Sterbelicht - One Sacrifice At A Time Against The Galaxy (40K)

What should your focus for the rest of the Quest be?

  • Mercy (Diplomacy and Expansion)

    Votes: 221 74.7%

  • Ruthlessness (Kick the Duchy in the Balls)

    Votes: 68 23.0%

  • Thule (Yeeni Handholding and Piscarian Cuddling)

    Votes: 117 39.5%
  • Total voters
    296
Voting is open
Reader mode
Godwinson said:
Wait, I thought we were supposed to get a bonus DP from hitting Void Industry 7. It's why we included it last vote.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Apparently we hit the point of DR but weren't informed of it because we didn't know that we reached that point. Ah well. There's still more to get, but it'll be less plentiful from here on out outside of Trying Things And Failing.

At least we unlocked Light Cruisers, and our local monitor forces are now more than up to the task of repulsing all but a full out fleet action.
 
Last edited:
I'm going to actually change my plan to add light lances in spite of the cost, being able to engage from long range will definitely increase the survivability and chances of escape for the scout ship.
 
10moorem II said:
I'm going to actually change my plan to add light lances in spite of the cost, being able to engage from long range will definitely increase the survivability and chances of escape for the scout ship.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Again, "Engage" is already a non-starter. The Scout-Ship should never intentionally engage a target except as an absolute final resort--and if it should, the focus should be on punching through and past that blockade.

If we could freely spend as many DP as we wanted as long as we accepted the normal cost, then sure, maybe. But we were explicitly told that our Scouts should be as inexpensive as we can muster without compromising on their main role, which requires us to minimize our DP expense on them.
 
So, yeah, going for Carrier Doctrine fucked us. We can't even make our shitacular destroyer main line any more. Every ship has to be a Carrier.
 
I am surprised at having Lances, the long range sniper weapons, increase in cost compared to missiles or macro cannons
 
Godwinson said:
So, yeah, going for Carrier Doctrine fucked us. We can't even make our shitacular destroyer main line any more. Every ship has to be a Carrier.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

We got massively discounted shields, acceleration, and long-range endurance stuff at the cost of Lance based weapons. That's hardly "Fucked us". We effectively got +2 DP out of every design that we make just by coming to the table. At the cost of needing to pay a premium for Lance weapons--not even a "You can't ever make them", just a premium. The Aries effectively just pays 1 DP for 2 DP worth of benefits there, it still comes out ahead.

Chill, I've got an angle.
 
Last edited:
Alectai said:
Again, "Engage" is already a non-starter. The Scout-Ship should never intentionally engage a target except as an absolute final resort--and if it should, the focus should be on punching through and past that blockade.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Yeah, I'm aware. But if we're ever forced into that situation then the light lances would still be helpful, especially with the increased manoeuvrability.
 
10moorem II said:
Yeah, I'm aware. But if we're ever forced into that situation then the light lances would still be helpful, especially with the increased manoeuvrability.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

The cost layout for hedging on that edge case is Enormous though.

There's a point when you need to cover every base. "I need to punch through a heavily armored target that I nonetheless cannot outmaneuver on a tight budget while having capped all mobility stats" is not something we can hedge for when a design on a budget is in play.
 
Alectai said:
We got massively discounted shields, acceleration, and long-range endurance stuff at the cost of Lance based weapons. That's hardly "Fucked us".

Chill, I've got an angle.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Lance weapons, Autoloaders, Pure Lenses, and Teleportariums. In exchange for +1 DP to Shields and Acceleration, and endurance stuff that in your own words are going to be irrelevant for quite a while yet still.
 
Alectai said:
The cost layout for hedging on that edge case is Enormous though.

There's a point when you need to cover every base. "I need to punch through a heavily armored target that I nonetheless cannot outmaneuver on a tight budget while having capped all mobility stats" is not something we can hedge for when a design on a budget is in play.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
*Shrugs*

Fair enough, I'll make another design in addition to the Hermes one.

Speaking of which we've all been very focused on the Scout. Don't we have two more ships to design? Are we on a budget for those too?
 
Godwinson said:
Lance weapons, Autoloaders, Pure Lenses, and Teleportariums. In exchange for +1 DP to Shields and Acceleration, and endurance stuff that in your own words are going to be irrelevant for quite a while yet still.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Pure Lenses don't matter for a brawler, Teleportariums require elite forces to take full advantage of. Autoloaders admittedly is a bit of an oof, but it's not to the point where it ruins everything forever.

In exchange, we get a free DP in Acceleration and Shields. Things that we'll want to improve when possible anyway, since they're both important parts of surviving while being an underdog. At worst, we have to cash in those savings to compensate for our Doctrine tax. But that's far from an apocalypse scenario. The only thing that's really outright denied by this is a full out Sniper Ship paradigm, which yeah, fair enough--the Sagittarius Type-2 is probably going to need to be revised as a torpedo frigate since we can't convert it to a full lance-boat with the new doctrine--but this is far from an apocalypse scenario like you're claiming.

