Hard Light Productions Forums
General FreeSpace => FreeSpace Discussion => Topic started by: CT27 on June 17, 2024, 07:26:05 pm
-
My last thread in the general area of "how should the GTVA military rebuild after Capella?" dealt with frigate-sized ships. This time I'd like to ask about cruisers.
What should the GTVA fleet do in regard to cruisers after Capella?
Ideally, I'd say two things:
-Start up Aeolus production again to have a good escort cruiser (I say ideally because I know the Aeolus was expensive)
-Look at a successor to the Leviathan (this would be a cruiser slightly more geared towards offensive missions and anti-cap duty...although I don't know if it would need to be as powerful as the Lilith in this area)
-
Seconding Aeolus production, since high cost is now less of a factor - post-Capella GTVA should be pouring money into military R&D and manufacturing out of sheer existential panic.
I like the idea of increased subspace maneuverability leading to more Ravana/Lilith-like tactics (a la Serkr Team from BP). The old Hyperion (which has a new model in Scroll! ;7) is good for this, since it looks like it's basically a couple massive beam cannons strapped to a subspace drive. The Aeolus could take on the anti-fighter flyswatter role, or a different spaceframe could pick up the slack in that department.
Random thoughts:
In general, Post-FS1 GTVA developed ships to combat the threat Shivans posed in FS1 (the Colossus in particular is billed as a Lucifer-killer). Post-FS2 GTVA should make the same mistake (as we silly organics do) and design its fleet doctrine to counter the Sathanas. This means a lot of focus on defanging heavy beam turrets and subsystems, and possibly even larger-scale beam platforms like the Mjolnir built for quickly locking down an area.
Beam tech evolves significantly. FS2 beam tech is based solely on what little analysis we could do of the Lucifer's beams, unless you want to retcon the rest of FS1 Shivans having them as well. In FS2 we got a much better look at Shivan beam cannons, including the Sath's which outclass the Lucifer's beams by a lot.
-
post-Capella GTVA should be pouring money into military R&D and manufacturing out of sheer existential panic !!!
Using GTSG Mjolnir and building a cruiser around it but I think a Corvette makes more sense.
with its reactor core, you could use it as an auxiliary power when not in use to boost either engine, weapons, sensor, navi, well the sub-systems are built to handle the extra juice.
-
I see a bit of a different evolution of the Mjolnir idea.
I have a few questions about Mjolnirs: since Mjolnirs can operate independently, shouldn't a ship that's just a cheap spaceframe with Mjolnirs strapped to it be devastating on the battlefield? Why can the Mjolnir, a sub-cruiser-size cannon, outclass destroyers in firepower? Why did the Colossus's heatsinks struggle so much, when Mjolnirs can output similar firepower with seemingly no such issues?
My headcanon/skul-gun: Mjolnirs are disposable, one-time-use beam platforms not meant for extended engagements. This is also why they're so lightly armored. They don't have a power generator that can sustain beam fire indefinitely - they have a battery that can support maybe a couple dozen shots. By the time it's done firing, the battery is empty, the heatsinks are fried, the beam cannon's innards are starting to melt, and the Mjolnir is a useless hunk of metal, but hopefully it's done its job. You wouldn't want this on a warship, but keep several of these in reserve to blockade a node on demand (also works well if your setting includes BP/BtA-style non-Newtonian node drift).
This is good only in situations where the dire need to lock down a node outweighs the prohibitive cost of disposable beam cannons. This is the calculus in "The King's Gambit". Normally, a fleet can break a blockade but will sustain heavy losses - usually not worth it. The NTF tries anyway since their goal is the Knossos portal. The GTVA counters with Mjolnirs, which works, taking down pretty much the entire NTF fleet, for the cost of a few Mjolnirs. (fine with Bosch: the fleet was only ever a meatshield for the Iceni anyway).
