CT Only: Book 2 and Book 5 Small Craft Gunners

[snrdg082102]

Hello all,

Yes, I back with another of the rules that don't make any sense every time I look at the rules.

Book 2 Ship Crews page 16

Gunners: "Armed small craft require a gunner in addition to the pilot."

Book 2 Small Craft page 17

Fittings: "If the craft is armed, but carries no gunner, the pilot may fire the weapon at -1 skill level."

Per the Ship Crew gunner rule the fighter carrying either a single laser and up to 3 missile racks or sandcasters described on page 18 is not possible because .

However, under the Small Craft rules the fighter is possible since the pilot can fire the weapon at -1 skill level.

I'm leaning towards the rule from small craft section on page 17.

Which rule is valid the armed small craft one from the ship crew gunner or the armed craft described under small craft?

Book 5 HG2 Small Craft Gunners pages 34 -35.

Weapons page 34:
"A small craft may mount the equivalent of one turret. In actuality, the mountings are probably rigid, and no actual turret is present. All computations, however, may assume that the craft carries one turret. Weight, tech level, cost, and energy point restrictions must be observed. The pilot is assumed to be the gunner for one type of weapon on the craft. If additional types are mounted (a craft could conceivably have three different types), a gunner is required for each addition weapon. Exception: no additional gunner is required for sandcasters."

My opinion if the only options are fixed mounts or a turret is either the gunner that operates all the weapons installed or the pilot operates all the weapons in the mount.

If both a fixed mount and turret can be installed then the pilot probably operates the fixed mount and a gunner operates the turret.

Of course I'm probably still out to lunch in my opinion about gunners for Book 2 and Book 5.

 

[McPerth]

Book 2 Small Craft page 17

Fittings: "If the craft is armed, but carries no gunner, the pilot may fire the weapon at -1 skill level."

Side question: -1 skill level to what skill? Ship's boat (assuming that the positioning of the craft is what is needed to aim the weapon) or gunner (as you're firing a weapon)?

See that if the needed skill (used at -1) is gunner, then we have another problem with the crew, as most fighter pilots are assumed to be from the Flight branch (page 23), and Gunnery skill is not in its MOS table...

 

[Selandia]

BTW, Merchant could have pilot and gunner skill.

I just apply the -1 penalty to whatever gunnery level the pilot may have.

As often in rules, imperative forms such as "Must" or "require" is understood by me as "should for normal operation", as in this case. I would not find it fun if Luke skywalker could not operate a fighter (although R2D2 is there...) or if Chewbaka was not operating a turret.

have fun

Selandia

 

[mike wightman]

Just use basic LBB1 generation, gunnery and ship's boat are available in the service skills table for the Navy.

 

[snrdg082102]

Hello McPerth, Selandia, and Mike Wightman,

Thank you for the replies

Side question: -1 skill level to what skill?

The skill that the -1 in the small craft rules of Book 2 is applied to the gunnery which is available to all naval characters generated using Book 1.

Ship's boat (assuming that the positioning of the craft is what is needed to aim the weapon) or gunner (as you're firing a weapon)?

The web gremlins seem to have messed with this question so I'm not sure how to respond, can I get a little help please.

See that if the needed skill (used at -1) is gunner, then we have another problem with the crew, as most fighter pilots are assumed to be from the Flight branch (page 23), and Gunnery skill is not in its MOS table...

Under Book 1 character rules a naval pilot having gunnery skills is a lot easier than one created using Book 5.

However, a Book 5 naval pilot can still get gunnery skill if the character gets special duty followed by cross-training, and then roll on the branch selection table gunnery. Another way is that the character was enlisted with gunnery and pilot skills that got a commission.

BTW, Merchant could have pilot and gunner skill.

I just apply the -1 penalty to whatever gunnery level the pilot may have.

As often in rules, imperative forms such as "Must" or "require" is understood by me as "should for normal operation", as in this case. I would not find it fun if Luke skywalker could not operate a fighter (although R2D2 is there...) or if Chewbaka was not operating a turret.

have fun

Selandia

I'm not very familiar with Merchant so thank you for the tidbit of information.

In Book 2 the Ship Crews gunner "requires" armed small craft to have a gunner, but the small craft crew appears to say that they are optional.

Book 5 allows the pilot to fire one weapon type, but requires a gunner, with the exception of a sandcaster, when a second type of weapon is installed.

Just use basic LBB1 generation, gunnery and ship's boat are available in the service skills table for the Navy.

You could combine the two books character generation.

Thanks again and my apologies about this post I goofed three times before I finished replying to your posts and managed to post before I was ready.

 

[Carlobrand]

... Which rule is valid the armed small craft one from the ship crew gunner or the armed craft described under small craft?

Yes.

Both rules apply. A gunner is required, but if you don't have a gunner then the pilot can do double duty at a penalty. That's a variation on the double duty rule:

CT Book 2, Page 16, SHIP CREWS: "One person may fill two crew positions, providing he or she has the skill to otherwise perform the work. However, because of the added burden, each position is filled with skill minus one, and the individual draws salary equal to 75% of each position ..."

The rules similarly state that a pilot is required, that a navigator is required for ships over 200 dT, that an engineer is required for ships of 200dT and over, et cetera. However, in each case you can satisfy the requirement by having someone wear two hats. With 1000 second turns, the pilot has adequate time to operate the guns as well - just at a penalty to both his ship's boat and gunnery skills.

... Book 5 HG2 Small Craft Gunners pages 34 -35.

Weapons page 34:
"A small craft may mount the equivalent of one turret. In actuality, the mountings are probably rigid, and no actual turret is present. All computations, however, may assume that the craft carries one turret. Weight, tech level, cost, and energy point restrictions must be observed. The pilot is assumed to be the gunner for one type of weapon on the craft. If additional types are mounted (a craft could conceivably have three different types), a gunner is required for each addition weapon. Exception: no additional gunner is required for sandcasters."

My opinion if the only options are fixed mounts or a turret is either the gunner that operates all the weapons installed or the pilot operates all the weapons in the mount.

If both a fixed mount and turret can be installed then the pilot probably operates the fixed mount and a gunner operates the turret. ...

"A small craft may mount the equivalent of one turret. In actuality, the mountings are probably rigid, and no actual turret is present. ..."

