MGT Only: Missiles, railguns and sandcasters, oh my

[kilemall]

If so, the same agreement would apply to Fusion Guns, Nuclear missiles, Meson weapons, Nuclear and bomb pumped laser (afetr all they are nukes) torpedoes, etc...

Oh ya, forgot fusion guns get rad damage in MgT.

Sure, idea being any of the radiological stuff is 'break glass in case of total war' stuff.

Would help the players survive space combat a bit better, ships and space stations are not glowing chunks after battle, and provides the same sort of break point for who is bad or gone too far in the old 'Imperial Rules of War' meme.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Sure, idea being any of the radiological stuff is 'break glass in case of total war' stuff.

Warships are pretty well protected with heavy armour and Rad Shielding, external radiation is not much of a problem.

Shooting radiation weapons at civilians should perhaps be limited by treaty.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

10 dton fighters may carry PB turrets, that coupled with good FC and crew can as well damage any ship, and you can carry more of them.

You are right. My memories are probably from the barrage system.

After a quick scan of the rules, there seems to be enough +DMs to make Particle turrets quite capable of penetrating even heavy armour.

Let's compare two old designs I made some years ago, 10 dT w Particle (Long,VHYield) and 40 dT w Particle barbette (Long,VHYield), both at TL12. Use good crew skill-2, DEX 9+, and skill augmentation for a total DM of +4.

The light fighter costs almost MCr 30, the heavy fighter almost MCr 60. Two light fighters needs less space on a carrier, but use more crew than a single heavy fighter. Call it even at 2:1 odds. Start at Distant range. The heavy fighter has superior sensors, so I will assume it has sensor lock, and the light fighters do not.

Two light fighters shoot at the single heavy fighter:
Help line up the shot manoeuvre: 2D + 4[crew] - 8 ≈ 3 average effect.
To Hit: 2D + 4[crew] +3[help] +4[FC] -2[range] -2[Evade] -2[Dodge] - 8 ≈ 4 Effect
Damage: 3D[Ave 4 each] + 4[effect] - 12[armour] ≈ 4 damage each producing a single hit each.

The heavy fighter shoots back:
Help line up the shot manoeuvre: 2D + 4[crew] - 8 ≈ 3 average effect.
To Hit: 2D + 4[crew] +3[help] +1[FC] +1[lock] -2[range] -2[Dodge] - 8 ≈ 4 Effect
Damage: 4D[Ave 4 each] + 4[effect] - 12[armour] ≈ 8 damage producing two hits.

The light fighters have 6 Hull + 1 Structure for 7 points each, so total 14 points. A light fighter is destroyed after about 14 hits (structure).
The heavy fighter has 13 Hull + 1 Structure for 14 points. The heavy fighter is destroyed after about 28 hits, but mission destroyed after about 18 hits (turret disabled).

So the light fighters are likely to win, but one of them will probably be destroyed.

 

[McPerth]

Oh ya, forgot fusion guns get rad damage in MgT.

Sure, idea being any of the radiological stuff is 'break glass in case of total war' stuff.

Would help the players survive space combat a bit better, ships and space stations are not glowing chunks after battle, and provides the same sort of break point for who is bad or gone too far in the old 'Imperial Rules of War' meme.

See that the situation called by the OP are more about sevral Pocket Empiers fighting among themselves than about PCs scale starship combat, I guess in such a War among diferent Political Entities such niceties would be quickly forgotten, being considered what Mercs call a Bad War.

Wat you tell is perfectly adecuate to inta-empire and merchants, as are IRW, but not on full external wars Unless all sides agree to what amounts to limit your starship weaponry more than I expect them to).

You are right. My memories are probably from the barrage system.

After a quick scan of the rules, there seems to be enough +DMs to make Particle turrets quite capable of penetrating even heavy armour.

Let's compare two old designs I made some years ago, 10 dT w Particle (Long,VHYield) and 40 dT w Particle barbette (Long,VHYield), both at TL12. Use good crew skill-2, DEX 9+, and skill augmentation for a total DM of +4.

The light fighter costs almost MCr 30, the heavy fighter almost MCr 60. Two light fighters needs less space on a carrier, but use more crew than a single heavy fighter. Call it even at 2:1 odds. Start at Distant range. The heavy fighter has superior sensors, so I will assume it has sensor lock, and the light fighters do not.

