design, which I may put to use, but am snipping out of this post as it is far beyond the scope of this vote.

Kodos666 posted:

As the Army is willing to back up the Navy in defence of the colonies we present the following mainstay of this tasking:

The Army Aviation Fighter

code:

Army Aviation Fighter class Fighter      330 tons       12 Crew       48 BP       TCS 7    TH 46    EM 0
7042 km/s      Armour 1-4       Shields 0-0       HTK 2      Sensors 0/0/0/0      DCR 0      PPV 1,5
Maint Life 0 Years     MSP 0    AFR 65%    IFR 0,9%    1YR 6    5YR 97    Max Repair 23,20 MSP
Lieutenant Commander    Control Rating 1   
Intended Deployment Time: 3 months    Morale Check Required    

Nuclear Pulse Engine  EP46,40 (1)    Power 46,4    Fuel Use 840,36%    Signature 46,40    Explosion 20%
Fuel Capacity 10.000 Litres    Range 0,7 billion km (25 hours at full power)

Gauss Cannon R200-25,00 (1x3)    Range 10.880km     TS: 7.042 km/s     Accuracy Modifier 25,00%     RM 20.000 km    ROF 5       
Beam Fire Control R11-TS8000 (1)     Max Range: 10.880 km   TS: 8.000 km/s     8 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Lackner-Ebner Active Search Sensor AS1-R1 (1)     GPS 3     Range 2m km    MCR 175,9k km    Resolution 1

This design is classed as a Fighter for production, combat and planetary interaction

utilising current technology, we will produce a faster, more capable and smaller fighter than our current craft, which would allow our current carrier to deploy a strikegroup of twelve fighters.

Three additional components are required:

Engine

code:

 Engine Power 46,40      Fuel Use Per Hour 389,93 Litres
Fuel Consumption per Engine Power Hour 8,404 Litres 
Size 2,9 HS  (145 tons)      HTK 1
Thermal Signature 46,4      Explosion Chance 20%      Max Explosion Size 11
Cost 23,20      Crew 6
Military Engine
Development Cost 232 RP

Materials Required
Gallicite  23,20

Gausscannon

code:

Damage Output 1      Rate of Fire 3 / 5s     Range Modifier 20.000
Max Range 20.000 km     Size 1,5 HS  (75 tons)    HTK 1
Cost 9,0    Crew 3
Development Cost 90 RP

Materials Required
Vendarite  9,0

Fire control

code:

Max Range 10.880 km     Tracking Speed 8.000 km/s
Size 0,68 HS  (34 tons)    HTK 0
Chance of destruction by electronic damage 100%
Cost 4,4    Crew 3
Development Cost 44 RP

Materials Required
Uridium  4,4

B - OddObserver entered the Poseidon class Heavy Fighter

OddObserver posted:

Since we're doing fighters, here is one with more firepower and less zip (and may be more accurate? dunno how bad the Gauss penalty is -- this is with 2000 bands for the hit rate).

code:

Poseidon class Heavy Fighter (P)      485 tons       22 Crew       58.7 BP       TCS 10    TH 64    EM 0
6607 km/s      Armour 1-5       Shields 0-0       HTK 3      Sensors 0/0/0/0      DCR 0      PPV 3
Maint Life 1.99 Years     MSP 7    AFR 19%    IFR 0.3%    1YR 2    5YR 35    Max Repair 32.00 MSP
Lieutenant Commander    Control Rating 1   
Intended Deployment Time: 0.3 days    Morale Check Required    

[320 RP] Nuclear Pulse Engine  EP64.00 (1)    Power 64.0    Fuel Use 715.54%    Signature 64.00    Explosion 20%
Fuel Capacity 5,000 Litres    Range 0.3 billion km (10 hours at full power)

