A Couple Missile Opinions

[whartung]

Would a ship go into a protective mode of venting the atmosphere (everybody suits up) to prevent explosive decompression when a missile strikes a craft?

I would think they would do this before anything strikes the craft. It's all a matter of how much the vacc suits hinder operations, but by that point, you'd think the ship would be designed to be operated efficiently by people in vacc suits.

Big knobs and levers to handle gloved hands, big button keyboards, extra space around things to accommodate larger, lumbering people.

Mind, at higher TLs, vacc suits may be like Super Hero painted on yoga pants with a bubble top. So, who can say.

 

[Spinward Flow]

Big knobs and levers to handle gloved hands, big button keyboards, extra space around things to accommodate larger, lumbering people.

 

[kilemall]

I have done missiles as Book 2, they hit next turn, so pretty fast. Nuclear is off the table for the most part.

Book 2 of CT or another version?

If the former, LBB2 had the missiles fly as per ships. Just went back and verified.

Or, you mean missiles in HG, which could be interpreted that way.

Think about it in terms of real world air-to-air missile ranges.
There are missiles hanging off wing pylons with in excess of 100+ miles of (publicized) range to hit targets.

Those numbers are usually referring to "head on" closing distances.
In terms of "nose to tail" ranges where the missile needs to pursue you can sometimes take those fast closing speed publicized ranges and figure only about 10-15% effective range to target if the missile needs to pursue and catch up to the target under its own power.

So vectors can make a LOT of difference in those air-to-air scenarios in terms of how "long" your missile range is to a hostile target.

If you're actually "mapping space" that ships are flying through and doing missile vectors and evasion ... that's when the capacity of missiles to "turn and burn" in pursuit can become extremely relevant depending on the context of the engagement (and the sensor ranges involved).

Yes I understand all this. I also have Fighter Tactics Combat and Maneuvering which gets quite a bit into missile envelope.

The point I'm asking about is the Missile Supplement interpretation, which apparently many here have interpreted as 5G6 meaning 1 turn of 5G and 1 turn of 1G, whereas my contention is the intent was always 5G at 6 turns or 30 burns.

But even if you take my interpretation, the darn things are still 'slow' and limited range whereas laser and presumably the more advanced weaponry in HG (barring plasma/fusion) are operating readily out to 500000 km and can get hits at a distant 900000 km. And the max speed is 6G.

Let's put it this way, do people prefer short range interpretation, long range interpretation or fast long range beyond the RAW?

I've already worked out a system to my tastes so I don't need pointers on how to do it, I just want to know what other people's tastes are.

 

[kilemall]

No, in the Missile Supplement they are just a deus ex machina device that kills a ship if it "hits". I mean IIRC 50 hits disables just about any LBB2 design.

In any other Traveller system they are more or less routinely used by navies and are quite survivable (by warships), except en masse.

Alright, so what should the nukes cost, even if they are restricted to HG big navy action? The only guideposts in CTland are the Missile Supplement costs or the warhead costs in Striker. I don't recall anything in TCS, where it should be.

The point is to properly cost them relative to their effect in either system. So if you unload a cruiser crippling salvo from 4 100-ton bays, it COSTS. Since they have near spinal weapon properties (barring sand/PD) without the carrying power/fuel/tonnage of the Big Rad Weapons, they should have a significant costing.

 

[kilemall]

Would a ship go into a protective mode of venting the atmosphere (everybody suits up) to prevent explosive decompression when a missile strikes a craft?

Absolutely. All those Star Trek dweebs are amateurs begging for a vacc death not to mention all that air rushing out and doing damage, or worse a hydrogen leak from the fuel mixes with the oxygen and your heroic ship does a Hindenberg.

Oh the sophontry!

 

[kilemall]

Well, I'm more akin to the Star Cruiser/TNE/Brilliant Lances world of "missiles" than the off the rails dog fighting robotech missiles. I don't think the Traveller games deal with the "missile as kinetic kill" vehicle mechanic very well. TNE pretty much assumes that actual impact is a very rare event, LBB don't deal with the kinetic energy issues much at all (even though it, ostensibly, support impact missiles).

