Traveller, The Rise of Empire: A Naval Design, Procurement and Command Quest
- Thread starter 4WheelSword
- Start date
- Original Art Quest Sci-Fi
When I read it, it occured to me, these systems are likely not inhabited. If that was the case DSSs would've picked some radio chatter as with Xyri and S'taxe. There might be small outposts there, but not full colonies.
Nah. It's too small to provide meaningful protection. It would be problematic for it to engage one small in-system defender.
Coyote Niff
the most transbian obligate scavenger on the 'net!
- Location
- Misery!
- Pronouns
- She/Her
Every torp has a variable warhead. 2.5 tons of missile with a nuke on the tip is a good deterrent for any larger vessel. Or would you prefer we send every fleet out with a Monitor?
- Location
- Here, there, everywhere.
Actually yes, we can fire heavy particle cannons as long as our reactors are still online, torps are finite and in too small of number can be swatted down by point defense easily.
[×] OPLAN: STEINER SCOUTEvery torp has a variable warhead. 2.5 tons of missile with a nuke on the tip is a good deterrent for any larger vessel. Or would you prefer we send every fleet out with a Monitor?
How much space do marines take? May be better off going double-barrel.
Or just ginormous missile swarms. But ultimately I don't know that escorted scouts work. Ships jump in too far apart for it to do much good. Perhaps a Heavy Scout concept, merge the escort and the survey ship together into a larger hull?
Or at least a shitload of point defence. Assuming PD actually works. I have absolutely no idea how much PD it takes to stop how many missiles or torpedoes.
Wasn't the multimission ship... tactically nonsurvivable?
Last edited:
It's not, because point-defense exists. Just 850 tonnes leaves us with 510 tonnes without fuel. You want to fit in a lot of stuff in there and so the ship wouldn't be competetive with anything but the smallest threats. Would it stand up to the situation Heimdall found itself in? I don't imagine so.
Monitors? No, these are meant to be semi-stationary. But, if we do aim to introduce self-sufficient long-range ships to the fleet we ought to it right. 850 tonnes is too small. Even 3K tonnes is too small, plus the current design is going to be obsolete soon. Better build something bigger from the start.Or would you prefer we send every fleet out with a Monitor?
If it's a torpedo bay rather than barbette that would be three missiles. Optional multiwarhead too. Though for numbers missiles would be better.
But it's all castles in the sky because only the qm knows how effective point defence actually is versus how many missiles.
And nothing would survive what happened to Heimdall. You really would need STEINER SCOUT to walk off jumping in right under the guns of a hostile capital warship.
Any jump capable ship is at a disadvantage vs an in-system monitor and a jump 4 especially is going to be hard pressed against a ship almost half its size. Shitloads of PD, countermeasures, and engines is probably the most effective tack IMO. Hope to stay alive long enough to run out the range and stern-chase them until the jumpdrive recharges.
Last edited:
- Location
- Here, there, everywhere.
Yeah 5k is the minimum size imo, and that's getting into All-or-Nothing Heavy Cruiser doctrine territory. Something in the 4-5k area could act as a flotilla leader role but would still be less efficient than a full on cruiser and would stretch our pilots thinner for less gain.
0t4n1z3r019
Member of the HAFPTG
- Location
- Philippines
[X] OPLAN: Prepare to Drink Vacuum
Rat King
Izutsumi-pilled
If we make 5k our minimum size we're going to be severely behind the ball on building since that eats up a good chunk of our yard space every time we want to build something. We would never be able to build any class in parallel unless we can find yard space in the cushions somewhere. And even in S'Taxu, we seem to be able to get maybe 2k worth of space at best.
It also makes repairs a problem if we're in the middle of a construction project and one of the existing large classes needs repairs.
I think 3-4k is the best bet for flexibility and economics, given our limitations.
