• We have updated our Community Code of Conduct. Please read through the new rules for the forum that are an integral part of Paradox Interactive’s User Agreement.
Interesting that you designated one as a gunship and one as a light cruiser. While the Storm class gauss PD ship - 8000 tons -is a destroyer, I believe?

Also, holy cow the bureaucracy. So much work... Still standing in awe.
I've downloaded the game again but can't even begin to start, so many questions...
 
Interesting that you designated one as a gunship and one as a light cruiser. While the Storm class gauss PD ship - 8000 tons -is a destroyer, I believe?

Also, holy cow the bureaucracy. So much work... Still standing in awe.
I've downloaded the game again but can't even begin to start, so many questions...
I try to classify my ships mostly by role rather than by tonnage.

You may have noticed that ALL of my so-called FACS are over 1000 tons, so they don't qualify as FACs at all if you went by tonnage. But that IS their role.

Similarly, the terms Corvette, Frigate, Destroyer, etc tend to describe roles.

Bureaucracy indeed. I'm just trying to keep it all straight. Stuff that STAYS in a particular star system (Orbital Naval Bases, Orbital Grinders, Orbital Refineries, DSP patrol bases, Sabre squadrons, etc) all gets tossed into those folders.
 
Ah, that makes sense.
 
sb-723.jpg


Cloaking Efficiency 8. That means that only 1/8th of the ship's tonnage needs to be the cloaking device itself.

I suspect that we'll need one more level of either this tech or the minimum cloak size tech (so that we can cloak a smaller scout) before this is 100% practical.

EDIT:

Seven months. We can have the "Minimum Cloak Size 400 tons" tech by November. Then we design our scout.
 
  • 2Like
Reactions:
By November of this game year, we should be able to design a scout that is too fast for the Galapagonians to catch with a gunship, too small (with its -90% cloaking device) to target with a missile fire control, and hopefully too dim (with its -75% thermal suppressors) to target with Infra-Red seekers.

Fighters and maybe FACs can catch it and kill it. But they might not have the sensors to SEE our scout if it detects them, goes stealthy and runs off.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Cool stuff. I would love to see that happening.
 
We now have more than 60 (!) Sabre V's either deployed or in reserve at Earth. I'm thinking about calling a halt to the production, in order to re-purpose those shipyards for Generals and Qualitys.

How many Sabres is enough?

Only too much is enough?
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
The limiting factor is mostly maintenance supplies at the moment, isn't it?
Perhaps though a little more diversification doesn't hurt, though.
 
The limiting factor is mostly maintenance supplies at the moment, isn't it?
Perhaps though a little more diversification doesn't hurt, though.
Sabres are cheap to support... a squadron of a dozen Sabres is easier to support than a SINGLE Carrier.

... but yeah, firing that many Lasers non-stop does burn through a pile of repair parts.

Maybe I should build more Maintenance Facilities?

Our Uridium crisis is now history... from a low point of just under 100,000 tons in stockpile, we are up over 300,000 tons and growing.
 
I'm also wondering about building a few new Jump Tenders. We used some back in the 1970s, but they were phased out once our Fleet had dozens of jump-capable ships. With swarms of Gunships as a possible doctrinal approach, perhaps Jump Tenders might make a comeback?
 
July 20th, 2005.

Our current build queue.

sb-724.jpg
 
I think moving the Maintenance Facilities up the queue might be best, below Research facilities, unless you desperately need the Cargo Shuttle Stations or Mass Driver.
 
Hot damn!

sb-725.jpg


Our first four 10,500 kps Gauss PD escorts are now being laid down.

I think moving the Maintenance Facilities up the queue might be best, below Research facilities, unless you desperately need the Cargo Shuttle Stations or Mass Driver.

Good point.
 
Another stealth tech!

sb-726.jpg


Is this the one that makes our stealth scouts practical? I'll have a look at a few designs.
 
Here's a possible design for a Passive Sensor stealth scout.



Spy class Stealth Scout (P) 2,662 tons 76 Crew 679.1 BP TCS 5 TH 154 EM 0
8266 km/s Armour 1-17 Shields 0-0 HTK 12 Sensors 56/126/0/0 DCR 1-3 PPV 0
Maint Life 1.30 Years MSP 159 AFR 57% IFR 0.8% 1YR 100 5YR 1,493 Max Repair 385 MSP
Lieutenant Commander Control Rating 1 BRG
Intended Deployment Time: 6 months Morale Check Required

Magnetic Fusion Drive EP440.00 (1) Power 440 Fuel Use 35.89% Signature 154.00 Explosion 11%
Fuel Capacity 250,000 Litres Range 47.1 billion km (65 days at full power)

EM Sensor EM7-126 2004 (1) Sensitivity 126 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 88.7m km
Thermal Sensor TH7-56 1976 (1) Sensitivity 56 Detect Sig Strength 1000: 59.2m km
Cloaking Device: Class cross-section reduced to 10.0% of normal

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
This design is classed as a Scout for auto-assignment purposes



Only 2,662 tons, and with a 90% cloaking device the RADAR signature is reduced to only 267 tons... the same as a Fighter. Carries large passive sensors.

Moves at 8,266 kps. The fastest Galapagonian that we've observed moved at just under 7,800 kps.

The thermal sensor is from the freaking 1970s. Perhaps we should delay just a few months to upgrade our thermal imaging tech.

If we replaced those off-the-shelf sensors with slightly smaller ones, we could increase the fuel endurance.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
We now have more than 60 (!) Sabre V's either deployed or in reserve at Earth. I'm thinking about calling a halt to the production...
LOL.

Technically, I'm still THINKING about it.

Still building more of them, though. We've got 70-odd, now.
 
  • 1Like
Reactions:
Maybe I should build more Maintenance Facilities?
Build a new set to store on the moon, so you can (more) quickly put them in use when needed?
 
If we replaced those off-the-shelf sensors with slightly smaller ones, we could increase the fuel endurance.

47 billion km range. How big was Alpha Centauri, exactly?
It's probably not needed imho, the idea is to just pop into a system, scout it, fly back.

But that said, it doesn't hurt to have some extra for emergencies...

Edit: more importantly, better thermal sensors sounds wise, if you're scouting it's basically your first set of eyes. Enemies that have no reason to look for you won't have active sensors running, and flipping on your own actives will make them see you immediately.
 
  • 1
Reactions:
The current fuel endurance is probably fine.

We should make sure it has enough repair parts to fix any ONE breakdown.

New Thermals. Other than that... looks OK?
 
Yup.