Battles within the gas giant

[Greylond]

Well, in fact the discussion was thought to be about the unique conditions of fighting inside a GG atmosphere, but, once determined that it had weapons effets (making nukes more letal, AP useless, etc...), we believe that the main effect will be on sensors, and so the discussion has derived to it...

That's my point. Effectively you are discussing altering the rules...

In any case, to see if we are discussing about equipment or rules we should agree about what set of rules to discuss about (as always...)

Exactly. Any gaming rules discussion should be based on an agreed set of rules OR agreed that you are deviating from the rules and creating new rules...

 

[McPerth]

That's my point. Effectively you are discussing altering the rules...

I prefeer to say complementing the rules, but sure that's a way to alter them...

Exactly. Any gaming rules discussion should be based on an agreed set of rules OR agreed that you are deviating from the rules and creating new rules...

When I say complement the rules, is because in the ones I know where sensors are factored (MT), there are no provisions for its use in ither than space (with nearly to no noise assumed), and so the need to feature how noise from a GG atmpsphere (or deep sea, for what's worth) are, IMHO, needed.

Sure some players will find it as needless complexity, others will thing it's good to try, and others just as trying to explain in the rules what is featured as usual in Traveller history (hidding in GG or deep ocean).

Yet, you're right, is altering the rules...

 

[Greylond]

I prefeer to say complementing the rules, but sure that's a way to alter them...

~snip~

Yet, you're right, is altering the rules...

Now we just have to agree to the set of rules that are being altered...

 

[McPerth]

Now we just have to agree to the set of rules that are being altered...

As I said, the only ones I know that feature sensors are MT...

 

[Greylond]

MgT has Sensors...

 

[Dragoner]

T5 has sensors as well.

 

[robject]

So what we're discussing is Atmospheric Combat. We have to know atmospheric conditions and effects.

I'd like to contribute, but all I can bring to the table is how I think things tend to work in Traveller. Should be enough to contribute something, maybe.

THE SUNBEARD BRIEF ON STARSHIPS IN ATMOSPHERIC COMBAT

Preliminary note. Fighter combat is a discussion all on its own; it is easier to treat separately.


Firstly, certain weapons are affected by atmosphere, to wit: particle accelerators become shorter-ranged, and nukes are more effective, delivering a "shock wave attack" and "heat attack" in addition to its typical spaceborne attack.


Second, I'll assume that sensors used in atmospheres are (a) designed to work in shorter ranges than space sensors, and (b) designed to work in all atmospheres. In other words, the tradeoff for the world-sensor's short range is its ability to work. Maybe. A Scout ship's sensors are built for world-mapping; it may take awhile to map a world, but it can be done. I'd say that task difficulty, TL, and skill is the stand-in for average time required and sensor quality. If there be atmospheric rules, then they apply within a GG, and increase task difficulty.

Personally, I like the idea of ghostly defenders rising through the murk to swap shots with an invading force struggling to refuel.

I like this sentiment. I also like the ability to have "sub hunts" in the insystem. In order for these to work, you will have to assume sensor countermeasures in each environment. I also like that idea, but I have not explored its implications completely. I suspect a solution would also be a compromise: i.e. stealth masks and "slick" hull coatings only go so far.


Third, hull configuration affects performance in at least two ways. One, streamlined hulls are better able to survive the heat generated by what is essentially reentry speed. Two, winged designs gain an agility boost, but increase reentry heat unless mitigated somehow (for instance, by folding into the hull).

Note that an SDB lurking within the atmosphere of a GG does not have to deal with reentry heat, reducing the price of its hull (a bit), and therefore the cost of defending from within the GG (a bit).


Fourth, I suppose it is possible to mine a GG -- perhaps by deploying missile platforms in an "atmospheric orbit". As vehicles, or small craft, or spaceships, they are subject to targeting rules.

 

[HG_B]

Firstly, certain weapons are affected by atmosphere, to wit: particle accelerators become shorter-ranged, and nukes are more effective (I suspect the shock wave plus heat effects would be the main additional attacks?).

Correct on the 2 additional effects.

Third, hull configuration affects performance in at least two ways. One, winged designs gain a performance boost. Two, streamlined hulls are better able to survive the heat generated by what is essentially reentry speed.

Wings increase maneuverability but, increase drag and thus, hull heating during reentry and overall, reduce speed.

Fourth, I suppose it is possible to mine a GG -- although it might be costly. Maybe "mining" a GG simply means deploying automated missile platforms in an "atmospheric orbit"... but I don't know.

This seems to be the most viable solution to "mining".

 

[McPerth]

MgT has Sensors...

T5 has sensors as well.

I said the only system I know. I didn't mean the only system to have them (and I believe TNE and T4 feature them too), but the only system that I know in detail enough.

Poor wording on my side I guess. Once more, please give some linguistic lattitude to this humble non-native english speaker

So what we're discussing is Atmospheric Combat. We have to know atmospheric conditions and effects.

I'd like to contribute, but all I can bring to the table is how I think things tend to work in Traveller. Should be enough to contribute something, maybe.

IMHO all contributions are worth reading them, as all help to see other views of the problem at hand.

Firstly, certain weapons are affected by atmosphere, to wit: particle accelerators become shorter-ranged, and nukes are more effective (I suspect the shock wave plus heat effects would be the main additional attacks?).

Will PAs be useful at all in atmosphere?

