Combat at "visible" range.

[McPerth]

I've always seen the multiple lasers in a fighter akin of the MGs/cannons a fighter had in WWII, all firing as a battery (misiles are left aside, as they are self-homing), or as a true turret, more akin the Defiant, but in any case, lasers firing as a single battery. Of course, that will preclude mixing pulse and beam lasers in the same turret(or the same fighter), something not told about in the rules.

Neither would I allow mixing lasers or missiles with energy (plasma/fusion) weapons in the same turret, as the turrets are quite different (1 dton for up to 3 weapons for lasers, 2 dton for up to 2 weapons for energy weapons), and I'd treat fusion and plasma weapons the same way as Plasers and Blasers, as told above.

NOTE: see that all of this is equally valid in MT and CT:HG

 

[Vladika]

Larger than this, I viewed each 100 dT bay weapon as equal to 10 hardpoints and, therefore extrapolated that a 50 dT bay should be equal to 5 hardpoints.

So a 500 dT ship may mount 5 turrets or one 50 dt bay weapon, and a 1000 dT ship may mount one 100 dT or two 50 dT bay weapons.

I think this is perfectly logical but pretty much against the rules as written. The biggest "problem" comes with refit, and the ability of bay weapons to be readily swapped out.

Now I can't design a ship with two 50dt bays in place of a single 100dt bay, but, if weapons are easily swapped out, then as new tech replaces old, why can't I "refit" that 100dt bay with 50dt bay weapons?

 

[aramis]

I think this is perfectly logical but pretty much against the rules as written. The biggest "problem" comes with refit, and the ability of bay weapons to be readily swapped out.

Now I can't design a ship with two 50dt bays in place of a single 100dt bay, but, if weapons are easily swapped out, then as new tech replaces old, why can't I "refit" that 100dt bay with 50dt bay weapons?

The problem is "What is a Turret or Bay?"
If we call it a socket into which a weapon canister fits, and it's some nice multiple of 3.5m in height (chosen to be proud of a standard deck).
The 1Td Turret is probably a can 3.5m x2.6m diam.
A 3 Td turret would be 3.5m x 3.9m diam
The 5Td Barbette is probably a can some 5.25m x 4.1m diam
the 10Td (HG1) Bay is a can some 7m by 5m diam
The 50Td Bay a can some 10.5 x 9.2m diam
the 100Td Bay, 14 x 11.28m diam.

 

[Vladika]

The problem is "What is a Turret or Bay?"
If we call it a socket into which a weapon canister fits, and it's some nice multiple of 3.5m in height (chosen to be proud of a standard deck).
The 1Td Turret is probably a can 3.5m x2.6m diam.
A 3 Td turret would be 3.5m x 3.9m diam
The 5Td Barbette is probably a can some 5.25m x 4.1m diam
the 10Td (HG1) Bay is a can some 7m by 5m diam
The 50Td Bay a can some 10.5 x 9.2m diam
the 100Td Bay, 14 x 11.28m diam.

Bay Weapons: Weapons may be mounted in bays, large areas near the skin of the ship's hull. Bays are available in 100-ton and 50-ton sizes (the size indicates the tonnage required) and must be installed during construction. The weaponry in bays is easily removed and replaced by other bay weaponry as the need arises. HG2 -30-

Not handy right now but either FF&S or MgT called for a rectangular proportioned volume, small dimension equal to height.

In either case, and I like turrets for energy weapons (just "feels" right), and missiles fired as "Arsenal" ships do. But any mix a designer calls for is fine by me.

Still, if volume is the controlling factor, why not? (I design for competition according to the rules, both as written, and intent).

 

[aramis]

Not handy right now but either FF&S or MgT called for a rectangular proportioned volume, small dimension equal to height.

In either case, and I like turrets for energy weapons (just "feels" right), and missiles fired as "Arsenal" ships do. But any mix a designer calls for is fine by me.

Still, if volume is the controlling factor, why not? (I design for competition according to the rules, both as written, and intent).

FF&S. Which used a cylindrical volume for turrets.

