View Thread
Page 1 of 2: 12
|
 Briefing on LiirHra Block 16 refit
|
|
| TelQuessir |
Posted on 26-09-2005 05:47
|
 Posts: 2598 Joined: August 30 2005 |
This briefing is for all light cruiser whores like Yasotay! There is going to be a drastic change in the LiirHra's weapons loadout. Over the past 3 weeks I have evaluated many sources of feedback stating that the battlecruiser class heavy armaments on the LH is overkill for the cruiser's role as a fast attack ship - they are simply too slow and draw too much from the ship in terms of power requirements and of course the internal space they take up. Thus, freeing up the dorsal heavy turret mount point and the ventral gun system will make room for about twice or three times as many heavy pulse ion cannons that are able to react faster and more decisively to a dynamic battlespace scenario. The 300mm pulse ion cannon is also a dual purpose weapon system, able to engage both small craft and armoured capital ships with high effectiveness. Thus a battery of three 300mm PICs in place of the present dual 557mm mount will make the LH cruiser both a more formidable combatant, and increase her maneuverability even further. Rounding out the resulting vast inventory of fast-response, high firepower repeating DEWs shall be a secondary battery of multiple 140mm automatic cannons, broadside medium ion cannons and short range attack missile pods (SRAMs), which have proven themselves as devastating short to medium range offensive weapon systems. Alternatively, the 300mm PICs may be retrofitted with HVR150 turreted launchers if a ballistic weapon loadout is desired - the HVR150 is capable of defeating frigate class frontal plating in the first hit thus a HVR150 loadout will have increased anti-capital ship firepower at the cost of lower sustainability of fire. In conclusion, the LiirHra we know will not have the smooth lines she has now - in order for the LH class cruiser to remain viable in the Generation Five battlespace she, like her other sisters-in-arms, will have to adapt to changing military requirements and keep ahead in the continuous game of technological evolution. |
|
|
|
| MarieHawke |
Posted on 26-09-2005 06:11
|
 Posts: 501 Joined: September 02 2005 |
Everywhere we have three PIC300s, isn't it better to have a hybrid(!) loadout with one HVR150 turret as well? Best of both worlds, more gas mileage, better taste, you know where I'm coming from.
A starlight sharpshot magical girl!
|
|
|
|
| yasotay |
Posted on 26-09-2005 13:44
|
 Posts: 637 Joined: September 09 2005 |
mmm... I really must get in on the MSN conversations.  I doubt anyone would object to better firepower. As long as the loadout provides for better maneuver and firepower, I doubt any crew would object. Of course all of these changes would put the HGN in the same boat as the Germans in WW2. A tremendous number of variations that the crews would have to know how to operate and the loggies would have to provide special parts for. The rapid fire change in the HGN vessels would present a very challenging training and logistics challenge for the HGN. Of course we do not have to worry about those RW issues here. Anyway looks good to me for a Block 16 |
|
|
|
| Glacialis |
Posted on 26-09-2005 14:43
|
 Posts: 368 Joined: September 02 2005 |
I know that this is unlikely, but in an attempt to preserve the clean lines and lower profile of the LH, does anyone have low-profile turrets they've been working on? Could certainly help a wide variety of ships -- less vulnerable to targeted fire and assisting with stealthiness. |
|
|
|
| yasotay |
Posted on 26-09-2005 23:22
|
|
Posts: 637 Joined: September 09 2005 |
I hope with the increased firepower and other capabilities and with an increase in the number of ships available, the LH(B.16) we will finally be able to exploit the 'hunter/killer' team tactics that a couple of these ought to exhibit. In early LH testing (way back when the ship had not even been finished [pre PDS ver. 5.0 I think]) it was a wonderful bit of fun to take a couple of LH and take apart Vaygr DD, CV and cripple ToF. Like watching a bull fight actually. Of course with the increased capability of the Vaygr and their significant increase in missile tech within the Vaygr ships has changed this dynamic somewhat. The limited availability of the LH within the Fleet also made it impossible to execute the pure H/K tactics. While an LH with PATCOM or Khopesh groups was able to exploit anti-frigate or strike group ops, it was difficult to maneuver against the capitol ships effectively. So the LH grows warts (maybe?)!. Perhaps Block 17 or greater will see an Aegis version with no dorsal or ventral main weapons. These space being used for VLM bays for heavy ASM or ADM. Is it possible that Block 15 and 16 (with later follow blocks as they come) will be considered to all be available simultaneously for access for combat operations? I realize B.16 superceeds B.15 so this may not be practical but it would be interesting to have a H/K team that allows for both close assault and stand-off engagement in the future. Edited by yasotay on 26-09-2005 23:27 |
