NationStates Jolt Archive

Hey everybody, I started FT about a couple months ago and have been hanging low (cause I have been so crazy busy). Anyway I am ready to have my fleet finished and to start getting into rps but I want to know what you think of my fleet.

Tidani Star Fleet:

10 Fleets consisting each of:

5 Navguard (http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/Tidani_Star_Fleet#Navguard_Class_Heavy_Cruiser) Heavy Cruisers
10 Liberty (http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/Tidani_Star_Fleet#Liberty_Class_Battlecruiser) Battlecruisers
8 Rhoaltar (http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/Tidani_Star_Fleet#Rhoaltar_Class_Cruiser) Cruisers
10 Armageddon (http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/Tidani_Star_Fleet#Armageddon_Class_Light_Cruiser) Light Cruisers
5 Monsoon (http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/Tidani_Star_Fleet#Monsoon_Class_Intelligence_Cruiser) Intelligence Cruisers

5 Horizon (http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/Tidani_Star_Fleet#Horizon_Class_Carrier) Carriers
1 Hospital (http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/Tidani_Star_Fleet#Hospital_Carrier) Carrier

55 Sea Dragon (http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/Tidani_Star_Fleet#Sea_Dragon_Class_Destroyer) Destroyers
23 Harpoon (http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/Tidani_Star_Fleet#Harpoon_Class_Destroyer) Destroyers

120 Narwal (http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/Tidani_Star_Fleet#Narwal_Class_Frigate) Frigates
90 Trident (http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/Tidani_Star_Fleet#Trident_Class_Frigate) Frigates
100 Flare (http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/Tidani_Star_Fleet#Flare_Class_Frigate) Frigates
20 Hammerhead (http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/Tidani_Star_Fleet#Hammerhead_Class_Frigate) Frigates

55 Northpass (http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/Tidani_Star_Fleet#Northpass_Class_Transport) Transports
200 Supply (http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/Tidani_Star_Fleet#Supply_Transport) Transports

900 Storm Rider (http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/Tidani_Star_Fleet#Storm_Rider_Omnifighter) Omnifighters
600 Hurricane (http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/Tidani_Star_Fleet#Hurricane_Omnibomber) Omnibombers
200 Dropships (http://ns.goobergunch.net/wiki/index.php/Tidani_Star_Fleet#Dropship)

30,000 – 80,000 Marines


Works out to 3.95 million crew in total

I'm just looking for some comments and advice from the rest of you who know what you are doing.

Well I may not always seem to know what I'm doing ^_^, but I personally really like your set up here, everything seems to be in order. The idea of having a few ships be able to actually go under water is an awesome one that I have played around with for a while, but never used, and rarely see used. It's also obvious you found that Deep Angel thing, which supplies some pretty nice stuff as well.


The only thing I'd like more information on is your plan of action for attacking planets. You seem to only have one dedicated planetary assault craft, and that's the one transport, that's not only unarmed, but also looks set up to be overkill for any missions requiring a smaller force and a smaller ship.

I'd also like to know how the fighters you've put up are implemented in your forces.

Your right, planetary assault isn't something I thought much about. I just figured I'd use my cruiser's large rail guns or my missile destroyer. What do you use/suggest for bombardment.

The transports I have would be used to transport or land large forces of troops on a planet, or smaller forces with lots of heavy equipment. The one frigate I have is for boarding enemy capital ships. It could be used to land a small force but is still large. I suppose I could use a shuttle craft or support ship from a carrier or cruiser. I suppose I should come up with something for this.

The fighters are submarine and atmosphere, I've made them be spacefighters too. They would be based on carriers, heavy cruisers, battlecruisers, stations, and planet bases. They only have convensional weapons, I was trying to avoid lasers because of the energy requirements and I think they are ok without lasers.

Your right, planetary assault isn't something I thought much about. I just figured I'd use my cruiser's large rail guns or my missile destroyer. What do you use/suggest for bombardment.

The transports I have would be used to transport or land large forces of troops on a planet, or smaller forces with lots of heavy equipment. The one frigate I have is for boarding enemy capital ships. It could be used to land a small force but is still large. I suppose I could use a shuttle craft or support ship from a carrier or cruiser. I suppose I should come up with something for this.

The fighters are submarine and atmosphere, I've made them be spacefighters too. They would be based on carriers, heavy cruisers, battlecruisers, stations, and planet bases. They only have convensional weapons, I was trying to avoid lasers because of the energy requirements and I think they are ok without lasers.


Railguns seems fine to me. I don't typically presume to tell or suggest what someone else should do with their fleets, and I'll stick to that.

