Heavily Armed and Dangerous

[far-trader]

So there I was minding somebody else's business when Savage strolled by and hit me upside the head with an inspiration wrapped around a brick. While I watched all the new stars forming constellations the idea soaked into the open gash in my head.

It all started innocently enough with that good soul Tom Rux asking about the differences in design systems, vis-a-vis hardpoint limits or none.

Savage's solution inspired a tie in with an earlier problem/idea I had and wasn't sure what to do with. I was looking for ways and means to increase the Structural Integrity of ships (select certain ships for mtu) using T20.

His solution just screamed reduce SI for weapons over the "safe" limit. It could maybe be as simple as treating the ship as that much smaller for SI calculations. For example a 400ton ship with 6 turrets is 2 turrets over the safe limit so for SI its treated as a 200ton ship.

Naturally this solved my earlier dilemma too. If a ship is below the "safe" limit its SI is increased. For example a 400ton ship with only 2 turrets (like the old Sub Merch) would be treated as a 600ton ship for SI calculations.

So what does everybody think? Where's the abuse potential? Does it break at kiloton levels? It seems pretty simple and elegant to me but right now its still got that glow of wondrous newness

Non T20 comments more than welcome here of course, the idea could be adapted for other purposes in other design systems.

 

[mike wightman]

This is going to get a bit tricky to follow, scattered across three threads

Why not fit internal armour or compartmentalisation like in GT: Starships to increase the SI too?

 

[far-trader]

Originally posted by Sigg Oddra:
This is going to get a bit tricky to follow, scattered across three threads

Yeah, and I posted it to the T20 Yahoo Group too

I'll try to track it all and compile it into a single meshed writeup.

Why not fit internal armour or compartmentalisation like in GT: Starships to increase the SI too?

Hmm, internal armrouring would be a good addition. Not sure how GT does it (no books) so I'd just be taking a shot in the dark based on FF&S(1) rules for internal armour. How do they do compartmentalisation? Just the basics or an outline would help.

 

[mike wightman]

"Heavy compartmentalisation" adds 10% of the hull mass to the ship's total mass, while "total compartmentalisation" adds 20% of the hull mass to the ship's total mass.
I've no idea what benefits the different levels of compartmentalisation (basic, heavy, or total) have for the ship though

I'd better go and read through GT again.

 

[savage]

Yeah Gaming Glen,

There are many versions of traveller and the lines occassionally get thin. I'd suggest assuming a basic element of compartmentalisation.

I toured the Iowa when it was still active. You enter the bridge and there is an inner bridge armoured. 3 feet of steel...definately not normal.
No reason that more extensive compartmentalisation couldn't occur (aka 10%...20%).

Savage

 

[shield]

FF&S allows you to armour internal elements (your choice of which ones). You just have to add up the volume and armour it like a second hull.

Incoming fire now blasts anything on the surface, penertrates the outer hull, destroys whatever is inside, then hits the inner armoured area and must attempt to penertrate the inner armour (but with a much reduced energy).

Cheers
Richard

 

[The Oz]

I have a house rule that allows you to use HG to "partially armor" a ship: you pick which components you want to armor and then calculate the needed volume of armor as if that was all of the ship. However, I add a premium on the cost of the entire hull to allow for additional bracing to handle the stresses of having part of the ship armored and part not armored.

I use it with a modified CT starship hit location table.

 

[marvo]

I like the sound of this but as you mentioned it probably breaks down on very large ships. On a large ship you have the spinal mount as the main weapon so why not take off a load of those hardpoints and just leave those required for defence. This would significantly increase the SI.
On a planetoid hull, things could get a little weird.

 

[TJP]

Originally posted by Sigg Oddra:
"Heavy compartmentalisation" adds 10% of the hull mass to the ship's total mass, while "total compartmentalisation" adds 20% of the hull mass to the ship's total mass.
I've no idea what benefits the different levels of compartmentalisation (basic, heavy, or total) have for the ship though

Well, according to GURPS Vehicles (2nd ed), one benefit is having more resistance to the loss of hull integrity. On p.179 under Damage Effects it says: "A hit location that has lost 10% of its hit points (20% if the vehicle has heavy compartmentalization, 50% if total compartmetalization) is no longer sealed."

BTW, "compartmentalization" must be the longest English word I know of. Whew.

 

[mike wightman]

I never thought of looking there, thanks

By the way, smiles is the longest word in the English language

 

[aramis]

Antidisestablishmentarianism was, last i checked, the lognest word recognized by the ALA for American English....

Traveller has never been clear when depressurization occurs, but has always been clear that at some point, it will...

MT noted that a result of a HiPen decompresses a vehicle.