Non OTU: Ahab's Traveller Stuff

[infojunky]

Now that I am retired, I have an abundance of time to fill until I drop dead

Not really
Based on pen/dmg given in MT (at best, 80/5), a 250Mw laser can normally only get a low pen result against spaceships and many grav-tanks, and a high-pen only against the bare minimum armor allowed for spaceships.
And zero pen against battleships and many cruisers

the 'high guard' style combat is rough to work with the large-scale combat rules in the Ref companion anyways

You might want to check your Errata for Striker, as the numbers for each are simular.

Striker
Base Pen for a Beam Laser is 73
Max Armor for Starships is 65

MT
Base Pen for Beam Laser is 70
Max Armor for Starships is 70

And in either the High Guard numbers and not the Vehicles controls damage to Ships.

Also note that High and low Pen is only a MT thing in that in striker the High and Low are both results on the same table.

 

[Captain_Ahab]

I am not using Striker
I don't know why you thought that I was, given I've really only referenced MT and FF&S2 as the MT and T4 CD's are all I now own

min armor RAW in MT is 40, so only the pulse-13 laser at 80/5 (phb) can have a high-pen on minimum armored ships, other starship lasers, only low-pen in MT. Sure at a dmg-600 for a tech-13 beam laser, a lo-pen will still be horrible, but it isn't like a laser is slicing through armor.
And that is assuming no losses due to attenuation, which means pen drops off at starship combat ranges anyways; 40 at very distant, and 20 at extreme orbital range bands

MT errata v.2.10 on the official CD does not state a maximum armor that I can see
I am not interested in a continual errata chase , nor am I interested in rebuilding a collection that I gave away years ago just to fuel edition wars

in any case, IMTU means I set my own minimums and maximums as I've already departed from RAW anyways

nice buzzkill, though

 

[infojunky]

I am not using Striker
I don't know why you thought that I was, given I've really only referenced MT and FF&S2 as the MT and T4 CD's are all I now own

But you are using MT, and the design tables in MT are based on Striker. Thus my inclusion.

min armor RAW in MT is 40, so only the pulse-13 laser at 80/5 (phb) can have a high-pen on minimum armored ships, other starship lasers, only low-pen in MT. Sure at a dmg-600 for a tech-13 beam laser, a lo-pen will still be horrible, but it isn't like a laser is slicing through armor.
And that is assuming no losses due to attenuation, which means pen drops off at starship combat ranges anyways; 40 at very distant, and 20 at extreme orbital range bands

Again, MT ship combat rules are based on High Guard. As such the High vs Low penetration mechanic isn't used.

Also if you are going to use the Pen and damage system, a low penetration does 250 points of damage. Which is enough to destroy a scout ship.

MT errata v.2.10 on the official CD does not state a maximum armor that I can see
I am not interested in a continual errata chase , nor am I interested in rebuilding a collection that I gave away years ago just to fuel edition wars

As per page 58. this bit is buried in Text.

"Armor Factor: Represents the thickness of the hull. The added value of armor for a ship may not exceed the ship's technological level times five. In the case of planetoid hulls, an automatic hull armor factor is already present-the Tech Level armor restrictiononly applies to armor added to the hull of a planetoid."

in any case, IMTU means I set my own minimums and maximums as I've already departed from RAW anyways

Go for it, I am just pointing out where the breaks in the system are.

 

[Captain_Ahab]

Again, MT ship combat rules are based on High Guard. As such the High vs Low penetration mechanic isn't used.

In my opinion, a mistake
and one of the reasons I am fooling with this

Also if you are going to use the Pen and damage system, a low penetration does 250 points of damage. Which is enough to destroy a scout ship.

Not necessarily
the dmg value given for the laser is in the personal combat section, thus must be the value meant to be used for personal combat
to use that value with starship combat implies that the starship damage points be multiplied by 10 when not using the High Guard inspired system
It will hurt, but not kill in one shot... maybe 3 to make inoperative; but type "S" are not meant to fight
Ships larger than 100dtons will take much more damage

Clearly, I will need to make a conversion from FF&S2 to MT to make suitable weapons for my setting
more work, alas

"Armor Factor: Represents the thickness of the hull. The added value of armor for a ship may not exceed the ship's technological level times five. In the case of planetoid hulls, an automatic hull armor factor is already present-the Tech Level armor restrictiononly applies to armor added to the hull of a planetoid."

I stand corrected
I never used that rule anyways
ah well, it is a stupid rule without any real explanation for a reason such a rule exists
if a mass can be lifted into orbit, it can be used as armor on a ship, as far as I am concerned

 

[mike wightman]

The additional armour can not exceed TLx5, base armour is 40 for a starship. So maximum armour at TL15 is 40 + 45 = 85.

