How cheap can you make a Commerce Raider?

[Matt123]

Just a thought or two on Commerce Raiders.

Light commerce raiders of 4-600 tons might ideally be custom made for the job, but more typically would be impressed ships tasked with raiding. Whilst larger commerce raiders will typically be military ships. But I'm more interested here in light raiders, how 'cheap' can you make a raider?

So what makes a good light raider? If you consider a raiders main task is to be a threat and cause appropriate (asset sapping and capacity reducing) counter measures, two aspects come to mind.

1. being a threat
2. surviving the counter measures & ensuring the threat is maintained

How much of a threat does a raider need to be? IMHO not much. The capacity to damage lightly armed merchants and launch a volley of missiles from very long range at lightly defended installations is about all that is needed. The success of any attack is inconsequential when weighed against the defenders response. The response is what will provide the real damage to the enemies war effort.

To be such a threat (in HG terms), a ship needs perhaps a model 3 or 4 computer to give it an edge over merchants, nice would be agility 1 or 2 to give it a defensive edge and all the turrets it can carry, at least one of which (or perhaps the ships boat?) should carry missiles. Pulse lasers are a must, with thier extra damage capacity against un-armoured merchants, causing MD damage (10/36) 28% of the time.

To survive the counter-measures needs consideration of the risks a raider faces.
1. Attacking lighly armed merchants
2. Being attacked by escorts, q-ships or heavily armed merchants
3. Refueling & Supply operations

The consequences of battle damage for a raider are quite serious, there are no ports available for repairs and the way home involves travelling through systems potentially occupied by major war fleets. At best field repairs will keep the ship operational with on-going issues. At worst the damaged raider will have to find a remote world or asteriod belt to take refuge on, until they feel hostilities have ended or freindly forces catch up with them. Getting news on the progress of the war when hiding behind enemy lines however may be problematic.

Attacking lightly armed merchants. The ideal scenario is that the crew will surrender as soon as you turn up. Two things are required for this to occour, a belief they have little chance of getting away (which may require a MD hit) and a belief that surrendering the ship will not amount to suicide (which means finding a way of returning captured crew & passengers in good condition to thier own side in order to spread the propaganda. Perhaps save them for when being chased by escorts, chuck them out in a captured lifeboat with limited air, but working comms...).

Avoiding damage from lightly armed merchants that have not surrendered, will be aided by computer size differance, agilty if available and Sand which is also helped by computer size differance. But the need for Sand must be weighed up against the need for offensive weaponry. On the whole however the ability to prevent damage occuring has to rate higher than extra offensive capability. Even if the merchant escapes, the attack will still achieve the desired strategic purpose - provided the raider is still operational.

Being attacked by escorts, q-ships or heavily armed merchants. In all three cases, the best option is to leave asap. Preferably before combat, but if surprised (possibly by Q-ship or heavily armed merchant) at the first opportunity. Even if the raider can win the combat, the damage taken will potentially hand a strategic victory to the defenders if the raider has to undertake repairs and possibly retire from raiding.

In many cases escape using the maneuver drive will be problematic, either through potential MD damage or the escort or Q-ship having a higher MD rating. Escape via jump is the most reliable method of escape, but this requires fuel for at least a J1 - after potentially taking numerous fuel-n hits, each causing at least 10 ton of fuel loss. On the positive side however a J1 escape should be possible after only 1 round of combat and can put the raider anywhere within the existing system, as well as 1 parsec away.

But, and this is a big but, jumping requires suffcient EP. A PP2 or greater will enable J1 in one turn. But there may not be sufficient PP capacity to allow use of the computer (outside of jump control), agility or any defensive weapons fire if there are not excess EP's available to allow the function of other ships systems. On custom built raiders, this can be allowed for in design, on impressed ships with only PP2 escape via jump gets very risky, likely havng to take 2 turns.

Refueling & Supply operations These are a potential weakness of raiders. Picketing wilderness refueling points with escorts will cause raiders issues if they are out of fuel, forcing them to retire to the outer system and await either help or the withdrawal of the escorts. Or they can run the gauntlet of fire whilst refueling (7 turns of skimming, once you get there plus time in & out).

The large cargo capacities of impressed raider/merchants with the addition of cheap collapsable fuel tanks can minimise the risk of being caught in any one system without fuel. As a strategic benefit it also multiplies the cost of picketing all the wilderness refueling points in a sub-sector with scarce escorts needed for many other duties. It also adds to the odds of rescue/help arriving for a stranded raider without fuel (if every raider can visit two systems before running out of fuel). At the least, two raiders running the guantlet of an escort stand a much better chance of success.

Of course the strategic cost of picketing every wilderness refueling point in a sub-sector is substantial, another strategic win for the raiders, with the strategy forcing escort shortages elsewhere.

