Corsair ships

[wbyrd]

No slouches in this room

By the way enjoying the conversation a lot...Good arguments all around, and making me think before replying., its really helping me work out a few things I am working on in my head.

I'm not sure armor can be added latter. Upguning it is a must for a Corsair.

I have the latest version of both Core and High Guard rules in front of me at the moment. I do not see any rules that specifically state armor can not be retro fitted onto an existing hull.

You're assuming that defenseless ships would be going to worlds without system defenses. I'm assuming that defenseless ships will keep to systems with defenses or upgrade their own defenses. I'm also assuming that only a fool would use a ship that couldn't be fitted with all the turrets possible for going into harm's way.


Hans

unfortunately that's not always the case if real world is any example. Modern vessels routinely enter pirate infested regions with only minimal protection. and no on board security to repel pirates.
A battery of Beam lasers, missiles, or installing new turrets is an expensive option.The expense and down time of installing new weapons, armor, sensors, hiring gunners, and purchasing ammunition, may make up gunning/armoring a ship an impossibility.
Since from practical experience boats, and ships, often run without a full crew, and even basic purchases slam into budget issues I have to assume that the same factors affect how prepared a vessel is prepared for attack.

Sure they can. It has 10 staterooms, so with double occupation for all the crew it could cary up to 12 "marines" (see that the crew listed in page 129 includes no gunners, I included 3 for the 3 turrets, sso raising the crew to 8). As I asume at least the Pilot and one other officer will have individual staterooms, let's asume 10 boarders.

Very true ut unless there is reason to suspect an serious threat of being boarded in a short time frame. Having a Dozen guys setting around the galley eathing, BSing, and doing damn little esle, is an expensive option. Have you seen how much a marine eats...

Nonetheless, that will make it quite vulnerable to Q-ships, even in only being merchants with marines inside...

Very true in my Traveller playing career my groups have taken more than one corsair this way. this is my preferred way to deal with pirates in general. Its how two of my groups went from, no ship to a spiffy Nearly Free Corsair....of course the ship captain was getting aid to play bait, and the Mercs were getting paid to ride around with someone else paying for their three month vacation before the pirate finally attacked..

All in all, it holds not enough firepower (aain IMHO) to really cow a merchant to submission without fight (that would be its intended mission).

That's really is a personal call, I have always tended to look at corsairs and go..I don't see that many commercial ship would risk a firefight with pirates over simply giving up the cargo. The cargo itself is worth less than the ship, and it's crew...unless the pirates on you scope have a habit of killing crews and jacking ships it's just safer and cheaper to give up the cargo.

and out of the book Commercial ship is suicidal to fight an out of the Book Corsair. even a fat trader which has a few guns out of the book cant be sure of getting away without loss of life,heavy damage, and down time getting the damage repaired.....you don't have to be able to blow a merchant out of space to get it to surrender..... just make the cost of fighting higher than the costs of giving up the cargo.

 

[McPerth]

No slouches in this room

By the way enjoying the conversation a lot...Good arguments all around, and making me think before replying., its really helping me work out a few things I am working on in my head.

Right, That's what makes this board so interesting.

And BTW, as a newbee you are, I'm afraid I have not yet welcomed you to it, in all the posts we crossed

I have the latest version of both Core and High Guard rules in front of me at the moment. I do not see any rules that specifically state armor can not be retro fitted onto an existing hull.

That's a personal interpretation of the rules, but, being part of the hull, I see armor as treamlining, so you wither put it in the design or cannot add it. The fact it includes space is explained in earlier versions (not sure in MgT) as because armor does not represent thight skin, but also internal bracing and so on, and that would be needed from design and should be very difficult (if not outright imposible) to add latter.

But that's my personal Reading of it, so far from holy writ...

Very true ut unless there is reason to suspect an serious threat of being boarded in a short time frame. Having a Dozen guys setting around the galley eathing, BSing, and doing damn little esle, is an expensive option. Have you seen how much a marine eats...

But that's the Corsair's busines, isn't it? If you want to have the possibility to board someone, you'll need those "marines" (and BTW, I use this term refereing to a boarding party, not true Marines. I hope they eat less...).

And, BTW, same can be said about fighter pilots (also biofreight until combat arises)...

Very true in my Traveller playing career my groups have taken more than one corsair this way. this is my preferred way to deal with pirates in general. Its how two of my groups went from, no ship to a spiffy Nearly Free Corsair....of course the ship captain was getting aid to play bait, and the Mercs were getting paid to ride around with someone else paying for their three month vacation before the pirate finally attacked..

