Carrier Battles Mod

[Suicide Junkie]

I think a thickness mount for armor will be good too:
EG:
Steel Armor Plating I
size - 1
HP - 3

Then we have mounts:
1-inch plating: size x1, hp x10
2-inch plating: size x2, hp x18
3-inch plating: size x3, hp x24
4-inch plating: size x4, hp x32

The rationale being as follows:
Thicker plating is less efficient in hp/kt, however the large hp per component makes it less leaky, and also improves the performance of any leaky shields which are still operating.

For example, the 1-inch steel plating (when shields are not destroyed) will be immune to weapons of less than 30 damage per hit.
4-inch plating, on the other hand, will have 80% the structural strength of the thin armor, but will be immune to weapons of less than 96 damage.

[Ed Kolis]

I suggested something like this for Adamant a while back (well, I suggested standard armor and then light and heavy armor mounts) but Fyron said it would be too complicated; he only wanted 2 types of armor

Just a silly question... why are you measuring the gun bores in millimeters but the armor in inches?

edit: oh, and maybe it would be good to have a "default" thickness for armor - in other words, instead of your scheme where the armors have 3 HP unmounted and the mounts raise their hitpoints by factors of 10-32, have the armors 30 HP unmounted and have the mounts raise their hitpoints by factors of 1 (no raise) to 3.2. That way if you forget to use a mount on your armor you're not screwed, you just get a "default" 1-inch armor

[Suicide Junkie]

I dunno.

What's a good armor thickness to use, anyways?
20 to 100 in cm?

[ZeroAdunn]

I think with armor mounts you are getting a few too many mounts.

[Suicide Junkie]

http://imagemodserver.mine.nu/other/...s_prealpha.zip

Strategies make a huge difference.
I just tried a simulator combat, small carrier loaded, vs 7 anti-fighter destroyers, which should be roughly balanced construction and maintenance costs wise.

With default strategies, the destroyers lose only one ship, and have only one or two damaged.

With smarter fighter strategies (not tactical combat - actual strategies), those destroyers all get disabled by the fighters. Although the fighters all die, the destroyers are worse than dead
In the combat I ran, the destroyers were left with weapons mostly intact, but immobilized and bleeding supplies.

In this case, the whole fighter load was set up as heavy dogfighters. Anti-Missile action was not a priority for any of them, though they did take some pot shots at missiles when there were no ships in range.

Note: Most of the tech levels are not finished, and race design has not been looked at yet.
This is just a Pre-alpha peek

[Arkcon]

Suicide Junkie said:
"I think a thickness mount for armor will be good too:
EG:
Steel Armor Plating I
size - 1
HP - 3

Then we have mounts:"

*SNIP*

This is very exciting, thickness mounts for armor. Now you'll be able to decide if you want light armor to provide some defense, or build a massive flying brick of a warship.

If only the armor had another detriment -- say, making to ship too very massive would rob you of some propulsion. Can you give armor a fractional minus to propulsion? So piling armor onto a large ship robs you of some movement, but the average amount of armor on a smaller ship wouldn't notice it at all.

[Suicide Junkie]

Arkcon said:
If only the armor had another detriment -- say, making to ship too very massive would rob you of some propulsion. Can you give armor a fractional minus to propulsion?

QNP does that automatically.

If you want to spend 10% more space on armor, you have to take the tonnage out of engines (or guns), and thus reduce your speed (or firepower).

If you want to allow some "free" armor, you can add some 0-kt components with a 10-per-ship limit.

[Nodachi]

Suicide Junkie said :

Anti-Missile action was not a priority for any of them, though they did take some pot shots at missiles when there were no ships in range.

Would putting a level of Multiplex Tracking on the hull solve this, assuming that the anti-missile weapons can't target anything else?

[Suicide Junkie]

Nodachi said:
Would putting a level of Multiplex Tracking on the hull solve this, assuming that the anti-missile weapons can't target anything else?

There were no missile-specific weapons on the figthers, so no.

I'm not sure if fighters get free multiplex, but I think I'll add some to the hulls just to be sure.
There are lots of fighters in the stack, so multi-targetting should not be a problem.

[VaultDweller]

Suicide

Hows the progress going, I'm really interested in this idea and wanted see if the idea is still alive.


VaultDweller