Personally follow about the path for planets. I do have one class of ships that's dedicated to all things planetary. It's a large platform dubbed the Colossus class Planetary Strike Cruiser, that's modular and various ships are fitted with different pieces of equipment. The general load is a hanger bay for about 50 or so dropships, 10 small (modern helo size.), 15 medium (about 50 men.), 15 heavy (about 200 men.), and 10 Ultra (About 1,000 men.).

That's either augmented or completely replaced by a load of all manner of armor, (Which I'm still developing.). Being a planetary assault ship, the armament on the under side is made specifically for pinpoint strikes for CSS (Close Space Support, a modification of modern CAS, or Close Air Support.) of ground forces. So there's essentially a bunch of launchers on the bottom that fire everything from "Dumb" nonexplosive rods (Velocity achieved from orbital drop off provides enough Kinetic Energy.) to "Smart" guided munitions or all typed modified to be able to be fired from space and hit pin-point on a planet.


With lasers on your fighters you would have a definite advantage over having conventional weapons with theoretically unlimited ammo and more power to strike against the ubershields of some fleets out there, (Mine included, though in RP's I obviously tone them down.) I'm not sure why you wouldn't have power for them as you've got fusion reactors, but that's you call I guess. Are they too large or something?

With lasers on your fighters you would have a definite advantage over having conventional weapons with theoretically unlimited ammo and more power to strike against the ubershields of some fleets out there, (Mine included, though in RP's I obviously tone them down.) I'm not sure why you wouldn't have power for them as you've got fusion reactors, but that's you call I guess. Are they too large or something?

No I guess lasers could work. I wasn't planning on using fighters for attacking ships, the bombers have missiles and torpedos. But I can see your point.

I'll think about adding a planetary assault ship or modifying one to be more suited to that role. Also, thank you for reminding me about dropships. I can remember thinking about making one earlier and completely forgot about them until now. I was also thinking of being able to use ion cannons in planetary attacks, but I have no idea how that would react to atmosphere.

No I guess lasers could work. I wasn't planning on using fighters for attacking ships, the bombers have missiles and torpedos. But I can see your point.

I'll think about adding a planetary assault ship or modifying one to be more suited to that role. Also, thank you for reminding me about dropships. I can remember thinking about making one earlier and completely forgot about them until now. I was also thinking of being able to use ion cannons in planetary attacks, but I have no idea how that would react to atmosphere.

All is only my opinion anyway. Since you say you did not intend for fighters to attack ships, You should probably keep it that way unless you feel you need to make them be able to. It's only that I focus almost entirely on fighters in my military that gave me that thought. A biased opinion I guess.

Heh, you're welcome about the dropships. If there's anything else I might think of, I'll just TG it to you or something.

EDIT: If your ion cannons are like anything else used here in NS, I'd say that they're probably just going to go right through it. But science wise, I just honestly couldn't say for sure.

Looks pretty good so far, and I like how you've gotten your Wiki set up.

Concerning fighter armament, it would depend on their role and how advanced your technology is. My fighters all use very conventional kinetic weapons and missiles, because Skeelzanian beam technology can't be effectively minaturized. As such they're used in swarming attacks and generally just for smashing the hell out of weakly shielded ships. I think most shields you would encounter are designed to negate beam weaponry over kinetic; and lasers have a very narrow field of damage making them even less effective over regenerating hulls.

In either case, I think the only way you can really make a fighter a threat is with missiles and torpedos. Fighters generally aren't large enough to carry weapon systems powerful enough to hurt capital ships, but if you can put a few AM-tipped missiles on them, then you have a much more dangerous weapons platform. Also, missiles would be much more effective in the anti-fighter role, as they don't require direct line of sight like guns or lasers.

Using beam weaponry as a planetary assault weapon is kind of iffy. Unless the planet lacked an atmosphere, the energy to overcome beam dispersal would probably be prohibitive. Ion beams, as I use them, would be more effective, but only because they burn off the atmosphere and basically melt the planet. Not something you want to do if you ever plan on occupying the planet.

My personal favorite for planetary attack is something called the Flak Ram. Basically, it showers an area with millions of metal nails from space; by the time they reach the surface they're traveling mighty fast and would chew up any unhardened target (cities, troops, etc.). You would need to use something that wouldn't burn up in the atmosphere, and develop a launching mechanism (the original Flak Rams used nanomachines [I think], while mine simply use big bundles of metal).

Looking at his technology, it all struck me as a level where he would be able to have beams that would do some damage against enemy ships. I had nations with similar tech levels in mind when I suggested the laser armament for his fighters, attacking ships with them and whatnot. I personally still have missiles and torpedoes on fighters, but having a laser instead of a conventional minigun is what I was referring to when I said:
With lasers on your fighters you would have a definite advantage over having conventional weapons with theoretically unlimited ammo and more power to strike against the ubershields of some fleets out there, (Mine included, though in RP's I obviously tone them down.) I'm not sure why you wouldn't have power for them as you've got fusion reactors, but that's you call I guess. Are they too large or something?
I didn't mean to say use them as a direct replacement, sorry.

