Naval Combat Primer (old)

[AKO]

Octagon,

Does that also mean that you cannot use them in a battle, since when a battle starts you do not have the time to assemble them from the crates? If your request is fullfilled, don't you agree that they can only be used for replenishment after a battle?

[octagon999]

Totally agree.

 

They would have to be reinforced in some future action, not during or even after a battle.

 

If you want after-battle supply, then build CVE's, not cargo ships carrying fighters and drones.

 

I'm thinking it worked in the Pacific, it should work in the 29th century.

 

I think the problem in terms of programming is the whole approach to cargo in the first place. But regardless, I hate for the program to "wag the dog". It should be possible, therefore it should be. Period.

[RTGPete]

For the LIFE of me, I cannot understand the logic behind fighters and drones not being able to be carried as cargo. Not launched, but carried. It makes NO sense to me. Sorry to be so undiplomatic, but this one escapes me.

 

You should be able to crate up both and ship them as cargo. Period.

In a way, they are carried as cargo. It's just that they require Fighter Bays or Drone Racks to do the carrying. If there were no Fighter Bays/Drone Racks in the game, things would be less interesting

 

I'm considering adding crating to the mix. It's not like there is any fundamental difference between Fighter Bays and Cargo Bays, except to add spice to the game and limit the number of Fighters that can be launched. With crating, you would have complete control over your launch and resupply capabilities. I feel that this would be superior to eliminating the concept of Fighter Bays/Drone Racks entirely from the game. Dedicating production tonnage to Bays/Racks means that you cannot simply switch a cargo ship over from hauling duty to become an instant fleet carrier.

[RTGPete]

Along this line, what if some carriers were destroyed in a battle and more fighters remained than were bays enough to carry them>? Would the figs die? IF so, then an uncrate/assemble order placed at a time where available space was low would spell the death of much material. This would be a natural delay to the re-supply process and likely good game design if automatic resupply of figs us undesirable as you cannot simply give several uncrate orders during a battle turn and be guaranteed that there will be slots for them to fit into.

 

Perhaps if the ship were given "launchable flags" noting how many figs could be launched based on available fig bays, so figs could still be carried in cargo bays, but not deployed.

Excess fighters (those without Bays to carry them) ditch, just like they did in WWII.

 

An uncrating option would not allow more Fighters to be uncrated than you had Fighter Bays for.

 

A launch count could be used instead of crating, but that would make Fighter/Drone operations perhaps too simple, with instant effective reloads occurring after every battle. There is an inherent challenge in using these expendable units--they do have superior firepower per ton, but resupply issues help to counter that advantage.

[hobknob]

I like the idea of crated fighters and drones. If you need to have the appropriate racks to carry reloads you really are just rotating the fleet back to dry dock for refit. This would also mean that the only way to supply at a forward base without using more warships to carry the drones/fighters is to carry the materials to the forward base and build them there. This is fine and dandy it that's what you want and could actually make a forward base/colony useful as a strategic point. However, given the option I would much rather see crated items that can be used to conduct resupply at space. I also agree that this is could be too powerful if it happened automatically and therefore should only happen as a result of a specific order.

 

Along these same resupply lines I would like to see some sort of casual tender that could transport large quantaties of fighters and/or drones but would not necessarily be able to launch many/any of them in the event of combat. This would likely require yet another type of cargo bay that would likely hold more than the current bays, but lacking much of the support system stuff that would allow the launch of the weapon system. Ships with these bays would be able transport but not launch the fighters or drones. The tradeoff would have to be that the bays cost less than the current bays or they kind of lose their value.

 

Since the fuel order only deals with a single item I think that it works. I don't think that it would work with numerous items that are interchangeable since you wouldn't have any control over what went where. To really do this you would need to have a fleet to fleet tranfer order and once again that idea has been shot down.

 

The other point of this discussion is that my exploring fleets not only need to have at least 25,000 carge per order executed but also need to have both fighter bays and drone racks in order to be completely covered. There are a lot of fighter a drone types out there so I imagine they will be fairly regular items to find. Of course they may not even be available at all. Who knows?