A small craft may only have one hard point. It may therefore mount up to three weapons, no more. The player may choose to see them as a turret, or he may choose to see them as fixed mount weapons like the guns pointing out the nose of a modern fighter. The rule is telling you that it doesn't matter which way he chooses to see it, it's all treated the same as if it were one turret. With nothing but vacuum around it, a thousand seconds to a turn and only the one hardpoint to worry about, there's no real problem with a small craft pointing its nose at a target when it's ready to shoot, the way a spinal mount cruiser does, and then pivoting about to put its drives where it wants before the enemy can react to its attitude change.

Note that Book 2 and High Guard differ in that the pilot in Book 2 draws a penalty for firing a weapon but in High Guard he's permitted to control one weapon type without penalty.

 

[snrdg082102]

Evening Carlobrand,

Yes.

Both rules apply. A gunner is required, but if you don't have a gunner then the pilot can do double duty at a penalty. That's a variation on the double duty rule:

CT Book 2, Page 16, SHIP CREWS: "One person may fill two crew positions, providing he or she has the skill to otherwise perform the work. However, because of the added burden, each position is filled with skill minus one, and the individual draws salary equal to 75% of each position ..."

The rules similarly state that a pilot is required, that a navigator is required for ships over 200 dT, that an engineer is required for ships of 200dT and over, et cetera. However, in each case you can satisfy the requirement by having someone wear two hats. With 1000 second turns, the pilot has adequate time to operate the guns as well - just at a penalty to both his ship's boat and gunnery skills.

I am quoting the Ship Crews Gunner rule exactly as written on Book 2 page 16 concerning armed ships.

"One gunner (gunner skill 1 or better required) may be hired per turret on a ship. Armed small craft require a gunner in addition to the pilot."

Had the rule read "Armed small craft require a gunner.", I would agree with you that one person, the small craft pilot, could also fill the gunner position.

The rule however includes the wording "in addition to the pilot" which to me means that the pilot cannot fill the gunner position.

Both the Ship Crews and the Small Craft crew listing rule state that a pilot is required. Unfortunately, the small craft crew listing states.

"If the craft is armed, but carries no gunner, the pilot may fire the weapon at -1 skill level."

If the armed small craft, with the exception of a fighter, was on a mission that wasn't supposed to need a gunner or was launched during an emergency I can agree that the pilot may fire the weapon at -1 skill level.

Unfortunately, the fighter breaks the Ship Crews Gunner rule being the only armed small craft with crew of one.

Modifying the rule from "Armed small craft require a gunner in addition to the pilot." to Armed small craft, except a fighter, require a gunner in addition to the pilot." Or dropping "in addition to the pilot" would make more sense to me.

Book 5 Small Craft Crew

[QUOTE"A small craft may mount the equivalent of one turret. In actuality, the mountings are probably rigid, and no actual turret is present. ..."

A small craft may only have one hard point. It may therefore mount up to three weapons, no more. The player may choose to see them as a turret, or he may choose to see them as fixed mount weapons like the guns pointing out the nose of a modern fighter. The rule is telling you that it doesn't matter which way he chooses to see it, it's all treated the same as if it were one turret. With nothing but vacuum around it, a thousand seconds to a turn and only the one hardpoint to worry about, there's no real problem with a small craft pointing its nose at a target when it's ready to shoot, the way a spinal mount cruiser does, and then pivoting about to put its drives where it wants before the enemy can react to its attitude change.

Note that Book 2 and High Guard differ in that the pilot in Book 2 draws a penalty for firing a weapon but in High Guard he's permitted to control one weapon type without penalty.[/QUOTE]

Apparently I didn't express myself correctly or I don't understand the comment. Actually I betting it is a combination of both.

1. Book 5 Crew requirements do not state that a gunner is required in addition to a pilot on armed small craft that Book 2 does.

2. Book 5 allows up to three weapons to be installed which is the maximum number of weapons that can be installed into a single turret.

3. Book 5 adds the detail that small craft weapons are probably rigidly fixed in position rather than a turret, while Book 2 doesn't mention a turret just one ton of weaponry which is actually, in my opinion, the fire control for a turret.

4. Book 5 a pilot can operate one type of weapon without the penalty applied to gunnery skill that would apply in Book 2.

5. Book 5 a gunner is required for each additional weapon type installed.

The possible weapon types are missiles, sandcasters, lasers, energy weapons, or a particle accelerator.

6. Pilot and Gunner firing weapons

A. The pilot can act a the gunner when either a particle accelerator or energy weapon is installed.

B. The pilot acts as the gunner when all the weapons are the same type for example three lasers or two missile racks.

C. Under the Book 5 rules a pilot can fire one type of weapon and a gunner is required if a second weapon type is installed, with the exception of a sandcaster which doesn't require. Here is where I get a bit unsure if on the right track.

The small craft mounts three missile racks the pilot can act as the gunner.
Changing the weapons to a missile rack and two lasers. The pilot can act as the gunner for the lasers and a gunner the missile.

Of course the rule might mean that the pilot could be the gunner for one laser, with one gunner required for the other laser and a second gunner firing the missile rack. Doesn't make much sense, but then again I could be out to lunch.

Here comes the problem I'm having when the weapons mix of a laser and a missile are in a fixed position pointing off the small craft bow or nose with a target in front of the nose and another one off the left side who decides which is the priority target the pilot or gunner.

If the weapons are in a turret who has the priority to aim turret the gunner or pilot.

If one could have either a combination of fixed mounting and a turret or mini-turrets housing the weapons then the pilot could operate one type, say the lasers and the gunner the missile rack.

Hopefully I'm making sense.

 

[Carlobrand]

... I am quoting the Ship Crews Gunner rule exactly as written on Book 2 page 16 concerning armed ships.

"One gunner (gunner skill 1 or better required) may be hired per turret on a ship. Armed small craft require a gunner in addition to the pilot."

Had the rule read "Armed small craft require a gunner.", I would agree with you that one person, the small craft pilot, could also fill the gunner position.

The rule however includes the wording "in addition to the pilot" which to me means that the pilot cannot fill the gunner position. ...

Yes, the rules states, "Armed small craft require a gunner in addition to the pilot."

The rules also state,

1) "Each starship and non-starship requires a pilot."
2) "Each starship displacing greater than 200 tons must have a navigator."
3) "Any ship with tonnage 200 tons or more must have one engineer (with minimum engineer-1 skill) per 35 tons of drives and power plant."
4) "If high passengers are carried, then a steward is required."
5) "Each starship of 200 tons or more must have a medic (medic-1 skill or better)."