THat's why I believe the best tactics for a pirate would be to be armed enough to really freighten the merchant and ordering it to dump its cargo so that it could be easily recovered, so avoiding combat and boardings if posible (boardings are always risky). But to do that, you need trully fireposer advantage, more tan the corsair has over a merchant

That's really is a personal call, I have always tended to look at corsairs and go..I don't see that many commercial ship would risk a firefight with pirates over simply giving up the cargo. The cargo itself is worth less than the ship, and it's crew...unless the pirates on you scope have a habit of killing crews and jacking ships it's just safer and cheaper to give up the cargo.

That will depend on the cargo. If you have a large investment in your hold that can ruin you and make you lose your ship to the bank, you sa nsee things differently. Most free merchants live on speculation.

And where have you seen a RPG group that just surrunds their cargo to the first pirate they ran across?

and out of the book Commercial ship is suicidal to fight an out of the Book Corsair. even a fat trader which has a few guns out of the book cant be sure of getting away without loss of life,heavy damage, and down time getting the damage repaired.....you don't have to be able to blow a merchant out of space to get it to surrender..... just make the cost of fighting higher than the costs of giving up the cargo.

I've never talked about unmodified ships. I asume the first thing most owners will do is to modify them somewhat (mostly upgunning them as budget allows)

To be fair, though, most of the Corsair design flaws (undergunned and underarmored to fight similar size traders, too slow to really outrun patrols, lack of decent computer, lack of wilderness refuelling capability, etc...) were also in earlier versions of Traveller

 

[rancke]

Ooops. Almost got sucked into another iteration of the Neverending Piracy Debate. Bowing out of this discussion now.


Hans

 

[wbyrd]

Right, That's what makes this board so interesting.

And BTW, as a newbee you are, I'm afraid I have not yet welcomed you to it, in all the posts we crossed

Well that has been corrected now

I visited off and on for a while until I got more involved in several Traveller games, and a personal project of my own...and decided to pop in and join in the fun .

That's a personal interpretation of the rules, but, being part of the hull, I see armor as treamlining, so you wither put it in the design or cannot add it. The fact it includes space is explained in earlier versions (not sure in MgT) as because armor does not represent thight skin, but also internal bracing and so on, and that would be needed from design and should be very difficult (if not outright imposible) to add latter.

But that's my personal Reading of it, so far from holy writ...

and a valid one, since it's not spelled out in the rules it's open to individual interpretations.

I went with the fact that warships and other vessels can be pulled into the yards and have radical alterations made to their hulls. it's time consuming and expensive but not beyond the ability of an engineer.

changing configurations would require rearranging the layout of too many internal structures and entire compartments so you might as well just go build a new ship.

But that's the Corsair's busines, isn't it? If you want to have the possibility to board someone, you'll need those "marines" (and BTW, I use this term refereing to a boarding party, not true Marines. I hope they eat less...).

And, BTW, same can be said about fighter pilots (also biofreight until combat arises)...

oops I was thinking of commercial vessels carrying marines... yeah a pirate or privateer would need boarding teams, and pilots.... the extra bunk space, and cost of upkeep wold be a pain in the butt but a required expense for a Corsair..

THat's why I believe the best tactics for a pirate would be to be armed enough to really freighten the merchant and ordering it to dump its cargo so that it could be easily recovered, so avoiding combat and boardings if posible (boardings are always risky). But to do that, you need trully fireposer advantage, more tan the corsair has over a merchant

"I surrender we'll transfer cargo to your vessel, don't shoot.." followed by... a squad of EVA equipped troopers sneaking around the other side of the ship and boarding the Corsair while it transfers the cargo was our standard mode of operation. Or hiding in cargo containers....

You would e truly shocked by the number of times Pirates overlook a density scan of a cargo container.... or mistaken a squad of marines hiding in a container full of frozen meat, for just another side of beef..."we called it the "canned ham" Maneuver.

That will depend on the cargo. If you have a large investment in your hold that can ruin you and make you lose your ship to the bank, you sa nsee things differently. Most free merchants live on speculation.

And where have you seen a RPG group that just surrunds their cargo to the first pirate they ran across?

Never, but thats a side effect of Being a PC, NPC vessels are a bit more rational.