Poseidon-Hyperion 10cm Railgun V20/C2 (1x4)    Range 16,000km     TS: 6,607 km/s     Power 3-2     RM 20,000 km    ROF 10        1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 0 0
[48 RP] Beam Fire Control R16-TS6000 (1)     Max Range: 16,000 km   TS: 6,000 km/s     88 75 62 50 38 25 12 0 0 0
[60 RP] Pebble Bed Reactor R2-PB20 (1)     Total Power Output 2    Exp 10%

[ 12 RP] Active Search Sensor AS2-R10 (1)     GPS 12     Range 3m km    Resolution 10

This design is classed as a Fighter for production, combat and planetary interaction

(It looked disapprovingly at me when I tried a 1.5 power reactor

)

Lots of components, but engine is the only expensive one... hmm, how do I look them up, though?

That�s all we�ll be considering. I�m not putting my ship into the mix as there are more than enough options. I�ve also excluded the scout-fighter design, as it wouldn�t be mass-produced. I will be making something as close to it as possible though, as it would make an excellent expendable scout to get vital recon data.

Please quote the docket, it really helps tab up results. If not that�s fine, just try to bold your results. Thanks!

I'm going to give this vote until mid-day on Monday. I'd love to get working on another update tomorrow, but we have so many ships I want to make sure everyone has ample time to vote.

++++++++++++Ship Production Docket++++++++++++

Contenders for our Naval Shipyards

A - Gnoman�s Firebat class Light Cruiser

B - Gnoman�s Avenger class War Cruiser

C - Foxfire_�s Wyvern Class missile Frigate

D - Foxfire_�s Dwayne Class Missile Base

E - Foxfire_�s Carrier Suite, which contains a carrier, fighter, and bomber

F - LLSix�s Hunter Class Destroyer

G - LLSix�s Inspector Gadget class Corvette

H - LLSix's Fast Attack Craft

Contenders for our Fighter Factories

A - Kodo666�s Army Air Aviation Fighter

B - OddObserver�s Poseidon class Heavy Fighter

++++++++++++ End of Ship Production Docket++++++++++++

Virtual Russian fucked around with this message at 04:01 on Aug 2, 2020

# ? Aug 2, 2020 03:18

EclecticTastes: Sep 17, 2012; "Most plans are critically flawed by their own logic. A failure at any step will ruin everything after it. That's just basic cause and effect. It's easy for a good plan to fall apart. Therefore, a plan that has no attachment to logic cannot be stopped."

I cast my vote for G. Go, go, Gadget Revenge Killing!

As for the fighter design, I'm partial to A. Faster fighters should be the core of our fighter forces, with heavier designs serving as support.

# ? Aug 2, 2020 03:38

GrabbinPeels: Jan 3, 2010; I only regret not giving up sooner.

Voting for G as well, A for fighter.

# ? Aug 2, 2020 03:42

Gnoman: Feb 12, 2014; Come, all you fair and tender maids
Who flourish in your pri-ime
Beware, take care, keep your garden fair
Let Gnoman steal your thy-y-me
Le-et Gnoman steal your thyme

You have the unnamed FAC labeled as a second copy of my Avenger in the voting docket.

# ? Aug 2, 2020 03:44

LLSix: Jan 20, 2010; The real power behind countless overlords

With the way the vote shook out to go for a cold war, I think what we want most is a Jump Point (JP) picket. The only suitable design for that to my mind is the Dwayne Class Missile Base, even if it might have been meant as a joke. A shame, I would have loved to see the Inspector Gadget on the attack.

Contenders for our Naval Shipyards
D - Foxfire_�s Dwayne Class Missile Base

Contenders for our Fighter Factories
B - OddObserver�s Poseidon class Heavy Fighter

Reducing the size of Gauss Cannon kills their accuracy.

# ? Aug 2, 2020 04:01

Virtual Russian: Sep 15, 2008

Gnoman posted:

You have the unnamed FAC labeled as a second copy of my Avenger in the voting docket.

Thanks, it was a long day at work, overnight the cleaners unplugged our server to clean around it, made for an exciting day. I really thought I got everything, but alas. Time for me to finally get some sleep.