The post-Capella evolution of this idea is basically a remote subspace strike, but with beamz. Strap a cheap subspace drive to the Mjolnir "ships", jump them in, have them get off a few devastating beam shots before they explode. Maybe make it so fighters have to paint the target with a TAG strike (good gameplay opportunities here for both attackers and defenders).
Better beam tech might mean this idea converges with Lilith/Ravana tactics - no need for disposable beam cannons if you can actually make one that lasts, after all. Also consider asymmetric warfare: These Mjolnir ships, if they existed, would be a prime theft target for pirates, rebels and other malcontents.
-
Ideally, I'd say two things:
-Start up Aeolus production again to have a good escort cruiser (I say ideally because I know the Aeolus was expensive)
-Look at a successor to the Leviathan (this would be a cruiser slightly more geared towards offensive missions and anti-cap duty...although I don't know if it would need to be as powerful as the Lilith in this area)
Post-Capella tricky question if I look at it from a universe perspective they would ramp up production for the Aeolus, Fenris?, and Leviathan but I think the ships are out of production anyway.
I think you can Spin the Canon that would support GTVA was already working on something else that was more cost-effective a good excuse for a new cruiser or GTVA was already retooling the cruiser production lines for the new cruisers (Terran, Vasudan, and GTVA Version) and a Low rate initial production (lrip) Prototypes.
All of this was already in the making when the NTF rebellion happened and the second Shivan incursion.
Because enough mothballed cruisers in reserve.
For the cruiser itself why not a GTVA cruiser inspired by the Anubis fighter and Aten, Aeolus cruiser with a better bite
for the GTVA Fleets and System Fleets to be mass-producible in any system and can carry the Meson Bomb, Mjolnir, or cargo for a better survival chance.
This is GalEmp's GVC Mekhet I think fits the bill of how it could look, but none of the mentioned blub represents the actual intended purpose!
(https://i.imgur.com/roP3Whp.jpeg)
-
I see a bit of a different evolution of the Mjolnir idea.
I have a few questions about Mjolnirs: since Mjolnirs can operate independently, shouldn't a ship that's just a cheap spaceframe with Mjolnirs strapped to it be devastating on the battlefield? Why can the Mjolnir, a sub-cruiser-size cannon, outclass destroyers in firepower? Why did the Colossus's heatsinks struggle so much, when Mjolnirs can output similar firepower with seemingly no such issues?
No restrictions you can cramp anything you need into the frame a possible answer
My headcanon/skul-gun: Mjolnirs are disposable, one-time-use beam platforms not meant for extended engagements. This is also why they're so lightly armored. They don't have a power generator that can sustain beam fire indefinitely - they have a battery that can support maybe a couple dozen shots. By the time it's done firing, the battery is empty, the heatsinks are fried, the beam cannon's innards are starting to melt, and the Mjolnir is a useless hunk of metal, but hopefully it's done its job. You wouldn't want this on a warship, but keep several of these in reserve to blockade a node on demand (also works well if your setting includes BP/BtA-style non-Newtonian node drift).
Valid point for it to be disposable or it would need a reload, fuel, or recharge without a reactor!
Better beam tech might mean this idea converges with Lilith/Ravana tactics - no need for disposable beam cannons if you can actually make one that lasts, after all. Also consider asymmetric warfare: These Mjolnir ships, if they existed, would be a prime theft target for pirates, rebels and other malcontents.
Using GTSG Mjolnir and building a cruiser around it.
with its reactor core, you could use it as an auxiliary power when not in use to boost either engine, weapons, sensor, navi, well the sub-systems are built to handle the extra juice.
That would be a lot of fun for mission design!
-
Cosidering that even at the start of FS2, the entry level weapons were good enough for policing action (E.g against 'pirate' freighters and occasional cruiser), I don't see the appeal of keeping anti-capital weapons on the Cruiser type at all, not when a wing of Tempest/hornet armed myrmidons can take out anything lighter armored than a Levi easily. If the type survives at all and is not just obsoleted immediately in favor of building more corvettes and fighters, I think the next cruisers should be fast anti-fighter platforms, dedicated to quick response.
