Hybrid missile/Graser Torp

Theemile wrote:The whole Alpha launch process has always had me scratching my head. You usually fire the alpha strike at range, meaning that the missiles have 3-9 minutes of run time on their drives, as does your opponent's missiles. The confusing part (for me) is we always see the subsequent salvos fired as if the opposition's fire is mere seconds out, instead of 5 minutes downrange.

Why not, after the Alpha launch, roll 10-12 patterns, fire, then repeat, until the opposition's alpha launch is in range to attack you? This way you get 2-4 Alpha launches, which are more likely to penetrate defenses than single or double salvos. The current behavior just seems like undue panicking.

It's baffled me a bit as well. Especially when they bemoan that they'd like to be closer before they launch yet still launch all their pods moments after the enemy does.

I can see logic for not holding your entire alpha launch too long - you probably want them out past the CM zone before your CMs start flying down range. And if you held them too long you risk large numbers of them wandering off unguided if your ships take too much damage from the enemy's alpha strike. The closer your salvo is to the enemy when it loses shipboard control the better the chances of it completing the attack run.

But you're right that you've got time to roll more multiple pod sequences in the 6 to 8 minutes of flight time of a normal initial MDM launch. Heck, there's an argument that the "alpha" strike might be more effective if you'd proceeded it with a tightly staggered stream of smaller launches to soak up enemy CMs and fire off ECM from closer to the enemy before your largest salvo enters their CM envelope. But either way, you don't have to launch everything immediately and then transition to single, or at most double, pod sequences.

Jonathan_S wrote:

Theemile wrote:The whole Alpha launch process has always had me scratching my head. You usually fire the alpha strike at range, meaning that the missiles have 3-9 minutes of run time on their drives, as does your opponent's missiles. The confusing part (for me) is we always see the subsequent salvos fired as if the opposition's fire is mere seconds out, instead of 5 minutes downrange.

Why not, after the Alpha launch, roll 10-12 patterns, fire, then repeat, until the opposition's alpha launch is in range to attack you? This way you get 2-4 Alpha launches, which are more likely to penetrate defenses than single or double salvos. The current behavior just seems like undue panicking.

It's baffled me a bit as well. Especially when they bemoan that they'd like to be closer before they launch yet still launch all their pods moments after the enemy does.

I can see logic for not holding your entire alpha launch too long - you probably want them out past the CM zone before your CMs start flying down range. And if you held them too long you risk large numbers of them wandering off unguided if your ships take too much damage from the enemy's alpha strike. The closer your salvo is to the enemy when it loses shipboard control the better the chances of it completing the attack run.

But you're right that you've got time to roll more multiple pod sequences in the 6 to 8 minutes of flight time of a normal initial MDM launch. Heck, there's an argument that the "alpha" strike might be more effective if you'd proceeded it with a tightly staggered stream of smaller launches to soak up enemy CMs and fire off ECM from closer to the enemy before your largest salvo enters their CM envelope. But either way, you don't have to launch everything immediately and then transition to single, or at most double, pod sequences.

But, with the added caveat that a bigger disaster is just waiting to happen in the area of proximity kills. A bigger stack for an Alpha launch can blow an awful lot of missiles. I guess it's like gambling, the more you risk the more you can win, or lose. I'm thinking specifically about the huge SLN Alpha launch in the battle against our lovely Megan Petersen.

The Lenny Dets may have a surprise or two in wait against totally podlaying designs, and their possible eggshell reputation.

tlb wrote:

Theemile wrote:When the pods are in the pod bays, they are safe. After... ehhhh...

Jonathan_S wrote:Or to phrase it another way the pods are vulnerable during the interval between when they're launched from the ship and when they've launched their missiles.

(Well the pod's circuitry might get fried by proximity nukes after their missiles have launched; but by then it doesn't really matter)

So for an alpha launch, the very first of a combat, you can stack many patterns of pods because even if the enemy fires first you expect to have plenty of time to launch before you's lose all those pods to their fire. But during an ongoing exchange of salvos you only have the interval between incoming salvos to roll pods and fire off their missiles - so normally you only do a single or double pattern [6 or 12 pods per SD(P)] depending on the interval between incoming fire.

Kizarvexis wrote:So, if you have a squadron of 6 pod layers, do you fire all 6 in waves, or fire 5 in waves and have one continually launch spoiler proximity nukes?