Then the rules tell you how to get around each of those requirements by having someone pull double duty.

... Book 5 Small Craft Crew

"A small craft may mount the equivalent of one turret. In actuality, the mountings are probably rigid, and no actual turret is present. ..."

A small craft may only have one hard point. It may therefore mount up to three weapons, no more. The player may choose to see them as a turret, or he may choose to see them as fixed mount weapons like the guns pointing out the nose of a modern fighter. The rule is telling you that it doesn't matter which way he chooses to see it, it's all treated the same as if it were one turret. With nothing but vacuum around it, a thousand seconds to a turn and only the one hardpoint to worry about, there's no real problem with a small craft pointing its nose at a target when it's ready to shoot, the way a spinal mount cruiser does, and then pivoting about to put its drives where it wants before the enemy can react to its attitude change.

Note that Book 2 and High Guard differ in that the pilot in Book 2 draws a penalty for firing a weapon but in High Guard he's permitted to control one weapon type without penalty.

Apparently I didn't express myself correctly or I don't understand the comment. Actually I betting it is a combination of both.

1. Book 5 Crew requirements do not state that a gunner is required in addition to a pilot on armed small craft that Book 2 does.

2. Book 5 allows up to three weapons to be installed which is the maximum number of weapons that can be installed into a single turret. ...

Correct.

...
3. Book 5 adds the detail that small craft weapons are probably rigidly fixed in position rather than a turret, while Book 2 doesn't mention a turret just one ton of weaponry which is actually, in my opinion, the fire control for a turret. ...

Book 2 has only 1 ton turrets, so correct.

...
4. Book 5 a pilot can operate one type of weapon without the penalty applied to gunnery skill that would apply in Book 2. ...

Correct.

...
5. Book 5 a gunner is required for each additional weapon type installed.

The possible weapon types are missiles, sandcasters, lasers, energy weapons, or a particle accelerator. ...

Correct. Because the small craft is limited to the one hardpoint, and because a mount with an energy weapon is limited to one other weapon, and a mount with a particle beam can have no other weapons, you will only ever have at most one gunner. The rules seem to think it might be possible to have three different offensive weapon types at the same time, but I don't see how.

...
6. Pilot and Gunner firing weapons

A. The pilot can act a the gunner when either a particle accelerator or energy weapon is installed.

B. The pilot acts as the gunner when all the weapons are the same type for example three lasers or two missile racks.

C. Under the Book 5 rules a pilot can fire one type of weapon and a gunner is required if a second weapon type is installed, with the exception of a sandcaster which doesn't require. ...

Correct.

...Here is where I get a bit unsure if on the right track.

The small craft mounts three missile racks the pilot can act as the gunner.
Changing the weapons to a missile rack and two lasers. The pilot can act as the gunner for the lasers and a gunner the missile.

Of course the rule might mean that the pilot could be the gunner for one laser, with one gunner required for the other laser and a second gunner firing the missile rack. Doesn't make much sense, but then again I could be out to lunch. ...

Well, you ... ummm ... I think ... Dagnabit!

The small craft's weapons can be arrayed as batteries just like any ship's, as far as I know. Makes more sense to pool them usually but if you're building it to hunt slow prey, like a freighter, then you can design the craft with separate batteries. of the same weapon. Ship rules say, "Turret weapons should have a crew of at least one per battery," (which makes it sound kind of optional - odd), but small craft rules stipulate one per type. Your pilot would pick up the missiles or lasers (one type) and your gunner would pick up the other type. The rules don't speak to adding gunnery skill (just pilot, ship's boat, ship tactics and fleet tactics), so who controls what is irrelevant.

However, if you house-ruled an option to add gunnery skill, and you had a boat with two lasers as two separate batteries, then you could conceivably have a player telling you, "I want the boat pilot to handle one laser, but I'm gonna have my gunner handle the other laser and the missile 'cause he has better skill."

At that point - well, I fall back on the specific wording of the rule: "If additional types are mounted (a craft could conceivably have three different types of weapons), a gunner is required for each additional weapon." Not weapon type - weapon. The pilot may operate one weapon type, the gunner operates one weapon. Doesn't actually make incredible sense, but it's the rules as worded. You could treat it as errata and read it as a gunner being required for each weapon "type" - that makes more sense - but it still doesn't allow the gunner to control two different types.

... Here comes the problem I'm having when the weapons mix of a laser and a missile are in a fixed position pointing off the small craft bow or nose with a target in front of the nose and another one off the left side who decides which is the priority target the pilot or gunner.

If the weapons are in a turret who has the priority to aim turret the gunner or pilot.

If one could have either a combination of fixed mounting and a turret or mini-turrets housing the weapons then the pilot could operate one type, say the lasers and the gunner the missile rack.

Hopefully I'm making sense.

Why does a missile have to be pointed at someone to shoot at them? There's no air in space. The missile pops out of the turret, orients on the bearing it was fed at launch, and then fires up its motor and goes charging off on that bearing.

The better example is a laser and an energy weapon. The energy weapon is a short-range weapon firing a blast of superheated hydrogen plasma at decidedly slower-than-light speeds. The laser is a long-range weapon firing a beam of light at - wait for it - light speed. The two are going to have very different targeting characteristics.

But recall that the same applies if the pilot has two lasers as two batteries of one each. He could conceivably fire at two different targets in the same turn. If the lasers are fixed mounts, that means two separate maneuvers by the boat. You could conceivably have one pilot controlling three individual lasers as three separate batteries - three separate maneuvers.

Remember we're dealing with thousand second turns. We're also dealing with the boat being able to maneuver for most of that turn and then quickly pointing its nose precisely at the target and squeezing off a shot without interrupting its maneuvering in a game-measurable way, just like the cruisers and dreadnoughts do. That implies that the weapon only has to actually be pointed at the target briefly in order to get off a shot. I figure most of the actual aiming is being done the way a submarine does it - sensors take in data, trying to get an exact fix on both the target's position and on its motion, then signal when they have a firing solution, at which point the pilot feeds the solution to the controls and the boat points the weapon and the pilot squeezes off a shot. Most of the time spent is not in training the weapon on the target, but in getting an accurate enough sensor fix to make a shot worthwhile. The sensors are clearly capable of tracking more than one target and orienting the ship for two (or even three, if it has the power) distinct laser shots without significantly affecting the boat's movement for game purposes; the combination of a laser with an energy weapon at a single or separate targets is not a significantly more difficult challenge.

