[Scotty]

If you keep the same general size as the Iceni, but remove a lot of the armor and command ship parts, you could conceivably leave the engines the same size, move the beam cannons to give them some minor overlapping fields of fire (like one on the front, and one on each side of the front), and keep the rest of the turrets.  That way you could get a lot more speed.  Imagine a corvette-ish ship that was really fast that could rip the stuffing out of same size or smaller ships quickly.  The Iceni was even kind enough to provide a designation, a Frigate.

Introducing the GT/GVF whats-its-name

[eliex]

Well the only thing such a ship would definitely require are stealth cloaking devices, lots of energy generators to satisfy the hi-powered one hit kill beams and fast engines to escape. Something along communications and navigation obviously but the said above defines a hunter killer class.

[AlphaOne]

I honestly do not understand why all this fuss about reducint the ships HP to about 20 k points ! Why would you have to reduce them that much .

I mean the Iceni proved you can make a ship with the HP of a destroyer class vessel and still have high  speed and more then enough beam firepower.

Just do the same only more powerfull reactors (vasudan ones) meaning higher speeds withouth sacrificing armour .

Sure you could argue that you will need at some point to lighten the ship but that would mean reducing the armour by 10 or 20 k points not 70 k !

[kalnaren]

I honestly do not understand why all this fuss about reducint the ships HP to about 20 k points ! Why would you have to reduce them that much .

I mean the Iceni proved you can make a ship with the HP of a destroyer class vessel and still have high  speed and more then enough beam firepower.

Just do the same only more powerfull reactors (vasudan ones) meaning higher speeds withouth sacrificing armour .

Sure you could argue that you will need at some point to lighten the ship but that would mean reducing the armour by 10 or 20 k points not 70 k !

The other thing to consider though is that your enemy won't tolerate a hunting destroyer very long. If you throw a ship that big behind enemy lines I'd bet they would dedicate a good percentage of their battlegroup to hunting it. Something smaller and maybe a little less deadly would be easier to hide.

[AlphaOne]

SO a less then 1 km warship armed with the latest stealth tech and electronic warfare tech and 2 or 3 wigs of stealth craft would be that easy to find ???

Rightttttt.........! They were searching for a whole destroyer right in their back yard and it took a well coordinated offensive and trap to lure it out in order to have the collie destroy it .

Its not such an easy job to accomplish.

[kalnaren]

SO a less then 1 km warship armed with the latest stealth tech and electronic warfare tech and 2 or 3 wigs of stealth craft would be that easy to find ???

Rightttttt.........! They were searching for a whole destroyer right in their back yard and it took a well coordinated offensive and trap to lure it out in order to have the collie destroy it .

Its not such an easy job to accomplish.

I still think it's a bad idea. Lets say you're right, and it could effectively completely hide and "stay off the radar"... wouldn't the cost vs. utility alone make it impractical as a hunter-killer?

I'd think a ship of that type would be far better suited to hit-and-fade strikes against fortified installations behind enemy lines -like on shipyards, for example- where it could actually stand in a somewhat prolonged engagement.

[AlphaOne]

Oh rly ?? and just how are you gonna manage to get such a ship behind the enmy lines. In order for it to be able to handle itself in a prelogued battle it would have to sacrifice firepower and speed and stealth.

I honestly believe you dont quite get the concept of stealth hunter-killer do you ??

[Kie99]

It is close to impossible to stealth something that size in Space, where the Ambient temperature is close to Absolute Zero and your ship is radiating out ****loads of heat.

[SpardaSon21]

Well, you try find finding a 1km object in space, radiating heat or not, especially if there's an asteroid field anywhere nearby for it to hide in.

[Polpolion]

It is close to impossible to stealth something that size in Space, where the Ambient temperature is close to Absolute Zero and your ship is radiating out ****loads of heat.

This is true, but the Freespace universe doesn't quite do that kind of stuff. Otherwise the GTVA always would've known exactly where the Iceni was, and it's clear that they didn't.

[kalnaren]

Oh rly ?? and just how are you gonna manage to get such a ship behind the enmy lines.

How about all those nice new stealth technologies you were talking about? How about that post you made on how it's hard to find ships behind your lines? You're contradicting yourself to argue against my points.

In order for it to be able to handle itself in a prelogued battle it would have to sacrifice firepower and speed and stealth.

Your words:

I honestly do not understand why all this fuss about reducint the ships HP to about 20 k points ! Why would you have to reduce them that much .

I mean the Iceni proved you can make a ship with the HP of a destroyer class vessel and still have high  speed and more then enough beam firepower.

