|
|
|
 |

June 17th, 2003, 12:22 AM
|
Colonel
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Calgary, AB, Canada
Posts: 1,743
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Weapons, engines and mods, Oh my!
this topic deserves a rename
__________________
Let the game begin!
Green bug from outa space!
|

June 17th, 2003, 12:58 AM
|
 |
Shrapnel Fanatic
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Southern CA, USA
Posts: 18,394
Thanks: 0
Thanked 12 Times in 10 Posts
|
|
Re: Weapons, engines and mods, Oh my!
In Adamant, colony ships are 3300 kT and the colony module is 3000 kT. I treated them as roughly 900 kT mass ships for purposes of engines per move, mostly just to make them slower than if they were 300 kT mass (without having no chance to move, as 300 kT is not enough to move much with a mass of 3300 kT). 
|

June 17th, 2003, 01:45 AM
|
 |
National Security Advisor
|
|
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 8,806
Thanks: 54
Thanked 33 Times in 31 Posts
|
|
Re: Weapons, engines and mods, Oh my!
Again, from what SJ says, it sounds like it is possible to get around most of the issues I anticipated with unlimited-engine QNP, if you use different sorts of values from the ones I used in Proportions. P&N seems like a great mod - I'm really hope I get more time so I can give it more of a shot (I've only started one game of it so far, though I've been tempted by the mentions of replacement players needed for PBW games).
I wouldn't say either system is better - they're both good and interesting (way more so than the unmodded system).
I still rather like the results of the Proportions QNP. I wouldn't change Proportions to unlimited-engine QNP, although it might make an interesting racial advantage. Proportions offers a nice range of propulsion designs possible with different combinations of engine types, with interesting trade-offs in cost, speed, fuel consumption, and combat mods. Those things could still exist without engine limits, but the engine limits add some baseline abilities to ship classes which give the classes themselves performance differences to consider. I like that small ships can go quite fast with just a few low-tech high-output engines (but can't go insane speeds by tripling the number of engines, even though they have "room" to do so), while massive ships take a lot to keep up to speed, and usually can't keep up with the fastest small ships. If you really want a fast large ship, though, you can spend a lot and develop gravitic drives (which isn't as efficient for smaller ships, so there is an interesting backwards efficiency effect there if that tech is developed) and/or deploy scale-mount emergency propulsion (which can be a nasty surprise for enemy light ships if mounted on a heavy interceptor ship).
PvK
|

June 17th, 2003, 02:15 AM
|
 |
Shrapnel Fanatic
|
|
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Southern CA, USA
Posts: 18,394
Thanks: 0
Thanked 12 Times in 10 Posts
|
|
Re: Weapons, engines and mods, Oh my!
|

June 17th, 2003, 06:16 AM
|
Major
|
|
Join Date: Apr 2001
Location: Rosario, Argentina
Posts: 1,047
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Weapons, engines and mods, Oh my!
Quote:
Mainly, reality is much more complex than SE4, and it seems to me from considering real-world examples, that one of the constants is that bigger is almost universally more expensive per unit measure rather than less - it's up to the larger and more expensive designs to realize their worth through even better performance.
|
I don't know where you get that impression from.
I think you may be comparing a group of tiny ships that is actually smaller than the massive one. If they are enough for the job, then yes the big ship would be overkill, but that does not make it less efficient.
That logic does not make any sense.
In general bigger designs are more efficient BECAUSE they are bigger.
Buying a large bottle of Coke is cheaper than buying many small cans.
Installing central air conditioning in a building is cheaper than installing an individual unit in every room (specially when it comes to usage and mantenance cost)
The same goes for ship systems.
Building a heavy baseship must be much cheaper than an equivalent tonnage of frigates.
Frigates will have their advantages, harder to hit, can be built faster by using many SYs. When it comes to use they can be much more flexibe being able to operate in many places at once.
Heavy baseships advantage is only being cheaper and more efficient.
Yes there are many technical details such as specialized parts, facilities, and support know how and technologies.
That is what's why you have to research to get larger hull, anyone that can design a certain ship can easily design something twice as big, research means solving all those technical issues involved in the larger design.
|