So, for the question, "who has priority," the answer is, "whichever weapon the computer gives a targeting solution to first," and then the other gets priority when its targeting solution is received.

 

[snrdg082102]

Morning Carlobrand,

Yes, the rules states, "Armed small craft require a gunner in addition to the pilot."

The rules also state,

1) "Each starship and non-starship requires a pilot."
2) "Each starship displacing greater than 200 tons must have a navigator."
3) "Any ship with tonnage 200 tons or more must have one engineer (with minimum engineer-1 skill) per 35 tons of drives and power plant."
4) "If high passengers are carried, then a steward is required."
5) "Each starship of 200 tons or more must have a medic (medic-1 skill or better)."

Then the rules tell you how to get around each of those requirements by having someone pull double duty.

Apparently we do not agree on what "in addition" means. In my experience "in addition" is another way of saying plus.

The medic position, like the gunner position, uses "in addition". Here is how I translate both medic and gunner using poorly written if statements:

Medic: Each starship >=200 tons must have 1 medic. In addition, there must be at least one medic per 120 passengers.

M1: If Starship >= 200 tons crew = 1 medic)
M2: If(Starship carries passengers >=120 passengers (includes non-medical crew) crew = round((Passengers + Crew)/120) x 1 medic)

Total Medical Crew = M1 + M2 medics

Gunner: One gunner may be hired per turret on a ship. Armed mall craft require a gunner in addition to the pilot. Which I translate to be

G1. If starship or non-starship and has turrets crew may have 1 gunner per turret.
G2. If small craft with turret crew =1 gunner + 1 pilot.

If "in addition" for medics means add the ship tons >=200 ton 1 medic and the 1 medic per 120 passengers how can in "addition to" not mean 1 gunner and 1 pilot is required on a small craft?

Book 2 has only 1 ton turrets, so correct.

Actually the fire control is one ton not the turret per LBB 2 page 15 F. Armament:

"One turret may be attached to each hard point on the ship. When it is attached one ton of fire control must be allocated."

Correct. Because the small craft is limited to the one hardpoint, and because a mount with an energy weapon is limited to one other weapon, and a mount with a particle beam can have no other weapons, you will only ever have at most one gunner. The rules seem to think it might be possible to have three different offensive weapon types at the same time, but I don't see how.

Attack or offensive weapons include lasers, energy weapons, missiles, and the particle accelerator that can be carried in a turret. Of those weapons three lasers or three missile racks or a combination adding up to three could might the criteria of three offensive weapons.

Well, you ... ummm ... I think ... Dagnabit!

The small craft's weapons can be arrayed as batteries just like any ship's, as far as I know. Makes more sense to pool them usually but if you're building it to hunt slow prey, like a freighter, then you can design the craft with separate batteries. of the same weapon. Ship rules say, "Turret weapons should have a crew of at least one per battery," (which makes it sound kind of optional - odd), but small craft rules stipulate one per type. Your pilot would pick up the missiles or lasers (one type) and your gunner would pick up the other type. The rules don't speak to adding gunnery skill (just pilot, ship's boat, ship tactics and fleet tactics), so who controls what is irrelevant.

I've asked for clarification a number of times about how batteries are designated when mixing two of one weapon type with another weapon type in one turret. The answer I've gotten is:

Each weapon, regardless of type, is consider to be one battery when mixed in the same turret. Two lasers and a missile rack breaks down to be 1 laser battery + 1 laser battery + 1 missile battery.

The breakdown doesn't make sense to me but that is the verdict handed down by the majority.

I've taken the skill rules to mean if a character operates a ship pilot skill for that type is required. If the same character wants to fire lasers gunnery skill for lasers is required.

However, if you house-ruled an option to add gunnery skill, and you had a boat with two lasers as two separate batteries, then you could conceivably have a player telling you, "I want the boat pilot to handle one laser, but I'm gonna have my gunner handle the other laser and the missile 'cause he has better skill."

At that point - well, I fall back on the specific wording of the rule: "If additional types are mounted (a craft could conceivably have three different types of weapons), a gunner is required for each additional weapon." Not weapon type - weapon. The pilot may operate one weapon type, the gunner operates one weapon. Doesn't actually make incredible sense, but it's the rules as worded. You could treat it as errata and read it as a gunner being required for each weapon "type" - that makes more sense - but it still doesn't allow the gunner to control two different types.

Is a laser, or missile rack, or sandcaster a type of weapon?

Is a laser, or missile rack, or sandcaster a weapon?

To me they both say the same thing the laser, missile rack, and sandcaster are all weapons which the pilot or a gunner can operate one of them.

Oops I'll have get back to you I've got to take my Mom out shopping and to lunch.

Why does a missile have to be pointed at someone to shoot at them? There's no air in space. The missile pops out of the turret, orients on the bearing it was fed at launch, and then fires up its motor and goes charging off on that bearing.

The better example is a laser and an energy weapon. The energy weapon is a short-range weapon firing a blast of superheated hydrogen plasma at decidedly slower-than-light speeds. The laser is a long-range weapon firing a beam of light at - wait for it - light speed. The two are going to have very different targeting characteristics.

But recall that the same applies if the pilot has two lasers as two batteries of one each. He could conceivably fire at two different targets in the same turn. If the lasers are fixed mounts, that means two separate maneuvers by the boat. You could conceivably have one pilot controlling three individual lasers as three separate batteries - three separate maneuvers.

Remember we're dealing with thousand second turns. We're also dealing with the boat being able to maneuver for most of that turn and then quickly pointing its nose precisely at the target and squeezing off a shot without interrupting its maneuvering in a game-measurable way, just like the cruisers and dreadnoughts do. That implies that the weapon only has to actually be pointed at the target briefly in order to get off a shot. I figure most of the actual aiming is being done the way a submarine does it - sensors take in data, trying to get an exact fix on both the target's position and on its motion, then signal when they have a firing solution, at which point the pilot feeds the solution to the controls and the boat points the weapon and the pilot squeezes off a shot. Most of the time spent is not in training the weapon on the target, but in getting an accurate enough sensor fix to make a shot worthwhile. The sensors are clearly capable of tracking more than one target and orienting the ship for two (or even three, if it has the power) distinct laser shots without significantly affecting the boat's movement for game purposes; the combination of a laser with an energy weapon at a single or separate targets is not a significantly more difficult challenge.