 

[Vladika]

FF&S. Which used a cylindrical volume for turrets.

Cylindrical for turrets makes perfect sense at least for the rotating, through hull, portion!

 

[McPerth]

Cylindrical for turrets makes perfect sense at least for the rotating, through hull, portion!

And I guess any turret with point defense capability needs that, at least to a point...

 

[Vladika]

So back to missile bays:

When I refit my TL13 missile cruisers to TL14 or TL15

Bays, per the rules, are nothing more than a slot for a weapon. They are bought and paid for, separately from installed weapons. Weapons, of whatever type, can be added, or removed, at any time. None of this changes the bay in any way. It is still there, empty or full, in whatever shape it was built.

A) Remove 100dt weapon from 100dt bay
B) Install TWO 50dt weapons in said 100dt bay

All bay weapons of the same type on a ship must be identical. Each bay weapon is a battery. Weapons installed in bays may not be allocated for turrets.

Bay Weapons: Weapons may be mounted in bays, large areas near the skin of the ship's hull. Bays are available in 100dton and 50dton sizes (the size indicates the tonnage required) and must be installed during construction. The weaponry in bays is easily removed and replaced by other bay weaponry as the need arises.

Weapons bays cost Cr10,000 per ton; 100-ton bays cost MCr1; 50-ton bays cost MCr0.5. They need not be assigned any specified weaponry during construction. HG2 -30-

So, why not? (This is about on par with Book 2, 1st ed, failing to specifically call for the J drive to require a Power plant. Thus the xboat.)

For that matter:

A) For simplicity assume any given 50dt missile weapon is a 3d rectangular extended shape.

B) By default, that is the size of the 50dt bay required to hold said weapon.

C) Build a 100dt bay with two of the same sizes for 50dt bays combined, side-by-side or over-and-below.

There is your 100dt bay holding TWO 50dt weapons.

 

[McPerth]

Could you pelase tell us where is this quote from?

 

[Vladika]

Could you pelase tell us where is this quote from?

HG2 -30-

 

[McPerth]

HG2 -30-

I guessed so.

This was one of the major changes in MT, allowing you to have both bays and turrets for the same kind of weaponry (and in the case of PA, spinals, bays and turrets) in the same ship. In HG, this was an enterly artificial (and absurd¹) rule to keep the USP within a 2-3 lines limits, and so to make it easier to write.

So, I guess the whole rule has no application in the MT design system.

Note 1: from the "reality POV, it could be accepted as a game wise decisión to keep it simple​

 

[mike wightman]

HG2 also has the limitation that you can only have 1 bay per 1000t, this bay may be a 100t bay or a 50t bay. So you can't double your actual number of bays :CoW:

If you allocate 100t bay spaces and later upgrade the weaponry to higher TL50t bay weapons so you can fit two, they combine their power and fire as a battery as if you had bought the 100t upgrade

The only weapon type this doesn't appear to work for is the missile bay because there are no high TL 100t missile bays according to HG.

What's needed are factor A 100t missile bays or magazine rules so that the high TL100t missile bays have twice the capacity of the 50t bay :CoW:

 

[aramis]

I guessed so.

This was one of the major changes in MT, allowing you to have both bays and turrets for the same kind of weaponry (and in the case of PA, spinals, bays and turrets) in the same ship. In HG, this was an enterly artificial (and absurd¹) rule to keep the USP within a 2-3 lines limits, and so to make it easier to write.

So, I guess the whole rule has no application in the MT design system.

Note 1: from the "reality POV, it could be accepted as a game wise decisión to keep it simple​

T20, as well, made the same change, but used otherwise HG2 as the design system (There are a handful of changes - Airframes, computers, weapon battery limits)

 

[Vladika]

HG2 also has the limitation that you can only have 1 bay per 1000t, this bay may be a 100t bay or a 50t bay. So you can't double your actual number of bays :CoW:

If you allocate 100t bay spaces and later upgrade the weaponry to higher TL50t bay weapons so you can fit two, they combine their power and fire as a battery as if you had bought the 100t upgrade

But:

All bay weapons of the same type on a ship must be identical. Each bay weapon is a battery.

