2300 Space Combat Scale- oops?

[rgrove0172]

I just read on another forum where the scale of the space combat in the original GDW 2300 rules (StarCruiser) has a glitch. Apparently the scale of the turns and that of the movement of vehicles on the given spacial scale dont jive.

Stutterwarp efficiency x .645 = AU/day of travel.

for a 1.5 EFF ship like the Aconit thats .96AU in 24 hours

150,000,000km x .96 = 144,000,000km in 24 hours or 6,000,000km/hr

Star Cruiser is played in 1 minute turns so.. The aconit should be able to move about 100,000 km per minute

Yet, it has a Movement of 3 for combat purposes.. which equates to 3x600,000km hexes every minute or 1,800,000km/minute or about 18 times faster than it should.

My math might be off somewhere but is seems there is some validity to the claim.

The recommendation is to drop the hex size, or essentially the spacial scale of space combat (which Ill admit always did seem a bit large) by a factor of 10 or so to correct things at least a bit. (maybe even 20 by calculations)

Now Ive been attempting to use the MgT2300 rules and their turns are 3 minutes long, and I havent done the math there yet (am about to) but Im wondering if the scale screw up carried over and a similar adjustment needs to be made.

 

[BMonnery]

Turn length implied is 1,000 seconds - exactly a CT turn. The turn length would thus seem to be a typo and then everything else makes sense.

Or, keep 1 minute turns, make turret weapons able to fire as far as sensors can see and worry about all you DC teams being up one end of the ship and needing 10 turns to make it down the other end to fix the drive....

 

[BMonnery]

Oh, and MgT scale is screwed up, but in a new and exciting way! (for the scale to fit range bands must be 0.75 ls).

 

[shaunhilburn]

GDW published movement rate figures that are inconsistent and cannot be reconciled. My preference is to ignore the 0.645 figure. See the earlier thread http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showthread.php?t=29392

The reason being that GDW published 0.645 twice (in both 2300 editions way in the back of the book) but, they published the faster rates three times. Four, I think, if you count the "Lone Wolf" articles.


Bryn M. has different take on this , he'll be along shortly.

 

[BMonnery]

GDW published movement rate figures that are inconsistent and cannot be reconciled. My preference is to ignore the 0.645 figure. See the earlier thread http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showthread.php?t=29392

The reason being that GDW published 0.645 twice (in both 2300 editions way in the back of the book) but, they published the faster rates three times. Four, I think, if you count the "Lone Wolf" articles.


Bryn M. has different take on this , he'll be along shortly.

GDW officially errata'd the insystem speed to 0.645. See the combined errata http://www.farfuture.net/2300 AD Consolidated_Errata 20090715.pdf

 

[rgrove0172]

Ok, so a fix of the turn duration on Star Cruiser to 1000 seconds is the easiest fix? (Rats, I kind of like the idea of scaling down the entire combat rules a bit)

how about MgT2300? Whats the accepted rule on getting it accurate?

 

[shaunhilburn]

Ok, so a fix of the turn duration on Star Cruiser to 1000 seconds is the easiest fix? (Rats, I kind of like the idea of scaling down the entire combat rules a bit)

Just make the hexes 33,500 km and keep the 1 minute turns. It fixes the scale/movement and has less impact.

 

[shaunhilburn]

I mean 67,000 km. Sorry.

 

[rgrove0172]

I mean 67,000 km. Sorry.

Would you need to upscale your sensor ranges then? Or do tactical sensors take a hit as well to fit?

 

[shaunhilburn]

Would you need to upscale your sensor ranges then? Or do tactical sensors take a hit as well to fit?

It's up to you, really. The shorter hex sizes seem like a better fit realistic WRT weapon and sensor ranges in the Reagan-era SDI concept. If I were making this change, it would be to the hex sizes only.

In this alternate scale:

1 hex = 33,500 km, 4,466 hexes per AU
WE 1 = 1,116.67 km/s = 0.026875 AU/hr = 0.645 AU/day

 

[rgrove0172]

Thats with the original 1 minute turns right?

1 hex = 33,500km
1 turn = 1 minute

Movement values remain the same but their RW reqivalent changes right? So the ships are moving considerably slower at STL than the original .645 multiplier right?

We are also nerfing sensor range and weapon ranges indirectly too. (no problem by me, Ive always thought they were a bit extreme)

Does that sum it up?

 

[shaunhilburn]

Thats with the original 1 minute turns right?

