Laser, Missile, Sand

[robject]

The Traveller Way. These are the main weapons with which Traveller's small ships have duked it out. Between these three, you cover a nice range of offense and defense, a kind of rock-paper-scissors relationship:

* Missiles are the most dangerous, and the most expensive of the three.
* Lasers are effective in offensive and defensive roles.
* Sandcasters stop lasers.

They're set up in Traveller so that you'll want one of each, at least. You'll want a Laser to kill someone's expensive Missiles. You'll want a Missile Launcher as a serious threat. You'll want Sand to stop someone's cheap Lasers from carving holes in your pretty starship.

And while I'm at it: single turrets are effective. The Oberlindes kiloton freighter can mount ten single turrets, and corsairs won't automatically laugh. They might consider that ship reasonably well defended.

Oh yes, one more thing: boarding actions are also effective. (This is something I think Traveller has not dealt with in space combat - it rather has sort of assumed that the first ship slagged is the loser and it's doubtful anyone is left alive.)

That's The Traveller Way.

So:

I'm going to brainstorm some ways to keep this Way valid for T5, while allowing T5 to be T5. This is not particularly hard, since I consider starship combat for T5 as rather undeveloped. Damage is well developed. Weapons, perhaps less so, perhaps not focused on the Big Three.

Are some weapons only allowed in military ships? I seem to remember that argument some time ago, and it seems to be a weak reason to forbid some weapons. I'm going to avoid it like the plague, and focus on other ways to favor the L-M-S mix.

For example, a set of mutually exclusive possibilities:

* Setting weapon TLs so that Laser turrets have a valid niche.
* Reaffirming that Sandcasters are valid "anti-beam" defenses.
* Make sure the Single Turret is effective? e.g. increase the DM or damage by +1 or +2. (And think about eliminating the quad turret).
* Limit the number of "special" weapons by TL. Not sure of the best way.

 

[flykiller]

hm. no mention of gunners and gunnery skill? perhaps instead of upping to-hit rolls maybe the captain should hire some decent gunners and pay them more than minimum wage?

 

[Khan Trav]

Yes, I agree with Flykiller, qualified gunners are under rated in Traveller. Fancy weapons and computers are critical in space combat but gunnery should not be overlooked.

 

[pendragonman]

That's The Traveller Way.

First, I read this in Sean Connery's brogue from "The Untouchables".

Second, LMS is a small ship universe thing. Which really means making a division/ option in the rules to list a set of items that are allowed in a small ship universe (or how the rules interact with a small ship universe). Making PAs and Meson turrets a military only thing and and a brutally, heavy handed enforced military thing would go a long way here.

This leads to other questions for other threads, like how else are the rules effected with a small ship focus.

 

[Magnus von Thornwood]

Whatever.

Lasers suck in T5, that is kind of a problem. They are short ranged and useless as an offensive weapon. Good for Anti-Missile/Anti-Boarding weapons but crap all useless in the few T5 Space Combats I have run, admittedly few but still they all ended being resolved by missile fire. No laser fire except as defenses.

If you want to keep LMS as a valid system then lasers need better range. I mean we regularly shoot Luna with lasers like every clear night. That is some 300,000 Km and so lasers with tiny world ranges with starship fusion plants powering them should have a greater range. Like say that old 2 Ls range they used to have.

Also, you can do what you, well what Marc approves, but I dislike limiting choices and so my ATU will keep all the Military grade weapons in my small ships. I don't particularly favor it for he OTU either, truth is on the Frontier what goes is never going to be the same as a core area. So, I think there is some wiggle room if there is an actual frontier.

Well, off to bed, busy week this one.

 

[David Johansen]

I expect the problem is spot diameter as discussed in Fire Fusion and Steel.

It's one thing to bounce a tightly focussed beam off the moon but quite another to keep the spot small enough to concentrate any energy at that distance.

 

[pendragonman]

Lasers suck in T5, that is kind of a problem. They are short ranged and useless as an offensive weapon. Good for Anti-Missile/Anti-Boarding weapons but crap all useless in the few T5 Space Combats I have run, admittedly few but still they all ended being resolved by missile fire. No laser fire except as defenses.

If you want to keep LMS as a valid system then lasers need better range. I mean we regularly shoot Luna with lasers like every clear night. That is some 300,000 Km and so lasers with tiny world ranges with starship fusion plants powering them should have a greater range. Like say that old 2 Ls range they used to have.

Also, you can do what you, well what Marc approves, but I dislike limiting choices and so my ATU will keep all the Military grade weapons in my small ships. I don't particularly favor it for he OTU either, truth is on the Frontier what goes is never going to be the same as a core area. So, I think there is some wiggle room if there is an actual frontier.

Well, off to bed, busy week this one.