-
The GTSXMC (galactic terran super experimental mega cruiser) Aeolus Mk4 has got everything you need.
#channelling my 1999 inner child.
-
The GTSXMC (galactic terran super experimental mega cruiser) Aeolus Mk4 has got everything you need.
#channelling my 1999 inner child.
This. And it has under 50 polygons, has 1000000 HP, and every turret is a BFRed :P
-
Re the Mjolnir, I have to admit I never really treated it as a "proper" ship given how much it deviates from the usuall firepower/size ratio. It probably shouldve been upscaled *2 at minimum to be more credible. The explination "it can fire 20 times before getting scrapped" is pretty good though.
For cruisers, I dont really see much potential for them after Capella. The reason is that you have a limited damage absorbtion potential on a small ship. The Aeolus is extremely good at demolishing fighters and bombers, but even then, if there are too many waves (or just other cruisers arrive) it'll perish quickly. A Deimos has (or atleast could have) the same or an even better AAA loadout while not suffering these backdraws. You could also just mount more armor on a cruiser for the same durability, but it'll likely much slower then. So in a way, the Deimos or a similar vehicle is the kind of cruiser you want - the rest is just a matter of size; but building things deliberately smaller makes them more difficult and expansive. Especially if you the other way and try to built a Terran/Vas Lilith with a big main beam and what else is required - there are relatively few Liliths in the Shivan armada either, so it is most likely an issue for them too.
-
Yeah, in the Capella era protecting most cruisers was much too difficult for any benefits they supposedly gave. The Aeolus could (mostly) hold its own, and the Leviathan had enough armor tank some hits and had good AAA coverage, but that was about it. Unless the GTVA can start up Aeolus production again, I don't think there's much of a practical future for cruisers.
-
If we're building ships to fight Sathanas threats, I've got one grim justification for cruisers in my head.
In a white room, just tabled stats, fleet vs fleet fight, if we assume a Sathanas has no delay from switching targets but can't switch a beam's target mid-shot, then it should a collosus in 40 seconds, or kill two destroyers every 10 seconds,or kill 4 of anything smaller every 10 seconds.
We can't really know how the costs and manufacturing capability break out, but if going just by a very crude estimate of volume then a destroyer is 'worth' around 25 corvettes, or 470-ish cruisers. It seems unlikely that it's a simple switch between "build 1 destroyer" and "build 500 cruisers", but dozens certainly seems plausible to me.
So, if you are planning for the possibility of having to fight a fully-fanged sathanas, cruisers start getting attractive because it can only kill them so fast, and when it does you lose a lot less than you would with a larger ship. It requires you to abandon the idea of your crews not being expendable, and there's a lot of other factors that muddy the waters, but I do think it's a plausible thread to pull on.
I do think there's also out-of-battle utility factors to consider. A cruiser can loiter, it can show presence and provide some measure of security. Yeah, fighters can do that some, but there's got to be a limit. The fighters have to go home after a few hours, the cruiser doesn't. And yeah, corvettes, but cruisers existing is easily justified by simply saying they can't afford as many corvettes as they'd like, and need cruisers to fill the gap. Sure, it'd be nice to just have bigger, better ships everywhere, but sometimes you just have to settle.
They can be needed for the fleet's overall operation, and still go up in smoke the minute a bomber wing or shivan cruiser notices them, that's not exactly a contradiction. At least, not the kind of contradiction that would stop a military for doing something.
-
For specifically countering Saths, I think the calculus turns out more in favor of bombers than anything else. Fast, agile bombers armed with heavy anti-subsystem bombs specifically tailored to Sath beams in particular and possibly Shivan beam tech in general. Bearbaiting was after all a resounding success by any measure: One bomber wing launched in desperation managed to completely defang the Shivans' biggest threat!