TBH, I think that while things like "quantum beam" would look better, (Albeit a little more iffy.) than "Laser" for attacking nations with higher tech (Ones that would have shields where fighters really did do nothing.), if the RPer on the receiving end is any good, the damage done would still be just that, damage done. And to me, that's typically what matters. At least you wrote down you hit the guy. Only weapons that do some special thing, like rips off shields or showers a planet in deadly nails seem worth making sure the other guy understands fully what it does.

[OOC: Just a few very general notes on space combat, from a realism point of view as opposed to a NationStates point of view.

So, as they come to me, eleven tips, including a zero - the critical rule for all military operations. :) Some are obvious, some perhaps not so!

0. OODA. Observe Orient Decide Act. This is the core of all military operations, and the order in which actions must be carried out. You can't act before you're in position, and you can't decide what to do after you act. Note that 'Act' comes last, and thus is least important. The first three phases - essentially planning, even when applied in the combat theatre itself during battle - are the truly critical ones. Screw those up, and you're dead. Simple as.
1. Distance is desirable. You don't want to fight up close and personal, because that gets you killed.
2. Computational power is king. He who has computer power can track faster, see better, and understand what's happening faster. Lag doesn't matter to a ship with good analytical ability; good software could, with sentient aid, decypher enemy movements and plan ahead based on past actions.
3. Missiles are better than beam weapons against unshielded opponents. Missiles don't depend on energy expenditure from the ship itself, typically, so your own defense systems can stay active.
4. Simplicity can be awfully effective. An unexpected attack with shrapnel left in the known path of a vessel - unshielded because it's not expecting said attack - can be devastating and leave no obvious trace of who was responsible.
5. Kill zones are critical. In space, swiftness can easily become command of the combat theatre; therefore, the potential movements of the enemy need to be limited. Funnel enemy ships into one area with careful 'persuasion', and then saturate that area with fire.
6. Missiles and beam weapons are effective, but combat drones are even better. Drones that can deploy small missiles and one-shot beam weapons can extend the optimum combat range of a vessel while allowing diversity of assault.
7. Never underestimate the power of electronic warfare. Without coordination, a fleet of big shiny ships is worthless.
8. 'Ground' in space is as unimportant as it is on land, at sea, and in the air. Never fight for one patch of open space.
9. Surprise strikes mean rapid victories. Being able to deploy, fire, and depart before the enemy can react means fewer losses. Surprise attacks are a necessity, not a dishonour.
10. Always do the unexpected.


On Space and Spacedy Ships.

1. Radiation shielding. Remember, your ship is going to be thoroughly irradiated if it spends any time outside of the Earth's/some other planet with an electromagnetic field/whatever's protection. If you want your crew to live long enough to be useful, you need to consider adequate protection against the perils of the void. Radiation being the worst - even worse than any enemy you may fight.
2. Space is always at a premium. Warships need to be like submarines, not aircraft carriers. Mass needs to be minimal to ensure a small turning arc, and thus better maneuverability. This doesn't mean don't build big ships; it means build big ships that meet the minimum requirements of their mission profile.
3. Space is big. It's really full of stuff, but all the stuff is really far apart. You need to move swiftly, then. FTL, however, can be inhibited (no matter what sort you use, someone can inhibit it). Therefore you need to think about acceleration, too. How many gs can the crew sustain? How can this be improved? Perfluorocarbon is one solution (filling the ship with breathable liquid); gravitics are another. As examples.
4. Don't aim to 'outgun' everyone. Outsmart works better.
5. Massive ships are more vulnerable than smaller ships, and are only useful as long-range support vessels or orbital assault platforms. Medium-mass ships are useful to provide cover, while smaller ships fight best in tight circles. Deploy accordingly.
6. Ignore anything you know about two-dimensional formations. It doesn't matter how far apart your ships are, so long as there's no appreciable time-lag on comms. Force the enemy to spread thinly, and an inferior force may triumph over a superior force.


On Big Huge Evil Ships in Roleplay.

1. Build in weaknesses. As many weaknesses as strengths. Think about how your own ship can be defeated - make sure it's possible, and possible just with good thinking. No ship, no matter how powerful, should ever be unbeatable.
2. If in doubt, take heavier losses, not lesser losses. And know every statistic about your hardware, if possible, so you can tell people in advance - and not be tempted to make up some new-fangled superweapon in the middle of a battle, and start an argument over whether you'd mentione it before or not.

On Lasers, etc.

Lasers are pretty cool, right? Yeah. Nifty. So, one question, really. Why lasers? Because everybody knows what they are.