If we had 10k of dedicated yard space, I'd say maybe 5k would work as a good general tonnage, but as it is we're maxed at 8k in Home and that is likely to be our limitation for the foreseeable future - we need to build with that in mind, not as we would like. I already think the 6k monitor is a bit of a waste of yard space from an economical standpoint since building just one, as we can see, makes squeezing in other projects difficult.
Given our limitations, I think we need to look for a 3k-4k "cruiser" or other multi-role vessel, preferably with relatively modular weapons layout for ease of upgrade or modification, with drop-tanks, backed up by a fleet or logistics tender to extend range as needed.
It also makes repairs a problem if we're in the middle of a construction project and one of the existing large classes needs repairs.
I think 3-4k is the best bet for flexibility and economics, given our limitations.
If we had 10k of dedicated yard space, I'd say maybe 5k would work as a good general tonnage, but as it is we're maxed at 8k in Home and that is likely to be our limitation for the foreseeable future - we need to build with that in mind, not as we would like. I already think the 6k monitor is a bit of a waste of yard space from an economical standpoint since building just one, as we can see, makes squeezing in other projects difficult.
Given our limitations, I think we need to look for a 3k-4k "cruiser" or other multi-role vessel, preferably with relatively modular weapons layout for ease of upgrade or modification, with drop-tanks, backed up by a fleet or logistics tender to extend range as needed.
Last edited:
4WheelSword
The original N-body Problem
- Pronouns
- It/She/They
Don't read too much into things I fail to mention.
Sincere: what do you mean by this?
4WheelSword
The original N-body Problem
- Pronouns
- It/She/They
It's weighted - if you have more PD guns than missiles, it's better, if you have less PD guns than missiles, it's worse. Torpedoes do more damage on hit, but less will get through because of their small numbers, while missiles are... well, sandpaper.
Coyote Niff
the most transbian obligate scavenger on the 'net!
- Location
- Misery!
- Pronouns
- She/Her
My question as well, as it was also your critique of the Lancer-class using drop tanks and torps. If anything, more fuel-efficient reactors and fuel capabilities means that we could simply leave the drop tanks off the B-model or C-model Lancer.
Side note: I am still fully behind building the Lancer as we have the formal build and stats drawn up. The Zhuge is just a stand-in designed for this phase of exploration, using the hulls and prototypes we already have.
Last edited:
Huh. Ta.
I suppose warheads are similar - MIRV to saturate PD, nuclear to batter enemy crew to death through their armour with radiation?
Can you fire a flurry of multiwarhead missiles to saturate PD and follow it up with torpedoes or would that be multiple attacks?
4K indeed has the advantage that it can be built in-parallel with the second flotilla support ship. If we want it to be capable of 4 jumps and don't expect it to be engaged in heavy combat it's the smallest viable size.
Remember, there are station segments that need to be built. It's probable more would be needed soon. If not, then there's always the option for building up more civilian converyors for our traders or more cruisers for patrol duties.
It's because it uses drop tanks. It works at the moment because our empire is small, but afterwards it's going to become a hassle. We want our workhorses to be able to operate without needing infrastructure to reattach their tanks.
4WheelSword
The original N-body Problem
- Pronouns
- It/She/They
I...
Hmm. I need to check that. I *think* they count as seperate shots but i'll double check.
How else do you forsee getting that range capability?
Rat King
Izutsumi-pilled
I don't think this follows, since I don't think the asteroid ships - which are the largest we've encountered - are that much bigger (and aren't jump capable, which means they can definitely cram more weapons in, but obviously that's the trade-off).
Maybe if we were a larger polity, covering a larger area, and definitely facing people with larger ships I'd agree - but we're not. We're exploring and facing other polities that are our size or smaller so far. The idea that we have to build larger seems like jumping to a conclusion that isn't necessarily borne out by what we're actually running into so far. Nor does it seem to be something we can necessarily overcome anytime in the near future because based on this logic, we should be building 10k ton ships and nothing else because we gotta cram as much fighting capability and range into them as possible.