Missiles are more a space control, "mine" like situation than a turn and burn thing. Get too close, and they zap you. It works in most of the games as a "close combat" weapon, within a couple of hexes range, but not a "chase them across the quadrant" thing. Because the power is in that ability to burn 6Gs of maneuver in one turn, which far outpaces most civilian craft. 6 hexes of range is actually rather far in terms of DMs for things like laser fire. In Mayday, it's a -1 DM per hex, so 6 hexes is -6 DM.

So, in that sense, missiles are very good at closing the gap, once you get "close". The goal being to get within range of the intruder to where they cannot maneuver out of the envelope of your vector plus the 6Gs of the missile in time.

In all of the Traveller systems, the game turns are too long to really respect the "turn and burn" aspect of missiles. Similarly the ranges are too long.

I was originally persuaded to the detlaser missiles, skipped MT in favor of 2300 and still have an option for them in CT. Mostly since they aren't kinetic the PD engagement doesn't happen, although the sand can still help. Not normal IMTU though because it's nuke-pumped and that means no-no for most. Course depending on how you define the capacitors I suppose they could charge up and do the same job, just charging missiles makes me queasy.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Alright, so what should the nukes cost, even if they are restricted to HG big navy action? The only guideposts in CTland are the Missile Supplement costs or the warhead costs in Striker. I don't recall anything in TCS, where it should be.

How much does a nuclear artillery round cost at your local Walmart? In the 3I setting Bad Things™ happen if you even ask...

TCS does not bother with petty logistical details like that. You pay 10% of ship cost per year and you get a competent logistical organisation (presumably including naval bases and supply ships) that delivers what you need, when you need it, no questions asked. It's a game...

I would assume small nuclear warheads to be quite cheap (by military standards) when mass produced at TL-12+.

The point is to properly cost them relative to their effect in either system. So if you unload a cruiser crippling salvo from 4 100-ton bays, it COSTS. Since they have near spinal weapon properties (barring sand/PD) without the carrying power/fuel/tonnage of the Big Rad Weapons, they should have a significant costing.

In HG and most other Traveller systems, nukes are nuisances. They can't kill even minimally armoured ships, just temporarily disable them. Spinals kills ships outright, they are in a different league.

In HG (and most other Traveller systems) four bays worth of missiles would not be "cruiser crippling", it would be lucky to even register a surface hit (slightly degrading a weapon system) against a properly defended warship. In LBB2 (with the supplement) any individual missile would cripple any one of the small, undefended, civilian ships that LBB2 models.

For a Free Trader stumbling in the way of a warship salvo, the difference is minimal, but you don't really need a detailed system to figure out exactly how you died, horribly, in the first round.

 

[kilemall]

How much does a nuclear artillery round cost at your local Walmart? In the 3I setting Bad Things™ happen if you even ask...

TCS does not bother with petty logistical details like that. You pay 10% of ship cost per year and you get a competent logistical organisation (presumably including naval bases and supply ships) that delivers what you need, when you need it, no questions asked. It's a game...

I would assume small nuclear warheads to be quite cheap (by military standards) when mass produced at TL-12+.


In HG and most other Traveller systems, nukes are nuisances. They can't kill even minimally armoured ships, just temporarily disable them. Spinals kills ships outright, they are in a different league.

In HG (and most other Traveller systems) four bays worth of missiles would not be "cruiser crippling", it would be lucky to even register a surface hit (slightly degrading a weapon system) against a properly defended warship. In LBB2 (with the supplement) any individual missile would cripple any one of the small, undefended, civilian ships that LBB2 models.

For a Free Trader stumbling in the way of a warship salvo, the difference is minimal, but you don't really need a detailed system to figure out exactly how you died, horribly, in the first round.

Agreed on free trader death.

