Mixed Turrets?

[RickA]

I can't find in the book what the effect of a mixed turret is.

Let's say I've got a single triple turret on my Scout ship. I can mount a single pulse laser, a single missle launcher, and a single Plasma gun?

If so, when my gunner fires that turret, what is the USP? Or is it that the gunner choses each round which of the three weapons in the turret he'll fire?

 

[veltyen]

If you check the rules on how to combine mounts you might find that it isn't possible to combine plasma/fusion/PA with anything else, those types of mounts have to be homogeneous.

You can combine Beam, Pulse, Sandcaster and Missile mounts however so your question is certainly still valid.

As far as I can tell the gunner can fire one of these weapon systems per turn, and it is iffy (GM fiat/feel) if other gunners at remote stations or computers can fire the remaining systems. I don't remember seeing any definitive rules, I am sure that someone will correct me if I am wrong.

Common combined mounts include the ever popular "I'm not quite sure what I want to do with this turret" missile/SC/(Beam|Pulse)Laser. The defensive SC/double Beam. The offensive missile/double beam and so on.

The USP is the same as from a single turret weapon attack, generally USP 1 (or 2 at highers TL's). Beam lasers have an advantage of a USP kick for twin weapons, meaning that twin beam lasers (USP 2, USP 3 at TL13+) and another system can be somewhat effective. Most of the other weapons are only at a higher USP with 3 weapons.

 

[RickA]

Excellent. I was leaning towards the "chose a weapon this turn" scenario. And I'd not let other gunners fire the other weapons on the turret from another station, unless the book flat out said they could. Then I'd have to think about it, heh.

And since it's one weapon firing off the turret each round, the USP question answers itself.

Thanks!

 

[far-trader]

I think T20 made things more complicated than needed in this respect. Rather than say that a turret needs to be 1 ton to mount the small weapons and is allowed up to three of them, and another turret needs to be 2 tons because it's for different weapons and can only mount 2 of them, etc., why not just say all turrets are X tons and this is how big each weapon is and you can mount as many of whatever type up to the limit of the turret? Anyway that's an old rant.

The way T20 seems to imply things is you decide what type of turret your ship will mount when the hardpoint is designated in the design/construction step. You can choose a light turret (1ton), a medium turret (2tons), or a heavy turret (3tons). You don't need to actually install the turret itself at this stage but you are limited to that (or smaller) without serious work. Once you have installed the turret you may drop in the appropriate weapons.

Lasers, missiles, and sandcasters are for light turrets which come in single, double or triple mount versions.

There are further complications. Such as mixed turrets, battery assignments (are they fixed or can they be reassigned on the fly), remote operation vs local and others. If you have the time and patience do a search on the boards as these discussions come up now and again. Where was that "traveller military faq" thread? It probably has some links to this type of question.

Energy weapons are for medium turrets which come only in single or double mount versions.

Particle weapons are for heavy turrets (and barbettes) and only come in a single mount version.

 

[veltyen]

Going off on a slight tangent, I don't think T20 explicitly talks about light/medium/heavy turrets.

I had interpreted the larger space requirements to be near the turret rather then the turret itself.

For example a plasma turret requires two dTon to mount, I had assumed the standard 1 dTon turret as such, and an extra dTon of capacitors/cooling/power conduits/sheilding that needs to be directly attached to the turret. Ditto for the PA turret with 2 extra dTon of "stuff" that needs to be nearby.

This means you don't need to designate what will go onto a hardpoint up front, but if it isn't designed with the slack space beforehand it is going to be difficult to shoehorn in the high energy weapons. If you design each turret point with a 2 or 3dTon "space" (missile storage, sand storage or high energy weapon stuff) arround it it becomes not a problem at all. If you only allocate 1dTon you become stuck with lasers, which isn't a bad thing in and of itself, it just limits your options.

Under T20 hardpoints don't take up any space, only the turrets do. Hardpoints can take any kind of turret later on.

 

[RickA]

Aye, there is no mention of medium, small, large turrets that I've seen.