The one firing spoilers, would launch a pod to a few pods at a time in sequence from salvos of pods to target proximity kills the other sides pods. A stream of pod missiles if you will. If you can keep a stream of missiles coming in for proximity kills, then you hurt the other sides ability to launch followup attacks. It would depend greatly on if a few pods can target the deployed pods without being shot down I think.

Yes, during the opening engagement, you would only have 5 ships launching salvos while the first salvos cross the gap, but once that happens, you can interdict the other sides followup attacks. Would also depend greatly on surviving the initial waves and that could be tricky depending on how big the initial launches are.

I believe you are overthinking it. In the opening salvo all ships fire at the enemy ships, because any pods on the other sides will be flushed before your missiles arrive.

Even in subsequent salvos, it is better to kill the ships that can launch pods than the pods themselves; although if pods were destroyed, then that would be a bonus. Also it is easier to defend against a stream of missiles from one ship than a salvo from all ships.

In the books, I can only remember a few instances of anti-pod fire. One was to fire an opening salvo at extreme range to force any tractored pods to be flushed. Another had LAC's come in under stealth to shoot at the towed pods with their grasers, before they could be used. The final instance was to use something like Mistletoe against system defense pods.

No, the thinking is there, I just don't think I provided enough detail. I was not thinking of killing the initial salvos. I was thinking of detailing a small fraction of the offensive missiles vs the deployed missiles of followup salvos. It's not as crazy as you think.

Only the Manticore pods with internal tractors will keep up with the ships dropping them. Ships don't have enough tractors for the pods, unless you do something like the Donkeys. So outside of those two systems, pods dropped will lag behind the accelerating ships in little puffs for each pod lot dropped. The puffs will slowly drift apart as well as the accelerating ships give each puff of pods a little more dV than the last pod lot deployed. The tactical officers then use time on target calcs to get a bunch of separate puffs of pods to become a large salvo.

So, would the attacking ships have enough reach on their CMs and point defense to defend the pods they left behind while they stack them? You don't need much to get out of PD range and the further out from the ships, the harder the CM coverage is. Not to mention, if you are defending from incoming salvos, can you put out enough defense to save the pods as well?


The point isn't to wipe out all the deployed pods from follow on salvos either. You want to get as many as you can of course, but the main point is with a missile stream large enough to threaten the trailing pods, you shorten the time to stack pods to the much shorter intervals of that missile stream rather than the larger intervals of a stacked launch. If you are using something like Donkeys, you either have to cut them loose before the first salvo arrives or likely loose them to collateral damage from the alpha strike. So then you are back to puffs of pods either way.

Of course, this depends on your surviving the initial alpha launch vs you, so would only be done if you have a missile defense advantage I would think.

Kizarvexis wrote:
No, the thinking is there, I just don't think I provided enough detail. I was not thinking of killing the initial salvos. I was thinking of detailing a small fraction of the offensive missiles vs the deployed missiles of followup salvos. It's not as crazy as you think.

Only the Manticore pods with internal tractors will keep up with the ships dropping them. Ships don't have enough tractors for the pods, unless you do something like the Donkeys. So outside of those two systems, pods dropped will lag behind the accelerating ships in little puffs for each pod lot dropped. The puffs will slowly drift apart as well as the accelerating ships give each puff of pods a little more dV than the last pod lot deployed. The tactical officers then use time on target calcs to get a bunch of separate puffs of pods to become a large salvo.

So, would the attacking ships have enough reach on their CMs and point defense to defend the pods they left behind while they stack them? You don't need much to get out of PD range and the further out from the ships, the harder the CM coverage is. Not to mention, if you are defending from incoming salvos, can you put out enough defense to save the pods as well?


The point isn't to wipe out all the deployed pods from follow on salvos either. You want to get as many as you can of course, but the main point is with a missile stream large enough to threaten the trailing pods, you shorten the time to stack pods to the much shorter intervals of that missile stream rather than the larger intervals of a stacked launch. If you are using something like Donkeys, you either have to cut them loose before the first salvo arrives or likely loose them to collateral damage from the alpha strike. So then you are back to puffs of pods either way.

Of course, this depends on your surviving the initial alpha launch vs you, so would only be done if you have a missile defense advantage I would think.

Some time back, I mentioned that a formation should have one if it's ships firing its missiles in a stream at the opponent to keep pods from building. The one ship fires 1 pod every 1.5 - 2 seconds in streams around the main squadron salvo. Leakers might explode before the enemy's pods can cycle to fire, and the steady stream of missiles would keep up a solid wall of ecm in front of the enemy.

