Laser, Missile, Sand
- Thread starter robject
- Start date
pendragonman
Absent Friends Margrave
I dunno. I think making the launcher more expensive makes sense if the Imperium is trying to keep every Tom Dick and Eri from having an offensive weapon. Makes the average frugal owner of a 40 year old type A think a bit on whether that launcher and the required space for missiles is worth the lost cargo space and cash that could be better invested in spec trade.
And the fewer just laying around in a type A that gets overtaken and captured by a corsair, the fewer that get remounted into those corsairs.
But on the other hand one primary mission of the Imperium is to promote trade between the stars. It would make Imperial economic sense for traders to have an effective weapon available cheaply to defend themselves against threat to trade. The more self-reliant traders are, the less Imperial Fleets have to worry about defending individual traders. That lets them concentrate on either big MegaCorps (where the nobility running them have direct relationships with the nobility running the navy) or on big political concerns (rivalry with Zhodani or Solomani, etc.)
Small Free Traders are never going to be a military threat when the Navy has nukes and spinal weapons.
Also, my 20c on cinematic vs. realistic; obviously with the imagery I've used in a previous post I like the cinematic and particular scenarios. But I do have a fondness for Traveller's efforts at internal consistency and specific postulated advances in scientific knowledge that ripple outwards as we think through the implications. Having a system consistent with reality as we know it helps play: the reality that we know is a useful reference point in situations not directly covered by the rules.
David Johansen
SOC-12
I'm just saying that as I search through T5 I'm not finding a three missiles per launcher reference and the weapon is listed as missile not missile launcher. At that rate, missiles may be longer ranged than lasers but they've got a significant limitation. Indeed, one may imagine that the typical engagement involves an exchange of missiles but as the missiles run out the vessels close to laser ranges. And the munitions are expensive whereas lasers never really run out of ammo.
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
In the CT missiles special supplement it was implied that the gunner could assemble the missile components desired to produce the missile parameters desired at the time.
How about missile makers...
Perhaps the new cost is justifiable if missile launchers now have that capability automated.
How about missile makers...
Don't worry - the missiles themselves are expensive enough that you just don't launch them willy-nilly. Not that that's *in* T5 (errata logged!)
pendragonman
Absent Friends Margrave
Rob, am I blind or is there no pricing matrix for missile assembly in 5.09?
Coming back late to the conversation, so some of this is rehash.
IMTU there are two main starship weapons - missiles and beams (lasers). As far as arming civilian ships, they were generally one TL below the military for weapons and fire control. There were exceptions, of course, at referee whim, IF it made sense -- nod to Hans -- and advanced the story line.
Defenses include point defense lasers, sand casters. Early PD weapons included slug throwers.
I did allow globes, but particle accelerators didn't exist.
I always saw missiles as stand-off weapons. They have good acceleration in the initial phase, balanced by reduced maneuverability at the terminal (impact/explosive) phase. This makes the guidance package a significant factor in combat.
Beams (generic term) had lesser range, but worked very well as point defenses. As PD weapons, they had an extremely fast cycle rate, but reduced damage.
More simply, gunfight versus knife fight. You tried to stay out of combat as much as possible - ship combat IMTU was deadly. It also didn't allow for much PC influence unless they were the gunner.
If the combat was critical to the story line, PCs were not usually involved - I was more about the story than the mechanics in most cases.
In my eyes, T5 is both good and bad with ship combat. I didn't feels like terms were clearly defined, and it seems that a lot of knowledge was assumed. In contrast, I liked the detail approach to what part of the ship was hit.
My interpretation (FACE) was mean to consolidate all the disparate sections affecting combat into one whole. I also tried to account for range, weapon type, and tech level.
Beams, for example, do less damage outside their base range. I did not increase damage as range decreased. TL affected both range and damage.
PD weapons did less damage per shot, and although FACE did't include the information, I assumed 10 times the fire rate, which made them devastating at boarding range.
I don't remember seeing much about missile costs in T5. I figured that would be something to calculate using the weapon maker -- another thing leaving a sour taste.
I do feel that cinematic combat has its place, as does the real (deadly) thing. Again, to me story is the driver for which one I will use.
I haven't done any updates to FACE in a long time - waiting for T5.10 to be released.
Anyway, enough for now. This thread has been an interesting read, and look forward to more in the future.
IMTU there are two main starship weapons - missiles and beams (lasers). As far as arming civilian ships, they were generally one TL below the military for weapons and fire control. There were exceptions, of course, at referee whim, IF it made sense -- nod to Hans -- and advanced the story line.
Defenses include point defense lasers, sand casters. Early PD weapons included slug throwers.
I did allow globes, but particle accelerators didn't exist.
I always saw missiles as stand-off weapons. They have good acceleration in the initial phase, balanced by reduced maneuverability at the terminal (impact/explosive) phase. This makes the guidance package a significant factor in combat.
Beams (generic term) had lesser range, but worked very well as point defenses. As PD weapons, they had an extremely fast cycle rate, but reduced damage.
More simply, gunfight versus knife fight. You tried to stay out of combat as much as possible - ship combat IMTU was deadly. It also didn't allow for much PC influence unless they were the gunner.
If the combat was critical to the story line, PCs were not usually involved - I was more about the story than the mechanics in most cases.
In my eyes, T5 is both good and bad with ship combat. I didn't feels like terms were clearly defined, and it seems that a lot of knowledge was assumed. In contrast, I liked the detail approach to what part of the ship was hit.
My interpretation (FACE) was mean to consolidate all the disparate sections affecting combat into one whole. I also tried to account for range, weapon type, and tech level.
Beams, for example, do less damage outside their base range. I did not increase damage as range decreased. TL affected both range and damage.
PD weapons did less damage per shot, and although FACE did't include the information, I assumed 10 times the fire rate, which made them devastating at boarding range.
I don't remember seeing much about missile costs in T5. I figured that would be something to calculate using the weapon maker -- another thing leaving a sour taste.
I do feel that cinematic combat has its place, as does the real (deadly) thing. Again, to me story is the driver for which one I will use.
I haven't done any updates to FACE in a long time - waiting for T5.10 to be released.
Anyway, enough for now. This thread has been an interesting read, and look forward to more in the future.
Baroun Tardis
SOC-12
laser range usefulness
In the T5 game I've been running, lasers have been the most commonly used ship weapon. The main reason is the range when the fights have started.
Getting pounced on during the approach to a gas giant for refueling.
Getting into an argument with a customs cutter on the topic of "did you really mean we were restricted from leaving the starport?"
Air to ground support during the raid on a prison camp on Ruie.
Air to air combat with TL 8 jet fighters over Ruie
There have been a couple fights near the Jump points, but in general when things are happening inside the 100D limit, they happen inside laser range.
In the T5 game I've been running, lasers have been the most commonly used ship weapon. The main reason is the range when the fights have started.
Getting pounced on during the approach to a gas giant for refueling.
Getting into an argument with a customs cutter on the topic of "did you really mean we were restricted from leaving the starport?"
Air to ground support during the raid on a prison camp on Ruie.
Air to air combat with TL 8 jet fighters over Ruie
There have been a couple fights near the Jump points, but in general when things are happening inside the 100D limit, they happen inside laser range.
You're not blind. I've logged that erratum.
Thank you. Those are good points.