Two light fighters shoot at the single heavy fighter:
Help line up the shot manoeuvre: 2D + 4[crew] - 8 ≈ 3 average effect.
To Hit: 2D + 4[crew] +3[help] +4[FC] -2[range] -2[Evade] -2[Dodge] - 8 ≈ 4 Effect
Damage: 3D[Ave 4 each] + 4[effect] - 12[armour] ≈ 4 damage each producing a single hit each.

The heavy fighter shoots back:
Help line up the shot manoeuvre: 2D + 4[crew] - 8 ≈ 3 average effect.
To Hit: 2D + 4[crew] +3[help] +1[FC] +1[lock] -2[range] -2[Dodge] - 8 ≈ 4 Effect
Damage: 4D[Ave 4 each] + 4[effect] - 12[armour] ≈ 8 damage producing two hits.

The light fighters have 6 Hull + 1 Structure for 7 points each, so total 14 points. A light fighter is destroyed after about 14 hits (structure).
The heavy fighter has 13 Hull + 1 Structure for 14 points. The heavy fighter is destroyed after about 28 hits, but mission destroyed after about 18 hits (turret disabled).

So the light fighters are likely to win, but one of them will probably be destroyed.

You're right the light fighter is more for large battles (where barrage rules are used) than for CB rules, but see that in the combat you tell is in a major battle, the remaining light fighter may then attack the carrier (or Heavy Fighter base, whatever it was), while its own is safe.

Of ourse, the carrier will not be too threatened by a single fighter, but if we're talking about fighter wings, things can well be diferent,

BTW, I don't understand the hull and structure that you tell about, In HG (page 57), at ship scale, the light fighter would have 0 hull and 1 structure, while the heavy one would be 1 hull and 1 structure...

 

[AnotherDilbert]

BTW, I don't understand the hull and structure that you tell about, In HG (page 57), at ship scale, the light fighter would have 0 hull and 1 structure, while the heavy one would be 1 hull and 1 structure...

Reinforced Hull (HG, p41). I think that is key to making fighters survivable.

the remaining light fighter may then attack the carrier (or Heavy Fighter base, whatever it was), while its own is safe.

Winning is winning. It's a bit expensive if you lose half of the fighters and crews every battle, though...

You're right the light fighter is more for large battles (where barrage rules are used) than for CB rules, but see that in the combat you tell is in a major battle,

The example I showed was small-scale Core combat. With barrages it would become:

Two light fighter shoots:
Barrage DM: +4[crew] +4[FC] +3[WpnDice] +2[VHYield] -2[range] -2[Dodge] -12[armour] ≈ -3 => Average Dam 40%, so 3 × 3 × 40% ≈ 3,6 dam => 1 hit from each fighter.

The heavy fighter shoots back:
Barrage DM: + 4[crew] +4[FC] +4[WpnDice] +2[VHYield] -2[range] -2[Dodge] -12[armour] ≈ -2 => Average Dam 58%, so 4 × 3 × 58% ≈ 6,9 dam => 2 hits.

Hmm, giving the same result.

It's not like I remember, what have I missed?

 

[McPerth]

Reinforced Hull (HG, p41). I think that is key to making fighters survivable.

In this, the 40 dton might have an advantage, as I don't believe the 10 dton would have volume to spare on it...

Winning is winning. It's a bit expensive if you lose half of the fighters and crews every battle, though...

Not so much if you also hit enemy's carriers...

The example I showed was small-scale Core combat. With barrages it would become:

Two light fighter shoots:
Barrage DM: +4[crew] +4[FC] +3[WpnDice] +2[VHYield] -2[range] -2[Dodge] -12[armour] ≈ -3 => Average Dam 40%, so 3 × 3 × 40% ≈ 3,6 dam => 1 hit from each fighter.

The heavy fighter shoots back:
Barrage DM: + 4[crew] +4[FC] +4[WpnDice] +2[VHYield] -2[range] -2[Dodge] -12[armour] ≈ -2 => Average Dam 58%, so 4 × 3 × 58% ≈ 6,9 dam => 2 hits.

Hmm, giving the same result.

It's not like I remember, what have I missed?

You forgot -4 due to targeting fighter wings (MgT page page 80)

Why do you multiply the damage x3? As I read it, the damage is total dice x percentage.

