Launching Carried Craft Prior to Combat

[Matt123]

I hold a view that you can and that both the rules and the Traveller context expressly allow it. Its the way I have run games & to me at least, it makes common sense. The contrasting view is that craft cannot launch until battle is started, I confess I struggle with this. A common theme is that launch facilities must have a purpose, therefore you cannot launch until battle is started. This ignores any possibility of launching prior to battle and also ignores the importance of being able to recover craft fast when you wish to leave under fire.

I am raising it in light of the CT/HG/TCS clarifications Don is working on. Views in support of or against launching before battle are welcome.

The Rules case for launching ships prior to the start of the HG battle, including the specific HG rules in question.

TCS p. 17 Fleet Tenders "...allow simultaneous launch of all craft carried immediately as the ship arrives in system." ie: no requirement to await enemy fleet action before launching.

TCS p. 32 Time Sequence
1. Jumps: All ships arrive in destination systems
2. Comms & Intelligence: Players get intel on the composition of enemy forces in the system, useful for initial battle deployment decisions. Ships may jump out before battle, indicating a minimum of two turns (40 minutes) exists in this phase & very likely much more.
3. Battles: HG sequence of play starts

TCS p. 38 Tactical Intelligence
Example given includes substantial numbers of fighters that may be detected in phase 2 "Comms & Intelligence". Goes on to state ships carried in other ships may not be detected. Indicating players have the option before phase 3, battle and may get a tactical advantage from the choices they make to hide or launch ships.

HG p. 38 Battle Formation Step, the opening sentance.
"Both players form their ships into two lines each."
Note that ships includes big & small craft. The means of getting to the system, where they are in the system and how long they have been there, is not taken into account.

HG p. 38 Launch & Recovery
Recovery may be done in turn 1. Indicating there may be something to recover. Especially useful if the player launched everything based on sketchy intel and now decides that was a bad idea... Vital in the context of a strategic campaign where withdrawal is the wiser option when faced with larger enemy fleets.

Cheers
Matt

 

[Whipsnade]

Matt,

Oddly enough, I've been having a similar conversation with another poster here. We've been discussing some of the recently released CT errata and what quibbles we may have with it. Let me quote a section from one of my notes on the subject:


"Mr. Miller's decision is the correct one from an "ease of play"/"simplicity" standpoint. He's maintaining an overall game designer viewpoint while I'm focused on what is very minor detail. I can easily houserule the added complexity I feel is necessary. Other GMs with other needs shouldn't be forced to address such complexity however.

My other quibble has to do with the pre-battle launch of small craft and that, like small craft crew quarters above, would result in another level complexity to HG2 battles. Again, while I may find that complexity very attractive others may find it very burdensome. The game should tilt towards "ease of play" and/or "simplicity" whenever possible. I can easily houserule pre-battle small craft launches or write it up as part of scenario instructions. Others shouldn't be forced to deal with that complexity if they don't want to."


Any good game designer has to look at the game as a whole and that means they must continually balance the desire for complexity against the ease of play. The designer must constantly ask themselves "Is the addition of this detail worth the complexity it will add?".

As with all such questions, the answer is entirely subjective. Each of us will answer it differently, so no one answer can be seen as "correct". That means that the official answer should be one that encompasses as many other answers as possible and an answer which focuses on simplicity and ease of play does just that. The simple answer allows for complexity to be added when the GM feels there is a need for it. Adding complexity where and when we feel it is needed is simple, removing complexity where and when we feel it isn't needed is very hard.

Disallowing the launch of carried craft prior to HG2 combat is a simple answer. It does not add complexity to the game. You and I can very easily add houserules to handle the launch of carried craft prior to battle while a GM who has no interest in it would be forced to either deal with the added complexity or create houserules to remove the option.


Regards,
Bill

 

[Matt123]

Hi Bill, I totally agree with the sentiment you put across on simplicity.

Another concept key to successfull game design is that it must also be intuitive, which is where I struggle with the concept of not allowing launch given the players ability to watch the approach of enemy fleets.

