• Welcome to the new COTI server. We've moved the Citizens to a new server. Please let us know in the COTI Website issue forum if you find any problems.

Best Traveller Variant for Small Ship Battles?

Thank you for all the suggestions, and detailed replies.

I really appreciate them.

I suspect I'd never have been able to get such a good understanding of all the variants available, without asking my questions, so I'm glad I did that.

Not sure where I ran across the tonnage reductions from hits, but thought it was in one of the topics here, on Traveller Spaceship Combat.

Of course, I did a little general surfing as well, so it could have been somewhere else.

It was in a Battle Report, AAR, or Playtest example someone had put together, and wrote up in detail. May have been a HG2 variant.

I'm not sure of that though, now, since I've run across so many options. They did allocate hits to various sections of the hull using the number of tons for the various areas as a guide for the chance to hit them. In one of the examples, a hit was scored on the computer, which only had 2 tons for it, and damage was 2+ hits, so the computer was knocked out, and the vessel couldn't be controlled, due to that.

Say, for example, the ship suffered four hits, then it's displacement tonnage was 196, instead of the initial 200.

For the beam hits, 1 ton of damage per hit was subtracted from the overall tonnage/damage points, and for missiles, 1D6 tons were subtracted for each hit. For the latter, I think they used all of the points doing damage to the initial area hit, with possible spillover to another area, if there weren't enough points to absorb the hit (instead of rolling up to six separate times for each point of damage, if a 6 was rolled on a missile hit.

They kept track of total tonnage destroyed/lost for the vessel, in addition to the DPs for the individual sections, e.g. bridge, computer, cargo, maneuver drive, etc., with the latter being the more critical issue.

As mentioned, I think they were using either High Guard, or Book 5, but could be wrong about that, since I came across so many variants.

I'm sure you can imagine, eventually, a vessel would most likely be disabled by catastrophic damage to an important system, long before the entire vessel would be destroyed due to the loss of all damage points, e.g. powerplant, computer, bridge, maneuver drive, weapons, etc.
 
Well Mako, how detailed do you want this to be?

For instance, at one end of the spectrum would be the even simpler system, Triplanetary. That's the grease pen ship movement game that has most ships using a limited fuel burn system and our fusion ships are known as 'torch' ships.

It is the often overlooked granddaddy to Traveller, definitely the tactical movement progenitor.

http://www.projectrho.com/game/triplanetary.html

You could think of it as the LBB2 of the GDW space board games, and Imperium as the HG progenitor.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Triplanetary

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/3637/triplanetary

So you could go as simple as that and pick up a copy.

pic1132027_md.jpg


shiptable.gif


Starting with that as a measuring point, how much detail per ship do you want to go? What scale do you want for your space movement and fight?
 
Asking us to ask you, especially in that passive-aggressive manner, is rather sad, don't you think?

Either share it with us or not. Suggesting that we need to wag our tails first is insulting.
It's also the most negative possible way to interpret his post. Why not assume that he was making a joke? That's what I did.

Internet interactions would be so much more pleasant if people never assumed any post to be meant in a negative way if there was an alternate way to interpret it more charitably.

If someone says something that gets your dander up (generic 'you', not you specifically, Orr), take a deep breath and check if there's any possible way that he might not have meant it like that. If you still find it offensive, write a polite note pointing out how it looks and ask if he really meant it that way. Give him a chance to explain himself.

I've said it before and I'll repeat it as often as I have occasion to, I really think that ought to be an explicit board rule.


Hans
 
Last edited:
I suspect I'd never have been able to get such a good understanding of all the variants available, without asking my questions, so I'm glad I did that.


Kilemall's suggestion is the best way to begin: Decide what you're looking for in a combat system first.

Choose what you want and we can make specific suggestions.

Do want a straight-up wargame? Some RPG elements? Lots of RPG elements? You did say you were interested in small ships but, as TNE's Brilliant Lances showed, even small ships can be very detailed. What level of detail are you looking for? Detail in damage application? Detail in energy allocation? Detail in fuel use? Do you want to use vector movement or not? How about sensors? You can see there are a lot of questions you need to answer first.

As a word of caution, our suggestions will be "best fits" for your various answers and not "perfect fits". However, thanks to the many Traveller ship combat games and the 30-plus years of variants, we should be able to give you multiple suggestions.
 
Hmmmm, lots of good stuff to think about.

I will have to ponder that a bit.

That maneuver chart from Triplanetary certainly does look interesting.

Right now, thinking about more of a small vessel encounter type of game, as either a stand-alone scenario, or perhaps part of a solo RPG campaign. Might also be useful for the odd Traveller, RPG game as well, with others too.

Don't want to get too down in the weeds, most likely, but do like enough tactical decisions and modifiers to make life interesting.

Probably want to use miniatures, and perhaps some other space terrain too, e.g. planets, moons, gas clouds, asteroid fields, etc., at least occasionally, also.
 
Back
Top