Vladika
SOC-14 1K
Funny, I was just reading that old thread...I'd probably be drawn and quartered though if started a rehash?
Cruiser v Cruiser-rider
- Thread starter Garyius2003
- Start date
Funny, I was just reading that old thread...I'd probably be drawn and quartered though if started a rehash?
Probably not a coincidence. I've started to look through the Who's Online pages and clicking on threads that look interesting. Including the threads the various bots and spiders and what-they're-called are looking at.
Rehash, perhaps. New views and insights, not at all. Such are always welcome.
Hans
I agree that can take you to some very old and very interesting threads you'd never find alone.
This is the oficial policy, as stated in Aramis' announcement about thread necromancy.
I'd love to rehash this topic.
My take-aways were:
1. The usefulness of Battle Riders may tend to be technology-dependent.
2. The differences between BRs and Battleships go beyond firepower, probably in several ways.
3. A BR may become slightly more strategically and operationally flexible by having a jump drive, with jump fuel carried in drop tanks.
4. A BR might possibly become more flexible by also carrying the jump drive in a drop tank... discuss.
5. Naval fleets appear to be built (and replaced) at a convenient TL relative to the regions of space they serve.
6. Naval elements often have a half-life of 60 years, but there could be many reasons for this.
My take-aways were:
1. The usefulness of Battle Riders may tend to be technology-dependent.
2. The differences between BRs and Battleships go beyond firepower, probably in several ways.
3. A BR may become slightly more strategically and operationally flexible by having a jump drive, with jump fuel carried in drop tanks.
4. A BR might possibly become more flexible by also carrying the jump drive in a drop tank... discuss.
5. Naval fleets appear to be built (and replaced) at a convenient TL relative to the regions of space they serve.
6. Naval elements often have a half-life of 60 years, but there could be many reasons for this.
IMHO, as they must fit into their BTs, the use of drop tanks does not help here against having them integral, as you must either accomodate the drop tanks (both in options 3 and 4) too in the Tenders or the capacity will be of little use.
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
You need several types of tender.
A jump 4 tactical tender which carries riders.
A jump 4 tactical tender that can carry riders and their drop tanks.
A jump 6 strategic tender that can carry riders with or without drop tanks, jump 3 BBs - anything in the fleet.
An oiler/refueler, call it what you will, that carries drop tanks an fuel for other vessels.
A jump 4 tactical tender which carries riders.
A jump 4 tactical tender that can carry riders and their drop tanks.
A jump 6 strategic tender that can carry riders with or without drop tanks, jump 3 BBs - anything in the fleet.
An oiler/refueler, call it what you will, that carries drop tanks an fuel for other vessels.
Vladika
SOC-14 1K
With you all the way! "Tugs" to skim GG with drop tanks for refueling. Each J"x" Identical for cost effectiveness and parts. Tenders (shipyards) carrying standard Jump Drives for replacement in place...
Last edited:
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
I wish there had been rules in HG or TCS for building the support ships the fleet needs.
Mobile repair jump frames, engineering vessels, supply ships, hospital ships that sort of thing.
If you dig through other Traveller versions - GT, T4, MgT etc. - you can find stuff to adapt to HG, but it would have been nice if ha been in the original TCS.
Mobile repair jump frames, engineering vessels, supply ships, hospital ships that sort of thing.
If you dig through other Traveller versions - GT, T4, MgT etc. - you can find stuff to adapt to HG, but it would have been nice if ha been in the original TCS.
Something I'm still missing are lists of different types of auxiliaries with rules for estimating numbers.
Hans
CT only
In this case, I see BR/BT combos not available before TL 12, as the main limit (IMHO) is computing power and the limits that puts on the size of your tender.
Before that, the máximum size you may build is Q (99 kdton), too small to effectively carrying BRs (unless you want to ressort to AndreaV single BR Tender theories, see this thread from there on and this one)
As for MT, the CPs limit the computers have give similar results. I don't know enough about other versions to give my opinion about that.
You asume you fleet is TL 15
. In any case, that would mean (IMHO) too many Tenders taht will make the BT/BR combo more expensive (at strategic scale), so depriving it of one of their main advantages.
Vladika
SOC-14 1K
You asume you fleet is TL 15
Not really. Mike has suggested many uses for Tender/Rider combinations, true, but they are still mated. The other main use suggested simply uses a Tender with drop tanks in place of an already necessary Tanker.
This Tender, as a Tanker, isn't charged against the Tender/Rider vs BB (or CC). Alternately this "Tanker" can adopt the role of a Tender when the need arises.
tcs was all about the battle itself. anything leading or aftermath action was completely ignored.