Not agreed on spinal vs bay. Yes the spinals individually deliver far more hits then individual bays, but IMO the proper way to compare them is tonnage to damage. A 900 ton spinal should be compared to 9 100 ton bays. Between the higher rolls to hit and penetrate and overwhelming defenses and the nukes getting the spinal bonus and the No cost way they are treated, missiles come out as a get fewer but guaranteed hits option.

Granted the deployment of nuclear dampers change this equation, but up to that point nuclear missiles are as viable as PA, particularly with less power cost allowing for more armor or agility.

It’s more accurate to say that meson guns are in their own category re: high levels of critical hits.

I don’t need to told TCS is a game so simplification. Just what tastes run to. I gather you are in the cheap nuke/who cares preference?

What about missile speed, ACS or otherwise?

 

[whartung]

The point I'm asking about is the Missile Supplement interpretation, which apparently many here have interpreted as 5G6 meaning 1 turn of 5G and 1 turn of 1G, whereas my contention is the intent was always 5G at 6 turns or 30 burns.

You're right. It's "A total of 6, 5G burns". Not "a 5G drive with 6 'G turns' of fuel".

I always interpreted it as the latter.

From S3 Revised PDF:

Propulsion systems are defined by two numbers, commonly separated by a capital G. The first number is the maximum number of Gs which the missile is capable of in a turn; the second is the number of G-burns of fuel the missile can make at maximum G. For example, a 1G1 propulsion system can accelerate a maximum of 1G per turn, and is capable of burning fuel to achieve 1G once. A 6G6 system can accelerate to a maximum of 6G per turn, and has enough fuel to reach 6G six times.

Book 2 doesn't really say anything on the matter.

Mind, this is what Mayday says.

Standard Missiles: Unless otherwise stated. the standard missile is assumed to have 6G6 limited acceleration, a homing guidance system, and contact detonation. Such a missile would cost Cr5,600.

The key phrase here is "6G6 Limited acceleration".

Limited: The missile is a!lowed a specific number of hex location changes for future position. This value may be applied in increments (one or more hexes change of the future position counter per turn). When the allowance is consumed, the missile may not change course.

So, that is the "short range missile" that I'm familiar with. Since the "standard missile" is the "limited variety", which means it can move up to 6 hexes, but with the 6G drive, it can do it "all at once".

Mind, this is in stark contrast to the definition of "6G6" in S3. Why that isn't "6G36", I don't know.

The Mayday "standard missile" is also different from the S3 standard missile. The S3 5G6 is a continuous burn style which means it not only can do 6 burns at 5G, is MUST to 6 burns at 5G.

So, all of the capabilities are there.

"everyone is right"

More a matter of which ones you wish to use in your games.

Obviously the use of a 6G6 "limited" missile is vastly different from a 5G6 "continuous" missile.

Now it's a matter of money, and whether you have it to spend on the more flexible missiles.

 

[kilemall]

You're right. It's "A total of 6, 5G burns". Not "a 5G drive with 6 'G turns' of fuel".

I always interpreted it as the latter.

From S3 Revised PDF:


Book 2 doesn't really say anything on the matter.

Mind, this is what Mayday says.



The key phrase here is "6G6 Limited acceleration".



So, that is the "short range missile" that I'm familiar with. Since the "standard missile" is the "limited variety", which means it can move up to 6 hexes, but with the 6G drive, it can do it "all at once".

Mind, this is in stark contrast to the definition of "6G6" in S3. Why that isn't "6G36", I don't know.

The Mayday "standard missile" is also different from the S3 standard missile. The S3 5G6 is a continuous burn style which means it not only can do 6 burns at 5G, is MUST to 6 burns at 5G.

So, all of the capabilities are there.

"everyone is right"

More a matter of which ones you wish to use in your games.

Obviously the use of a 6G6 "limited" missile is vastly different from a 5G6 "continuous" missile.

Now it's a matter of money, and whether you have it to spend on the more flexible missiles.

Thanks for clarification for RAW, and proper pricing is high on my list.

