High Guard 1.5 (<1979 edition)

[robject]

Thinking out loud.

And focused on 50t and 100t bays. Desperately ignoring 10t for now.

HG1.5

Factor  LBay M    Points      Notes
  1        <         120      Turrets or SBay
  2        <         360      Turrets or SBays
  3        1         500
  4        2       1,000
  5        4       2,000
  6        7       3,500
  7       10       5,000
  8       15       8,000
  9       20      10,000
  A       30      16,000
  B       40      21,000
  C       60      32,000
  D      100      54,000
  E      200     108,000
  F      400     216,000
  G      800     432,000

 

[AnotherDilbert]

(1) 100 LBays is 100 LBays

Agreed, it's at least a simple concept to start with.

(2) HG1 for Capitals

or, Turrets are for the Unarmored

I don't agree: Escorts and fighters are part of the fleet.

HG is THE design system for small craft including fighters.

(3) No Capital Screens

But it seems to me that the gigantic ships get short shrift in the defense department, and I think you guys see this as well. They DO need to be tougher.

Agreed.

Million-ton supercargoliners are not tougher.

Therefore, it is the defensive choices that make a ship tougher. A larger ship has room to spare to make it even tougher.

Basically agreed, but it becomes tricky to balance sufficiently. Escorts should still have some chance of damaging a BB, at least en masse. 2D does not give a lot of room...

Still, a megaton merchantman should be tougher than a kiloton merchantman. But agreed, a warship should be tougher still.

Mike suggested a bonus, which makes sense, but what it is implying, I think, is that defenses scale with tonnage.

The advantage is that it's simple and is easy to balance.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Thinking out loud.

HG1.5

Factor  LBay M    Points      Notes
  1        <         120      Turrets or SBay
  2        <         360      Turrets or SBays
  3        1         500
...
  E      200     108,000
  F      400     216,000
  G      800     432,000

15 factors gives us more room to include turrets. I don't think we really need to consider larger ships than the Tigress (~400 bays).

How about:

0          0
1         12         1 wpn
2         27         1 turret
3         55         2 turrets
4        110         4 turrets
5        220         7 turrets
6        438         1 bay ≈ 12 turrets
7        875         2 bays
8      1 750         4 bays
9      3 500         7 bays
10     7 000        13 bays
11    14 000        25 bays
12    28 000        50 bays
13    56 000       100 bays
14   112 000       200 bays
15   224 000       400 bays ≈ 6200 turrets
16   448 000       800 bays

Small batteries (roughly turret sized) has very little chance penetrating hitech defences in HG'79. If we remove the small batteries, we would have to rebalance the penetration tables completely.

 

[robject]

OK, that's fine. I tend to forget that the ships in the 1,000 to 5,000 ton range rely heavily on 2, 4, 6, or 8 turret batteries and 1 or 2 Bays.

I see a big, likely artificial, jump from the Sloan (5kt) to the Gionetti (30kt).

After that we jump to the Lightning, Arakoine et al with 4, 24, 30, 32, or 40 Bays and 1, 2, 3, 6, or 9 LBays.

Then the 100k+ with 50-430 Bays, 3-50 LBays...

And that *seems* OK, since there's not much tonnage difference between 8 bays and 14, or 15 and 25, or 25 and 50. Might be a little coarse after that?

Stretch out the batteries a bit more for those midsize ships.

1    1 wpn
2    1 turret
3    2 turrets
4    4 turrets
5    6 turrets
6    8 turrets
7    1 Bay ≈ 13 turrets
8    2 Bays  ≈ 25 turrets
9    3 LBays or 4 Bays
A    6 LBays or 7 Bays
B    9 LBays or 11 Bays
C   25 LBays or 31 Bays
D   50 LBays or 63 Bays
E  100 LBays or 124 Bays
F  200 LBays or 249 Bays
G  400 LBays ≈ 6200 turrets = 498 Bays
H  800 LBays = 996 Bays

An interesting side effect here is that if a ship is VERY large, it could be beneficial to use 50t bays over 100t bays.

 

[kilemall]

So do I but that is not up for discussion as the aim is to preserve as much of HG79 (and even HG80) as can be done while 'fixing' the issues.

Is it? Is that the OP goal?

I would interpret making it an OTU game differently.

 

[robject]

The assumption, until we decide it's not true, is that a few tweaks to HG79 could be sufficient to make it work for the OTU. Depending on what "few" means, and how extensive "tweaks" are.

Let's say "few" means "seven plus or minus two."

---

So far I think the current tweaks being considered are:

(1) The 1000t normalization goes away. This means all those points need to be handled, so:

(2) The weapon code table is re-balanced.

(3) If (2) is as extensive as I think it is, then the combat tables will get extended as well.

(4) Large hulls should be able to load up on considerable defenses, inadequate currently.

(5) Spines are not as devastating as they ought to be.

 

[robject]

OP updated with combat tables. They're reasonably close to the originals... I think... I'll have to look at them more carefully.

 

[robject]

Wikipedia:

The second-system effect

The second-system effect proposes that, when an architect designs a second system, it is the most dangerous system they will ever design, because they will tend to incorporate all of the additions they originally did not add to the first system due to inherent time constraints. Thus, when embarking on a second system, an engineer should be mindful that they are susceptible to over-engineering it.

