SE V: Unique Abilities And Ideas

[President_Elect_Shang]

@SpecterOfDeath: I will need to read your post over when I am a little less worn out (long day and all); however, most of what you asked about can be done. Such as the sensor range is very easy to mod.

@ SJ: I had no idea this was such a stickler for you (/end rant of the day). You say specialized designs will emerge than fine. You don’t think the idea of this mod is a good one because it is an “iron-fist” approach than that’s cool to. I think it’s a fine idea with lots of potential. So lets agree to disagree and move on.

@Atrocities: I am open to fielding ideas and laying the ground work for you to review if you like. My TC isn’t going anywhere until Aaron does something about the generational components.

[Kana]

On the subject of Unit Specialization, Weapons, and Cloaking...

From Atomic Rockets (http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/rocket3t.html)
Back in between WWI and WWII, the Battleship was the queen of the ocean. It had titanic guns capable of blowing enemy ships out of the water, and armor thick enough to bounce off enemy shells. Granted it had all the speed and turning radius of a pregnant hippo, but that didn't matter.

Until some clown invented the Torpedo Boat. These little gnats could run rings around the battleships, were too agile to be targeted by the battleship's guns, and had torpedoes quite capable of sending the battleship to Davy Jone's Locker. Especially since the torpedo boats would attack in packs of twenty or more. The battleship was much too ponderous to avoid the swarm of torpedoes the pack would launch.

So the Destroyer was invented. This name was actually short for "Torpedo-boat Destroyer." This was a speedy, agile warship with quick guns designed to chew up torpedo boats. Of course this ability came at a price. The destroyer speed came at the cost of no armor, and the quick guns meant they are too light to damage anything heavier than a torpedo boat.

The upshot of this is that destroyers are pathetically vulnerable to enemy battleships.

So destroyers and battleships have to support each other. Destroyers protect their sister battleships from enemy torpedo boats, and battleships protect their sister destroyers from enemy battleships.

What happens if you design a warship that is equally balanced with regards to armor, guns, and speed? You get a Cruiser. Since cruisers are not specialized, they are viable enough to operate independently. They can be detached from a fleet as a task force of one for missions such as convoy raiding, deep scouting, and related missions. Generally a cruiser can outrun anything it cannot outfight. Heavy cruisers have large endurance for long distance scouting. Medium cruisers are often used as raiders, on convoys and other soft targets. Light cruisers generally operate with a fleet, scouting and repelling attack by enemy cruisers and destroyers.

(See Attached Graph)

From Atomic Rockets (http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/rocket3t.html)
There is a trade off between armor, guns, and speed. Each comes at the expense of another. One method of displaying this is by a triangular graph. It has three scales for three variables. At any point on the graph, the percentages of each variable add up to 100%. There are areas of the graph. All points to the right of the red line have a higher percentage of weapons than of defenses. All points below the blue line have more weapons than propulsion. So the pointy bit that is below the blue line and to the right of the red line are all the points where the ship has more weapons than either propulsion or defenses.

This "weapon dominance" area is divided by the green line. All points above the green line have more propulsion than defense. So the blue area containing the letter "A" is the area where a ship will have more weapons than propulsion and more propulsion than defense. Indeed, in the adjacent purple area there are no defenses at all.

As an aside, Ken Burnside points out that there are actually five major dimensions of ship design: armor, guns, speed, endurance (how long between refueling and re provisioning), and command & control (how large the bridge crew is, which boils down to how many different tasks can be done simultaneously).

From Atomic Rockets (http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/rocket3t.html)
There are two classes of ships in a fleet: Main Units and Auxiliary Units.

Main units include Dreadnoughts (which were never an official type of unit but is included here as a tribute to E.E. "Doc" Smith, who spelled it "Dreadnaught"), Battleships, Battlecruisers, Heavy Cruisers, Light Cruisers, Escort Cruisers, Anti-aircraft ships, Destroyer Leaders, Destroyers, Submarines, Submarine Minelayers, Minelayers, Aircraft Carriers, and Aircraft,

Auxiliary units include Destroyer Tenders, Sub Tenders, Mine Sweepers, Aircraft Tenders, Fuel Ships (Oilers and Tankers), Supply (Logistics) Ships, Transports, Repair Ships, Hospital Ships, Colliers (missile supply ships), and Ammo ships.

