Cruiser v Cruiser-rider

[mike wightman]

I'm interested in hearing how MT caused problems for ship design. Wasn't it's combat model essentially unchanged from HG?

It seems to me that the battle rider concept developed AFTER high guard. I'll have to go back and read the HG rules on battle riders and drop tanks.

I'd say the rules change more easily than the setting, but I never know.

Anyway, I think HG needs reworking. So does Don McKinney, by the way, which is why he's working on HG3, or was anyway.

It's not so much the ship combat or design system, but the folks at DGP don't actually appear to have read up on a lot of the setting fluff.

The fixation became BBs in big fleets.

I think the GT authors suffered from this lack of attention to setting detail and BB fixation to a small amount too.

S:9 FS clearly states that the Imperial fleet is exclusively ships in the frontier sectors with the main line of battle BR and tenders held in reserve a sector behind the lines.

 

[robject]

Ah, you're right. There it is, and the shift showed up in the fourth frontier war. Interesting.

Now tell me, because I cannot remember. When did the Imperium reach TL15?

 

[rancke]

Now tell me, because I cannot remember. When did the Imperium reach TL15?

Year 1000. However, we don't know exactly what that implies. Unless we believe that new jump drives are always invented in years divisible by 100, it doesn't mean that the jump-6 drive was invented then. Rather, it's a date chosen by Imperial historians as the time a certain percentage of Imperial worlds had reached TL15. Or perhaps a certain percentage of civilian ships were TL15. Or perhaps a certain percentage of Imperial military ships were TL15.

Note that the Imperium is said to be TL15 in 1116, despite the fact that some prototype TL16 stuff is already being manufactured.


Hans

 

[robject]

Interesting. By the charts I see, it seems that TL is typically the Imperial maximum. So in 1107, the Imperial maximum is TL 15. And in 550, the Imperial maximum is TL 13. I'll do some more digging.

 

[aramis]

One of the few changes on combat system was that the modifiers for good pilot or tactician were left out. I'm not sure if it was intentional or, as too often in MT, they assumed people knew CT well enough to make it unnecessary to rewrite some things.

MT didn't leave out Tactics; it changed the nature of tactics skill from a direct DM on a few things, to a pool of DM's you could apply to any rolls as needed until depleted.

 

[McPerth]

MT didn't leave out Tactics; it changed the nature of tactics skill from a direct DM on a few things, to a pool of DM's you could apply to any rolls as needed until depleted.

True, but if using the tactics pool rule, how many tactics skill may be found in a thousand member crew? May all this skill be pooled? how much can?

Should I follow on?

 

[aramis]

True, but if using the tactics pool rule, how many tactics skill may be found in a thousand member crew? May all this skill be pooled? how much can?

Should I follow on?

It says all on page 90. Truth be told, if you use the adv CG, only O4 (Lt Cdr) & up have access to it... So that means probably 3-5 people on a DD, and probably twice that on a Cruiser. So, if not PC's, I'd roll 1d6 for people with tactics, and level on 1d6-3 minimum 1, Rolling twice and keeping better for O6+ (the CO, and on BB's, the DC)

 

[McPerth]

It says all on page 90. Truth be told, if you use the adv CG, only O4 (Lt Cdr) & up have access to it... So that means probably 3-5 people on a DD, and probably twice that on a Cruiser. So, if not PC's, I'd roll 1d6 for people with tactics, and level on 1d6-3 minimum 1, Rolling twice and keeping better for O6+ (the CO, and on BB's, the DC)

And if you consider (as in mercenary, CT or assignment vigilante) that only a small elite are with adv Chargen and the rest are basic chargen? In it it's quite easier to obtain.

 

[aramis]

And if you consider (as in mercenary, CT or assignment vigilante) that only a small elite are with adv Chargen and the rest are basic chargen? In it it's quite easier to obtain.

I reject mixing them. If one's a valid picture, the other isn't.

