HG crew rounding carification

[McPerth]

Hello McPerth,



I'll agree that my example of 5 turrets falls short, as mentioned my brain was in serious need of a nap. Let me try this again.

TL 12 HG hull has a Model 6/fib and 10 missile turrets. Per the rules 10 turrets are automatically a battery. One battery of 10 turrets requires 1 gunner with more being added as desired.

If I've pulled the MT rules together right this is how I see the crew requirement.

TL 12 MG hull with a Model 6/fib, with a CP of 45, and 10 missile turrets cost of Cr 7,500,000. Turret CP = (7,500,000/100,000) x 12 = 75 x 12 = 900. Cg = 900/45/10 = 20/10 = 2. Like HG, MT requires that 10 turrets using the same weapon system are automatically a battery, MT RM page 88. The battery requires 2 gunners based on the crew calculations.

Of course I could have missed something in MT that allows there to be 1 gunner per battery which throws my arguement right down the disposal tube.

Hi again Tom,

I'd have to dig a little more in my books, but I don't remember anyway in HG nor in MT making 10 turrets automatically a battery. IIRC, you can organize your weaponry as you see fit, up to the maximum of weapons shown in the table.

Aside from this, your numbers are correct, and if there's a rule allowing a gunner per turret, I don't remember it. In any case, see that if you organize your weponry in 10 single turret batteries, you still need 2 gunners (and its gunnery skill may substitute the tables numbers for all of them, depending on how do you read the rules...)

 

[snrdg082102]

Hello McPerth,

Thanks for continuing to humor me and hopefully I don't get into a loop here.

Hi again Tom,

I'd have to dig a little more in my books, but I don't remember anyway in HG nor in MT making 10 turrets automatically a battery. IIRC, you can organize your weaponry as you see fit, up to the maximum of weapons shown in the table.

Okay, I admit the "automatically" part was my addition and omitted the phrase "more than ten" which does make me technically incorrect. Hopefully I've typed the HG rule correctly, the MT rule any errors are from my electronic copy.

CT Book 5 HG page 90
Batteries: Ships with more than one weapon mount of a type may group then into batteries. Ships with more than ten mounts of the same type must group into batteries. A battery may be as few as one turret, or as many as ten, but all batteries of the same type of weapon must have the same weapon code (USP factor).


MT RM page 88 (copy and paste from PDF)
Determining Batteries: Space-faring craft with more than one weapon of a type may group them into batteries. Space-faring craft with more than ten weapons of the same type must group them into batteries. A battery may be only a single turret, or may be as many as ten turrets, but all batteries of the same type of weapon must have the same UCP factor.

Aside from this, your numbers are correct, and if there's a rule allowing a gunner per turret, I don't remember it. In any case, see that if you organize your weponry in 10 single turret batteries, you still need 2 gunners (and its gunnery skill may substitute the tables numbers for all of them, dpending on how do you read the rules...)

I'll concede that for 10 batteries of 1 turret in HG you need 10 gunners and in MT the same 10 batteries of 1 turret requires 2 gunners. However, in MT by combining the 10 turrets into a single battery consisting of 10 turrets you still need 2 gunners, while in HG that same battery requires only one gunner.

In CT I'm getting a handle on the HG combat system which has rules for the following skills: Fleet Tactics, Ship Tactics, Pilot, and Ship's Boat. I made a start on CT Book 2 Starships combat and then switched to HG. However, CT Book 2 Starships, page 30, does show that the Attacker using Gunner Interact receives a +gunner skill DM.

I may be in error and have a faulty memory but my understanding in both Ct and MT only the individual, gunner here, with the highest skill level is applied as a die modifier.

 

[McPerth]

Hi again Tom,

Hello McPerth,

Thanks for continuing to humor me and hopefully I don't get into a loop here.



Okay, I admit the "automatically" part was my addition and omitted the phrase "more than ten" which does make me technically incorrect. Hopefully I've typed the HG rule correctly, the MT rule any errors are from my electronic copy.

CT Book 5 HG page 90
Batteries: Ships with more than one weapon mount of a type may group then into batteries. Ships with more than ten mounts of the same type must group into batteries. A battery may be as few as one turret, or as many as ten, but all batteries of the same type of weapon must have the same weapon code (USP factor).