So, for the question, "who has priority," the answer is, "whichever weapon the computer gives a targeting solution to first," and then the other gets priority when its targeting solution is received.

 

[snrdg082102]

Hello Carlobrand,

I'm back and I'll pick-up

Well, you ... ummm ... I think ... Dagnabit!

The small craft's weapons can be arrayed as batteries just like any ship's, as far as I know. Makes more sense to pool them usually but if you're building it to hunt slow prey, like a freighter, then you can design the craft with separate batteries. of the same weapon. Ship rules say, "Turret weapons should have a crew of at least one per battery," (which makes it sound kind of optional - odd), but small craft rules stipulate one per type. Your pilot would pick up the missiles or lasers (one type) and your gunner would pick up the other type. The rules don't speak to adding gunnery skill (just pilot, ship's boat, ship tactics and fleet tactics), so who controls what is irrelevant.

I've asked for clarification a number of times about how batteries are designated when mixing two of one weapon type with another weapon type in one turret. The answer I've gotten is:

Each weapon, regardless of type, is consider to be one battery when mixed in the same turret. Two lasers and a missile rack breaks down to be 1 laser battery + 1 laser battery + 1 missile battery.

The breakdown doesn't make sense to me but that is the verdict handed down by the majority.

I've taken the skill rules to mean if a character operates a ship pilot skill for that type is required. If the same character wants to fire lasers gunnery skill for lasers is required.

I omitted two items in the above comment. In combat per LBB2 the skills are DMs in LBB 5 as you point out skills of the pilot and gunner are not considered.

However, if you house-ruled an option to add gunnery skill, and you had a boat with two lasers as two separate batteries, then you could conceivably have a player telling you, "I want the boat pilot to handle one laser, but I'm gonna have my gunner handle the other laser and the missile 'cause he has better skill."

At that point - well, I fall back on the specific wording of the rule: "If additional types are mounted (a craft could conceivably have three different types of weapons), a gunner is required for each additional weapon." Not weapon type - weapon. The pilot may operate one weapon type, the gunner operates one weapon. Doesn't actually make incredible sense, but it's the rules as worded. You could treat it as errata and read it as a gunner being required for each weapon "type" - that makes more sense - but it still doesn't allow the gunner to control two different types.

Is a laser, or missile rack, or sandcaster a type of weapon?

Is a laser, or missile rack, or sandcaster a weapon?

Replace: To me they both say the same thing the laser, missile rack, and sandcaster are all weapons which the pilot or a gunner can operate one of them.

With: To me they both say the same thing the laser, missile rack, and sandcaster are all weapons that either the pilot or a gunner can operate one of them.

No additional gunners are needed for a sandcaster, which I take to me either the pilot or gunner can be designated to launch a canister in addition to handling a laser, missile rack, energy weapon, or particle accelerator.

Here are the combinations I come up with for small craft weapons mix:

Unmixed weapons 1: 1, 2 , or 3 lasers which the can be designated to be fired by the pilot or a gunner.

Unmixed weapons 1: 1, 2 , or 3 missile racks which the can be designated to be fired by the pilot or a gunner.

Unmixed weapons 1: 1, 2 , or 3 sandcasters which the can be designated to be fired by the pilot or a gunner.

Mixed weapons 1: 1 missile rack and two lasers

Mixed weapons 2: 1 missile rack and two sandcasters

Mixed weapons 3: 1 laser and two missile racks

Mixed weapons 4: 1 laser and two sandcasters

Mixed weapons 5: 1 sandcaster and two lasers

Mixed weapons 6: 1 sandcaster and two missile racks

Mixed weapons 7: 1 sandcaster, 1 missile rack, and 1 laser

1 or 2 Energy weapons

1 particle accelerator.

As indicated that a pilot can fire one type of weapon which would allow the character to operate any of the unmixed weapons while three gunners would be needed, if the pilot didn't control one weapon type.

In the mixed weapons the pilot could either fire the single weapon type or the two laser type of weapons. One gunner would be needed to fire each of the mounted weapons, unless the pilot had control of the two lasers which I consider to be one type of weapon

Requiring one gunner per weapon when they are mounted in a turret doesn't make sense unless there a multiple fire control stations doesn't make a bit of sense.

Why does a missile have to be pointed at someone to shoot at them? There's no air in space. The missile pops out of the turret, orients on the bearing it was fed at launch, and then fires up its motor and goes charging off on that bearing.

The better example is a laser and an energy weapon. The energy weapon is a short-range weapon firing a blast of superheated hydrogen plasma at decidedly slower-than-light speeds. The laser is a long-range weapon firing a beam of light at - wait for it - light speed. The two are going to have very different targeting characteristics.

But recall that the same applies if the pilot has two lasers as two batteries of one each. He could conceivably fire at two different targets in the same turn. If the lasers are fixed mounts, that means two separate maneuvers by the boat. You could conceivably have one pilot controlling three individual lasers as three separate batteries - three separate maneuvers.

Remember we're dealing with thousand second turns. We're also dealing with the boat being able to maneuver for most of that turn and then quickly pointing its nose precisely at the target and squeezing off a shot without interrupting its maneuvering in a game-measurable way, just like the cruisers and dreadnoughts do. That implies that the weapon only has to actually be pointed at the target briefly in order to get off a shot. I figure most of the actual aiming is being done the way a submarine does it - sensors take in data, trying to get an exact fix on both the target's position and on its motion, then signal when they have a firing solution, at which point the pilot feeds the solution to the controls and the boat points the weapon and the pilot squeezes off a shot. Most of the time spent is not in training the weapon on the target, but in getting an accurate enough sensor fix to make a shot worthwhile. The sensors are clearly capable of tracking more than one target and orienting the ship for two (or even three, if it has the power) distinct laser shots without significantly affecting the boat's movement for game purposes; the combination of a laser with an energy weapon at a single or separate targets is not a significantly more difficult challenge.

So, for the question, "who has priority," the answer is, "whichever weapon the computer gives a targeting solution to first," and then the other gets priority when its targeting solution is received.