Supplies for raiders are an issue (air scrubbers, food, maintenance items, news, orders, mail & entertainment for example) not addressed in HG or TCS. The need is obvious & meeting with a supply ship will require a pre-arranged meeting or drop-off point and the Supply ship to transit the main combat zone. I'll have to give this some more thought.

So back to the original question.
How cheap can you make a Commerce Raider?

 

[E.D.Quibell]

Logistics are everything (sweeping statement I know, but I'm sure you will get my point).

The commerce raider must be able to keep it'self running for as long as you want it behind ememy lines. So that means cargo space and lots of it.

Missiles might be good offensivly but you need reloads (read ... more cargo space). I would expect commerce raiders to use weapon systems that don't need to be reloaded, because cargo space can be better used for air scrubbers and food.

I would guess that something escort sized with a bunch of cargo space is the most likely candidate (2,000 to 5,000 tons?), or maybe something old, larger and no longer front line capable refitted specifically for the role (10,000 ton light cruiser?).

Regards,

Ewan

 

[far-trader]

Well, let's look at it this way...

Depending on the way you see the OTU (or YTU) which ships are going to be targeted by commerce raiders?

Not the small independents. The Free-Traders and Far-Traders are too many and too wide to make a reasonable campaign against. Knock one out and two more will happily jump in to take up the slack and extra profits. Besides which they (individually) won't cause much loss in throughput of goods and people. And they may well be armed and crewed every bit as good as the smaller raiders. And probably more prone to fight you hard since it's their own ship and possibly cargo on the line.

Ah, but there's the moderate subsidized ships. The Fat-Traders and Liners are good targets. You know when and where they'll be (they have a route to service). You'll even know if and how well armed they are. They aren't fast and they carry more cargo, and likely more important cargo being under contract. They probably won't fight you too hard, if at all. It's not their ship or cargo on the line, it's their life on the line if they fight too hard.

And finally there's the larger merchants. Usually operated by Mega-Corps. Easily well armed, likely as well as a warship of the same size, the extra investment in weapons and gunners is a fraction of the price of the ship and contents. And they are also likely to have excellent intelligence. They usually have additional protection elements as well, as warranted, against the very threat of commerce raiders. And they'll have their own commerce raiders as well, if you really want to pick a fight with a Mega-Corp you'd best be ready for them to not only defend themselves but take the fight to you in return. And they also have influence with the Navy and can bring those forces to bear in short order.

So in summary, imo, it depends on the level you want to escalate it to.

Small merchants are too small to be worth it, except maybe to another small merchant. And that's not so much commerce raiding as it is competition, albeit cutthroat competition, and piracy.

Medium merchants are just right. You'll disrupt significant trade without undue risk or attention, if you strike and move on. Preying on the same area for too long will guarantee a Navy encounter.

Big merchants are usually too big. The risks are too great, even for the greater reward.

I think the perfect commerce raider is going to be a 400ton or 600ton converted subbie. Upgraded drives for damage soak, performance, and unrefined fuel use. Upgraded computer and software. Added weapons. Gunned gig. Extra crew for damage control, boarding, and prize crewing as well as shifts. Cargo space (mostly) converted to fuel for quick jump-in jump-out strikes without messing about refueling. And of course being made to resemble your prey allows you get that much closer to strike.

The original Q-ships were of this nature. Commerce raiders employing false plating to hide guns until needed (aka pop-up turrets) and other hidden features and deceptive tricks. Appearing as simple merchant ships until the victim was located and then sinking them.

 

[Tellon]

We have 2 schools of thought -- stay small -- and use a pack-mentality, or go BIG and get in -- do a quickk patrol, make the locals all VERY nervous and dissapear to repair/re-arm; So for the small guys -- I would be stuck with missile boats *As my lasers dont do gravitic focusing ...

WHich is why I went the BIG route, and thus a 5000 dTon boat with BB level armor, a spinal PAW and loads of missiles barbettes -- as the mission is not to take the cargo -- but to destroy it! And being 5000 dTons --having enough missiles and a PAW will mean, if you can't destroy the ships -- you can target the poplulation and bomb them into the stone age --

Thus --- instead of targeting ships -- take out the people themselves -- an obvious act of war -- but hey, your doing commerce raiding -- it's also an act of war ..

*remember, the ancients used asteroids for planetary bombardment -- WMD's have been used for a VERY, VERY long time in other words ..

 

[aramis]

My most successful Q-ship was a 400 Ton merchantman with extra turrets, and a meson artillery piece. The meson arty was preprogrammed to fire on positions centered 6m past each airlock... given the 5m radius of a battlefield meson gun... that just enough to not catch the ship's own hull.