I like the idea of cruisers' disposability vs Shivans being factored into their construction. (Ties in well with my Mjolnir plans! ;)) But I also like the idea of cruisers just not being such absolute ass, the way they're depicted in FS2. BP's cruisers seem much more believable, being a serious threat to enemy fighters, and needing a coordinated effort to take down - contrast with the Fenris or maybe even the Aeolus in retail FS2, which could lose a fight to a single sufficiently determined Herc 2.
One thing that hasn't been mentioned is subspace maneuverability: small ships (fighters especially) are generally considered to have shorter cycle time on their jump drives (I don't know how canon this is, but it's definitely a factor in many campaigns - see all the times you have to guard a larger ship while its jump drives "recharge"). It's entirely up to campaign authors what to do with the worldbuilding here, but the "Lilith-Aeolus" can likely move around easier and reach its destination faster than the "Lilith-Deimos", which makes it better specifically at executing Lilith ambush tactics.
-
It would be useful if a group of AWACS could effectively jam Shivan targeting sensors. Just create a bunch of AWACS cruisers with enough anti-fighter coverage to protect themselves from swarm attacks by fighters, and have them run interference for the big-gun warships to engage the Sath from distance with their own beams.
-
The GTSXMC (galactic terran super experimental mega cruiser) Aeolus Mk4 has got everything you need.
#channelling my 1999 inner child.
This. And it has under 50 polygons, has 1000000 HP, and every turret is a BFRed :P
:welcomegreen:
Yes my guy. The Volition watch archives rejoice.
-
It would be useful if a group of AWACS could effectively jam Shivan targeting sensors. Just create a bunch of AWACS cruisers with enough anti-fighter coverage to protect themselves from swarm attacks by fighters, and have them run interference for the big-gun warships to engage the Sath from distance with their own beams.
I remember a single mission once where there was a GTVA ship that had a beam inhibitor device. It was able to disable all beams on the battlefield (IOW while it would disable Shivan beams, it would also mean allied ships couldn't fire beams either).
Could something like that be an effective strategy against Sathani? I.e., turn the device on, have a squad destroy the four primary beams on a Sathanas...then turn the device back off again?
-
post-Capella GTVA should be pouring money into military R&D and manufacturing out of sheer existential panic !!!
Using GTSG Mjolnir and building a cruiser around it but I think a Corvette makes more sense.
with its reactor core, you could use it as an auxiliary power when not in use to boost either engine, weapons, sensor, navi, well the sub-systems are built to handle the extra juice.
Well, a Deimos with one big beam instead of 4 medium ones would be feasible. The combined damage output of all 4 slashers is about 2/3 of a single Mjolnir, so some sacrifices would probably have to be made, but I think it's still safe to assume this ship would have enough defensive turrets to hold its own.
There would be one more issue - the whole ship has to get aimed exactly at the target, so a rather expensive and powerful drive system needs to be used (keep in mind the Mjolnir only shoots at full power when aimed straight down the turret's axis, if the beam is guided off center its power is decreased by a lot).
Thus the GTCv Mjolnir would not be an easy thing to build, but would in the end probably be much more effective than the Colossus, dollar for dollar (or whatever the FS universe currency is).
I see a bit of a different evolution of the Mjolnir idea.
I have a few questions about Mjolnirs: since Mjolnirs can operate independently, shouldn't a ship that's just a cheap spaceframe with Mjolnirs strapped to it be devastating on the battlefield? Why can the Mjolnir, a sub-cruiser-size cannon, outclass destroyers in firepower? Why did the Colossus's heatsinks struggle so much, when Mjolnirs can output similar firepower with seemingly no such issues?
I think its heat sink is the rotating thingy - so really easy to put holes through it and make it stop working.
The turret has 2500 HP, compared to a Deimos at 80k.