|
|
|
| Glacialis |
Posted on 27-09-2005 00:43
|
|
Posts: 368 Joined: September 02 2005 |
Enlighten me: Block? Is that another way of saying Mark? |
|
|
|
| TelQuessir |
Posted on 27-09-2005 00:48
|
|
Posts: 2598 Joined: August 30 2005 |
Yes, you can say that. Example - F-16C Block 50/60. For streamlined turrets - I don't want that for the present situation. This will reflect the relatively crude nature of a field modification - streamlining comes later. |
|
|
|
| Glacialis |
Posted on 27-09-2005 15:25
|
|
Posts: 368 Joined: September 02 2005 |
Works for me. |
|
|
|
| TekGnosis |
Posted on 27-09-2005 16:18
|
 Posts: 11 Joined: September 02 2005 |
I've been fighting with the loadout of the smooth but sometimes ineffective ship for quite some time. Having toyed with the project of stripping the HOD of weapons and placing hardpoints instead, I am quite pleased to see this enter into existance, allowing continued use of a strong chasis designed with little battle experience in turret placement. I feel obligated to note the choice of +40 degree PIC turrets when an energy mount not constrained by plasma or physica munition load would be at least +70 deg. Also the obvious mountings that fire 'through' the ship on straight ahead shots... Simple hull clearance for 360 operation will be a blessing for this craft. w00t |
|
|
|
| BigFish |
Posted on 27-09-2005 18:36
|
|
Posts: 106 Joined: September 02 2005 |
could you chanel the ICs out throught the tips of the wings? more clearance that way
Rampent Kitty-basher
http://img341.imageshack.us/img341/10...ang0gu.gif |
|
|
|
| TelQuessir |
Posted on 28-09-2005 00:37
|
|
Posts: 2598 Joined: August 30 2005 |
The wings are sensor systems at this point - reference, Yasotay's fiction. (I'll upload the document to filefront soon) |
|
|
|
| BigFish |
Posted on 28-09-2005 00:56
|
|
Posts: 106 Joined: September 02 2005 |
Quote The wings are sensor systems at this point Rampent Kitty-basher
http://img341.imageshack.us/img341/10...ang0gu.gif |
|
|
|
| Thorin |
Posted on 28-09-2005 03:03
|
 Posts: 414 Joined: September 02 2005 |
Well, putting ICAs on the flat areas of that would interfere with sensors... There should be no surprise that I am happy at the operational status of broadside beam weapons  |
|
|
|
| yasotay |
Posted on 28-09-2005 04:29
|
|
Posts: 637 Joined: September 09 2005 |
The wings support sensor systems and PROGENTECH hyper technology that makes hyperspace more efficient for the given ship size. That last bit is fluff and I don't think that it has actually been implimented into the game. Not sure that the game, being a tactical level game really has a sensitivity to that sort of thing. |
|
|
|
| TelQuessir |
Posted on 28-09-2005 04:58
|
|
Posts: 2598 Joined: August 30 2005 |
With the proliferation of 4-5G conventional and hyper-drives the differences in efficiency would be non-existent. Fuel expenditure for hyper transits varies according to ship mass, so getting a Khopesh from place to place would be cheaper. So the LH ingame although I didn't pay much attention - would have a reasonable hyper cost for a small capital ship with the similar mass to a Imperator CVF. |
|
|
|
| yasotay |
Posted on 28-09-2005 05:23
|
|
Posts: 637 Joined: September 09 2005 |
Indeed it was not something that was significant enough to concern ourselves with. It was just some fluff why the Hiigaran ships started sprouting wings |
|
|
|
| TelQuessir |
Posted on 29-09-2005 05:42
|
|
Posts: 2598 Joined: August 30 2005 |
Yep, wing mounted sensor systems are one of the ideas explored in 5G tech. Consider that sensor systems on a ship's main hull can detract from performance of other systems on board, or compromise on some survivability. |
|
|
|
| Thorin |
Posted on 07-10-2005 04:04
|
|
Posts: 414 Joined: September 02 2005 |
I have taken up the task. First report: The large 577mm stream ion cannon has been removed, and the plasma ducting system has been analysed. In its place will be three 300mm pulse ion cannons, and a beam version in the middle. It, unlike the ICA180, can benefit from the agility of the turret it is using. I will likely also replace the ventral PC300 with a single 4x SRAC140 turret. I'm still prospecting for additional point defense locations, and am considering other broadside weapons. |
|
|
|
| MarieHawke |
Posted on 07-10-2005 04:34
|
|
Posts: 501 Joined: September 02 2005 |
*notices everyone is looking at him* Fine, fine, after I'm done with homework, I'll screen the CL and make weapon mount layouts. Also, Thorin, did you forget about the HVR150s? A starlight sharpshot magical girl!
|
|
|
|
| TelQuessir |
Posted on 07-10-2005 04:36
|
|
Posts: 2598 Joined: August 30 2005 |
Thorin's spearhead effort will get all the hardpoints in place. Then we decide whether we want HVRs or heavy pulsars. |
|
|
|
Page 1 of 2: 12
| Jump to Forum |