MT RM page 88 (copy and paste from PDF)
Determining Batteries: Space-faring craft with more than one weapon of a type may group them into batteries. Space-faring craft with more than ten weapons of the same type must group them into batteries. A battery may be only a single turret, or may be as many as ten turrets, but all batteries of the same type of weapon must have the same UCP factor.



I'll concede that for 10 batteries of 1 turret in HG you need 10 gunners and in MT the same 10 batteries of 1 turret requires 2 gunners. However, in MT by combining the 10 turrets into a single battery consisting of 10 turrets you still need 2 gunners, while in HG that same battery requires only one gunner.

There's nowhere, AFAIK neithre in HG nor in MT, that forbids you to organize your 10 turrets into 2 5 turret batteries, but you cannot organize them in 3 3 turret batteries unles you foresake the tenth one (and after all, it has few sense as factors are organized, as usually only 1, 2, 4 , 5 or 10 batteries are worth it, as the factors are computed).

In some instances, it can be better to have more batteries, even if they are with lower factors (e.g. when you're concerned about swarms of fighters, as each batterie can only fire at one each turn). This is also featured in MgT HG, where batteries are not used, when it says you cannot destroy more fighters in a volley then you have gunners, hinting that you need to dedicate one gunner to each fighter, even if you have more weapons and your result allowed you to destroy more fighters.

In CT I'm getting a handle on the HG combat system which has rules for the following skills: Fleet Tactics, Ship Tactics, Pilot, and Ship's Boat. I made a start on CT Book 2 Starships combat and then switched to HG. However, CT Book 2 Starships, page 30, does show that the Attacker using Gunner Interact receives a +gunner skill DM.

Yes, that's what Gunner Interact is for. In any case, see that it's worth only for a specific turret, so needing to have slots for one such programs per turret (quickly overloading your computer capacity to handle programs), as a difference for Predict, that only applies to Lasers, but affects all turrets firing to the same target (at least that's how I read it).

In HG (and in MT), the computer number is used instead of the specific programs for all the ship's batteries, making the program use more abstract.

I may be in error and have a faulty memory but my understanding in both Ct and MT only the individual, gunner here, with the highest skill level is applied as a die modifier.

In CT, the gunner skill is used as to hit DM by each gunner in his turret. It's not lear should a weapon need more than a single gunner, but that does not happen until HG, as in CT there are no bays nor larger weapons.

In MT the situation is quite more complex and quite less clear. Treated the issue in Consolidated MT errata, but had no answer:

http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showpost.php?p=370039&postcount=526

 

[McPerth]

As I thought to remember the MT question had had more discussion, I found the thread where it was (so forget about the no answer comment above):

http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showthread.php?t=26227

 

[snrdg082102]

Hello again McPerth,

Thanks for the reply and my apologies for the off the forum prompt.

Hi again Tom,

There's nowhere, AFAIK neithre in HG nor in MT, that forbids you to organize your 10 turrets into 2 5 turret batteries, but you cannot organize them in 3 3 turret batteries unles you foresake the tenth one (and after all, it has few sense as factors are organized, as usually only 1, 2, 4 , 5 or 10 batteries are worth it, as the factors are computed).

I wasn't clear in my earlier reply that I was specifically comparing a HG single battery of 10 turrets with a single missile launcher with a MT single battery of 10 turrets with the same weapon system.

I agree and I thought that somewhere in the replies I mentioned that other combinations for batteries where possible. I can't seem to find the post so I may have imagined the whole thing.

Continuing with the missile turret example from 2/10/2013, if the calculated MT crew numbers where right to begin with here are the crew for an optimized HG battery of 10 missile launchers for each turret configuration:

1 optimized battery of TL 12 10 single missile launcher turrets with a Model/6 computer in HG can be controlled by 1 gunner. In MT the requirement is 2 gunners.

1 optimized battery of TL 12 10 dual missile launcher turrets with a Model/6 computer in HG can be controlled by 1 gunner, while a similar MT requires 4 gunners.

1 optimized battery of TL 12 10 triple missile launcher turrets with a Model/6 computer in HG can be controlled by 1 gunner, while a similar MT requires 6 gunners.

