A few points of armour only protects against small-arms, it does very little against spacecraft weapons, yet the tonnage cost is not insignificant.
Carrying more fighters would be a better defence.
They can be the most efficient choices.
The point of armor is to hinder damage. Your position is the one that is currently at play with most naval architects today - why bother with any armor if you can't really protect yourself. Indeed, if you can eliminate the chance of anyone hitting you by keeping them away (or intercepting the incoming fire), there is no need for armor. But experience tells us that this idea isn't always the wisest of choices. Whether the incoming fire is from missiles, or shells (or lasers), armor does have value, and it can effect the course of battle.AnotherDilbert wrote: ↑Wed Dec 27, 2017 4:49 pmThey can be the most efficient choices.
Even the damage from a light fighter is barely hindered by light armour. Even heavy armour does not make you immune, but it significantly reduces damage.
I'm arguing on the basis of the MgT2 combat system. It does not work the way you seem to think it should.
Most ships at this scale are 8 weeks tops and can be extended by dromedary ships if needed.Very tight accommodations and little cargo space makes for very short mission endurance?
I hate the cheese that comes with this, would be nice to fix the calculations to prevent this sort of thing.It could save some space and money with a TL12 PP with 3 × Reduced Size.
Another peeve of mine is the general application of the Enhanced Signal Processor to Ewar situations, as both ecm and signal processing should be specializations.It could get much better sensor performance (+1 to +5) by exchanging the Countermeasures Suit for a Enhanced Signal Processor, and even get better ECM performance, although at a cost of MCr 4.
I tend to favour that weight class, but I was trying to see if I could pack more launchers available within the constraints of the carrier platform.A 35 Dt fighter with a missile barbette would launch more missiles per Dt or per MCr, so have higher combat value.
Since the missile's electronics handle the attack roll and not the pilot, its not even needed.It could even launch missiles without penalty.
Allows interception further out from the fleet and the ability to disengage, not to mention can trade thrust for defense. ( Also the reason for evade/3)Does it even need a reaction drive?
Users browsing this forum: Majestic-12 [Bot] and 5 guests