# ? Aug 2, 2020 04:03

Flamester: Dec 30, 2012

Contenders for our Naval Shipyards
G - LLSix�s Inspector Gadget class Corvette

Contenders for our Fighter Factories
A - Kodo666�s Army Air Aviation Fighter

Dorf me, preferably as some position that die a glorious death against the alien menace.

# ? Aug 2, 2020 04:03

The Lone Badger: Sep 24, 2007

Virtual Russian posted:

++++++++++++Ship Production Docket++++++++++++

Contenders for our Naval Shipyards

D - Foxfire_�s Dwayne Class Missile Base
++++++++++++ End of Ship Production Docket++++++++++++

More missiles!

# ? Aug 2, 2020 04:22

Radio Free Kobold: Aug 11, 2012; "Federal regulations mandate that at least 30% of our content must promote Reptilian or Draconic culture. This is DJ Scratch N' Sniff with the latest mermaid screeching on KBLD..."

F - LLSix�s Hunter Class Destroyer
A - Kodo666�s Army Air Aviation Fighter

# ? Aug 2, 2020 14:06

BUG JUG: Feb 17, 2005

Virtual Russian posted:

++++++++++++Ship Production Docket++++++++++++

Contenders for our Naval Shipyards

E - Foxfire_�s Carrier Suite, which contains a carrier, fighter, and bomber

Contenders for our Fighter Factories

None since I voted for the Carrier

++++++++++++ End of Ship Production Docket++++++++++++

# ? Aug 2, 2020 15:43

Kodos666: Dec 17, 2013

GA

While the heavier designs are enticing, having light, powerful ships are the base for fleet of upcoming capital ships.

# ? Aug 2, 2020 18:41

Iceblocks: Jan 5, 2013; Taco Defender

GB

I have glanced at a few Aurora LPs, but none of them really grabbed me, so I am happy with being on the ground floor of this one.

May I be dorfed as a scientist, provided there are any positions available?

# ? Aug 2, 2020 19:21

Malick23: Sep 10, 2001; I bought all my friends forum accounts and all I got was this lousy custom title

G B

Please dorf me in the navy. The last time I participated in an Aurora game my ship disintegrated almost immediately. Hopefully I'll have better luck here.

# ? Aug 2, 2020 19:56

Foxfire_: Nov 8, 2010

Virtual Russian posted:

++++++++++++Ship Production Docket++++++++++++

Contenders for our Naval Shipyards
D - Foxfire_�s Dwayne Class Missile Base

Contenders for our Fighter Factories
No fighter

++++++++++++ End of Ship Production Docket++++++++++++

Unless the Kookian fire is lasers or they're chasing railgun damage while ignoring railgun range, all the beamships are going to get outranged and none of them seem tanky enough for that. Plus they'd be torn up even if they win a brawl.
Dwayne fits with a defensive war and lets a future aggressive force have high power engines after we sort out our fuel situation. Carrier ops could also benefit a lot from stealthy engines.

If we're not building more carriers, we'd be limited to the 4000 ton hanger on the existing carrier. Building only 8 or 12 fighters isn't enough to justify the component research needed (the Army Fighter also has accuracy problems with a 2% maximum hit chance and needing to be inside PD range to fire)

# ? Aug 2, 2020 20:46

Not Alex: Oct 9, 2012; Cut loose before the god eaters show up.

D
A

# ? Aug 2, 2020 21:55

Deptfordx: Dec 23, 2013

Gnoman posted:

It has the same effect as any other radiation. Just like real-world enhanced radiation weapons, commonly called "neutron bombs" .

