?

Theemile wrote:I wish MaxxQ was still around, I'd ask him if he had any Spider ship drawings he could share.

I did send him a private message some years back, but he had moved on to other things.

Shouldn't there be a big difference in the number of SBs, LACs, etc., a freighter can carry opposed to its military equivalent, like a CLAC. Freighters can simply stack 'em and pack 'em. But CLACS have to leave room to service them. Same for ships carrying SBs, etc.

A MAN Tactic

This has been simmering on my brain for some time. Shouldn't LACs as a picket suffer a serious tactical disadvantage against ships that can hyper out? I agree that it hasn't appeared to have mattered ordinarily. Navies have been antagonizing each other at the hyper limit forever.

But in the case of the MAN there's a significant difference. They have a stealth mode. It is difficult to prevent being pincered when you do not know where the enemy is. The result is that the LACs would need to stay concentrated when they investigate sensor ghosts. But if the MAN is materializing all around the hyper limit simultaneously it will be impossible to check out all of the incidences without splitting up the LAC group.

The danger of LACs splitting up the LAC group is being defeated in detail against enemy warships that are carrying more CMs and can soak up bigger launches. The MAN has those revolutionary CMs.

I don't know what the smallest MAN ship would be that is more tactically suited to take on LAC contingents with this notion in mind when open war actually begins; perhaps the Sharks. But with their stealth and toys, flawless implementation and a clear head, the MAN can defeat systems protected by LACs only. By attrition. LAC groups will be exhausted chasing a lot of sensor ghosts. Eventually they will make the mistake of not maintaining concentration and split up their forces. If they don't split up their forces, there will be insertion after insertion. And g-torps will be infesting the system.

LACs have a serious disadvantage against ships with a bigger load out. And although the LAC's missiles will maintain a range advantage, there aren't enough missiles to compete with a navy that has an advantage in missile and CM load out. Especially if the enemy's CM warfare exceeds their own.

And that's not even figuring in g-torps, the stealthy spider-drive etc. Against a large squadron of Sharks systems that are protected by LACs are doomed.

Plus LACs have limited endurance don't they?


Even if the hyper capable ships don't have a stealth mode, if the LACs can not enter hyper their tactics are more limited. Hyper capable ships can hyper out and micro jump back in to pincer LACs. They can switch to spider-drive working in conjunction with other stealthed ships and torps pre inserted lying in doggo. LACs can be trapped, pincered, flanked, surrounded and destroyed.

Especially if the MAN's Captain is an Ace who has tricked the LAC contingent into splitting up its forces into packets that are too small chasing after the many sensor ghosts. Similar to the tactic used by a basketball team which continuously passes the ball to get the defenders out of position. I just don't see how ships can prevent being pincered, trapped and surrounded by stealthy ships or stealthy missiles when they cannot see their enemy?

One successful insertion starts the ball rolling. That ship or platform or drone can relay data on every LAC in the system.

Plus, as I said before, the enemy can set up shop around the perimeter of your hyper limit in a higher hyper band that is unreachable.

Thinksmarkedly indicated that would still be two hours away. But in a system protected by LACs, it can be just inside of hyper. LACs can't enter hyper. Against LACs only, the MAN can operate in hyper with impunity.

penny wrote:The result is that the LACs would need to stay concentrated when they investigate sensor ghosts. But if the MAN is materializing all around the hyper limit simultaneously it will be impossible to check out all of the incidences without splitting up the LAC group.

Plus LACs have limited endurance don't they?

Thinksmarkedly indicated that would still be two hours away. But in a system protected by LACs, it can be just inside of hyper. LACs can't enter hyper. Against LACs only, the MAN can operate in hyper with impunity.

No one will use a LAC group to investigate a sensor ghost, that is a job for a destroyer group. If the sensor indicates just outside the hyper-limit, it is not a "ghost", but a solid contact. The true "ghosts" occur so far out that only a ship that can enter hyperspace would be able to investigate in a timely manner.

Jumping in and out of normal space to agitate defenders was also a tactic used by Honor's long range attack group in either Cutworm or Sanskrit. It is not limited to systems with only a LAC defense.

The fission powered LAC in use by Manticore has an endurance that is unreasonably long, but those of other people might be limited to several days.

And it's hardly surprising if the MAN can defeat a system defended only by LACs. That indicates that it is, at best, a 4th tier system -- without major defenses.

One that anybody with a powerful navy would be expected to be able to defeat. (Even Shrikes and Ferrets perform poorly against actual ships of the wall. They can kill them which is more than old-style LACs were generally able to do; but usually taking significant losses to do so)

Now LACS + Mycroft is stronger, but even so a system with no hyper capable combatants; much less hyper capable capital ships, simply isn't a first or second tier system and should not ne expected to necessary hold out against a major naval attack (or an especially sneaky one)

penny wrote:Where is the ready squadron hypering in from???

Thinksmarkedly wrote:From somewhere close to and outside of the hyperlimit. The whole idea is that they can respond readily, so they mustn't be two hours away under impeller drive from doing so.

Exactly! But, my point is they can be only a half hour away or less and it won't do the LAC group any good if the ready squadron cannot be summoned. A LAC cannot summon them. And if a single destroyer is left behind to summon them what do you think the first order of business is going to be for the MAN?

Also, in time of peace, like now, the GA will not remain together. Neither member of the alliance can afford to do that. I am sure they will reform when and if it becomes necessary, but each member will settle back into their normal defensive postures existent before the war with the SLN and later Galton.

