Oolite Bulletins

El Viejo wrote:

Incoming!

Thank you Sir, arrived safely.
But since I'm going to work in the morning, I'll have a look tomorrow. I don't trust myself to start up Oolite now.

El Viejo wrote:

Zero-distance doubles attract me, and I think they may attract the Navy as well.

Goood point.... Needs investigating.

Don't forget to visit L'Auberge de Lago, the finest restaurant in the eight!

Gimi, you are in for a treat

Gimi wrote:

The reason I'm asking for a sun, is that I'm thinking that the one place where you might meet the Navy during normal play is when sun skimming. In addition to that, I'm also thinking that the navy probably wouldn't want their high value resources wandering around where everyone can see them. An uncharted system would be ideal.

Could be a brown dwarf ... basically a whacking big gas giant. You could see if you could create something like the fuelling zone from Thargoid's fuel station OXP somewhere under its atmosphere, just at the point where the altitude gets perilous. That might simulate skimming – or at least "scooping up patches of quirium from the atmosphere of a brown dwarf".

Edit: the gas giant wouldn't need to be that big: apparently they all have roughly the same radius as Jupiter – it's just their mass that's bigger.

Smivs wrote:

Gimi, you are in for a treat

Yep... unfortunately, I didn't send you my overloaded-with-asteroids personal copy of Coyote's Run. I'll organise that tomorrow.

Disembodied wrote:

Could be a brown dwarf ... basically a whacking big gas giant.

Another good idea, D!

Would be nice if my Behemoth Lave class could make it into this oxp. It is currently in the ADCK's Behemoth OXP.

Smivs wrote:

The Boa Class Cruiser is to my mind mis-named. It is a civilian transport/freighter and the name 'cruiser' implies a military role. I therefore normally refer to it as the Boa 2.
...
bearing in mind that the stock Boa 2 is fairly quick and manoevreable I think this vessel fits more into a Destroyer role. A heavily modified Anaconda might make a better cruiser.

Fair enough. The Boa 2 and especially the Boa 2 Clipper are as fast as almost any fighter in the game, so despite the silly naming conventions calling them "Destroyers" isn't too far-fetched.
Modifying Anacondas into a fast and heavier "Cruiser" type should/would reduce its cargo bay considerably...and still might not justify giving them >0.3 LM speeds. The Galactic Navy Anaconda Transport could could even be renamed "Flak Cruiser" due to its turrets...then its military-quality power plant can run the engines and the turrets, something a smaller ship should couldn't feasibly do.

Gimi wrote:

HIMSN Light cruiser with small docking bay allowing docking of Sidewinders.
HIMSN Assault Ship. Bulky Logistics ship with docking bay up to Asp size ships.
HIMSN Behemoth. Large battle ship with docking bay.

Your Light Cruiser and Assault Ship are more like escort and light carriers, but just to make them big enough to suit their role will make them a lot bigger than an Anaconda. Either the Sidewinders or Asps have to be turned around inside these mini-carriers or they have to either dock or launch in reverse. Carrying capacity really needs to be greater than 4 "fighters" carried internally just to justify their existence. On top of that, the overspecialized docking bays would pretty much doom the design to obscurity. But I think the whole idea of multiple "carrier" types gets away from the idea of a small overall navy.

Behemoths can exist simply because they're limited to 16 total and considered budget-breakers. As big as they are, even they probably can't hold more than 20 Sidewinders or fewer larger ship-types. You should never see one patrolling a system. It would either be coming back for repairs/replenishment or fighting the bugs in distant interstellar space .

To keep the Navy different than GalCop, Vipers probably should be excluded as possible navy fighter types. They are explicitly police ships. Instead it make more sense for the Behemoth to carry upgraded military-quality Sidewinders and Asps. Regular Sidewinders are so heavily mass-produced that trader freighters can be escorted by 2 or more of them. Asps should be fewer in number at least in proximity to Behemoths, due to their higher cost than the Sidewinders. They don't need a carrier to hyperspace jump, so the Behemoth only acts as a rest stop for their pilots. Asps are desperately needed in solo/paired armed recon missions where anything slower and weaker would die.