In LBB5's abstract system the referee could allow missiles to be launched without pointing their noses in the general direction. None of my referee's where that kind, the missile's guidance system had to be pointed so that the target was in a cone 30 to 60 degrees left or right od the missiles warhead.

I didn't sleep well so my eyes are trying to close and my brain isn't staying focused so I'll end now. Sorry it I'm not making any sense.

As indicated a small craft, per discussions on this forum, when weapons are mixed, 2 lasers and a missile rack each weapon is one battery.

As long as the two laser targets are relatively close each in the direction the lasers are pointed can be each assigned a different target resulting in a Factor of 1 or 2.

 

[Carlobrand]

...Apparently we do not agree on what "in addition" means. ...

I agree on what "in addition" means. We do not seem to agree on what, "getting around the requirement" means. It's a role-playing game. There are any number of requirements which, in play, may not be met:

"Thou shalt have a navigator," the rules say. "Wait," says the player, "my navigator was killed in that last melee with the natives, and I am by Glob going to jump out of this godforsaken backwater and back to civilization." And we say, what? No, because you don't have navigator skill? Or we give him some sort of chance and make him make a roll for it?

The rules require a gunner "in addition". The gunner isn't there. The pilot is getting shot at and would very much like to return fire. It's a thousand second turn and he's got a computer at his disposal. We say, "No," because the rule says "in addition"? Or we search the rule book for a rule that describes what you might do if you were desperate and couldn't obey the usual rules? Well, as it happens, there is such a rule.

 

[Carlobrand]

...Actually the fire control is one ton not the turret per LBB 2 page 15 F. Armament:

"One turret may be attached to each hard point on the ship. When it is attached one ton of fire control must be allocated." ...

My apologies for imprecise wording then. "Book 2 has only 1 ton fire control, so correct." And the fusion gun has two tons of fire control, and the particle beam has 3 or 5. We get designs where the turret's a little lump, it's volume apparently small enough to be inconsequential to the overall design, and the dTon is inside the ship - usually a seat and some machinery-looking stuff, like the Far Trader. Seems to make sense, since if you didn't have the gun you'd be using that space for something else, not losing it. But then we get designs where the whole volume seems to be outside the ship proper, like the Gazelle. I don't want to get caught up in semantics when the designers themselves can't agree, but in practice I'd tend to agree that the bulk of the workings is in the ship, not the turret.

... I've asked for clarification a number of times about how batteries are designated when mixing two of one weapon type with another weapon type in one turret. The answer I've gotten is:

Each weapon, regardless of type, is consider to be one battery when mixed in the same turret. Two lasers and a missile rack breaks down to be 1 laser battery + 1 laser battery + 1 missile battery.

The breakdown doesn't make sense to me but that is the verdict handed down by the majority. ...

That's my experience too, and I agree it doesn't necessarily make sense.

...I've taken the skill rules to mean if a character operates a ship pilot skill for that type is required. ...

Near as I can tell, a pilot is a pilot is a pilot. Pilot skill doesn't break down; it would make perfect sense to house-rule a difference between a dreadnought pilot and a scout/courier pilot, but it would be a house rule. Pilots do get a -1 when flying small boats, but that's it.

...If the same character wants to fire lasers gunnery skill for lasers is required. ...

Agreed.

...
Is a laser, or missile rack, or sandcaster a type of weapon?

Is a laser, or missile rack, or sandcaster a weapon?

To me they both say the same thing the laser, missile rack, and sandcaster are all weapons which the pilot or a gunner can operate one of them. ...

Lasers are a type of weapon. Two lasers are not two types of weapons, they are two weapons of the same type. A sandcaster is technically not a weapon in the traditional sense - it can't hurt anything (except in ground combat). Well, okay, it can hurt the inbound missile, which I guess makes it a point defense weapon. Still, there's no gunnery skill for it - anyone who can push a button can man the ship's battery and make it send a cloud of sand in the general direction of an inbound, and the small craft don't even need a specific gunner for it.

 

[Carlobrand]

... In LBB5's abstract system the referee could allow missiles to be launched without pointing their noses in the general direction. None of my referee's where that kind, the missile's guidance system had to be pointed so that the target was in a cone 30 to 60 degrees left or right od the missiles warhead. ...

And when a referee can point to the rule that says that, I will cheerfully agree. Until then, lacking any rule stating what face a boat's weapons emerge from or any rule at all governing facing or firing arc, I'd have to say the referee was trying to play Star Fleet Battles instead of Traveller.

... As long as the two laser targets are relatively close each in the direction the lasers are pointed can be each assigned a different target resulting in a Factor of 1 or 2.

Factor is determined at construction, not in combat (aside from imposing damage results). For a ship, two lasers in the same turret is either two batteries of Factor 1 (or 2 if TL13+) or one battery of factor 2 (if a beam laser, and again +1 if TL13+). Firing the two laser batteries at the same target in the same turn will not make them act like one battery, even if they happened to be in the same turret.

I can't see any reason two lasers on a fighter shouldn't be one battery, if two lasers on a scout can be one battery. By extension, adding a missile to the mix shouldn't change that. However, the errata clearly states that if you mix things, they have to be separate batteries. Logic fail, but it's the rule.

 

[snrdg082102]

Morning Carlobrand,

I agree on what "in addition" means. We do
not seem to agree on what, "getting around the requirement" means. It's a role-playing game. There are any number of requirements which, in play, may not be met:

"Thou shalt have a navigator," the rules say. "Wait," says the player, "my navigator was killed in that last melee with the natives, and I am by Glob going to jump out of this godforsaken backwater and back to civilization." And we say, what? No, because you don't have navigator skill? Or we give him some sort of chance and make him make a roll for it?

The rules require a gunner "in addition". The gunner isn't there. The pilot is getting shot at and would very much like to return fire. It's a thousand second turn and he's got a computer at his disposal. We say, "No," because the rule says "in addition"? Or we search the rule book for a rule that describes what you might do if you were desperate and couldn't obey the usual rules? Well, as it happens, there is such a rule.

Yep, we disagree only on the gunner requirement but we agree that the one person filling two positions works for the rest since none of them add the requirement "in addition" to another crew position being needed or specifically mentioning small craft as do the gunner and pilot Ship Crews rules.

The Ship Crews pilot rule specifically mentions that small craft require a pilot and the small craft crew listings reinforces the Ship Crews pilot rule.

