>>43779943
Regarding technology.

I have asked our Philosophiae to collate the complete set of codicies we still possess in the wake of the Great Plague. While much has clearly been lost, stored only in the minds of those now dead, enough was committed to electro-tabulas to be able to utilise the following technologies.

- Biology (Nothing of note here)

- Construction/Production
Basic shipyards

- Defensive Systems
Alpha Shields (Basic energy shielding)
Duranium Armour (stronger and lighter but uses more minerals)
Shield Regeneration Rate 1

- Energy Weapons
12cm Laser Focal Size (determines damage output)
10cm Mesons (basic)
10cm Microwave Projectors (basic)
15cm Plasma Cannonades (basic)
Visible Light Lasers (stronger than Infrared)
Basic Meson and Microwave Focusing Tech
Particle Beam Strength 2 (basic)
Particle Beam Range 60,000km (basic)
Turret Tracking Speed 2000 km/s at 10% gearing

- Logistics/Ground Combat
Ship Components: Maintenance Storage, Bridge, Cargo Handling System, Cargo Holds (Small and Standard), Crew Quarters (Normal, Small and Tiny), Cryogenic Transport (Normal, Emergency and Small), Engineering, Flag Bridge (for Sector Command ships), Fuel Storage (Large, Normal, Small and Tiny), Luxury Passenger Accomodation, PDC Barracks (Normal and Small), Recreational Module, Company-Scale Combat Drop Module

Ground Units: Garrison Battalion, Mobile Infantry Battalion, Replacement Battalion

>>43780467

- Missiles / Kinetic Weapons
Railguns (Launch Velocity 1, 10cm)
Gauss Cannons (Launch Velocity 1, ROF1)
Missile Launchers Sizes 1-24, Reload Rate 2
Reduced-Size Launchers 0.75 Size / 2x Rate
Missile Agility 32/MSP
Levitated-Pit Implosion Warheads: 4 x MSP
Magazine Feed System Efficiency 80%
Magazine Ejection System 70%

-Sensors and Fire Control
Geological Sensors
Gravitational Sensors
Active Grav Ping Sensor - Strength 12
Electromagnetic Sensor Sensitivity 5
Thermal Sensor Sensitivity 5
Planetary Sensor Strength 250
Beam Fire Control Range 16,000 km
Fighter Fire Control (only works for Gauss Cannons)

>>43780512

- Power and Propulsion
Nuclear Pulse Engine Technology
Pebble Bed Reactor Technology
Military and Commercial Jump Drives

Capacitor Recharge Rate 2
Fuel Consumption: 0.9 Litres per Engine Power Hour
Jump Drive Efficiency 5
Max Jump Squadron Size 3
Max Jump Squadron Radius 50,000km
Maximum Engine Power Modifier x1.25
Minimum Engine Power Modifier x0.4
Minimum Jump Engine Size 15
No Reactor Power Boost

>>43780673

Out of this list, my Senators, the only major advancements beyond the most basic Heavenly Technology that we have discovered is as follows:

- 12cm Visible Light Lasers
- Turret Tracking 2000km/s at 10% gearing
- Combat Drop Modules (Company Scale)
- Large and Tiny Fuel Storage
- Implosion Fission and Levitated-Pit Implosion Warheads (quite advanced)
- Magazine Feed Efficiency 80%
- Missile Agility 32/MSP
- Missile Launcher Reload Rate 2
- Reduced-Size Launchers, 075 Size / 2x Reload
- Capacitor Recharge Rate 2
- Fuel Consumption: 0.9l/EPH
- Jump Drive Efficiency 5
- Max Squadron Jump Size 3
- Max Squadron Jump Radius 50k
- Max Engine Power Mod x1.25
- Min Engine Power Mod x0.4
- Nuclear Pulse Engine Tech
- Pebble Bed Reactor Tech
- Active Grave Sensor Strength 12
- Beam Fire Control Range 16,000 km
- Gravitational Survey Sensors

(This is the list of techs the game gave us at start for those playing along at home.)

>>43780728

One last note for those who may not know Aurora. Yes, that is an insanely long list of techs and there's a lot more besides and yes it is exactly this detailed.

I am willing to fill in some of the details and let the Senate make more broad-sweep decisions if you desire it so, but based on the last thread I'm handing out the Complete List Of Space Autism.

>>43780763
>Complete List Of Space Autism.
Huzzah.