Blame Dredd Pirate Quint for the idea. His player found my copy of striker, the battlefield meson gun contined within, and the reference in library data that Mesons ignore armor, and put the two together... His ship was a 400Td J2 M2 P2 design with 2 triple turrets (2x Laser, 1x sand), and 2 pop turrets (triple laser each). He'd wait until the got REALLY close (like about to dock), and then kill the boarders with the Meson gun, then their PP...

 

[Whipsnade]

Gents,

As has been pointed out, it's a horses for courses kind of question. What you'll be hunting, where you'll be hunting, who will be hunting you all play into the equation.

Snapping up Beowulfs and Maravas is one thing and likely to be an easy thing too given their size and limited defenses, but do vessels that size move the majority of your opponent's cargo? If yours is a Small Ship setting they do, but in a Big Ship setting that cargo is be more often aboard vessels above 1K dTons like Arekut's 5,000 dTonners in TTA or the 20,000 dTon Common Imperial Transports from MT.

Missiles, especially nuclear missiles, will be a good choice. While they do present a logistics problem, they have both the range to keep you away from defenders and the ability to harm electronics and crew along with inflicting more ordinary damage. Missiles also mean your targets will be using their lasers and energy weapon in an anti-missile role and not on you.

I'd like to speak up for fighters too. Above TL13 they pass out of the line of battle because they can no longer damage true warships. Merchant vessels are another kettle of fish however. Small, agile, armed with nukes, and above all numerous, a visit by a raiding carrier and her fighters will see escorts and pickets alike bedeviled while at the same time their charges find themselves under attack.

USS Ranger, the small experimental carrier built in the early 1930s, only participated in two battles during her 12 year career. She was too slow, slight, and fragile to risk in a real battle and even during the darkest days in the Pacific no one ever dreamed of using her there. Her first battle occurred during Torch when she led a small task group of escort carriers, ships she was scarcely larger than, to provide air cover for the landings. Her second and final battle however is one that should interest us.

She was part of a task force which included 2 battleships, 4 cruisers, and more than a dozen destroyers that steamed for the the Norwegian Arctic port of Bodo. All those other ships were along to protect little old Ranger as she launched three days of air strikes against German shipping in the area. Operation Leader went very well. Over a dozen ships were sunk or damaged, losses the German merchant marine could not afford. German defenses in the area didn't respond well to the surprise either, only three fighters found the Allied task force and only one of those got back home. Ranger herself never repeated the mission, she spent the rest of the war training pilots. Other Allied carriers visited Norway though and had similar success.

Going by too many years of playing Mayday, HG2, Battlerider, Brilliant Lances and other space combat rules sets, plus too many years of mulling over the types of operations we're discussing here, I should think a sudden, rapid, and violent descent on a system with the aim of temporarily overwhelming and/or perplexing the defenders while damaging and destroying as much merchant shipping as possible would be the most common modus operandi for commerce raiding operations. I also know that such raiding operations are mentioned in TNS items from the Rebellion era.

Thanks to the submarine commerce raiding campaigns of the 20th Century, we're far too wedded to the idea of the lone raider lurking in ambush. Historically those campaigns are an exception and the physical circumstances that led to them do not exist in the 57th Century of the OTU.


Regards,
Bill

 

[jappel]

Don't forget, the original designation of the Azhanti High Lighting was "Fleet Intruder", and commerce raiding was part of the original mission for the class - hence the oversized jump drives (J5) and the healthy fighter complement. I think we have the top of the range covered.

At the low end, perhaps a modified subsidized merchant or liner configured to be the mothership for a horde of small fighters, armed with lasers and sandcasters itself would be the way to go - or even a purpose-built vessel. Throw in a few small escort craft to help cover launch and recovery and you've got a task force.

 

[Whipsnade]

At the low end, perhaps a modified subsidized merchant or liner configured to be the mothership for a horde of small fighters, armed with lasers and sandcasters itself would be the way to go - or even a purpose-built vessel. Throw in a few small escort craft to help cover launch and recovery and you've got a task force.

John,

Once canonical "pocket" carrier that always gets overlooked in the Broadsword-class mercenary cruiser.

One of the modules for the modular cutter happens to be a "fighter frame" which can hold 4 fighters of up to 6 dTons displacement each. Launching fighters from the frame takes less than a minute and the process for all four can take place simultaneously. Add that time to the five minutes needed to launch a cutter from a it's cutter well, which can also occur simultaneously, and a Broadsword can deploy eight fighters within a single 20 minute HG2 combat round, a single 1,000 second LBB:2 combat round, or a single 100 minute Mayday combat round.

While the Broadsword with it's small batteries, smaller computer, and lack of armor is a rather lousy combat vessel in a HG2 environment, it's a nasty old bear in a LBB:2 setting.


Regards,
Bill

 

[robject]

I'll answer by taking a Vargr Dhaztuen-class R2 "Far" Merchant and (cheaply) arming it.

It's a 600t hull, Jump 3, Maneuver 1.