Personal opinion skimping on the gunners is probably not a good idea, especially when you need to reload the turrets. IIRC a missile launcher turret has 3 ready missiles which takes a minimum of one turn to reload. By the time the HG gunner reloaded all the turrets the ship is probably an expanding ball.

In some instances, it can be better to have more batteries, even if they are with lower factors (e.g. when you're concerned about swarms of fighters, as each batterie can only fire at one each turn). This is also featured in MgT HG, where batteries are not used, when it says you cannot destroy more fighters in a volley then you have gunners, hinting that you need to dedicate one gunner to each fighter, even if you have more weapons and your result allowed you to destroy more fighters.

Yes, the whole point of grouping weapons into batteries, at least in my opinion, is to optimize the USP for the best possible To-Hit result against a specific target.

Thanks for the bit on Mongoose Traveller combat rules. I've got Mongoose Traveller and done some tinkering with the design rules, sadly like most gaming systems I'm a bit light on the combat rules. Okay, I haven't looked at them yet.

Yes, that's what Gunner Interact is for. In any case, see that it's worth only for a specific turret, so needing to have slots for one such programs per turret (quickly overloading your computer capacity to handle programs), as a difference for Predict, that only applies to Lasers, but affects all turrets firing to the same target (at least that's how I read it).

In HG (and in MT), the computer number is used instead of the specific programs for all the ship's batteries, making the program use more abstract.

I noticed the change which is why I focused on HG Space Combat instead of Book 2 Starships. Right now I'm bouncing between Book 2, Book 5, Mayday, and SS3.

In CT, the gunner skill is used as to hit DM by each gunner in his turret. It's not clear should a weapon need more than a single gunner, but that does not happen until HG, as in CT there are no bays nor larger weapons.

In MT the situation is quite more complex and quite less clear. Treated the issue in Consolidated MT errata, but had no answer:

http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showpost.php?p=370039&postcount=526

When something isn't clear in CT to me I usually fall back to Book 2 Starships requirements. In this case Book 2 page 18 states:

"Gunner: One gunner (gunnery skill 1 or better required) may be hired per turret on a ship."


The HG small craft weapons crew requirement, in my opinion, really doesn't make sense. Per the HG Small Craft Weapons rule a pilot is capable of firing a single weapon type, which means the crew can be from 1, 2, 3, or 4 depending on how many gunners the designer feels like stuffing in the hull.


If the small craft has two different weapon systems the pilot can handle one and a gunner handles the other or the pilot flews the craft and two gunners are onboard. With three different weapons systems onboard the crew requirement goes to 3 (pilot and 2 gunners) or 4 (pilot and 3 gunners).


Again falling back to Book 2 a small craft is considered capable of housing a single turret's worth of weapons. However, the small craft weapons rule modifies the starship/spaceship one gunner per turret by using a negative DM To-Hit.

I've already admitted to be light on the combat rules in Mongoose and I'll admit the same in MT.

 

[snrdg082102]

Hi again McPerth,

As I thought to remember the MT question had had more discussion, I found the thread where it was (so forget about the no answer comment above):

http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showthread.php?t=26227

Thanks for the links in both of you posts.

Gunnery skill (screens) of the defending gunner may be used as an unfavourable DM on the 'to hit' task

I'm apparently an odd duck since the term unfavorable in the above quoted material equates to a negative to me. Of course I'm comparing the posts from that one to the newest one and may be missing the whole point.

 

[Vladika]

Hi Tom

Hello again McPerth

If the small craft has two different weapon systems the pilot can handle one and a gunner handles the other or the pilot flews the craft and two gunners are onboard. With three different weapons systems onboard the crew requirement goes to 3 (pilot and 2 gunners) or 4 (pilot and 3 gunners).

Not quite for HG:

Weapons: A small craft may mount the equivalent of one turret. In actuality, the mountings are probably rigid, and no actual turret is present. All computations, however, may assume that the craft carries one turret. Weight, tech level, cost, and energy point restrictions must be observed. The pilot is assumed to be the gunner for one type of weapon on the craft. If additional types are mounted (a craft could conceivably have three different types of weapons), a gunner is required for each additional weapon. Exception: no additional gunner is required for sandcasters. HG p 34

There is no penalty for the pilot operating sandcasters. You could want a gunner to get any positive skill DMs I suppose.