For my purposes I’m assuming the full discretionary burn, but I’m off the supplement build ranch anyway.

Keep in mind those Mayday ranges and time scales are not the same as LBB2.

What’s your preference re: speeds and range?

 

[whartung]

What’s your preference re: speeds and range?

I've never played the "fast" missiles, so I can't say. I'm used to the "slow" ones. The fast ones change the maneuver game substantially, and increase the threat radius of a ship.

LBB2 and Mayday have different scales, but in the end the systems are pretty much the same. One uses "hexes", the other uses centimeters, in the end 1G moves one XXX of space and range and such is calculated in those XXX units.

 

[kilemall]

I've never played the "fast" missiles, so I can't say. I'm used to the "slow" ones. The fast ones change the maneuver game substantially, and increase the threat radius of a ship.

LBB2 and Mayday have different scales, but in the end the systems are pretty much the same. One uses "hexes", the other uses centimeters, in the end 1G moves one XXX of space and range and such is calculated in those XXX units.

Yes but Mayday is on a different time/space scale, those missiles have a much greater “range” and can therefore reach higher absolute delta vees.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Not agreed on spinal vs bay. Yes the spinals individually deliver far more hits then individual bays, ...

OK, take a TL-15 Meson N gun vs. equal tonnage missile bays (obviously using LBB5).
A Meson N is 2000 Dt + 600 Dt PP + 600 Dt fuel = 3200 Dt, so the same size as 64 small missile bays.
Assume long range, so no range mods, and medium sized ships, so no size mods. Assume max agility and screens. Generally a bad case for the spinal (short range is much better for the spinal).

Meson N: To hit 10+ (6/36), pen 7+ (21/36) and 4+ (33/36) for a total kill chance of ~9%.

Missile bay: To hit 8+ (15/36), pen 10+ (6/36), dam 6- (15/36) for a total damage chance of 2.9% × 64 bays = 1.8 hits.

So the spinal has a ~10% chance per round of killing the missile boat, and the missile boat will inflict about 2 hits (mostly weapon) each round. Statistically, when the missile boat blows up, it will have degraded the spinal from factor N to about factor L.

I'll take the spinal...


One bay each in 1000 Dt rocks (hello, Eurisko), is a completely different case, and the reason we need PA spinals.

Granted the deployment of nuclear dampers change this equation, but up to that point nuclear missiles are as viable as PA, particularly with less power cost allowing for more armor or agility.

It’s more accurate to say that meson guns are in their own category re: high levels of critical hits.

Mesons kills all ships, but PA:s are more efficient at killing small ships (higher tohit and size crits).

I gather you are in the cheap nuke/who cares preference?

Something like that: Nuke missiles are cheap compared to multi-GCr warships.

What about missile speed, ACS or otherwise?

Missiles must be able to reach ships to be effective, so must be faster than ships to work. Hence: They are supposed to be effective in canon, so I guess they are faster than ships.

I am much too lazy to play LBB2 combat with a few ships and dozens of missiles flying around, so I have never really explored missile vector combat.

 

[whartung]

Yes but Mayday is on a different time/space scale, those missiles have a much greater “range” and can therefore reach higher absolute delta vees.

In terms of "real physics", yes. But in game terms, no.

Consider you 5G6 missile. Whether in Book 2 or Mayday, at the end of 5 turns of 6G, the missile will be going "30".

In book 2, one turns is 1000s. 1000s at 1G produces a velocity of 10,000km, or 100mm.

In Book 2, 100mm is "one hex". One high level unit of measure.

In Mayday, the turn is 100m. Each hex is 300,000km (30 times book 2).

1 turn at 1G is "one hex". In this case, 300Kkm. So velocity is 300Kkm/100m.

(Looking at these numbers, they..sorta don't really add up, but..anyway.)

But it's still "1 hex".

With a 5G6 missile, the missile will move, what, 5+10+15+20+25+30 hexes in 6 turns. 105 hexes. So, in book 2, that will be 105 * 10000km - 1,050,000km. In Mayday, at 300Kkm per hex, it's 31,500,000km. Because the missiles use the abstract higher units of measurement.