Neither member of the alliance has an infinite supply of ships, and each member has to deploy ships to protect its rear areas and to meet its obligations; the same as it has always been. The RMN nor Haven has ever had enough ships to do that at any time. I find it difficult to believe that the RMN can protect all of its systems now. It just isn't a perfect universe. I do not expect even all Tier 1 systems to have both a ready squadron of destroyers and a LAC contingent.

As Thinksmarkedly implied, the destroyers will be deployed close enough to cover as big an area as strategically and tactically possible. But LACs cannot enter hyper to call for help.

As far as the GA is concerned, there is no longer an existing threat that can take on ~ 212 LACs. Try convincing the civilians the need for deploying that many ships in time of peace. It is costly.

If I am wrong, then Grendelsbane Station would not have been lost.

penny wrote:Also, in time of peace, like now, the GA will not remain together. Neither member of the alliance can afford to do that. I am sure they will reform when and if it becomes necessary, but each member will settle back into their normal defensive postures existent before the war with the SLN and later Galton.

Neither member of the alliance has an infinite supply of ships, and each member has to deploy ships to protect its rear areas and to meet its obligations; the same as it has always been. The RMN nor Haven has ever had enough ships to do that at any time. I find it difficult to believe that the RMN can protect all of its systems now. It just isn't a perfect universe. I do not expect even all Tier 1 systems to have both a ready squadron of destroyers and a LAC contingent.

As Thinksmarkedly implied, the destroyers will be deployed close enough to cover as big an area as strategically and tactically possible. But LACs cannot enter hyper to call for help.

As far as the GA is concerned, there is no longer an existing threat that can take on ~ 212 LACs. Try convincing the civilians the need for deploying that many ships in time of peace. It is costly.

If I am wrong, then Grendelsbane Station would not have been lost.

Why would you think that members of the Grand Alliance cannot afford to remain united? What exactly is the unbearable cost of unity? You might suggest expensive fleets, but cutting back on ships can be done just as easily while together, as apart (perhaps even easier, since resources can be pooled).

The loss of Grendelsbane can be blamed on incompetent leadership at the highest level (they refused to create peace, without remaining prepared for war), but it still could happen if everyone was competent. However that is not an argument about whether the Alliance stays together or falls apart.

Note that the leadership of Haven is talking about a European style union, with free trade and free movement. Manticore, Grayson, Beowulf and Haven are already so entangled, that it would be difficult to retreat to isolationism.

penny wrote:If I am wrong, then Grendelsbane Station would not have been lost.

Grendelsbane station was probably a tier 2 (or maybe 3) system just because of the number of implement cutting edge hulls in its yards. Logically those yards shouldn't have been there - but they were and made it important.

But even in peacetime, under the neglectful Janacek admiralty it
seven SD(P)s, sixteen pre-pod SDs, four CLACs, nineteen battlecruisers and cruisers, and 430 LACs (plus forts)

WoH doesn't bother to give the number of associated destroyers -- but it'd be more than enough to have divisions assigned to investigate suspected hyper emergences.

(Now, yes, the High Ridge government was nearly criminally neglectful in failing to update those defenses to deal with modern threats like CLACs and MDM equipped SD(P)s. But that doesn't change that there'd have been plenty of DDs around.

tlb wrote:Why would you think that members of the Grand Alliance cannot afford to remain united? What exactly is the unbearable cost of unity? You might suggest expensive fleets, but cutting back on ships can be done just as easily while together, as apart (perhaps even easier, since resources can be pooled).

Agreed. Now the Grand Fleet probably won't remain an active formation. But you can remain allies without concentrating your main striking power into a single unified fleet.

Jonathan_S wrote:And it's hardly surprising if the MAN can defeat a system defended only by LACs. That indicates that it is, at best, a 4th tier system -- without major defenses.

Also, it belatedly occurred to me that a system with only LACs for defense isn't going to be important or rich enough to even have the vast deep space sensor arrays you'd need to detect arrivals much beyond the hyper limit.

So nobody, not even the LACs, would be out investigating someone who emerged even a light-hour beyond the hyper limit because the system wouldn't even know they were there. That's just the reality of a low tier system. (Pretty sure it's cheaper to afford DDs than it is to afford the kind of sensor array needed to see deep space arrivals -- or at least it's a better investment. So I'd think that any system able to see an long distance arrival would have the hyper capable units that are capable of getting there quickly through hyper)

Jonathan_S wrote:

penny wrote:If I am wrong, then Grendelsbane Station would not have been lost.

Grendelsbane station was probably a tier 2 (or maybe 3) system just because of the number of implement cutting edge hulls in its yards. Logically those yards shouldn't have been there - but they were and made it important.

But even in peacetime, under the neglectful Janacek admiralty it
seven SD(P)s, sixteen pre-pod SDs, four CLACs, nineteen battlecruisers and cruisers, and 430 LACs (plus forts)

WoH doesn't bother to give the number of associated destroyers -- but it'd be more than enough to have divisions assigned to investigate suspected hyper emergences.

(Now, yes, the High Ridge government was nearly criminally neglectful in failing to update those defenses to deal with modern threats like CLACs and MDM equipped SD(P)s. But that doesn't change that there'd have been plenty of DDs around.

I am surprised at your designation of Grendelsbane. Grendelsbane had to have been at least a Tier 2 system. If it wasn't classified as a Tier 1 system it was only because of the limited ships I speak of above. Because an easy argument could be made that it should have been classified as a Tier 1 system, if it wasn't already.