So, um, why lasers, again? And more critically... what sort?

Personally, I spurn 'lasers' (as in the general use of the word here on NationStates, rather than altogether, if we want to be technical about it!) utterly, as I'm not 100% convinced they'd be particuarly efficient.

There are alternatives. Masers, for example (molecular/microwave amplification by stimulated emission of radiation. See here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Maser) for more info.

Then again, there are also free-electron lasers. (I call these 'E-cannon', ICly.) For these beauties, see here (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Free_electron_laser).

Little research goes a long way. :)

(As does humility and editing. - Ed.)]

[OOC: Just a few very general notes on space combat, from a realism point of view as opposed to a NationStates point of view.

So, as they come to me, eleven tips, including a zero - the critical rule for all military operations. :) Some are obvious, some perhaps not so!

0. OODA. Observe Orient Decide Act. This is the core of all military operations, and the order in which actions must be carried out. You can't act before you're in position, and you can't decide what to do after you act. Note that 'Act' comes last, and thus is least important. The first three phases - essentially planning, even when applied in the combat theatre itself during battle - are the truly critical ones. Screw those up, and you're dead. Simple as.
1. Distance is desirable. You don't want to fight up close and personal, because that gets you killed.
2. Computational power is king. He who has computer power can track faster, see better, and understand what's happening faster. Lag doesn't matter to a ship with good analytical ability; good software could, with sentient aid, decypher enemy movements and plan ahead based on past actions.
3. Missiles are better than beam weapons against unshielded opponents. Missiles don't depend on energy expenditure from the ship itself, typically, so your own defense systems can stay active.
4. Simplicity can be awfully effective. An unexpected attack with shrapnel left in the known path of a vessel - unshielded because it's not expecting said attack - can be devastating and leave no obvious trace of who was responsible.
5. Kill zones are critical. In space, swiftness can easily become command of the combat theatre; therefore, the potential movements of the enemy need to be limited. Funnel enemy ships into one area with careful 'persuasion', and then saturate that area with fire.
6. Missiles and beam weapons are effective, but combat drones are even better. Drones that can deploy small missiles and one-shot beam weapons can extend the optimum combat range of a vessel while allowing diversity of assault.
7. Never underestimate the power of electronic warfare. Without coordination, a fleet of big shiny ships is worthless.
8. 'Ground' in space is as unimportant as it is on land, at sea, and in the air. Never fight for one patch of open space.
9. Surprise strikes mean rapid victories. Being able to deploy, fire, and depart before the enemy can react means fewer losses. Surprise attacks are a necessity, not a dishonour.
10. Always do the unexpected.


On Space and Spacedy Ships.

1. Radiation shielding. Remember, your ship is going to be thoroughly irradiated if it spends any time outside of the Earth's/some other planet with an electromagnetic field/whatever's protection. If you want your crew to live long enough to be useful, you need to consider adequate protection against the perils of the void. Radiation being the worst - even worse than any enemy you may fight.
2. Space is always at a premium. Warships need to be like submarines, not aircraft carriers. Mass needs to be minimal to ensure a small turning arc, and thus better maneuverability. This doesn't mean don't build big ships; it means build big ships that meet the minimum requirements of their mission profile.
3. Space is big. It's really full of stuff, but all the stuff is really far apart. You need to move swiftly, then. FTL, however, can be inhibited (no matter what sort you use, someone can inhibit it). Therefore you need to think about acceleration, too. How many gs can the crew sustain? How can this be improved? Perfluorocarbon is one solution (filling the ship with breathable liquid); gravitics are another. As examples.
4. Don't aim to 'outgun' everyone. Outsmart works better.
5. Massive ships are more vulnerable than smaller ships, and are only useful as long-range support vessels or orbital assault platforms. Medium-mass ships are useful to provide cover, while smaller ships fight best in tight circles. Deploy accordingly.
6. Ignore anything you know about two-dimensional formations. It doesn't matter how far apart your ships are, so long as there's no appreciable time-lag on comms. Force the enemy to spread thinly, and an inferior force may triumph over a superior force.


On Big Huge Evil Ships in Roleplay.

1. Build in weaknesses. As many weaknesses as strengths. Think about how your own ship can be defeated - make sure it's possible, and possible just with good thinking. No ship, no matter how powerful, should ever be unbeatable.
2. If in doubt, take heavier losses, not lesser losses. And know every statistic about your hardware, if possible, so you can tell people in advance - and not be tempted to make up some new-fangled superweapon in the middle of a battle, and start an argument over whether you'd mentione it before or not.]


Heh heh. Tidan, listen to him. Most of the stuff he just put down I believe many better FT nations out there follow.