Someone send for servant boys, for this engorges me as though an avatar of Priapus.

>>43780467
>electro-tabulas
I love you op.

If nobody's going to respond, I'd say research infrastructure techs (+production, +research) and start working towards surveying our system/our system's wormholes.

>>43781819
As a quick note from the last thread's discussion:

When a component is designed it then needs to be researched before it can be used. We currently have no component designs at all (because I'm a dumb faggot and forgot to check that box) so I have created two engine designs, one military and one commercial, which need to be researched before any ships can be built at all.

Other than that, and the current 11,000 ton limit on military ships (as per the shipyard list I gave upthread), I don't think there are any constraints on designing and building survey vessels at present. (Geological and Gravitational Survey Sensors are one-off techs and do not need to be specially designed once you have them.)

It will take a matter of weeks to finish the Military Engine Design with all 20 research labs working on it, and will take until May to finish the Commercial Engine Design. Using fewer labs would take progressively less time - so using 10 labs would roughly double the amount of time it would take, and so on.

I think we need, like, a factory that converts plebians into spaceship fuel.

>>43779943
>check /tg/ for Aurora Quest
>OP is using my flag
t-thanks.

>>43782046
I say we just need to focus on getting a simple, reliable, general purpose chassis available. One that can easily be adapted to survey, hauling, transport, whatever.

Would that be possible?

>>43782109
Unfortunately not, great Senator. We can sometimes manage to make ship-lines sufficiently similar that the same shipyard might build different variants, and refitting is definitely a (painfully slow and expensive) thing, but modular ships like you describe are beyond our capabilities.

That said, with enough work it would certainly be possible to create a General Purpose Vehicle of some sort which could handle many tasks. It would have to be a large craft, though, and cargo hauling in particular requires a very specialised type of ship to drag such vast masses through the howling void.

>>43782214
Very well then; I say we focus on getting the planetary and the wormhole survey vehicles in production, as well as possibly getting a jumpstart on prototype, preliminary colonization vessels.

Although our planetary population is quite low, It's better to spread out early and design our population centers for maximum efficiency, rather than repeating the growing pagns of urban development.

Aurora aka Dwarf Fortress in space Aurora?

>>43779943
I would not delay the production of our main ships for it but we should add an efficient slow civilian engine to our defensive and offensive and long range scouts military craft (short range scouts like our first ones dont need that) for 2 reasons first we can use just the civilian engine when moving on our own initiative to have much greater fuel efficiency and second that means that any enemy needs to disable 2 engines to cripple the ship.

Also, does anyone have any problems with the flag? I just threw it out there, and if the rest of the senate prefers we can return to the previous standard.

Should we adopt senatorial names for this thread?

>>43782483
Great Senator, while the idea is potentially splendid for our larger vessels, it should be noted that due to moderati influence and the exacting requirements of our great Militaria, civilian engines are often between five and twenty-five times as large as military engines with commensurate increase in mass.

Shipyards are always tricky to manage. I always messed up and left them on the "expand gradually" setting and then forgot about them for several years. When I looked back at the shipyard it was set to handle ships massing millions of tons and I ended up having to scrap it because I couldn't afford to retool it for anything of sane size.

>>43782798
The other problem being the mineral cost. The number of times I've done the same thing and then spent ages later on wondering where all my Neutronium went...

>>43782474
Yep. Feel free to jump in, Senator.

can someone archive the last thread on sup tg?
>>43782434
I agree
>>43782474
yes
More Construction Factories.
more civie shipyards.
more Naval Academies.
a few Auto miners for use on other planets.

I think our main transport strategy should be to use jump tenders to ferry ships across jump points If jump ships don't need to travel with send ships and can pull ships then i dont think they will need very powerful engines. I like the idea of a ship that is capable of deep surveys across the unexplored frontier.

>>43782565
I am aware of the vast size differential in engine size bit is it not so that we can design a very small (relatively speaking) civilian engine module with a low speed that can be added to military craft its purpose would be to save precious fuel at the cost of time it would not be suitable for our early exploration craft but mostly as a tool that we first use ether in our first defensive legions or as the survey engines on our first out of sol jump survey craft.

We should not delay our first scouts on this but i think it is a good idea. What say my fellow senators?

As for our research of components I say we should have the military engine use 19 labs and the civilian have one until the military engine is ready then set 10 to finish the protect while the other ten resume "normal" operations.

