Missile Turrets: Outdated and Obsolete ?

[aramis]

I have not read the entire thread, but has anyone plugged in the fact that it you are firing missiles when in orbit, unless you fire retrograde, the missiles go in orbit too, and do not go away? The same hold true for missiles fired when not in orbit. Like the Energizer Bunny, they just keep going and going and going . . . . .

But they won't be in YOUR orbit.

If you're spin of me and I fire spinward at you, either I aimed slightly under you (and they rise into you), or I fired flat or above and the missiles have to fight down into you. (Or I screwed up, and they are fired "flat" and rise above you.)

Case 1 - Aim low - on a miss, they fall into a higher orbit, if not escape.
Case 2 - Aim high, thrust down - on a miss, they hit atmo.
Case 3 - aim flat, thrust down - on a miss, they rise to higher orbit and/or escape.

It's not that big a deal. And, with the 360 second turns of mongoose, that's 3.5 kps per gee, or about 1/3 LEO escape velocity per gee. (Keep in mind, escape velocity is about 2^0.5 times orbital velocity for a given altitude.)

A "typical" 6G missile hits escape velocity for even a size 12 world within the first turn.

 

[wbyrd]

Missiles may not be able to inflict ship killing damage without a very large number of them in the air at once. But they can serve a very practical secondary roll.

Laser Bait. Launching a large salvo as your vessel tries to close range to bring heavier weapons into play force the defender to decide on point defense fire, or focusing on the launch vessel

I have tried a couple of rail gun, and pulse laser, armed 500 ton corvettes. the mix of missiles and torpedoes being launched in large numbers force other vessels to go defensive. In most of the engagements me and my friends have played out a faster vehicle with a heavy missile load can close to short range with little resistance while the target vehicle is forced to evade, and fire it's weapons defensively..


On the original subject, there seems to be a trend away from, and back to turreted launchers as technology changes.

The rail style turreted launcher is a hold over from the technology around the time traveler came out. Missiles required time to lock onto a target and acquire them with their own guidance systems. which mean you had to point them at a target before firing.
Newer containerized launchers don't have that limitation since they are being fed target information from the launch vessels own systems, and partially guided by the launch vessel.

The turreted mounting although is now making a comeback. The rolling airframe missiles (RAM) now being tested and deployed are high velocity designs they can't use their own systems until launched so they receive part of their targeting info from the launch vessel. However once they are airborne they need to have their targeting sensors lined up in the general direction of the target, so they are a turreted systems....and the pendulum swings back.

 

[JFGarber]

I have tried a couple of rail gun, and pulse laser, armed 500 ton corvettes. the mix of missiles and torpedoes being launched in large numbers force other vessels to go defensive. In most of the engagements me and my friends have played out a faster vehicle with a heavy missile load can close to short range with little resistance while the target vehicle is forced to evade, and fire it's weapons defensively..

Which rule set are your using?

 

[wbyrd]

Currently mongoose.

But in several other systems I've noticed the same effect when using a heavy missile load.

 

[Carlobrand]

Currently mongoose.

But in several other systems I've noticed the same effect when using a heavy missile load.

What systems were those? High Guard II laser lacks punch for combat against armored warcraft. Nuke missile's the offense of choice until you get big enough to mount spinals; laser tends to be used in the antimissile role unless you're facing civilian craft or craft small enough to lay crits on. CT Book 2, the only offensive choices are missiles and lasers. GURPS, maybe?

 

[aramis]

What systems were those? High Guard II laser lacks punch for combat against armored warcraft. Nuke missile's the offense of choice until you get big enough to mount spinals; laser tends to be used in the antimissile role unless you're facing civilian craft or craft small enough to lay crits on. CT Book 2, the only offensive choices are missiles and lasers. GURPS, maybe?

MegaTraveller uses HG 2E as the basis; it's a task system version of HG 2E combat.

T20 has the same issue - as the factors are derived the same way as HG 2E... But it's both exacerbated by and mitigated by the damage system.
Nuclear Missiles are d6 standard + d12 radiation damage.
But PA turrets are (aside from being 3Td each) d12 standard +d10 radiation.
Fusion does d20 surface.
Meson does d20 surface +d12 radiation, but is special in that both sides are damped by Meson Screen only.