 

On a similar topic we still need some more information on the repair function of the game. If we may be ditching fighters due to lack or carrier spaces it would be nice to be able know which ones are the first to be ditched and to also be assured that before anything ditches all possible bays will be at 100%.

 

Another fighter issue that I noticed long ago was the inability to detail tactics to different types of fighters. You may have a mixed force of interceptors, bombers, strike fighters etc and they all have different strengths and functions. Has this been worked out or is it still rather limiting?

 

[EternusIV]

Thanks Pete

 

1) I think the drone/fighter system is just fine and I wouldn't want "cargo" ships able to carry fighters/drones alongside carriers.....

 

2) I continue to support the movement to allow fleet to fleet transfer on all other goods except drones/fighters/troops

 

 

PS = merge NEWF/RN orders?

 

Hobknob-

 

you posted seconds before me, hehe....

 

As for diverse fighters/drones, I expected to build separate fleets/ships that carry each type to better track their effectiveness and use. I imagine the variance in damage type is cumulative...and I wouldn't want to issue separate tactics for each fighter/drone type....<shudders>.....

 

I completely oppose fighters/drones being carried as cargo. Why? They aren't run of the mill carg to begin with. You won't see oil tankers and trains shoving F16s into their holds. I can't imagine stuffing an x-wing fighter on a ship designed to haul around iron. /shrug

 

From a gaming perspective --- I DONT WANT TO CHANGE THE RULES IN MIDSTREAM. As it stands now, it takes a ton of resources to build fighter bays/drone racks. Allowing fighters/drones as cargo undermines the current choice early empires have: CBs or Fighter Bays/Drone Racks?

 

 

Cargo Bays and Racks/Bays cost the same amount of steel to hold the same amount of fighters. The only reason to have Fighter Bays and Drone Racks would to make them a unique production requirement for building Fighter/Drone fleets. The disadvantage of having FB/DR as opposed to Cargo Bays only concerns flexibility.....to allow fighters/drones to be hauled aroound like "cargo" would make FB/DR obsolete...as I would prefer the more flexible cargo bay everytime.

 

There is a unique strategic element at play as well - I can neutralize a Fighter/Drone fleet in one of two ways: 1) Defeat their fighters/droens with Point Defense; or 2) Wipe out the carriers. Advantage: Defender. Which is fine - because I have a feeling that Fighter/Drone fleets have a tremendous upside to them anyway....

 

 

I like the current system: if you want to use fighters/drones, you better have a damn good supply line and plan laid out.

 

To change it, reduces a critical layer of strategy from the game.

[Laserwolf]

Isnt the fragile nature of cargo ships enough to offset the benefit of having them in your fleet for resupply? What a wonderful target, cargo ships full of crated figs and drones. Automatic, after battle resupply, (like an "X" order only) as opposed to during combat could make it workable.

 

Because 10,000 cargo bays cost the same as a 10,000 tons of Fig bay, it is not a production saving effort, only a fleet efficiency one. Unless you are planning to make crated figs LIGHTER than assembled ones...

[hobknob]

My initial thought is that I would not want to have cargo ships patrolling with my war fleets. Instead I would want them somewhere nearby and would simply meet at a location to offer some resupply items. The only time they would be in combat is if the resupply ships were attacked directly. I guess what I am looking for is some sort of compromise between dedicated fighter.drone bays and cargo space. I can't seem to get past the idea that there needs to be a way to resupply that isn't just rotating other carriers out with fresh loads. Even if you just have rotating carriers you still have the problem of not being able to actually move the fighters from one fleet to another without conducting several RN's and fuel order.

 

I also have a tough time with the idea that I can pick up a 25,000 ton item that spreads across multiple ships yet I can't grab a 100 ton fighter or drone and stick it in the cargo hold. This just doesn't make sense.

 

For some reason I also thought that fighter bays had a lot of support equipment that would preclude them form carrying the same amount of stuff as the same tonnage of open cargo, ie a big box. Must have been wishful thinking on my part.