>>43782565
What is the maximum size of fighter we can stow?
What is the max missile size?
what is the size of a geological sensor?
what hard or semi hard limits are there on fighter endurance?

in a perfect world when we build our first long range craft we can mount our geological sensors on fighters and then drop them near foreign planets to scan and then rodevuos back with the main ship for transport ether back to Terra for maintenance or on to the next system.

God night fellow senators and most noble monkey.

>>43783026
I have spent some time discussing this with our engine specialists and I am afraid they inform me it is not possible to load more than one kind of engine onto a craft at a time.

(This also includes different engine designs, so you can't load a 40EP Military Engine and a 10EP Military Engine onto the same ship.)

We can, however, use commercial engines in our military vessels for fuel efficiency, as you suggest.

>>43783371
Personally, I don't think we should worry about military craft with commercial engines just yet; whatever military action that will arise in the near term will be close by to developed gravity wells, and will likely be comprised of orbital defense craft and fighter sorties; Let's leave the longer range craft for later, as we don't want to waste time developing craft we have no mid-term or short-term need for.

>>43783026
>What is the maximum size of fighter we can stow?
None at present. We will need to research the Boat Bay to permit the construction of carrier vessels.
>What is the max missile size?
We can build launchers at any size up to 100. They become increasingly unwieldy, however. In addition, creating very large components is a significant research endeavour in itself.
>what is the size of a geological sensor?
Survey Sensors are all Size 5.
>what hard or semi hard limits are there on fighter endurance?
There are no hard limits; the main issue is the balance between engine output (especially at the tiny scale of fighter engines) and fuel capacity. We have Tiny Fuel Storages, so we can potentially have reasonably long-ranged fighters. The other problem is that since fighters have extremely small crews (usually 2 for a survey fighter - one pilot and one to manage the survey sensor) they are not designed to perform long tours and usually have an extremely small deployment time.

>>43783500
>>43783613
It's sounding like we should invest in fighter tech in broad strokes so that we can overlap research for both defensive/offensive fighters, and utility (survery) fighters.

So let's uh, get some research work on the requisite chassis/fighter-scale engines we'll need, then?

>>43783668
Is it even possible to have survey fighters? It would certainly cut down time on exploring new systems if we could launch survey fighters from a central carrier all at once.

Oh, in any case; Senatorial Adviser Monkey (SAM), what does our home system look like? Have all local objects been surveyed? Are any suitable for development and/or colonization?

>>43783719
Yes, with the caveats noted above - the survey sensor is quite large at Size 5 (roughly 250 tons) and fighters have to remain below 500 tons total. Which means you have to fit the engine, fuel supply and "crew quarters" (which pretty much means life support here) into 250 tons. Quite possible with a specialised fighter engine built for size and speed over fuel efficiency. Just be aware that they can't really be away from the mothership long - 15 days at a stretch before they begin to suffer severe penalties.

>>43783774
>Oh, in any case; Senatorial Adviser Monkey (SAM), what does our home system look like? Have all local objects been surveyed? Are any suitable for development and/or colonization?

I will put up a picture of the Sol system shortly. We have conducted no surveys of the system yet. Mars and Luna represent the primary potential colony bases, at a Colony Cost (Infrastructure points needed per million population) of 2.0 each.

File: Starting_System_Map.png (92 KB, 1194x907)

92 KB PNG

The Sol System, as promised.

File: Starting_System_Map_Zoom.png (89 KB, 1194x907)

89 KB PNG

And zoomed further out to show the geometrically aligned Gravitational Survey Points.

Our philosophers are certain that an unknown number of these points will, when surveyed, reveal the location of Jump Points that will permit travel to other systems. They believe they are likely to be the nearby star systems of Proxima and Alpha Centauri.

>>43783983
Let's start making infrastructure to dump on our first available colony. One design fits all, right?

And get to surveying ASAP.

How effective would a dedicated surveyor/mini carrier that can carry a dozen survey-fighters be? Find point, jump through, then dump the fighters and and find out what everything in the system is like?

Failing that, get us a dedicated system boat we can use to survey gravpoints 24/7.

>>43783888
>>43783953
>>43783983
Very well then; I propose a general plan to develop, design, and produce a line of intra-solar survey ships, followed by survey missions of Luna, Mars, and possibly Europa. If resources permit, construct survey ships capable of examining these possible jump points to nearby systems.