My headcanon/skul-gun: Mjolnirs are disposable, one-time-use beam platforms not meant for extended engagements. This is also why they're so lightly armored. They don't have a power generator that can sustain beam fire indefinitely - they have a battery that can support maybe a couple dozen shots. By the time it's done firing, the battery is empty, the heatsinks are fried, the beam cannon's innards are starting to melt, and the Mjolnir is a useless hunk of metal, but hopefully it's done its job. You wouldn't want this on a warship, but keep several of these in reserve to blockade a node on demand (also works well if your setting includes BP/BtA-style non-Newtonian node drift).
I don't think they're disposable, but actually high maintenance. They'd be placed in friendly territory before a battle and could be resupplied easily to keep them online until the battle.
Re the Mjolnir, I have to admit I never really treated it as a "proper" ship given how much it deviates from the usuall firepower/size ratio. It probably shouldve been upscaled *2 at minimum to be more credible. The explination "it can fire 20 times before getting scrapped" is pretty good though.
I'd change "scrapped" for "resupplied".
For cruisers, I dont really see much potential for them after Capella. The reason is that you have a limited damage absorbtion potential on a small ship. The Aeolus is extremely good at demolishing fighters and bombers, but even then, if there are too many waves (or just other cruisers arrive) it'll perish quickly. A Deimos has (or atleast could have) the same or an even better AAA loadout while not suffering these backdraws. You could also just mount more armor on a cruiser for the same durability, but it'll likely much slower then. So in a way, the Deimos or a similar vehicle is the kind of cruiser you want - the rest is just a matter of size; but building things deliberately smaller makes them more difficult and expansive. Especially if you the other way and try to built a Terran/Vas Lilith with a big main beam and what else is required - there are relatively few Liliths in the Shivan armada either, so it is most likely an issue for them too.
Escort ships.
The corvettes are the standard combatant ship, but there is a niche for smaller units where they don't have to deal with destroyers often.
Capital ships, regardless of size, offer to have good staying power. As mentioned, fighters can only be on station for so long and need a hangar bay nearby.
Let's do a speculation on ship design for soon after Capella:
If the Mentu got rid of its 2x THT's and grabbed 2 extra Flak guns (maybe the long range variety), it would have been perfect for this role. It already is a thick skinned ship with enough anti-fighter firepower to do the job.
To escort gas miners and freighters, this would be enough, and would free the more expensive ships for front line use.
The Aeolus ought to be rearmed so all 4 of its centerline turrets are AAA beams, and kick out the THT's for 2x Prometheus turrets (fighter weapons were sometimes mounted on turrets, so this does not break canon).
There is also a version of its beams that has a much quicker rate of fire, called the Green Beam ( https://wiki.hard-light.net/index.php/Green_Beam ).
The Terran cruiser is the expensive one already, so why not give it a bigger anti-capship punch.
It could then fill the roles of both the Fenris and Leviathan.
Regarding its price tag... I think it was so expensive per unit because of the small production run before the GTVA shifted towards corvettes. It also may have been a testbed for new weapons (AAA beams, flak?).
If it gets approved for a long production run, even with the upgrades, it would still become affordable eventually.
The Aeolus is also surprisingly effective against enemy cruisers if it can get into flak range. Then it chews up their systems and weapons with the flak's ability to explode all over the place, and when the target is disarmed and disabled, the Aeolus can finish it off safely.
I ran tests a long time ago, and if the Aeolus could disarm the main beam on a Lilith with the first salvo of its main beams, it would win the duel.
-
The FS2's campaign nerfs the leviathan throughout most of its missions. The standard cruiser is supposed to have 4 AA beams, but these loadouts get overridden by mission designers quite a lot. A proper leviathan is, imo, an AA threat similar to the aeolus - Whilst the Aeolus has flak guns, they're a lot easier to avoid and they're outranged by a Prometheus S. AA beams on the other hand...
But a big problem for any warship post capella is going to be the trebuchet and maxim cannons. Yes, the Shivans do not have access to this long-range weaponry in capella itself, but it's safe to assume that if the GTVA can develop these weapons, so can the Shivans (and as ever, the Shivans aren't the only threat to the GTVA). I do think that a relatively small platform that's dedicated to improved AA beams and only AA beams (like the long range variant that the Warspite is testing) has value, especially if that ship doesn't have the blind spots in AA coverage that the more anti-warship focused warships have.
