Beams or Missiles?

[Murph]

Whats better: Beam weapons or Missile weapons.

Essentially in Traveller, missiles seem to be the equal of a TOW or similar weapon. Pretty pathetic. There is no equivalent of the detonation missile from 2300, or even the submunition dispenser. There are no mass driver cannon, or gauss weapons that fit on ships.

Energy weapons are the only real choice IMHO, lets discuss and come up with some decent alternatives.

 

[danbuter]

I like the idea of a submunition dispenser, as well as AP rockets.

 

[RainOfSteel]

Jefferson P. Swycaffer had an article in Dragon (#57, I think . . . hmm, can't remember for sure right now) that discussed Anti-Missile Missile load-outs for missile turrets. Also, it discussed "round-shot" weapons, the old-navy euphemism for solid-shot weaponry.

 

[veltyen]

Um. I thought missiles were Mass drivers.

With a 50 kg missile something else must be accelerating it.

Missile as in a "projected physical object", rather then as "spanky guided rocket thingie"

 

[GypsyComet]

The TNE missiles were the attempt to bring the 2300AD det-laser into Traveller, providing even little ships with something that could cause a cap-ship some concern. They were, of course, MUCH bigger than CT/MT missiles.

I prefer a TU with both, personally, and would love to see the the det-torps brought into T20...

(on a side note, the name of this topic had me flashing back to a completely different game: Warpwar!)

 

[BetterThanLife]

Laser heads are the replacement for submunitions. But missiles are and always be expensive. They also take up space. (Not that the power requirements of a beam weapon don't take up space but with a little judicious power management.....) Once you install a beam weapon you don't have to pay for it again. Further most beam weapons are Light Speed Weapons. Since most sensors are also light speed sensors, the time the enemy realizes you are shooting at them you have already hit. (And I still don't understand how sand is supposed to work.

)

 

[GypsyComet]

Depends on the version of Sand you know, I suppose. Recall that this is the setting that has mylar-like anti-laser armor for people...

 

[gardclan]

T20 Page 270.
Conventional missiles are pretty poor, doing 1d6 per attack factor. Those are probably civilian defense models found on free traders and the like. A factor 3 salvo would generate 3d6 (avg 10.5pts) damage to the target hull. The main things they have going for them from the merchants view would be standoff range (90,000km short vs the 30,000km for a beam laser) and the fact that they don't use power. And merchies are notoriously light on excess power.

Nuclear missiles do 1d6 per factor + 1d12 radiation per factor. So a factor 3 missile salvo does 3d6 + 3d12 radiation hits. (avg 10.5 + 19.5 radiation) Fairly nasty compared to a 3d8 beam laser. Especially considering that the radiation hits go straight through armor. These are probably illegal without a fairly hefty weapons permit. The problem? Nuclear dampers make mincemeat out of them.

Bomb pumped x-ray lasers (same chart) list for 1d6 hits from a 1d10 pulse laser. So, that same factor 3 salvo now deals 3d6 * 3d10. (avg 173.25 pts) These require VERY high category weapons permits and are way expensive.

 

[veltyen]

Apologies for heading off into T20 rules clarification.

Unless it has changed in the 2nd printing, nukes do an additional 5 dice of damage. So (5+UWP)d6 and (UWP)d12 radiation damage. Nukes also do better criticals, much better then anything except spinal weapons.

My reading of the bomb pumped lasers (bpl) is (d6+UWP)d10 damage (your interpretation is also potentially correct, the wording is a little fuzzy). This is with an improved critical chance from being a pulse laser equivalent.

This would make a UWP 3 missile (Triple Turret TL13)
Normal 3d6(average 10.5)
Nuke 8d6 + 3d12 radiation + better criticals (average 28 + 19.5 radiation)
BPL (d6+3)d10 + slightly better criticals (average 35.75)

The equivalent Beam and Pulse Lasers are
Beam 4d8 (average 18) better to hit, short range, requires 3 EP
Pulse 3d10 (average 16.5) + slightly better criticals, requires 3 EP, medium range

For a warship all have their place, the ability to have a mix of nuke/bpl/conventional missiles to keep your opponent on edge, along with the good standoff range, mixed with Pulse Laser for medium range and relatively good damage and reserving the Beam lasers for anti-missile and point blank fire.