The question on batteries certainly causes problems. Can they be reassigned on the fly? That is an important question because of the immense ammount of firepower you lose when you run a battery of (for example) two triple pulse turrets (4d10 damage instead of 6d10 damage if fired seperately).

 

[far-trader]

No T20 doesn't label them as such, I thought I was clear they were my labels. Not clear enough I guess

The problem is that T20 is so unclear about what exactly a turret is it leaves it open to so many interpretations. This can be a good thing (each referee can mold them to fit their vision) but more often it just leads to confusion.

Sure hardpoints might be able to take any turret, and you are correct they don't require volume in and of themselves. But if you don't plan that your turret volume (whatever size) is all one space in that hardened location you are tugging my belief suspenders.

Can I have (for a big example) 100 hardpoints designated and reserve 100 tons of space for later turrets but in the meantime use that as a single large cargo bay or maybe a vehicle or small craft hanger? No, I don't think so. Unfortunately this seems to be the way the ships in T20 are done. Look at the type-S and it's boast of 20tons of cargo space. I've addressed this notion in my post INSIDE - The Type S Scout/Courier but how many new (and perhaps old) players and referees would look at the stats and figure "Oh, let's put those two 10ton cargo crates in the old type-S and freight them over to the next system."

 

[veltyen]

Can I have (for a big example) 100 hardpoints designated and reserve 100 tons of space for later turrets but in the meantime use that as a single large cargo bay or maybe a vehicle or small craft hanger? No, I don't think so.

Depends whether you have thought of this during the deckplan construction phase. At minimum a hardpoint needs
-power bus
-data bus
-gunner access
-freespace (minimum 1dTon, preferably 3dTon)

Unless you are being really gungho about the deckplans you can generally skip the first three. Gunner access can be by capilary access (Jefferys tubes in star trek parlance) at a pinch and the power and data buses generally aren't marked on most deckplans.

If you are careful about where you place the hardpoints then sure they can spill out into cargo space, replace staterooms, replace smallcraft hangars and so on when armed. Most of the time this level of detail is overkill.

I certainly agree that the space for a turret needs to be in one lump. No point in having a plasma containment vessel (for a plasma gun) at the other end of the ship from the turret. Ditto for sheilding for PA's.

If the turrets were of a different size then you should be able to place the same number of the weapon systems in each, 3 PA's in a Heavy triple turret for example. The fact that you can only place one in a turret implies to me that the turret is in fact a similar size.

 

[far-trader]

Originally posted by veltyen:

If the turrets were of a different size then you should be able to place the same number of the weapon systems in each, 3 PA's in a Heavy triple turret for example. The fact that you can only place one in a turret implies to me that the turret is in fact a similar size.

Well, HG 1st edition was like that. All turrets were 1ton and you could put three regular weapons or two energy weapons or one PA into a turret. It was HG 2nd ed that complicated (unneccesarily imo) things with different tons for the weapons.

Note I am not using dtons here, HG specifically called it weight. And in more than one place tons are called weight. I think there was a long ago error on many peoples part that said ship component tons is dtons when in fact it was never meant to be so, it was always meant to be weight.

In that case you can have a turret a standard displacement but limited to different types of weapons by weight. So if you design your ship based on weight performance and include a turret with 1ton of weapons (say a beam and missile) and later want to add another beam you're fine. But if you want to change it to a fusion gun or two you'll have to drop a ton of weight somewhere else, like limiting your cargo. Or alternatively you could drop the weapons from the turret and carry an extra ton of cargo in the hold without impacting performance.

Anyway, I'm drifting off topic so I'll drop my ranting, it's only going to cause more confusion I'm sure

 

[RickA]

What about the batteries? Can they be reassigned on the fly? I can't find anything in the book about that and it seems to be one danged crucial question.

 

[far-trader]

As far as I've ever been able to tell from the rules batteries are designated when the ship is built (my version ii below*).