Mags, I don't think your TU is a particularly small ship universe anyway, is it? Upper limit on tonnage is greater than 10 kdtons isn't it?

 

[whulorigan]

Lasers suck in T5, that is kind of a problem. They are short ranged and useless as an offensive weapon. Good for Anti-Missile/Anti-Boarding weapons but crap all useless in the few T5 Space Combats I have run, admittedly few but still they all ended being resolved by missile fire. No laser fire except as defenses.

If you want to keep LMS as a valid system then lasers need better range. I mean we regularly shoot Luna with lasers like every clear night. That is some 300,000 Km and so lasers with tiny world ranges with starship fusion plants powering them should have a greater range. Like say that old 2 Ls range they used to have.

Is this problem solved by Stage Effects with increasing TL? Lasers are fairly low-tech, so they ought to benefit in terms of range and other considerations by improving them with increasing TL. Note that I have not tried T5 Starship combat yet, but I am intrigued by the system at first glance.

Also, you can do what you, well what Marc approves, but I dislike limiting choices and so my ATU will keep all the Military grade weapons in my small ships. I don't particularly favor it for he OTU either, truth is on the Frontier what goes is never going to be the same as a core area. So, I think there is some wiggle room if there is an actual frontier.

Frankly, I am not aware that there has ever been a prohibition in canon concerning non-LMS weapons on civilian ships other than Nukes and perhaps Meson Weapons (certainly not from CT:High Guard that I recall). In CT, most Small Ships were USP-detailed (and some were actually built) under HG rules, which made no restrictions as to their weapon choices. As far as I can see, T5 has no specific mention of restrictions either.

I can understand that the Imperium would not want private vessels to be able to mount weapons that could potentially damage IN ships (especially meson weapons), but I hardly think that means that all weapons other than L-M-S would be forbidden (or at least, a permit should be possible to obtain lesser military-grade systems of barbette or turret size at least). If we keep in mind the analog-model for Traveller (i.e. the Age of Sail or early steam-age), such vessels were armed against piracy and/or other attack out of necessity because ships at sea were quite effectively on their own. No country stipulated that its merchant vessels could only mount musket-fire from the rigging or only swivel-guns or only "one-pounders or less" as a maximum shot size for its guns (at least not that I am aware of). Regulations in Imperial space may be somewhat different than the Age of Sail, or course, but the reason behind arming civilian vessels is the same (at least out on the Frontier, at any rate).

 

[Epee]

I agree with the "Age of Sail" cannon analogy with conditions. While ship-to-ship weapons and certainly defenses would be allowed, I cannot imagine that private ships loaded with nuclear missles would be allowed within range of a starport or populated world.

 

[robject]

Jim Kundert also brought up the point that the average TL of a setting could influence what weapons you might want to put on your ship.

And a trader that needs to pack a punch to back-up its missile launcher will take the space and cost hit and install a Particle Accelerator barbette. I don't see why not. It's survival.


But my main point is Craig's point - lasers are defensive as currently written. They're too short ranged to be useful otherwise.

If Sandcasters are to be taken seriously, then so should lasers: they should be long-ranged. Otherwise, I think we don't need Sandcasters (AH, unless Sand is good against any beam weapons) -- nor do we need three kinds of lasers.

 

[robject]

hm. no mention of gunners and gunnery skill? perhaps instead of upping to-hit rolls maybe the captain should hire some decent gunners and pay them more than minimum wage?

I'm all for skilled gunners -- that part of combat works fine. But you also want an emplacement that is worth the cost. The best gunner can't damage a starship with a slingshot.

 

[flykiller]

hm. maybe good weapons could be a mustering-out benefit for merchants ....

'course, they'd be expected to go where such weapons are pertinent ....

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WcaJjwz6JWU

 

[whulorigan]

I agree with the "Age of Sail" cannon analogy with conditions. While ship-to-ship weapons and certainly defenses would be allowed, I cannot imagine that private ships loaded with nuclear missles would be allowed within range of a starport or populated world.

Absolutely agreed (and this is already stipulated in setting-canon). But note that the main concern here is the fact that a nuclear-tipped missile makes a handy and easily-acquired terrorist weapon if it is not regulated, and such a weapon does a lot more damage to a world-environment than to a space-based one. The same can be inferred for a meson-weapon: it can be fired from orbit and easily hit any target regardless of cover (ground based or otherwise) that does not happen to have a meson screen.

Perhaps something like the above is the "grid" to run the legality issue thru.

 

[flykiller]

lasers are a trope of scifi, but missiles alone (and anti-missile- and anti-sensor-sand if you're determined) can supply quite a bit of both combat action and role-playing. one can feel the sense of doom as the incoming approaches faster than 100d, navigators attempting to jam signals, pilots attempting to dodge incoming ... so perhaps it is not necessary to include offensive lasers?