I'll rip out 20 of the 24 passenger staterooms and most of the cargo space and put in fuel tankage enough for a few more weeks and another parsec jump range. Ordnance can go into what's left of the cargo hold.

Cheap, eh? Well it won't be the greatest setup, but I'll go really cheap and install three single beam lasers and three single missile launchers. I will add some expense and make the launchers long-ranged tho. All of that adds a whopping MCr 4.5: pocket change. (Doing it "right" would cost MCr 48, so...).

Total cost, new, is MCr 245 (by T5 rules).

Probably would be worthwhile to upgrade the maneuver drive... would cost 12 tons of space and another MCr24 to get to M3. Or as Bill suggests, perhaps carry a fighter...


It'll need some supply caches... alternately I might try to drop supplies into a system at a pre-arranged point, perhaps on the "masked" side of a GG or in the Kuiper Belt or something. Whatever. Depends on the setting.

 

[Whipsnade]

Robject,

Nice thinking there. It's definitely "frugal" weapons-wise, and weapons cost, but those three missile batteries should give it a good long range threat.

If possible, I'd take some of the CrImps saved and upgrade the maneuver drive. Gaining another gee and perhaps some agility would help a lot. A better computer/avionics suite is something to look at too, but if we start to "pimp" too much the sticker price goes way up.

I'd like some sort of small craft too, single or plural. Getting another missile battery out there means your targets won't have another battery to aim at you. Sensor rules don't enter into the Traveller space combat picture that much, but having an asset that can extend your sensor range or (possibly) enhance it via some 57th Century version of flank spotting would be a huge help.

Also, pre-positioned supply caches for a variety of "uses" and "customers" are a big part of MTU. One figured prominently in a nasty little Amber Zone I ran once.


Regards,
Bill

 

[rancke]

Snapping up Beowulfs and Maravas is one thing and likely to be an easy thing too given their size and limited defenses, but do vessels that size move the majority of your opponent's cargo? If yours is a Small Ship setting they do, but in a Big Ship setting that cargo is be more often aboard vessels above 1K dTons like Arekut's 5,000 dTonners in TTA or the 20,000 dTon Common Imperial Transports from MT.

A very good point. I took a look at the typical merchant vessels described in The Traveller Adventure. Some of them are severely undergunned, at least in peacetime. A Tukera Longliner is said to have only one turret installed, although it does have the option to install up to five. A 400-600T ship is going to have a fair fight with any longliner that does install a full complement of turrets. Fair fights are not conductive to success for commerce raiders. Even if they win, odds are that they'd be chewed up enough to have to break off and go home for repairs. A 3000T Tukera freighter only has two turrets installed but can have ten. Any 400-600T raider who runs into one with all its turrets installed is suddenly the underdog. A frontier transport or a cargo carrier has ten turrets installed at all times. Only the 5000T heavy merchant is really severely undergunned, with just four turrets and no way to install more.

The biggest problem that faces commerce raiders in the Traveller Universe is that there's are few factors that can make a para-military ship more effective than a civilian ship of the same size, other than the lack of some of the turrets that the civilian could mount if it wanted to. Run into a ship that is as heavily armed as itself and the raider is going to have a bad day.

There's armor, of course. An armored ship is going to be at an advantage against an unarmored one, no argument there. But armor is expensive and cuts into other things a raider needs, such as storage space for supplies to keep it functioning far from resupply.


Hans

 

[Matt123]

Some good stuff here.

It would seem the bigger merchants likely do not need escorting if the threat is from raiders 4-600 tons. But the smaller merchants do. I can see ad-hoc convoys being made up as Far Traders and the like cluster up with the big boys, seeking safety in numbers. Given the frequency of shipping between major worlds I cannot see that trade would be affected.

If the strategic goal is to slow trade and divert escorts away from the front line, as several have mentioned, we likely need a raider (or raider group) that can defeat a 3000 ton 10 turret merchant. Otherwise neither strategic goal is achieved.

I've knocked up a 600 ton J2 raider costing 304MCr (380MCr before discount), I'll post it here and I'll draft up a combat simulation of it vs a 3000 ton Tukera Freighter. I suspect tho' most Tukera Freighters would be accompanied by a couple of Far Traders.

The biggest problem that faces commerce raiders in the Traveller Universe is that there's are few factors that can make a para-military ship more effective than a civilian ship of the same size, other than the lack of some of the turrets that the civilian could mount if it wanted to. Run into a ship that is as heavily armed as itself and the raider is going to have a bad day.

Computers can provide that advantage and size modifiers help if the raider is under 1000 tons and the target isn't. Agility also helps but at least with my 600tn raider, increasing the computer model was cheaper than giving it agility.

I don't know however whether its enough to make a differance tho', either way it'll be an interesting exercise. I'll post the raider shortly and the combat simulation later tonight.