 

[Captain_Ahab]

The additional armour can not exceed TLx5, base armour is 40 for a starship. So maximum armour at TL15 is 40 + 45 = 85.

(15*5)+40?

out of curiosity, what is the reason for such an arbitrary limitation?

 

[infojunky]

The additional armour can not exceed TLx5, base armour is 40 for a starship. So maximum armour at TL15 is 40 + 45 = 85.

Shit, you're right.... Duh... My bad

 

[infojunky]

In my opinion, a mistake
and one of the reasons I am fooling with this

Cool, I am just pointing out potential stumbling block in the rules as written. Not trying to discourage you. To be honest I mine MT for things to use in CT's Book2 design and combat.

Not necessarily
the dmg value given for the laser is in the personal combat section, thus must be the value meant to be used for personal combat
to use that value with starship combat implies that the starship damage points be multiplied by 10 when not using the High Guard inspired system
It will hurt, but not kill in one shot... maybe 3 to make inoperative; but type "S" are not meant to fight
Ships larger than 100dtons will take much more damage

Honestly, two or three shots will generally mission kill many of the smaller ships. IMHO there should be a combat system more focused on the smaller ships and small craft being that is where most PC groups live.

Clearly, I will need to make a conversion from FF&S2 to MT to make suitable weapons for my setting
more work, alas

Vaguely, this is where Striker comes in handy, in that it uses similar armor scale as MT, but is expressed in thickness of armor which is what FF&S uses.

 

[mike wightman]

MT states that 40 is the armour value you must install as the minimum for a starship, you may then add TLx5 to this base value (clarified by Q&A with DGP but it is there in the rules for ship construction).

 

[Captain_Ahab]

MT states that 40 is the armour value you must install as the minimum for a starship, you may then add TLx5 to this base value (clarified by Q&A with DGP but it is there in the rules for ship construction).

yes, but why?
what is the rational behind such a limitation?

 

[mike wightman]

I think it was explained as the minimum AV it needs to withstand 40 plus years of abrasion due to space dust hitting at 100km/s, on top of this for ships that routinely enter atmospheres to skim fuel of land then a strong hull is required.

As to the added armour I have no idea why a limit is imposed, but then armour in MT is broken (it has mass, but mass doesn't affect a ship's performance, but it takes no volume, and a smallcraft can have the same armour value as a BB). I much prefer the way it was done in Striker, and then later in FF&S, a bit of maths is required but it is worth it.

 

[kilemall]

I think it was explained as the minimum AV it needs to withstand 40 plus years of abrasion due to space dust hitting at 100km/s, on top of this for ships that routinely enter atmospheres to skim fuel of land then a strong hull is required.

As to the added armour I have no idea why a limit is imposed, but then armour in MT is broken (it has mass, but mass doesn't affect a ship's performance, but it takes no volume, and a smallcraft can have the same armour value as a BB). I much prefer the way it was done in Striker, and then later in FF&S, a bit of maths is required but it is worth it.

CT High Guard had an armor value limit of literally TL. So TL15 could only be built to a level of 15.

I think the idea was to abstract materials science improvements. It was Striker that introduced named material types such as Bonded Superdense that live onto the present day.

Important to note that HG armor didn’t stop damage, just limited it by sliding damage down the results table.

The most important armor levels to have prevented critical and internal damage table results for nuclear and PA spinal hits. They did nothing for meson gun hits, of course.

 

[infojunky]

Important to note that HG armor didn’t stop damage, just limited it by sliding damage down the results table.

Well, kinda, remember Armor reduces Criticals beside the roll on the damage table. That is in the 80 edition of High Guard.

The 79 edition you need to roll versus the armor code for penetration.

 

[infojunky]

yes, but why?
what is the rational behind such a limitation?

The short answer is the armor limit was in High Guard, and that was used in Striker and as such it was written in to MT.

The key fact here is MT is just CT with a bunch of house rules used by the DGP folks.

 

[Captain_Ahab]

I knew about the reasoning behind the 40 minimum, although I disagreed with it
Voyager 1 and 2 have shown that dust is less a worry, even when passing through Saturn's rings
Much of it can be measured in microns and picograms
Or technology, like suggested for a Ram Augmented Interstellar Ramjet, might allow for protection against dust impacts
I'll use a minimum of whatever can support the accelerations needed for a specific sized ship

If the maximum is simply a rule to maintain consistency with earlier rules of "High Guard", then I'm going to ignore them

In MT, DGP folks, for the most part, merely collated and simplified rules that had been added to CT over the years
sometimes for the better and sometimes falling short

 

[whulorigan]

I knew about the reasoning behind the 40 minimum, although I disagreed with it
Voyager 1 and 2 have shown that dust is less a worry, even when passing through Saturn's rings
Much of it can be measured in microns and picograms
...

