Fixing High Guard... again

[Rev Round]

" Given that Traveller ships exist in a reasonably accurate Newtonian environment, they will be pretty much *constantly* on the move. And it takes extremely slight changes in course to dodge something when the scale is 1" = 2500 km."

That works both ways. The rock ship is doing the opposite to evade. If a missile can do 20g so can an unmanned rockship.

 

[aramis]

Speed is irrelevant on it's own. Only the difference in speed matters for damage, and the difference in speeds coupled to the available ∆V.

Evading a missile on RCS is NOT doable if the missile has TL8+ ATG, and enough ∆V (in the form of reaction mass) to engineer intercept. Realistic missiles are (as in TNE) going to be 10G's... high enough that even with G-Comps, it's beyond the reach of all but the best craft. Ignoring, for the moment, Bk2, SS2, and mayday, with their 6G 18G-Turn combat missiles, we find in TNE 10-15 G 20-30GTurn discretionary burn missiles are readily done. Put a 1kt tac-nuke on, and get it within half a km (readily done) with an ATG that attempts to close towards matched course and speed for detonation.

As long as the ∆V holds out, the higher burn rate CONTROLS the distance.

It's not like Air-to-air. It's more like fighter-to-fighter, or PBR vs PBR.

 

[Whipsnade]

If a missile can do 20g so can an unmanned rockship.

Rev Round,

An unmanned rock ship is also a much larger target than a missile. Don't forget that two light second engagement envelope.


Regards,
Bill

 

[Rev Round]

Quote:
Its a game where's your sense of game?REV

"My sense of game doesn't include poor physics and poorer math skills."

Really? well build a real space battleship then :rofl:

"My sense of game doesn't include poor physics and poorer math skills."

If that is the case a 200 ton far trader can utilise the cargo hold for more weapons. Right? At least 8 more missile launchers to front of ship. More to sides top and bottom... etc etc.

The 1 hard point per 100 ton is "shot away"

 

[Rev Round]

Rev Round,

An unmanned rock ship is also a much larger target than a missile. Don't forget that two light second engagement envelope.


Regards,
Bill

Yes Bill I know. It is an expensive decoy. Albeit one with the capacity to be a deadly kinetic missile, utilising a vehicle bay on a ship limited in hard points, for an extra weapon. Perhaps a disk shaped one could literally be a shield to the mother ship thus providing extra armour beyond the armour limits too.
I'm a designer as well as an artist Bill. My brain continually thinks outside the frame. I leave the nit-picking to the code merchants. Except one little bit of code which is the 1 hard point to the 100 ton rule. Which is silly.

 

[Rev Round]

Speed is irrelevant on it's own. Only the difference in speed matters for damage, and the difference in speeds coupled to the available ∆V.

Evading a missile on RCS is NOT doable if the missile has TL8+ ATG, and enough ∆V (in the form of reaction mass) to engineer intercept. Realistic missiles are (as in TNE) going to be 10G's... high enough that even with G-Comps, it's beyond the reach of all but the best craft. Ignoring, for the moment, Bk2, SS2, and mayday, with their 6G 18G-Turn combat missiles, we find in TNE 10-15 G 20-30GTurn discretionary burn missiles are readily done. Put a 1kt tac-nuke on, and get it within half a km (readily done) with an ATG that attempts to close towards matched course and speed for detonation.

As long as the ∆V holds out, the higher burn rate CONTROLS the distance.

It's not like Air-to-air. It's more like fighter-to-fighter, or PBR vs PBR.

Blimé Aramis that all sounds good to me. 'Cept for RCS and ATG and PBR? What are they? Remind me if I already know please.

(Think I'll double the size of the engines to obtain reverse thrust )

My stretch toroidal suicide rock ships are beginning to look sexy

 

[Whipsnade]

It is an expensive decoy.

Rev. Round,

An expensive target you mean.

And congratulations on finally learning how to quote. It makes reading your posts much easier.

Albeit one with the capacity to be a deadly kinetic missile...

You still don't understand that ships can move very easily, do you? A KKM is fine against a target whose vector is know and can't be changed easily, like a planet, a KKM is worthless against a ship however. Move a few meters in one direction or another and your KKM misses.

I'm a designer as well as an artist Bill. My brain continually thinks outside the frame.

Good for you. I'm pretty creative also, but I don't think I can cheat nature because my brain continually uses math.

I leave the nit-picking to the code merchants.

You call it nit-picking, I call it acknowledging the math. You can't quite grasp that it's not Traveller's rules saying your idea is ludicrous, it's the physical laws of the universe saying your idea is ludicrous. You can't cheat nature, no matter how good a "designer" and "artist" you think you may be.

Except one little bit of code which is the 1 hard point to the 100 ton rule. Which is silly.

