Topic Actions

Topic Search

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Theemile and 46 guests

Forcing a Roland to withdraw...

Join us in talking discussing all things Honor, including (but not limited to) tactics, favorite characters, and book discussions.
Forcing a Roland to withdraw...
Post by SharkHunter   » Sat Dec 27, 2014 12:48 am

SharkHunter
Vice Admiral

Posts: 1608
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2014 3:53 pm
Location: Independence, Missouri

Just read a fabulous post with a chronology about the point where the SLN's battle fleet strategic ops plan became irrelevant for Manticore / the Haven sector, with the conclusion that it would be some time in the last 6 years from "PD 1922". Within it there was a really good snippet as follows:
drothgery wrote:...Not anywhere near good enough to beat the RMN in a fleet engagement, but a Nevada with Capharact-C pods on tow and Capharact-As in the tubes ought to be able to hold off a Roland or at least force it to withdraw.
For the sake of conversation, I'm taking the opposing position, that in PD1920+, no known SLN ship operating solo can force a Roland to withdraw from a system it is scouting, but [sans system defense pods], a single SLN SD or a squadron of battle cruisers could keep a single Roland from gaining the planetary orbitals.

What do y'all think?
---------------------
All my posts are YMMV, IMHO, and welcoming polite discussion, extension, and rebuttal. This is the HonorVerse, after all
Top
Re: Forcing a Roland to withdraw...
Post by n7axw   » Sat Dec 27, 2014 1:05 am

n7axw
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 5997
Joined: Wed Jan 22, 2014 8:54 pm
Location: Viborg, SD

I agree. The catapharact has fifteen milliom klicks of range, the mark 16 more than thirty. In addition to that the EW Systems are superior as well as the missile defence capability. The SLN vessel would never close to its own engagement envelop or launch enough missiles to swamp the Roland no matter what it did unless it caught said Roland asleep at the switch and I don't think Roland commanders are drawn from a hat.

Don
When any group seeks political power in God's name, both religion and politics are instantly corrupted.
Top
Re: Forcing a Roland to withdraw...
Post by SharkHunter   » Sat Dec 27, 2014 1:21 am

SharkHunter
Vice Admiral

Posts: 1608
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2014 3:53 pm
Location: Independence, Missouri

My main reason for that logic, by the way, is that besides the missile ranges and speed advantage, the SLN isn't going to get recon drones in spitting distance of the Roland, vs. the Roland "so far PD1922" being able to putting out ghost-rider drones on any SLN ship or set of implaced ships with relative impunity.

That said, I wonder how many ships it would take to force the Roland to withdraw, at least until the missiles in the tubes and pods were expended. It seems like the current force imbalance would be like sending an infantry squad armed with shotguns out to deal with a sniper who has "eyes on you".
Last edited by SharkHunter on Sat Dec 27, 2014 2:07 am, edited 1 time in total.
---------------------
All my posts are YMMV, IMHO, and welcoming polite discussion, extension, and rebuttal. This is the HonorVerse, after all
Top
Re: Forcing a Roland to withdraw...
Post by stewart   » Sat Dec 27, 2014 1:53 am

stewart
Captain of the List

Posts: 715
Joined: Sat Nov 30, 2013 10:54 pm
Location: Southern California, USA

SharkHunter wrote:
It seems like the current force imbalance would be like sending an infantry squad armed with shotguns out to deal with a sniper who has "eyes on you".


--------------------

A good simile

The answer to the question is what do you do to cause (or fool) a Roland Commander into shooting his / her tubes dry ?

Knowing their load-out at (IIRC) approx. 240 Mk16's , they are rarely sent out as singletons, and would likely take several times their tonnage before departure.

It gets expensive very quickly.

With GhostRider deployed, I don't think Shannon's ballistic approach would work either.

-- Stewart
Top
Re: Forcing a Roland to withdraw...
Post by Jonathan_S   » Sat Dec 27, 2014 3:01 am

Jonathan_S
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 8800
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 2:01 pm
Location: Virginia, USA

n7axw wrote:I agree. The catapharact has fifteen milliom klicks of range, the mark 16 more than thirty. In addition to that the EW Systems are superior as well as the missile defence capability. The SLN vessel would never close to its own engagement envelop or launch enough missiles to swamp the Roland no matter what it did unless it caught said Roland asleep at the switch and I don't think Roland commanders are drawn from a hat.

Don
To be fair either one is capable of inserting a ballistic phase, making their maximum range fire control limited rather than power limited.

Of course beyond 15 million km the Mk16 would arrive first (if fired simultaneously) - at less than 15 million km the CM "sprint" stage of the Cataphract should get them there first - I need to recheck it but I had a note that I'd seen the Javelin's 100% accel stated at 92,000g (same as a Mk16) so the the first stage / first drive should be a dead heat between them, then the 2nd stage of the Cataphract is much higher accel (but much lower endurance) than the 2nd drive on the Mk16.


