The definition in question is "weapon mount". There's no question about battery.
CT Errata Compendium
- Thread starter DonM
- Start date
The definition in question is "weapon mount". There's no question about battery.
BlackBat242
SOC-14 1K
I typed the wrong word (and have edited my post).
Your assertion was that "weapon mount" included spinal mounts but not individual weapons... and my query was that, since spinal mounts ARE always singular (and thus meet the definition of "individual"), how can a spinal mount be an weapon mount but not an individual weapon?
But the Weapon is not the Mount.
Refer to the ship refit rules (S5: TCS) where it says you CAN change the weapon in the mount, so long as the tonnage does not increase. So the "mount" isn't the weapon, or you could not refit.
Any how, the point of the matter is/was that by rule text and logic you can identify that mounts are spinal, bay and turrets. No where does it state an individual weapon is a weapon mount, and if there's doubt then that's why we need a clarification.
A weapon mount is a weapon component used to secure an armament. Weapon mounts can be broken down into two categories: static mounts and non-static mounts.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weapon_mount
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Weapon_mount
pendragonman
Absent Friends Margrave
Blackbat, you answer your own assertion. By calling it a spinal mount you admit that spinal mounts are weapon mounts. But by calling it a spinal mount without identifying what kind of weapon then we are not talking about a weapon but a mount only. Until you identify a weapon type you are not talking about a weapon but a mount.
Now, had you said "Factor T Spinal Meson Gun" you identify a) the weapon and b) the mount (and c) the battery factor).
I can't comment on how productive that would be, but it does fit with the interpretation that a Weapon Mount = a mount for a weapon. (Not a turret etc.)
Given the first two sentances (Batteries HG pg29) gives you the option of grouping similar weapon mounts if you have 10 or less, the triple laser turret containing 3 batteries fits nicely (it's effectiveness aside).
All the mixed turret rule does, is allow you to mix & match differant mounts in the same turret.
Last edited:
If you change that, don't forget to change these bits;
- Sandcasters require a gunner
- Pilots cannot fire weapons, a gunner must be present
- Staterooms must be 4 tons and cost 500,000 Cr
- A Bridge must be present
We can't have small craft with differant rules to big craft.
EACH BATTERY REQUIRES a GUNNER.
It is very disadvantageous.
And a weapon mount <> a weapon. I have proofed that statement and no amount of argument can change that there is no part of the rules that refute the proof - it is not subject to "interpretation". Find a rule(s) that refute the proof and present them, please.
Please errata that... please! : )
Last edited:
If you change that, don't forget to change these bits;
- Sandcasters require a gunner
- Pilots cannot fire weapons, a gunner must be present
- Staterooms must be 4 tons and cost 500,000 Cr
- A Bridge must be present
We can't have small craft with differant rules to big craft.
The rules are different for a reason. You're just being snippy now.
No offense
In naval parlance a mount is not the same as a mounting nor a battery.
A battery is one or more mounts sharing a single firing solution, often each mount having 2-3 mountings.
A mounting holds one weapon. A mount holds 1 or more mountings, and turrets are a type of mount. (A forward casement was also a mount... sometimes with as many as 20 weapons.)
A battery is one or more mounts sharing a single firing solution, often each mount having 2-3 mountings.
A mounting holds one weapon. A mount holds 1 or more mountings, and turrets are a type of mount. (A forward casement was also a mount... sometimes with as many as 20 weapons.)
Thanks.
That makes sense with the 'ten+ mounts must be grouped into batteries' rule and the HG tables showing that 30 lasers/missiles peak out the UWP for that battery and the 10+ turrets/hardpoints = 1000 dT plus ship.
I never saw the problem or need for errata (except for the quirk that one turret with 3 different weapons counts as 3 batteries in HG combat - how does one turret aim at 3 different firing solutions?)
Lol, I agree. A weapon mount is not the weapon. I don't need your proof, we agree!
& you are again correct, every battery does need a gunner. Unless it is a Bk2 design (1 gunner per turret) or a Small Craft (where the pilot may fire weapons instead and sandcasters do not need gunners).
@ atpollard
Give a professional weapon designer the specs (max 1 ton & three weapons capable of firing individually) and I am sure he/she will provide half a dozen solutions that will achieve those specs within budget. However that may be a mute point.