That requirement has been explained on Traveller fora for as long as there's been an internet. It was even discussed here at COTI recently. The one hardpoint per 100dTons rule is an admittedly coarse way to model the surface area and volume requirements of weapons systems AND their ancillary detection and targeting systems. It was a quick way to model a complicated situation.

Change the rule to 75, 50, or 10 dTons, allow missile packs to be crammed into cargo bays, fiddle with weapons restrictions all you want, and do you know what the result will be? Each ship's combat power will remain unchanged relative to all other ships because your changes effect all ships equally.

Your designs may be artistic but, in the end, they are even more silly than the one hardpoint per 100dTon rule because they don't even attempt to acknowledge reality.


Regards,
Bill

 

[Maccat]

Well this is fixing HG, for me the question would be as there are impact rules in the special supplement 3 (Missiles), 1 hit for a 50kg missile per 300mm (round down), using 1000kg/ton (displacement) we get 20 hits per ton per 300mm. a HE missile produces 2 hits, .1kt nuke 10 hits. How would this cross-correlate with HG? Off hand I'd say the colliding ship takes as much as it inflicts. Any actual collision will likely be catastrophic (crits, internal explosions). Question would be deriving a fire factor equivalent for it. (Would the reactor explode?)
The damage inflicted is by the "sum of the vectors of the missile and it's target". I'd argue a ship attempting to collide with another, assuming the target is trying to (or can even!) avoid it, would be one running (target) and one chasing (missile). This would mean you need a 3g advantage over the target, which case could very well develop at some point in a battle even if all start at 6G. Further would use Agility rather than maneuver G, we're trying to dodge and weave after all <s>.
As far as robot suicidal pilots, meh i guess. I'd think it would go against the Shudusham Concords (robots supplement). Our own history has numerous instances of actual people using these tactics. There is some fair arguement to "oh, no torpedo? *ramming speed!*". So a 10t fighter 6G, assuming it could get 300mm vector, 200 hits... per 300mm (!)
The Missiles supplement also allows faster than 6G missiles. I guess the point being you can design non-explosive kinetic-only missiles. Second being that missile bays allow larger missiles, so one could be having these shot from missile bays.

 

[aramis]

Blimé Aramis that all sounds good to me. 'Cept for RCS and ATG and PBR? What are they? Remind me if I already know please.

(Think I'll double the size of the engines to obtain reverse thrust )

My stretch toroidal suicide rock ships are beginning to look sexy

RCS = Reaction Control System
ATG = Active Terminal Guidance or Automated Terminal Guidance
PBR = Patrol Boat, River

 

[tbeard1999]

" Given that Traveller ships exist in a reasonably accurate Newtonian environment, they will be pretty much *constantly* on the move. And it takes extremely slight changes in course to dodge something when the scale is 1" = 2500 km."

That works both ways. The rock ship is doing the opposite to evade. If a missile can do 20g so can an unmanned rockship.

My statement countered your suggestion that forcing a ship to evade an unguided object would also force the ship to "abandon" the ground it was holding. As I noted, a ship in a newtonian universe will pretty much *always* be moving. It's also not necessary to "dodge" very much, especially on the scale of Book 2 (15 minute turns; 1"=2500km, etc).

Oh, and a missile is an unmanned rocketship.

Personally, I don't think that any ship can be easily rammed by another ship unless the other ship has significantly faster drives. And even then, the right approach profile will be required.

I'd also note that the INCREDIBLE energy released by an outright collision at even modest CT speeds would make ramming largely a desperation tactic and a suicide tactic. (For instance, in another thread, I noted that a starship missile travelling for only 3 turns at 6G would impart 324 times the damage as a 120mm tank shell, from fragmentation damage alone. That's 5 kg of shrapnel. Imagine what the effect of 400 metric tons of scoutship would be? Or 400,000 metric tons of battlecruiser?

This is the Real Problem with reactionless drives (as CT has). Within a short amount of time, you can generate speeds high enough to turn a 100 ton scout ship into a weapon capable of devastation on a planetary scale. No way a sane government would allow casual ownership of vessels capable of that kind of carnage.

 

[Mithras]

I'd say the Rev's tactic would make a great close-range tactic for pirates or someotherFirefly-type campaign. Its really in the spirit of close-range ruses and deception than standing up as a bona fide ship of the line weapon system!

Let's go easy.

This is fun.

 

[tbeard1999]

I'd say the Rev's tactic would make a great close-range tactic for pirates or someotherFirefly-type campaign. Its really in the spirit of close-range ruses and deception than standing up as a bona fide ship of the line weapon system!

Let's go easy.

This is fun.

Oh, I agree. And it's probably helpful to go through the analysis in case your players wanna try it. And as noted, *if* this tactic works, the destruction could be utterly staggering.

