Please allow carriers to resupply themselves through the use of cargo ships.

[Shadowofpeace]

I would just be fine if Egosoft would just allowed carriers to...carry....torpedoes and missiles like RL carriers. I find the ideea of having a bunch of workers tinkering away with little hammers to make torpedoes and missiles, a bit ridiculous

Not sure it works quite that way. Pretty sure missiles are manufactured using entirely automated systems - don't need any crew on board a carrier for it to make missiles. Personally quite like the flexibility of being able to change missile loadouts at a carrier whenever I feel like it, rather than being restricted to only having access to whatever pre-built missiles happen to be in storage on the carrier. However I do still generally take the precaution of filling the carrier's own missile storage with an emergency supply of missiles (usually filled with whatever it's fighters are using and/or battlefield salvage), just in case it ever runs out of parts.

Please refer to my post below, hope it is helpful

[Shadowofpeace]

God yes, i thought Carriers were broken because this doesnt work for them. It's seems crazy they can't function in the same way given that the script already exists for Auxillery ships.

Carriers are not broken, first carrier jobs and role is different to aux. Carrier are meant mainly as a wing repair and mobile wing ship while using turrets in direct combat and to engage the enemy while aux is meant as a support ship as defensive repair and rearming ship while mainly staying out of direct combat while main fleet engages the enemies. If trade ship where to supply the carrier while in direct combat it is likely to be destroyed while trying to dock and while be using valuable docking bays and internal ship storage needed to repair damage ships in wing.

[flywlyx]

If deck size, fuel, buoyancy(in water as well as flight) were not factors you can be sure the surface navy would do every single bit of supply with helicopters & planes & the only purpose of fleet auxiliary would be to resupply depots to reduce round trip time for those craft. Indeed, as the longest a resupply trip could possibly take is a few hours even in the worst conditions..

Carriers are supposed to be warships, they need armor, a lot of armor. These factors will only be more restricted in space

While that may be true that carrier is basic mobile spaceport/airport, but it's can be town/city mobile because in long deep space, long travel, it's could be people live, born and grow old in home of carrier, unless carrier had jumpdrive making short trips that is. Depend on if had jumpdrive and how powerful it is, and how powerful engine is it, so go on. Carrier could carry people from/to station, ship and planet

In this case, you have your headquarters with teleportation ability, you don't need a carrier to do this job.

Perhaps, but a mobile airport that can store several dedicated M trade ships, so I don't see why it shouldn't be able to send them out for supplies.

At the end of the day, you can do it all manually, but it's time-consuming, and a bit of a pain, but I feel that if you can do it manually, and the game doesn't restrict from doing so, why not just automate it? As cjelliott already said in this thread, the script is there for auxiliary ships, why not port it over for carriers.

On the contrary, I think carriers having the current ability is a mistake, it should only be able to store wares like missiles/deployables, all the manufacturing should be done by factories or auxiliary ships. And we should give cargo ships the ability to transfer missiles/deployables like typical cargo, I think this should be the way the carrier supply chain should work.

[Ragnos28]

On the contrary, I think carriers having the current ability is a mistake, it should only be able to store wares like missiles/deployables, all the manufacturing should be done by factories or auxiliary ships. And we should give cargo ships the ability to transfer missiles/deployables like typical cargo, I think this should be the way the carrier supply chain should work.

This ^

[sh4l0m]

If deck size, fuel, buoyancy(in water as well as flight) were not factors you can be sure the surface navy would do every single bit of supply with helicopters & planes & the only purpose of fleet auxiliary would be to resupply depots to reduce round trip time for those craft. Indeed, as the longest a resupply trip could possibly take is a few hours even in the worst conditions..

Carriers are supposed to be warships, they need armor, a lot of armor. These factors will only be more restricted in space

While that may be true that carrier is basic mobile spaceport/airport, but it's can be town/city mobile because in long deep space, long travel, it's could be people live, born and grow old in home of carrier, unless carrier had jumpdrive making short trips that is. Depend on if had jumpdrive and how powerful it is, and how powerful engine is it, so go on. Carrier could carry people from/to station, ship and planet

In this case, you have your headquarters with teleportation ability, you don't need a carrier to do this job.

Perhaps, but a mobile airport that can store several dedicated M trade ships, so I don't see why it shouldn't be able to send them out for supplies.

At the end of the day, you can do it all manually, but it's time-consuming, and a bit of a pain, but I feel that if you can do it manually, and the game doesn't restrict from doing so, why not just automate it? As cjelliott already said in this thread, the script is there for auxiliary ships, why not port it over for carriers.

On the contrary, I think carriers having the current ability is a mistake, it should only be able to store wares like missiles/deployables, all the manufacturing should be done by factories or auxiliary ships. And we should give cargo ships the ability to transfer missiles/deployables like typical cargo, I think this should be the way the carrier supply chain should work.

So, the logic of a carrier is built with surface navy and extrapolated into X-space. Pretty much the whole point of a carrier is that they fight with their small craft & escorts & rl carriers basically don't have armour, they have structure with which to attach engines to - with which they stay away from surface threats. In X it's different ofc, but in X - Carriers broadly are not supposed to win s2s brawls.