All in favor?

>>43784046
Sure.

These ships must carry A contingent of Mobile Infantry For starters, Our legions should be well established on our new worlds.

>>43784179
I'm sure the technicicans and operators will have firearms on them; no reason to waste air and food on infantry if we're not even sure that there's something there to shoot.

>>43784179
That comes later. Mobile Infantry has no purpose until we can colonize space. Unless we encounter barbarian peoples in the void of space.

>>43784179
I don't think colonisation works that way

>>43784229
Would you trust mere technicians and operators to properly explore potential ruins or other finds?

>>43784279
Of course not. That's what engineers are for.

>>43784279
I'm sure their will be proper exploration teams on board landing craft, along with whatever weaponry is needed.

Also, that reminds me, I need to go sink some stock into the shipyards and defense contractors. Do we have a law against insider trading? I forget.

>>43784041

This. We should start pumping out the cheapest survey units we can and a one size fits all colony expedition. Just to start us off and adapt later on depending on what we find out there. I think rushing out with an army would be more expensive than it has to be when what we need is a streamlined resources and production system. Without that we won't be sustaining an empire for long.

>>43784363

Speaking of this, what is our current economic situation? I think if we find a way to streamline that and work on a cheap mass production line we may set ourselves up for a better future as we can then grow exponentially assuming we can breed enough people for the task. And then from all the planets we'd have and the resources, we'd have a lot to work with.

But, the cons are we'd be spread thin and have pretty cheap tech if we did get attacked (not sure how likely that is), and we have a larger domain to keep track of and get those resources around on. So, we could stretch ourselves thin.

>>43784327
Would it not be better to put forth your Drachmas into Civil Options?

>>43779943
>only one commercial slipway
we need more and designs for freighter + passenger ship to ship infrastructure and plebs to our new colonies ASAP. I suggest always left some construction factories to build another construction factories and labs and start building infrastructure, because for some reason plebs refuse to survive without.

>>43783026
>>43783371
With enough harvesters + tankers fuel really isn't problem.

>>43784327
We are capable of creating a number of types of specialist team from our officer and scientist corps. These are Diplomatic, Espionage, Geological, and Xenological teams, and they are capable of travelling on any starship that has a Bridge (I believe). The downside is that whatever officers/administrators/scientists are in these teams cannot perform any other job while doing so.

Diplomatic teams can be set to attempt to communicate with alien races if we encounter any.

Espionage teams can be set to infiltrate alien races we encounter.

Geology teams can be put on a celestial body, after which they will perform an in-depth geological survey which may find additional stocks of Heavenly Elements our survey scanners miss.

Xenology teams can be put on a celestial body that has Alien Ruins in order to examine the ruin and attempt to retroengineer technology from them.

>>43784681

Would it be possible to do Tau level expansion? Moving out in phases only once our current holdings are secure and everything is built up? So, Sol system being phase one, any others being phase 2 and so on. Or is there a need to rush expansion ASAP? Do we have the swarm enabled or not?

>>43784764
For the time being, if at all possible, maintain a small team of geological specialists and xenological specialists on our survey ships; as we expand beyond the solar system, include diplomatic teams as well.

How Large Can our fighters be? could we make a Large Fighter covered in many weapons systems?

>>43783026
To this anon and any others who're also wondering, I took it upon myself to archive the first thread on Suptg.

You can find it here: http://suptg.thisisnotatrueending.com/archive.html?tags=Aurora%20Quest

>>43784811
>How Large Can our fighters be? could we make a Large Fighter covered in many weapons systems?

According to De Astra Definitio, a fighter is a military ship below 500 tons. A ship below 1000 tons is referred to as a Fast Attack Craft (and in the current version this doesn't really change much other than making it dockable like a fighter.)

My engineers tell me that Fighter-Only fire controls can only be used for Gauss Cannon weapons, meaning standard fighters will tend to have very limited beam armament unless we miniaturize the hell out of our beam fire control tech.

(On the other hand, Aurora vets will no doubt know about the joys of the Box Launcher - a single-shot missile launcher with no reload system that you can easily bolt onto a fighter and reload from the mothership's magazine.)

>>43784798
We probably could, though there would be the problem of resources.

We'd have to closely monitor our resource expenditure and income. If we aren't care we could end up severely stunting our empire's growth.