Note that Armor directly reduces the number of dice counted 1AV = -1 die, until a single die remains (the largest), at which point it reduces the damage 1AV= -1 point. Nuclear Dampers reduce radiation damage, Meson Screens reduce Meson Gun damage, and Armor reduces standard damage. Black Globes and White Globes reduce everything. And all relevant AV stacks. Damage dice = USP factor.

So missiles are the fastest way to get through armored ships, but AV 15 is a guaranteed stop of standard missiles in any battery of less than USP 10. (Note that Turret Missiles can't exceed USP 7). AV 12 converts 6 AV to stopping the 6 lowest d6's, and then hits a DM -6 on the last die, making the maximum damage 0. Nukes need the d12's to be stopped by Dampers.

It takes AV 14 to stop factor 7 Pulse Lasers (the best factor available), (6AV for reducing to 7d8k1, and then 8 remaining for turning that to 7d8k1-8.)
AV15 is a guaranteed stop against beam lasers... maximum battery factor is 9, so 9d6k1-6 is the math.

And since Nuclear Dampers cap at USP 9... that radiation from the missiles isn't getting stopped by them. 7d12k1-3 is still likely a couple points of damage.

So, yeah, Nuclear missiles are pretty well still dominant.

 

[McPerth]

Currently mongoose.

But in several other systems I've noticed the same effect when using a heavy missile load.

In MgT missiles are close to useless.

If using Core Book, just having enough armor makes them useless without even needing lasers to be fired against them.

If using HG, also a well armored ship is nearly imprevious to them, and nuclear dampers make them even more useless. See this example among TL10 ships, comparing missiles vs PA batteries (and see no dampers were used):

See that in MgT missiles are no longer the decisive weapons told about in CT:HG (I guess they are the "Dethroned Queen of the Battle").

If you use CB rules, 2d6 damage (I asume nukes) against heavy armor (Let's asume equal to TL) plus nuc damper plus (possibly) sand, usualy means no damage.

As for barrages (those numbers were run for another thread on a TL 10 ship):

to make numbers easy, let's imagine your 20 missile bays against 16 bearing:

Missiles barrage: 384 - nuclear missile - long - 2

Against an armor 10 ship, in all cases crew quality 3 and FC +2 8maximum for TL A):

Missiles modifier: -10 armor, +2 dice/weapon, +3 crew, +2 FC, - (1d6-1¹+1) sandcasters, -(1d6-2¹+1) for lasers= -(2 + (2d6-1)), so, -(2d6+1). So, assuming average dice, no damage (as the dice for PD will offset barrage roll and still leave a -1 result).

I asume PD is under 90% of missiles in both cases​

Of course, a lucky missile barrage can be devastating (both PD rolls being 1, so a total of -3 and boxes on the barrage roll would inflict 150%, so 576 damage points, But you need a barrage roll 5 over the PD rolls to inflict any damage (I leave the numbers to anyone else). And again, against fighters things go even worse.

As your TL raises, so does Fire Control (up to +5), but so does enemy's armor, for a net effect of 0 until TL 13 (when Fire Control/5 is reached), and negative for the missiles upwards...

More or less the same happens when diffreent Crew Quality is used (after all, +3 is elite crews according to HG: At Crew quality +2, both PDs (sand and lasers) lose a +1 to the roll, but so does the barrage roll (for a total of +1 for the missiles), while Crew Quality +1 evens it again, as the PDs are unaffected while the missiles lose another +1. Crew Quality +4 will again give a +1 to the missiles and won't affect PDs, giving again a +1 more to the missiles. See that in both cases where the missiles receive this additional +1 for Crew Quality they still need to toll on the barrage roll 4 over the PDs rolls to affect the ship (albeit if they do the damage can be devastating).

And all of this is aside form the cost (both in tonnage and Credits) that the ammo represents...

See that the example in MgT LBB2:HG (pages 74-75) is against an armor 2 ship, and even then it only achieves 50% barrage damage on a barrage roll of 7 and PDs rolls of 4 and 2 (so, barrage roll 1 over PDs ones and against very low armor)

 

[wbyrd]

Well someone saved me a lot of writing.....

On Small star ships the armor of most civilian or criminal ships remains very low due to tonnage and cost considerations. they can not afford to armor up. So they must either jam, evade, or shoot down incoming missiles or risk "death by a thousand cuts."

