Solomani Confederation (Military)

Confederation Navy: Shadow of the Storm

1. It seems plot holey.

2. It feels rushed.

3. Apparently, the Imperium instigates a sector wide insurrection a year after canon, Eleven Oh Eight.

4. This is not how I understand a duel over honour works, especially if the participants and institutions are renown for being traditionalists.

5. You have to charge the laser capacitors; how long does it take to charge spinal mounts?

6. Do missiles have minimum range?

7. Where's the entry for hot and cold rounds for the revolver?

8. Speaking of which, the Stormshadow's actual stats should have been printed in the back.

9. Maybe, the starring characters' as well.
 
Confederation Navy: Missile Doctrine

L. Now we know that the torpedo endurance is twenty turns, or two hours.

M. And half don't drift off every five turns.

N. Actually, that would explain why missiles self destruct after ten turns, since two times fifty percent means they lose track after an hour.

O. The ortillery torpedo is the only one so far with factor six acceleration, but with a running start, could reach distant range.

P. Needing twenty one turns to reach there, so enough push should boost it to twenty turns.
 
Confederation Navy: Missile Doctrine

Q. The primary difference between the ortillery missile and torpedo, besides the warhead, would be range.

R. The torpedo can be released at distant range, with a running start.

S. The missile, to avoid a midlife crisis, would need to be released at long range.

T. For thrust/six you'd need to move to medium range to minimize the window to one turn.

U. Or short, for a more immediate result.
 
Confederation Navy: Fighters

1. I've been rethinking the optimal fighter mix for the Confederation Navy.

2. Optimal tonnage multiplier for armour is twenty six tonnes, the next being hundred.

3. It tends to lift morale if the the pilots think that their institution tries to maximize their chances for survival, and return to base mostly intact.

4. Also. you want to keep your veteran pilots alive as long as possible, so that they spread their experience amongst the next intake.

5. Optimal manoeuvre caps at forty nine tonnes.

6. Smallcraft get two firmpoints at thirty five tonnes, the next upgrade would be three at seventy.

7. My take on this is to design fighters at thirty five tonnes, which leverages two firmpoints, maximum manoeuvre, and about as much hull armour as is feasible.

8. However, a fly dropped into the ointment.

9. I started taking a closer interest in smaller weapons.
 
Last edited:
Confederation Navy: Fighters

A. In terms of volume over effect, smaller weapons are obviously inefficient compared to spacecraft weapon systems.

B. Especially, if in mounted fixtures, they become virtual.

C. However, on one hand, the firmpoints slots are limited to about one per thirty five tonnes.

D. And tend to cost more when compared to groundscale weapon systems.

E. And on the other, appear to have a limited rate of fire.

F. Or, at least, draw from a limited energy pool.
 
Confederation Navy: ARTEMIS BATTLESTAR | A revolutionary but flawed ship

Generic greetings and welcome to a lore talk on the Artemis Battlestar. The Original, first draft, and the spark of brilliance that captured the hearts of a generation of kids and went on to inspire one of the greatest television shows ever made. So settle in as we cover everything from it's stats and dimensions to it's abilities and use in battle. Hopefully satisfying those old guard super fans while we're at it.




1. Armoured

2. Organic aerospace wing.

3. Powerful primary armament.

4. Command ship.

5. Marine contingent, given.

6. No space for refits or upgrades.

7. Missile armament.

8. Flak screen.

9. Secondary armament seems a waste.

A. Armoured thrusters.

B. As I used them, divisional wall formation creating a relatively impenetrable shield against missiles, occasionally dropping them to fire off missile salvoes.

C. And, as a mobile aerospace platform.

D. Heavy artillery to finish off anyone who came too close, or coup de grace.
 
Confederation Navy: Fighters

G. The thing is, firmpointed energy based weapon systems pretty much got the short end of the stick.

H. You'd have to move up to hardpointed variants to recover the range, but that also means minimum hundred tonne hull.

I. Which potentially costs you two factors in manoeuvring.

J. The only weapon systems that retain their range are missiles and torpedoes.

K. Well, laser drills and casters, as well.
 
Confederation Navy: Fighters

L. There are a number of tropey fighter planes to draw inspiration from.

M. Tomcats, Raptors, Lightning Tooeds, Falcons, Eagles, Warthogs, Fishbeds, and so on.

N. So, if we decided on two firmpoints, you have to figure out the optimal configuration.

O. You don't need a single turret, unless you plan into going dogfight mode.

P. On the other hand, putting one firmpoint into a module, means that you can choose whether you want a firmpointed fixed mount or a single turret, for any particular mission.
 
Confederation Navy: Fighters

Q. Since it's the Confederation Navy, the primary role has to be fleet defender.

R. Which means the Tomcat.

S. The question was, would the result be a fifty tonne smallcraft, or a two hundred tonne hull, in order to optimize the range (and number) of the onboard weapon systems and sensors.