 

[Vladika]

Gunnery skill (screens) of the defending gunner may be used as an unfavourable DM on the 'to hit' task

I'm apparently an odd duck since the term unfavorable in the above quoted material equates to a negative to me. Of course I'm comparing the posts from that one to the newest one and may be missing the whole point.

Tom, that is correct. It's a negative for the firing player, not your defender. Your gunner's skill reduces the firing players chances to penetrate your screens.

 

[McPerth]

Hi again Tom

The HG small craft weapons crew requirement, in my opinion, really doesn't make sense. Per the HG Small Craft Weapons rule a pilot is capable of firing a single weapon type, which means the crew can be from 1, 2, 3, or 4 depending on how many gunners the designer feels like stuffing in the hull.


If the small craft has two different weapon systems the pilot can handle one and a gunner handles the other or the pilot flews the craft and two gunners are onboard. With three different weapons systems onboard the crew requirement goes to 3 (pilot and 2 gunners) or 4 (pilot and 3 gunners).


Again falling back to Book 2 a small craft is considered capable of housing a single turret's worth of weapons. However, the small craft weapons rule modifies the starship/spaceship one gunner per turret by using a negative DM To-Hit.

The small craft rules in HG also lead to other problems (that I also outlined in other threads):

- Most fighter pilots are taken from the Flight scool, but the skill most thought there is Pilot, not ship's boat, that is the one used for fighters (being nos jump crafts under 100 dton).

- As you say, the pilot may use one of the weapons, but that would require gunnrey skill, a skill not in the flight MOS table, nor in any table the Flight officers (and so most fighter pilots) may use.

- Filling 2 positions is described in Bk2 (page 16) as using both of them at -1 to skill (and earning 75% of both salaries). If this is applied, fighter pilots would use their (unattainable) gunnery skill at -1, their ship's boat skill at -1 (or more likely their pilot at -2) and earn only 5250 Cr a month (instead of the 6000 for a pilot).

As you see, according the letter of the rules, single seated fighters are inefficient and not a wanted post for pilots, and the flight branch is not ready to train pilots for them (and yet are the most usual ones).

I guess something is flawled here...

 

[Vladika]

Hi McPerth

Small interplanetary craft (under 100 tons) handle somewhat differently; pilot expertise minus 1 may be used as ship's boat expertise as applied to interplanetary vessels under 100 tons; thus, an individual with pilot-3 could also operate a small craft interplanetary vessel as if he or she had a skill of ship's boat-2. The reverse is not true. Book 1, p21

HG Doesn't asses a penalty for the pilot being the gunner, only Books 1&2 do (in CT). So, Fighter pilots can be a gunner in addition to flying the craft.

Since HG does not allow positive or negative DMs for gunnery they would have to be "house rules". You can just as easily do away with the penalty for Books 1&2 as allow bonuses in HG.

For Spinal weapons it makes very good sense to allow gunnery skill to hit and penetrate. I would allow for that in any game I ran.

 

[McPerth]

Small interplanetary craft (under 100 tons) handle somewhat differently; pilot expertise minus 1 may be used as ship's boat expertise as applied to interplanetary vessels under 100 tons; thus, an individual with pilot-3 could also operate a small craft interplanetary vessel as if he or she had a skill of ship's boat-2. The reverse is not true. Book 1, p21

True, but it is inefficient to teach a skill that will be used with penalty for the primary use of the pupils (fighter crafts).

HG Doesn't asses a penalty for the pilot being the gunner, only Books 1&2 does (in CT). So, Fighter pilots can be a gunner in addition to flying the craft.

As I understand rules, what is not explicity changed in Bk5 remains as in Bk2, and the fact taht HG doesn't asses it means that it remains unchanged from Bk2, so as I read it, the problem remains (aside from the one about fighter pilots not knowing how to use its weaponry).

Since HG does not allow positive or negative DMs for gunnery they would have to be "house rules". You can just as easily do away with the penalty for Books 1&2 as allow bonuses in HG.

For Spinal weapons it makes very good sense to allow gunnery skill to hit and penetrate. I would allow for that in any game I ran.

In HG combat any discussion about gunnry skill is fruitless, as it is not used (as you hint here), but if you want to use the fighter depicted in Bk2, using Bk2 rules (as otherwise it is suicide for lack of computing power) with a character generated as fighter pilot (flight school and branch) in HG CharGen, al lthose problems remain.