Yes, but the Voyagers are coasting at a constant velocity which took them years to reach the orbits of Jupiter and Saturn. Traveller Starships are under constant acceleration and reach velocities sufficient to place them at the same relative distances within hours to days, depending on the maneuver rating. Those micron/picogram dust particles will be impacting with much higher kinetic energy than the Pioneers and Voyagers.

 

[Duke Craig]

Hi, I saw that you're using T4 FF&S and MT. I also have MT and T4 FF&S. Though I use Brilliant Lances and TNE FF&S for the same sort of designs that you are detailing here. I'd just suggest that TNE FF&S might make some of the tasks that you are trying to achieve a little bit easier, detailing modifications in the standard tech for Traveller.

Just my 2 centi-creds.

 

[Captain_Ahab]

Yes, but the Voyagers are coasting at a constant velocity which took them years to reach the orbits of Jupiter and Saturn. Traveller Starships are under constant acceleration and reach velocities sufficient to place them at the same relative distances within hours to days, depending on the maneuver rating. Those micron/picogram dust particles will be impacting with much higher kinetic energy than the Pioneers and Voyagers.

Traveller starships using reactionless drives can do that
Ships using reaction mass, even as thrifty as HEPlaR, do not
Assuming a dust particle of 1 microgram and a velocity of 3.3e6m/s from 90 g-turns ( 3-g over 30 hours ), the kinetic energy is only about half of a .50 caliber Browning M2 round, so the same level of armor as an Imperial tech-15 MBT isn't needed
I could go with armor as radiation shielding if I wanted to keep track of rad exposure ( I don't ), but if I can ignore radiation, I can ignore dust

----------------

FF&S1 would be good, but I would prefer not to repurchase things I discarded years ago
I just happen to have the MT and T4 cd's and some files scattered on drives
I did find a copy of Guns,Guns,Guns, but alas, it only has conversion info to TNE and T4

I'm reasonably sure I can use T4's dmg as MT pen after dividing by 1.43 based on armor conversion notes I found online, but I'm not sure how MT figured the damage values for starship weapons or explosives or energy penetrators

I'm afraid that I've become fixated on making MT's 'striker' combat system work for ships just so I can use ships with the large-scale combat system in the ref's companion; that'd make wargaming easier imo

I have ideas on how to use T4's info

I really need to learn to focus
no wonder my wife thinks I am on the autism spectrum

 

[infojunky]

I knew about the reasoning behind the 40 minimum, although I disagreed with it
Voyager 1 and 2 have shown that dust is less a worry, even when passing through Saturn's rings
Much of it can be measured in microns and picograms
Or technology, like suggested for a Ram Augmented Interstellar Ramjet, might allow for protection against dust impacts

Note, in Beltstrike an operating Maneuver drive provided protection from micro meteorites. I.e. a low level deflector shield. Also note with the prevalence of steerable gravity fields I don't have a problem with it.

 

[kilemall]

Traveller starships using reactionless drives can do that
Ships using reaction mass, even as thrifty as HEPlaR, do not
Assuming a dust particle of 1 microgram and a velocity of 3.3e6m/s from 90 g-turns ( 3-g over 30 hours ), the kinetic energy is only about half of a .50 caliber Browning M2 round, so the same level of armor as an Imperial tech-15 MBT isn't needed
I could go with armor as radiation shielding if I wanted to keep track of rad exposure ( I don't ), but if I can ignore radiation, I can ignore dust

----------------

FF&S1 would be good, but I would prefer not to repurchase things I discarded years ago
I just happen to have the MT and T4 cd's and some files scattered on drives
I did find a copy of Guns,Guns,Guns, but alas, it only has conversion info to TNE and T4

I'm reasonably sure I can use T4's dmg as MT pen after dividing by 1.43 based on armor conversion notes I found online, but I'm not sure how MT figured the damage values for starship weapons or explosives or energy penetrators

I'm afraid that I've become fixated on making MT's 'striker' combat system work for ships just so I can use ships with the large-scale combat system in the ref's companion; that'd make wargaming easier imo

I have ideas on how to use T4's info

I really need to learn to focus
no wonder my wife thinks I am on the autism spectrum

I tried doing Striker plus a bit of 2300 as High Guard- you end up doing a computer sim game model, without the computer assistance.

Perhaps you can do better.