For a merchant the missiles are probably a better bet. 1 dTon of ammo gives you several volleys, enough to scare off a casual predator. Even up the high tech end (TL15) the triple laser turret (either type) requires 3 dTon for powerplant and fuel. If you have the spare power however the lasers take up less space. The cost of the ammo is academic, you keep the missile turrets for the deterent. Firing the missiles costs money, leaving them in storage does not.

 

[BetterThanLife]

Actually your BPL rules interpretation looks like the right one.

I see a couple flaws in your logic. when it comes to arming Merchantmen.

First Missiles take up space.(and merchantmen are trying to cram as much in there as possible.)

Second, Missiles are offensive only, where lasers work well in defense as well as offense.

Third, as well as having pitiful amounts of energy available Merchants also have pitiful sensors. You aren't going to stand anyone off as you can't see them far enough away.

Fourth Legitimate merchants are unlikely to be able to carry military grade missiles (Nukes and BPLs.)

Fifth, Missiles get shot down. (Especially in T20.)

Sixth, Missiles are expensive. on average a ton of missiles is likely to cost more than your profit margin on any run. (And if you get the lasers for cash, or pay for them outright, or put them in when you buy the ship and they are part of the mortgage then all you are worried about is battle damage not replacing spent missiles. (See Beams can be used for defense.

)

Install Lasers. If this is an aftermarket installation and you don't have excess power then install a second powerplant with 2-3 days fuel specifically for weapons/agility. Or upgrade your powerplant from TL9 to TL 13 or better to TL15. You get half again to three times as much power and if you are good on trade and spec, and or are lucky then you might even be able to pay for most of the work and the upgrade by selling the old plant.

Originally posted by veltyen:
Apologies for heading off into T20 rules clarification.

Unless it has changed in the 2nd printing, nukes do an additional 5 dice of damage. So (5+UWP)d6 and (UWP)d12 radiation damage. Nukes also do better criticals, much better then anything except spinal weapons.

My reading of the bomb pumped lasers (bpl) is (d6+UWP)d10 damage (your interpretation is also potentially correct, the wording is a little fuzzy). This is with an improved critical chance from being a pulse laser equivalent.

This would make a UWP 3 missile (Triple Turret TL13)
Normal 3d6(average 10.5)
Nuke 8d6 + 3d12 radiation + better criticals (average 28 + 19.5 radiation)
BPL (d6+3)d10 + slightly better criticals (average 35.75)

The equivalent Beam and Pulse Lasers are
Beam 4d8 (average 18) better to hit, short range, requires 3 EP
Pulse 3d10 (average 16.5) + slightly better criticals, requires 3 EP, medium range

For a warship all have their place, the ability to have a mix of nuke/bpl/conventional missiles to keep your opponent on edge, along with the good standoff range, mixed with Pulse Laser for medium range and relatively good damage and reserving the Beam lasers for anti-missile and point blank fire.

For a merchant the missiles are probably a better bet. 1 dTon of ammo gives you several volleys, enough to scare off a casual predator. Even up the high tech end (TL15) the triple laser turret (either type) requires 3 dTon for powerplant and fuel. If you have the spare power however the lasers take up less space. The cost of the ammo is academic, you keep the missile turrets for the deterent. Firing the missiles costs money, leaving them in storage does not.

 

[BetterThanLife]

I know how the rules read, I just don't understand how they are supposed to work in a Hard Science game. There is a thread on the topic but basically how do you detect a lightspeed weapon before it hits when you are limited to light speed sensors. Your first indication that they are firing at you is you are hit. Using mylar armor is possible because it is always on. But firing sand to intercept a laser when you can't detect the laser until it is too late is another story.

Originally posted by GypsyComet:
Depends on the version of Sand you know, I suppose. Recall that this is the setting that has mylar-like anti-laser armor for people...