Going to LLB 2 Ship Crews an armed small craft requires a gunner in addition to the pilot, while the Small Craft Fittings crew listing, as we've talked about, indicate that the pilot can fill the second position of gunner when the craft is armed. If the pilot is the gunner, the character does so with -1 DM applied to gunnery skill.

To me the Ship Crews gunner and the Small Craft gunner are saying the opposite of each other, unlike the pilot rules, which are in agreement that a pilot is required.

I think my original question was something along the lines of:

Which set of crew rules should be used Ship Crews which lists the requirements for starships, non-starship's, and small craft or Small Craft Fittings crew listing?

To me the hierarchy is Ship Crews and then Small Craft, I will admit that my choice is going with the small craft gunner.

Unfortunately, that still leaves me with two official written rules that appear to say the opposite of each other.

Since this is not the first time I've asked there have been several suggested errata entries that change the Ship Crews gunner rule of: "Armed small craft require a gunner in addition to the pilot."

My latest suggestion would change "Armed small craft require a gunner in addition to the pilot." to "Armed small craft may have a gunner in addition to the pilot."

Of course I've so far been unsuccessful in my attempts to prove or convince other people that the two rules don't agree with each other. Hopefully, this time around I have made a better case with your help, however I feel I'll strike out again.

Thanks for the discussion Carlobrand.

 

[snrdg082102]

Hello again Carlobrand,

My apologies for imprecise wording then. "Book 2 has only 1 ton fire control, so correct." And the fusion gun has two tons of fire control, and the particle beam has 3 or 5. We get designs where the turret's a little lump, it's volume apparently small enough to be inconsequential to the overall design, and the dTon is inside the ship - usually a seat and some machinery-looking stuff, like the Far Trader. Seems to make sense, since if you didn't have the gun you'd be using that space for something else, not losing it. But then we get designs where the whole volume seems to be outside the ship proper, like the Gazelle. I don't want to get caught up in semantics when the designers themselves can't agree, but in practice I'd tend to agree that the bulk of the workings is in the ship, not the turret.

No apologies needed, unfortunately I occasionally, as in this case,get a bit picky on details so I'm the one who should have let minor details not be brought up about LBB2 turrets/fire control. My apologies to you since either way one tone of space is required.

Don't forget that in LBB2 deck plans have a 10% to 20% leeway of representing the hull volume. I've compared some of the deck plans with the volume and the plans had more volume.

Near as I can tell, a pilot is a pilot is a pilot. Pilot skill doesn't break down; it would make perfect sense to house-rule a difference between a dreadnought pilot and a scout/courier pilot, but it would be a house rule. Pilots do get a -1 when flying small boats, but that's it.

Now I have to apologize for being imprecise.

I agree that for starships and non-starships over 100 tons the pilot is a pilot. I also feel that a character with Ship's Boat skill is a pilot since the character is doing the same thing only on hulls from 5 and 100 tons per LBB1 page 21.

LBB1, as you have mentioned, allows the pilot of a starship or large interplanetary ship to operate a small interplanetary craft with a -1 DM.

However, the character, who is a pilot in my opinion, using Ship's Boat skill cannot operate a starship or large interplanetary ship.

I'm wondering if I could get away with my 100-ton scout/courier pilot losing the -1 DM since the size meets the top end of the Ship's Boat skill requirement?

Lasers are a type of weapon. Two lasers are not two types of weapons, they are two weapons of the same type. A sandcaster is technically not a weapon in the traditional sense - it can't hurt anything (except in ground combat). Well, okay, it can hurt the inbound missile, which I guess makes it a point defense weapon. Still, there's no gunnery skill for it - anyone who can push a button can man the ship's battery and make it send a cloud of sand in the general direction of an inbound, and the small craft don't even need a specific gunner for it.

In my head I thought I said what you said above, which apparently did come across, my apologies. Do you know of a place I can go to make some adjusts to my head?

 

[snrdg082102]

Greetings for the third time Carlobrand,

And when a referee can point to the rule that says that, I will cheerfully agree. Until then, lacking any rule stating what face a boat's weapons emerge from or any rule at all governing facing or firing arc, I'd have to say the referee was trying to play Star Fleet Battles instead of Traveller.

Your comment about construction just triggered part of why the particular referee required the missiles be pointing in the general direction of a target.

LBB 5 page 23 Batteries Table note:
"The number of batteries which may bear in combat is affected in combat by the size of the ship. Only the percentage shown may bear (fire) on the target in space combat. Round fractions to the nearest whole number."

Of course the referee added some tweaks from LBB2 and other sources most of which came from other Traveller sources and sources approved for use with Traveller. The referee probably did incorporate rules from Star Fleet Battles or other similar games too.

For small craft the referee I'm fairly sure threw in rules from Mayday, unfortunately I can't find specific rules in Mayday or any other sources.

One of the reasons we are having a hard time trying to figure LBB2 small craft design is that one designer interpreted the rules as if something is not specifically written as forbidden you can do that something, while another designer interprets the rules as if something is not written out then you can't do the something.

Factor is determined at construction, not in combat (aside from imposing damage results). For a ship, two lasers in the same turret is either two batteries of Factor 1 (or 2 if TL13+) or one battery of factor 2 (if a beam laser, and again +1 if TL13+). Firing the two laser batteries at the same target in the same turn will not make them act like one battery, even if they happened to be in the same turret.

I can't see any reason two lasers on a fighter shouldn't be one battery, if two lasers on a scout can be one battery. By extension, adding a missile to the mix shouldn't change that. However, the errata clearly states that if you mix things, they have to be separate batteries. Logic fail, but it's the rule.

I thought I was saying the same thing a fighter that has two or three lasers can be combined into a single battery boosting the factor. Add a missile rack or sandcaster, as you've stated change the to one laser battery, one laser battery, and one missile rack/sandcaster.

Yep, the rule fails the logic test.

Got to go I have places to be.

 

[snrdg082102]

Afternoon PDT Carlobrand,

While I was out and about I may have stumbled over away to explain why we disagree about applying the one person can fill two crew positions with the Ship Crews requirement that armed small craft require a gunner in addition to the pilot.

My take is that the armed small craft has a pilot and that the required gunner could be any other crew character that has a secondary skill as gunner. The gunner as I see it cannot as the requirement is phrased be the pilot.

By modifying or getting rid of the "in addition to the pilot" requirement and I have no problem with the armed small craft pilot also filling in as the gunner.