The only things I'd say are that:
-Computer power is king, but far too many people have instant everything computers, and saying that one person has better computers than the other might be hard unless the tech gap is large between the two. Quantum computers against an iMac for instance. (Ok, supremely exaggerated, but the point is there.) Hopefully the RPer is willing to "dumb down." something, and not act like a noob claiming he has uber everything. At which point I would be sad I even started Rping with that person.

-And the up close and personal fights sometimes make things more interesting, (Though some will say more stupid.). Boarding enemy ships, capturing a few or whatnot. He [Tidan] seems to have ships dedicated for the up close an personal role anyway.)

No logistics at all, everyone forgets in FT that you still need ammunition, hospital, repair, and supply ships.

Random replies to Ma-tek's post...


1. Distance is desirable. You don't want to fight up close and personal, because that gets you killed.

Not always true, in my opinion. If you rely on kinetic weaponry, you'd want to be closer, as its fairly easy to dodge a giant rock flying at you. Even at light speed, the distances in space combat ensure you have a second or two to dodge (assuming your ships can pull off such a manuever). Also, close-in fighting allows for boarding, which can catch some people completely unprepared. Ramming is also rarely seen, but good for tying up a capital ship.


1. Radiation shielding. Remember, your ship is going to be thoroughly irradiated if it spends any time outside of the Earth's/some other planet with an electromagnetic field/whatever's protection. If you want your crew to live long enough to be useful, you need to consider adequate protection against the perils of the void. Radiation being the worst - even worse than any enemy you may fight.


I think its a given that all ships have radiation shielding built in, as well as something to deal with micrometeors. Still want to mention it, just incase someone fields a Radgun against you or something, but don't get too bogged down.


2. Space is always at a premium. Warships need to be like submarines, not aircraft carriers. Mass needs to be minimal to ensure a small turning arc, and thus better maneuverability. This doesn't mean don't build big ships; it means build big ships that meet the minimum requirements of their mission profile.

Elaborating on this a bit, you might want to develop something or explain how you deal with the effects of gravity and inertia on a ship. If something over a few hundred meters tried a turn at speed, the inertia would snap that sucker in half. I use a blanket Interial Dampner (of Improbotech Industries) on my ships to compensate; a side effect is the generation of artificial gravity within a ship.

Kreynoria']No logistics at all, everyone forgets in FT that you still need ammunition, hospital, repair, and supply ships.

[OOC: Yeah, that's a critical point, that is. *nodsnodsnods* I once enacted an orbital strike... somewhere. Can't remember where. Anyway, I vividly remember describing a veritable stream of small cargo-bearing ships docking constantly with the Battlegroup, but nobody attacked it.

Kill the damned supply ships, people!

Oh, and, one thing. Satelites/observation drones. Destroy them, kay? Nobody ever attacks my satelites and they're my BIGGEST weakness. My military can function without them, but very sluggishly.

Having said that, they're pretty well defended, so that's really not an invitation to try. ;)]

Has the idea of a small ship or swarm of small fighters going at light speed or beyond making a kamikaze attack against planets or capital ships been thought of? They could be automatated or flown by robots anyway, so no loss of life.

Kreynoria']Has the idea of a small ship or swarm of small fighters going at light speed or beyond making a kamikaze attack against planets or capital ships been thought of? They could be automatated or flown by robots anyway, so no loss of life.

I've done Suicide fighter runs only a few times. When the fighter was definitely beyond saving. Small ships however, I have not yet attempted. I'd rather just ues a really big spread of torpedoes or one of those really big missiles, (heh.) instead of losing a ship that, while possible half dead, might be more useful later on. After all, the other RPer might disregard a disabled ship, not suspecting the potential threat it still poses...

EDIT: Ma-tek, isn't this thread already "OOC" ? Or is that just a thing...?

Not always true, in my opinion. If you rely on kinetic weaponry, you'd want to be closer, as its fairly easy to dodge a giant rock flying at you. Even at light speed, the distances in space combat ensure you have a second or two to dodge (assuming your ships can pull off such a manuever). Also, close-in fighting allows for boarding, which can catch some people completely unprepared. Ramming is also rarely seen, but good for tying up a capital ship.


[OOC: Very true - based on the supposition that kinetic weapons can't be 'smart'. Also, see the bit on combat drones -carrying- kinetic weapons. That can get them close enough for a kill strike (such as with my Combat Hornets).

Ramming is indeed rarely seen, though I've done it in the past. Just ask Melkor. ;)]

Elaborating on this a bit, you might want to develop something or explain how you deal with the effects of gravity and inertia on a ship. If something over a few hundred meters tried a turn at speed, the inertia would snap that sucker in half. I use a blanket Interial Dampner (of Improbotech Industries) on my ships to compensate; a side effect is the generation of artificial gravity within a ship.