I love all this talk about mixing various jump capabilities in one "fleet". won't work. as a strategic situation develops the fleet forces either will be limited to the slowest boats or will be divided as the fleet breaks up into squadrons based on jump capabilities.
CT only
In this case, I see BR/BT combos not available before TL 12, as the main limit (IMHO) is computing power and the limits that puts on the size of your tender.
Before that, the máximum size you may build is Q (99 kdton), too small to effectively carrying BRs (unless you want to ressort to AndreaV single BR Tender theories, see this thread from there on and this one)
As for MT, the CPs limit the computers have give similar results. I don't know enough about other versions to give my opinion about that.
You asume you fleet is TL 15
A TL12 computer can handle up to 100KTd. that's good enough for a bunch of destroyer-riders in the 5KTd Factor C meson riders. (They're unarmored, low agility, and low G)
A 100KTd Cruiser-tender at TL 12 J3 1G is using about 60% on ship; that's 3-4 10KTd decent factor C Meson riders, or 6-8 crappy 5KTd popcorn ones.
And how will those destroyer/riders last against the accompainign fighters (of the same TL)?
I assume any tender also has its fighter wing, algng with the riders...
Vladika
SOC-14 1K
I think this MAY be a portion of the answer to Hans's recurring issues of BB vs BT/BR doctrine of the IN. At various times the concept simply WON'T work. At others it work alarmingly well.
Anyone in, or having been in, the military knows how slow things (doctrinally) change. Every senior officer is afraid to get away from the tried and true. And then there is the "not invented here" syndrome.
I am in agreement with Hans about something WRONG with setting vs rules. I differ in the solution.
My thoughts are that the rules are "OK" (yes there are problems) and viable for gaming, though possibly not for world building. The setting is incomplete, and BT/BR fleets are much more common, though held in reserve. As they are in reserve, and at depots and Naval bases, few average citizens get much chance to see them. They are probably at least classified and therefore not talked about (much) by active duty personnel, or those retired who value their retirement pensions and freedom. (Prison Planet anyone?)
i
The heavies? Reasonably well, because at 10KTd, they're AV12 and have some point defense capability, and agility 6.
I don't agree. First, while the bulk of a fleet should probably be of the same jump rating, the fleet may need specific elements that can range farther - I'm thinking communications couriers and scouts here.
Second, strategic circumstances may leave the admiralty little choice but to mix fleets. Lower-jump ships tend to pack more punch and protection, higher-jump ships have strategic maneuverability advantages. The two types would probably be kept separate at the start of a conflict, but as the months pass circumstances may force mixing in order to bring enough power to bear on a specific system.
One thought on the BB vs BR issue is that BRs are purely intended for naval combat against forces of approximately equal caliber. For showing the flag, suppression of planetary revolts, show-of-force missions against pocket empires of inferior technological capabilities and such, a single well-armored jump-capable multi-role ship can be more useful at a lesser cost than a battletender. The fleet spends more time in "peace" than in war with equals. A mixed fleet with BBs and CAs serving dynamic peacetime roles while powerful rider squadrons waited in the rear to respond in the event of war would seem to be the ideal.
print out a map of the spinward marches. draw up some counters representing fleet elements for both sides. determine some objectives and starting points. walk through their interactions over a few months or years (game time). no need for anything elaborate or exact, just run the elements in a reasonable manner. see what happens. rebuild your fleet elements. try it again. get a feel for how things flow and what is needed, what works and what doesn't. now try it with a friend - you run one side, he the other, just so you get a different view of how to do things. see what happens.
Vladika
SOC-14 1K
For the Spinward Marches you have to take the high population, high tech worlds. You are never going to be able to mass enough strength with a J4 against a J2 fleet unless you are using Tenders with either BRs or Crs. An invader simply can not make proper repairs to damaged ships. A few "beaten" J2 Fleets latter and your J4 Fleet may as wells not exist a few battles down line.
The Defender doesn't have to hold every system, just the right ones. Take all the low tech low population worlds you want; it doesn't even scratch my tax base nor building and repair ability. Refuel all you want and drive deeper inward. Sooner or latter your weakened fleet is going to find itself in the wrong system. Those systems are predictable.
A J4, non Tender, Fleet is doomed from the outset. Forget ship for ship. we're talking Credit for Credit ship building and having more than enough to go around.
Defense in depth and shorter interior lines of communication WILL win out in the end. (Unless the defender is way beyond inept!)
Similar threads