 

[EternusIV]

If we crate:

 

"crates" should cost at least twice us much per tonnage of fighter/drone carried.

 

Hobnob--

 

I love this point:

 

Even if you just have rotating carriers you still have the problem of not being able to actually move the fighters from one fleet to another without conducting several RN's and fuel order.

 

and this one:

 

For some reason I also thought that fighter bays had a lot of support equipment that would preclude them form carrying the same amount of stuff as the same tonnage of open cargo

 

As it stands now, the most effective way you can reload fighters/drones, is by docking them....I'm not so sure thats a "bad" system. Convenient? No. Realistic? Well, its a game Do I like it? For now

[hobknob]

Alright!!!! Two more sound bites for me.

[ShadowKitsune]

Eternus,

 

I must respectfully disagree with your idea to make "crates" cost twice as much. I don't see where that makes any sense at all. To me, the difference between a crated fighter or drone and a deployable fighter or drone is analogous to Population and Colonists - one you can move around, the other you can use.

 

While you may not see F-14 Tomcats being loaded onto a Tractor-Trailer rig, you will definitely find parts being shipped that way. Additionally, SN:ROTE doesn't allow you to fly a replacement fighter wing to the front. You have to carry it there. Drones are even easier to justify, since they are simple big, smart missiles, and missiles are carried by truck, plane and ship to resupply the forward elements of your armed forces.

 

To me, Drone Racks and Fighter Bays allow you to use specialized munitions: Drones and Fighters. You should be able to tote them around in cargo bays.

 

The only justification I see for not allowing Fighters to be carried as cargo is that Fighters ostensibly require Pilots, and you can't tote Pilots around in Cargo Bays. Of course, since Fighters don't actually require Pilots (or Troopers of any stripe) in order to be constructed, one could argue that they are an abstraction that automatically come with any vessel that has Fighter Bays in whatever quantity is necessary. If that is the case, then Fighters should be considered ultra-sophisticated (super-genius smart) munitions and therefore should be portable as cargo.

 

-SK

[Locklyn]

Fighters ostensibly require Pilots

 

AHA! That would explain the poor results we've been having with our Strike Fighters, your actually supposed to put a gremloid into that small, lightly armored can of highly explosive fuel thingy???

 

Perhaps we should relook the Bombardment Drone tech instead

 

/Locklyn

[EternusIV]

Locklyn-

 

AHA! That would explain the poor results we've been having with our Strike Fighters, your actually supposed to put a gremloid into that small, lightly armored can of highly explosive fuel thingy???

 

:lol:

 

SK-

 

I must respectfully disagree with your idea to make "crates" cost twice as much.

 

I guess my main conern is that it should take a little extra effort to keep drones/fighters resupplied. And you make some good points, SK.

 

Well, wherever the shoe falls, I hope we find out about the change soon. The sooner I know, the sooner I can plan my long-range forward base strategies.

 

 

Hobknob-

 

Alright!!!! Two more sound bites for me.

 

Three

[Kurassier]

I would make an analogy to Victory here. In Victory, you can move planes aboard cargo ships you just can't use or deploy them until they are offloaded at a port. The same could be used here, you can crate fighters around as Cargo, but can't USE them as fighters until they are offloaded at a port (or in this case, colony or HW) and then loaded unto a ship capable of handling fighters. This to me makes perfect sense. If you want 'instant' reload, then build ships with fighter bays, that are capable of launching them.

Also, (if you are worried about losing fighters to lack of space in battle) if you have multiple CV/CVE's, don't load them to capacity, that way if one is destroyed, the fighters can land on other ships.

 

[octagon999]

I agree with K's points exactly. I'm not nearly suggesting that fighters and drones be able to resupply in fleet. But they should be able to do what was done in WWII. Load them aboard freighters, ship them to (pick your port of choice). Unload them. Fly them to either carriers or airbases.

 

Now, on another point altogether... Why is it that fleets can execute exploration orders, but pop groups cannot?

 

Why not be able to assign an explorer/scientist, whatever to a world, and have that pop group perform an EXPL order?