About using gunnery skill for spinal weaponry, while logical as it's only one weapon (I always assumed that gunnery is not featured in HG combat, while pilot and ship's tactis are because there are too many gunners for it to be playable), but whose skill do you use, as there is more than one gunner? The average? the leader's?

 

[Vladika]

True, but it is inefficient to teach a skill that will be used with penalty for the primary use of the pupils (fighter crafts).

Agreed. However, just like a modern jet fighter, the fighters designed for HG could, and probably should, have a second crew member.

As I understand rules, what is not explicity changed in Bk5 remains as in Bk2, and the fact taht HG doesn't asses it means that it remains unchanged from Bk2, som as I read it, the problem remains (aside from the one about fighter pilots not knowing how to use its weaponry).

You may be right. I see a possibility of ambiguity as regards sandcasters though.

In HG combat any discussion about gunnry skill is fruitless, as it is not used (as you hint here), but if you want to use the fighter depicted in Bk2, using Bk2 rules (as otherwise it is suicide for lack of computing power) with a character generated as fighter pilot (flight school and branch) in HG CharGen, al lthose problems remain.

Book 2 fighters, fighting under book 2 rules, work fine. Book 2 anything, under HG rules, is toast!:toast:

About using gunnery skill for spinal weaponry, while logical as it's only one weapon (I always assumed that gunnery is not featured in HG combat, while pilot and ship's tactis are because there are too many gunners for it to be playable), but whose skill do you use, as there is more than one gunner? The average? the leader's?

I would use the senior gunnery officer assigned to the spinal weapon, not the ships senior gunnery officer. It seems to me his attention is divided to many ways. (Offensive weapons, defensive weapons, screens, and, in all likelihood, damage control for the weapons under his charge.

 

[Matt123]

As I understand rules, what is not explicity changed in Bk5 remains as in Bk2, and the fact taht HG doesn't asses it means that it remains unchanged from Bk2, som as I read it, the problem remains (aside from the one about fighter pilots not knowing how to use its weaponry).

HG is intended to be backwards compatible, meaning book 2 ships can be used in HG. However HG is a complete game in its own right at a different gaming scale and contains all its own modifiers. Book 2 modifiers are not bought forward.

If HG is being used as part of an rpg session, you might as the referee make a few exceptions to get the granularity desired for the players, but as a strategic simulation book 2 ships are compatible (can be made to equate to HG ships) but the bk 2 rules are not.

About using gunnery skill for spinal weaponry... snip

HG assumes an average skill level of 2 across the navy in key skills, all modifiers are based on this assumption. I can think of only 2 reasons for making an exception; if you are in a rpg session and a player wishes to use a skill (getting granularity out of HG) or if you are playing HG and there is a house rule that stipulates that advanced training to raise the skill across the entire navy, costs xyzMCr or perhaps more likely a percent of your budget.

Off the top of my head, for game balance that percent may need to be in the ballpark of creating the budget difference between New Home and everyone else in TCS. To raise every relevant skill to get +1 bonuses, perhaps reducing your budget by a factor of five to ten. (This observation is not based on anything else other than a view to retaining game balance, I have no idea what a budding empires advanced training schools and higher educational expectations of its students, would cost).

Getting the game balance right would be interesting, too cheap and everyone would raise everything, in effect retaining the status quo and not adding any real value to the game. Too expensive and only those experimenting will try it, and no doubt promptly be targeted by the others as a threat

The thread has strayed a little, I'm still interested in hearing what you guys do for rounding in HG.

[FONT=arial,helvetica]For Service crew do you;

• 3 per 1000 tons, ignoring fractions or
• 3 per 1000 tons or part there-of or
• 3 per 1000 tons or pro-rata rounding down (or other rounding?).

Leading to crew of, (in the same order) for a ship of 10,400 tons;

• 30 or
• 33 or
• 31 crew.

[/FONT]Tom has expressed he uses pro-rata, rounded down as do I. But HG is strangely silent on this, meaning 30 crew in this example is legal. Or that Tom and I are both wrong and it should be pro-rata rounding up meaning 32 crew. At the moment I have four "legal" answers. Thoughts?