T. Potentially, you could have a hundred tonne bay weapon system, to deal damage at a distance.

U. The real issue would be how much you invest, specifically in electronics.
 
Confederation Navy: Fighters

V. If we want to give the Tomcat a hardpoint, we need at least a hundred tonne hull.

W. If we want to make it mission modular, the module has to be at least a hundred tonnes to have a hardpoint.

X. Or, at least, that's my take on that.

Y. If it were a turret or a barbette, those are modular by design and can be popped out.

Z. Since what we are interested in is a fifty tonne bay, hundred tonnes would cover that, and possibly subsidiary power plant and/or magazine.
 
Yeah, I feel like heavy missiles only really make sense if you give them like, a bay level damage multiplier and substantial resistance to point defense, and probably to all be long range, could be an interesting drone platform maybe? You can pretty much get everything you could want on a torp drone as it is, and tbh the missiles aren't bad you just can't expect to be able to use them in atmosphere. I dunno what else you'd really want. A drone controller for handling it's own missile/torp swarm? Infinite endurance? A bunch of armor?? Some weapon systems(for what)? Some vehicle components(the only ones that really make any sense are like sensors(maybe), meson communicator, fusion plant and ecm)?
Something I've been thinking about is loading up mines into the gp mass driver from the companion update, either for bombardment (can run the mines on silent so they're cold all the way in), or just as a way to give yr torps a bit more reach if you have to in a straight up fight
Messed with the heavy missile robots some today, there's some ambiguity in how big they are, the ones from the sword worlds book are twice as big as torpedos(size 7) which is not really useful at all I think. but the ones from the solamani alien book(vol2) are sort of ambiguously probably bigger than that(despite doing the same damage) and at size 8 you can make a functional missile that also carries a 1 space vehicle component. The ones that jumped out to me were the ecm and the sensor package(with fidelity upgrade for +1dm/sp), the sensor package doesn't take a space by default, so I assigned it 15slots (the same as a vehicle weapon mount, you'll note that a fixed mount for a weapon doesn't normally take a space either). Anyway this yielded some interesting drones.
 
Having not really started with Robots, yet, beyond establishing torpedo endurance is twenty turns, or two hours.

Damage seems arbitrary for spacecraft weapon systems, so in terms of realism, I wouldn't bank too much on given values.

In theory, we could build planet buster nukes.

Heavy missiles have a number of issues; if you compare them to the potentialities of drones, drones can be stored in a hangar, do not take upto two hardpoints, and could be auto fired out of a launch tube.

My assumption is that missiles and torpedoes use reactionary rockets/high thrust burners combinations, in order to get those accelerations at low technological levels, but I trying to figure out what the drones would be using configured as drones in space.
 
Having not really started with Robots, yet, beyond establishing torpedo endurance is twenty turns, or two hours.

Damage seems arbitrary for spacecraft weapon systems, so in terms of realism, I wouldn't bank too much on given values.

In theory, we could build planet buster nukes.

Heavy missiles have a number of issues; if you compare them to the potentialities of drones, drones can be stored in a hangar, do not take upto two hardpoints, and could be auto fired out of a launch tube.

My assumption is that missiles and torpedoes use reactionary rockets/high thrust burners combinations, in order to get those accelerations at low technological levels, but I trying to figure out what the drones would be using configured as drones in space.
The only way to get a thrust value(and thus a reasonable speed in space) is by using the thruster locomotion option, so probably all of your space drones are using it. It's a bit abstract so you can certainly flavor it however you want, there's no real reason imo that they couldn't be miniaturized m-drives or fusion torches or whatever you prefer
 
I would like that nailed down.
I'm fairly sure that all of the places where robot endurance is referenced it's described as if the whole system just runs on electricity, and there's certainly nothing stopping you from making an RTG or solar panel powered missile, imo the implication here is that the "thruster" also runs on electricity, however you want to interpret that
 
Confederation Navy: Aesthetics

1. I'm pretty sure that the original intent was to make Confederation ships look like fish.

2. Despite the hint that they borrowed the look heavily from the Aslan.

3. Being cats and all.

4. By the time of the Imperium war of Aggression, the look evolved to Evil Empire.

5. Wedge hull configuration.

6. Currently, I would guess Galacticaesque.

7. I would suppose that originally, stuck with the scraps of the Imperium Navy, you probably couldn't spot much difference.

8. Supposedly, they shopped around among their member Navies' design bureaus for new construction.

9. Probably to see what would work, and if it can scaled to the interstellar level.
 
Confederation Navy: Aesthetics

A. Why are aesthetics important?

B. Besides the metagame reason to differentiate factions, and to encourage customers to Pokemoni(ti)ze your products.

C. The ingame reason would be, that it's a statement.

D. Sort of an unwritten one that emphasizes the strengths (and possibly beauties) of the faction.

E. That gamers would want to play, even if they might not quite agree with the factions aims, and/or ideology.

F. And ingame, is a form of morale booster.
 
Confederation Navy: Aesthetics

G. If the Confederation Navy had a choice, they'd design and manufacture continuously modern and exciting starwarships.

H. To present their service and its personnel as patriotic, superior, competent, and efficient.

I. Beyond infiltration cruisers, they wouldn't want to commission planetoid hulled starwarships.

J. But they're under budget constraints, and with rather expensive ships of the line, you're going to need to economize somewhere, in order to keep up the numbers and capabilities.

K. And planetoid hulls deliver the best bang for buck per tonne, for the majority of starwarship roles.
 
Back
Top