Having never restricted the launching of any or all craft in the first battle formation step, I can assure you the game retains its simplicity and is also intuitive.

Cheers
Matt

 

[Whipsnade]

Another concept key to successfull game design is that it must also be intuitive, which is where I struggle with the concept of not allowing launch given the players ability to watch the approach of enemy fleets.

Matt123,

Watching the approach of the enemy force is something that takes place beyond the scope of HG2. You're arguing for the inclusion of an operational framework in a purely tactical game.

FWIW, I've always houseruled, with varying levels of success, the very situation you're discussing. I also realize that the situation is beyond the scope of HG2.

Having never restricted the launching of any or all craft in the first battle formation step, I can assure you the game retains its simplicity and is also intuitive.

Simple and intuitive? Let's examine it from the other half of HG2, the half you're forgetting, the half that handles designing warships.

A vessel can launch whatever small craft it wants in whatever numbers prior to the battle beginning? Then why all the verbiage about differing launching rates between ships with regular launch facilities, those with "fighter tubes", and those that are dispersed structures? Why all the various tonnage and volume requirements? Why the defensive penalties for certain design choices? Why the specific results on the damage tables?

Think of it for a moment. If you can launch as much as you want prior to battle, then your carrier needn't have "fighter tubes" and your tender needn't be a dispersed structure. You can simply state "Yeah, I know the carrier can only launch 10 fighters per round, but it's been launching them the entire time the fleet has been moving to contact so all 500 fighters are deployed before the battle begins." You needn't bother with the design strictures of different launch facilities at all because you can launch whatever you want in whatever numbers you want before the battle begins.

So, ask yourself this question: If you can launch whatever you want in whatever numbers you want before the battle begins, why did HG2 designers spend so much effort describing those various launch facilities? They did so because HG2 is a tactical game and the type of launches you're discussing occur at an operational level.

I've fought HG2 battles and written HG2 scenarios for decades and I've allowed pre-battle launch of small craft for both. I also realize that HG2 is tactical in nature, such launches are operational in nature, and as such operational concerns are in my purview as the GM and not in HG2's purview as a tactical wargame.

Simply put, allow as many or as few pre-battle launches that you as the GM wish, but don't insist on including an operational-level activity in a tactical game.


Regards,
Bill

 

[DonM]

Wow. I wish I'd written that.

Which sadly points out the component that's missing from the TCS campaign game.

TCS effectively imagines a universe where every system hex is divided into "inner system" and "outer system" boxes, and when opposing forces meet in the inner system box, they fight HG battles. Control of the inner system means control of access to any and all refuel points in the system, and forces in the outer system never meet, but everyone knows they are there. When a force jumps from one system to another, they all arrive in the inner system box together, encounter all forces in the inner system box and resolve control, either by winning HG battles or jumping to another system or reteating to the outer system box.

But what we want is a system that handles the fact that Regina has two effective systems, both with gas giants, and the possibility of splitting forces between them because of distances, or encounters in the middle.

On the other hand, the inner system/outer system boxes do make a campaign simple to run.

 

[Supplement Four]

Simple, maybe stoopid, question...

Small craft certainly have the speed to keep up with the large vessels. Sometimes, their M-Drives allow them to outdistance the bigger ships.

But, do small craft have the range of the bigger ships?

I guess the answer is, "Yes, they do", as an adventure class ship has a range of about a month (O2, food, expendables, etc).

I'm not as familiar with small craft. What's their range? How large are the L-Hyd tanks on small craft? Powers the power plant for how long? How many days of food, O2, an other expendables is the craft rated for?

This may effect how long before a large ship can launch small craft and have the vessels travelling along with the large craft before an engagement.

If we find that the range of small craft is quite short...then, there's the answer.

 

[far-trader]

Wow. I wish I'd written that.

Ditto. I tried over on the CT Yahoo Group but felt like I was missing getting my point across clearly. Bill has done so before and again Maybe English isn't my first language

Simple, maybe stoopid, question...

There are no stupid questions, only stupid answers (those I can do, but I'll try to avoid it here...)

