That's a hundred thousand tons of Infantry.
We'll need... several million?
We'll need... several million?
- 2
-
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.
The Lizard is the drop ship, right?
So we can't disassemble it either?
We were building more training capacity, right?
- 1
A drop rack, to be towed into combat by a Tug, yes.
Right.
I've been using it to drop on all those enemy mining sites.
Correct.
- 2
- 1
At some point.
Lots of priorities, to allocate effort to.
Military shipyards are currently focused on preparing for a build of modern Fortress components.
Civilian shipyards are switching over to drop-racks and drop-ships, and we're considering Rocks.
Ah. And it'd be yards needing expansion anyway, right, as roo expensive to expand military kne.
Or must military ships be disassembled in military yards?
We can always just continue to use the captured ship for minor peripheral operations, such as its present uses (cleaning up enemy auto-mining sites).
That way we won't need to assign a first-line ship to that job.
The captured drop-ship is civilian.
Drop-pods USED to be considered a military component, and any ship that carried them had to be military.
But that was changed and now drop-pods are a civilian component.
That way we won't need to assign a first-line ship to that job.
The captured drop-ship is civilian.
Drop-pods USED to be considered a military component, and any ship that carried them had to be military.
But that was changed and now drop-pods are a civilian component.
- 2
- 1
No. If I recall correctly you can use civilian yards for disassembly as well.
Maybe repair yards, too.
Not that it matters in this case.
- 1
Hmm. 20.000 BP worth of troops. That STO is 11.500 tons and takes about 2 months to complete the remaining 78% or so.
So let's say we build about 10.000 BP worth of ground troops in 2 months. We want to build 100 * 20.000 BP. That should take at current construction rate .. 400 months or so.
34 in game years, ballpark figure.
We should figure out how much we actually need for this one, but at current construction rates it will take decades.
- 1
Yeah, 2000 BP is a lot better.
So 40 months. Much faster
So 40 months. Much faster
Last edited:
- 1
- 1
So that would be only 3.4 in-game years... and we've got more ground forces training centers in the build queue.
- 2
It's actually 2184 BP. But most of these numbers are really rough estimates anyway.
We should be done with about 4 years, maybe 5 years or building though. Sooner if we get impatient or estimate we need less from the ground forces signature on the planet.
Last edited:
- 1
Just came across this thread, and speant the last couple of weeks catching up. Can I just say what an awesome achievment such a thread is? Can't think of many, no, any AARs to go this long and into this much detail. Kudos: we are not worthy.
Long time Aurora player myself (though not C# version yet) so absolutely fantastic to see.
Long time Aurora player myself (though not C# version yet) so absolutely fantastic to see.
- 4
- 1
Welcome to the thread. I used to play older versions myself. As usual, Blue Emu is teaching me a lot. I will probably download and play the new version soon. I really want to play an "Expanse" type scenario where mankind has conquered the solar system before discovering TN technology.
- 2
My game/tactical thoughts:
1) Is it not time to turn the Jerx off? They were a wonderful entertainment and test in the early game, but I no longer see any purpose to their raids, other to enforce a trade protection flotilla which is mandated anyway by the likely upcoming appearance of the swarm.
2) Did we not discuss at one point a ground support fighter, but fail to actually deploy such a thing? Pretty sure I saw one in action in Ad Astra, which inspired me to use significant numbers myself. Seem to remember it to be a useful force and tech multiplier.
3) Our carriers seem to remain a disposable CVL style of design. Is it not time, as we move to shield-bearing ships, to design more durable fleet flagship type of CV? This depends on AI tergetting of course: what we want is a high-value target the AI will consistently aim at, and has to pass through our "onion" of fleet defence roles to get to.
Also: sign me up! Anything you like, but if there are any super-carriers in the design future, I'll take one of those.
1) Is it not time to turn the Jerx off? They were a wonderful entertainment and test in the early game, but I no longer see any purpose to their raids, other to enforce a trade protection flotilla which is mandated anyway by the likely upcoming appearance of the swarm.
2) Did we not discuss at one point a ground support fighter, but fail to actually deploy such a thing? Pretty sure I saw one in action in Ad Astra, which inspired me to use significant numbers myself. Seem to remember it to be a useful force and tech multiplier.
3) Our carriers seem to remain a disposable CVL style of design. Is it not time, as we move to shield-bearing ships, to design more durable fleet flagship type of CV? This depends on AI tergetting of course: what we want is a high-value target the AI will consistently aim at, and has to pass through our "onion" of fleet defence roles to get to.
Also: sign me up! Anything you like, but if there are any super-carriers in the design future, I'll take one of those.
- 2
- 2