A neutron bomb is still a nuclear explosion, just smaller. There is no "kill all the people, leave the rest untouched" weapon. That is pure myth. Enhanced radiation weapons were developed to take out tank divisions, because it turns out that a vehicle curved and sloped to deflect shells is shockingly resistant to the blast effects of a small atomic weapon, but does not keep out radiation. So radiation output was cranked up to kill the crews in a "holy poo poo the Russians are pouring through the Fulda Gap" scenario. Later, i was discovered that neutron radiation is hellaciously effective at destroying electronics, so the Russians tipped their second-generation anti-ballistic-missile missiles with them.

...and just to add to this excellent summary. The whole enhanced radiation doesn't matter against things that aren't as tough as a tank, e.g. civilian targets. If you're close enough to the bomb going off to get a lethal radiation dose you won't have time to worry about it. Because if you're in the open the thermal pulse will fry you and if you're in a civilian grade building you'll be crushed/buried alive when the blast hits.

# ? Aug 3, 2020 00:19

AJ_Impy: Jun 17, 2007; SWORD OF SMATTAS. CAN YOU NOT HEAR A WORLD CRY OUT FOR JUSTICE? WHEN WILL YOU DELIVER IT?; Yam Slacker

Contenders for our Naval Shipyards
G - LLSix�s Inspector Gadget class Corvette

Contenders for our Fighter Factories
A - Kodo666�s Army Air Aviation Fighter

# ? Aug 3, 2020 01:14

sebmojo: Oct 23, 2010; Legit Cyberpunk

AJ_Impy posted:

Contenders for our Naval Shipyards
G - LLSix’s Inspector Gadget class Corvette

Contenders for our Fighter Factories
A - Kodo666’s Army Air Aviation Fighter

# ? Aug 3, 2020 01:21

Virtual Russian: Sep 15, 2008

I'm going to give the vote another hour or so. I'll also take care of the back log of dorfin' I need to get caught up on.

Innocent_Bystander posted:

Oh boy here we go again.

Sign me up to the navy, please.

I already look forward to dying gloriously to alien missiles, millions of kilometers before being able to shoot back.

Got you in.

Demiurge4 posted:

Also sign me up as a fleet officer!

You're in!

ChaseSP posted:

Did I ever get an officer/admin role yet Virtual Russian?

Yes, you're the commanding officer of the GEC Paul Gotz So far you've received a ten year service badge(almost everyone has this now), and the New Horizon Badge!

Flamester posted:

Dorf me, preferably as some position that die a glorious death against the alien menace.

You're in, currently commander of the colonial strike group.

Malick23 posted:

G B

Please dorf me in the navy. The last time I participated in an Aurora game my ship disintegrated almost immediately. Hopefully I'll have better luck here.

You're in, also perfect timing to maybe get disintegrated instantly.

Iceblocks posted:

GB

May I be dorfed as a scientist, provided there are any positions available?

Got you in!

Shoeless posted:

When we eventually do get a fight, will you explain how that works? Assigning fire control, weapons, how to target enemies, etc?

Yes. I plan to "show my work" on the first couple battles, plus I'm going to try to do a battle summary that makes the battles a bit less abstract.

Virtual Russian fucked around with this message at 22:05 on Aug 3, 2020

# ? Aug 3, 2020 19:13

Virtual Russian: Sep 15, 2008

++++++++++++Ship Production Results++++++++++++

Contenders for our Naval Shipyards

G - LLSix�s Inspector Gadget class Corvette

Contenders for our Fighter Factories

A - Kodo666�s Army Air Aviation Fighter

++++++++++++ End of Ship Production Results++++++++++++

That fighter may have sub par accuracy, but enough of them could be effective. I will produce them, if nothing else they can help divide the Kookan's fire, in an insanely wasteful manner. The research projects will be a lower priority though. I am going to slightly modify the fire control, the tracking speed is a bit higher than realistically needed, so I'm dropping it to 7,000km/s and am increasing the max range to 16,000km. This will better utilize the range of the gauss cannon, with a minimal reduction in speed. This should also see them hitting something at least roughly every 15 seconds, while still low, that's much better than 2% accuracy.

