Fighters verse Type S scout ships

[mike wightman]

There are a couple of ways to make a more combat viable scout, the most obvous being increase the maneuver drive and agility so it is harder to hit and always have the highest computer factor your TL and power plant can support.

Still won't win against a purpose built fighter though

 

[atpollard]

Wouldn't 'apples to apples' require the B2 Scout to fight the B2 Fighter?
Is anyone suprised that a 'custom' (B5) Fighter can defeat a 'stock' (B2) Scout?

 

[tim_manley]

Wouldn't 'apples to apples' require the B2 Scout to fight the B2 Fighter?
Is anyone suprised that a 'custom' (B5) Fighter can defeat a 'stock' (B2) Scout?

I'm not surprised at the outcome. I do think a nice comparison would be to re-run it and have an out of the text B2 scout vs an out of hte text B2 fighter using as written B2 combat rules....

 

[far-trader]

Wouldn't 'apples to apples' require the B2 Scout to fight the B2 Fighter?
Is anyone suprised that a 'custom' (B5) Fighter can defeat a 'stock' (B2) Scout?

To be clear it was a B5 type S (built to B2 specs) and the reason I went HG was for the combat. It was just more interesting (and easier) than B2 for me at that moment. The thing is B2 models Fighters poorly. There's little difference between a fighter and a lifeboat in it.

I wasn't surprised at all, I wouldn't even be surprised to find that running it all B2 will find the fighters win. Especially since it'll be a squadron of 3 fighters vs 2 scouts for about equal MCr. It's as it should be, a fighter should beat a scout. How badly is the only question really.

Heck, I'd expect even a gunned up Free-Trader to wipe out a Scout in B2.

 

[mike wightman]

Wouldn't 'apples to apples' require the B2 Scout to fight the B2 Fighter?
Is anyone suprised that a 'custom' (B5) Fighter can defeat a 'stock' (B2) Scout?

The original poster asked about High Guard - and under High Guard a purpose built fighter is going to win every time.

If you want to go the LBB2 route I'd put money on the fighers too - especially since they get saving throws to avoid damage (look in LBB1 ship's boat skill description)

 

[mike wightman]

I'm not surprised at the outcome. I do think a nice comparison would be to re-run it and have an out of the text B2 scout vs an out of hte text B2 fighter using as written B2 combat rules....

Nice idea - I'll see if I can get the time - or FT can do it

 

[far-trader]

...a 'stock' (B2) Scout?

I think I found the source of the confusion, my apologies, I screwed up

Now I see the possible confusion I caused and was operating under. While I did recreate the type S in HG I forgot to follow through with the math on the fuel calcs for bingo jump out in the example above. I had the fuel right for the Scout in the workup, but not in the example. A moot point as it turned out, but the source of the confusion perhaps.

 

[far-trader]

Well, that was even quicker and more brutal than I thought it would be. It took longer to figure out the ships than run the combat. I simplified (ignored) movement.

Again an equal MCr investment:

A MCr69.0 squadron of 3 Book2 Fighters with minimal programs (Target and Launch), triple missiles, and an added gunner and small magazine in the one ton of open space (more for reloading than anything but didn't need it)

vs

A pair of MCr34.5 gunned Book 2 Scouts with minimal programs (Target, Gunner Interact) and double beam lasers.

Turn 1:

S1 fires twice on F1 needing only a 7+ thanks to Gunner Interact. It misses.
S2 fires twice on F3 needing only a 7+ thanks to Gunner Interact. It scores one hit for Computer -1.

F1 launches 3 missiles at S1 and needs an 8+ to hit.
F2 launches 3 missiles at S1 and needs an 8+ to hit.
F3 launches 3 missiles at S2 and needs an 8+ to hit.