 

[rancke]

Computers can provide that advantage...

You're absolutely right. I can't understand how I overlooked that. Yes, a commerce raider with a factor 9 computer is going to shoot rings around any ship with a normal commercial computer.


Hans

 

[Matt123]

Budhyi Sandoo 600 ton Freighter / Commerce Raider

Built at TL13 to move freight for the navy (Imperial, Zhodani, Sword World???), the Budhyi is intended to hand that role in war-time to the merchant fleet. Without the peace-time purpose, funding is not available.

FR-1010___FR-6624452-040000-25000-0___MCr304___600 tons
Batteries Bearing________2_____61_________________TL 13
Batteries______________2_____61_________________Crew = 13.
Fuel 144. EP = 24. Agility = 1. Size Mod = -1. Total Def Mod = 2. Computer model = 5.
Cargo = 214 tons. Staterooms = 12. Passengers = 4 (8 if bunked up). Low Berths = 20
Streamlined. Fuel Scoops. Fuel Purification Plant. 10 ton Launch
Emergency Agility = 4. Class development cost = 79.83 MCr
Backups; 2x Computer model 2

For its peace time role of shipping goods for the Navy, the Budhyi features 214 tons of cargo space, 8 bunked Navy passengers and 20 low berths. Often Gunners are dropped in favour of more passenger capacity.

For the Commerce Raiding role the Budyhi features extensive computer power-5, a high factor Fusion-5 battery, two Sandcaster-4 batteries and 6 batteries of Pulse Lasers-2, the Budhyi is equipped for hunting large merchant targets. An 8 man boarding squad is carried, which uses the lifeboat to close with and board the victim.

When raiding the 214 ton cargo capacity usually holds 204 tons of fuel in a collapsible tank (with existing tankage this is sufficient for a total of J5 and 56 days of PP fuel). The remaining 10 tons hold food supplies and maintenance spares. At the start of the cruise, additional supplies are stored in every stateroom, passage, vacant low berth and fresher.

If engaging an emergency jump-1, the ship jumps in 20 minutes (one turn). Agility drops to 0, but all other systems are operational.

The multi-role Ships Launch performs as a life boat, stand-off missile platform and ship to ship shuttle. It contains 4 emergency low berths (16 person capacity) and 1 ton of lifeboat supplies. It is armed (computer model 1 reduced to 0, due to no bridge) with 3 missile batteries factor-2 and the remaining .6 tons of cargo is usually used for missile reloads. The offensive role for the launch is to fire very long range missile attacks on immobile facilities.

Doctrine is to attack lightly armed shipping and installations. Jump tanks must be filled before engaging in combat, preferably also keep the fuel cargo full. If engaged with a dangerous foe, doctrine is to immediately engage in an emergency jump-1, minimising exposure to potential damage.

The priority is to maintain a viable threat, secondly to cause damage to shipping and installations. The viable threat of course assumes the raider alone or in packs can actually harm shipping. Combat Simulation to follow.

 

[Matt123]

You're absolutely right. I can't understand how I overlooked that. Yes, a commerce raider with a factor 9 computer is going to shoot rings around any ship with a normal commercial computer.

Its likely factor 9 is overkill, a two or three point advantage may be enough and keep the costs down.

 

[aramis]

Just slapping some numbers inspired by Robject's... in MGT...

A dedicated commerce escort, designed to CRUNCH similar scale ships

600 _48.00 600Td Hull Code 6 (12HP 12 SP)
__0 126.00 Reflec Self-Sealing Stealth mods
_75 _60.00 BSD AV15 armor.
_35 _60.00 JD F (J2)
240 __0.00 Fuel 2J2
_35 _72.00 MD T 6G
_55 144.00 PP T P6
_72 __0.00 Fuel PP6 x 4wks
_20 __3.00 Bridge
__0 __4.00 Model 3bisfib
__5 __4.00 Very Advanced Sensors (DM+2)
_10 _16.00 2x PA Barbettes (4d6+Crew, Long Range)
__4 __4.00 4x Triple turrets
___ _36.00 9x Turret PA Beams (3d6+Crew, Long Range)
___ __0.75 3x Sandcaster
__1 __1.05 1x FPP & Fuel Scoops
_48 __6.00 12xSR for 14 Crew PPPNEEEGGGGGGO
=== ====== ============================================
500 584.80 Hardware Totals

Normal software running: JumpCon2, Maneuver, and either evade 1 or fire control 2. Evade option is MCr1.2, FC option is MCr4.2

for +48.2 MCr, upgrade to a model 7fib, and run JumpCon2, Maneuver, Evade 1, and fire con 3. (Includes hardware upgrade plus software.) For another 16MCr, make it 7bisfib and upgrade to evade 2.