* though it seems the rules just go with many multiples of turrets all over the hull

But I wasn't satisfied with that so I also came up with reconfigurable batteries (version i below). So I have two different methods:

i) A computer program "Battery Fire" that allowed changing battery assignment on the fly, so you could rearrange your 4 triple beam turrets as 4 batteries of F3, 2 batteries of F4 or 1 battery of F5. 1 slot MCr1 for the program iirc.

ii) A larger turret with bigger weapons as a single battery. In the example above rather than 4 individual triple turrets for 1 battery of F5 you'd have a single large turret of 4tons for the same rating of 1 battery of F5. The single turret cost the same as a smaller triple turret, it was just bigger. Each of the three larger beam lasers cost the same as 4 of the smaller beam lasers. In fact a small cost savings could be realized there too, since it only take 10 beam lasers for F5 the three bigger lasers would only cost a total of MCr10 instead of the MCr12 for the four smaller triple turrets.

Both cases above were mostly color since the combat rules were all pretty much the same. Battery USP reduction and such. The difference being in the multiple turrets as a battery model a USP reduction was an actual turret lost, while in the single larger turret as a battery model a USP reduction was just damage to that turret. Damage can be reapired to a point, lost turrets can't. Which gives the big turrets another small advatage. The balancing disadvantage was that big turrets needed more crew to fire under local command, the same as if they were individual small turrets. So in the example above the bigger single turret would need 4 crew to fire locally. Most of the time though they would be fired under computer control from the fire center by a single gunner.

 

[RickA]

I've been going back and forth on whether it's possible. If they had given me a clue I'd be able to easily call the rule, but there's nothing.

If I found "Battery adds .1 tons to the turret" or anything I could point to that and say "There, it's hardware! Can't be easily changed on the fly!" but there isn't so much as a hint much less a statement that I can find.

So, I've got a situation where we've got three triple pulse turrets. They are obviously already hooked up for remote fire, since they can be fired from the bridge or any terminal on the ship with the right access codes (I guess?). Can the computer or the gunnery terminal operator click the "Turret 1" button on his holographic terminal and next round chose to hit the "Turret 1 Turret 2 Battery" button? Why not?

This is the sort of rules dilemma that drives me batty. How is something like this not clearly presented and if it's really not in the book... how does that gap slip through? (those are rhetorical questions, ignore them at your leisure)

 

[far-trader]

For the most part I don't mind the rules not being so bogged in detail that everything is covered, leaves more room for my personal tastes and ideas. I'm thinking mostly CT here of course. But I can see how that's not what a lot of people, especially the younger/newer gaming crowd wants it. After all I've had years to slowly build a collection of house rules for most of the problems that crop up.

So try not to let it get to you Rick

Any question, any time, here on CotI will usually get a pretty quick opinion if not a rule reference, and most of the opinions will be from those who have run into the problem long enough ago to have had some thought and experience to back up the idea

And even the ideas that don't work for you might lead to your own eureka.

Originally posted by RickA:
So, I've got a situation where we've got three triple pulse turrets. They are obviously already hooked up for remote fire, since they can be fired from the bridge or any terminal on the ship with the right access codes (I guess?). Can the computer or the gunnery terminal operator click the "Turret 1" button on his holographic terminal and next round chose to hit the "Turret 1 Turret 2 Battery" button? Why not?

My opinion is as long as you have a functional computer then turrets may be fired remotely, and with all the computer assistance available, including reconfiguring batteries on the fly. It's a fairly simple thing to do.

However if the computer is dead you may still be able to fire the turrets locally. This may require more crew and you can't have batteries of multiple weapons (except as a single larger turret as noted in my post above) and you also don't have the benefit of many of those computer assists.

But that's just the way I see it

 

[veltyen]

I always had the feeling (at least in T20) that the gunner isn't pulling the trigger as such, but instead is programming in a pattern of fire for the weapons under their control, combined with maintaining the weapon (checking overheating conduits, reloading and so on).

There should be no problem cutting batteries to a smaller size, effectively the fire pattern is just spread over a larger area (multiple targets). Combining predetermined smaller batteries I would see as more problematic. The fire arcs need to cover similar areas of space, or at least be linked in some meaningful way.

Per the rules battteries are descided at build time, and come hell or high water that is how they are till the end of time (or until a minor refit

). Personally it hasn't impinged on my games a lot, so I've never needed to come down with a way of handling it. Batteries are more a "big ship" thing, even vessels such as mercenary cruisers don't really have enough firepower to really worry about this issue.