Statistically the effects of stacked pods and pods fired by multiple ships without stacking are about the same as long as the fight runs long enough. The first few missiles are obliterated,casually, but by the time you 30 or so seconds into after the first missile arrives you have the target engaged throughout the entire depth of their CM envelope as missiles constantly arrive and have to be stopped.

So rapidly the defenders lose the ability to do long range CM fire, as there are always targets closer in that need to be stopped right now.

Theemile wrote:

Kizarvexis wrote:
No, the thinking is there, I just don't think I provided enough detail. I was not thinking of killing the initial salvos. I was thinking of detailing a small fraction of the offensive missiles vs the deployed missiles of followup salvos. It's not as crazy as you think.

Only the Manticore pods with internal tractors will keep up with the ships dropping them. Ships don't have enough tractors for the pods, unless you do something like the Donkeys. So outside of those two systems, pods dropped will lag behind the accelerating ships in little puffs for each pod lot dropped. The puffs will slowly drift apart as well as the accelerating ships give each puff of pods a little more dV than the last pod lot deployed. The tactical officers then use time on target calcs to get a bunch of separate puffs of pods to become a large salvo.

So, would the attacking ships have enough reach on their CMs and point defense to defend the pods they left behind while they stack them? You don't need much to get out of PD range and the further out from the ships, the harder the CM coverage is. Not to mention, if you are defending from incoming salvos, can you put out enough defense to save the pods as well?


The point isn't to wipe out all the deployed pods from follow on salvos either. You want to get as many as you can of course, but the main point is with a missile stream large enough to threaten the trailing pods, you shorten the time to stack pods to the much shorter intervals of that missile stream rather than the larger intervals of a stacked launch. If you are using something like Donkeys, you either have to cut them loose before the first salvo arrives or likely loose them to collateral damage from the alpha strike. So then you are back to puffs of pods either way.

Of course, this depends on your surviving the initial alpha launch vs you, so would only be done if you have a missile defense advantage I would think.

Some time back, I mentioned that a formation should have one if it's ships firing its missiles in a stream at the opponent to keep pods from building. The one ship fires 1 pod every 1.5 - 2 seconds in streams around the main squadron salvo. Leakers might explode before the enemy's pods can cycle to fire, and the steady stream of missiles would keep up a solid wall of ecm in front of the enemy.

So we are saying the same thing.

Kizarvexis wrote:No, the thinking is there, I just don't think I provided enough detail. I was not thinking of killing the initial salvos. I was thinking of detailing a small fraction of the offensive missiles vs the deployed missiles of followup salvos. It's not as crazy as you think.

Only the Manticore pods with internal tractors will keep up with the ships dropping them. Ships don't have enough tractors for the pods, unless you do something like the Donkeys. So outside of those two systems, pods dropped will lag behind the accelerating ships in little puffs for each pod lot dropped. The puffs will slowly drift apart as well as the accelerating ships give each puff of pods a little more dV than the last pod lot deployed. The tactical officers then use time on target calcs to get a bunch of separate puffs of pods to become a large salvo.

So, would the attacking ships have enough reach on their CMs and point defense to defend the pods they left behind while they stack them? You don't need much to get out of PD range and the further out from the ships, the harder the CM coverage is. Not to mention, if you are defending from incoming salvos, can you put out enough defense to save the pods as well?


The point isn't to wipe out all the deployed pods from follow on salvos either. You want to get as many as you can of course, but the main point is with a missile stream large enough to threaten the trailing pods, you shorten the time to stack pods to the much shorter intervals of that missile stream rather than the larger intervals of a stacked launch. If you are using something like Donkeys, you either have to cut them loose before the first salvo arrives or likely loose them to collateral damage from the alpha strike. So then you are back to puffs of pods either way.

Of course, this depends on your surviving the initial alpha launch vs you, so would only be done if you have a missile defense advantage I would think.

Theemile wrote:Some time back, I mentioned that a formation should have one if it's ships firing its missiles in a stream at the opponent to keep pods from building. The one ship fires 1 pod every 1.5 - 2 seconds in streams around the main squadron salvo. Leakers might explode before the enemy's pods can cycle to fire, and the steady stream of missiles would keep up a solid wall of ecm in front of the enemy.

Kizarvexis wrote:So we are saying the same thing.