Rationale: She can do 11 crew radiation hits, and can dump 35 dice of damage at target. The 2 4d6 barbettes are not a good conversion to damage, but are there just in case someone has been paranoid and armored up... you are not getting armor over 12 normally, so those PA Barbettes can expect to crunch into just about anything; even the heavy armored TL15 warships feel their sting (the flat-spot is roughly 12-16, and that's meaning almost 50% of hits penetrate even warship's best armor). It's a ballance act.
Or, if feeling like massive damage is better but penetration isn't, replace the 2 barbettes with 2 more triples... for a total of 4 Triple PA turrets, 1 Triple Missile, and 1 Triple Sand.

600 _48.00 600Td Hull Code 6 (12HP 12 SP)
__0 126.00 Reflec Self-Sealing Stealth mods
_75 _60.00 BSD AV15 armor.
_35 _60.00 JD F (J2)
240 __0.00 Fuel 2J2
_35 _72.00 MD T 6G
_55 144.00 PP T P6
_72 __0.00 Fuel PP6 x 4wks
_20 __3.00 Bridge
__0 __4.00 Model 3bisfib
__5 __4.00 Very Advanced Sensors (DM+2)
__6 __6.00 4x Triple turrets
___ _48.00 12x Turret PA Beams (3d6+Crew, Long Range)
___ __0.75 3x Sandcaster
___ __2.25 3x Missile
__1 __1.05 1x FPP & Fuel Scoops
_56 __8.00 14xSR for 14 Crew PPPNEEEGGGGGGO
=== ====== ============================================
500 539.05 Hardware Totals

She does 36 dice of PA, plus launches 3 missiles.

 

[Matt123]

As promised, a HG combat simulation of our 600 tn commerce raider vs Tukera's 3000 ton freighter.

***** Summary *****
- This raider is easily a match for a large freighter, but taking even a little damage is a concern as it reduces the reliability of your raiders weapon systems over time.
- Nuclear missiles are a must for raiders (arse, must remember this!). Only by attempting to get internal explosions, will the raider have a chance at destroying a merchant (of any size).
- Smaller merchants will get hit far more often, I was surprised at the computer-4 on the Tukera Freighter (needed for J4). Most smaller traders will only have computer-2.
- On the other hand, most escorts will have higher computers than the raider putting the raider at a big dis-advantage vs escorts. Raiders should avoid escorts. Q-ship computers may be on a par with the raider.
- From a cost/benefit POV, the raider cost 304 Mcr and caused roughly 53 Mcr worth of damage, plus the loss of the merchant for several weeks, plus the established need for escorts.
- A Gazelle/Fiery Close Escort costs 287 Mcr and will be needed on all the routes reachable by the raider. In numbers they will cost many times the cost of the raider, assuming they are available for this role.
- A Gazelle/Fiery has a slightly higher computer-6, Armour-3 and two PA weapons. Not enough to be lethal, but enough to potentially cause unwanted damage, including potential computer damage.
- A Gazelle/Fiery can screen the merchants whilst the merchant fleet runs for the 100D limit and the jumps. Unless the raider can cause a lucky hit on the Gazelle, the merchants will nearly always get away without damage.

***** Combat Simulation *****
The Tukera Freighter is 3000 tons, J4, MD1, Agility 0, Computer model 4. It has 10 hardpoints, with two triple turrets installed as standard giving it 2x beam-2, 2x missile-2, 2x Sand-3.

The cost of a 3000 ton Tukera Freighter is 809 Mcr (vs our raider at 304 MCr).

For the purposes of this exercise, we are assuming losses have already occurred, causing Tukera Lines to up-arm its local fleet of Freighters. Commercial weapons available are limited to beam, sand and missiles. We will assume the preference is on defence, but with a single powerful and long range offensive weapon acting as a deterrent. 1x missile-5 (4 turrets), 3x beam-4 (3 turrets), 3x sand-4 (3 turrets).

Our trusty Budhyi Commerce Raider as already detailed is closing with the Freighter. Combat starts at long range. Defensive modifiers are; Budhyi -3 (size -1, agility 1, computer difference -1), Freighter +1 (size 0, agility 0, computer difference +1).

Turn 1. All combat is simultaneous.
Budhyi fires 6 x pulse-2 needing 7+ to hit, modified to (def penalty +1, lasers at long range -1) 7+ (58.333%) giving 3.5 hits. 3x sand-4 batteries must be defeated, needing 7+ modified to (computer advantage) 6+ (72.2%), stopping .833, leaving 2.666 hits rounded to 3 hits
Damage inflicted is on the surface explosion table and is subject to a +4 modifier (+6 for weapon factor under 9, -2 for pulse laser). The range of results is from 6 to 16.
Damage (die roll - ??/36)...... hits (fractions of 3 hits)
Maneuver-2 (2 – 1/36)..... 0.083
Fuel-3 (3 – 2/36)..... 0.013
Weapon-3 (4 – 3/36)..... 0.25
Maneuver-1 (5, 8 – 9/36)..... 0.75 (Maneuver hit .833 (.083 + 0.75) )
Fuel-2 (6 – 5/36)..... 0.417
Weapon-2 (7 – 6/36)..... 0.5
Fuel-1 (9, 12 – 5/36)..... 0.417 (Fuel loss 1.29% (.013 *3) + (.417*2) + .417 ))
Weapon-1 (10, 11 – 5/36)..... 0.417 (weapon hits 1.167, factor losses 2.167)
* Damage results are Maneuver-1 (Freighter is immobilised), Fuel-1 (1% or 12.4 tons of fuel lost, weapon-2 (attacker chooses to destroy a beam battery).