[OOC: Gyros can also do the trick, rather than using thrusters. Segmented hull designs could also overcome the problem, without the need for inertial dampeners. Originally, this is how I overcame the problem; each part of the ship was involved in the turn, thus decreasing overall stress. Nowadays some of my ships use psuedo-gravity fields (PG fields, which also allows for movie jokes about ratings) - posh name for inertial dampeners - that also supply something similar to a gravity field without rotation, and, at a low level, can work as an external field as well, to tinker with inertia and provide turning power. PG-driven ships are, however, limited to space combat only. My other ships are atmosphere capable.

And K...something...sorry, should have looked longer before coming back to edit, heh. >.> Ksomething who said about the OOC tags - I always do these. Without fail. It's weird of me, but a habit.

Oops. Sorry if it's annoying. (Though probably not as annoying as me forgetting your nation's name! Double-sorry.)]

Heh heh. Tidan, listen to him. Most of the stuff he just put down I believe many better FT nations out there follow.

The only things I'd say are that:
-Computer power is king, but far too many people have instant everything computers, and saying that one person has better computers than the other might be hard unless the tech gap is large between the two. Quantum computers against an iMac for instance. (Ok, supremely exaggerated, but the point is there.) Hopefully the RPer is willing to "dumb down." something, and not act like a noob claiming he has uber everything. At which point I would be sad I even started Rping with that person.

-And the up close and personal fights sometimes make things more interesting, (Though some will say more stupid.). Boarding enemy ships, capturing a few or whatnot. He [Tidan] seems to have ships dedicated for the up close an personal role anyway.)


Range really has no mening when you realise that power is no longer a function of distance, in atmosphere, it still matters, but in space, if you can see it, and you have energy weapons, you can hit it, the only advantage of range is maneuver time, and even then it's a pretty short amount of time, for exampole, against a missile going at .99c my countermissiles have 3 seconds to identify, target, plot and enagage the missile before it hits my ship, that's 3 seconds for the entire intercept pocess to occur, now, I may have some truly kick ass computers, but even they would have trouble picking off more than 3-4 at that speed...

Range really has no mening when you realise that power is no longer a function of distance, in atmosphere, it still matters, but in space, if you can see it, and you have energy weapons, you can hit it, the only advantage of range is maneuver time, and even then it's a pretty short amount of time, for exampole, against a missile going at .99c my countermissiles have 3 seconds to identify, target, plot and enagage the missile before it hits my ship, that's 3 seconds for the entire intercept pocess to occur, now, I may have some truly kick ass computers, but even they would have trouble picking off more than 3-4 at that speed...



@Ma-tek: Haha, no worries. The name thing nor the "OOC" thing annoys me. Just curious.

@Mini Miehm: Close range means something when you want to board enemy ships with pods or something of that sort. Plus, Tidan here uses conventional weapons like really big machine guns and regular missiles, that probably don't move a .99c, so for him, range is very relevant.

That's what I was thinking of.

Range really has no mening when you realise that power is no longer a function of distance, in atmosphere, it still matters, but in space, if you can see it, and you have energy weapons, you can hit it, the only advantage of range is maneuver time, and even then it's a pretty short amount of time, for exampole, against a missile going at .99c my countermissiles have 3 seconds to identify, target, plot and enagage the missile before it hits my ship, that's 3 seconds for the entire intercept pocess to occur, now, I may have some truly kick ass computers, but even they would have trouble picking off more than 3-4 at that speed...

[OOC: If an object were to travel at .99c, it would a) arrive far too late to be of trouble because of time dilation assuming that b) it doesn't become ionized gas near instantly. Although space is a near-vacuum, it does have particulate matter floating about. Now, if you're going fast enough, the impacts have so much force that the particulates begin to take on the properties of cosmic rays. This superheats the object very rapidly.

I doubt you'd have to worry about the missile.

I believe the theoretical limit would be something like .15-.2c relative (to any particles you were hitting), IIRC. Travelling at that speed would be a problem, though, as any object moving with almost any force in the opposite direction would cause a rather big boom.

Oh, and that's another problem. C-fractional matter weapons are a bit naughty, because they cause exceptionally large explosions. Exceptionally large explosions with a full range of electromagnetic emissions. Which would confuse sensors for some time afterwards. Which, clearly, in space, when everyone is moving very quickly in different directions and plotting their courses relative to stable objects (such as planets), would pose a distinct navigational hazard.]

@Ma-tek: Haha, no worries. The name thing nor the "OOC" thing annoys me. Just curious.

@Mini Miehm: Close range means something when you want to board enemy ships with pods or something of that sort. Plus, Tidan here uses conventional weapons like really big machine guns and regular missiles, that probably don't move a .99c, so for him, range is very relevant.

That's what I was thinking of.