Turn 2:

F1 missiles contact S1, 2 detonations, for 7 hits (this will be bad) for Turret -3, Power -1, Jump -1, Fuel -1, Maneuver -1.
F2 missiles contact S1, 0 detonations, for 0 hits, lucky.
F3 missiles contact S2, 2 detonations, for 2 hits (snake eyes... ) for Jump -1, Hold -1

S1 is crippled and not hanging around to be killed, it jumps out.
S2 is no dummy and follows his busted up buddy and jumps out.

Like I said, quick and brutal. Maybe a little bit luck, but the numbers (9 to 4) and being missiles vs lasers was a decidedly nasty proposition even given the practically equal to hit numbers.

Fighters win, even more decisively.

 

[far-trader]

...If you want to go the LBB2 route I'd put money on the fighters too - especially since they get saving throws to avoid damage (look in LBB1 ship's boat skill description)

You know, I couldn't remember ever doing that back in the day so I gave it a reread. I don't think I'd allow it (and didn't apply it in the above combat) in regular combat. The saving throw seems to be an example limited to a simple evasive run away scenario. Even the combat damage in the example is highly abstracted from the actual combat rules.

 

[mike wightman]

It's there in black and white in the rules - so what if it's in LBB1 rather than LBB2

I never use it either if truth be told

 

[far-trader]

New and Improved! Now fortified with Errata and vitamin D6!

In the first example fight above, of two B5 Fighters vs three B5 Scouts, I screwed up and looked at the wrong price for the Scouts. Turns out they cost almost exactly the same as the Fighters. So the Scouts lose the slim numerical superiority and die even more assuredly. Sorry about that. Now we know why the Scout career survival roll is so low

 

[Icosahedron]

You sure about that, FT? Isn't it the fighters that lose the numerical superiority?

 

[aramis]

You sure about that, FT? Isn't it the fighters that lose the numerical superiority?

No. Bk5 fighters are F*ING expensive! it was 2 Bk5 fighters vs 3 Bk2 Type S's in Bk5 combat...

 

[PFVA63]

Hi

Hi,

This is a very interesting and informative string. In some ways though the 50dton Heavy fighters described in some of the Traveller Books and Adventures really kind of seem more like small System Defense Boats (with a two man crew, small stateroom, and turret) than what I typically have thought of for fighters in Traveller (especially stuff like the 15dton RF-128 Rampart fighters).

As others have noted it might also be interesting to see how a group of scouts might fair against these other type fighters as well.

Specifically, looking through the CT CD, I see that

• in Book 2 (1981 Ed), the Traveller Book, and the Traveller Starter Edition they talk about 10dton fighters
• in Supplement 5 "Azhanti High Lightning" as noted above they describe the Rampart RF-128 fighter as being a 15 dton craft
• in Adventure 4 "Leviathan" they talk about 8dton fighters
• in Adventure 5 "Trillion Credit Squadron" they talk about a notional 20dton fighter size, but also provide stats for an 8.5dton FP-123 Gnat Provincial fighter
• in Adventure 6 "Expedition to Zhodane" they talk about both 50dton Heavy fighters, 30dton fighters, and 8 dton Light fighters
• in Adventure 7 "Broadsword" they talk about 6 and 8dton fighters
• in Module 3 the "Spinward Marches Campaign" they mention both 50dton and 15dton fighters, and
• in Book 5 (1980 Ed) while they don't appear to really discuss any specific fighter types but they do mention that on small craft "Crew and passenger couches allow temporary transportation, up to a maximum of 36 turns in combat (12 hours), and 24 hours for routine operations. For longer periods, staterooms must be provided."

As such, for a 50dton fighter (with a small stateroom) endurance will probably be very good, but for smaller craft like the 6 to 15dton fighters (and maybe even the 20 to 30 dton ones) in the other books and adventures that would suggest a much shorter endurance, and as such potentially to ensure a 24hr round the clock capability you might need to have at least 2 fighters for each 1 fighter on station, as well as potentially needing a base or mothership to operate the fighters from.

For these type fighters the comparison between fighters and scouts might be a bit different, and it would be interesting to see how these would compare.

Anyway, just some thoughts.