The basic range of small craft is identical to that of large ships, the default 4 weeks of minimum power plant fuel required by the design rules.

Where the most limiting difference comes in is operational endurance. Most small craft have only acceleration couches for the crew allowing 24 hours of routine operation or 12 hours of combat operation. Adding small craft staterooms for the crew gets around that if there is sufficient volume and budget to spare.

For carried large craft they normally have full staterooms for the entire crew as standard so they have the full 4 weeks as supported by the required minimum fuel.

However, one point I keep meaning to address and forgetting is life support. That's normally purchased in two week blocks and part of stateroom tonnage (per Book 2). So the four weeks is longer than most crews will last without addressing additional life support as a cost and storage requirement. High Guard iirc doesn't even mention life support. Again, it's an issue outside the scope of the tactical combat wargame. It's part of the ref purview for scenario setups.

 

[Whipsnade]

Simple, maybe stoopid, question...

S4,

The only stupid questions are those that aren't asked.

Dan already gave the primary answer to your query; crew endurance is the real limiting factor in the small craft operational endurance equation. I'll suggest another, admittedly minor, factor; munitions.

Now, whether you're modeling crew endurance or munition levels you're adding additional complexity to the game. The question now becomes whether or not this addition to game play is worth the extra record keeping it requires.

Case in point is Avalon Hill's Fleet series which model various Cold War naval campaigns. I love the series but even I, a maniacal grognard, do not regularly play them with the optional munitions rule in place. I'll also be the first to admit that the optional munition rules greatly effects game play, when you use them you simply cannot play the games' scenarios in the same manner you do when not using them.


Regards,
Bill

 

[Whipsnade]

Gents,

Those of you who've been putting up with me all these years know that I've long advocated the idea that Traveller naval combat has been missing a major component. We've plenty of tactical and strategic models, but no operational ones. We've models for moving between star systems and models for fighting battles, but we've no models for moving within a star system prior to a battle. This middle step has been missing for over thirty years.

So, what use is an operational system? Such a system would have a number of uses, not all of which would be limited to ship combat. Let me explain.

A continual complaint regarding HG2 is the ineffectiveness of "fighters" or, more accurately, small craft at higher TLs. Such craft have significant handicaps in the line of battle, so much so that people question why they're even constructed and why there canonical designs. These complaints lack perspective however. Small craft do have little or no role in HG2's tactical line of battle, but such craft would have a vital role in an operational wargame. Our skewed and limited perception of Traveller space combat leads some to a skewed and limited perception of the utility of small craft.

Take Avalon Hill's classic Panzerblitz for example. When played normally, that is face-to-face with all units revealed on the board, many of the units in the countermix have no real use at all. Scout cars, light tanks, and even trucks are seen as so worthless that they're routinely used as sacrificial "speed bumps" to deny an opponent's use of roads. It's only when you play Panzerblitz doubleblind that the vital role of scout cars and light tanks becomes apparent. The location of your opponent's T-34s or PzKw-IVs is suddenly unknown and you can't risk having most of your force blunder into an ambush, so scouting becomes paramount.

Now, if face-to-face Panzerblitz were our only guide to WW2 armored warfare on the Eastern Front, we would seriously question the utility and reasons behind the presence of scout cars and light tanks just as the limited perspective of Traveller space combat afforded us by HG2 makes some seriously question the utility and reasons behind the presence of small craft.

If an operational level game became part of the Traveller space combat "triad", many of the questions people have regarding canonical designs and force descriptions would be answered. Just how an operational game can or should be designed is a question best left for another time.


Regards,
Bill

 

[Matt123]

Watching the approach of the enemy force is something that takes place beyond the scope of HG2. You're arguing for the inclusion of an operational framework in a purely tactical game.

The tactical game cannot exist without a context. A restriction on launching fighters implies that most if not all Traveller HG battles occour within a few minutes (less than 20 minutes) of exiting jump, in the same time & location as another fleet also exiting jump. The odds against this must be astronomical. How can you justify the tactical game representing this as a Traveller norm? As a GM houserule for a battle to the death tournament perhaps, but not as a Traveller norm.