In game terms, they're both "6 turns" away, regardless of what their "real" velocities are. And their real velocities, as I understand it, don't impact play because they're not considered when a missile hits a ship. A hit is a hit, regardless of how fast they were going.

 

[kilemall]

In terms of "real physics", yes. But in game terms, no.

Consider you 5G6 missile. Whether in Book 2 or Mayday, at the end of 5 turns of 6G, the missile will be going "30".

In book 2, one turns is 1000s. 1000s at 1G produces a velocity of 10,000km, or 100mm.

In Book 2, 100mm is "one hex". One high level unit of measure.

In Mayday, the turn is 100m. Each hex is 300,000km (30 times book 2).

1 turn at 1G is "one hex". In this case, 300Kkm. So velocity is 300Kkm/100m.

(Looking at these numbers, they..sorta don't really add up, but..anyway.)

But it's still "1 hex".

With a 5G6 missile, the missile will move, what, 5+10+15+20+25+30 hexes in 6 turns. 105 hexes. So, in book 2, that will be 105 * 10000km - 1,050,000km. In Mayday, at 300Kkm per hex, it's 31,500,000km. Because the missiles use the abstract higher units of measurement.

In game terms, they're both "6 turns" away, regardless of what their "real" velocities are. And their real velocities, as I understand it, don't impact play because they're not considered when a missile hits a ship. A hit is a hit, regardless of how fast they were going.

All good enough within RAW, not good when I AM looking to use kinetic impact within an LBB2 maneuver realm but largely HG resolution and looking for functional G numbers to give the missiles.

If you’re happy with the lower speeds and ranges within the context of the two games, well then that’s the answer I’m looking for.

 

[kilemall]

OK, take a TL-15 Meson N gun vs. equal tonnage missile bays (obviously using LBB5).
A Meson N is 2000 Dt + 600 Dt PP + 600 Dt fuel = 3200 Dt, so the same size as 64 small missile bays.
Assume long range, so no range mods, and medium sized ships, so no size mods. Assume max agility and screens. Generally a bad case for the spinal (short range is much better for the spinal).

Meson N: To hit 10+ (6/36), pen 7+ (21/36) and 4+ (33/36) for a total kill chance of ~9%.

Missile bay: To hit 8+ (15/36), pen 10+ (6/36), dam 6- (15/36) for a total damage chance of 2.9% × 64 bays = 1.8 hits.

So the spinal has a ~10% chance per round of killing the missile boat, and the missile boat will inflict about 2 hits (mostly weapon) each round. Statistically, when the missile boat blows up, it will have degraded the spinal from factor N to about factor L.

I'll take the spinal...


One bay each in 1000 Dt rocks (hello, Eurisko), is a completely different case, and the reason we need PA spinals.



Mesons kills all ships, but PA:s are more efficient at killing small ships (higher tohit and size crits).



Something like that: Nuke missiles are cheap compared to multi-GCr warships.


Missiles must be able to reach ships to be effective, so must be faster than ships to work. Hence: They are supposed to be effective in canon, so I guess they are faster than ships.

I am much too lazy to play LBB2 combat with a few ships and dozens of missiles flying around, so I have never really explored missile vector combat.

Ok I’m taking that as your preference answers re missiles, mostly ya they fly fast but would be abstract role played out and damn the nuke costs.

I highly disagree with your 50-ton bay example, of course 100-ton missile bays per 1000 tons just for the high factor pen vs any PD/sand/ND. I would also want a breakdown of how you are getting such a low nuke effect. I do get the meson effect of the chances at critical hits, that of course is what makes the meson so decisive. Nukes are surface like PA so armor affects them both.

Pre nuke damper is also a better use case of course.

And don’t forget the radiation hits nukes are doing as well.

 

[whartung]

All good enough within RAW, not good when I AM looking to use kinetic impact within an LBB2 maneuver realm but largely HG resolution and looking for functional G numbers to give the missiles.