LLSix and Kodo666 both gain an extra vote to use on future votes. No ones used these yet, are people saving them or just don't plan to use them? Just curious.

Virtual Russian fucked around with this message at 21:23 on Aug 3, 2020

# ? Aug 3, 2020 20:59

LLSix: Jan 20, 2010; The real power behind countless overlords

Virtual Russian posted:

LLSix and Kodo666 both gain an extra vote to use on future votes. No ones used these yet, are people saving them or just don't plan to use them? Just curious.

I would have used mine on the war vote, but it wasn't remotely close enough to matter.

# ? Aug 3, 2020 22:26

Gnoman: Feb 12, 2014; Come, all you fair and tender maids
Who flourish in your pri-ime
Beware, take care, keep your garden fair
Let Gnoman steal your thy-y-me
Le-et Gnoman steal your thyme

Once this is done, I'd like to propose devoting a few labs to updating our existing components to the latest tech, and possibly some wholly new engines. If our every ship contest is going to be limited by "that's going to take too long to research", we're going to be really locked in.

# ? Aug 3, 2020 23:19

Virtual Russian: Sep 15, 2008

Gnoman posted:

Once this is done, I'd like to propose devoting a few labs to updating our existing components to the latest tech, and possibly some wholly new engines. If our every ship contest is going to be limited by "that's going to take too long to research", we're going to be really locked in.

I was already planning on that. One step ahead even, that Gauss Cannon for the fighter was already made and researched. I'm going to do my best to always make and research direct upgrades. I've also got a commercial engine to research.

It is painful how few labs we have.

# ? Aug 3, 2020 23:31

Foxfire_: Nov 8, 2010

Virtual Russian posted:

In the future I think I'll only give a couple options for technology focus, depending on what makes sense at the time. I'm seeing very decisive returns on everything except the tech focus, which I think is too broad and doesn't really offer people a clear vision of what you get when you pick one.

One thing you could do is group by application instead of the game's fields to make it more focused. i.e.

- Point Defense (gauss techs, fire controls, turret speed)
- Missiles (warhead, ordnance production, reload speed)
- Particle Beams (strength, range, reactors, fire controls, turret speed)
- Economy (wealth creation, construction/research/mining speed)
- Stealth (low emissions engines, cloaking)
- Passive Sensors (EM, thermal, planetary sensors)
- Active Sensors (Active sensor strength, EM sensitivity)
- Speed (reactors, engines)
- Fuel (fuel consumption, fuel refining)
etc

Gnoman posted:

Once this is done, I'd like to propose devoting a few labs to updating our existing components to the latest tech, and possibly some wholly new engines. If our every ship contest is going to be limited by "that's going to take too long to research", we're going to be really locked in.

This should settle out once we get out of early game (plus this one was extra rushed since imminent alien threat and all). Dropping a couple thousand on an engine is much more palatable when tech levels are 40k apart instead of 4k apart

# ? Aug 3, 2020 23:54

LLSix: Jan 20, 2010; The real power behind countless overlords

I think taking research costs into mind is reasonable. It wasn�t even something OP imposed on us. A lot of us designers mentioned it this time because we�re in a semi-crisis and time to deployment matters.

If no fighter had been listed as an option, I would have voted for it. I didn�t write it in because I figured OP wanted to maximize his fighting options, which is fair. Kind of curious how he plans to get them off Earth without a carrier though.

LLSix fucked around with this message at 02:46 on Aug 4, 2020

# ? Aug 4, 2020 02:43

Gnoman: Feb 12, 2014; Come, all you fair and tender maids
Who flourish in your pri-ime
Beware, take care, keep your garden fair
Let Gnoman steal your thy-y-me
Le-et Gnoman steal your thyme

It wasn't wrong to consider it a factor. My point was that waiting for new components with ship submissions would make it always a factor no matter what.

# ? Aug 4, 2020 05:20

ChaseSP: Mar 25, 2013

Engine/Reactor techs are really cheap early, it's painful to spend time on getting new engines earlier on when you can easily get up to Ion Drives and have fast as hell ships with powerful reactors.