Further to the discussions above, I am going to implement the Senate's stated desire to move forward with its exploration agenda by putting in place the aforementioned plan to assign 19 Research Labs to produce the Simple 40EP Military Nuclear-Pulse Engine, with the remaining 1 Research Lab devoted to the Simple 200EP Commercial Nuclear-Pulse Engine.

The following construction priorities were put forward during our last Grand Senate, which I will put into place:

15% Construction Factories
40% A new Civilian Shipyard
40% A new Naval Academies
5%auto miners (only enough to fill one cargo ship)

I have also enacted simple assignment of our ground force commanders to our existing ground forces to ensure they have plentiful time to develop into skilled commanders. I will bring naval command positions before the Senate once we have ships for them to command.

Are there any objections from the floor of the Emperor's Most Glorious Senate to proceeding as described above?

>>43784798
If you look carefully at the last thread you might spot which enemy options are enabled. (In retrospect I shouldn't have actually said, it's more fun if you don't know what's waiting out there.)

>>43785062
Further information - at current construction rates, it will take around 11 months to finish the new Civilian Shipyard and Military Academy. New construction factories will come online at a rate of two every 3 months, while the new automated mines will come online at a rate of one every 9 months.

(Of course these are all maximum estimates, as the slow trickle of new Construction Factories will gradually increase the rate at which all of these are built.)

>>43785156
Could we take 5% each away from the shipyard and naval academy to bump up our construction facilities an extra 10% and construct things faster?

If so, I motion that we do that. We could probably use faster construction.

>>43785183
I also agree to these minor changes, and vote to carry the motion.

>>43785183
Recalculating, this will mean that the Shipyard and Academy will be finished towards the end of January the next year, not including construction capacity increases, and that we will be producing a new Construction Factory every 27 days at most.

File: Screenshot_2015-06-10-18-21-06.png (361 KB, 1280x720)

361 KB PNG

So I just got here.
Woooooow. Jesus christ. I'm both madly intrested and unwilling. I should grab this sim first and run it before participating.

>>43785546
Any updates?

>>43785938
Giving the Senate a little more time for votes to come in, then we'll run through until the engines are done and get the first ships built.

>>43785986
Ok. Might as well play some FTL and try aurora while waiting.

>>43785062
I say this all looks fine.

One last thing before we put the plans in motion, Senators. As mentioned earlier, we have four Naval Shipyards and one Commercial Shipyard. These can be given instructions as regards expansion. 10kt is more than enough, however, to handle all of our needs for survey ships and other utility vessels for some time.

Do we wish to invest minerals in expanding our shipyards capacity, or constructing new slipways? (In particular, adding an extra slipway to our existing Commercial Shipyard seems a good idea.)

>>43786609
Increase capacity to 1 Giganigga

File: 1433830234384.png (14 KB, 400x400)

14 KB PNG

>>43779943
>You actually came back
Nice, I gave that about 50-50 odds. Now to catch up on the haps.

>>43786609
Hmmm... Alright, I don't suppose an extra slipway would hurt. Add one to the Commercial Shipyard.

>>43786632
'Course he came back.

Anyone willing to run an Aurora Quest on /tg/ has to be dedicated to the point of near insanity.

>>43783371
do you know when that game rule was changed?
That's a relay junky nerf like when multiple ships using tractor beams was removed, he should have mad it an advanced tech not removed it?

File: Untitled.png (6 KB, 373x239)

6 KB PNG

>>43779943
>a 5HS 40EP NP Engine for the Military design, and a 25HS 200EP NP Engine for the Commercial

Advisor Monkey, are you certain of this? My expert friends in the relevant industries tell me that an error may be present in these designs. Is the larger engine actually classified as a Commercial engine? Our own speculative designs tell us that an engine of that size and power is impossible without adhering to military standards.

Or in other words, you seem to have forgotten that commercial engines must be at least size 25 AND have a power multiplier of .5 or less.

>>43786737
It was changed when engines became a designed component. I wouldn't really call it a nerf, considering how extremely versatile the new way of engine design is and how you can tailor it all

>>43786737
The tractor beam limit is really annoying. It forces you to construct dedicated tug ships with very high power-weight ratios instead of just tasking any old fleet you have lying around to drag something.

These ships tend to be Plaid tier speed demons because they go super fast when not towing anything. But at least you can usually get by with only one tug because towing jobs rarely come up.