Simple and intuitive? Let's examine it from the other half of HG2, the half you're forgetting, the half that handles designing warships.

FWIW I included this arguement in my opening post.

In your arguement you are forgetting that Launch & Recovery systems have two purposes. To Launch and Recover. By argueing "Launch facilities exist therefore they must be used at the start of battle..." is the tail wagging the dog. (Used it again Hal...).

I'll throw another major game mechanic/consideration into the mix, sitting up there with simplicity & intuitive. Play balance.

As Don notes there are only two locations in TCS, Inner System & Outer. There is also an optional location, Carried. Intruder fleets utilize the carried location, defender fleets usually don't. As a consequence, defender fleets gain the advantage of having "carried craft" on the battle line from turn one. Planets and orbiting Starports do not require launch facilities.

Now you have intruder fleets achievng surprise (its hard not to), watching the entire defensive fleet launch from the planet surface and line up into formation (what, 2 hours minimum?) before any intruder carried craft (Battleriders or Fighters) can be launched. This is not an obscure scenario, this is bread & butter stuff for fleets.

In a historical context & you know naval history better than I, you are effectively argueing that carrier fleets at Midway should have waited until the Admirals were sure both sides were ready before launching fighters, on the basis of justifing the cost of the launch facilities!

Cheers
Matt

 

[BlackBat242]

Exactly.

To argue that carried small craft cannot be launched before combat begins is a stupid and utterly unrealistic piece of crap, and a direct insult to the intelligence of Traveller players and Refs.

Sorry if you feel bad about that, but that's how I feel.

 

[far-trader]

OK then

Launch all 500 of your fighters (per the example above) before battle is ever engaged, at 10 per turn (over 16 hours) and I'll just loiter over here out of range until all your pilots are sick of sitting in their seats chasing us around (12 hours later) or dead (24 hours later) and you have to begin recovering them at 10 per turn to give your crews a rest. Oh, some of them will be wanting to get back before you even launch them all. And before you can recover them all some of your pilots will be dead. Then we can engage battle with you having no fighters in the line or reserve since the crews are either dead or exhausted.

Oh, you didn't mean you'd launch all of them like that after all? Because that would be a stupid and utterly unrealistic plan

So where does the rule that you begin with all carried craft aboard and actually have make a decision about the type of launch facility you choose make such a big difference?

As has been said, until and unless the ref applies fair scenario elements for both sides the game can't include a simple "all craft can be in play" for carried craft without making a real mess of it. As long as I get to choose as freely as you when the battle begins there's no way I'll engage while you have all your fighters launched. I'll wait for them to become exhausted and you are in the process of recovering them.

 

[BlackBat242]

Who ever said anything about "all fighters being launched"? Maybe someone else, but not me.

Note BSG (original, I don't know if they had the new ones competent to wipe their own ass or not) for an example...
You have patrols (usually 5%-10% of complement) out at all times you are in-system, launching the first just after exiting jump, and recovering the last just prior to entering jump.

When you are approaching a possible ambush point or suspect ships/objects, you launch a second patrol to cover while the first investigates.

When hostile ships are confirmed, you launch ~1/3 of your mission-capable force as a primary strike/cover force, and if contact is not made you replace them at regular intervals, not do something as idiotic as you suggest!


Therefore, the launch/recovery capability IS important... before combat, and during, and after... and so is having small craft able to launch before combat.

And one more thing... tell me where the "rule that you begin with all carried craft aboard" is... I certainly couldn't find it. I found the rule that places launching of small craft into the "Battle Formation step", but it says nothing about this being the only time small craft can be launched... NOR THAT ALL CRAFT HAVE TO BE ABOARD AT THIS TIME.


But then, all I have is CT... I don't have any of the "new & improved" (read: screwed up) versions of the rules.

 

[Whipsnade]

The tactical game cannot exist without a context.

Matt,

You're confusing in-game context with meta-game context.