 

[selunatic2397]

From what I remember from my old CT games, we fired sand off after we knew we were under attack. we then kinda figured that we hung around the sand cloud during the fight or the referee would tell us we had maneuvered out of it's protection. I think I read somewhere that sand had a magnetic base and was controlled someshow from the turret useing magnetic field generators...but I don't remember if this was a house rule or canon. Sand only blocks one laser shot per cannister doesn't it? I tend to think of sand as something you use when you can't out run or escape a pirate...and since lasers don't run out of ammo like missles or sand I and my players never used it much. It would only put off the inevitable and annoy the pirates.

 

[gardclan]

Originally posted by veltyen:
Apologies for heading off into T20 rules clarification.

Unless it has changed in the 2nd printing, nukes do an additional 5 dice of damage. So (5+UWP)d6 and (UWP)d12 radiation damage. Nukes also do better criticals, much better then anything except spinal weapons.

Quite correct, I neglected to include the extra five dice. Good catch.

I have to agree with you in terms of the missiles. Bhoins has a point that missiles take up space, but compared to the extra energy point (and note, also extra fuel to power that energy point) lasers take up far more space.

Where your turret launcher contains storage for the first three missiles intrinsic to its volume, and extra missiles (assuming no auto-loader or magazine) can be kept in the hold at a rate of 0.05 tons per round. The laser on the other hand requires 1 EP at 1.5 tons and one ton of fuel at TL-9. At a change over of 0.05 tons per spare shot vs. 2.5 tons for the laser the missiles become a very viable option. Don't forget to pay for the fuel again, and again, and again each time you refuel at a starport. Even at TL15 the laser will still require 1.5 tons of space for its power consumption.

If you DO have the money to burn (and your ref allows re-fits), your refit is going to cost you bundles. MCr4.5 per EP just for the powerplant PARTS at TL9. That doesn't begin to cover the lasers, turret, fuel bunkerage and labor ^_^. Were I as a GM counting this up for my players to pay for in game, their bill would run MCr10.0 (including all parts and labor). Not to mention two to three weeks downtime while the ship is making zero profit. A triple turret mounting two missile and one sand will run MCr2.75 and mounts to a handy hardpoint in a few hours.

In fact, I had a party that chose this option. They then proceeded to use regular missiles to cover most situations, but had two nukes hidden aboard for "special occasions" that required a little extra punch. (No, they didn't have the permit, Yes I gave them all kinds of grief over hiding the things come "inspection time". But thats the risk you run.)

Now granted, the laser does have defensive uses (such as shooting down incoming missiles) and the fact that you don't have to pay for reloads is a big consideration. However, for the merchant who's ship has a power shortfall and no way to pay for a larger power plant and fuel bunkerage, missiles are a very good bet.

Merchants have no real business charging into combat, but sometimes you just can't avoid it. If the other guy is intent on chasing you down, it helps to be able to "argue back". Besides, the other guy can't know what you are throwing at him until its too late anyway. That has to give missiles a fair intimidation factor. (at least until the first one hits.) Either way, a merchant's only real intent is to hold the other guy off until you can escape (jump or reach help). One or two shots is pretty much all you are going to get. At Cr5000 per reload, if all I could mount was missiles and sand because of my power shortfall... you had better believe I'd at least carry a few missiles.

Personaly, if I were a simple merchant and had enough power excess, I would favor the triple threat mix (laser, sand, and missile in the same turret). None of the three is going to be terribly effective compared to a homogeneous mount, but at least you can respond to any threat.

 

[gardclan]

Originally posted by Rhys Trask:

Originally posted by selunatic2397:
[qb] From what I remember from my old CT games, we fired sand off after we knew we were under attack. we then kinda figured that we hung around the sand cloud during the fight or the referee would tell us we had maneuvered out of it's protection. I think I read somewhere that sand had a magnetic base and was controlled someshow from the turret useing magnetic field generators...but I don't remember if this was a house rule or canon. Sand only blocks one laser shot per cannister doesn't it? I tend to think of sand as something you use when you can't out run or escape a pirate...and since lasers don't run out of ammo like missles or sand I and my players never used it much. It would only put off the inevitable and annoy the pirates.

