CT Missile Massacres

[Bob Weaver]

Here's the situation: for practice I pitted a custom-built 800 ton merc cruiser against a 1000 ton carrier, loaded with 26 standard 10-ton fighters.
Starting at long range (50+ range bands) the merc was able to put some holes in the carrier, but not before it launched all 26 fighters, which then swarmed in on the slower merc. The merc shot down a few (fighters are one-hit kills) but the remaining 13 fighters launched 39 missiles, which had sufficient velocity to overtake the merc in the next round. Anti-missile fire got a few, and ECM took out some more, but enough got through that the merc suffered 15D6 damage results. That's a guaranteed kill. :devil:

Using only Book 2 ship rules (and associated house rules) how does a combat vessel survive missile massacres?

Best regards,
Bob W

 

[whartung]

The Merc cruiser should have run away.

Keeping the fighters at range as long as possible, picking them off, hoping to attrit them down.

But this is a classic problem of missile saturation, and shows how fighters can be dangerous. The down side for the carrier is that he lost 1/2 of his launchers on this pass, plus there's the down time of reloading the fighter and launching them again.

Time is on the Merc cruisers side if it can keep the fighters at range.

I don't know the carrier design, or load out, or the speed of the fighters (I assumed they were M6). I also don't know

if the cruiser is faster than the carrier then it can simply go around the carrier, giving it a wide berth.

At range 50, if the cruiser turned around immediately and started accelerating, the cruiser has almost 15 turns (probably start getting dangerous around 12 or so) to shoot at the closing fighters with it's 8 turrets.

Engaged in a running gun battle, the cruiser should be able to take out the fighters before they become dangerous, then he can swing around and start gutting the carrier at his leisure.

The cruiser could also take very high speed (15+) gun run passes against the carrier. The missiles way well be slow enough to simply not be able to match the cruisers speed. M6 can't match a +15 delta V. Basically taking pot shots at range while trying to avoid the missile envelope of the fighters.

 

[kilemall]

Type C should have a capacity of 24 weapon slots with triple turrets.

Breakdown IMO should be 4 sandcaster, 10 missile, 10 laser.

So a lot of those missiles should be outbound to blowing up the fighters, which will likely have minimal defenses to stop a missile shot. That's 10 missiles per turn, 30 total before reload, enough to destroy most fighters without tying up the lasers- or 30 against the carrier and lasers to stop the fighters fast before they unload their full strike potential.

CT allows 3 laser shots per turn- main firing, return fire and anti-missile, with the possibility of double fire taking it to 4 shots.

HG limits launch rate to one per turn unless the carrier has launch tubes or is dispersed, but a review shows CT has no such restriction, so assuming mounting/bay architecture allows it looks okay for a mass launch.

Now a subtle point is the way the ECM rule reads- it's not 7+ per missile, but 7+ and ALL missiles in contact detonate that turn. Very much an all or nothing proposition. That would be the main survival or not roll. Pucker factor increased.

SS3 allows spending to have smart missiles that ignore ECM and increases damage if the missiles are set to impact, but also allows sand to possibly disable missiles on the way in.

Don't forget the Type C is packing two small craft of it's own, cutters, they could be armed, launched, and help even the odds.

That's 100 tons of small craft carrying capacity, so if the Type C knows it's opponent ahead of time the cutters could be swapped out for 10 fighters- considerably evening the odds.

 

[kilemall]

Oh, and the rules probably should have stated ship vehicle mounts/bays/wells consume one hardpoint.

So the Type C would have 6 turrets and 2 cutters, and the carrier could carry 10 fighters and no defense, or some combination in-between.

 

[mike wightman]

Oh, and the rules probably should have stated ship vehicle mounts/bays/wells consume one hardpoint.

So the Type C would have 6 turrets and 2 cutters, and the carrier could carry 10 fighters and no defense, or some combination in-between.

You are making stuff up now

In CT you get one hardpoint per 100t that is used for mounting turrets and nothing else.

An 800t merc cruiser has 8 hardpoints for mounting turrets.

Carrying fighters/other small craft is a good way to increase your damage potential.

And note that you can only attack one inbound fighter per turn unless you are running the multitarget program.

 

[whartung]

You are making stuff up now

This struck my fancy.