-
It would be useful if a group of AWACS could effectively jam Shivan targeting sensors. Just create a bunch of AWACS cruisers with enough anti-fighter coverage to protect themselves from swarm attacks by fighters, and have them run interference for the big-gun warships to engage the Sath from distance with their own beams.
I remember a single mission once where there was a GTVA ship that had a beam inhibitor device. It was able to disable all beams on the battlefield (IOW while it would disable Shivan beams, it would also mean allied ships couldn't fire beams either).
Could something like that be an effective strategy against Sathani? I.e., turn the device on, have a squad destroy the four primary beams on a Sathanas...then turn the device back off again?
I also remember a (non-public) mission where Shivan main beams were jammed, but it was using some ETAK device to get that done. It was done pretty well but overall I think it'd be kinda lame if Shivan capships could just be disabled by ordinary EM warfare. Basically the entirety of FS2s plot was about how Alien their tech is, so it should be somewhat more exotic, and the effects more limited, perhabs declining in intensity, duration etc as time goes on.
For specifically countering Saths, I think the calculus turns out more in favor of bombers than anything else. Fast, agile bombers armed with heavy anti-subsystem bombs specifically tailored to Sath beams in particular and possibly Shivan beam tech in general. Bearbaiting was after all a resounding success by any measure: One bomber wing launched in desperation managed to completely defang the Shivans' biggest threat!
I like the idea of cruisers' disposability vs Shivans being factored into their construction. (Ties in well with my Mjolnir plans! ;)) But I also like the idea of cruisers just not being such absolute ass, the way they're depicted in FS2. BP's cruisers seem much more believable, being a serious threat to enemy fighters, and needing a coordinated effort to take down - contrast with the Fenris or maybe even the Aeolus in retail FS2, which could lose a fight to a single sufficiently determined Herc 2.
Fighting a Sath with beams alive is an extremely bad idea. Whether you're trying to waste cruisers instead of corvettes doesnt make it any better.
Besides, we already know how to defeat how to kill a Sath. Defeating an entire armada of them - which is the bar set by FS2 alone - requires a significant amount of firepower, perhabs more than bombers alone can ever deliver (unless you just make super-mega-meson-whatever warheads that can kill a destroyer with a single hit), so you'll need something bigger bc you'll unlikely be able to fit beams of that magnitude on a cruiser - if you like the Mjolnir-but-ship concept it should be corvette or frigate sized, minimum, as even an LRed/BGreen/BVas will need a very long time for a million HP. For the reasons EtP mentioned, you dont want to build it too big either, elseway you'll be too dependent on just a few ships.
Beyond that it gets interesting though. Most people always think about Saths when talking about post-Capella - not even an armada of 80 of them, but just a handful or maybe a dozen; when they appear to be more of a disposable tool to blow up stars and their main beamweapons just a neat byproduct. The way I think about them is more the way somebody posted here a long time ago - that the Lucifer is much like an Ursa (it blows stuff up) while the Sathanas is much like a Faustus (serving some exotic scientific purpose). So, GTVA should also take into consideration that the Shivans finally pull out their Orion...
-
The FS2's campaign nerfs the leviathan throughout most of its missions. The standard cruiser is supposed to have 4 AA beams, but these loadouts get overridden by mission designers quite a lot. A proper leviathan is, imo, an AA threat similar to the aeolus - Whilst the Aeolus has flak guns, they're a lot easier to avoid and they're outranged by a Prometheus S. AA beams on the other hand...