There are ships that generally operate on their own, apart from any fleet. These are called Independent Units. They include Cruisers, Submarines, Gunboats, Torpedo Boats, Minelayers, Sub Chasers, Yachts, Aircraft, and assorted auxiliaries.

Don't sneer at the auxiliary units. An army marches on its stomach, and a rocket ship jets with its propellant tank. The old bromide is that amateurs study military tactics but professionals study logistics.

Of course ever since the writers of classic Star Trek took the movie The Enemy Below and re-wrote it into Balance of Terror, everybody knows that Submarines = Ships with a Cloaking Device. The advantage of submarines is that they are very good at hiding, and can attack while hid. In interplanetary terms, this would require a science fictional level of stealth, since by the laws of physics as currently understood interplanetary stealth is more or less impossible (see the entry "CLOAKING DEVICE" in The Tough Guide to the Known Galaxy). For a good treatment of this theme, read PASSAGE AT ARMS by Glen Cook. Early non-nuclear submarines needed sub tenders for logistical support. Nuclear submarines do not need them. Sub minelayers can lay mines without the large escorts that a surface minelayer requires.
The design of the ships of fleet are driven by requirements. Requirements are driven by mission and threat. The Royal Navy of the 18th century had one mission (control of the seas through destruction of the enemy fleet and blockade of his ports) and one threat (the muzzle loading black powder cannon). And it remained pretty much that way until the late 19th century. Battleships were for the destruction of the enemy fleet, and frigates (or later "cruisers") were to be where ever power was needed that didn't rate a battleship. Then newer threats showed up (the torpedo boat, the mine, the submarine) and new ships (the torpedo boat destroyer, the minesweeper, and the subchaser) appeared to counter those threats.

As those threats grew more sophisticated, and others appeared (aircraft), the design of ships and ship types changed to match. Aircraft carriers, and ships designed to counter the air threat (the Atlanta and Iowa classes) appeared. Existing ships adapted to the new threats, as destroyers became the primary defense against subs, and anti-aircraft batteries sprouted on every ship. Specialized amphibious ships were developed as the mission of projecting power ashore through troops grew more important.

After the war, the carrier was supreme, not the least because its aircraft could deliver nuclear weapons. In the US Navy the offensive mission centered totally on the carrier, and the various escorts (cruisers and destroyers) became almost purely defensive, putting up a barrier of guns, then missiles against air, and then missile attack.

(In contrast, the Soviets worked almost solely on carrier killers - cheap platforms with powerful missile armament).

For the US Navy of the future, things are changing again - the next generation "destroyer" - the DDX - will be optimized for deep attack missions against shore targets (and some of the capability will be usable for sea control). The next 'cruiser' will be a dedicated air defense platform. And a new class of ship, the "sea fighter" will take the fight close inshore, to deny the enemy the ability operate in shallow waters.

Links
http://www.projectrho.com/rocket/
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homep...spaceguide.htm

[Suicide Junkie]

Nothing to do with the mod, just that you've got a fancy design screen available... why not use it to its full potential rather than going towards mostly predefined "tokens".

[Spectarofdeath]

Well.....I'll just say this, I would support a mod like this. Obviously there are others as well. Just as obvious is that some people DON'T support the idea. Which is fine. To each their own and all that. It's not like anybody said SEVI was going to be that way, we're just talking about a mod to SEV to allow the players who WANT to play this way, this way. AFAIK nobody talked about this being added into the Balance mod or anything, just a seperate, stand alone mod. In reality we don't even need this to be a mod, someone could just figure out how to do it and paste a "what to do" list to make it work for the ones who want to use.

