Batteries bearing

[GypsyComet]

I'm honestly not sure what the whole percentage-batteries-bearing business is: if they're saying a dreadnought can dodge and wiggle around as it likes and still bring the spinal to bear when the time comes, how hard is it to turn on one's axis and put everything on target(s)? And who says the targets are all standing over there like some re-enactment of the Battle of Jutland?

It isn't that they are all "standing over there", it means that any single target in any given bearing can only be shot at by a portion of the batteries on a large ship. The "Spinals always bear" rule is just making sure that regardless of what else is going on, if something is getting shot at the spinal is involved.

Remember, CT High Guard is an abstract fleet conflict sim, not rocket science.

 

[Carlobrand]

It isn't that they are all "standing over there", it means that any single target in any given bearing can only be shot at by a portion of the batteries on a large ship. The "Spinals always bear" rule is just making sure that regardless of what else is going on, if something is getting shot at the spinal is involved.

Remember, CT High Guard is an abstract fleet conflict sim, not rocket science.

Yes, but that's the point: it's abstract. Rules don't say you can only fire a portion of the batteries at any single target. Rules say you can only fire a portion of the weapons, period. Or have I been interpreting that wrong all these years?

 

[aramis]

Yes, but that's the point: it's abstract. Rules don't say you can only fire a portion of the batteries at any single target. Rules say you can only fire a portion of the weapons, period. Or have I been interpreting that wrong all these years?

I believe you've been doing it wrong. Then again, i've played several naval wargames, and the issue of batteries bearing has always been a limit on any single target...

 

[McPerth]

[m;]Former post are taken from this thread, as I think it can sequestrate the thread's question[/m;]

 

[McPerth]

It isn't that they are all "standing over there", it means that any single target in any given bearing can only be shot at by a portion of the batteries on a large ship. The "Spinals always bear" rule is just making sure that regardless of what else is going on, if something is getting shot at the spinal is involved.

Remember, CT High Guard is an abstract fleet conflict sim, not rocket science.

I believe you've been doing it wrong. Then again, i've played several naval wargames, and the issue of batteries bearing has always been a limit on any single target...

Do you mean the remaining batteries may fire at a different target?

That's not how I (or the people I played with) understand what's written, and it's the first time I read this interpretation.

Now I must admit the rules (CT:HG, page 29) are not as clear as I've always read it:

The actual number of batteries which may bear on the target may be less than the total number of batteries on larger ships (...)

As it talks to the target, it seems to mean a single target...

(...)the figures on the table reading that code P hull can bring 80% of their batteries to bear on a target (...)

See that here it says on a target, not a single target.

I'm probably among the ones that can most easily missread an english meaning, but shouldn't "on a single target" instead of "on a target" be the correct wording to mean that the rest can be used on other targets?

In any case, it's ambiguous (as I read it, at least).

Thus, the ship above can initially bring 12 of the 15 particle accelerator batteries to bear, but the first three battery hits the ship takes on particle accelerators will not reduce its firepower

See that it does not talk about in its firepower against a single ship, so, IMHO, meaning that its initial firepower was based on the 12 batteries, not on the 15, and so, that the 3 non-bearing batteries are useless (except to soak hits, off course).

 

[GypsyComet]

Ambiguity was a hallmark of early GDW writing, though. A "literal" read can go both ways because so much interpretation is required.

Since one comment didn't transfer, let me repeat it: CT High Guard is an abstract fleet conflict sim, NOT a "game" as we now understand the term. Movement is abstracted to three options: Close, Retreat to Reserves, or Withdraw. Facing and the related issue of rotational inertia is abstracted to Batteries Bearing.

 

[robject]

Wow, I never thought about Batteries Bearing being anything other than a way to provide a "damage track" or "damage endurance" for High Guard weapons.

(Which is a pretty nifty mechanic, I think. Imagine if they extended that to drives in HG.... hey that gives me an idea...)

 

[McPerth]

Wow, I never thought about Batteries Bearing being anything other than a way to provide a "damage track" or "damage endurance" for High Guard weapons.

(Which is a pretty nifty mechanic, I think. Imagine if they extended that to drives in HG.... hey that gives me an idea...)

I've always thought they were just to limit larger ships.

In any case, I looked for MT (RM, page 89, as it is an expansion from CT, as I see it) and, curiously, phrasing is nearly the same, with a little (and quite relevant this time) change in the second quoted part above:

The figures are based on the table reading that a 50000 displacement craft can bring 80% of its batteries to bear on a single target

So seeming that the rest of the batteries can fight agains other ships, even though the system is not so abstract in MT, having on map movement (so you can find all enemy ships in the same relative direction)...

Unfortunately there's no equivalent to the third quote above in MT:RM (or at least I have not found it).

 

[robject]

I've always thought they were just to limit larger ships.

Maybe so. And that makes me think that there is a "typical hard maximum" number of bay weapons a ship could need in High Guard, regardless of ship size.

Some sort of heuristic based on the half-life of the spine, and the typical number of targets to defend against.

Of course there will always be edge cases. But that would seem to call for specific mission designs, rather than general design parameters.

Take a million-ton M6 J3 P9 dreadnought. 39% fuel, 32% drives, 2% bridge... call it 80% "stuff", and 200,000t for weapons and defense.

Give the Meson spine 10,000 tons (I don't know why).

So 190,000 tons for bays, point defense, and so on.

This ship won't have a thousand Particle Accelerator bays. Will it?

 

[Carlobrand]

...In any case, I looked for MT (RM, page 89, as it is an expansion from CT, as I see it) and, curiously, phrasing is nearly the same, with a little (and quite relevant this time) change in the second quoted part above:

The figures are based on the table reading that a 50000 displacement craft can bring 80% of its batteries to bear on a single target

So seeming that the rest of the batteries can fight agains other ships, even though the system is not so abstract in MT, having on map movement (so you can find all enemy ships in the same relative direction)...

Unfortunately there's no equivalent to the third quote above in MT:RM (or at least I have not found it).

So, in a nutshell, I misunderstood it.

Sigh.

 

[McPerth]

So, in a nutshell, I misunderstood it.

Sigh.

So did I, as I've explained, if that makes you feel better...

 

[BlackBat242]

Now I must admit the rules (CT:HG, page 29) are not as clear as I've always read it:

The actual number of batteries which may bear on the target may be less than the total number of batteries on larger ships (...)

As it talks to the target, it seems to mean a single target...

(...)the figures on the table reading that code P hull can bring 80% of their batteries to bear on a target (...)

See that here it says on a target, not a single target.

I'm probably among the ones that can most easily missread an english meaning, but shouldn't "on a single target" instead of "on a target" be the correct wording to mean that the rest can be used on other targets?

In any case, it's ambiguous (as I read it, at least).

According to the rules of grammar of the English language, "a target" is the singular tense - always!

"Targets" is the plural tense. So, both of your quotes are referring to a single target.


As for the use of "the" and "a":

A and AN are called indefinite articles. "Indefinite" means "not specific". Use A(AN) when you are talking about a thing in general, NOT a specific thing.

Examples:

I need a phone. Not a specific phone, any phone


THE is called a definite article. "Definite" means "specific". Use THE when talking about something which is already known to the listener or which has been previously mentioned, introduced, or discussed.

Examples:

I have a cat. The cat is black.