 

[snrdg082102]

Hello Vladika,

Not quite for HG:

Weapons: A small craft may mount the equivalent of one turret. In actuality, the mountings are probably rigid, and no actual turret is present. All computations, however, may assume that the craft carries one turret. Weight, tech level, cost, and energy point restrictions must be observed. The pilot is assumed to be the gunner for one type of weapon on the craft. If additional types are mounted (a craft could conceivably have three different types of weapons), a gunner is required for each additional weapon. Exception: no additional gunner is required for sandcasters. HG p 34

There is no penalty for the pilot operating sandcasters. You could want a gunner to get any positive skill DMs I suppose.

Pesky sandcaster, of course I wasn't thinking about the sandcaster, my three weapons where a combination of missile, laser, fusion gun, plasma gun, or particle accelerator. Of course I don't recall every trying to build a small craft with anything but lasers, missiles, or sandcasters.

In short the requirement of a gunner per weapon type on board a small craft doesn't make sense to me in fixed mounts since, with the possible exceptions of missiles, all weapons have to be pointed at the target. I include sand since in order to be effective the material has to be between the firing unit and the target.

Mounting weapons in a turret and having a gunner makes sense, having different types in the same turret and requiring an equal number of gunners doesn't make sense. In Book 2 craft >= 100 dtons with mixed turrets only require 1 gunner not three.

Okay, I'll stop now since the the topic of small craft gunners is one of my sore spots with Traveller. Not that I have a lot.

Of course I've brought the above up a couple of times before without any success in getting the powers to be to make the changes.

 

[Vladika]

Matt123

I add 1 crew member for each "break point".

For large ships needing 2 crew per thousand I add 1 crew member for each 500 tons over a round 1000 or part thereof.

Examples:
10,000dt ship = 20 service crew and 10 troops/marines.
10,100dt ship = 21 service crew and 11 troops/marines.
10,499dt ship = 21 service crew and 11 troops/marines.
10,999dt ship = 22 service crew and 11 troops/marines.
11,000dt ship = 22 service crew and 11 troops/marines.
11,100dt ship = 23 service crew and 12 troops/marines. etc.

For Engineering drives I work the 100dt "break point" in the same manner. Rules do say 1 Engineer per 100dt of DRIVES. (It could be broken out by type of drive if you were so inclined.)
100dt TOTAL drive tonnage = 1 Engineer.
101dt TOTAL drive tonnage = 2 Engineers. (I'd let it go but there are rules warriors and munchkins everywhere.)
199dt TOTAL drive tonnage = 2 Engineers.
200dt TOTAL drive tonnage = 2 Engineers.
201dt TOTAL drive tonnage = 3 Engineers. etc.

 

[snrdg082102]

Hello McPerth,

Hi again Tom

The small craft rules in HG also lead to other problems (that I also outlined in other threads):

- Most fighter pilots are taken from the Flight scool, but the skill most thought there is Pilot, not ship's boat, that is the one used for fighters (being nos jump crafts under 100 dton).

I'll admit its been a while since I rolled up a character but several of mine had both pilot and ship's boat skills that came out of the Naval Character Generator process and by the whims of the GM from time to time.

- As you say, the pilot may use one of the weapons, but that would require gunnrey skill, a skill not in the flight MOS table, nor in any table the Flight officers (and so most fighter pilots) may use.

Again harking back to my pilot characters that obtained gunnery skills by rolling on the Command Duty Table or the Specific Assignments/Special Duty/Cross Training/Branch Selection Table.

- Filling 2 positions is described in Bk2 (page 16) as using both of them at -1 to skill (and earning 75% of both salaries). If this is applied, fighter pilots would use their (unattainable) gunnery skill at -1, their ship's boat skill at -1 (or more likely their pilot at -2) and earn only 5250 Cr a month (instead of the 6000 for a pilot).

Book 2 page 17 small craft weapons also states that "If a craft is armed, but carries no gunner, the pilot may fire the weapon at -1 skill level.

A pilot can attain gunnery skills by getting the right die rolls, by dispensation of the GM, or have started out as enlisted and getting the skill there.

As you see, according the letter of the rules, single seated fighters are inefficient and not a wanted post for pilots, and the flight branch is not ready to train pilots for them (and yet are the most usual ones).

I guess something is flawled here...