If you use Basic, then ...

doing the mathyou should have a level per 25 crew or so... it's a 2/24 chance with random table selection of getting the space combat cascade, and we'll double it's weight in the cascade due to the other skills being in other cascades, so that's 2/5 *2/24 for 1/30 (=(2*2)/(5*24)=4/120). Well, really, it's slightly more than that, since only 45% of people have access to table 4... so fudging just a bit, call it 1 level per 25 people, since only about 1/5 to 1/10 are likely to be 2nd termers... who should count as 2 crew... So if we go with 1/5 as 2nd termers, and 1/10 as 3rd termers, 1/20 as 4th, 1/40 as 5th, etc... that counts 100 people as 100+20+10+5+3+2+1 141 chances per 100 people 141 * 1/25 = 5 16/25 levels per 100 people.

So, for basic, figure 1 level per 20 to 1 level per 25 crew... i which case, a CA or BB has a +8 DM on ALL rolls every turn.

 

[AndreaV]

Year 1000. However, we don't know exactly what that implies. Unless we believe that new jump drives are always invented in years divisible by 100, it doesn't mean that the jump-6 drive was invented then. Rather, it's a date chosen by Imperial historians as the time a certain percentage of Imperial worlds had reached TL15. Or perhaps a certain percentage of civilian ships were TL15. Or perhaps a certain percentage of Imperial military ships were TL15.

Note that the Imperium is said to be TL15 in 1116, despite the fact that some prototype TL16 stuff is already being manufactured.

Hans

Actually there are some hints in canon as to what it means.

In 1002 Imperial units are equipped at TL14 (Invasion Earth). In 1115, they're equipped at TL15 (Fifth Frontier War plus others). In 904 the 154th batron was reequipped, presumably with TL14 ships, which it retained until refitted again in 1084 with TL15 vessels (Spinward Marches Campaign).

I'd take it to mean that by 1000 TL15 worlds were widespread enough in the Imperium to support the general use of this level of equipment for Imperium wide organisations, both government and commercial (read: Megacorps). And that over the next 100 years or so TL14 equipment was phased out in favour of TL15. This was done in the normal cycle of attrition and replacement.

Andrew

 

[robject]

Wow Andrew, how late was TL14 anyway? If the 154th was upgraded in 904, (and more upgrades to the fleet after the fourth frontier war), then does that imply that it takes 80 or more years for a TL to become widespread?

 

[rancke]

Wow Andrew, how late was TL14 anyway? If the 154th was upgraded in 904, (and more upgrades to the fleet after the fourth frontier war), then does that imply that it takes 80 or more years for a TL to become widespread?

The Imperium reached TL14 in 700. The 904 upgrade could have been from a different TL14 design. The problem is at the other end, where it takes 80 years to upgrade from TL14 to TL15. OTOH, the 154th BatRon may have had a low priority. I'm not sure if it's a big enough problem to be a problem. I do think it'll take a lot less time to replace a design once the decision to do so has been made. Even if you go with natural attrition, it would only take 40 years. More likely, the oldest of the old vessels would be scrapped and the newest would be mothballed, allowing the squadron to switch component vessels in a just a few years.


Hans

 

[shield]

It is possible that the 904 upgrade was for new TL15 riders, coupled to the existing TL14 tender. Its the riders that are important, not the tender.

If they were new TL15 riders in 904, it could explain why they were changed out again later. The first designs at a new TL probably don't fully take advance of all the benefits of the new tech.

Same reason for the Korriaks getting pensioned off, a first stap at a TL15 design, being replaced by mature TL15 designs.

Cheers
Richard

 

[McPerth]

I reject mixing them. If one's a valid picture, the other isn't.

Well in Bk4 (mercenary), while recruititng, you have 4 kinds or possible recruits: raw recruits (no previous military experience), veterans (non commisioned basic CharGen, oveteran ficiers (comisioned basic CharGen) and elites (Advanced CharGen).