As an aside, when you talk about dodging, I guess you mean defensive posture, as specified in page 81. If so, remember the barrages are reduced by 20%.

And an aside is that you cannot kill more fighters than weapon mounts you have (also page 80)

So, assuming that 50 heavy fighters fight against 100 light fighters, they will be 200 dice against 300 dice, but the heavy fighters may kill at most 50 fighters, while the light ones might kill all the heavy ones in a (lucky) salvo.

On a 40% damage, as you said (but not counting reinforces hulls/structures to ease things), the heavy fighters would inflict 80 hits (but they can only kill 50 fighters), while the light ones would inflict 120, what means 60 fighters (a they have 1 structure and 1 hull each, so needing 2 hits to kill each fighter).

Another advantage of the light fighters is that while (as you said) by Price the relation would be about 2:1, by tonnage (and so carrier space needed) they won't, being a litle over 3:1 (as you need also the quarters for the crew).

And if you have overcome the fighter screen, without the fight against the carriers can be quite deadly (as the carriers would have the -4 against fighter wings, while the foighters won't...

 

[McPerth]

Warships are pretty well protected with heavy armour and Rad Shielding, external radiation is not much of a problem.

Most warships don't need radiation shielding, as armor 8+ makes you immune to radiation hits (MG excluded, off course), as is explicited in MgT:HG page 79 and implicit in CB table in page 151 (with a -8 DM, maximum result is 4: no effect).

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Most warships don't need radiation shielding, as armor 8+ makes you immune to radiation hits (MG excluded, off course), as is explicited in MgT:HG page 79 and implicit in CB table in page 151 (with a -8 DM, maximum result is 4: no effect).

Thanks, I seems to have forgotten most of this system.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

In this, the 40 dton might have an advantage, as I don't believe the 10 dton would have volume to spare on it...

With a bit a of experimentation I can build a 17 dT fighter with 4 times reinforced hull at TL12. Statistically the turret will be disabled before the craft is destroyed, so no reason to add more reinforcement.

You forgot -4 due to targeting fighter wings (MgT page page 80)

Thanks, I thought it was a little to easy to hit.

Why do you multiply the damage x3? As I read it, the damage is total dice x percentage.

Only capital ships use the simplified damage system... (HG, p75)

On small craft or spacecraft, multiply the final barrage total by 3 to determine the actual amount of damage inflicted by the attack. If the barrage total is greater than the ship’s remaining Hull + Structure, assume that the ship is annihilated...

And Fighter Squadrons. HG, p80.

As an aside, when you talk about dodging, I guess you mean defensive posture, as specified in page 81. If so, remember the barrages are reduced by 20%.

No, (HG, p74):

An attack with a barrage roll is made by rolling two dice and with dice modifiers for range, fire control software, dodging, Gunner skill and ship defences.

And an aside is that you cannot kill more fighters than weapon mounts you have (also page 80)

Not a problem with reinforced fighters? Unreinforced fighters are too fragile to use?

So, assuming that 50 heavy fighters fight against 100 light fighters, they will be 200 dice against 300 dice, but the heavy fighters may kill at most 50 fighters, while the light ones might kill all the heavy ones in a (lucky) salvo.

On a 40% damage, as you said (but not counting reinforces hulls/structures to ease things), the heavy fighters would inflict 80 hits (but they can only kill 50 fighters), while the light ones would inflict 120, what means 60 fighters (a they have 1 structure and 1 hull each, so needing 2 hits to kill each fighter).

With the -4 for shooting at squadrons (and reinforcements):

100 light fighter shoots:
Barrage DM: +4[crew] +4[FC] +3[WpnDice] +2[VHYield] -4[Sqn] -2[range] -2[Dodge] -12[armour] ≈ -7 => Average Dam 3,6%, so 100 × 3 × 3,6% ≈ 10,8 total, not even killing a single heavy fighter.

50 heavy fighter shoots back:
Barrage DM: +4[crew] +4[FC] +4[WpnDice] +2[VHYield] -4[Sqn] -2[range] -2[Dodge] -12[armour] ≈ -6 => Average Dam 8%, so 50 × 4 × 8% ≈ 16 total, killing 2 light fighters.

It seems much easier to attack each fighter directly, which we can according to p80.

 

[Brandon C]

See that the situation called by the OP are more about sevral Pocket Empiers fighting among themselves than about PCs scale starship combat, I guess in such a War among diferent Political Entities such niceties would be quickly forgotten, being considered what Mercs call a Bad War.