CT and HG never really explained HOW the sand was deployed, but in the modifiers table they apply a -3 DM to hit for each "1/2" of obscuring sand". This implies to me at least that the sand canister is deployed as a loose, free floating cloud between the opponent and the defender. Lets call this an obscuring screen deployed the same way one would a smoke grenade.

TNE claimed that the sand was "held in place" by use of magnetic fields to protect the firing ship. (FF&S page 58), but still required a gunnery check to intercept incomming beam fire (BL p 10), which implies a "dadelous disk" (a la robotech) which can be moved about at need.

T20 on page 269 states that sand fired defensively by a ship will continue at the original course and speed of the ship. It also states that the sand protects the ship only as long as the ship stays within the cloud (looses its benefit as soon as it maneuvers). This version is a "shroud of sand" that isn't kept on station by any means. You are essentially hiding inside your smoke grenade's discharge if you will.

Three different editions. Three different rulings. I'm not sure how GURPS Traveller handles this, but I recall seeing a picture of a starship deploying sand as a "spray". IF so, they you have potentially a fourth canon concept for use of sand.

My view has always been that the sand canister was launched to a safe distance from the ship by some means (puff of air, magnetic sling, what have you), where a bursting charge deployed the cloud. Since I never could find how much "cloud" was in a canister, I always gave the full 1/2" / -3 DM per cannister. Now, if you maneuvered straight away from the cloud so as to keep it between you and your opponent, you were under its protection until the opponent passed the cloud, or you maneuvered to the side and came out from behind its sensor shadow.

YMMV

 

[BetterThanLife]

Actually that fuel cost only happens if you have it as part of your main fusion plant. You can, at TL13 have a trip laser turret powered by 3.1 tons. You can use unrefined fuel, and granted you only have enough fuel to power that turret for a day, you are only powering it for combat. Now the other point I was making is that by replacing the typical TL-9-12 Fusion plant with a TL13 (or better a pair of TL-13 plants) one is that it takes very little additional space to power all sorts of lasers. And going all the way to TL-15 you can actually save space to power your lasers over a TL9-12 plant. For example, replacing the 6 ton TL-9 power plant in a Scout Courier with a 4 ton TL15 plant, gives you 8EP, instead of 4EP, uses the same fuel (4 tons) and frees up 2 tons for something else. (And is actually MCr6 cheaper than the TL-9 powerplant.) So you install your nice new TL-15 plant, then with your TL-9 plant in your cargo hold you go to a TL-8 world and sell it. You have now paid for your upgrade and have enough power to run a dual laser, a model 4 computer (or a trip laser and a model 3 computer) and still have an agility of 2 while actually adding 2 tons to your available space. (Which makes the Trip laser and model 3 computer rather nice as it fits the space you freed up.)

Originally posted by Rhys Trask:

I have to agree with you in terms of the missiles. Bhoins has a point that missiles take up space, but compared to the extra energy point (and note, also extra fuel to power that energy point) lasers take up far more space.

Where your turret launcher contains storage for the first three missiles intrinsic to its volume, and extra missiles (assuming no auto-loader or magazine) can be kept in the hold at a rate of 0.05 tons per round. The laser on the other hand requires 1 EP at 1.5 tons and one ton of fuel at TL-9. At a change over of 0.05 tons per spare shot vs. 2.5 tons for the laser the missiles become a very viable option. Don't forget to pay for the fuel again, and again, and again each time you refuel at a starport. Even at TL15 the laser will still require 1.5 tons of space for its power consumption.

 

[daryen]

The way sand "reacts" to a light speed weapon is because of the long turns. A "turn" in most versions of Traveller (all I know of) last on the order of 10-20 minutes. For a laser to score a "hit" and do damage, it actually has to hit the target with multiple shots.

Consequently, the sand is not launched until after the first laser shot (hit or miss). Since multiple actual shots are required for a "hit", even if the first shot connects, the sand can prevent the cumulative effects necessary for a damaging hit.