June 17th, 2003, 09:46 AM
|
 |
National Security Advisor
|
|
Join Date: Dec 1999
Posts: 8,806
Thanks: 54
Thanked 33 Times in 31 Posts
|
|
Re: Weapons, engines and mods, Oh my!
I tried looking for cost figures today, but haven't found a great source yet. My impression mainly comes from various books and discussions of naval design, which have often mentioned the great expense and difficulty of producing capital ships, which could only be justified by their ability to deliver ship superiority (usually, for semi-modern navies, by virtue of superior range).
I am entirely certain of it being true for the example of WW2 tank design. Both the Germans and the Americans considered different designs which were either relatively small weak and cheap, or large and powerful but much more difficult to produce and maintain.
Coke bottles and Coke cans are both common and cheap. The six-pack is a little more like the battleship anyway, because it's got slightly more complex and expensive ingredients and manufacturing process.
Knowledge is only part of the challenge of producing something.
Here is a good example of the sorts of problems that appear when building building massive ships, from an excellent web site describing the Japanese Yamato class battleship:
Quote:
"When the construction of the Yamato class was planned, there was no shipyard in Japan capable of building such ships without expanding it's building facilities.
Since the Japanese Navy intended to build four Yamato class ships in succession, special preparations for their construction had to be made in selected shipyards.
Some of these arrangements consisted of expanding dock capacities, building a special transport ship capable of carrying an 18 inch gun turret and hiding such a vessel behind sisal rope curtains for security reasons.
The depth of the building dock at the Kure naval yard, in which the Yamato was built, was deepened about 3 feet so that the hull could be floated in the dock.
The capacity of the gantry crane straddling the dock was increased to 100 tons in order to lift heavy armor plates. Furthermore, about a quarter of the dock at the landward end was covered with a roof to prevent it from being seen from a prominent hill nearby.
In the Yokosuka district a large dry dock was specially built and the third ship of the Yamato class, later named Shinano and converted into a carrier was built there.
The Nagasaki Yard of Mitsubishi Heavy Industries Co. Ltd. was the only other shipyard capable of building a Yamato class battleship. even with some expansion of it's facilities.
Unlike Kure's building dock a slipway was to be used for the construction there. Needless to say, the launching of a vessel weighing 30,000 tons raised various problems technically. Not only was the slipway strengthened but workshops and piers were also expanded or strengthened. The overall area of the expansion of the workshops reached a total of almost 787,401 square feet. Floating cranes of 350 tons and 150 tons were built and installed to lift heavy armor plates and gun fittings.
At Sasebo, one of the three major naval bases in Japan, a dry dock capable of accommodating a Yamato class battleship was also built.
Some measures taken to safeguard the security of the Musashi were interesting.
The slipway on which she was built was covered by a sisal rope curtain.
The total length of rope used reached 1,683 miles and it's weight totaled 408 tons. This great consumption of sisal rope caused a temporary shortage of this item on the market, and caused complaints among fishermen.
One more thing to be mentioned was the construction of a transport vessel to carry the 18 inch guns and turrets from Kure to either Nagasaki, where the Musashi was being built, or to Yokosuka, where the Shinano was to be built.
These 18 inch guns and turrets were manufactured at the Kure naval yard and they could be transported only by this specially-built vesse
Even in accommodation the Yamato had remarkable features.
She was the first Japanese warship to be equipped with an air conditioning system.
Although this comfort was not afforded to all the living quarters, the Yamato and her sister Musashi had a favorable reputation among sailors as the most comfortable ships in the Japanese Navy."
|
These are just some of the sorts of issues that come up when undergoing massive engineering projects, which don't tend to have to be considered at all for building smaller craft. However, except for WW2 tanks, I'm not entirely sure how well the numbers back up these ideas. I'd like to know, so I'm going to try to dig up some good figures.
PvK
|

June 17th, 2003, 12:29 PM
|
 |
Lieutenant General
|
|
Join Date: Jan 2001
Location: Oxford, UK
Posts: 2,592
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: Weapons, engines and mods, Oh my!
Surprisinly, nobody mentioned yet the wonderfull idea of using engine mounts insted of engine numbers to achieve "realistic" ship movement.
I forgot what mod uses this idea, but I really like it !
__________________
It is forbidden to kill; therefore all murderers are punished unless they kill in large numbers and to the sound of trumpets. - Voltaire
|
Posting Rules
|
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts
HTML code is On
|
|
|
|
|