The other point to be made is in fleet actions all your weaponry on a particular ship is generally fired at only a handfull of targets per turn (concentration of fire & all that). Other situations are relatively rare until you get into Bk2 scenarios and there it explicitely states "All lasers from one turret must fire on the same target." Interestingly, there is no similar restriction for Bk2 missiles.
And since I have just re-read it & it pertains to Deans query relating to small craft batteries, Bk 2 rules require 1 gunner per turret regardless of weapon layout (ie: 1 gunner may fire 3 batteries).
It must be remembered that Bk5 does not supercede Bk2, in HG (& TCS) Bk2 designs are an integral part of the game.
I'll also quote this bit from Bk2.
"Turrets themselves are available in single, double, and triple mounts which will hold one, two, or three weapons respectively."
Ergo a Weapon Mount = a mount to hold a weapon. A turret may contain up to three mounts which will hold three weapons.
And of course in Bk5 (which MM endeavoured to keep consistent with earlier CT rules), a ship with up to 10 mounts of the same type may use them as very low factor batteries. Over 10 mounts & they must be grouped. And only under 1,000tn can you can mix weapon types in a turret.
All fairly consistent, if poorly written.
Last edited:
Strictly from a grammar perspective, "mounts" (in the LBB2 quote) is plural because "turrets" is plural rather than because "weapons" is plural. I am not attempting to split hairs, but simply point out that MOUNT = TURRET (or Barbette or Bay or Spinal), per standard naval parlance, is a perfectly acceptable way to read the LBB2 statement that you quoted.
Thus a Single Turret with one weapon mounted inside it is a MOUNT, a Double Turret with two weapons mounted inside it is A MOUNT, and a Triple Turret with three weapons mounted inside it is A MOUNT.
A 900 dTon ship with two Triple Turrets, four Double Turrets, and three Single Turrets has 17 weapons, 9 turrets, 9 gunners (1 per turret), 9 MOUNTS and still has the option to mix weapons in a turret or not and group turrets into batteries or not. The naval rules agree with the standard naval parlance of the time and all work together to allow LBB2 ships to do what they have always done.
Over 1000 dTons one gets into the over 10 turrets (over 10 Mounts) area where High Guard 'Battries' become manditory.
Last edited:
lol. For two years its been me accused of "splitting hairs" to justify my "flimsy" position.
Use of grammer and paragraph construction has already been cast aside by the powers that be as tools for supporting (my & I guess now your) arguements.
Otherwise I'll go back to pointing out the batteries section starts at the Individual weapon/mount level, then moves through Turrets, Bays and Spinals.
And that the games use of Batteries is based on Individual weapons grouped together, not turrets.
But those arguements too were "hair splitting"...
Personally, I call it "consistent".
My arguement these days is simply that a Weapon Mount = a mount for a weapon. Simple arguements seem to work better and rely less on "hair splitting" concepts.
Mini rant over (& not directed at you personally).
The problem is that your interpretation is linguistically inaccurate to the naval use of the term mount. (which really, is a 19th C concept).lol. For two years its been me accused of "splitting hairs" to justify my "flimsy" position.
Use of grammer and paragraph construction has already been cast aside by the powers that be as tools for supporting (my & I guess now your) arguements.
Otherwise I'll go back to pointing out the batteries section starts at the Individual weapon/mount level, then moves through Turrets, Bays and Spinals.
And that the games use of Batteries is based on Individual weapons grouped together, not turrets.
But those arguements too were "hair splitting"...
Personally, I call it "consistent".
My arguement these days is simply that a Weapon Mount = a mount for a weapon. Simple arguements seem to work better and rely less on "hair splitting" concepts.
Mini rant over (& not directed at you personally).
The mount was for the turret, not the individual weapons. And, despite their tiny size, the turrets follow that pattern in Traveller. Weapons go in turrets, turrets go in hardpoints.
Bay mounts hold bay weapons. And are swappable, too.
TNE shows us all the turrets and bays are, in fact, mounts for the installed "cans" containing the individual weapons.