Cobra 3's might be used as a small missile bomber, used as an interim ship at least out of urgent desperation until replaced by a specialized navy ship...which will never be seen due to the navy being overstretched and underfunded.

Multiple Constrictors, if they ever get produced, would be too expensive and too few to replace Asps, Cobra 3's, and Sidewinders. At best, I'd believe they could barely exceed Behemoths in number. But they would fit too many roles (fighter, bomber, scout) and would not be consistently available for any of them. Any Navy Admiral requesting them for missions would likely be "outbid" by other higher-ranking Admirals demanding their use elsewhere. Even spreading a "massive" 40 Constrictors between all the different navy commands means each navy command might get 5, if each navy command roughly included a Galaxy Chart in their sphere of influence. Were they stationed as part of the fighter compliment of the 16 Behemoths, there'd only be 2-3 with each Behemoth. They should be latecomers to the fight, by which time there likely isn't 16 Behemoths left in service.

So, for the total navy:
16 Behemoths (8 older types, 8 newer types)
Anaconda Transport "Flak Cruisers"
standard Anaconda "Supply Ships"
Boa 2 and/or Boa 2 Clipper "Destroyers"
Navy Asps "figher/recon/solo craft"
Navy Cobra 3's "light bombers"
Navy Sidewinders "close support fighters"
Navy Morays "Search-and-Rescue" ships
Navy Constrictors "Special OPs" ships (but very few in number)
numerous Worms, Shuttles, and Transporters

Even assuming there's 4-10 "Flak Cruisers" or "Destroyers" per Behemoth, there's no reason to have more than 1-3 big bases spread between all 8 galaxy charts for major support and 1-3 small bases per galaxy chart so supplies can reach them in less than 1 month.

Very cool ideas guys. There were some old ideas I had thought of last year pertaining to an oolite advanced oxp concept, some of which might work here.

Take the boa class cruiser and the python class cruiser...and blow them up to 2 or 3 times the size, same models, different textures. Make 'em military ships for this oxp of yours. In addition, modify slightly both ships with a dock box sideways through the ship(imagine a flight deck where the floor moves vertically from below and pops up with a sidewinder and then it launches out the side of the ship, you don't have to make a moving deck, just imagining how it works and has ships shooting out the sides.) These variants would be called the boa class carrier and the python class carrier... And they would carry the sidewinders the way the british had harrier jump jets, maybe half a dozen to a carrier, maybe big missile and laser batteries on the front for the low profile aspect shown to the enemy and plasma turrets on the sides for defense. And forget the Anaconda, it's a freighter like those ponderous cargo container ships that plod along the oceans today in RL. You couldn't realistically make that into a warship so why the Anaconda?

Anyway these are just ideas I made notes on that also included a much larger Anaconda, larger main stations that could dock these bigger versions of ships and smaller cargo containers with flashers. Just dreams of mine really...

Switeck wrote:

Fair enough. The Boa 2 and especially the Boa 2 Clipper are as fast as almost any fighter in the game, so despite the silly naming conventions calling them "Destroyers" isn't too far-fetched.

Agreed, and in modern Navies today the Cruiser, Destroyer, Frigate denotions are more linked to their role and capability rather than size and speed. I do wish to use "slightly" modified versions of the standard ships as much as possible.

Switeck wrote:

Modifying Anacondas into a fast and heavier "Cruiser" type should/would reduce its cargo bay considerably...and still might not justify giving them >0.3 LM speeds. The Galactic Navy Anaconda Transport could could even be renamed "Flak Cruiser" due to its turrets...then its military-quality power plant can run the engines and the turrets, something a smaller ship should couldn't feasibly do.

Military combat ships won't have any cargo space. All taken up by extra fuel, sensors and weapon systems. The Military Anaconda supply ship however, will have it's full cargo space, and will have to rely on a small escort for protection. If destroyed, it should drop ONLY food, arms and medical supplies (narcotics). So not a very profitable ship to attack for a clean trader. I don't foresee putting turrets on the Anaconda at all, I want to reserve turrets for the very large ships.