 

[Maccat]

well the missiles supplement has actual contact detonators, either within 1 turn G maneuver, or cross the vector, so i guess they CAN actually hit stuff like ships. I still wonder how to figure HG fire factors for the collision (sigh) ShipSizeCode*((ShipAg/TgtAg)/3) ?

Very fun. The ship holds 5t HE in the hold. The fusion reactor is set to overload (actually remember trying to figure out the yield of that lol)

 

[Rev Round]

Rev. Round,

An expensive target you mean.

And congratulations on finally learning how to quote. It makes reading your posts much easier.



You still don't understand that ships can move very easily, do you? A KKM is fine against a target whose vector is know and can't be changed easily, like a planet, a KKM is worthless against a ship however. Move a few meters in one direction or another and your KKM misses.



Good for you. I'm pretty creative also, but I don't think I can cheat nature because my brain continually uses math.



You call it nit-picking, I call it acknowledging the math. You can't quite grasp that it's not Traveller's rules saying your idea is ludicrous, it's the physical laws of the universe saying your idea is ludicrous. You can't cheat nature, no matter how good a "designer" and "artist" you think you may be.



That requirement has been explained on Traveller fora for as long as there's been an internet. It was even discussed here at COTI recently. The one hardpoint per 100dTons rule is an admittedly coarse way to model the surface area and volume requirements of weapons systems AND their ancillary detection and targeting systems. It was a quick way to model a complicated situation.

Change the rule to 75, 50, or 10 dTons, allow missile packs to be crammed into cargo bays, fiddle with weapons restrictions all you want, and do you know what the result will be? Each ship's combat power will remain unchanged relative to all other ships because your changes effect all ships equally.

Your designs may be artistic but, in the end, they are even more silly than the one hardpoint per 100dTon rule because they don't even attempt to acknowledge reality.


Regards,
Bill

Bill the universe isn't flat and it's not made of hexes. Please... you can argue all you like about maths. The game is based on complete fiction. That being acknowledged perhaps we can now count how many missiles fit in a spacey ship? Lots more missiles can be fired as a volley than lazers due to power restrictions right? Ok now do your probability nut over that.

By the way the cargo area, in the stretch toroidal thrusty suicide rocks, wraps round all the sensitive parts of the ship and the cargo carried is lead.

It is actually a 199ton spaceship requiring only a pilot for operation when not "activated and pilot-less" The hard point is a secondary pop up sensor suite. All the bridge seats are occupied with small fluffy toys with white head bands with a red dot to the front. The scene is broadcast to the enemy like some weird sick twisted psychopathic ranting dialogue interspersed with actual bridge shots of famous film stars shouting orders like " not that ship! the other one" just before a course correction is made. And " I am the cargo". And "I can cut a pie into three equal parts while you argue with yourself after the point forever". Always good to add a bit of colour.

The suicide rocks are terror weapons. And they are waking up!

 

[Rev Round]

RCS = Reaction Control System
ATG = Active Terminal Guidance or Automated Terminal Guidance
PBR = Patrol Boat, River

Thanks Aramis

I read them as

RCS = Radio control sock
ATG = I thought easy! Anti Tank gun (oops)
PBR = Apocalypse Now!

I sort of got the gyre and gymble of what you were saying.

 

[Whipsnade]

Bill the universe isn't flat and it's not made of hexes. Please... you can argue all you like about maths. The game is based on complete fiction. That being acknowledged perhaps we can now count how many missiles fit in a spacey ship? Lots more missiles can be fired as a volley than lazers due to power restrictions right? Ok now do your probability nut over that.

By the way the cargo area, in the stretch toroidal thrusty suicide rocks, wraps round all the sensitive parts of the ship and the cargo carried is lead.

It is actually a 199ton spaceship requiring only a pilot for operation when not "activated and pilot-less" The hard point is a secondary pop up sensor suite. All the bridge seats are occupied with small fluffy toys with white head bands with a red dot to the front. The scene is broadcast to the enemy like some weird sick twisted psychopathic ranting dialogue interspersed with actual bridge shots of famous film stars shouting orders like " not that ship! the other one" just before a course correction is made. And " I am the cargo". And "I can cut a pie into three equal parts while you argue with yourself after the point forever". Always good to add a bit of colour.

The suicide rocks are terror weapons. And they are waking up!

Rev. Round,

Wow...

... I finished reading that and this scene from the movie Tommy Boy popped into my head.

Chris Farley had taken Rob Lowe out cow tipping with predictably calamitous results. The two are standing outside an all-night gas stations where Lowe is hosing a melange of mud and cow manure off Farley. As Farley gets soaked, he starts channeling Jessica Biel from Flashdance, copying her dance steps, and singing I'm a maniac, maniac, for sure....