I know the books are written as though the pods might be visible (except when the books are calling them stealthy), but if the pods are stealthy and as far from the ships as you say, then how are the missiles to target them? I can imagine hitting some by chance when targeting the ships, but that would be for ones that were close.

tlb wrote:

Kizarvexis wrote:No, the thinking is there, I just don't think I provided enough detail. I was not thinking of killing the initial salvos. I was thinking of detailing a small fraction of the offensive missiles vs the deployed missiles of followup salvos. It's not as crazy as you think.

Only the Manticore pods with internal tractors will keep up with the ships dropping them. Ships don't have enough tractors for the pods, unless you do something like the Donkeys. So outside of those two systems, pods dropped will lag behind the accelerating ships in little puffs for each pod lot dropped. The puffs will slowly drift apart as well as the accelerating ships give each puff of pods a little more dV than the last pod lot deployed. The tactical officers then use time on target calcs to get a bunch of separate puffs of pods to become a large salvo.

So, would the attacking ships have enough reach on their CMs and point defense to defend the pods they left behind while they stack them? You don't need much to get out of PD range and the further out from the ships, the harder the CM coverage is. Not to mention, if you are defending from incoming salvos, can you put out enough defense to save the pods as well?


The point isn't to wipe out all the deployed pods from follow on salvos either. You want to get as many as you can of course, but the main point is with a missile stream large enough to threaten the trailing pods, you shorten the time to stack pods to the much shorter intervals of that missile stream rather than the larger intervals of a stacked launch. If you are using something like Donkeys, you either have to cut them loose before the first salvo arrives or likely loose them to collateral damage from the alpha strike. So then you are back to puffs of pods either way.

Of course, this depends on your surviving the initial alpha launch vs you, so would only be done if you have a missile defense advantage I would think.

Theemile wrote:Some time back, I mentioned that a formation should have one if it's ships firing its missiles in a stream at the opponent to keep pods from building. The one ship fires 1 pod every 1.5 - 2 seconds in streams around the main squadron salvo. Leakers might explode before the enemy's pods can cycle to fire, and the steady stream of missiles would keep up a solid wall of ecm in front of the enemy.

Kizarvexis wrote:So we are saying the same thing.

I know the books are written as though the pods might be visible (except when the books are calling them stealthy), but if the pods are stealthy and as far from the ships as you say, then how are the missiles to target them? I can imagine hitting some by chance when targeting the ships, but that would be for ones that were close.

You are dumping the pods out of the wedge at a set velocity. Then it is just tracking where the pods would be going and setting off nukes to trash them with collateral damage. You don't have to see them to target them with splash nuke damage. The wedge restricts the volume that the pods move into and the pods themselves can't move meaning that they keep the velocity the ship was moving at, so hitting that volume where the pods would be with nukes should not be hard.

By mysterious means having a nuke go off thousands of km away from a pod full of missiles designed to attack ships while thousands of other nuclear warheads are going off all around and much closer to the missiles will destroy the pod.

It’s the power of plot!

Which is why nobody shot at the RHN at BoM while they were building their salvos despite Home Fleet having hugely more missiles then they expected to be able to shoot and markedly more range than the RHN missiles. I guess nothing gets you a great OER then having your command obliterated with lots of unused ammo that you refused to shoot.

tlb wrote:I know the books are written as though the pods might be visible (except when the books are calling them stealthy), but if the pods are stealthy and as far from the ships as you say, then how are the missiles to target them? I can imagine hitting some by chance when targeting the ships, but that would be for ones that were close.

Kizarvexis wrote: You are dumping the pods out of the wedge at a set velocity. Then it is just tracking where the pods would be going and setting off nukes to trash them with collateral damage. You don't have to see them to target them with splash nuke damage. The wedge restricts the volume that the pods move into and the pods themselves can't move meaning that they keep the velocity the ship was moving at, so hitting that volume where the pods would be with nukes should not be hard.

If the pods are stealthy (as indicated by HAE, which prompted the suggestion of adding a beacon for after action recovery), then the enemy does not know when they are dropped and if the ship is accelerating or turning then they do not stay near the ship. You were the one that said:

Kizarvexis wrote:So, would the attacking ships have enough reach on their CMs and point defense to defend the pods they left behind while they stack them? You don't need much to get out of PD range and the further out from the ships, the harder the CM coverage is. Not to mention, if you are defending from incoming salvos, can you put out enough defense to save the pods as well?

That implies that having missiles get close enough for a proximity kill is not trivial.