Just do the same only more powerfull reactors (vasudan ones) meaning higher speeds withouth sacrificing armour .

Sure you could argue that you will need at some point to lighten the ship but that would mean reducing the armour by 10 or 20 k points not 70 k

A ship with 80k would be able to handle itself. Right here you argued that the Iceni would be well suited to a hunter-killer role with a bit of modernization. I'm saying it would be better suited to conducting prolonged hit-and-fade engagements. We're talking about the exact same ship.

I honestly believe you dont quite get the concept of stealth hunter-killer do you ??

I stated in my previous post a ship like that [modern Icini] would not be as well suited as a hunter-killer. You sure I'm the one that doesn't understand the concept?

A hunter-killer is a ship designed to combine both the sensor/detection and killing into a single vessel. A FreeSpace destroyer-sized vessel is not well suited to that roll, at least how I see it. Like I said in my post on a previous page -the idea of hunter-killer makes more sense put into context of submarine warfare and wolfpack tactics. What do navies send when they want to hunt down enemy shipping? A frigate/submarine, or a battleship?

A ship the size of a FreeSpace Destroyer might be able to accomplish it.. but here we come back to the cost vs. utility aspect. No navy in their right mind is going to spend the money on an destroyer that can't fight in prolonged engagements. And if it can, look at what you have... a modernized (and more expensive) Orion/Hecate.

[BengalTiger]

If the ship's a big flying plastic thermos it could be hard to detect. But filling most of it with radar absorbant material, thermal insulation and passive sensors might kill it's ability to fight properly (less armor probably, smaller ability to dissipate reactor heat would limit it's energy use in weapons due to reactor overheating, etc).

[Mura]

Wasn't the point of this excercise to see a ship capable of getting in, make loads of damage to a single target, probably destroying it, then get the frak out before anyone can retaliate?
@AlphaOne: What do you need so much armor for doing that? your rage for hitpoints seems pointless to me.

I don't know if it could be possible to also make it depend on TAG, the pegasus fly, TAG points of interest on enemy ship and the killer takes perfect aim (like tagging a huge beam weapon looking at you, subsystems, engines w/e). What do you think?

[Krelus]

I think a much more functional idea would be some sort of stealth-carrier and Artemis bombers. But hey, that's just me.

[kalnaren]

Wasn't the point of this excercise to see a ship capable of getting in, make loads of damage to a single target, probably destroying it, then get the frak out before anyone can retaliate?
@AlphaOne: What do you need so much armor for doing that? your rage for hitpoints seems pointless to me.

I don't know if it could be possible to also make it depend on TAG, the pegasus fly, TAG points of interest on enemy ship and the killer takes perfect aim (like tagging a huge beam weapon looking at you, subsystems, engines w/e). What do you think?

I was thinking something similar. A fighter jumps in, tags the target giving the hunter exact co-ords of the enemy ship, it jumps in right behind it and shoots once or twice, then jumps out.

[Kie99]

It is close to impossible to stealth something that size in Space, where the Ambient temperature is close to Absolute Zero and your ship is radiating out ****loads of heat.

This is true, but the Freespace universe doesn't quite do that kind of stuff. Otherwise the GTVA always would've known exactly where the Iceni was, and it's clear that they didn't.

Is it?  It's clear to me that the GTVA wanted to let Bosch escape.

If the ship's a big flying plastic thermos it could be hard to detect. But filling most of it with radar absorbant material, thermal insulation and passive sensors might kill it's ability to fight properly (less armor probably, smaller ability to dissipate reactor heat would limit it's energy use in weapons due to reactor overheating, etc).

It would also kill the crew and destroy the reactors due to overheating.

[SpardaSon21]

For Freespace ships, they could be able to radiate all that heat away while in subspace for all we know.  And even if it can't, you try finding a 1km hunk of metal in an entire star system, radiating heat or not.  You would need some very sensitive passive scanners to detect its emissions, and you would need to be looking right at the ship.  It would be like detecting a stealth bomber from halfway around the world.

[AlphaOne]

Oh rly ?? and just how are you gonna manage to get such a ship behind the enmy lines.

How about all those nice new stealth technologies you were talking about? How about that post you made on how it's hard to find ships behind your lines? You're contradicting yourself to argue against my points.

In order for it to be able to handle itself in a prelogued battle it would have to sacrifice firepower and speed and stealth.

Your words:

I honestly do not understand why all this fuss about reducint the ships HP to about 20 k points ! Why would you have to reduce them that much .