>>43786789
I know, though I am a fan of planing to put a tractor beam and extra engine power on every ship so that thy can tow a mission based extra module like a sensor pod or extra missile launchers or a drop able fuel tank.

>>43786609
For military I move we set Murena Naval to expand in size.
Euphemius-Cosmas, Murcurinius Gulf to add slipways.
I do not know what is the wisest plan for Cararius Marine more slipways has obvious net value. no changes will save precious resources. and expansion will be of some use but some cost in the long run

For commercial we should add slipways to Ecdicius Marine and continue on the newly commissioned one

Also as a general tip to my fellow senators on industry terminology, 1 HS is equivalent to 50 tons. So that 5 HS engine would size in at 250 tons, and a 10,000 ton ship would consist of 200 HS

>>43786923
I'm a big fan of orbital habitats for terraforming and gas giant fuel mining, but since they weigh a metric shitton I only put one or two engines on them so they can enter orbit without help. To get from A to B in a reasonable amount of time requires a really beefy jump capable supertug which is basically 95% engines and fuel.

For everything else though I just use regular ships which have tractor beams fitted as standard. My military ships have more than enough engine power to tow each other. So really the only time I need mass towing power is wreck fields and I just use small freighters for that.

Speaking of freighters. How many tons of cargo do you expect your freighters to shift? I try to set capacity in multiples of 5 to match certain buildings. You can do anything from zippy 5 capacity freighters to 500 capacity bulk transporters. But there is definitely diminishing returns in terms of cost and speed of transport, I have yet to find the sweet spot.

>>43786923
I see no flaws in this course of action, and so I support it.

>>43786768
>Advisor Monkey, are you certain of this? My expert friends in the relevant industries tell me that an error may be present in these designs. Is the larger engine actually classified as a Commercial engine? Our own speculative designs tell us that an engine of that size and power is impossible without adhering to military standards.
>Or in other words, you seem to have forgotten that commercial engines must be at least size 25 AND have a power multiplier of .5 or less.

You're quite right. As ever, OP is a faggot, even when it's me. (I think I didn't click it through or it didn't register the change to -50% or something.)

Fixed it now, it's a 100EP engine at 25HS.

>>43787153
Excellent. My other ingame concerns are far less pressing. I would have proposed a larger military engine, but the only downside at this stage of the game is a minor bit of fuel use, which is more than acceptable for now

Also, if not a regular schedule would you consider setting up a twitter or something to let us know when new threads are made?

>>43786923
>For military I move we set Murena Naval to expand in size.
>Euphemius-Cosmas, Murcurinius Gulf to add slipways.
>I do not know what is the wisest plan for Cararius Marine more slipways has obvious net value. no changes will save precious resources. and expansion will be of some use but some cost in the long run
>For commercial we should add slipways to Ecdicius Marine and continue on the newly commissioned one

Estimated completion for the new slipways is roughly 3.5 years for the two Naval yards and 2.5 years for Ecdicius Marine.

>>43787193
Christ, this may need to wait until we can research some timesaving measures for shipyards, since they can't construct ships at the same time as they're expanding, correct?

>>43787177
>Also, if not a regular schedule would you consider setting up a twitter or something to let us know when new threads are made?

Will probably do something like that if this thing really beds in. At the moment it's actually producing a rather nice turnover and keeping itself up, I've been rather impressed.

>>43787208
They can build ships, but they can't retool for new ships without halting improvement.

>>43787221
Right. Assuming that we will most likely wish to retool the yards to build our Geo and Grav survey vessels in the coming months, I have left only Murena Naval's "Continual Expansion" order. I'll record the other orders for later implementation.

If no-one has any objection, I'm going to close this Senate meeting and we can reconvene when we are ready to design our ships.

>>43787657
I aprove

>>43787657
I support the current proposals.

have past threads been archived?

>>43787742
The First thread can be located through this post:
>>43784840

Welcome back, Senators. It is now 21st Januari, 1757 from the founding of the True City.

Events that have occurred:
- Spurius Pisentius has completed his work on the Larcius 40 EP Simple Nuclear Pulse Engine.
- A group of profit-minded citizens of the Empire living in the Caecinea region have begun an interstellar corporate project that they are naming the Caecinea Transport Company.

The choices that stand before us now:

- It has been mooted that we raise the current research capacity granted to Appius Tertinius Sortinus's Commercial Engine to 10 and apply the remaining 10 to a different project. Is this still the policy the Senate wishes to pursue, and if so, what other project does the Senate favour?