I've never talked about unmodified ships. I asume the first thing most owners will do is to modify them somewhat (mostly upgunning them as budget allows)

To be fair, though, most of the Corsair design flaws (undergunned and underarmored to fight similar size traders, too slow to really outrun patrols, lack of decent computer, lack of wilderness refuelling capability, etc...) were also in earlier versions of Traveller

My apologies, if I improperly interpreted what you were say

I have seen the older versions of vessels and the newer versions are mostly remakes of the older ones. But then again the ships are not the focus of the game, an important prop for adventures, with the potential to become major supporting characters, but all in all ships for many groups are a way to get around and not much else.

If people are really into the ship to ship, and ship oriented games they seldom use the Off the shelf designs so the holes in the designs are rapidly plugged by clever players and Refs.

as a rule when I design a ship I tend to get carried away a little and leave the players no where to go. I've had to curb my enthusiasm a bit with my latest batch since i am doing them for a friend who wants bare bones options for his players....which has led to a player or two going.."these suck they ont have x...y...and z.... until the ref pointed out they could upgrade them the way they want....

Ooops. Almost got sucked into another iteration of the Neverending Piracy Debate. Bowing out of this discussion now.

Hans

:CoW:
Sorry to hear that..hard to find an original subject to talk about these days

 

[aramis]

But how big a percentage of the ships that would frequent the places where it has freedom to attack them is it?

Probably most - as no commercial line is going to risk the capital and reputation going there.

Which means only the foolish, ignorant, or insane are going to go there on trade runs. Counting Subsidy contracts as a form of foolish.

And, since there is potentially money to be made, SOME will get greedy enough to brave it. And so long as at least some make it through.... more will follow.

 

[pendragonman]

snip...

And, since there is potentially money to be made, SOME will get greedy enough to brave it. And so long as at least some make it through.... more will follow.

Like Serenity and other free traders...

 

[GypsyComet]

Ooops. Almost got sucked into another iteration of the Neverending Piracy Debate. Bowing out of this discussion now.

Repeat after me: "Pirates commit High Crimes using Starships".

There is a lot of room in that statement on purpose.

 

[Dagrill]

Free/FAR (not FAT) traders have two hardpoints. The subsidized merchant (FAT trader) comes with three but could mount four.
Just as the 400 ton corsair could mount 4.

In the subbie's case only going with three is probably being penny-wise. In the corsair's case, WHAT WAS THE DESIGNER THINKING, only putting 3 turrets on this thing?

If you check the little box at the bottom of page 114, it's clear the ships are designed to be upgraded, the Type R has 3 tons unused, the Corsair 2 tons unused.

Personally I'd strip out a triple turret and some cargo and aff a couple of Particle Barbettes, I'd definitely do that with the Close Escort.

Regards

David

 

[Dagrill]

I understand your points. But the Corsair is not a BAD design, it's not a great design. But it is capable of carrying out it's intended mission. Fat traders, Yachts, Heavy Freighters, are all vulnerable to the Corsair. that's over half the commercial vessels in the core book.
also the book examples are all left open for improvement and upgrades. I cant speak for the original designers but the vessels are meant to be upgraded after purchase by players, or tweaked by Referees as needed.

While, Out of the book Far traders and Free traders are well enough armored to absorb the Corsair fire without significant damage. however they are not fat enough to exploit that advantage to escape.
The corsair can close and force a boarding action. on free and far traders. the target ship does not have to be at a dead stop to be boarded it just makes the task a bit trickier.

And one final option is that a Corsair can carry six 10 ton fighters in it's cargo hold and still have 100 tons of cargo space

Well said! totally agree.

Regards

David

 

[Dagrill]

My suggested upgradings would be:

1. Adding a fourth turret (IMHO a must)
2. Adding some armor (at least as much as a far/fat trader)
3. At least one turret should be PB. Asside from being quite damaging to enemy ship, the added crew radiation damage could be handy, either to cow them or to reduce the crew for a boarding
4. Upgrade de computer so that it can either have better fire control, evasion or use the repair drones at its full
5. Add scoops and purification plant to allow it wilderness refuelling (remember a Corsair might not depend on starports, where it can be wanted)
6. Add some more accomodiations for boarders.

See that some of them cannot be added (armor and scops, not sure about hardpoints) so, I keep opining it's a bad design for its intended mission.

I agree all these things should be added, it's a question of cost, I think scoops & purification plant and computer upgrade and software are the essentials, then more guns then armour, by then you're turning people away and need more staterooms.