As an aside, a lot of stuff in these forums remind me of reading recipe reviews:

"Franks Red Beef Chili"

"****- 4 stars - I made this with Turkey and a verde sauce, and it tasted great!"

Half the reviews swap out key ingredients and then rave (or condemn) the recipe.

Seems like a lot of "IMTU" gets folded in to basic mechanic discussions. Like in the computer topic that recently came up. Guy was interested in how computers played, and now it's all "well I don't do computers that way cuz CT computers are all wrong".

 

[kilemall]

This struck my fancy.

As an aside, a lot of stuff in these forums remind me of reading recipe reviews:

"Franks Red Beef Chili"

"****- 4 stars - I made this with Turkey and a verde sauce, and it tasted great!"

Half the reviews swap out key ingredients and then rave (or condemn) the recipe.

Seems like a lot of "IMTU" gets folded in to basic mechanic discussions. Like in the computer topic that recently came up. Guy was interested in how computers played, and now it's all "well I don't do computers that way cuz CT computers are all wrong".

Now I separate out the IMTU stuff much as possible, in that case I gave him examples of mixes of programs for situations, ship equipment available and opposition straight up in one post and all the coulda woulda shoulda in other posts, responding to other coulda woulda shouldas.

 

[kilemall]

You are making stuff up now

In CT you get one hardpoint per 100t that is used for mounting turrets and nothing else.

An 800t merc cruiser has 8 hardpoints for mounting turrets.

Carrying fighters/other small craft is a good way to increase your damage potential.

And note that you can only attack one inbound fighter per turn unless you are running the multitarget program.

Now now, I said the rule 'probably should state', which means it doesn't state.

But my comment does speak to the original poster's experience of the inherent flaw of how many fighters can be crammed on a hull vs. the hardpoint firepower limits vs. multitargetting.

Which I was thinking the missiles were immune to, but no they need the target program too, dammit. Better load those fighters in the cutter wells if you want that Type C to survive.

I think there is a reason they went out of their way to define carrier rules in HG.

An attach point/bay/well for a 10 ton plus small craft should be just as big a hole in the hull or whatever else the excuse for the limit is, and re-balances the turret vs. carrier design in one stroke.

Just came up with it mid-posting my reply too, feeling pretty good about it.:badger:

 

[mike wightman]

Well if we are making stuff up ...

many years ago I posted something about making hardpoints limited by hull surface area rather than volume - this was very much stolen from TNE and grafted on to CT hulls.

Hardpoints under my system were spent on things like turret mounts, bay slots, launch bay doors even m-drive exhaust.

 

[kilemall]

Well if we are making stuff up ...

many years ago I posted something about making hardpoints limited by hull surface area rather than volume - this was very much stolen from TNE and grafted on to CT hulls.

Hardpoints under my system were spent on things like turret mounts, bay slots, launch bay doors even m-drive exhaust.

Even an airlock is about the same stress point/hull opening as a turret.

So think that one through, most Type S are depicted with a turret, 2 airlocks, 2 M-drive nozzles and a cargo bay, possibly one escape hatch.

Call it 3 m3 for most with the cargo bay and nozzles 6 m3, that's 21 m3 of which only 3 is the turret.

Of course hardpoints are just a game mechanic balancing upgrades to ship and economics of earnings with ship survivability ratio to destructive weapons, but it is tough to reconcile on either a logical or a balance 'many ways to win' perspective vs. carriers.

 

[mike wightman]

The other way I have fiddled with a way to up-gun CT ships is to allow 5t barbettes to be installed above the hardpoint limit - CT requires a gunner per weapon system so this effectively costs you 9t when you take into account the crew stateroom requirement.
You also have to install a power plant at least one letter greater than the maneuver drive - two if you want to be able to doublefire.

 

[whartung]

Surface area is a more logical limitation than simply dTons, but it adds complexity. TNE used it also more to balance the needs for the large sensor array with the need to have holes in the hull to poke gun barrels out of.

As for "balancing" ships, it can't be done in a vacuum. Simple economics aren't necessarily enough. The carrier, for example, requires an extra 26 pilots -- a rare commodity indeed compared to gunner. It also make the pilots an expendable resource vs missiles, which is also a moral issue.