But again, that doesn't match our economic reality - we only have 8k and we have to use that for everything we're building. So we have to balance our designs around what we have available, not what we wish we had.
Indeed. It's the exact reason I'm opposing long-range escorts and multi-roles, we're too small to support them. If you guys insist on them, then these designs should be made with longevity in mind.
I was hoping fuel ballons would do the trick, but alas the idea was popped.
Perhaps ballons with some sort of collapsible rigid framework would work? If not, just the classic internal tanks plus more logistic ships.
Rat King
Izutsumi-pilled
Multi-roles are absolutely the best for longevity since the basic class design can be further modified to fit niches, as needed. Or even retrofitted, if needed. They cover a lot of different tasks on a single hull - perhaps not as effectively as a dedicated vessel, but considering our building and crew limitations that's probably for the best. Building a multitude of specialized craft eats up a lot of yard space to cover the same roles and probably requires more crew as well.
Like, our interstellar cruisers, which are apparently the biggest thing on the block besides the pair of asteroid vessels, were enough to severely tip the balance of power in S'taxu. Why isn't a vessel with 3-4x the tonnage suitable for picking up the "cruiser" role and running with it?
Last edited:
To be fair. For a "gatecrasher" heavy scout going into potentially hostile systems, droptanks aren't too bad. A ship like that is only deployed occasionally.
As I understand it they let you carry the payload of a ship substantially heavier. You're saving on yard mass in exchange for logistical nuisance.
I don't think you have to detach droptanks if you're willing to spend fuel to bring it along, so if you're with a tender and topping up now and then the difference between 850t J2/2 and 1150t J4 is that the latter needs an extra 10t of fuel per jump and 300t more yard space and the former only has 3 jumps of range if it brings the tanks with it. And presumably if you get shot up mid transit the droptanks would be vulnerable.
As I understand it they let you carry the payload of a ship substantially heavier. You're saving on yard mass in exchange for logistical nuisance.
I don't think you have to detach droptanks if you're willing to spend fuel to bring it along, so if you're with a tender and topping up now and then the difference between 850t J2/2 and 1150t J4 is that the latter needs an extra 10t of fuel per jump and 300t more yard space and the former only has 3 jumps of range if it brings the tanks with it. And presumably if you get shot up mid transit the droptanks would be vulnerable.
Last edited:
Yes. But for multi-roles I'd want something that is more reliable and easier to handle on the day-to-day basis.
Of course, but that's something for the future. We won't do with just one or two of these ships, we'd want them to be the workhorses of our empire. For now, we focus on getting proper defense for Home, exploration and expanding our infrastructure to nearby systems.
Rat King
Izutsumi-pilled
Why do you think a 3,000 ton ship, which has three times the tonnage and twice the range of our current "Interstellar Cruiser" class (the most numerous vessel in service) isn't sufficient to be a workhorse and provide both defensive and offensive capabilities? It sounds like you want us to have more of them, in which case the alternative would be for less tonnage - a 2,000 or 2,500 ton cruiser.
Also, you've changed from "multi-roles aren't good for longevity" to "actually they are good for longevity, but that's why we shouldn't build them right now".
Last edited:
Or if your mission is short ranged.
According to Google: traveler droptanks have to be rigid because there's only a short time for them to pump their fuel and flexible tanks wouldn't take the strain, and also they have to blasted free of the forming jump field on explosive bolts so there's something like a 40% chance they get destroyed when you detach them. Not sure if that's a different ruleset though.
Also apparently they were a very expensive and deliberately nerfed piece of legacy equipment that was only ever used on one official ship carried over from the first edition.
According to Google: traveler droptanks have to be rigid because there's only a short time for them to pump their fuel and flexible tanks wouldn't take the strain, and also they have to blasted free of the forming jump field on explosive bolts so there's something like a 40% chance they get destroyed when you detach them. Not sure if that's a different ruleset though.
Also apparently they were a very expensive and deliberately nerfed piece of legacy equipment that was only ever used on one official ship carried over from the first edition.