I don't know much about PA, but in the article in JTAS 20, page 40 dedicated to spinal weapons they gave much importancde to the difference among N-PAWS (Neutral Particle Accelerator Weapons System) and C-PAWS (Charged Particle Accelrator Weapons Systems), telling that the C-PAWS would be for atmospheric use (its charge allowing to charge atmpsphere and so giving them more accuracy) and N-PAWS for space, where charged particles would repel themselves and so disperse the beam.

In such reasoning, Ships PAWS should be N-PAWS, and so nearly (if not outright) useless in atmosphere. That's coherent with MT giving them penetration 0 if atmosphere was higher than trace.

Second, I'll assume that sensors used in atmospheres are (a) designed to work in shorter ranges than space sensors, and (b) designed to work in all atmospheres. In other words, the tradeoff for the world-sensor's short range is its increased resolution. Maybe. A Scout ship's sensors are built for world-mapping; it may take awhile to map a world, but it can be done. I'd say that task difficulty, TL, and skill is the stand-in for average time required and sensor quality. If there be atmospheric rules, then they apply within a GG, and increase task difficulty.

But I guess the ships' sensors (and mostly the larger ones, not thought to fight in atmosphere) would be mainly on the space cathegory, so losing a quite large part of its usefulness in atmosphere (and probably even more if they try to detect into de atmosphere from out of it).

Of course, any SDB though to lurk into a GG atmosphere will probably have both kinds of sensors, as most ships thought for atmospheric entry (either in planets or to refuel at GGs).

As the SDB would be lurking deep in atmosphere (or sea), they would rely on aotside sensors (e.g. in orbiting rocks) relaying information on them until the enemy initates its drive into atmosphere, and then either throw its missiles and rely in their self-built senbsors and targeting, or keep them into sensor surveillance until the attack moment arrives).

The intruder fleet has not such choice, having to make its initial scannings from space before driving into atmosphere, and having less clue about where to look once they do.

EDIT: I don't comment the rest of your post as I basically agree with it.

 

[Greylond]

IMO, the main problem to sensor range would be the local horizon. Even a GG is going to have a horizon that beyond which sensors will have a problem with. RADAR/EM Sensors can follow the curve of a dirtball to some extent but we really don't know enough about the gravity well deep inside of a GG to know what that would do but no matter what I doubt the sensors would be able to detect something on the opposite side of the GG itself.

For example Jupiter's diameter is roughly 143000* km, so if both ships are in the atmo of a GG, that is going to be a max range right there.

*very rough, I don't have the time to do the math to figure out the exact shadow range...

 

[Maitrejeanthierry]

MgT has Sensors...

So has GURPS:TRAVELLER, big time.

 

[HG_B]

IMO, the main problem to sensor range would be the local horizon. Even a GG is going to have a horizon that beyond which sensors will have a problem with. RADAR/EM Sensors can follow the curve of a dirtball to some extent but we really don't know enough about the gravity well deep inside of a GG to know what that would do but no matter what I doubt the sensors would be able to detect something on the opposite side of the GG itself.

For example Jupiter's diameter is roughly 143000* km, so if both ships are in the atmo of a GG, that is going to be a max range right there.

*very rough, I don't have the time to do the math to figure out the exact shadow range...

Even in MT the max solid material penetration of the best grav sensor is 1 KM. So, only horizon range basically.

 

[Greylond]

For example MgT Sensors have Range Bands of;

Adjacent: <1km
Close: 1 to 10km
Short: 10km to 1250km
Medium: 1250 to 10,000 km

So, a battle in Jupiter's Atmo is going to mean that most combats are going to be at Short or less Range just due to Jupiter's diameter unless you have a sensor that can "see" through Jupiter's dirtball center.

 

[robject]

Granted, how sensors and weapons and hull configurations operate in atmospheres will vary with ruleset, and therefore Your Mileage Will Vary [YMWV]. However, observations about ranges and horizon effects are generally useful. They will apply to some rulesets more than others.

Thus I see multiple new discussion threads created:

* How sensors, weapons, hull configurations, maneuver drive, et al "should" apply to "Traveller" in general is a new thread. (Or, perhaps, this is a reasonable thread for that discussion?).

* How sensors, weapons, hull configurations, m-drive, et al applies to a particular rules set is a new thread in the appropriate forums, and are potentially more productive than the general discussion here.

 

[HG_B]

Granted, how sensors and weapons and hull configurations operate in atmospheres will vary with ruleset, and therefore Your Mileage Will Vary [YMWV]. However, observations about ranges and horizon effects are generally useful. They will apply to some rulesets more than others. How they "should" apply to "Traveller" in general is a new thread.

The only (not familiar with T4) sensor that would work through a GG is an MT neutrino sensor.

 

[robject]

The only sensor that works through a GG is a neutrino sensor.

And this is as good a place as any to discuss that.

I think you're right. That, and a meson communicator (comms are arguably, technically, sensors).

The other sensors are all about reading the "surface" of an object, to a certain small depth.

 

[HG_B]

And this is as good a place as any to discuss that.

I think you're right. That, and a meson communicator (comms are arguably, technically, sensors).

The other sensors are all about reading the "surface" of an object, to a certain small depth.

A TL 13 neutrino sensor from MT detects a power source (nuc) as small as 100 kw. What is the range? The rules don't state in the Ref Man.