Switeck wrote:

Gimi wrote:

HIMSN Light cruiser with small docking bay allowing docking of Sidewinders.
HIMSN Assault Ship. Bulky Logistics ship with docking bay up to Asp size ships.
HIMSN Behemoth. Large battle ship with docking bay.

Your Light Cruiser and Assault Ship are more like escort and light carriers, but just to make them big enough to suit their role will make them a lot bigger than an Anaconda. Either the Sidewinders or Asps have to be turned around inside these mini-carriers or they have to either dock or launch in reverse. Carrying capacity really needs to be greater than 4 "fighters" carried internally just to justify their existence. On top of that, the overspecialized docking bays would pretty much doom the design to obscurity. But I think the whole idea of multiple "carrier" types gets away from the idea of a small overall navy.

Agree, and nothing is set in stone. My idea for the assault ship comes from RL Amphibious Assault Ships. Basically a ship that is more support and logistics than combat, but with command facilities on board and designed for "special" operations. It carries the hardware to battle, so I would want it to have a smaller docking bay, able to launch Sidewinders and, if they are small enough, Constrictors only. 6 Sidewinders and 2 Constrictors pr ship. This might not work though. I foresee the navy having maybe 2 or 4 of these.

Switeck wrote:

Behemoths can exist simply because they're limited to 16 total and considered budget-breakers. As big as they are, even they probably can't hold more than 20 Sidewinders or fewer larger ship-types. You should never see one patrolling a system. It would either be coming back for repairs/replenishment or fighting the bugs in distant interstellar space.

Agree

Switeck wrote:

To keep the Navy different than GalCop, Vipers probably should be excluded as possible navy fighter types. They are explicitly police ships. Instead it make more sense for the Behemoth to carry upgraded military-quality Sidewinders and Asps. Regular Sidewinders are so heavily mass-produced that trader freighters can be escorted by 2 or more of them. Asps should be fewer in number at least in proximity to Behemoths, due to their higher cost than the Sidewinders. They don't need a carrier to hyperspace jump, so the Behemoth only acts as a rest stop for their pilots. Asps are desperately needed in solo/paired armed recon missions where anything slower and weaker would die.

Agree, Vipers are police ships and will not feature in HIMSN.
I see Asp as the main heavy fighter
The Sidewinder as a light fighter attacking in formation using some sort of swarm tactics.
The Constrictor would be mainly used for recon and spec ops.

Switeck wrote:

Cobra 3's might be used as a small missile bomber, used as an interim ship at least out of urgent desperation until replaced by a specialized navy ship...which will never be seen due to the navy being overstretched and underfunded.

Cobra 3's will not feature in HIMSN.

Switeck wrote:

Multiple Constrictors, if they ever get produced, would be too expensive and too few to replace Asps, Cobra 3's, and Sidewinders. At best, I'd believe they could barely exceed Behemoths in number. But they would fit too many roles (fighter, bomber, scout) and would not be consistently available for any of them. Any Navy Admiral requesting them for missions would likely be "outbid" by other higher-ranking Admirals demanding their use elsewhere. Even spreading a "massive" 40 Constrictors between all the different navy commands means each navy command might get 5, if each navy command roughly included a Galaxy Chart in their sphere of influence. Were they stationed as part of the fighter compliment of the 16 Behemoths, there'd only be 2-3 with each Behemoth. They should be latecomers to the fight, by which time there likely isn't 16 Behemoths left in service.

2 Constrictors for each Assault ship pluss maybe 6 or 8 in reserve at stations, none on the Behemoths. They are restricted to recon and spec ops only and I foresee them having a cloaking device.