What carriers have is a great deal of open space internally. Which causes greater dimensions, but not greater mass except in the structure 'required' to surround it. In X volume & hitpoint pool do not need to be linked any more than they are in rl(where they obviously aren't being as hp don't exist.) In space ofc you don't get create more buoyancy by increasing the surface area, but then - you don't need more.

When you say 'These factors will only be more restricted in space' some reasoning would be great, because I can't detect any reasoning being done.

Hull material (or armor, as we might call it when talking about carriers, being as in X & rl they amount to the same thing) is cheap as chips relative to other components of a ship, both in X & rl




//

Re: 'on the contrary'

tbh I don't have an opinion either way as to which is better, except that it should make sense in-universe.


On the one hand when factories are never far away there is little point in putting much effort into providing a carrier with the capacity for independent action.

On the other, if the logic is adjusted to require frequent returns to factories for trivial issues then the in-game people would not want to deal with that logistical mess any more than player do, so they would build in self-service capability. As to whether it's plausible re: all the mention of 'a carrier is not a factory' - every fleet carrier that ever went into service had the capability to repair it's own complement. The majority of expected repair & replace work done on warships ever since the age of sail was not done in a dock - but on the ship either by the crew or by contractors taken onboard. By & large every warship ever expected to leave it's own coast was/had a factory.

But on the third hand of this Paranid fantasy, if a factory can build an entire fighter in a couple of minutes why bother repairing them. (See also - common user behaviour)

[flywlyx]

So, the logic of a carrier is built with surface navy and extrapolated into X-space. Pretty much the whole point of a carrier is that they fight with their small craft & escorts & rl carriers basically don't have armour, they have structure with which to attach engines to - with which they stay away from surface threats. In X it's different ofc, but in X - Carriers broadly are not supposed to win s2s brawls.

WWII carriers do have armor, Modern naval warfare is totally different from X4 universe, it is more like WWII.

When you say 'These factors will only be more restricted in space' some reasoning would be great, because I can't detect any reasoning being done.

Hull material (or armor, as we might call it when talking about carriers, being as in X & rl they amount to the same thing) is cheap as chips relative to other components of a ship, both in X & rl

Raptor hull (no equipment )is only 75% mass comparing to monitor, while it has 3.68 times more hull and 2 times more expensive. What is lighter, more expensive, and provides more ability to counter damage? It is called armor.
And in real life, even on naval ships, armor steel is really high-quality steel, and on space ships, the heat shield tile is way more expensive than other tiles, and it is only to counter the heat.

On the other, if the logic is adjusted to require frequent returns to factories for trivial issues then the in-game people would not want to deal with that logistical mess any more than player do, so they would build in self-service capability. As to whether it's plausible re: all the mention of 'a carrier is not a factory' - every fleet carrier that ever went into service had the capability to repair it's own complement. The majority of expected repair & replace work done on warships ever since the age of sail was not done in a dock - but on the ship either by the crew or by contractors taken onboard. By & large every warship ever expected to leave it's own coast was/had a factory.

This is the exact logic why the supplier ships should do the manufacturing and the carriers do the maintenance. War is a battle of efficiency, the carrier with a factory is havier than the carrier without, and the factory is totally useless during a fighting scenario, so the carrier doesn't need a factory, while the fleet does.

[sh4l0m]

Re: ww2 cv's, 2" of armour is not armour designed to stop incoming shells.

Re: "What is lighter.." Armour steel is not lighter than structural steel. Empty space for hangars is lighter than structural steel.



Re: Heat shield

The estimated total cost of space shuttle heat shielding is ~90 million.
The estimated total cost of a space shuttle launch is 1.5 billion.
Otoh, 1/15 still looks like a lot, otoh, you're not launching any shuttles without my ceramics.

As to quality - in such industries cost is far more dictated by how rarely purchases occur (and the need to make it worth people's while & keep them in jobs in the gaps between purchases) than it is to do with the quality & actual instantial cost of producing a given product. Invoices, after all, are made by people with lives to live, not by the materials they produce.


To the rest, as I said, Idd with the discussion/proposal in general, what I disagreed with were specific points made to try and justify.

[flywlyx]

Re: ww2 cv's, 2" of armour is not armour designed to stop incoming shells.

X4 doesn't have these differences.

Re: "What is lighter.." Armour steel is not lighter than structural steel. Empty space for hangars is lighter than structural steel.

It is stronger in the same weight, or lighter in the same strength.

Re: Heat shield

The estimated total cost of space shuttle heat shielding is ~90 million.
The estimated total cost of a space shuttle launch is 1.5 billion.
Otoh, 1/15 still looks like a lot, otoh, you're not launching any shuttles without my ceramics.

You should compare tiles to tiles, not full cost, is this kind of basic logic so hard for you?

Re: Heat shield

As to quality - in such industries cost is far more dictated by how rarely purchases occur

Nope, price is also influenced by production ability, no matter how eager you want it, if you can't get it, the price go rocket high.