- We can now design new classes of ship. The Senate has expressed its desire for Survey vessels. Does the Senate have any specific wishes - eg, for intended deployment tours and so on?

Dear Senators, as the need for Survey Vessels has been foreseeable my design office has already created such vessels for review.

Due to their compact size they would even be easily ferry-able within a larger ship if the senate decides to continue their use beyond our home.

However, the point of note is that my office assumed drastically stronger materials than available, so the finalized designs would likely be larger. Read: I used considerably better armor tech here, so the actual designs will probably gain another 50 - 100 tons

Via class Gravitational Survey Vessel 750 tons 20 Crew 164.4 BP TCS 15 TH 40 EM 0
2666 km/s Armour 2-7 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/1/0 Damage Control Rating 1 PPV 0
Maint Life 11 Years MSP 137 AFR 4% IFR 0.1% 1YR 2 5YR 31 Max Repair 100 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months Spare Berths 1

Roman 40 EP Nuclear Pulse Engine (1) Power 40 Fuel Use 85.5% Signature 40 Exp 10%
Fuel Capacity 50,000 Litres Range 14.0 billion km (60 days at full power)

Gravitational Survey Sensors (1) 1 Survey Points Per Hour

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes


Sollum class Geological Survey Vessel 750 tons 20 Crew 164.4 BP TCS 15 TH 40 EM 0
2666 km/s Armour 2-7 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/1 Damage Control Rating 1 PPV 0
Maint Life 11 Years MSP 137 AFR 4% IFR 0.1% 1YR 2 5YR 31 Max Repair 100 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 12 months Spare Berths 1

Roman 40 EP Nuclear Pulse Engine (1) Power 40 Fuel Use 85.5% Signature 40 Exp 10%
Fuel Capacity 50,000 Litres Range 14.0 billion km (60 days at full power)

Geological Survey Sensors (1) 1 Survey Points Per Hour

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes

>>43788188
With respect, honoured Senator, those designs will likely require significantly more fuel storage unless they are intended to be docked within a larger vessel.

>>43788271
My honored Senatorial Adviser Monkey, I am a mere ship designer, not a senator.

And indeed, these vessels are not meant to operate without support, be it a friendly population or vessel.

Their compact size however means they can simply be carried within a support vessel, allowing to serve the people well beyond the confinements of our home and thus stalling their obsolescence by years.

>>43788271
With all due respect, I believe that scouting the immediate area is fine for now. We should focus on colonizing the immediate nearby planets for now, and for that we need to scout them first.

>>43788441
I forgot to mention, we need tankers.

Saving out from my ramdisk and getting some sleep. I'll most likely start a new thread when I wake up.

>>43788940
sure, then I'll archive this thread.

>>43789426
archived!

http://suptg.thisisnotatrueending.com/archive.html?tags=ROME%20IN%20SPAAAAACE

File: Untitled.png (9 KB, 458x265)

9 KB PNG

>>43788188
I second the concerns about range, both in terms of fuel and in crew accommodations. especially for a gravitational survey ship. I propose, and also with the correct numbers for armor densities:

>=
Gravitational Survey Vessel 1 000 tons 25 Crew 214 BP TCS 20 TH 40 EM 0
2000 km/s Armour 1-8 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/1/0 Damage Control Rating 1 PPV 0
Maint Life 11.08 Years MSP 134 AFR 8% IFR 0.1% 1YR 2 5YR 30 Max Repair 100 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 36 months Spare Berths 0

40 EP Nuclear Pulse Engine (1) Power 40 Fuel Use 85.5% Signature 40 Exp 10%
Fuel Capacity 225 000 Litres Range 47.4 billion km (274 days at full power)

Gravitational Survey Sensors (1) 1 Survey Points Per Hour

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
>=
And
>=
Geological Survey Vessel 1 000 tons 25 Crew 214 BP TCS 20 TH 40 EM 0
2000 km/s Armour 1-8 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/1 Damage Control Rating 1 PPV 0
Maint Life 11.08 Years MSP 134 AFR 8% IFR 0.1% 1YR 2 5YR 30 Max Repair 100 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 36 months Spare Berths 0

40 EP Nuclear Pulse Engine (1) Power 40 Fuel Use 85.5% Signature 40 Exp 10%
Fuel Capacity 225 000 Litres Range 47.4 billion km (274 days at full power)

Geological Survey Sensors (1) 1 Survey Points Per Hour

This design is classed as a Military Vessel for maintenance purposes
>=

Identical in survey capabilities to your proposal, a bit slower, but with far greater range and endurance. They also have the (in my mind) benefit of a nice round speed that comes from having properly-rationed propulsion percentages.