On the other hand, a couple pods worth of Cataphract, even with a 15 million km (90 second) coast phase, are a lot for a DD to survive unscathed. If you get a piece of the Roland and can continue firing with internal tubes it might well retreat out of effective combat range.

(But a SLN BC doesn't have the accel to bring a Roland, or for that matter an Invictus, to missile range unless the RMN unit screws up or wants to fight. So the SLN BC can't prevent it from dodging around to scout a system because the RMN ship can just outrun it no matter what the BC tries. (At best it might manage to keep close enough to the planet to stay interposed between the RMN ship and the planet - but even then you can skate ghost rider recon drones past it for an up close look)
Top
Re: Forcing a Roland to withdraw...
Post by kzt   » Sat Dec 27, 2014 3:10 am

kzt
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 11360
Joined: Sun Jan 10, 2010 8:18 pm
Location: Albuquerque, NM

If you get a hit on a destroyer with a capital ship missile it's not likely to end well for that destroyer, even if it is the size of a CL. It's got no armor. I suspect it's a death spiral, as the first hit causes the destroyers defenses to become less effective, so the second hit is a lot easier then the first.
Top
Re: Forcing a Roland to withdraw...
Post by SharkHunter   » Sat Dec 27, 2014 8:32 am

SharkHunter
Vice Admiral

Posts: 1608
Joined: Fri Nov 14, 2014 3:53 pm
Location: Independence, Missouri

kzt wrote:If you get a hit on a destroyer with a capital ship missile it's not likely to end well for that destroyer, even if it is the size of a CL. It's got no armor. I suspect it's a death spiral, as the first hit causes the destroyers defenses to become less effective, so the second hit is a lot easier then the first.
Agreed, but given that the RMN was able to operate stealthed destroyers in Haven nodal systems with relative impunity, there's the problem of finding the DD to begin with. Even when found though, an even giving the Cataphracts a ballistic phase I wonder if the Roland would be able to move far enough outside the SLN missile's targeting guestimate and interpose wedge / countermeasures enough for the light speed delay which the SLN missiles endure to still avoid being driven off station.

Plus, if forced to engage and then dodge/reengage, with judicious missile fire, even in two or three missile salvos plus Ghost Rider drones already on station, (the Hexapuma approach at Monica), I woner if that might give the Roland's computers and tac crew enough time to analyze the Sollie signatures for a follow on two or three pod set of Mark 16g's (28-42 missiles) a really good chance of getting a golden BB shot on the command decks enough to discourage further pursuit, and then drop back into stealth. Thoughts?
Last edited by SharkHunter on Sat Dec 27, 2014 8:44 am, edited 1 time in total.
---------------------
All my posts are YMMV, IMHO, and welcoming polite discussion, extension, and rebuttal. This is the HonorVerse, after all
Top
Re: Forcing a Roland to withdraw...
Post by n7axw   » Sat Dec 27, 2014 8:40 am

n7axw
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 5997
Joined: Wed Jan 22, 2014 8:54 pm
Location: Viborg, SD

The problem here would be getting a hit to start with. The qualification here would be the stealth, which on those indefatigables at Monica was really quite good. So it could be that it would be possible to get in range, although if the Roland deploys ghost rider in advance he will probably find you, as was demonstated by Zuvala at Saltash.

Then if you do get into range of a Roland, you have to cope with its anti missile capability which is quite good while yours quite frankly suck.

So yes, it is possible that you would get the hit which would ruin the Roland's day, as has been pointed out. But given the odds, bet on the Roland.

Don
When any group seeks political power in God's name, both religion and politics are instantly corrupted.
Top
Re: Forcing a Roland to withdraw...
Post by SWM   » Sat Dec 27, 2014 8:48 am

SWM
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 5928
Joined: Mon Jan 11, 2010 4:00 pm
Location: U.S. east coast

The Roland is not as small as the destroyers which staked out Havenite systems. That means it is not as stealthy as those smaller cousins.
--------------------------------------------
Librarian: The Original Search Engine
Top
Re: Forcing a Roland to withdraw...
Post by JeffEngel   » Sat Dec 27, 2014 9:48 am

JeffEngel
Admiral

Posts: 2074
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2014 6:06 pm

SWM wrote:The Roland is not as small as the destroyers which staked out Havenite systems. That means it is not as stealthy as those smaller cousins.

Well - all else being equal, at least. It'd mean making the assumption that RMN stealth technology hadn't advanced enough to compensate in that time. What do we have for evidence to bear on that?
Top

Return to Honorverse