PC scale starship combat does matter but your point about treaties breaking down in war is valid. This also assumes that a particular combatant is a treaty signator.

On other points ...

I finally found a reference to sandcasters being able to stop missiles (High Guard, p.50, after the description of the sandcutter round). Apart from this thread, also important for one empire that restricts civilian ships to only sandcasters (any other functional weapon is considered proof of piracy, leading to seizure of the ship and execution of the crew).

As for the ineffectiveness of missiles and torpedoes, I am tempted to allow them to use the stealth option on p.106 of the core rules (this would add Cr 12,500 per missile and MCr 0.25 per torpedo). While it doesn't directly effect the Gunner roll, it does make it harder to detect or lock on to a missile or torpedo.

As a setting change, I am now considering dropping the highest TL empire from a 15 down to a 12 or 13, and have the rest fall in line. The TL 12 line is an important one, because under it there are no nuclear dampers or meson screens except as prototypes. The big problem will be the loss of bonded superdense armor and the lower maximum of ship armor, meaning I will have to redesign many ships.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

I finally found a reference to sandcasters being able to stop missiles (High Guard, p.50, after the description of the sandcutter round). Apart from this thread, also important for one empire that restricts civilian ships to only sandcasters (any other functional weapon is considered proof of piracy, leading to seizure of the ship and execution of the crew).

As for the ineffectiveness of missiles and torpedoes, I am tempted to allow them to use the stealth option on p.106 of the core rules (this would add Cr 12,500 per missile and MCr 0.25 per torpedo). While it doesn't directly effect the Gunner roll, it does make it harder to detect or lock on to a missile or torpedo.

Missiles are ineffective because they have a problem penetrating armour.
Torpedoes are ineffective because they are too easy to kill with point defence.

If you allow stealth torpedoes (& missiles), say, a DM -4 on point defence they will be much more dangerous.

Below TL12 you do not have access to Point Defence Networks, hence you can overwhelm a single ship's point defence by concentrating fire.

 

[Brandon C]

Missiles are ineffective because they have a problem penetrating armour.
Torpedoes are ineffective because they are too easy to kill with point defence.

Missiles would have to be nuclear to have any chance against warships.

The downside with torpedoes is the volume they take up.

If you allow stealth torpedoes (& missiles), say, a DM -4 on point defence they will be much more dangerous.

Admittedly, this is a simpler solution than the -4 to detect and lock on.

Below TL12 you do not have access to Point Defence Networks, hence you can overwhelm a single ship's point defence by concentrating fire.

Where are Point Defence Networks described?

 

[AnotherDilbert]

The downside with torpedoes is the volume they take up.

They do almost as much damage as bays, so we could say they take surprisingly little space?

Admittedly, this is a simpler solution than the -4 to detect and lock on.

Simple and fast is good. Without barrages you will have a lot of rolls, even for very small warships.

Where are Point Defence Networks described?

Trillion Credit Squadron. It also has rules for naval campaigns, e.g. refitting old or captured ships, starport repairs, and fleet refuelling.

 

[McPerth]

With a bit a of experimentation I can build a 17 dT fighter with 4 times reinforced hull at TL12. Statistically the turret will be disabled before the craft is destroyed, so no reason to add more reinforcement.

I'm surprised there's no limit to how much you can reinforce the hull/structure (aside from the volume, off course). Yes, this way you can make them more resistent, at a cost on other oerformances, I guess...

About when the weapons will be disabled, that would depend on the combat rules you use. If you're using barrage rules, you don't care about it, as fighters are outright destroyed (at most you will have one of them damaged).

No, (HG, p74):

An attack with a barrage roll is made by rolling two dice and with dice modifiers for range, fire control software, dodging, Gunner skill and ship defences.

But that is not an automatic action, it requires a pilot task roll. So you should roll for each craft, if we want to apply RAW, and then, how to treat the squadron as somones will succeed and othres will fail?

I've always assumed that this was included in the -4 against fighter squadrons, and only really applied to major ships (whree you can roll for each of them), but I must concede that's not specified in the rules

Not a problem with reinforced fighters? Unreinforced fighters are too fragile to use?

I keep thinking that the main defense for fighters is avoiding being hit, not resisting hits, but this should be tested...