Lowe shuts the hose off, stares at Farley for a moment, and then asks:

Did you grow up under power lines or something?

I'll be backing slowly out of this conversation now Rev, making sure to maintain eye contact, and avoid any sudden movement. I'm also going to take the advice several members here have given me privately and put you on ignore.

I won't be seeing you 'round the clubhouse but enjoy your stay anyway, okay? And be sure to take your meds just as the doctor prescribed too.


Regards,
Bill

 

[Rev Round]

o: :rofl: Yes it was filmic was it not?

"Lots more missiles can be fired as a volley than lasers due to power restrictions right?"

Pity you backed away from answering that one because it is a huge hole in the ship battle rules actually. Even an averaged number of missile tubes in the hull (to roughly cover all hulls types) would make that first attack a crucial one. One that would change the level and type of defence carried perhaps. And all without removing the number of turrets(hard points) allowed.

"Change the rule...allow missile packs to be crammed into cargo bays, fiddle with weapons restrictions all you want, and do you know what the result will be? Each ship's combat power will remain unchanged relative to all other ships because your changes effect all ships equally."

No Bill incorrect. Design is about compromise. Aiming a Laser weapon and firing is different to aiming and launching a missile. Turrets are not absolutely necessary for missiles. The first round of fire from a missile ship might overwhelm the defences of a laser equipped ship.

"...I'm also going to take the advice several members here have given me privately and put you on ignore.

I won't be seeing you 'round the clubhouse but enjoy your stay anyway, okay?..."

It's your football and you are taking it home with you... bye bye

Will full ignorance is complete. I think it is sad. Besides Bill when someone points a finger and shouts mental health implications at someone else it usually means they have a few unsorted issues themselves. I shall not put you on iggy and will respond to your posts if I feel it appropriate to do so.

 

[BillDowns]

... As Farley gets soaked, he starts channeling Jessica Biel from Flashdance, copying her dance steps, and ....

Bill, Jessica Biehl is about 20 years too young for Flashdance. That was Jennifer Beals

 

[Rev Round]

Thankyou for the change of pace BillDowns

Here is another one

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7916582.stm

Real world with politics attached. Don't look if you are complexity phobic or politically phobic. However it is about collisions in space.

Game on...

P.S. this link is in the last shown but produced here for your convenience

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/science/nature/7257666.stm

 

[Andrew M]

Bill,

Why should there be? Honestly, why should there be a torpedo analog in Traveller space combat?

Real world torpedoes as a surface ship-launched ship killing weapon only existed for a few decades, roughly from 1900 to 1950, and then had only limited effect. All of one battleship in all of history was sunk by a motor torpedo boat, the Austro-Hungarian Navy's Szent Istvan in late 1918, and that was more due to the battleship's incredibly poor design and construction, plus idiotic operational decisions, than anything else. The IJN put her Long Lance design to good use for less than a year until the USN developed counter-tactics. Most times surface ships used torpedoes as a coup de grace option, sinking both enemy vessels that were too badly damaged to resist and friendly vessels that couldn't be salvaged or towed to safety.

As ship killing weapons launched from submarines and aircraft, torpedoes have had a somewhat longer life span. Missiles have eclipsed them as the weapon of choice due to their greater range. However, Traveller space combat has nothing resembling submarines and aircraft because the physics don't allow it.

So, why should there be torpedoes in Traveller?

Let me also point out that your 5dTon torpedo suggestion is just a bigger target for a warship's anti-missile defences. If those lasers, plasma/fusion guns, and sandcasters can already stop a high-gee volley from a 100dTon missile bay, potting a slower 5dTon target will be much easier.


Regards,
Bill

I was thinking that this might serve as a Traveller equivalent to the torpedo. You propel your missile with a stutter warp drive. The quote is from here .. http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showthread.php?t=7660

Very dificult to ram another ship or "hit" a metior. This is because the ship tunnles from ons point in space to another, up to a hundres meters or so away, with no elaps time (as oposed to that in diodes where there is a n elaps time equal to time that would normaly be taken for a particle of the given energy to traverse the tunnled distance). This means that in order for two ships to ram they have to be stuttering with exactly the same frequency, and have to have real space velocity vectors that intersect during the very short interval that they are in real space together. The realy nasty outcome is for one ship to materialise inside the other momentarilt, as their paths cross, or for the ship to materialise around a metior of some kind, this would cause enormous damage to all concerned. Still difficult to achieve if you are trying to and your target is trying to stop you.

The problems of using jump drives near large object would explain why this was a small craft weapon. The firer would probably still have to put some distance between their ship and the missile before it jumped. The weapon would be fairly expensive, very unreliable and potentially devastating. It may have the same unnerving qualities the torpedo would have had in its day.


Andrew G. Morris (UK), [first post to this forum]