Not really flawed, both Book 2 and Book 5 are just biased toward large ship combat. Unfortunately, I don't recall how attacks on fighters are resolved.

 

[Vladika]

Hi Tom

both Book 2 and Book 5 are just biased toward large ship combat.

At TLs below 12 Fighters RULE in HG. You can carry the same computer as a large ship, have the same, or better, agility and use the size DMs to good effect! (TL 12 isn't so bad either.)

You do need decent size fighter though.

 

[snrdg082102]

Vladika are you trying to hijack the topic back on track

I add 1 crew member for each "break point".

For large ships needing 2 crew per thousand I add 1 crew member for each 500 tons over a round 1000 or part thereof.

Examples:
10,000dt ship = 20 service crew and 10 troops/marines.
10,100dt ship = 21 service crew and 11 troops/marines.
10,499dt ship = 21 service crew and 11 troops/marines.
10,999dt ship = 22 service crew and 11 troops/marines.
11,000dt ship = 22 service crew and 11 troops/marines.
11,100dt ship = 23 service crew and 12 troops/marines. etc.

For Engineering drives I work the 100dt "break point" in the same manner. Rules do say 1 Engineer per 100dt of DRIVES. (It could be broken out by type of drive if you were so inclined.)
100dt TOTAL drive tonnage = 1 Engineer.
101dt TOTAL drive tonnage = 2 Engineers. (I'd let it go but there are rules warriors and munchkins everywhere.)
199dt TOTAL drive tonnage = 2 Engineers.
200dt TOTAL drive tonnage = 2 Engineers.
201dt TOTAL drive tonnage = 3 Engineers. etc.

Interesting method, I can clearly see the progression for the Service Crew/Ship's Troops.

Why isn't the break point similar for the Engineers?

I'm going to break down each system using the HG rules, combined them first as a starship without an MD, then a non-starship, a starship with all three systems, and then a starship that has the JD removed. Hopefully, my numbers aren't to far off, since I just threw them together:

TL 13 2,000 dton hull

J-4 Drive requires 3,750 dtons of space Crew = round(3,750/100,0) = round(37.5,0) = 38

PP-4 Drive requires 6,000 dtons of space Crew = round(6,000/100,0) = round(60.0,0) = 60

M-4 requires 8,250 dtons of space Crew = round(8,250/100,0) = round(82.5,0) = 83

A starship with a J-4 Drive and PP-4 requires 9,750 dtons of space Crew = round(9750/100,0) = round(97.5,0) = 98.

A non-starship with a M-4 Drive and PP-4 requires 14,250 dtons of space Crew = round(14250/100,0) = round(142.5,0) = 143.

A starship with a M-4 Drive, J-4 Drive, and PP-4 requires 18,000 dtons of space Crew = round(18000/100,0) = round(180.00,0) = 180.

Adding the crew numbers by individual device 38 + 60 + 83 = 98 + 83 = 181.

Take the J-Drive out the crew is now 180 - 38 = 142, which doesn't match the requirement for a vessel with a M-4 Drive and PP-4 of 143. Apparently one of the J-Drive engineers slums as either a M-Drive or PP engineer.

Of course a shared design will probably have two engineering crew notations the standard crew round((MD + JD + PP)/100,0) and the recommended crew.

 

[Vladika]

Vladika are you trying to hijack the topic back on track

Sort of...Matt123 ask this question specifically so...In gave it to him. Happy to digress again at any reasonable, or unreasonable, provocation.

Interesting method, I can clearly see the progression for the Service Crew/Ship's Troops.

Why isn't the break point similar for the Engineers?

Engineers are 1 per 100dt of drives, not 1000dt of ship. (If you "mix" drives from Book 2 and HG then I use 1 engineer per 35dt of drives, or part thereof, for those drives from Book 2.) Try a Book 2 maneuver drive for a factor 6 instead of a HG factor 6 at 17%! Only works for smaller ships though.

 

[snrdg082102]

Hi Tom



At TLs below 12 Fighters RULE in HG. You can carry the same computer as a large ship, have the same, or better, agility and use the size DMs to good effect! (TL 12 isn't so bad either.)

You do need decent size fighter though.

I'll have to take your word, since the only time I played the fighters got hammered. Of course my character was one of the fighter pilots that survived the battle and was interned at a POW camp. At least the character survived the battle.