October 23rd, 1998.
Retooling complete. We now have two yards (eight slips in total) retooled for Sabre IVs.
Retooling complete. We now have two yards (eight slips in total) retooled for Sabre IVs.
- 1
I don't think we should give up carriers. Ther'es a reason that battleships were superceded by carriers during the war.I am beginning to think that GUNS are the new meta. Maybe we should switch from a Carrier-centric doctrine to a Laser-centric doctrine.
I'm going to see if it's possible to design a reasonably large ship (say 15,000 to 25,000 tons, somewhere in that range) that moves at over 10,000 kps, carries very thick armor, and also packs a serious Laser punch. A sort of Uber-Sabre.
If you're going to fight Gun actions, there are a few things you absolutely NEED.
1) Protection from enemy missiles. Gauss PD and/or dedicated Laser PD would be best.
2) THICK armor. A minimum of six layers, and ten or twelve would be better.
3) Very high speed. You first need to CATCH your prey, and then you want to be fast enough to stand off at your most effective distance while you wreck it.
4) ECM and ECCM if you got them.
Combining all of those things on a single platform is almost impossible at our tech level... but I wonder how close we can come to it? That might guide our research.
Can we terraform that athmosphere away?The second planet might be habitable if not for that poisonous NO2 (Nitrogen Dioxide) atmosphere.
I don't think we should give up carriers. There's a reason that battleships were superceded by carriers during the war. - Carriers are far too useful to give up on... they can carry ANYTHING that fits in their hangars. Fighters. Missile Boats. Sabres. Cloaked scout ships. AWACS vessels. Anything. The question is whether to center our doctrine on them. And the answer is that I agree with Iche Bins. It's too early to decide. All of our experience has been against one opponent.
Can we terraform that athmosphere away? - Yes.
I would also not count out missiles just yet. The sabres worked in a very specific circumstance against one enemy. Let's see how our ships do against other enemies. - Agreed.
How does the spare parts consumption interact with the rate of fire?We should bear in mind the Sabre's limitations, though.
Fuel for only 25 days. Enough spare parts for only a few hours fighting. No defense at all against missiles or Fighters. Only three layers of armor.
This is pretty much my thinking. The sabres work against an opponent who they out-range, out armor, and out-run. If any of those conditions fail, won't they be in serious trouble?I would also not count out missiles just yet. The sabres worked in a very specific circumstance against one enemy. Let's see how our ships do against other enemies.
It's not an easy decision. Your analysis is correct, of course, for the factors it covers... but other factors also enter the picture.How does the spare parts consumption interact with the rate of fire?
I know this is theory-crafting, but if the probability of failure is only checked when a weapon fires, and the spare parts cost to repair the bigger 37.5cm laser cannon per failure is the same as the 25cm laser cannon, you would get the same number of shots per ship before it was forced to withdraw due to weapon failure, but each shot would do in the order of twice the damage (at the absolute limit of range, they both do 1 damage if I understand the system correctly, but as soon as the range starts closing, the bigger one does 2x damage per shot). This would result in the same net "damage per unit time" (unless you are sticking strictly to the 1 damage range!) while doubling the "time in combat". Assuming my base assumption around spares consumption holds, of course.
This is pretty much my thinking. The sabres work against an opponent who they out-range, out armor, and out-run. If any of those conditions fail, won't they be in serious trouble?
Given my propensity for theory crafting I should probably volunteer for a position as either a theory researcher, or prototype/skunkworks commander.
Do you have the game installed?Given my propensity for theory crafting I should probably volunteer for a position as either a theory researcher, or prototype/skunkworks commander.
I do not, to be honest I hadn’t even heard about it until I started reading this thread.Do you have the game installed?
You could use SM (space master) mode to set up the same techs, and start designing ships.
Well... if you decide to break down and get it, the game is a free download from the creator's website.I do not, to be honest I hadn’t even heard about it until I started reading this thread.
I have so far resisted the temptation to try and get it running on Linux due to having to pretend to actually hold down a real job. Same reason I am avoiding Dwarf Fortress!
My theory crafting is done based on what I have read here, so I am sure I am often missing details!
I was going to ask if this was possible, but when changing the page the answer was already thereAnother outside-the-box idea:
Our Carriers have a hangar capable of holding 8,000 tons of parasite craft. At the moment, that's around 30 Fighters.
If we loaded a Carrier with Sabres instead, it could carry four. Naturally, we would field a whole group of such Carriers, perhaps 24 Sabres in total.
This would allow us to use Sabres in a general fleet engagement, despite their 25-day fuel load.
Another (inferior) possibility is loading a Carrier with Cutlass class Box Launcher armed Torpedo Boats.
That would give us 56 missiles in a salvo. I suppose that's not really competitive with heavy Fighters, which can put 78 missiles in a salvo.
Maybe you shouldn't call them carriers but... sheathsAnother outside-the-box idea:
Our Carriers have a hangar capable of holding 8,000 tons of parasite craft. At the moment, that's around 30 Fighters.
If we loaded a Carrier with Sabres instead, it could carry four. Naturally, we would field a whole group of such Carriers, perhaps 24 Sabres in total.
This would allow us to use Sabres in a general fleet engagement, despite their 25-day fuel load.
Another (inferior) possibility is loading a Carrier with Cutlass class Box Launcher armed Torpedo Boats.
That would give us 56 missiles in a salvo. I suppose that's not really competitive with heavy Fighters, which can put 78 missiles in a salvo.
Scabbards!Maybe you shouldn't call them carriers but... sheaths
I like it the way you've done it.My own inclination is to build up methodically, setting up a Naval base in each system as we expand to host a squadron of Eyeballs and Sabres. That keeps the Pirates limited to smash-and-grab attacks, if they don't want to risk another major disaster (like losing 25 ships in one engagement!).