A restriction on launching fighters implies that most if not all Traveller HG battles occour within a few minutes (less than 20 minutes) of exiting jump, in the same time & location as another fleet also exiting jump.

A HG2 battle implies nothing of the sort. You only think it does because you don't quite understand what a HG2 battle actually models.

HG2 reduces space combat to it's most basic component and only it's most basic component; combat. A player controls offensive and defensive fire allocations, damage control, how/when to break off combat, and nothing more. There is no maneuvering, no real tactics, there's no map, and none of the other things you unconsciously assume are present because they are present in nearly every other wargame. A Hg2 battle consists of nothing but shooting, shooting, more shooting, and damn little else.

HG2's combat rule's stance on limiting the launch small craft to the launch capacity of their carriers is entirely correct because those launches are taking place during a twenty minute combat round in the battle. HG2 doesn't pretend to model anything that occurs prior to the battle, that's beyond the context in which it operates.

Providing that pre-battle context and stating how many pre-battle launches can take place is up to you the GM or you the scenario writer.

In your arguement you are forgetting that Launch & Recovery systems have two purposes.

Now you're confusing HG2's construction rules with it's combat system. If I were to only apply the context of the combat system, no vessels would ever require more than a jump1 because that is all that is required to break off by jump. As narrow as HG2's combat system may be, it's construction system must model something far more expansive.

Let me use Panzerblitz to again attempt to explain this. If I used only the context within the face-to-face version game itself, scout cars and light tanks would not exist because they have no real use. In the context of the double-blind version and in the meta-game context of the WW2 Eastern Front scout cars and light tanks should exist because they had great utility.

I'll throw another major game mechanic/consideration into the mix, sitting up there with simplicity & intuitive. Play balance. As Don notes there are only two locations in TCS...

You're confused again.

You're talking about importing strategic and operational concerns into a very narrowly-focused tactical wargame. Once again, HG2 rules only model the launch of small craft during a battle. Not days before a battle, not hours before a battle, not minutes before a battle, but only during the battle itself. Launches at any other time are not part of HG2's narrow focus because they are beyond it's context.

In a historical context & you know naval history better than I, you are effectively argueing that carrier fleets at Midway should have waited until the Admirals were sure both sides were ready before launching fighters, on the basis of justifing the cost of the launch facilities!

That analogy is fundamentally flawed because you still don't quite understand what Hg2 actually models.

HG2 would not model the "Battle of Midway", instead HG2 would model the attack by carrier aircraft on enemy warships. HG2 wouldn't model, indeed cannot model, the distribution of the IJN into different task forces, the positioning of the US carriers, the maneuvering to contact of both sides, the searches launched, the strike groups launched, or their flights either to or from battle. All HG2 could do is model the actual torpedo, bombing, and strafing runs performed by the aircraft on either side. Everything else is literally beyond the context of narrowly focused HG2's combat system.

HG2 doesn't deal with pre-battle small craft launches because they occur outside of it's combat rules. That doesn't mean that pre-battle launches don't occur. It does mean that they occur as you the GM or scenario writer say they occur.

Perhaps, when an operational component is added to Traveller's various space combat models, we'll have rules for small craft launches occurring before the shooting begins. At the moment, however, HG2's combat system only deals with those events that can take place during frantic 20 minute periods in which the opposing battlelines hammer away at each other. Everything not part of those rounds is quite literally outside the context of that combat system and it's rules.


Regards,
Bill

 

[Whipsnade]

BlackBat,

All your examples - and they're very good ones - are operational in nature.

As I've repeatedly stated, HG2 has no operational components and no provisions for the addition of operational components.

What you do as a GM or scenario writer is your own brief. You can allow any number of pre-battle launches that you deem plausible as that is beyond the context of the combat rules. All HG2 says is that - once the battle begins with the first step of the first phase of the first combat round - carriers can't launch more vessels in the launch step of the combat round than it's launch facilities normally allow.


Regards,
Bill

 

[BlackBat242]

Exactly... and HG (1 or 2) does NOT ban those pre-battle, operational launches... which is what some here are insisting it does!!!