 

[RickA]

Veltyen, where is that in the book? I need to be able to point out to my players, lol (the part about how batteries are decided at build time that is). I was leaning towards "It's built that way" but then found no extra room or weight caused by battery mechanisms so ended up leaning back to the "on the fly" computer controled model.

Our 300 ton ship has a battery of two triple pulse lasers plus a solo triple turret pulse lasers. The reason is that we just don't have enough gunners to run three seperate turrets. But if you did have enough gunners you sure would do a lot more damage per round if you forego batteries.

The lost of damage caused by batteries in T20 is so significant I cannot imagine any naval vessel using them. I truly can't. 10 triple turrets batteries vs. 10 triple turrets firing with seperate gunners is a monsterous difference in damage output per round for the combatant ship.

 

[Rossoneill]

I take it they have never fought an Armored Ship ?
You use batteries to help penetrate the AR of the enemies Armor by increasing the USP of the weapon
At least thats how the rules read to me .
It also states that batteries increase chance to hit .
The above are the only reason i can see to use Batteries normally .
And normally only military ships or adventurers fighting armored ships would use them (IMO)
The concentrated fire gets through the armor better, because technically since it is all firing as one and aimed as one it hits the same spot on the armor and blows through the armor better ?(IMO)
Batteries are mentioned on page 278 of the design sequence as part of the design and construction of the ship .
Also under batteries all weapons in a battery must be the same type or each diff weapon in the turret counts as a battery
Hope this helps

 

[Whipsnade]

Originally posted by RickA:
Veltyen, where is that in the book? I need to be able to point out to my players, lol (the part about how batteries are decided at build time that is). I was leaning towards "It's built that way" but then found no extra room or weight caused by battery mechanisms so ended up leaning back to the "on the fly" computer controled model.

Rick,

Stick with It's built that way.

If your players choose to believe that permanent battery assignments don't exist because no 'extra' room was taken up by the 'weight' of 'battery' mechanisms, enforce your role as the GM. The batteries set-up aboard their ship exists because you say so and, if they want to change it, make them work for it!

Their complaints about battery assignments have just handed you a ready made 'hook' with which to tug them about!

Explain it this way. There isn't any 'extra' components within their ship's turret tonnage that magically makes those three separate pulse laser turrets into one battery. It isn't a case of building three separate turrets and then adding something to make them a battery. Instead, the three pulse laser turrets were built to operate as one battery in the first place. They were built to operate together and thus cannot operate independently.

If the players want those turrets to operate outside of their of their current, physical default state; i.e. one battery, the players will have to add all the proper mechanisms. And their search for all the extra stuff they need will keep that nice 'hook' in your GM's bag of tools!

You're correct in pointing out how poor battery assignments during the design phase can rob a ship of it's offensive punch. And you also correctly point out that sometimes players will want several batteries and sometimes they'll want one big battery.

As a GM, I faced a similar problem for similar reasons back in the early 80s. My players had got their sweaty little hands on a Broadsword only to discover it's puny battery factors. Sure, it had four laser and missile batteries aboard, but each battery consisted of only one turret! What a waste of potential firepower.

I used my players' wish for bigger batteries to help control an entire campaign. They scrounged up money, parts, labor, etc. for the job while they flitted from session to session and adventure to adventure. Their obsession served me very well.

Anyway, to toot my own horn here... I've a little article at Jeff Zeitlin's Freelance Traveller site that deals with 'flexible' battery assignments. You can find a link to Jeff's site at COTI's Starport. The article is for CT only, but I deal with issues like retrofits, costs, parts, legality, default assignments, and so forth. If memory serves, I even tackle DIY upgrades!


Have fun,
Bill

 

[RickA]

Rossthree, that's the bit of data I needed, thank you. Batteries are listed in the Construction section of ship design, that says all.

The point about armor is good too, it explains why naval vessels waste so much damage output on all of those batteries. It still barely makes sense considering how many dice of damage are lost, but those armored enemy ships would be a big factor.

Thanks as well, Bill, I'll find that article and see what I can adapt with it.