[President_Elect_Shang]

@SJ: Sorry but I didn’t get that at all? Was that meant for me?

@SpectarofDeath: Man I have got to come up with something shorter for you. Typing out your name is like typing mine out! Nutz! Do you have a preference? Anyway I don’t think SJ was saying making the mod was a dumb or pointless idea. He was just arguing that optimal fighter designs in each category will surface. While I don’t agree and feel a middle of the road design will come to dominate, everything is still good. I respect his opinion and feel enriched for having read it. I’m sure he will agree that he too took something positive out of this.

Now as for the mod Atrocities and I have spoken a little by PM and he has expressed an interest but lacks the time to dedicate right now. Did I get that right Atrocities? Anyway I am interested in this and have even gone so far as jotting down a few short notes focused on ship classes and what role they may best serve. Kana has posted this excellent graph which would create a wide range of flexibility, maybe even outside the scope of a mod like this. I would envision his graph best applied to one or two limited hull sizes and those few would be specialty classes. If another person is willing to head up this mod; with Atrocities blessings of course, I would certainly be willing to work on it. Currently I have another project underway and fear getting into this as a solo project.

[Suicide Junkie]

The empirical evidence in CBmod does show that you *can* make the specialized designs come to dominate... but its not nessesarily easy.

The important point is that you have to set up the underlying physics carefully; all the roles have to be of roughly equal importance. (Focus on balancing point defense, leaky PD too, in order to keep missiles fighters and ships all useful throughout the game.)
The weapons that are good for one should be mostly incompatible with use in the other roles. Not only the weapons, but engines, and defenses too.
It helps to allow things to take up huge amounts of space. A good anti-ship weapon could take up 80% of a fighter, naturally leaving you with a slow, lightly armored bomber design.
The best anti-missile weapons could be short ranged, thus requiring powerful engines to intercept successfully. Engines taking up half the space on your fighter, plus the guns, leaves little armor.
And if you want a fighter that can stand up to return fire, you'll need moderate guns and a moderate engine, giving you a dogfighter.

In SE5, you have the additional dimension of shot speed to play with, but you lose the weapon-stacking mechanism.


Its not easy, but IMO, it is worth it.

PS:
Would you like to play a game of CBmod to see the theory in action?

[President_Elect_Shang]

SJ I just realized we are talking apples and oranges here. Your observations are based on MP and mine on Solo. From each of our respective POV’s we are correct. Thanks for the offer but I don’t play online games, never have, given it some thought but haven’t been persuaded yet.

[Kana]

President_Elect_Shang said:
Kana has posted this excellent graph which would create a wide range of flexibility, maybe even outside the scope of a mod like this. I would envision his graph best applied to one or two limited hull sizes and those few would be specialty classes.

From what I gathered from that portion of the website. The chart is setup in such a way to show the balance between ship types/sizes/roles. Basically for a whole design (100%), you have to dedicate a certain percentage of the design size/weight/space whatever it is to either offensive/defensive and propulsion components. So if you want a fast ship, it will have a lot of space dedicated to engines and such, say 60%, which only leaves 40% of the remaining space for weapons and defenses. This could be a even split 20%/20%, or 10%/30%, or even 30%/10%. I'm not sure how this relates to SEV, and the ship components, but I would assume that 10 ktons of engines is the same as 10ktons of defenses, and 10ktons of weapons. So bigger guns take up more space, more tonnage dedicated to armor or shielding will allow you to absorb more damage, and more or bigger engines will allow you to manuver away from the enemy quicker, but you can't do all exeptionally well, or dedicated more space/tonnage to one specific function.

[Phoenix-D]

President_Elect_Shang said:
SJ I just realized we are talking apples and oranges here. Your observations are based on MP and mine on Solo. From each of our respective POV’s we are correct. Thanks for the offer but I don’t play online games, never have, given it some thought but haven’t been persuaded yet.

The same thing applies in solo if the AI is smart enough to recognize it.

[Spectarofdeath]

Spec or Spectar is fine, it's what other ppl use.