Switeck wrote:

So, for the total navy:
16 Behemoths (8 older types, 8 newer types)
Anaconda Transport "Flak Cruisers"
standard Anaconda "Supply Ships"
Boa 2 and/or Boa 2 Clipper "Destroyers"
Navy Asps "figher/recon/solo craft"
Navy Cobra 3's "light bombers"
Navy Sidewinders "close support fighters"
Navy Morays "Search-and-Rescue" ships
Navy Constrictors "Special OPs" ships (but very few in number)
numerous Worms, Shuttles, and Transporters

I haven't done the numbers for HIMSN order of battle, but you are not far off. I will be staying with the maritime naming convention though. Corvette, Frigate, Destroyer, Cruiser and so on. "Flak Cruiser" is a no go.

Switeck wrote:

Even assuming there's 4-10 "Flak Cruisers" or "Destroyers" per Behemoth, there's no reason to have more than 1-3 big bases spread between all 8 galaxy charts for major support and 1-3 small bases per galaxy chart so supplies can reach them in less than 1 month.

I have a fairly good idea concerning the number and placement of bases. You are not far off. My earlier estimates will be reduced considerably.

Edit: Fixed numerous spelling mistakes, there are bound to be more.

CommonSenseOTB wrote:

Take the boa class cruiser and the python class cruiser...and blow them up to 2 or 3 times the size, same models, different textures. Make 'em military ships for this oxp of yours. In addition, modify slightly both ships with a dock box sideways through the ship(imagine a flight deck where the floor moves vertically from below and pops up with a sidewinder and then it launches out the side of the ship, you don't have to make a moving deck, just imagining how it works and has ships shooting out the sides.) These variants would be called the boa class carrier and the python class carrier... And they would carry the sidewinders the way the british had harrier jump jets, maybe half a dozen to a carrier, maybe big missile and laser batteries on the front for the low profile aspect shown to the enemy and plasma turrets on the sides for defense. And forget the Anaconda, it's a freighter like those ponderous cargo container ships that plod along the oceans today in RL. You couldn't realistically make that into a warship so why the Anaconda?

Intriguing idea CSOTB. I don't think we'll go for "enlarged" Anacondas or Boas, but your idea about a sideways docking bay is cool. Not sure how well that will work when ships are approaching and docking though.

pagroove wrote:

Would be nice if my Behemoth Lave class could make it into this oxp. It is currently in the ADCK's Behemoth OXP.

Not there yet pagroove. But as we will have Behemoth Battle Ships, not unlikely. I would probably ask you to redo the textures though. We are pondering a standard colour for all HIMSN ships. Will come back to that.

Gimi wrote:

The Military Anaconda supply ship however, will have it's full cargo space, and will have to rely on a small escort for protection. If destroyed, it should drop ONLY food, arms and medical supplies (narcotics). So not a very profitable ship to attack for a clean trader.

Both firearms and narcotics are very profitable. (If you're in a system where narcotics sell for over 100Cr narcotics are the most profitable commodity.) So these ships would be very attractive for pirates.

Perhaps attacking them would have to carry a big bounty, which would make them unattractive for someone who wants to stay clean. But selling loot never carries a bounty, so that would not make them unattractive.

Attacking or killing a military ship (unlike attacking the police) does not make the attacker an offender or fugitive by default. So this would have to be taken care of by script.

Commander McLane wrote:

Gimi wrote:

The Military Anaconda supply ship however, will have it's full cargo space, and will have to rely on a small escort for protection. If destroyed, it should drop ONLY food, arms and medical supplies (narcotics). So not a very profitable ship to attack for a clean trader.

Both firearms and narcotics are very profitable. (If you're in a system where narcotics sell for over 100Cr narcotics are the most profitable commodity.) So these ships would be very attractive for pirates.

Perhaps attacking them would have to carry a big bounty, which would make them unattractive for someone who wants to stay clean. But selling loot never carries a bounty, so that would not make them unattractive.

Attacking or killing a military ship (unlike attacking the police) does not make the attacker an offender or fugitive by default. So this would have to be taken care of by script.

I did say unattractive for Clean traders. I have been thinking about giving the Navy a very, very long memory concerning any hostile action against them. If the player chooses to attack a Navy ship, the Navy basically never forgets. You will have to ditch your ship to fix it. Not sure if that is possible though.