But in the end, it is economics that balances these things. Cheaper effective ships get built while expensive ones do not.

Traveller lacks the Rock/Scissors/Paper aspects of many "less realistic" games to force balance.

 

[Bob Weaver]

I just noticed a rule on anti-missile fire which complicates matters even more. The AM program allows you to fire at incoming missiles, yes, but only ones that are in the same range band as the ship. So AM fire is the close-in, last ditch mini-guns used once the birds are in visual range. This is according to the Starter Traveller rules, page 41. Is this rule the same in LBB2 and TTB?

 

[mike wightman]

Yes, but remember that if you are running the AM program you still get to shoot your lasers on your turn and during the laser return fire phase if you are running that program too.

 

[kilemall]

I just noticed a rule on anti-missile fire which complicates matters even more. The AM program allows you to fire at incoming missiles, yes, but only ones that are in the same range band as the ship. So AM fire is the close-in, last ditch mini-guns used once the birds are in visual range. This is according to the Starter Traveller rules, page 41. Is this rule the same in LBB2 and TTB?

Not sure about TTB, in LBB2 the rules are oriented towards minis not range bands, but the anti-missile shots are on 'missiles that have contacted the ship' meaning they are imminently to hit for damage, so effectively the same thing.

So no, you aren't shooting the incoming arrows down 60,000 km away, it's last ditch and that's it.

That ECM program is pure gold. Chances are at least one set of missiles out of three will get through, but you may be able to defer it until you have reduced the fighter count significantly.

If you go to a more laser outfit on your turrets, say 2 out of 3 are lasers, that's 20 shots against missiles without multitarget program limitations.

 

[kilemall]

Yes, but remember that if you are running the AM program you still get to shoot your lasers on your turn and during the laser return fire phase if you are running that program too.

Yes, 1 shot during your attack phase (two if Double Fire), 1 shot anti-missile, 1 shot on fighters/ship that shot at you if you have Return Fire.

I think he was tasking the lasers during his attack phase to shoot incoming missiles at range, and to my knowledge that's always been a no go.

 

[mike wightman]

Mayday lets you shoot at missiles as if they are ships at range, I think I have always assumed it to be possible in LBB2 combat too. There is a -DM to hit due to size.

 

[kilemall]

Mayday lets you shoot at missiles as if they are ships at range, I think I have always assumed it to be possible in LBB2 combat too. There is a -DM to hit due to size.

The LBB2 target program uses the term 'target' and that it is required for all fire except anti-missile fire. Multitarget uses the term 'ship target', so to me there is an inference of regular fire against ships, anti-missile fire is against missiles and they are two different things, but it's not explicit or forbidden.

I would assume the same target limits apply though, so in this case the Type C would probably still do better to attack fighters or the carrier rather then shoot down missiles at range, unless the Type C is already on a vector to drag out the missile impact time.

 

[Bob Weaver]

Fighter/Interceptors

If you look at the description of the Fighter (LBB) it is not well situated to be a missile interceptor. It can only mount one laser, and not even that if you give it a better computer (model/3). The best option, I think, would be to upgrade the Model/1 to a /1Bis, giving you 4 CPU slots, to fill with Maneuver, Target and Anti-Missile. An Interceptor is a weak force multiplier as it can only shoot at one Fighter and/or missile in a turn. A big enough computer to mount ECM doubles the price of the ship, so that's not very cost effective on a vessel as fragile as they are. Pretty much all of the damage locations on the Small Craft table are mission-kills.

I'm going to try re-running the ship encounter with the merc ship having 8 fighter/interceptors instead of two larger carried craft. I expect to still see a missile massacre.

Does a launched small craft get to add its own G rating to its initial velocity on the turn it is launched, or must that wait until the next turn's movement phase?

 

[kilemall]

Hmm, I wasn't suggesting the interceptors be anti-missile shields for the Type C, more like 'if the Type C goes down so does the carrier', or reducing the fighters so they do not get three rounds of missile fire at full numbers.

Also, might try what the guys are saying the missile movement rules are re: 5G6 burns, the missile swarm might not be so terrifying if the Type C can maneuver at range and force them to spread their shots or spend the time to close to 50000 km or less.