Blood, Sweat, and Tears (WH40k Design Bureau)
- Thread starter DaLintyGuy
- Start date
- Sci-Fi
If you do not go all in on the dockyard spend only 120M on it and 20M more on the cruiser that way it can be completed next turn even without the dockyard complete as my plan makes use of the fact that we can spend 20M more one a single ship once the dockyard is complete to finish the cruiser next turn.
looking at our existing squadrons the heralds in the 4th have cargo bays so we can decide if we want to send them there during the next vote.
Wait a second, our lances cost 4M now? They used to cost 3. @DaLintyGuy, did you raise the cost for the increased range and just forget to mention it in the design results post?
Also:
Also:
I don't like how this plan cuts our support for Yttreum down to a few scraps. Honestly, I'd much rather put off the defense platform until next turn. And as for the defense platform, I think including both the Bastion housing and the exoskeleton support bays is overkill, and a repair deck would be far more useful.
F0lkL0re
Officially not an Inquisitor
- Location
- Shetland
The defence platform is to reinforce one of the liberated systems so we don't have to patrol it all the time, it won't stop a determined attack but it will discourage the enemy from just casually taking those systems while our backs are turned.
Yeah, obviously that's what it's for, and I do want it, I just don't think it's absolutely critical this turn, since the Chaos forces are going to be pretty preoccupied for at least a turn or two. Yttreum is probably a lot more time-sensitive; they've got fighting going on right now.
Also, it doesn't actually let us skip patrolling it; it can't do anything to combat piracy, only assaults on the planet itself.
[X] Plan: Yttreum Support
- [X] 120M on Drydock
- [X] Spend 19M, 3A on Auxiliary Carrier (cannons first, then shields)
-- [X] Auxiliary Carrier (Total cost: 69M)
-- [X] Bulk Hauler (0M)
-- [X] Merchant Bridge (4M)
-- [X] T-100 Auspex (8M)
-- [X] Merchant Warp Drive (0M)
-- [X] Expansive Life Support (0M)
-- [X] Barracks Housing (0M)
-- [X] Standard Macrocannons MkII (12M, 3A)
-- [X] Cargo Bay Hangar 1 (broadside) (6M)
-- [X] Cargo Bay Hangar 2 (broadside) (6M)
-- [X] Troop Deck (6M)
-- [X] Bubble-type Rapid Shield (18M)
-- [X] Scaffold Armor (6M)
-- [X] Merchant Thrusters (3M)
- [X] Incomplete Spatha hull with better engines for Yttreum (17M)
-- [X] Spatha-class hull, militarized engines, merchant sensors, warp, essential life support, barracks
- [X] Give the Khornate Armed Merchant Hull to Yttreum 7M to add parts
- [X] Send Yttreum the salvaged IN lance
- [X] Send Yttreum the design for scaffold armor
- [X] Build Watchtower-class Defense Platform in Uniary (Total cost: 39M, 2A)
-- [X] Trench-Class Small Defense Platform (3M)
-- [X] Groupsight Combat Bridge (4M)
-- [X] Distributed Array Auspex (4M)
-- [X] Essential Life Support (2M)
-- [X] Bastion Housing (3M)
-- [X] Farstrike Lance 1 (4M, 1A)
-- [X] Farstrike Lance 2 (4M, 1A)
-- [X] Cove-pattern Hangar (4M)
-- [X] Bubble-type Rapid Shield (6M)
-- [X] Scaffold Armor (2M)
-- [X] Repair Deck (2M)
-- [X] Savior S-1s (1M)
- [X] Repairs, etc. (98M)
- [X] Add heavy artillery and medium walkers to 1st Calavar Armored Army (free, omake bonus)
Last edited:
On the balance pass I bumped them up to account for the new machinery.
What I SHOULD have done from the start is make the default cost of something more like the square of its effectiveness but c'est le vie. This is more for the story than difficulty.
So we'd be spending 4M for the mark 1 macrocannons, and 9M for the mark 2? Ouch. I hope we'd be getting tons more industry in that case. OTOH, the prices we have been seeing aren't that far off from (effectiveness^2)/2, so I guess you could use that as a rule of thumb going forward.
By the way, are you going to update the naval intelligence and diplomacy posts, or not until the strategic phase?
I'll see what I can do.
- Location
- Queensland, Australia
I take it that this is where upgrading, rather than just developing a new systems shines? Because you get a better result compared to the old system, but you don't get the price tag that would be attached if you developed a new system with the same capabilities as the upgrade. Of course, it does come at the cost of being unable to add fancy new capabilities that weren't expected to be installed in the previous model but there's always a cost somewhere.
To get the performance it would still be roughly the same thing but I have to confess that I am not positive I know what your post was trying to communicate.
[X] Plan: Yttreum Support
@DaLintyGuy is the Khornate hull even safe to give to Yttreum given its previous owners being Chaos cultists?
Has our AdMech contingent certified the purity?
Edit: also @Vanigo why torpedo tubes instead of guns for the bulk hauler? If we do that it'll have nothing to protect itself with against a raider that slip past our fleet for example.
Has our AdMech contingent certified the purity?
Edit: also @Vanigo why torpedo tubes instead of guns for the bulk hauler? If we do that it'll have nothing to protect itself with against a raider that slip past our fleet for example.
Last edited:
That's what escorts are for. This hull is never going to be one we want in slugging matches, so we want a long-range weapon on it. That does mean that if something gets in close it'll need the rest of the fleet to rescue it, but we're not about to send it anywhere without a fleet in support, so I don't really see a problem there. Mark 1 macrocannons, meanwhile, are short ranged and not very good against serious warships.
It's safe. Enough.
- Location
- Queensland, Australia
I was basically asking if upgrading a component/design was better than designing a new one because if you upgraded something, then it's cost didn't increase to the square of it's new capabilities but rather more than before but not that much more. On the other hand, there are restrictions to how much you can 'push' a design via upgrading it before it's easier to develop a new design, and just upgrade it to be cheaper with the same capabilities.
Sir_Travelsalot
Never wakes up tired.
- Location
- At Home
As awesome as that sounds, it would probably also be ruinously expensive, even without taking into account that torpedoes aren't very accurate weapons in this universe.
The difference would not be very pronounced in that case though I suppose it would be there.
While more expensive due to needing stand off sensors and having to batter down shields because it's a laser weapon, bomb pumped torpedoes are more accurate in the sense they don't need to maneuver to hit the target or pass through most PD screens.
I mean we already have high-yield fusion warheads, and i don't really see a way to use bomb-pumped lasers as an actual ship-board weapon, so the way i see it, a bomb-pumped "lance" torpedo would basically be a less technologically intense way of delivering lances to the battlefield, albeit one with ammunition concerns, since you don't have to worry as much about making the lance actually reach; you'd only have to worry about maximizing yield.
Another thing that came to my attention is that the IN intel report stated that calvan ships have rather anemic PD. Does that mean we only have minimal turrets, or basically none at all? Have we considered getting something like Type-3 Shells for the Macrocannons to improve anti-ordnance performance?
Another thing that came to my attention is that the IN intel report stated that calvan ships have rather anemic PD. Does that mean we only have minimal turrets, or basically none at all? Have we considered getting something like Type-3 Shells for the Macrocannons to improve anti-ordnance performance?