Ok, for weapons that can't handle the accel to .99c, I guess range would be more of an issue, but I always think of things in terms of my Grav-drive missiles, which is admittedly a flaw of mine... I have the weapons to do it, so I always think in terms of MY maximum capabilities... Those missiles I mentioned, they have a maximum engagement range of somewhere on 65 million KM, EFFECTIVE range is only like 30 million, but they can hit anything inside their range, in theory at least... Point is, I didn't rreally consider the difference in capabilities when I made my post.

Ok, for weapons that can't handle the accel to .99c, I guess range would be more of an issue, but I always think of things in terms of my Grav-drive missiles, which is admittedly a flaw of mine... I have the weapons to do it, so I always think in terms of MY maximum capabilities... Those missiles I mentioned, they have a maximum engagement range of somewhere on 65 million KM, EFFECTIVE range is only like 30 million, but they can hit anything inside their range, in theory at least... Point is, I didn't rreally consider the difference in capabilities when I made my post.

Heh, I think that Ma-Tak's post above is the one you'll have to respond to here. Everything he mentions I find I know, yet was too stupid to remember... >_< . Ah well.

[OOC: If an object were to travel at .99c, it would a) arrive far too late to be of trouble because of time dilation assuming that b) it doesn't become ionized gas near instantly. Although space is a near-vacuum, it does have particulate matter floating about. Now, if you're going fast enough, the impacts have so much force that the particulates begin to take on the properties of cosmic rays. This superheats the object very rapidly.

I doubt you'd have to worry about the missile.

I believe the theoretical limit would be something like .15-.2c relative (to any particles you were hitting), IIRC. Travelling at that speed would be a problem, though, as any object moving with almost any force in the opposite direction would cause a rather big boom.

Oh, and that's another problem. C-fractional matter weapons are a bit naughty, because they cause exceptionally large explosions. Exceptionally large explosions with a full range of electromagnetic emissions. Which would confuse sensors for some time afterwards. Which, clearly, in space, when everyone is moving very quickly in different directions and plotting their courses relative to stable objects (such as planets), would pose a distinct navigational hazard.]

Do not blame me for any physics errors, my stats are taken directly from David Webers Honor Harrington series of books, with a specific reference to "The Honor of the Queen", "At All Costs, and "Flag in Exile".

As for KEWs, I use them as regular weapons on my SDns and Dns, because they make those big explosions youmentioned, a mass of metal moving at .3c will tear ANYTHING to hell and gone, sure SDns can only mount 50 of the things, total, and they're 6 frigging miles long, Dns only mount 18, and BCs only mount like six... They may be naughty, but if I need that kinda firepower, I'm gonna need it bad...

It appears that you have maximum speeds listed for vacuums. Technicly while there is a finite speed limit (Isn't it something like 2X the speed of the particles leaving the rocket nozzle or something. Oh well, C is an absolute), it is a little more conventional to list acceleration.

Looks like you've seen Deep Angel too! (and Homeworld was an awesome game!) Everything looks great!

The one thing I do though, and you can weigh this how you will, is add in multiple sized weapons and put them in similar numbers as might be found on a modern BB. You're going to want a lot of weapons yes, but 60 of the exact same weapon ('turbolaser batteries') is a strange layout for the Navguard cruiser. 4 very large sized weapons (uses 5X power of turblaser battery), 10 large weapons (2X), and 20 standard weapons (equal) is a slightly more effective layout IMO. It gives you four weapons that can shoot to heck and back, ten that will cause severe trouble for capitols, and leaves twenty regular ones for use against those annoying frigates that insist on dodging your heavy weapons. All of this in about the same power draw.

This DOES reduce the number of targets you can engage at once, and means you have to watch for your heavy weapon's blind spots though.

::fully expects to have this strategy shreded by more experienced players::

Personally I prefer to use hulking ships with lots of guns and ample fighter protection. For a classic ezample, see my Leviathan class Meganaught (its in my sig). That baby is nearly 6 miles long, carries 1,200 light fighters (basically meant to tie up the enemy's fighters and harass small ships), 315 heavy fighters (designed to do damage to capitol ships, as well as escort friendly ships because they have a FTL drive), 269 bombers/shuttles/transports of all sizes (depends on which of the myriad models I produce is currently in abundance), 204 torpedo tubes, 198 Lance Cannons (fancy lasers), 192 MACs (Magnetic Accelerator Cannons), and a big-ass planet-killer gun that fires shells as big as skyscrapers.

All of my ships are equipped with rams, as I like to get close and personal, and all of them carry drop pods and boarding torpedoes. Now, most FT players dislike my style of play, citing it as big, slow, and stupid, and I admit it is challenging to fight with, but it works well.