From turn 2, the Freighter is immobilised, but still carries a punch. The benefit for our raider is that he can automatically close to short range in turn 2.

Freighter fire for turn 1. 1x missile-5 battery, hits on 4+ modified to (defensive modifier -3) 7+ (58.3%) giving .583 hits. 1x fusion-5 battery must be defeated on 5+ modified to 6+ (72.2%) giving 0.42 hits, rounded to 0 hits.
3x beam-4 batteries, hitting on 6+ modified to (defensive mod -3, long range -1) 10+ (16.6%) giving 0.5 hits. 2x sand-4 must be defeated 4+ modified to (computer disadvantage) 5+ (83.33%) (twice) giving 0.347 hits, rounded to 0 hits.
*** However the Freighter is lucky (ie: I'm feeling generous...) and gets 1 hit.
Damage inflicted is on the surface explosion table and is subject to a +6 modifier (+6 for weapon factor under 9). The range of results is from 8 to 18.
Damage (die roll - ??/36)...... hits (fractions of 1 hits)
Weapon-3 (2 – 1/36)..... 0.028
Maneuver-1 (3, 6 – 7/36)..... 0..19
Fuel-2 (4 – 3/36)..... 0.083
Weapon-2 (5 – 4/36)..... 0.11
Fuel-1 (7, 10 – 9/36)..... 0.25 (Fuel hit 0.333, Fuel loss 0.416% (.083 *2) + .25 ))
Weapon-1 (8, 9, 11, 12 – 12/36)..... 0.333 (weapon hits 0.471, factor losses 0.637)
* Damage result is weapon-1, the attacker chooses a sandcaster hoping to give her offensive batteries a better chance of penetrating the raiders active defences in turn 2.

Turn 2 results will depend on how one treats the immobile Freighter. HG does offer any benefit to firing at immobile ships (Don !). IMHO hits should be automatic & I'll follow my gut on this. Regardless in turn 2, the Freighter will elect to escape by jump-1, risking miss-jump if need be. (I'm assuming she elected to fight it out in turn 1, rather than run, due to an excess of confidence.)

------------ Immobile Ships, not automatically hit ------------
Budhyi closes to short range and fires 6x pulse-2 batteries hitting on 7+ modified to (def penalty +1) 6+ (72.2%) giving 4.333 hits. 3x sand-4 batteries must be defeated, needing 7+ modified to (computer advantage) 6+ (72.2%), stopping .833, leaving 3.5 hits rounded to 4 hits
Damage inflicted is on the surface explosion table and is subject to a +4 modifier (+6 for weapon factor under 9, -2 for pulse laser). The range of results is from 6 to 16.
Damage (die roll - ??/36)...... hits (fractions of 4 hits)
Maneuver-2 (2 – 1/36)..... 0.111
Fuel-3 (3 – 2/36)..... 0.222
Weapon-3 (4 – 3/36)..... 0.333
Maneuver-1 (5, 8 – 9/36)..... 0..999 (Maneuver hit 1.11 (.111 + 0.999) )
Fuel-2 (6 – 5/36)..... 0.555
Weapon-2 (7 – 6/36)..... 0.666
Fuel-1 (9, 12 – 5/36)..... 0.555 (Fuel hits 1.332, Fuel loss 2.33% (.222 *3) + (.555*2) + .555 ))
Weapon-1 (10, 11 – 5/36)..... 0.555 (weapon hits 1.554, factor losses 2.664)
* Damage inflicted is fuel-2 (total lost 3% or 37.2 tons of fuel) and two weapon hits inflicting 3 weapon factors lost (attacker chooses to reduce the missile-5 battery to missile-3 and destroy a sand battery). The Freighter is immobilised, has lost 37 tons of fuel and has for offensive armament 1x missile-3 battery, 2x beam-4 batteries, 2x sand-4 batteries.