In Assignment Vigilante, the only MT supplement (IIRC) that talks about recruiting, the cathegory are more or less the same, but taking number of terms into accunt.

So, I see mixing them is an accepted practice by cannon

So, for basic, figure 1 level per 20 to 1 level per 25 crew... i which case, a CA or BB has a +8 DM on ALL rolls every turn.

(Emphasis is mine)

And that's what I meant. As I understand that the DefDM may not be so modified (though that's not specified in game, it just says may add tactics to any DM), that means (most so when coupled with the usually reduced agility when compared with HG) that quite many more hits are achieved in MT than in HG.

 

[travlar]

Well, keep in mind that canon does say that the Imperial Navy still uses and buys ships of TLs lower than 15, presumably because of easier maintenance or something like that. So the point when a squadron is upgraded doesn't necessarily tell us much.

 

[pendragonman]

Well, keep in mind that canon does say that the Imperial Navy still uses and buys ships of TLs lower than 15, presumably because of easier maintenance or something like that. So the point when a squadron is upgraded doesn't necessarily tell us much.

It is very much due to ease of maintenance. TL15 jump drives, computers, etc. aren't available everywhere.

For instance, can you tell me how many TL 15 worlds are in the Imperial part of the Spinward Marches?

Now compare that with the TL 14, 13, and 12 numbers.

 

[McPerth]

Now that I had time to look the tables, let me add some things to the use of tactical pool in MT ship combat (remember I began this discussion saying '...if the tactical pool rule is used', as I see it too decisive. Yet rules are what they are...)

It says all on page 90. Truth be told, if you use the adv CG, only O4 (Lt Cdr) & up have access to it... So that means probably 3-5 people on a DD, and probably twice that on a Cruiser. So, if not PC's, I'd roll 1d6 for people with tactics, and level on 1d6-3 minimum 1, Rolling twice and keeping better for O6+ (the CO, and on BB's, the DC)

I'm affraid you numbers are not right. In staff officier table, ship tactics is on a die roll of 6 and 9, so any officier that rolls on it (and anyone attending OCS) has 1/6 probability to achieve ship tactics (2/6 if O7+)

If you use Basic, then ...

doing the mathyou should have a level per 25 crew or so... it's a 2/24 chance with random table selection of getting the space combat cascade, and we'll double it's weight in the cascade due to the other skills being in other cascades, so that's 2/5 *2/24 for 1/30 (=(2*2)/(5*24)=4/120). Well, really, it's slightly more than that, since only 45% of people have access to table 4... so fudging just a bit, call it 1 level per 25 people, since only about 1/5 to 1/10 are likely to be 2nd termers... who should count as 2 crew... So if we go with 1/5 as 2nd termers, and 1/10 as 3rd termers, 1/20 as 4th, 1/40 as 5th, etc... that counts 100 people as 100+20+10+5+3+2+1 141 chances per 100 people 141 * 1/25 = 5 16/25 levels per 100 people.

Space cbt skill is not in adv education table, so any character may achieve it.

EDIT: and how can I forgot? In MT, tactics skill may be used as ship tactics (at -1). So the Marines become quite more decisive in Ship combat, even if no boarding action is undertaken. How can tthe Marines affect the tactics of a ship (even if manning turrets) its to anyone's guess...

Also, I think there are too many men affecting ship's combat capabilities with tactics skill, considering the ship is one single entity in combat, Idon't believe so many men cann influence its tactics to that point. END EDIT

Even so, given the high number of batteries any capital ship has, I dubt all rolls have the +8 modiffier, but sure all spinals.

And, if the tactics pool may be used for penetration too (after all in HG it affected computer size, so it affected penetration too), then most screens may be considered neutralized, and combat is still quite deadlier...

In combat among smaller ships, MT fails (IMO) miserably in the explanation of use of gunnery skill. I posted about it in the errata thread of MT.

EDIT: but perhaps this is not the thread to discuss that. Do you think it's worth a thread on its own?