Since these were done, as a group, by the same 5-6 guys in the same shop... it's likely they were fairly consistent about it. (MT is the outlier here... being done by 3 guys in a different shop... but it informs of a published interpretation by an authoritative source, and almost everything in MT is derived from CT as long as one is including Striker as part of CT)
And in MT, Ref's Manual, page 59, it lists 4 kinds of weapon mounts: Spinals, Bays, Turrets, and Gun. Since turrets can mount multiple weapons, occam's razor is that a mount is NOT a weapon's bracket.
Also, in CT Bk 5, p 34, uses "mountings" for the affixed weapons without turret.
Last edited:
Yes turrets are mounted on ships. Yes weapons are mounted in turrets.
A Hardpoint = a mount for a turret.
A Weapon Mount = a mount for a weapon.
I can't really comment on naval terminology of 19th Century relating to turrets, but I can see why you are relying on it to support your position.
At the end of the day, this section is not the best bit of rules writing FC ever did. We are left with the text and what came before it, knowing MM wanted consistency with existing rules at the time.
Those existing rules were bk2. Which allows for ships up to 5,000tn to hold 50 turrets, operated by 50 gunners, firing 150 individual weapons.
The rules in HG tone this down to "more than 10 weapon mounts of a type MUST be grouped into batteries" as well as requiring a gunner per battery and limiting mixed turrets to ships under 1,000tn. The same 5,000tn ship built under HG2 is limited to 10 laser (missile, sand, energy) weapons occupying 4 turrets. No mixed turrets & needing 10 Gunners.
But that Bk2 design is still an integral part and valid under HG2. I don't believe the HG2 writers liked it, but the reality is that it already exists within the Traveller Canon and HG2 had to be fully compatable with what came before.
Later rules developments don't really help, despite being interesting.
Yep, a Weapon Mount = a mount for a weapon. It is the means for afixing a weapon to its desired location within a wing, hull, turret or bay.
Last edited:
Errata Question for Don M.
Are Book 5 Weapons REQUIRED to be organized into batteries for combat purposes?
The combat sequence A-E on page 40 refers only to batteries rolling to hit. The subsequent section discusses "weapons" but this seems to be a more concise way to speak to the individual types of batteries rather than actually talking about individual weapons themselves. It also repeated refers to battery fire penetration and damage for "types of weapons".
AND if the answer to the first question is YES, then
What is the smallest battery possible under book 5 rules for non-mixed turrets?
Page 29 states "A battery may be as few as one turret, or as many as ten..."
Are Book 5 Weapons REQUIRED to be organized into batteries for combat purposes?
The combat sequence A-E on page 40 refers only to batteries rolling to hit. The subsequent section discusses "weapons" but this seems to be a more concise way to speak to the individual types of batteries rather than actually talking about individual weapons themselves. It also repeated refers to battery fire penetration and damage for "types of weapons".
AND if the answer to the first question is YES, then
What is the smallest battery possible under book 5 rules for non-mixed turrets?
Page 29 states "A battery may be as few as one turret, or as many as ten..."
This was clarified in the errata previously:
Page 29, Batteries (clarification): The text is somewhat confusing. In order to use the HG Combat rules, all ships must organize their weapons into batteries. All weapons in a mixed turret must be organized as single weapon batteries, even if a mixed turret has more than one of the same weapon in it, and weapons in a mixed turret cannot be organized into batteries with weapons from other turrets (including other identical mixed turrets).
So the smallest possible battery would be a single weapon in a single weapon turret organized as a battery, OR a single fixed weapon (as per the rules from AM6 Solomani) organized as a battery by itself.
The clarification DELIBERATELY did not use the word mount in it.
The rules from AM6 Solomani (published 1986) mention the fixed mounts in context with Book 2 rules, not Book 5. Book 2 already assumes all weapons can only be used as a single battery (3 weapons in a turret = 3 batteries under Book 2).
For example the 1000tn Cruiser SM listed on page 43 (AM6) has 10 triple laser turrets. Book 2 does not have battery rules and in Book 2 combat it essentially has 30 lasers firing independently at up to 10 targets.
Under Book 5 (or TCS?) it is possible to reconfigure at a shipyard to group those lasers into larger batteries (making many of the 10 gunners redundent), but the player does not have to do that and can use that Cruiser in Book 5 combat with 30 batteries of lasers. (I would also keep the restriction that each turret engages one target with its three laser batteries.)
Just food for thought.