And there are now TWO bay weapons; ergo TWO batteries per ONE bay.

There is still only ONE bay per 1000dt. It just busier than the bay used to be.

And I agree, this is a :CoW:.

The only weapon type this doesn't appear to work for is the missile bay because there are no high TL 100t missile bays according to HG.

What's needed are factor A 100t missile bays or magazine rules so that the high TL100t missile bays have twice the capacity of the 50t bay :CoW:

Bring back those from HG (and a few others) just like the "medic" rule was brought back.

 

[McPerth]

T20, as well, made the same change, but used otherwise HG2 as the design system (There are a handful of changes - Airframes, computers, weapon battery limits)

I don't know T20 (in fact I've never heard about it before joining this board), so I trust your word about it.

 

[aramis]

One of the problems with the TNE-style canned bay weapons is that a 100T bay won't fit 2x 50T weapons. It's 1.25x the dimensions, but would need to be 1x1x2 times the size, rather than the more likely 1.4x1.4x1 or 1.25x1.25x1.25 ratio of the 50T bay.

 

[atpollard]

One way that I had to visualize the whole 50 dTon vs 100 dTon Bay weapons issue was to imagine the 50 dTon bay weapon like a WW2 bomber turret where 90% is a can inside the hull with only a small blister outside the hull. The 100 dTon bay weapon is more like the 16 inch guns on a WW2 battleship where half of the weapon is inside the hull and half of the weapon is a large 'turret' outside the hull.

Thus the 50 dTon and 100 dTon hardpoints are structurally identical on the ship - a 50 dTon reinforced can shaped hole in the ship.
A 50 ton bay weapon fills the can.
A 100 ton bay weapon fills the can and adds another 50 tons of turret outside the hull.
Refits between 50 and 100 ton bay weapons are possible, and simple.

This is not how I play IMTU, just a mental visualization to make sense of the rules as written. (I mean why the heck can't I design a 1000 ton ship with a pair of 50 ton bay weapons for symmetry rather than a single 100 ton bay weapon? - IMTU I can. In the OTU I need to resort to the above mental gymnastics to try to make sense of the rules.)

 

[mike wightman]

I can't help but think that if we cherry picked the best bits from HG1, HG2, MT and the JTAS fighter rules we could come up with a pretty good version of HG3.

 

[McPerth]

One way that I had to visualize the whole 50 dTon vs 100 dTon Bay weapons issue was to imagine the 50 dTon bay weapon like a WW2 bomber turret where 90% is a can inside the hull with only a small blister outside the hull. The 100 dTon bay weapon is more like the 16 inch guns on a WW2 battleship where half of the weapon is inside the hull and half of the weapon is a large 'turret' outside the hull.

Thus the 50 dTon and 100 dTon hardpoints are structurally identical on the ship - a 50 dTon reinforced can shaped hole in the ship.
A 50 ton bay weapon fills the can.
A 100 ton bay weapon fills the can and adds another 50 tons of turret outside the hull.
Refits between 50 and 100 ton bay weapons are possible, and simple.

This is not how I play IMTU, just a mental visualization to make sense of the rules as written. (I mean why the heck can't I design a 1000 ton ship with a pair of 50 ton bay weapons for symmetry rather than a single 100 ton bay weapon? - IMTU I can. In the OTU I need to resort to the above mental gymnastics to try to make sense of the rules.)

If you're right (and I trust you knowledge about structural engineering), those refits would be quite easy, but will reduce the total tonnage for the ship in 50 dtons each, as the whole bay volumen is charged in the ships tonnage.

See that, if so, if a 10 kdton has the 10 100 dton bays it can and refits all of them to 50 dton bays, it will become a 9500 dton ship, and some performances might change (e.g. it becomes more vulnerable to criticals due to weapon rate/size ratio...

 

[aramis]

I can't help but think that if we cherry picked the best bits from HG1, HG2, MT and the JTAS fighter rules we could come up with a pretty good version of HG3.

Don't forget T20 - which was, in essence, HG3.