 

[Garyius2003]

EDIT: and how can I forgot? In MT, tactics skill may be used as ship tactics (at -1). SO the Marines become quite more decisive in Ship combat, even if no boarding action is undertaken. How can tthe Marines affect the tactics of a ship (even if manning turrets) its to anyone's guess...

Also, I think there are too many men affecting ship's combat capabilities with tactics skill, considering the ship is one single entity in combat, Idon't believe so many men cann influence its tactics to that point. END EDIT

Actually, during and after their second round of schooling, US Marine officers will either gain some ship tactics through the Marine schools at the Marine Corps University system, or quite a bit if they attend naval command/staff schools through the NWC.

 

[AndreaV]

The Imperium reached TL14 in 700. The 904 upgrade could have been from a different TL14 design. The problem is at the other end, where it takes 80 years to upgrade from TL14 to TL15. OTOH, the 154th BatRon may have had a low priority. I'm not sure if it's a big enough problem to be a problem. I do think it'll take a lot less time to replace a design once the decision to do so has been made. Even if you go with natural attrition, it would only take 40 years. More likely, the oldest of the old vessels would be scrapped and the newest would be mothballed, allowing the squadron to switch component vessels in a just a few years.

Hans

I think its a not problem problem .

Assuming the life span of a Traveller ship is on the order of 200-300 years give or take a bit and compare that to modern ships (lifespan about 40 years). A modern ship will usually receive a midlife upgrade incorporating new technology, possibly also retasking to an auxiliary role when it ceases to be an effective unit due to advances that can't be refitted. So lets say usually Imperial ships have a major refit around the 100 year mark. That puts the 154th refit around 1000. At that point the 154th is in the Marches, on the other side of the Imperium the biggest war its ever faced is raging and a new TL is available. The Marches are quiet, the 3rd FF has brought relative peace and anyway the Zhodani only have TL13-14 (Vargr and Sword Worlds probably less), so TL14 is adequate for the threat.

So perhaps the 154th never got its scheduled refit (maybe it did though, we are getting far more out of some colour text than I think ever was intended). Probably because it was never a priority. Budgets would be down after the expense of the SRW, the main threat is in the Rim not the Marches, other newer ships have higher priority for refit, TL14 is good enough for where they are... But along rolls 1084, the obsolete ships of the 154th are nearing the end of their design life and the situation in the Marches is "hotting up". So they get replaced perhaps a bit sooner than otherwise, The old ships still have some life, so they may get retasked (riders to local worlds as monitors, tender turned into a fuel tanker or bulk carrier or the like).

I don't think the replacement would happen quickly. When the new TL comes in the oldest units would be replaced and the newest refitted as a priority. The ones in the middle tend to get missed as refit resources get allocated to more valuable (ie those with a greater useful life left) assets. The Imperium seem always to have had a solid +1 TL advantage over its rivals, so why rush.

(its late and this is rambling, but I think you'll get the drift of my argument )

Andrew

 

[rancke]

Stumbled across this thread while browsing. I must have wanted to look up some data before replying and never gotten around to it.

Assuming the life span of a Traveller ship is on the order of 200-300 years give or take a bit and compare that to modern ships (lifespan about 40 years).

I don't think that's a tenable assumption. We have quite a bit of information about the Azhanti High Lighting. 100 were ordered and 92 of them were built. The first was laid down in 991 and the last to be completed was laid down in 1003. No replacements for lost ships were built, perhaps because they were TL14 designs. The class was discontinued in 1048. That's discontinued by the IN; a number of them were transferred to auxiliary duties. So it looks like their primary service life was roughly 50 years.

The TL15 Atlantic class was produced from 1020 (possibly a bit earlier) until 1050 and in 1105 it is "fast approaching obsolescence". That's a service life of 80 years, although by the end of that 1/3 of the Atlantics have been lost one way or another despite the absence of a major war in the period.

From these examples I'll venture to say that a century is plenty of time to replace the entire Imperial Navy at least one time over, part of it twice.


Hans