In a running engagement missiles can help to force pursuing ships to use up thrust to evade, or damage them as the defending ship opens up range. Additionally almost every Referee I have played with allows players to target incoming missiles on the players action phase as well as a reaction to incoming fire.
This usually ends up with most gunners using up their attacks to try and snipe incoming missiles well before they get to the defending vessel. this decreases the number of weapons available to target a hostile vessel.


When you consider the number of missiles that can be in the air at once with a number of turrets, barebettes, and bays a small warship can mount. Defenders have to sweep space with every system they have rather than use their lasers in an offensive role.

 

[wbyrd]

I have not read the entire thread, but has anyone plugged in the fact that it you are firing missiles when in orbit, unless you fire retrograde, the missiles go in orbit too, and do not go away? The same hold true for missiles fired when not in orbit. Like the Energizer Bunny, they just keep going and going and going . . . . .

In orbital space the missile will eventually decelerate and fall out of the sky.

now in space yeah... Energizer Bunny of death... fortunately there is a LOT of empty space out there. The odds of running into, or being ran into by, a stray missile are pretty slim. and without power you can see them coming and simply change course.

 

[Carlobrand]

...On Small star ships the armor of most civilian or criminal ships remains very low ... When you consider the number of missiles that can be in the air at once with a number of turrets, barebettes, and bays a small warship can mount. Defenders have to sweep space with every system they have rather than use their lasers in an offensive role.

When I hear warship, I tend to think military: a ship whose job is war. I think it's true in all systems that civilian ships face significant limitations that make them more vulnerable than their military counterparts. However, you also speak of small warships facing problems when it's already been mentioned that heavy armor - is 10 heavy in that system? - will neutralize the missiles. Are small warships unable to mount the same degree of armor as their larger cousins in Mongoose? Or is it that they face some other effect, like the critical hits that High Guard assigns when a big battery hits a smaller ship?

 

[aramis]

In orbital space the missile will eventually decelerate and fall out of the sky.

now in space yeah... Energizer Bunny of death... fortunately there is a LOT of empty space out there. The odds of running into, or being ran into by, a stray missile are pretty slim. and without power you can see them coming and simply change course.

Escape velocity at surface of Earth is only 11.2 km/s... only 1142 G-seconds of acceleration. That's 190 seconds at 6G... 0:03:10.

In CT, that's less than one turn for a typical missile; only the 1G1 missiles don't hit that.

In MgT, which IIRC has the shortest turn length of any Traveller edition's space combat, the turn in space combat is 6 minutes (360 seconds). a 3G missile or higher is going to hit escape velocity in turn 1. (And the standard is 6G 3 turns.) Earth is size 8. Even a size 10, with 1.2-1.3x the escape velocity required, is going to be escaped by the standard 6G 3turn missile.

So, no, they will not in fact stay in orbit.

 

[wbyrd]

Escape velocity at surface of Earth is only 11.2 km/s... only 1142 G-seconds of acceleration. That's 190 seconds at 6G... 0:03:10.

In CT, that's less than one turn for a typical missile; only the 1G1 missiles don't hit that.

In MgT, which IIRC has the shortest turn length of any Traveller edition's space combat, the turn in space combat is 6 minutes (360 seconds). a 3G missile or higher is going to hit escape velocity in turn 1. (And the standard is 6G 3 turns.) Earth is size 8. Even a size 10, with 1.2-1.3x the escape velocity required, is going to be escaped by the standard 6G 3turn missile.

So, no, they will not in fact stay in orbit.

curse you and you're close attention to physics.....

When I hear warship, I tend to think military: a ship whose job is war. I think it's true in all systems that civilian ships face significant limitations that make them more vulnerable than their military counterparts. However, you also speak of small warships facing problems when it's already been mentioned that heavy armor - is 10 heavy in that system? - will neutralize the missiles. Are small warships unable to mount the same degree of armor as their larger cousins in Mongoose? Or is it that they face some other effect, like the critical hits that High Guard assigns when a big battery hits a smaller ship?

By warship I was referring to any vessel intended to engage in combat as a primary unction. Merc Cruisers, frigates, corvettes escorts etc fit into that group.