With the -4 for shooting at squadrons (and reinforcements):

100 light fighter shoots:
Barrage DM: +4[crew] +4[FC] +3[WpnDice] +2[VHYield] -4[Sqn] -2[range] -2[Dodge] -12[armour] ≈ -7 => Average Dam 3,6%, so 100 × 3 × 3,6% ≈ 10,8 total, not even killing a single heavy fighter.

50 heavy fighter shoots back:
Barrage DM: +4[crew] +4[FC] +4[WpnDice] +2[VHYield] -4[Sqn] -2[range] -2[Dodge] -12[armour] ≈ -6 => Average Dam 8%, so 50 × 4 × 8% ≈ 16 total, killing 2 light fighters.

As said above, I assumed that the -2 for dodging was included in he -4 for squadrons, and the -2 for distance will fade when they close, but you're right, they are not easy to hit.

It seems much easier to attack each fighter directly, which we can according to p80.

Of course, if (for the skirmish I told above where 100 light fighters engage 50 heavy ones) you're willing to roll for the 150 dodging rolls, plus the 150 to hit rolls, plus the damage rolls for those that hit (and of course you'll need to know the exact skill of all crewmembers, no longer averaging them)...

Personaly, I see it as a sure way to bog down the game, so, for better or worse, I'd use the barrage rules for this kind of battles and fleet games.

For Player's ships' combat, of course, things would be different, but I'd also expect numbers not to be so large.

Below TL12 you do not have access to Point Defence Networks, hence you can overwhelm a single ship's point defence by concentrating fire.

How do you overload them?

Unless TCS changes it, even a single turret will give you the defense benefit (albeit probably at the -1 for being less than 90%), so, unless you have more ships to attack tan it has turrets dedicated to PD, it's quite difficult to do it...

 

[AnotherDilbert]

I'm surprised there's no limit to how much you can reinforce the hull/structure (aside from the volume, off course). Yes, this way you can make them more resistent, at a cost on other oerformances, I guess...

Everything comes at a cost, of course.

About when the weapons will be disabled, that would depend on the combat rules you use. If you're using barrage rules, you don't care about it, as fighters are outright destroyed (at most you will have one of them damaged).

Brandon C specified no barrages.

Even with barrages only capital ships and squadrons use the simplified damage system. Single fighters hit by a barrage use the basic damage system from the Core book, unless it is immediately destroyed, as far as I can tell.

But with barrage rules you are correct; I should squeeze in as much reinforcement as possible, regardless of when the fighter's turret is disabled.
I also counted without armoured bulkheads, so it should take more basic hits to disable the turret of a competently designed fighter.
Edit: But armoured bulkheads can only protect internal components, so not turrets...

But that is not an automatic action, it requires a pilot task roll. So you should roll for each craft, if we want to apply RAW, and then, how to treat the squadron as somones will succeed and othres will fail?

I've always assumed that this was included in the -4 against fighter squadrons, and only really applied to major ships (whree you can roll for each of them), but I must concede that's not specified in the rules

I agree the rules are unclear.

I keep thinking that the main defense for fighters is avoiding being hit, not resisting hits, but this should be tested...

Unfortunately, fighters are not more difficult to hit than ships.

As said above, I assumed that the -2 for dodging was included in he -4 for squadrons, and the -2 for distance will fade when they close, but you're right, they are not easy to hit.

Most ships don't have all that much thrust over after combat manoeuvres, such as dodge, so the battle is likely decided before we can get much closer.

Of course, if (for the skirmish I told above where 100 light fighters engage 50 heavy ones) you're willing to roll for the 150 dodging rolls, plus the 150 to hit rolls, plus the damage rolls for those that hit (and of course you'll need to know the exact skill of all crewmembers, no longer averaging them)...

Personaly, I see it as a sure way to bog down the game, so, for better or worse, I'd use the barrage rules for this kind of battles and fleet games.

Being lazy I would resort to computers or statistical resolution.

How do you overload them?

Brandon C specified no barrages.

With barrages I agree a single laser turret can successfully ward off attacks by unlimited amounts of missiles, which is probably not a perfect system...

 

[Brandon C]

Unfortunately, fighters are not more difficult to hit than ships.

However, it appears that missiles are easier to hit than ships. They are fired at a range that lasers suffer a range penalty, but there is no mention of this being applied.