I mean the Iceni proved you can make a ship with the HP of a destroyer class vessel and still have high  speed and more then enough beam firepower.

Just do the same only more powerfull reactors (vasudan ones) meaning higher speeds withouth sacrificing armour .

Sure you could argue that you will need at some point to lighten the ship but that would mean reducing the armour by 10 or 20 k points not 70 k

A ship with 80k would be able to handle itself. Right here you argued that the Iceni would be well suited to a hunter-killer role with a bit of modernization. I'm saying it would be better suited to conducting prolonged hit-and-fade engagements. We're talking about the exact same ship.

I honestly believe you dont quite get the concept of stealth hunter-killer do you ??

I stated in my previous post a ship like that [modern Icini] would not be as well suited as a hunter-killer. You sure I'm the one that doesn't understand the concept?

A hunter-killer is a ship designed to combine both the sensor/detection and killing into a single vessel. A FreeSpace destroyer-sized vessel is not well suited to that roll, at least how I see it. Like I said in my post on a previous page -the idea of hunter-killer makes more sense put into context of submarine warfare and wolfpack tactics. What do navies send when they want to hunt down enemy shipping? A frigate/submarine, or a battleship?

A ship the size of a FreeSpace Destroyer might be able to accomplish it.. but here we come back to the cost vs. utility aspect. No navy in their right mind is going to spend the money on an destroyer that can't fight in prolonged engagements. And if it can, look at what you have... a modernized (and more expensive) Orion/Hecate.

So you are comparing a barely 1 km long warship to a 2.2+ km long destroyer several times the volume dimensions etc.
Rrrrright......!

Also the 70 k points are a trade off for better speed. I mean we see the Iceni at 90 k points just 10 k short o the Hecate and Orion HP managing 35 m/s !

So in order for it to have 40m/s at least 3/4 Bgreens and several aaaf weapons it has to give away something. so 20 k points seem like a logical conclusion.


20 k points means it wouldnt be able to take a hit from even a cruiser .

I mean i know it has to take out the target fast but that doesnt mean it wont take a few hits . sure there wont be too many hits but if its HP is too low then it will just be for nothing.

Also you do know that a ship's HP is made of more then just the armor. Its made of the armor around its engines weapons subsystems etc.

Also WE DO KNOW that in the game universe an in real life for that matter you CAN NOT track down a ship even a 2+km long warship that easy .

I mean you could hide sush a shop behind a large asteroid or a moon or on the ourskirts of the solar sistem .

Rest assured that such a ship woul pay or its price the second it manages to take out a Ravana and a Lilith cruiser. 

I mean the GTVA lost i believe 3 or 4 warships to a single Ravana . By making a ship that costs just as much as all those 4 warships put toghether but can survive enough to take out 1 Ravana and a Lilith minimum you are in the win. sort of. Well not really but you get my point.

Such a ship can send out one or 2 wings on a scouting mission for targets . Then when the target is found go in fast fire the beams once or twice and get the hell out before reinforcement arrive.

some good com's and sensor jamming should also provide enough cover so as not to be able give away who did it !

[Scotty]

Just because we want to make it a hunter killer doesn't mean we have to let a cruiser beat the stuffing out of it.  Besides, if it is a hunter killer, it hunts them down, not a little fighter wing.  Then because it is a hunter killer, it has to have the HP to win.  Two shots isn't going to cut it for a great deal of ships. (I propose a compromise, say 50~60k hp).  Size means nothing except what kind of hit profile it has.  A hunter killer could be a bigass juggernaut (the Sathanas is the perfect example of a gigantic hk) and still work.  It can be 1k, or even 5 or 6k long, or as short as 200m.

[kalnaren]

Just because we want to make it a hunter killer doesn't mean we have to let a cruiser beat the stuffing out of it.  Besides, if it is a hunter killer, it hunts them down, not a little fighter wing.  Then because it is a hunter killer, it has to have the HP to win.  Two shots isn't going to cut it for a great deal of ships. (I propose a compromise, say 50~60k hp).  Size means nothing except what kind of hit profile it has.  A hunter killer could be a bigass juggernaut (the Sathanas is the perfect example of a gigantic hk) and still work.  It can be 1k, or even 5 or 6k long, or as short as 200m.

Hmm. I think what we're getting at is our idea of the ship really depends on how we view a hunter-killer, or rather what it's target is more likely to be.

I suppose you are correct in that it could be practically any size of ship. However, there would be no need to make a destroyer-sized hunter/killer to take on convoys, and likewise if the main idea was to hunt down destroyers a smaller ship wouldn't do.