 

[whulorigan]

lasers are a trope of scifi, but missiles alone (and anti-missile- and anti-sensor-sand if you're determined) can supply quite a bit of both combat action and role-playing. one can feel the sense of doom as the incoming approaches faster than 100d, navigators attempting to jam signals, pilots attempting to dodge incoming ... so perhaps it is not necessary to include offensive lasers?

I like the above, and think missiles should be superior to offensive lasers, but I still rather like the trope of offensive lasers, even if they are not the best offensive weapon-choice compared to other options. Their versatility as either offensive attack or defensive point-defense ought to be their selling-point.

 

[robject]

lasers are a trope of scifi, but missiles alone (and anti-missile- and anti-sensor-sand if you're determined) can supply quite a bit of both combat action and role-playing. one can feel the sense of doom as the incoming approaches faster than 100d, navigators attempting to jam signals, pilots attempting to dodge incoming ... so perhaps it is not necessary to include offensive lasers?

I could buy into this.

I've also (as usual) completely forgotten about Boarding Actions, also an interesting and fun trope. They tend to be taken for granted in Traveller but neglected in combat rules. If they're promoted as the endgame in typical space combat scenarios, then I think that in combination with missiles as above and short-ranged lasers may help restore a feeling of rightness in the universe for me.

 

[dalthor]

When I was playing with my "custom" starship combat (FACE) I tried to account for range and other factors.

Didn't get much feedback on it, but firmpoints had the least range, mining laser short, beam and pulse lasers long range. Pulse and beam lasers also did more damage.

Don't have access to the doc right now, but it is posted elsewhere on CoTI.

Kinda worked for me, but still left a sour taste in my mouth.

 

[robject]

When I was playing with my "custom" starship combat (FACE) I tried to account for range and other factors.
[...]
Kinda worked for me, but still left a sour taste in my mouth.

I apologize for not looking at it more closely; it's hard enough scrutinizing Traveller5's rules, and then having riffs off of it in various flavors to think about. It's hard to get a systematic view of things that way. At least, that's my excuse.

I find that all of my solutions to date feel inadequate to me -- they lack that "Traveller" feel to them. I'm trying not to sound like a sycophant here, but I tend to prefer GDW's and FFE's work to mine. That means I'm missing pivot points (or whatever) in those systems.

 

[David Johansen]

I think part of the problem is that early rpg design tends to be pretty organic, experimental, and sprawling. CT has at least three combat systems (depending on how you feel about Book IV mass combat), three ship to ship combat systems and a number of alternate mechanics in board games. For all that, many people never look past the core. Heck, Starter Traveller folks even look at you funny when you mention vectors.

We don't seem to have that luxury of exploration and experimentation now. People expect games to be absolutely flawless out of the gates and are no longer happy to pony up cash for the latest stack of APA churn.

Oh, and Classic Traveller's core never knew what to do about vehicle damage or weapons heavier than a Laser Rifle and the implementations from Mercenary and Citizens of the Imperium weren't great and it didn't take any more damage to kill the drives on a 2000t ship than a 100t ship and most of the technology presented was available in 1977.

 

[OjnoTheRed]

Great discussion - my 20c.

I think I could live with L-M-S as it currently is if we do work in boarding actions.

Missiles then become the "kill the target I don't care to know the details" weapon.

BUT the object of pirates isn't to destroy the target, it's to take it as a prize, or at least its cargo. They want to get in close and 'take out the masts' (to continue the Age of Sail analogy) and then board to take the ship as intact as possible (occasional holes from portable heavy weapons / firm points notwithstanding). This would suggest a strategy of heavy on the lasers; partly to screen for the merchants lobbing missiles at them, partly to disable crucial components (drives, weapons) when they get close. They want to get close to board anyway; now they can use close range ship-damaging weapons effectively. The rules as written (IIRC) do allow targetting of hotspots on the ship.

We would then just need to work in a rule for boarding in a similar way that there is a rule for ramming. It could be as simple as the boarding ship has to survive a round of defensive fire from the ship being boarded. This is easy to do if you take out all the weapons first. But there could be dramatic moments when the boarding ship takes a risk and is almost a wreck itself before desperate borders blow the airlock and start a desperate fight to take out remaining enemy ship weapons and control of the enemy ship. This might require some adjustment to the Personal Combat rules for boarding actions, or just track movement through the ship and individual combats as enemies encounter each other.

Missiles might also be equipped with safety devices to stop them exploding too close to a ship, rendering them useless against a ship that has closed to contact range for boarding (I immediatley think of Sean Connery's character in Hunt for Red October saying "even now he has realised his error and is removing the safety devices on his torpedoes").

Sand then becomes very relevant for merchants alongside lasers to counter the lasers taking out weapons, drives and power.