Regarding my fleets: I have 2,500 warships divded into 8 fleets that mostly do police work, anti-piracy, and patrols when not in war. However, if the time comes, the fleets are joined by a plethora of non-combantants, including factory ships to produce fuel, hospital ships, troop ships, oilers (ammo resuppliers), repair plates, etc...

The only atmospheric capitol ship I use is Kyanges ES cruiser. Which reminds me, Kyanges, I need another 100 or so.

@Ma-tek: Excellent advice, I'm sure I will be looking back at this often. As for the distance part that was discussed a little more, my large ships goals are to square off at distance with other capitals while other ships in my fleet have other jobs like my Narwal frigate which is supposed to go in close range and try to divide the enemy formations.

I obviously need to come up with an inertial dampner. I will probably fill the ships with water too since my species is aquatic.

@[NS]Kreynoria: You are abolutly right. I didn't put much thought into that, especially using so many rail guns. My missile destroyer carries sort of its own missile factories to extend the time between replenishing. I will look into support craft. Though to be honest I'm not sure if I should begin listing all the support ships and such in the fleet list.

My friend has AI missiles that launch out at FTL and hunt down enemy ships or something. Like the Cardassian Dreadnaught missiles from star trek.

@No endorse: Ya I had thought about the speed thing while making my fleet. The speeds originally came from the homeworld stats. I realize in a vacuum this is pretty much irrellivant, but I decided to leave them in as some sort of power or thrust comparison.

With the turbolasers, again those were just from the armament from the Mon Calamari cruisers. I haven't spent very much time on my heavy cruiser or battlecruiser, they are new additions. The ion cannons are the only thing I changed.

@Einhauser: Your ships look really impressive. I wanted to move more towards smaller ships that work in formations and more of a swarm than large super powerful ships. Just my preference.

Thanks guys your advice has been great so far, that's why I did this. This is much better than having this come up during an rp ;)

...The only atmospheric capitol ship I use is Kyanges ES cruiser. Which reminds me, Kyanges, I need another 100 or so.

Ein, check your TGs.


@Tidan: You're welcome. Aquatic, eh? Interesting...

[OOC: Most welcome. : )]

I wanted to move more towards smaller ships that work in formations and more of a swarm than large super powerful ships. Just my preference.

Yes, I half expected that answer.

...which is why I have designed ships for just an occurrence. If you are looking for fast, heavily armed, and maneuverable, click on the link in my sig that leads to the Mercury class Strike Cruiser.

You may also like the Firebat class Battlecruiser. It was my first design, and has sold extremely well. It is a bit on the large scale of your requirements (960 meters, I believe), but it packs a wallop.

check your TGs.

Replied.

I'd suggest breaking down each fleet into further organizational units like squadrons or battlegroups. For large battles, this can be especially handy for fleet coordination and movement synchronization.

@Einhauser: I like your ships but I would like to produce my own ships, at least for now. I like your void shield, I'd love to use that on my ships. Can I buy its plans from you?

@Vernii: Ya I've got some plans like that.

Tidan, I may not be able to expand on the great advice the others have given you. I can only describe what I do and know.

Don't forget civilian ships. Even cops need ships to go after crooks in, for example. The military can't handle everything. An ideal police ship would be sleek and fast. It should be able to outrun anything that can outfight it.

Also, don't forget the frieghters. They may play a small role, but it is an important role. Supplies must have a way of getting around inside the territory you control. For cargo transports, artificial gravity isn't all that important.

And you will also need construction ships, boarder patrol ships, ship yards, and other stations.

Oh, and don't forget little things like possibly adding civilian cruise liners or some other detail. Little details like that help.


Let me know if you have any questions.

I like your void shield, can I buy its plans from you?

Certainly. It is only used on older model Einhauserian ships since the new Phased Shields have come out, so you can get them at a discount price. Remember, however, that the shield will not be able to stop energy weapons, and it will cost extra for the device that pulls it flush against the hull.

Considering all that, I believe I can let the system plans go for $7,163,849,037.

@SeaQuest: Very good advice, none of which I thought of before. Though this is just my military fleet, so I'm not too worried about civilian and police right now. I'll make sure I come up with that stuff though.

@Einhauser: $7,163,849,037, that is for the plans, with the device that pulls the shield to the hull, right? If so it's a deal.

I'm just looking for kinetic shields right now. I have an idea for having the hull deal with energy that I kind of like, it may not turn out to be very advance or effective, but I want to play with the idea and I think it fits my species fairly well.

You cloaking device gave me an idea to build a class of ship just for my intelligence agency. I am going to have them be pretty powerful and independent in my country, kind of like the tal'shiar or the obsidion order. So having their own ships wouldn't be too much of a stretch.

I've added some ships to the fleet to try to fill in the gaps you guys have pointed out. The first post has been updated.