At least, that's how I always figured it. YMMV

 

[gardclan]

Originally posted by Bhoins:
Actually that fuel cost only happens if you have it as part of your main fusion plant. You can, at TL13 have a trip laser turret powered by 3.1 tons. You can use unrefined fuel, and granted you only have enough fuel to power that turret for a day, you are only powering it for combat. Now the other point I was making is that by replacing the typical TL-9-12 Fusion plant with a TL13 (or better a pair of TL-13 plants) one is that it takes very little additional space to power all sorts of lasers. And going all the way to TL-15 you can actually save space to power your lasers over a TL9-12 plant. For example, replacing the 6 ton TL-9 power plant in a Scout Courier with a 4 ton TL15 plant, gives you 8EP, instead of 4EP, uses the same fuel (4 tons) and frees up 2 tons for something else. (And is actually MCr6 cheaper than the TL-9 powerplant.) So you install your nice new TL-15 plant, then with your TL-9 plant in your cargo hold you go to a TL-8 world and sell it. You have now paid for your upgrade and have enough power to run a dual laser, a model 4 computer (or a trip laser and a model 3 computer) and still have an agility of 2 while actually adding 2 tons to your available space. (Which makes the Trip laser and model 3 computer rather nice as it fits the space you freed up.)

[/QB][/QUOTE]

Nice argument, I'll grant you. Yes, your fuel is only used up in combat operations, but bottom line is still bottom line.

You still have to pay for the engineering change over UP FRONT, you still loose at least one and a half tons of space, and any merchant whom has access to TL15 (which would normally be reserved for military use) power plants is a person to watch very closely. Your refit is still going to cost you way more than the missiles will, and your party has to have the initial capitol to spend. You can hold ten missiles in half a ton of space, and thats plenty to defend yourself with unless you are regularly running blocades.

In addition, the standing rule of thumb is that used starship components sell for 1/4 their original cost. Were you to try this on my watch, I would FIRST derate the plant, THEN apply any markup for the TL difference. You can also make a good bet that I would turn a fair adventure out of you trying to locate the TL15 gear and the techs to install it for you. Would I prohibit this? Not a chance. Its enough work dreaming up adventures on your own without your party handing you such good stuff to rake them...er... use as this!

You can recoup SOME of your expense that way, but you should never be able to pay for it all by that means.

That being said, you could always purchase USED TL-15 drive components and make the change over yourselves. At 1/4 cost, you could probably make this work for about the cost of my new missile turret. Thats ok, I'd happily let you do this were I your ref. Its another opportunity to inflict fun stuff... like breakdowns, and the afore mentioned adventure to locate this stuff in the first place.

Now, if your party has that much cash lying around, by all means lasers are a very good option. I happen to prefer them myself for military operation type setups. I've even had a party arm their trader with fusion guns once. Thats their call, they're the players.

But my point was this:

If you don't have the cash or access to the engineering changes you propose, and if you need to arm your ship, conventional missiles are a VERY cost effective means of doing so. Furthermore, you can have missile armament TODAY instead of three weeks of downtime from now. All the firepower in the world means nothing if you can't afford the initial cost in the first place.

As always with economics, its a cost/benefit thing. Waiting six months for your savings to be enough to make the engineering changes needed to power your lasers means nothing if your ship is taken from you by pirates tomorrow.

Of course, you can always pull another trick out of the hat. Predatory starship equity loans! Those are always fun (for the ref).

In addition, if you want agility, non powered weapons like missiles let you get the agility up much faster than if you have to also power your weapons mounts.

YMMV

 

[mike wightman]

Originally posted by Murph:
Whats better: Beam weapons or Missile weapons.

Essentially in Traveller, missiles seem to be the equal of a TOW or similar weapon. Pretty pathetic. There is no equivalent of the detonation missile from 2300, or even the submunition dispenser. There are no mass driver cannon, or gauss weapons that fit on ships.

Energy weapons are the only real choice IMHO, lets discuss and come up with some decent alternatives.

It depends on the rules you are using.
In CT/Mayday, GT, and especially SS3, missiles are a much greater threat than in other versions of Traveller (unless you build contact detonating nukes for TNE )
If you use SS3 then even conventional missiles can become ship killers.