Regards

PF

 

[Blue Ghost]

PF, those are some very interesting points you bring up. Fighters were never a part of any of my Traveller campaigns. As such I just assumed they were all the Rampart variety mentioned in MT; i.e. a single-seat fighter that's a loose cousin to the F-16.

I figured they probably had a couple of nose guns mounted forward, but no turret. As such I thought a squadron of Type-Ses would be more than a match for a squadron of Ramparts. That is because the Type-S could mount a triple turret, and the fighter a set of forward mounted weapons, then the scouts would have the advantage.

But, as Far-Trader's sim points out this isn't the case.

What does this mean? Well, for one, it means a piece of fiction I was writing will not materialize as envisioned. For another, it means that other classes of fighters need to be addressed by the rules. Oh well. Another project for another time.

 

[far-trader]

No. Bk5 fighters are F*ING expensive! it was 2 Bk5 fighters vs 3 Bk2 Type S's in Bk5 combat...

It was in fact a Book 5 type S, to be fair design wise. And while Book 5 Fighters are expensive, so are those ubiquitous Scouts in the same design rules*. Checking my notes I goofed (mentioned above) and an armed Book 5 type S costs almost the same as the 50ton Fighter. For much less combat ability. Which is as it should be imo.

The Book 2 Fighter is nothing but a fancy dangerous name put on a Lifeboat cut in half. Really. The two are, for the same money, equally impotent as "Fighters".

* built to the same specs and at TL9, before adding all the "special" sensor gear or whatever.

 

[far-trader]

...But, as Far-Trader's sim points out this isn't the case.

What does this mean? Well, for one, it means a piece of fiction I was writing will not materialize as envisioned. For another, it means that other classes of fighters need to be addressed by the rules. Oh well. Another project for another time.

Drat! Don't let my idle hands be the devil in your project :devil:

Use "fighters" that will work for your fiction. The one I did was a TL9 Heavy intended for space combat. I daresay a TL7 model might not fare as well (in Book 5 at least, Book 2 hard to say, as that reminds me of another rule difference from LBB1-3 and Book 5, low tech weapons, basic had them, not High Guard).

So maybe the type S has to mix it up with a squadron of close orbit defense fighters? Like the type you imagined. Limted to barely getting to space. Limited by simple fixed fire weapons, and maybe short range missiles, of much less lethality than the turret versions. Maybe instead of doing 1D6 damage rolls per hit they only do 1 damage roll per hit, and at a + on the table? So the type S can laugh off all but a lucky strike. Just saying, maybe you can still make your story work in Traveller (if that was the goal).

Heck, for that matter, the Book 2 Fighter sim would have gone a little differently with some luck or different weapons. It was unfair giving the Fighters missiles and not the Scouts. But the way the Book 2 Fighter is designed I'd never do it differently (but some planetary defense organization might). And maybe the type S has a better computer with more software punch? Or even a mixed turret. Or...

 

[Icosahedron]

My fighters range from 6 to 20dT and have cockpit only. Anything larger is a patrol boat. For my smaller fighters, I often equip them with 'ground-attack' weapons derived from Striker, which are zero rated for space combat. It might be interesting to have slightly larger weapons that can engage in space combat, but only at point blank range, so that fighters need to 'buzz' a target to engage it, whereas scouts and other ships can stand off and engage from a distance. Thanks for the idea.

 

[Blue Ghost]

Heh, I guess I often let the printed word of the rules dictate my printed word

Ergo, when I write the encounter I'll liven it up

 

[mike wightman]

My fighters range from 6 to 20dT and have cockpit only. Anything larger is a patrol boat. For my smaller fighters, I often equip them with 'ground-attack' weapons derived from Striker, which are zero rated for space combat. It might be interesting to have slightly larger weapons that can engage in space combat, but only at point blank range, so that fighters need to 'buzz' a target to engage it, whereas scouts and other ships can stand off and engage from a distance. Thanks for the idea.

Putting a battlefield meson gun on a smallcraft could be a bit of a surprise to anything that gets too close...