>>43788448
And speaking of support vessels, some proposals for those as well:

>=
Oiler 5 000 tons 34 Crew 352 BP TCS 100 TH 200 EM 0
2000 km/s Armour 2-26 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 1 PPV 0
MSP 44 Max Repair 25 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 24 months Spare Berths 0

100 EP Commercial Nuclear Pulse Engine (2) Power 100 Fuel Use 11.93% Signature 100 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 1 750 000 Litres Range 528.1 billion km (3056 days at full power)

This design is classed as a Commercial Vessel for maintenance purposes
>=
A note: commercial vessels may be built in military shipyards, if the tonnage is sufficiently small. In this case it is, and our commercial yards are at a greater premium than our military ones. Double the propulsion percentage was allotted to allow for such a vessel to operate with our standard military vessels, since commercial engines are half as powerful at least.

As for vessels large enough to require our commercial yard...

>>43791636

>=
Cargo Ship 37 550 tons 121 Crew 570 BP TCS 751 TH 800 EM 0
1065 km/s Armour 1-99 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 1 PPV 0
MSP 9 Max Repair 25 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 24 months Spare Berths 0
Cargo 25000 Cargo Handling Multiplier 5

100 EP Commercial Nuclear Pulse Engine (8) Power 100 Fuel Use 11.93% Signature 100 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 1 000 000 Litres Range 40.2 billion km (436 days at full power)

This design is classed as a Commercial Vessel for maintenance purposes
>=
And
>=
Colony Ship 37 850 tons 216 Crew 1575.5 BP TCS 757 TH 800 EM 0
1056 km/s Armour 1-100 Shields 0-0 Sensors 1/1/0/0 Damage Control Rating 1 PPV 0
MSP 26 Max Repair 25 MSP
Intended Deployment Time: 24 months Spare Berths 0
Cryogenic Berths 100000 Cargo Handling Multiplier 5

100 EP Commercial Nuclear Pulse Engine (8) Power 100 Fuel Use 11.93% Signature 100 Exp 5%
Fuel Capacity 1 000 000 Litres Range 39.8 billion km (436 days at full power)

This design is classed as a Commercial Vessel for maintenance purposes
>=
These designs don't have the clean multiples of my other proposals, but that's more of a struggle with commercial vessels anyway. The real important matter is this: If a shipyard is tooled for this colony vessel, that shipyard will be able to produce both it AND the cargo vessel! Enough of the basic hull and component layout are shared between the two to make such a thing possible. It doesn't work the other way around, as a warning.
(The DAC / Rank / Info tab in the class design screen can tell you when this opportunity applies)

And a bump to keep us floating until the next thread

>Aurora wiki down for maintenance because of scripting problems messing with the server.
ALL IS LOST.

>>43796398
There are still the tutorials located on the home forum here:
http://aurora2.pentarch.org/index.php?board=101.0

>>43796680
Yeah those help, but the wiki data was a lot easier to sort through. I'm looking for exact weapon stats and I can't get them in game because I haven't researched most of them.

What Does our Current force disposition look like adviser monkey?

>>43799773
Apart from the ground forces he listed I believe our armada currently amounts to... nothing. A shameful state of affairs, but one soon rectified.

Away from Aurora atm, but will be back later on.

If we can lock down a decision on what type of survey craft we want I'll be able to leap forward quite quickly. Also there are 10 RFs running the Commercial Engine right now, so we need a decision on the other 10.

>>43802998
Senators, I believe the surveyor designs presented here (>>43791439) is our most acceptable choice of craft for the moment.

>>43788188
>Via
>not Vidi

>>43802998
>>43791439
Seconding my own designs, just for the formal record

>>43802998
As for RFs, 1 to turret gearing and the remaining 9 to Construction Speed I believe was the plan

>>43803354
Yeah, I think that's what was agreed upon

OK. Will implement these and the 9/1 spread, advance time and set up the new thread (which should be fleet management, officers and Tours of Duty) later. Bit of a busy day,