-------------- Immobile Ships automatically hit ------------
Budhyi closes to short range and fires 6x pulse-2 batteries automatically hitting 6 times. 3x sand-4 batteries must be defeated, needing 7+ modified to (computer advantage) 6+ (72.2%), stopping .833, leaving 5.167 hits rounded to 5 hits
Damage inflicted is on the surface explosion table and is subject to a +4 modifier (+6 for weapon factor under 9, -2 for pulse laser). The range of results is from 6 to 16.
Damage (die roll - ??/36)...... hits (fractions of 5 hits)
Maneuver-2 (2 – 1/36)..... 0.139
Fuel-3 (3 – 2/36)..... 0.2778
Weapon-3 (4 – 3/36)..... 0.417
Maneuver-1 (5, 8 – 9/36)..... 1.25 (Maneuver hit 1.389 (.139 + 1.25) )
Fuel-2 (6 – 5/36)..... 0.694
Weapon-2 (7 – 6/36)..... 0.833
Fuel-1 (9, 12 – 5/36)..... 0.694 (Fuel hits 1.666, Fuel loss 2.92% (.2778 *3) + (.694*2) + .694 ))
Weapon-1 (10, 11 – 5/36)..... 0.694 (weapon hits 1.944, factor losses 3.611)
* Damage inflicted is 2 fuel hits causing 3% losses (total 4% or 49.6 tons of fuel lost) and two weapon hits inflicting 4 weapon factors lost (attacker chooses to reduce the missile-5 battery to missile-3 and destroy a sand battery). The Freighter is immobilised, has lost nearly 50 tons of fuel and has for offensive armament 1x missile-3 battery, 2x beam-4 batteries, 2x sand-4 batteries.

Freighter fires 1x missile-5 battery, hits on 4+ modified to (defensive modifier -3, short range -1) 8+ (41.6%) giving .416 hits. 1x fusion-5 battery must be defeated on 5+ modified to 6+ (72.2%) giving 0.3 hits, rounded to 0 hits.
2x beam-4 batteries, hitting on 6+ modified to 9+ (27.7%) giving 0.554 hits. 1x sand-4 must be defeated 4+ modified to (computer disadvantage) 5+ 83.33% giving 0.462 hits, rounded to 0 hits.
* We will assume she scores another hit causing a weapon-1 hit, choosing to knock out a pulse-2 battery.

At the end of turn 2, the Freighter escapes by jump. It needs repairs to its maneuver drive, fuel tanks, missile battery, beam and sand batteries. The repair costs are (LBB bk2, which is expensive compared to HG/TCS rules) MD 42 Mcr, fuel tanks free, missiles 6.8 Mcr, beam 2.8 Mcr, sand 1.225 for a total of 52.825 Mcr and taking one to four weeks (TCS).

The raider has suffered two weapon hits (sand & pulse batteries). A full week of field repairs restores them both to full strength, but thereafter the system breaks down on a roll of 10+ on 2d6 rolled every week (or when first used that week) (11+ if the previous week gave no problems). If it breaks down again, repairs will need repeating. (TCS)

Cheers!

 

[Whipsnade]

Nuclear missiles are a must for raiders...

Matt,

Great combat examples.

As you note, nukes are the key, even more so than a big computer differential. Nukes give you more potential damage with each strike and, in the strategic warfare game, damage is just as good as destruction.

The only canonical merchant design I know of with nuclear dampers is the 20K dTon Common Imperial Transport from MT's Rebellion Sourcebook.

As with retrofitting ships with fuel refineries, something that is usually suggested in these threads, retrofitting merchants with dampers in time of war could be very problematic. Aside from the cargo space the newly installed dampers will take up, would a ship even have the power the damper requires? How quickly can you train new operators?


Regards,
Bill

P.S. In your last example, I would think that - most of the time - the raider would disengage once the freighter was immobilized. The raider's weapons have little chance of completely destroying the freighter as there's no real 57th Century analogy to the historical torpedo. Hanging around both increases the chances of the raider being intercepted and keeps the raider from targeting other merchantmen.

 

[E.D.Quibell]

As promised, a HG combat simulation of our 600 tn commerce raider vs Tukera's 3000 ton freighter.

Cheers!

How many Sand canisters does the raider use in the 2 turns?

Regards,

Ewan

Edit: 32? (Sand 4 being 8 weapons) batteries 2 = 16 casisters a round. 2 rounds = 32 canisters?

 

[Matt123]

How many Sand canisters does the raider use in the 2 turns?

Interesting question. In CT sand-4 at TL13 requires a battery of 3 Sandcaster weapons.

Turn 1. 2 sand-4 batteries fire in active defence. Thats 6 canisters if you go with the line of thought 1 canister per weapon per turn.
Turn 2. 1 sand-4 battery remains and fires in active defence. Plus another 3 canisters.

Total 9 fired. Without the loss of a battery, it would have been 12.

MT of course may be differant. If you are looking at the CT design tables for sandcasters, note the TL modifier at the bottom, TL10+ gets a TL modifier of +2 (ie factor-2 to factor-4).