We Also unlocked a unique 3 DP option for our Cruiserweights from this doctrine as well--Handpicked Pilots was unlocked from the Doctrine, not from unlocking Light Cruisers. We're going to have very scary carriers for our polity size.

10moorem II said:
*Shrugs*

Fair enough, I'll make another design in addition to the Hermes one.

Speaking of which we've all been very focused on the Scout. Don't we have two more ships to design? Are we on a budget for those too?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

That's on the way, I'm going to knuckle down working on that right now.
 
Last edited:
[] [Scout] WindChaser
-[] Length - 1.200 (+2DP)
-[] Width - 200 (+2DP)
-[] Acceleration - 8 Gravities (-1DP)
-[] Armor - Single Hull
-[] Shields - Two Emitters (+1DP)
-[] Weapons - 2x60m Torpedos and Light Missiles
-[] Equipment - Superior Gravimetric Engine Calculations, Enhanced Supply Generation and Emergency Maneuver Engines (-3DP)

Another provisional Scout Design.
 
10moorem II said:
[] [Scout] WindChaser
-[] Length - 1.200 (+2DP)
-[] Width - 200 (+2DP)
-[] Acceleration - 8 Gravities (-1DP)
-[] Armor - Single Hull
-[] Shields - Two Emitters (+1DP)
-[] Weapons - 2x60m Torpedos and Light Missiles
-[] Equipment - Superior Gravimetric Engine Calculations, Enhanced Supply Generation and Emergency Maneuver Engines (-3DP)

Another provisional Scout Design.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
1 DP scout, huh. If we don't produce them in double batches I'm gonna be mad XD.

BigBadBob7070 said:
Not only that, but advanced equipment as well. Now even autoloaders and pure lenses costs more
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
and our hangar upgrades cost less, your point?
 
*name* said:
just asking cause i dont know, but can hangers be used to extend the range we can scout things out?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Alectai said:
I don't know, can they @HeroCooky ?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Your scouting range is measured in systems. Hangars do not come equipped with warp engine and gellar field equipped craft.
Godwinson said:
Wait, I thought we were supposed to get a bonus DP from hitting Void Industry 7. It's why we included it last vote.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
You did, you went from 5 to 6.
Legion0047 said:
I am surprised at having Lances, the long range sniper weapons, increase in cost compared to missiles or macro cannons
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The Exploration/Expansion Doctrine Attachment made high-tech equipment (Lances/Auto-Loaders) more expensive. I told such when asked.
Godwinson said:
So, yeah, going for Carrier Doctrine fucked us.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
A Light Cruiser with 2 Bomber Hangars is capable of nuking 2 Destroyers per flight mission-cycle provided they don't have shields. You have pilots on par with Space Marines if you take all the boosting options. It didn't "Fuck Us," it made you better at X at the cost of Y. Leaving plenty of weapon choices in the meanwhile.
Woltaire said:
@HeroCooky can we change our Doctrine if we spend a ap on it?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Like I said, you absolutely can. You can even use a new Doctrine from the get-go.

Also, OLD DESIGNS ARE NOT IMPACTED BY DOCTRINE CHANGES. Just as a FYI.
10moorem II said:
Are we on a budget for those too?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
No. Not even for the Light Cruiser once you try to make one.
Alectai said:
Teleportariums require elite forces to take full advantage of.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
They come with those attached. You aren't sending green recruits over, but dedicated boarding specialists.
 
Last edited:
HeroCooky said:
Medium Hangars - [Mixed/Fighter/Bomber/Boarding] - Capable of holding either 2 squadrons (24) of fighters and 1 squadron (12) of bombers, four squadrons (48) of fighters, 2 squadrons (24) of bombers and 1 squadron of figthers (12), or 3 squadrons (36) of boarding craft these hangars allow a variety of missions to be carried out. However, the mission expectancy of the pilots is usually in the lower double digits if not extensively supported. Can only be installed as a battery.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Shouldn't this be discounted so it would only cost 2 DP? We did say we were going to specialize in carriers.
 
Alectai said:
I'm hip deep in the Aries Type-II, does this mean that I can treat it like it's not benefiting from our new Doctrine? And the Sagitarrius Type-II when I get to it?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Old Designs can still be built, they just don't have the benefits/disadvantages of a Doctrine attached to them.
BigBadBob7070 said:
Shouldn't this be discounted so it would only cost 2 DP? We did say we were going to specialize in carriers.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Missed that, thanks for pointing that out.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Voting is open
Back
Top