HG1 was the second system for Traveller.
HG2 was the second system for High Guard.
HG1.5 is also a kind of second system for High Guard.

 

[mike wightman]

As Another Dilbert has said - keep it simple.

Take HG79, fix the issues with the minimum adjustment you can get away with to produce a better game.

Then use to produce BCS for T5

 

[mike wightman]

Statistical combat resolution is the route taken by HG80, I thought we were trying to build a game where you get to roll a couple of dice for each weapon type fired...

 

[robject]

Statistical combat resolution is the route taken by HG80, I thought we were trying to build a game where you get to roll a couple of dice for each weapon type fired...

You're right. I was running down a rabbit hole.

 

[mike wightman]

I once toyed with a system to 'build the counters' that you get in I:E, FFW etc.

The combat matrices of those games could then be used to resolve fleet engagements.

Here is the link to the thread from seventeen years ago

Abstract combat thoughts

Just something to play around with. Battleships and tanks have long had to balance three factors - offensive punch, defence(armour+screens+point defence), and mobility(agility). Let's start with a TL9 and factors of 3-3-3. You can lower one factor to increase one of the other two. For each...

www.travellerrpg.com

 

[robject]

^ I did something like this as well. Thanks for the link.

 

[robject]

THE IDEA

Larger ships can be more effective at power projection. This translates to hulls taking more abuse before suffering damage, and potentially dealing damage more effectively.


POWER PROJECTION MODIFIER

Battleship hulls in particular (a) take more abuse before suffering damage, and (b) potentially deal damage more effectively. The "easiest" way to do this is to have a modifier based on main hull size.

My modifer table currently looks like this, based on discussions here.

3000 (C) thru (K) 19,999 tons = +1
20k (L) thru (P) 99,999 tons  = +2
100k (Q) to (Q) 199,999 tons  = +3
200k+ (R and up)              = +4

This modifier is applied (a) as a defensive DM on all attacks, and (b) as an additional number of damage rolls per hit for the spine, if one is installed.

"Main hull" means the central operational hull, discounting attached or modular sub-hulls.

 

[robject]

OK here's where I'm at today.

---

(1) The 1000t normalization is replaced by a straight mapping of total points to attack factors.

(2) There are fifteen battery factors instead of 9; the highest 6 are actually Factor-9's with a defensive -DM included. This preserves the combat tables as-is, but it produces rather nastily powerful batteries.

(3) Larger hulls get a defensive DM against all attacks. Is it enough? I doubt it.

(4) Spines get additional damage rolls when they hit. It's a coarse solution but it's tidy. It it enough? I doubt it.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

3000 (C) thru (K) 19,999 tons = +1
20k (L) thru (P) 99,999 tons  = +2
100k (Q) to (Q) 199,999 tons  = +3
200k+ (R and up)              = +4

I like the idea, but a DM+4 is huge on a 2D roll. E.g. it means that a factor 9 nuke can no longer penetrate a factor 9 damper, making large ships practically immune to many weapons.

I don't think the DM is even necessary, especially if defences are scaled up like weapons. A cruiser will have a hard time penetrating the defences of a battleship without the DM...


I would advice making some basic ships and shoot them at each other to see the effects before adding huge DMs.

 

[robject]

^ Good advice of course. Playtest? What's that for?? Yeahhhh....

I guess defenses automagically get beefier if the weapon requirement goes up, but ... I'm not sure. Hence the playtesting, yeah.

 

[robject]

A cruiser will have a hard time penetrating the defences of a battleship without the DM...

That's the assertion. Playtesting will find out if that's true.

Kokirrak BB-R436664-999949-AACTA-0                        TL 15
Refinery=12 hours. Troops=2,000. Magazine. Aux Bridge.    Crew=1930.


TONS            COMPONENT            NOTES         
(199,995)       Close Str Hull.      + Computer-6
   8,000        Bridge + Aux
   8,000        Jump-3
  40,000        Maneuver-6
  12,000        Powerplant-6
  72,000        Fuel                 + Scoops
   5,000        Fuel Refinery        12 hours
      80        Operations Crew (20)
   3,440        Engineering Crew (860)
   4,200        Gunnery Crew (1050)
   3,000        Armor-9
     200        T3 Sandcasters        Factor-9
      40        Meson Screen        Factor-9
      20        Nuke Damper        Factor-9
      25        Black Globe-4        Factor-4 (artifact)
   2,000        LBay Repulsors        Factor-9
     200        T3 Beam Lasers        Factor-A
   2,500        Bay Fusion             Factor-A (almost B)
   1,650        S-Bay PA            Factor-C
   7,000        Meson Spine T
   2,500        Bay Missile        Factor-A
     250        Magazine             (why not?)
   8,000        Troops’ quarters        2,000 troops

  23,045 Tons Free

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Thats a very modest HG1.5 battleship. Give it say 750 sand turrets for a factor B defence against everything, to see how fun that is for a cruiser...

 

[robject]

I very quickly got lost determining the turret budget from the bays installed. I need to notate it rather than try to hold it in my head.