1 hex = 33,500km
1 turn = 1 minute

Does that sum it up?

Yup.

 

[rgrove0172]

I noticed you didnt include some of my comment in your quoted "yup".. does that mean they were excluded from your agreement?

 

[shaunhilburn]

I noticed you didnt include some of my comment in your quoted "yup".. does that mean they were excluded from your agreement?

Sorry for the laconic reply. I meant "Yes" to everything you said.

1 hex = 33,500 km hexes and keep the 1 minute turns. Leave movement and sensor ratings alone, and everything should fall into place. This only requires a scale change and reconciles the discrepancies without re-writing a major game subsystem. Less change is better.

Ships have much slower STL movement under the "0.645 scale" than with the Star Cruiser scale; 0.645 AU/day vs 11.55 AU/day.

 

[McPerth]

In any case, changing the scale changes too much of the game. A planet (e.g. Jupiter) might not fill in a single hex, orbit will not be in the same hex as the planet, satellites will be some hexes away (Moon would be about 8-9 hexes from Earth), and sensors and weapons ranges should be recalculated.

My take here would be to leave as it is, either ignoring time scale (after all, it would only have importance if you must take account for time, either because personal combat is also being fought (e.g. boarding) or because some side expects reinforcements.

Another explanation would be to asume that the Stutterwarp may be used for higher pseudo-speeds (the ones in SC) for short periods of time (one combat), while the warp efficiency in LY/Day is the sustained psuedo-speed they can use for longer periods.

 

[rgrove0172]

In any case, changing the scale changes too much of the game. A planet (e.g. Jupiter) might not fill in a single hex, orbit will not be in the same hex as the planet, satellites will be some hexes away (Moon would be about 8-9 hexes from Earth), and sensors and weapons ranges should be recalculated.

Another explanation would be to asume that the Stutterwarp may be used for higher pseudo-speeds (the ones in SC) for short periods of time (one combat), while the warp efficiency in LY/Day is the sustained psuedo-speed they can use for longer periods.

I see your point but IMO the extreme ranges of sensors and weapons have been a point of discussion and at times questionable. Im not certain a reduction isnt a good thing.

As for Stutterwarp Battle Speed, I imagine it could be the opposite. To my mind traveling at those speeds prohibits any meaningful exchange and its far easier to imagine combatants slowing to velocities where sensor data is more accurate and readily available, weapons are able to track targets etc. At any rate, I dont believe changing the combat scale is a game breaker. Having a couple moons on the map for 'space scenery' and perhaps provide some tactical color is a good thing.

 

[McPerth]

As for Stutterwarp Battle Speed, I imagine it could be the opposite. To my mind traveling at those speeds prohibits any meaningful exchange and its far easier to imagine combatants slowing to velocities where sensor data is more accurate and readily available, weapons are able to track targets etc. At any rate, I dont believe changing the combat scale is a game breaker. Having a couple moons on the map for 'space scenery' and perhaps provide some tactical color is a good thing.

Most naval and air combat crafts have combat speeds quite higher than the speeds usually used (mostly to save fuel, something not aplicable to 2300 space combat), and it's quite believable to me (while I admit I'm not an expert on it) the possibility to use relativelly short bursts of speed in combat, not usable in regular travel for many posible reasons (drive/coils overload, drive overhead, etc...).

 

[rgrove0172]

Yeah, I can see both points... modern jets dont usually go full afterburner until engaged. If the weapons worked equally well at any speed then sure, high speed passes and ships screaming across light seconds is fine. Ive just always had a bit of a snag on 900,000km weaponry.

 

[BMonnery]

Changing hex size has some nasty knock-on effects.

For example, 2300 assumes soft X-ray lasers as the main turret weapon. With smaller hexes their range extends to 20 hexes plus and SC needs a rewrite.

If to preserve weapons ranges you bin the X-Rays to UV/Vis lasers then the main starship weapons are operating in the atmospheric windows, and ground batteries become a reality. If we could have them then subterranean fortifications with hundreds of dispersed starship scale lasers are *the* way to go.

Remember that when deciding which you prefer, canonical 0.645 or one of the other several figures.

 

[shaunhilburn]

Changing hex size has some nasty knock-on effects.

For example, 2300 assumes soft X-ray lasers as the main turret weapon. With smaller hexes their range extends to 20 hexes plus and SC needs a rewrite.

My proposal only changes the hex sizes, not the weapon ranges or sensor values. The x-ray lasers have a range of one hex - 33,400 km. Two hexes at -2.