 

[Carlobrand]

... LBB 5 page 23 Batteries Table note:
"The number of batteries which may bear in combat is affected in combat by the size of the ship. Only the percentage shown may bear (fire) on the target in space combat. Round fractions to the nearest whole number."
...

Ah, yes, one of the other rules that fails the logic test, in my mind. We're saying the small craft can maintain and increase vector while firing up to three possibly fixed batteries at separate hostile targets in any direction, the capital ship can likewise maintain and increase vector while bringing his spinal mount to bear on a target regardless of the target's bearing, but the capital ship can't manage enough of a shift to bring his remaining turret weapons to bear long enough to squeeze off a shot. Logic inconsistency, especially given that the capital ship may be firing at several different targets in several different directions.

But, it is unfortunately the rule as written. I might note that your ref's rule violates this rule since this rule clearly states that size 0 craft are entitled to fire 100% of their batteries. Sometimes a ref gets a fixed idea in his mind about how things work, and he tries to make the rules fit that instead of making that fit the rules.

 

[snrdg082102]

For my part my thinking goes like this

1. A spinal mount/major weapon is fixed to fire in one direction, which I'll say is the bow. Anything off the bow in a direct line, more likely a small degree of arc on either side, of the bore can be designated as the target.

2. Bays are a bit more complex but my thinking is similar to the spinal mount. For example a hull with twenty bays distributes them in groups of five. Bay group 1 is down the port side, Bay group 2 is down the starboard side, Bay group 3 is dorsally mounted, bottom side, and Bay group 4 is ventrally mounted, top side.

An enemy ship located on the starboard side can be targeted by the percent bearing of the bays located on the starboard side. Things get a bit more complicated when you allow for 3D combat since the target's position could allow including dorsal and ventral bays to be fired.

3. Turrets can be rotated and/or elevated to bear on a target. Setting up twenty turrets as I did for the bays, the same enemy ship can have, in theory, all the ventral, dorsal, and starboard side turrets brought to bear. In reality this may not be the case, but keep the rules as simple as possible is how the referee allowed the turrets to be.

Armed small craft are in my opinion similar to fixed and/or rotary winged aircraft with turret or fixed mounted weapons.

One of the boxed Traveller games is an illustration of a fighter with an opening in the nose, which I think is for whatever armament is being carried. In this case an enemy ship with in an arc, or to simplify the game straight in front of the fighter can be targeted.

Small craft in a turret can be brought to bear on a target off the bow/nose, to port, to starboard, of the stern, and above the hull. The blind spot is something flying at a lower level and close enough that the turret weapons can't be lowered to get a shot.

A missile turret would allow the missile to be point towards, or close enough, the target which would allow the missile time to orient on the target relatively easily.

Fixed missile racks are probably mounted along the length of the crafts hull pointing in the same direction as the nose. In the abstracted LBB5 combat system one can argue that the missile can orient itself on the target. However if you used the vectored movement rules with a time and/or fuel limit a missile having to orient on the target is wasting time and/or fuel. Of course that referee went with the less abstract rule set.

Ah, yes, one of the other rules that fails the logic test, in my mind. We're saying the small craft can maintain and increase vector while firing up to three possibly fixed batteries at separate hostile targets in any direction, the capital ship can likewise maintain and increase vector while bringing his spinal mount to bear on a target regardless of the target's bearing, but the capital ship can't manage enough of a shift to bring his remaining turret weapons to bear long enough to squeeze off a shot. Logic inconsistency, especially given that the capital ship may be firing at several different targets in several different directions.

But, it is unfortunately the rule as written. I might note that your ref's rule violates this rule since this rule clearly states that size 0 craft are entitled to fire 100% of their batteries. Sometimes a ref gets a fixed idea in his mind about how things work, and he tries to make the rules fit that instead of making that fit the rules.

Thanks for the discussion

 

[Carlobrand]

For my part my thinking goes like this

1. A spinal mount/major weapon is fixed to fire in one direction, which I'll say is the bow. Anything off the bow in a direct line, more likely a small degree of arc on either side, of the bore can be designated as the target. ...

Anything can be designated as a target. There are no limitations. Even though the spinal mount is hypothetically very limited in its angle of fire, the game permits the ship to shoot at any opposing target without limitations - and most importantly without impairing its own agility. This tells us that the ship does not spend the entire turn training its spinal mount on the target; it doesn't even spend long enough doing that to impair its evasive maneuvering. Ergo, the time spent actually pointing the spinal mount at the target is a very small percentage of the turn.

... Small craft in a turret can be brought to bear on a target off the bow/nose, to port, to starboard, of the stern, and above the hull. The blind spot is something flying at a lower level and close enough that the turret weapons can't be lowered to get a shot. ...

Blind spot? Book 2 is running a hundred kilometers to the millimeter. There are no blind spots at those ranges, not in space.

... Fixed missile racks are probably mounted along the length of the crafts hull pointing in the same direction as the nose. In the abstracted LBB5 combat system one can argue that the missile can orient itself on the target. However if you used the vectored movement rules with a time and/or fuel limit a missile having to orient on the target is wasting time and/or fuel. ...

How so?? The missile leaves the tube, orients, activates drive. I see no loss of fuel at all, and the loss of time is on the order of a second or two. These missiles are covering 30,000 kilometers in a turn; I don't think 30 meters is even noticeable on that scale.

The ship/boat launches one missile from a given launcher in a thousand second turn. If the missile was responsible for locking and pursuing from the tube, as it were, the ship could launch as many as it could shove out that tube in that time and basically machine-gun the opponent with missiles - or at the very least put three missiles in space per turn, since that's the rated capacity. That is not the image the game offers: the game has one missile being launched per tube per turn, which in my mind suggests that the missile is depending heavily on the launching ship's sensor feeds for the early phase of its attack. Which makes sense given the size of the missile's sensors, the size of the ship's/boat's sensors, and the tens of thousands of kilometer ranges we typically deal with.

There are no firing arcs in Traveller, not in Book 2, not in Book 5, not in MegaTraveller. There is nothing that limits a boat from firing missiles or lasers at a target in front, behind or to the side of its flight path. One cannot create rules from artwork, and that passing mention that says the weapons are "probably" rigid doesn't occur until Book-5, wherein we are also told the boat has 100% of its batteries bearing. Your referee was wrong; it happens sometimes.