But a big problem for any warship post capella is going to be the trebuchet and maxim cannons. Yes, the Shivans do not have access to this long-range weaponry in capella itself, but it's safe to assume that if the GTVA can develop these weapons, so can the Shivans (and as ever, the Shivans aren't the only threat to the GTVA). I do think that a relatively small platform that's dedicated to improved AA beams and only AA beams (like the long range variant that the Warspite is testing) has value, especially if that ship doesn't have the blind spots in AA coverage that the more anti-warship focused warships have.
Yeah, that's why I was lobbying to get 4x AAA beams on a next production run for the Aeolus.
If they are ULTRA beams then even better. :D
Would counter the long range guns and missiles, however a scout fighter with target designators was needed during the campaign. However again - that could have been due to some nebula effects...
A different way is when targeting systems catch up with weapons and flak can intercept a Trebuchet. It's fast, but it's also big, kinda an equivalent of hypersonic missiles of today.
Didn't the Fenris have 2 beams?
I don't think the Levi was ever with 2 AAA's, I thought it had 4.
If it did, then it might be that not the whole fleet was rearmed to the new standard. This could be explained with in game lore, and not just mission design.
Now regarding dodging beams vs flak - if you fly alongside the enemy ship rather than towards it, you will get out of the beam before it causes much damage as AAA beams do not follow their targets during a shot.
Just do a 90 deg turn when its beams are charging up and you'll be fine for the most part, and keep going until the beam is powering down.
Bonus points for using afterburners at the right time. Then your ship will be out of the beam in a small fraction of a second.
-
If we're building ships to fight Sathanas threats, I've got one grim justification for cruisers in my head.
In a white room, just tabled stats, fleet vs fleet fight, if we assume a Sathanas has no delay from switching targets but can't switch a beam's target mid-shot, then it should a collosus in 40 seconds, or kill two destroyers every 10 seconds,or kill 4 of anything smaller every 10 seconds.
We can't really know how the costs and manufacturing capability break out, but if going just by a very crude estimate of volume then a destroyer is 'worth' around 25 corvettes, or 470-ish cruisers. It seems unlikely that it's a simple switch between "build 1 destroyer" and "build 500 cruisers", but dozens certainly seems plausible to me.
So, if you are planning for the possibility of having to fight a fully-fanged sathanas, cruisers start getting attractive because it can only kill them so fast, and when it does you lose a lot less than you would with a larger ship. It requires you to abandon the idea of your crews not being expendable, and there's a lot of other factors that muddy the waters, but I do think it's a plausible thread to pull on.
I do think there's also out-of-battle utility factors to consider. A cruiser can loiter, it can show presence and provide some measure of security. Yeah, fighters can do that some, but there's got to be a limit. The fighters have to go home after a few hours, the cruiser doesn't. And yeah, corvettes, but cruisers existing is easily justified by simply saying they can't afford as many corvettes as they'd like, and need cruisers to fill the gap. Sure, it'd be nice to just have bigger, better ships everywhere, but sometimes you just have to settle.
They can be needed for the fleet's overall operation, and still go up in smoke the minute a bomber wing or shivan cruiser notices them, that's not exactly a contradiction. At least, not the kind of contradiction that would stop a military for doing something.
I'm not sure cruisers are capable. After you scan the Sathanas in A Monster in the Mist the briefing for the next mission says the Sathanas has weaknesses, but only the guns of capital ships are sufficient to exploit them. In game this manifests as weapons without a certain damage flag being unable to damage the Colossus or Sathanas to below 75%.
If you're going the suicide mission route with cruisers I'd say the PVC Mauler provides the blueprint for how to do it.
-
If we're building ships to fight Sathanas threats, I've got one grim justification for cruisers in my head.
In a white room, just tabled stats, fleet vs fleet fight, if we assume a Sathanas has no delay from switching targets but can't switch a beam's target mid-shot, then it should a collosus in 40 seconds, or kill two destroyers every 10 seconds,or kill 4 of anything smaller every 10 seconds.