10 pts of armor is heavy for most ships under 3000 tons. most ships under 3000 tons in any material I have on hand have much less than that.


the limiting factor for armor is tonnage and cost, armor consumes a percentage of hull volume depending on the type of armor
armor is allocated in 5% blocks ( although you can apply it in smaller increments)
titanium steel 2 pts per 5% cost 5% of base hull per block
crystal Iron 4 pts per 5% cost 20% of base hull per block
Bonded superdense 6 pts per 5% cost 50% of base hull per block

so the limits are how much space you want to give up, and how deep your pockets are.

To negate a missile you need to mount 5-6 pts of armor, which can be fairly expensive, and burn up a sizable chunk of tonnage.

most of the ships I am looking at have 8pts armor at most, which neutralizes common missiles and 1 dice lasers.... You need particle beams or rail guns ( from High Guard) to punch through those sorts of shells.

Missiles are not completely useless, unless you pick a fight with a heavy combat craft.

Now capital ships add up there weapons into barrages then apply defense modifiers. a Barrage or salvo from one poorly armed capital ship will flash fry most small star ships. ( 3000 tons or less is a Small Starship. 3000+ is a Capital ship.)

 

[McPerth]

the limiting factor for armor is tonnage and cost, armor consumes a percentage of hull volume depending on the type of armor
armor is allocated in 5% blocks ( although you can apply it in smaller increments)
titanium steel 2 pts per 5% cost 5% of base hull per block
crystal Iron 4 pts per 5% cost 20% of base hull per block
Bonded superdense 6 pts per 5% cost 50% of base hull per block

so the limits are how much space you want to give up, and how deep your pockets are.

To negate a missile you need to mount 5-6 pts of armor, which can be fairly expensive, and burn up a sizable chunk of tonnage.

Or what is your perceived threat...

I was surprised in seeing the free/far merchants are armored in MgT as much as I was in seeing the Corsair is not, as I agree most merchants will prefer to have those 10 dtons free for cargo, but if the thread is high enough, it can pay off (though in this case I'd pay 2 MCr more to have the armor of bonded superdense and fully nullifying beam lasers and non nuclear missiles).

most of the ships I am looking at have 8pts armor at most, which neutralizes common missiles and 1 dice lasers.... You need particle beams or rail guns ( from High Guard) to punch through those sorts of shells.

Also Pulse Lasers may penetrate it (once changes from page 47 of high guard are applied), but they are less accurate tan beam lasers..

Missiles are not completely useless, unless you pick a fight with a heavy combat craft.

They are not complely useless, just close to (unless you intend to use them as ortillery too). They have no real advantage over PBs, aside from buying price, but their advantage pays off (better damage, armor penetration do not need ammo, that costs money and space for ammoand may run out...)

Now capital ships add up there weapons into barrages then apply defense modifiers. a Barrage or salvo from one poorly armed capital ship will flash fry most small star ships. ( 3000 tons or less is a Small Starship. 3000+ is a Capital ship.)

As it should be.

Nonetheless, if you have a heavy armored small craft with a few PD weapons, the formulas for the barrage are the same as for a Capital ship, so the example above also applies (until it rolls high enough and the small craft is vaporized by a single lucky salvo :devil.

 

[Xerxeskingofking]

sorry for the threat necromancy, but I got myself the MgT Trillion Credit Squadron book as a present to myself, and discovered that the book included rules for a VLS style missile launcher (pg. 22, for those with the book).


to paraphrase the rules:

the missle pack has 12 missles. it takes up one Dton of space, one hardpoint and fires all 12 missles at once, using the Gunner (bay) skill. can only reloaded at a starport.

This would give small craft a option to put serious amounts of missles downrange, and make a 10 ton strike fighter a potential threat to large ships when fired in barrages.

now, I'm of the opinion that what they mean by "starport" is "shirt sleeves environment", I.e. normal atmospheric pressure and such, so the crew can work without vac suits. I'd say a full hanger would count, so a carrier could reload it's strike crafts missile packs and launch a another strike.

 

[McPerth]

sorry for the threat necromancy, but I got myself the MgT Trillion Credit Squadron book as a present to myself, and discovered that the book included rules for a VLS style missile launcher (pg. 22, for those with the book).


to paraphrase the rules:

the missle pack has 12 missles. it takes up one Dton of space, one hardpoint and fires all 12 missles at once, using the Gunner (bay) skill. can only reloaded at a starport.