Regards

David

 

[Dagrill]

unfortunately that's not always the case if real world is any example. Modern vessels routinely enter pirate infested regions with only minimal protection. and no on board security to repel pirates.

Well said look at the idiots that sailed their yacht near Somalia and with out insurance!

Regards

David

 

[McPerth]

If you check the little box at the bottom of page 114, it's clear the ships are designed to be upgraded, the Type R has 3 tons unused, the Corsair 2 tons unused.

Personally I'd strip out a triple turret and some cargo and aff a couple of Particle Barbettes, I'd definitely do that with the Close Escort.

Regards

David

For the close escort (Gazelle), even upguning it with PBs without modifying any turret (as the original CT design, arming it with 4 triple turrets, two with PBs and 2 with triple lasers will make it quite a better light fighting (patrol) ship...

 

[wbyrd]

Well, if I ever wanted to put together an improved corsair I have the input for the job. All the suggestions are great. and I have to agree with the need for them to Make an acceptable design a bit more ideal.

 

[rancke]

unfortunately that's not always the case if real world is any example. Modern vessels routinely enter pirate infested regions with only minimal protection. and no on board security to repel pirates.

Well said look at the idiots that sailed their yacht near Somalia and with out insurance!

There are a couple of differences between Somali pirates and Traveller pirates.

First of all, until recently civilian ships have not been allowed to carry adequate weapons. This is changing, and, surprise, surprise, ships that shoot back at the pirates tend to be avoided like the plague. Whereas Traveller merchants are canonically allowed to arm themselves. Secondly, Somali pirates can carry out their business in comparatively cheap motorboats. Traveller pirates need to invest in a ship worth many millions of credits before they can even get started. A ship worth many millions of credits that, if it is ever identified as a pirate ship becomes the lawful prey of every national ship in the region. That makes for quite a different business model for Traveller pirates.


Hans

 

[wbyrd]

There are a couple of differences between Somali pirates and Traveller pirates.

First of all, until recently civilian ships have not been allowed to carry adequate weapons. This is changing, and, surprise, surprise, ships that shoot back at the pirates tend to be avoided like the plague. Whereas Traveller merchants are canonically allowed to arm themselves. Secondly, Somali pirates can carry out their business in comparatively cheap motorboats. Traveller pirates need to invest in a ship worth many millions of credits before they can even get started. A ship worth many millions of credits that, if it is ever identified as a pirate ship becomes the lawful prey of every national ship in the region. That makes for quite a different business model for Traveller pirates.


Hans

Good points. The modern pirates can get away with their tactics only when Commercial ships are unarmed, and aren't carrying armed security. For years the presence of pirates in Somalia and other areas was tolerated as a nuisance since the cost of protecting shipping exceeded the losses incurred from piracy.

this encouraged more groups to get involved in the Piracy, and eventually led to a situation where the losses to piracy were severe enough to require a response.
Since economics of risk versus profit is a universal constant. I have to think that, in The Imperium, there are similar areas in which the risk of attack, and the losses to piracy, were low enough to tempt lightly protected vessels to operate.
This would also attract less organized and less well funded pirates to move into these regions until Security forces and merchants reacted by upgrading their defenses or deploying escorts, and warships to chase off the bottom feeders.


So as the situation changed either vessels would adapt to the environment or the operators would move to an area more suited to their vessels. depending on the local situation there would be a lot of variation in the capabilities and defenses of both pirate and commercial shipping.
Less well protected vessels would seek out safer routes, while less well equipped pirates would look for more favorable conditions for their vessel. that means depending on the conditions you would find pirate vessels that were weakly armed with more cargo space, and pirate vessels more suited to hitting harder targets.

 

[aramis]

[m;]Due to the Somali Pirate digression being directly relevant, but also being modern politics, a limited exception is being given to the No Politics Outside the Pit rule.[/m;]

The Somali Pirates lack naval weapons, too. Traveller pirates do not.

I expect that, if the majority of the Somali Pirates' targets begin carrying small arms, many Somali Pirates will quit; the rest will get inexpensive anti-tank weapons (RPG-7's, etc).

The lack of effective rule of law is the apparent cause of Pirates. It was true of the Barbary Coast, The Alaskan Coast, and the South China Sea in the 19th C, the Caribbean Sea in the 18th C and early 19th C, and of the Somali Coast now.