Well the problem there is the detail of relative velocity. There's a big difference between a head on missile impact and a trailing one. You can split the difference, of course. In that case, just give missile an "impact" velocity of 1/2 their G. i.e. a 6G missile accelerating at 3G for a "game turn", that's the impact velocity, and do the math from there.

But...that's a lot of energy.

Supplement 3 says the standard missile is 48kg. Kinetic Energy = .5mv^2.

Given a 20 minute turn, a 6G missile (divide by 2) is 3G. v = at, v = 30 * 1200 = 36,000.

So, m = 48kg, v = 36,000m/s, so .5mv^2 = 31,104,000,000 Newtons. Thats...a lot! (At least I think it's a lot.)

The way I've always looked at all Traveller missiles, simply because of the base mechanics of the systems, is essentially like a proximity mine.

Anything that gets within range (i.e. 6 hexes) gets zapped. Imagine a loitering drone with a kinetic penetrator. It's just flying over a battle field waiting to see something, slowly circling, like a vulture, then WHAM. It fires.

Mechanically, in game, that's how missiles operate. Rather than them rocketing in, they drift until that magic barrier is crossed. THEN the motor kicks in. Then all the drama happens. Until then, "Tut tut, looks like rain, I'm just a rain cloud.". Then the lightning and thunder.

Hard to express that in a 100 minute game turn .

"Sir! Missile attack! Here it comes!" "Oh yea?" ...glances at watch... "Well, I guess we have time for a sandwich, eh?"

 

[AnotherDilbert]

I highly disagree with your 50-ton bay example, of course 100-ton missile bays per 1000 tons just for the high factor pen vs any PD/sand/ND.

At TL-15 the small and large bays both have factor 9, so identical effect.

I would also want a breakdown of how you are getting such a low nuke effect.

Missile bay: To hit 8+ (15/36), pen 10+ (6/36), dam 6- (15/36) for a total damage chance of 2.9% × 64 bays = 1.8 hits.

Missile bay, factor 9:
To hit: 2+ + Agility = 8+ (15/36) 42% chance. (HG'80, p45)
Penetrate damper (factor 9): 10+ (6/36) 17% chance. (HG'80, p45)
Damage table (armour 15): 6- (15/36) 42% chance. (HG'80, p48)
42% × 17% × 42% = 2.9% total chance to hit, penetrate, and do damage.

The damper is the biggest problem, but it is rather cheap for the defender. Before good dampers, say up to TL-12, nukes dominate combat (because spinals are too low factor and too expensive cause the huge power plants), but can be countered by planetoid ships with massive armour (e.g. Eurisko), lowering the chance to do damage...

I do get the meson effect of the chances at critical hits, that of course is what makes the meson so decisive. Nukes are surface like PA so armor affects them both.

Mesons don't do crits except against small ships, they do Interior Damage, which is enough... With statistical combat resolution 10 Interior hits (factor J) is a certainty of a Fuel Tanks Shattered, which is a mission kill.

The surface damage from PA:s is trivial, it's the size crits against smaller ships that's the killer.

Nukes just do repairable attritional damage (against warships).

And don’t forget the radiation hits nukes are doing as well.

Nukes get a DM -6 on the Surface hit table only. Armour takes care of the radiation hits.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

So, m = 48kg, v = 36,000m/s, so .5mv^2 = 31,104,000,000 Newtons. Thats...a lot! (At least I think it's a lot.)

Correct, but not Newton (force), energy is measured in Joule [J].

A kiloton (known from nuclear explosions) is ~4 × 10¹² J = 4 TJ = 4000 GJ.

31 GJ, as in your example, is 31 / 4000 = 0.008 kiloton, or in the same ballpark as 8 kg 8 ton TNT exploding. Quite a bang, but not all that impressive in a starship context.

Edited idiocy...

 

[Condottiere]

In theory, a hundred megatonne warhead needs only to detonate once near a Tigress.