This would give small craft a option to put serious amounts of missles downrange, and make a 10 ton strike fighter a potential threat to large ships when fired in barrages.

now, I'm of the opinion that what they mean by "starport" is "shirt sleeves environment", I.e. normal atmospheric pressure and such, so the crew can work without vac suits. I'd say a full hanger would count, so a carrier could reload it's strike crafts missile packs and launch a another strike.

I don't believe they make any difference, as in most cases the missiles are useless against any decently aremored ship with some PDs if using the barrage rules, as I showed before. The expected multiplier for hits in barrage rules for missiles against such a ship is 0, the true number of missiles being irrelevant.

I don't believe any true warship to have less armor than 8, if only because that makes you impervious to radiation damage (and, as barrage rules are, I expect most, if not all, of them to have máximum armor), and I guess all of them will have some PD weapons, so, having more missiles in a single salvo just wasted them, unless you're truly lucky in this specific salvo (as they are only useful on a single one).

And against fighters, even if they are only lightly armored (and this may well not be the case), the -4 against fighter swarms and the fact you cannot achieve more hits than gunners you have, no matter how lucky you are, makes them (IMHO) even more a waste of missiles...

 

[Patron Zero]

Going back the origins of the thread and my intent, I was more referring to missiles aboard civilian vessels and relocating such to VLS-type launchers in general.

Any freighter thinking of slugging it out against a dedicated naval-military ship is only going to end up one way, said destroyer, cruiser, etc probing the debris of the freighter for survivors.

Mind tossing out a spread of missiles carrying jammers or other sensor-confusing devices in their wake as the freighter flees into J-space might be a different thing.

 

[Carlobrand]

Going back the origins of the thread and my intent, I was more referring to missiles aboard civilian vessels and relocating such to VLS-type launchers in general.

Any freighter thinking of slugging it out against a dedicated naval-military ship is only going to end up one way, said destroyer, cruiser, etc probing the debris of the freighter for survivors.

Mind tossing out a spread of missiles carrying jammers or other sensor-confusing devices in their wake as the freighter flees into J-space might be a different thing.

Me personally, I'd still limit merchant vessels to one missile launch per turn per turret/VLS/what-have-you as a regulatory requirement. Between the risk of desperate merchantmen turning pirate and hints of occasional trade wars between freight companies, I'd want a regulation that kept them from turning each other into scrap metal before my police craft could arrive to sort things out. Of course, that would only apply to ships in Imperial (and probably Zhodani) space; merchants in Vargr space or in unincorporated regions could be nasty.

 

[McPerth]

As for missile armed merchants, I again feel it a poor choice, given MgT rules.

Being non military ships, I'll assume we use Core Book rules for them (so no barrages, etc...)

If we stay in OTU, I must guess Imperial Rules of War keep in force and so the missiles may not be nukes. That reduces its damage to 1d6. See that any ship with armor 4 (at usual TLs that means 5% of tonnage) will ignore about 2/3 of them, and any ship with armor 6+ will fully ignore them.

The issue about ammo cost (in money and tonnage keeps), so the missiles are quite inferior (IMHO) to lasers or (the ones I feel would be the main weapon in MgT) PBs. Lasers don't use ammo and may be more powerful (at some accuracy cost, for Plasers), and may also help you as PD weapons. PBs are quite more powerful (even inflicting radiation damage) and accurate, and in MgT are quite low TL and power needs is not a problem (the main advantage for missiles in other versions).

See also that in no place (at least no place I've found) PBs are in MgT limited as ortillery, taking off another of their disadvantages from previous versions, where they could not be used against atmospheric targets (but that's again mostly for military thought crafts, not so important for civilian merchants).

 

[Carlobrand]

... so the missiles are quite inferior (IMHO) to lasers or (the ones I feel would be the main weapon in MgT) PBs. ...

Mongoose lets you mount particle beams on merchantmen?

 

[Xerxeskingofking]

Mongoose lets you mount particle beams on merchantmen?

well, they are in the core rulebook, which does not, of itself, place any limit on what weapons a ship may carry. Nor do any of the OTU setting books I've seen form MgT, for that matter.

the only real limits placed on particle beams are added in MgT High Guard. in that, one PB takes up a whole triple turret, and their is a basic power limitation (P1 or P2 can only have 25% turrets as PB, P3 or P4 50%, P5 and P6 no limit)

out of intrest, is their official word about weather PB are affected by sand? or if you can use them as point defence? I narrow interpretation of the rules as written would imply not, but I would have assumed yes to both myself.