We can't really know how the costs and manufacturing capability break out, but if going just by a very crude estimate of volume then a destroyer is 'worth' around 25 corvettes, or 470-ish cruisers. It seems unlikely that it's a simple switch between "build 1 destroyer" and "build 500 cruisers", but dozens certainly seems plausible to me.
So, if you are planning for the possibility of having to fight a fully-fanged sathanas, cruisers start getting attractive because it can only kill them so fast, and when it does you lose a lot less than you would with a larger ship. It requires you to abandon the idea of your crews not being expendable, and there's a lot of other factors that muddy the waters, but I do think it's a plausible thread to pull on.
I do think there's also out-of-battle utility factors to consider. A cruiser can loiter, it can show presence and provide some measure of security. Yeah, fighters can do that some, but there's got to be a limit. The fighters have to go home after a few hours, the cruiser doesn't. And yeah, corvettes, but cruisers existing is easily justified by simply saying they can't afford as many corvettes as they'd like, and need cruisers to fill the gap. Sure, it'd be nice to just have bigger, better ships everywhere, but sometimes you just have to settle.
They can be needed for the fleet's overall operation, and still go up in smoke the minute a bomber wing or shivan cruiser notices them, that's not exactly a contradiction. At least, not the kind of contradiction that would stop a military for doing something.
I'm not sure cruisers are capable. After you scan the Sathanas in A Monster in the Mist the briefing for the next mission says the Sathanas has weaknesses, but only the guns of capital ships are sufficient to exploit them. In game this manifests as weapons without a certain damage flag being unable to damage the Colossus or Sathanas to below 75%.
If you're going the suicide mission route with cruisers I'd say the PVC Mauler provides the blueprint for how to do it.
Well, the Mjolnir itself is just a bit over 100 m long, add the freighter for the engines needed to move it in place, and we are looking at a ship of like 200 meters.
That is cruiser size, and it can do damage to the largest targets.
That said, if you add armor, some defensive turrets to survive in a contested environment and then get engines big enough to push all the extra weight - it gets to corvette size really quick.
The Saths are not going to be in a vacuum, in a real battle royal there would be thousands of fighters and bombers from the Shivan side, vs hundreds from the GTVA side. Add probably dozens of Shivan cruisers and corvettes, and maybe some destroyers in the mix as well.
That Deimos does not look like such a bad decision now, does it?
The Sobek can focus both of its main beams on one target, so it's actually better at hitting targets bigger than itself, even though the Deimos has much better abilities to destroy things that are smaller than itself.
I don't think "spam ship design X" will work. The big beams need to have escorts. The escorts need to chase away anything from an SF Dragon to a Lilith if our big beams are to focus on the juggernauts. If combined into one big ship that can do it all, we lose the ability to maneuver around and get into a frontal duel.
If there is plentiful corvettes such as a Sobeks with one BVas or a rebuild of the Deimos with one Mjolnir instead of all 4 slashers, then these could simply warp into the battle space at such directions that they are outside of the Sahanas's firing arcs.
Each of those would need something like an updated Aeolus orbiting it, moving to block the most common direction enemy bombers are approaching from.
On top of that, lots of fighters. This requirement makes the Hecate a very good ship class, even though nobody gives it respect because it's not a good battleship.
A Hecate was a command and control carrier, so it could coordinate the various tactical jumps, and supply wave after wave of friendly fighters and bombers.
To have a proper battleship - the Big Hat can put all 3 of its main beams on one target, so it's like a Sobek, only way bigger. If one gets introduced into battle in such a way that it orbits a Sathanas without going into its BFRed WEZ, then it will win a 1 vs 1.
But destroyers are a topic of its own.
-
Bengal Tiger. You still making ships etc?
-
I still have all the files, but I have not touched the mod Teeth of the Tiger for several months now.
I'm trying to finish off a separate project for this turn based strategy called Open General first, with great progress so far.
Then I plan to finish TotT as well..
Need to get up to speed in Blender first though.
I did learn a thing or two about programming over the years, so I should be able to FRED my way through when my probably dozen remaining ships are done.