HG only governs the actual battle itself, and it does NOT require that all small craft be aboard before combat begins. If you look at Far-trader's statements, he was saying the HG rules DO demand exactly that!

 

[far-trader]

Exactly... and HG (1 or 2) does NOT ban those pre-battle, operational launches... which is what some here are insisting it does!!!

HG only governs the actual battle itself, and it does NOT require that all small craft be aboard before combat begins. If you look at Far-trader's statements, he was saying the HG rules DO demand exactly that!

I don't think I was, I certainly didn't mean it to. My point is only that any ruling of craft launched prior to the first turn are situational and beyond High Guard's combat rules.

I've never said HG bans pre battle launches, or any other conditions. Only that they are all situational conditions and have to be handled by the ref in the scenario. But I'll want ALL situational conditions covered and spelled out before sitting down to play that campaign. And I mean ALL. Life support, fatigue, missile and sand reloads, etc, etc,...

What some want(ed) to do was make the game rule say that any or all craft could be considered launched prior to that first turn without any other situational conditions factored. Or have I misread the intent there?

What that would do among other things is make the whole of the launch facilities rules pointless. Who would choose a dispersed hull with no armor over any other hull with armor? Nobody. Who would spend the extra credits, volume and crew requirements for launch tubes? Nobody. Everybody would use the free no crew required 1 launch per 10Kton of hull per turn.

And damn and to hell with the reality* of it (as per my post above of ignoring that some of your Pilots will be exhausted before you finish launching and others dying before you recover them). Yes, you could fly a scout squadron, or any other partial deployment, fine. Again it's situational, and it'll mean at least a portion of your fighters are out of combat when it starts as they will have been on patrol and possibly nearing exhaustion.

* trade one unreality for another before somebody harps on that, though the unreality of the High Guard rule of launching in turn one at least preserves the general game of combat and design that is High Guard

And ignore that I might have some choices I'd make as well before that first turn while you're moving your carried craft slowly out the hatch. Choices that would make you regret not having a faster launch rate.

But the big point is all that, ALL OF IT, is situational and High Guard is not a set of situational rules. Trying to take the rules which allow for a situational condition (such as launching some craft before the engagement) and making it a simple rule that "any craft may be considered launched in the first turn" without addressing other situational aspects is a mistake.

And as far as it goes for all I know the designers intended that all craft could begin combat launched. That just makes less sense without any additional conditional situational rules.

Bill has explained it well. If I've failed to be as clear just read what he's said on it, I've been saying the same thing, or trying to, since this started on the HG Yahoo Group.

 

[far-trader]

I wonder if I should also mention that High Guard doesn't include sensor rules? (does it? I don't recall any and don't see them on a quick glance)

And that even Book 2 sensor rules are such that detection of other ships is at best 600,000km?

 

[Whipsnade]

HG only governs the actual battle itself, and it does NOT require that all small craft be aboard before combat begins. If you look at Far-trader's statements, he was saying the HG rules DO demand exactly that!

BlackBat,

I don't think he was. I believe that he, like me, was pointing out that such launches aren't handled by HG2 at all. HG2's combat system is very narrowly focused and simply leaves such matters up to the GM or scenario writer.

You can see how that decision to leave pre-battle launches out of the HG2 combat model was the correct one. Dan brings up several of the issues that any model of pre-battle operational small craft launches would have to tackle. The model would have to address crew size, crew endurance, small craft fuel capacities, small craft quarters, and several other issues. I would be hesitant even to begin to address the requirements of such a model and would much prefer to leave it up to the GM or scenario writer.


Regards,
Bill

 

[DonM]

I don't think he was. I believe that he, like me, was pointing out that such launches aren't handled by HG2 at all. HG2's combat system is very narrowly focused and simply leaves such matters up to the GM or scenario writer.

Which is precisely why the clarification was written as it was:

Battle Formation Step, p. 38: All carried craft are assumed to begin a battle on-board the carrying vessel. Referees and players may agree to adjust this as part of a specific scenario as needed.