 

[wbyrd]

[m;]Due to the Somali Pirate digression being directly relevant, but also being modern politics, a limited exception is being given to the No Politics Outside the Pit rule.[/m;]

The Somali Pirates lack naval weapons, too. Traveller pirates do not.

I expect that, if the majority of the Somali Pirates' targets begin carrying small arms, many Somali Pirates will quit; the rest will get inexpensive anti-tank weapons (RPG-7's, etc).

The lack of effective rule of law is the apparent cause of Pirates. It was true of the Barbary Coast, The Alaskan Coast, and the South China Sea in the 19th C, the Caribbean Sea in the 18th C and early 19th C, and of the Somali Coast now.

Since pirates tend to be opportunistic sorts, when it gets too dangerous, or too much like work. they go back to what ever they were doing before they became ocean going petty thugs.

Once the European powers decided they had enough of the pirates in the new world they were able to put an end to the golden age of piracy pretty quickly. Since most pirate vessels were not up to dealing with warships, or Marines storming their safe harbors, a lot of them just took the chance to get out of the business.

 

[Dagrill]

[m;]Due to the Somali Pirate digression being directly relevant, but also being modern politics, a limited exception is being given to the No Politics Outside the Pit rule.[/m;]

The Somali Pirates lack naval weapons, too. Traveller pirates do not.

The lack of effective rule of law is the apparent cause of Pirates. It was true of the Barbary Coast, The Alaskan Coast, and the South China Sea in the 19th C, the Caribbean Sea in the 18th C and early 19th C, and of the Somali Coast now.

Perhaps the Corsair could be a 'Tender' to half a dozen small fighters as someone suggested, making it a workable in a sort of RL situation.
I know it's a can of worms, but clearly there is some scope for Piracy in OTU Traveller.

Regards

David

 

[McPerth]

Perhaps the Corsair could be a 'Tender' to half a dozen small fighters as someone suggested, making it a workable in a sort of RL situation.

For this use the corsair should be more optimized for fighters using (in MgT:HG terms it should have fighter clamps, etc...), and even so the fighters are not as cheap as the motor boats RW nowdays pirates are using (at MCr 18-21 wach, according MgT:CB).

Also, remember another thimg Ranke said as different: in Traveller ships are assumed to be rutinely armed with anti-ship weaponry, and most those fighters will not resist a single hit. SO, where RW pirates risk losing some cheap motor boats (usually Zodiac type) if the target is armed (and, as someone said, when they find that they use to retreat), in Traveller they have to asume the ships are armed and they can lose very expensive fighters in the assault.

This aside, if the goal is to rob hem their cargo or to board the ship, in neither case the fighter is a good means to achieve it (no space for either cargo or boarders).

I know it's a can of worms, but clearly there is some scope for Piracy in OTU Traveller.

Of course there is, even if the referee must ignore some realities of life. Piracy is just too cool and adventure calling as not to have it in your TU...

 

[wbyrd]

For this use the corsair should be more optimized for fighters using (in MgT:HG terms it should have fighter clamps, etc...), and even so the fighters are not as cheap as the motor boats RW nowdays pirates are using (at MCr 18-21 wach, according MgT:CB).

Also, remember another thimg Ranke said as different: in Traveller ships are assumed to be rutinely armed with anti-ship weaponry, and most those fighters will not resist a single hit. SO, where RW pirates risk losing some cheap motor boats (usually Zodiac type) if the target is armed (and, as someone said, when they find that they use to retreat), in Traveller they have to asume the ships are armed and they can lose very expensive fighters in the assault.

This aside, if the goal is to rob hem their cargo or to board the ship, in neither case the fighter is a good means to achieve it (no space for either cargo or boarders).



Of course there is, even if the referee must ignore some realities of life. Piracy is just too cool and adventure calling as not to have it in your TU...

fighters are not the best for the job that's for sure.... But fighters can burn thrust to evade, and very quickly get inside the optimum range for a target vessels weapons. a few modifiers, to the attack roll and a crewman with a 0 or 1 in gunnery alters the odds in the fighters favor.
If the commercial captain saw six fighters each with a single pulse laser streaking towards him backed up by a corsair with three triple turrets he's outgunned 3 to one... His two or three turrets cant take out the incoming hostiles before they can cripple his ship....followed by angry pirates coming through through the airlock looking for payback.
Outgunned outnumbered, and looking at the possibility being destroyed in the attack. In addition, to the chance the boarding team looking to exact vengeance instead of just taking the cargo... it's probably time to cut your losses.