# ? Aug 4, 2020 06:32

Virtual Russian: Sep 15, 2008

LLSix posted:

I think taking research costs into mind is reasonable. It wasn�t even something OP imposed on us. A lot of us designers mentioned it this time because we�re in a semi-crisis and time to deployment matters.

If no fighter had been listed as an option, I would have voted for it. I didn�t write it in because I figured OP wanted to maximize his fighting options, which is fair. Kind of curious how he plans to get them off Earth without a carrier though.

We do have the crummy starting carrier, plus the Wvyerns can each carry two fighters in a pinch. I'd rather make some less than perfect fighters now, instead of waiting and having nothing when I need them.

My main thought though was simply getting more raw tonnage made faster, as diplomacy demands are factored through how big a navy you have.

# ? Aug 4, 2020 12:55

LLSix: Jan 20, 2010; The real power behind countless overlords

Virtual Russian posted:

We do have the crummy starting carrier, plus the Wvyerns can each carry two fighters in a pinch. I'd rather make some less than perfect fighters now, instead of waiting and having nothing when I need them.

My main thought though was simply getting more raw tonnage made faster, as diplomacy demands are factored through how big a navy you have.

Cool!

I forgot we had a starter carrier.

# ? Aug 4, 2020 16:09

ChaseSP: Mar 25, 2013

At the least, fighter factories are separate from slipways so they can take some production we aren't using otherwise to soak up some hits in combat.

# ? Aug 4, 2020 21:44

Servetus: Apr 1, 2010

Looking to join the Navy Sir!

Also, if this Cold war thing keeps up we can always name that colony Cadia.

# ? Aug 4, 2020 23:14

Virtual Russian: Sep 15, 2008

Servetus posted:

Looking to join the Navy Sir!

Also, if this Cold war thing keeps up we can always name that colony Cadia.

In at the rank of Lieutenant Commander, we ran out of open commander spots. You command an old Gladius FAC.

# ? Aug 5, 2020 00:24

Shoeless: Sep 2, 2011

Virtual Russian posted:

In at the rank of Lieutenant Commander, we ran out of open commander spots. You command an old Gladius FAC.

What mighty vessel do I command? How effectively am I able to bring peace through superior firepower to our people?

# ? Aug 5, 2020 00:43

MuteAllison: Nov 16, 2013

I'm loving this LP so far. Designing ships in Aurora is a whole different ballgame, and I really like the logistics aspect, definitely an interesting layer of strategy.

May I be dorf'd into the Navy? Even if there's no position, I'm down to be on the waitlist.

# ? Aug 5, 2020 01:24

Virtual Russian: Sep 15, 2008

Shoeless posted:

What mighty vessel do I command? How effectively am I able to bring peace through superior firepower to our people?

You are currently the Commander of the Corvette Maginus, one of our Artemis class Corvettes.

MuteAllison posted:

I'm loving this LP so far. Designing ships in Aurora is a whole different ballgame, and I really like the logistics aspect, definitely an interesting layer of strategy.

May I be dorf'd into the Navy? Even if there's no position, I'm down to be on the waitlist.

You're in at the rank of Lieutenant Commander, currently commander of one of our Kobold FACs. I ran out of Commanders, but we have plenty of junior officers.

# ? Aug 5, 2020 01:38

Adbot: ADBOT LOVES YOU

# ? Jun 7, 2024 18:25

Zanzibar Ham: Mar 17, 2009; You giving me the cold shoulder? How cruel.; Grimey Drawer

I'm also enjoying things a lot atm! Sadly I can't bring myself to join in on ship design votes, because the "schematics" are way above my comprehension ability.

# ? Aug 5, 2020 01:43

The Something Awful Forums > Discussion > Video Games > Let's Play! > Let's Rule the Stars: An Aurora 4x Participation Let's Play

«‹›31 »