CT Only: My TC Universe

[Frankymole]

Sandcaster "sand" (ablative and prismatic particles) can indeed cause damage to ships flying through them according to something I read last night, I think it might have been the "lost rules" supplement listing differences between 1977 and 1981/Starter Traveller rules.

Presumably that's one reason "sand" is useful in disabling missiles.

 

[kilemall]

Sandcaster "sand" (ablative and prismatic particles) can indeed cause damage to ships flying through them according to something I read last night, I think it might have been the "lost rules" supplement listing differences between 1977 and 1981/Starter Traveller rules.

Presumably that's one reason "sand" is useful in disabling missiles.

Well, can't speak to that, but the impression I get from the missile supplement is that the missile is abraded to death, which I suppose translates into a hit on the missile.

The supplement does have a hit table for missiles, with perhaps critical bits hit that stop it, or sometimes you get the warhead but the missile can still hit for impact damage.

I think there is something poetic about getting hit with human debris like sand. I would almost try to arrange a high vee sand hit around where a sand cloud would be months or years after the players themselves released it.

 

[Jame]

Did a quick lookup of him and his blog, can't pick out a definitive set of rules/setting beyond the polity thread and various star map this and that, can you point me to something I may be missing?

Here is the wiki entry: http://wiki.travellerrpg.com/Outer_Veil

And the Drive Thru RPG link in case you decide to buy it (that is up to you even though I recommend it): http://www.drivethrurpg.com/product/96124/Outer-Veil

 

[kilemall]

There are of course ways around this 'speed limit' business, and has to be for my setting and mapped jump destination system to work.

First, the options I looked at and rejected-

1) Shields. This would be the simplest method, and the one you would expect. Power up to near C, set the shields, hop in the low berth and dream of exploration glory.

Well, except that you have to LIVE with the darn things when you aren't zipping along at relativistic speeds.

The feel for Traveller is our oddball mix of weapons and defenses, having shields just would make it another game.

Particularly since they would be VERY powerful in order to be of use for near C and introduce all manner of complications for combat.

Pass.

2) Drive Bubbles

This one I wrestled with for some time, I liked the idea of having a pseudo-universe bubble to explain all the low fuel use, the VERY short detection ranges, and yes taking care of bothersome high C rocks.

I even considered upping the speeds by a factor of 100, just to speed things up getting to the action, having frac-C battles with people on combined closing speeds of .8C, etc. etc.

It just got too weird dealing with issues like launching small craft/missiles, impacting weapons, what happens when you 'drop' your M-drive field, does the M-drive bubble work in atmo, phasing on two different time scales, etc.

Play value not worth rejiggering everything.

So, dropped this option, but certainly one to consider for others oriented to play effects and not inclined to fret about ugly consistency details.

 

[salochin999]

One of the arguments in "how fast can ships go" is as speed increases the potential damage from space dust increases also from tiny indentation to sizable dent.

So maybe sand ought to be speed dependent?

A missile with enough G to catch an accelerating ship might be damaged more than one that slows down and creeps through the sand screen and then accelerates again

 

[aramis]

One of the arguments in "how fast can ships go" is as speed increases the potential damage from space dust increases also from tiny indentation to sizable dent.

So maybe sand ought to be speed dependent?

A missile with enough G to catch an accelerating ship might be damaged more than one that slows down and creeps through the sand screen and then accelerates again

Keep in mind also - at a certain point, the gas in the interplanetary medium becomes low energy alpha radiation, which can trigger secondary cascades of x-ray and gamma-ray radiation.

16,000 km/s is the standard alpha speed. C is just shy of 300,000. If you're moving that fast, you're getting alpha radiation decay at 5MeV per He nucleus particle, and a particle density of 5 particles per CC. which means, about 500,000 per cubic meter, and thus 16,000,000 m/s, so 8,000,000,000,000 impacts per second, each at 5MeV for each frontal square meter. Yes, about 8e12 impacts per second. (however, most of the medium is ¹H hydrogen, aka protium, so cut the energy to a quarter that.)

At about 3,000 km/s, roughly 0.01C, the impacts are 1,500,000,000,000 per square meter per second, and 176 keV each (thanks to E=V²). Or about 1.5e12 impacts per second. (Again, cut that energy to 1/4th, because most of it's ¹H, aka protium )

It's not going deep, but it can and will abrade the surface... by breaking the molecular bonds of the surface materials.

At that 1PSL speed, we're getting (as a safe minimum, presuming protium particles, aka, ¹H... 44e3 eV each, x 1.5e12= 66e15 eV per square meter...

It's not a lot of heat, tho', at 1 PSL - it's only about 9 calories per square meter per hour. It's still a major abrasion, tho', and why in Beltstrike, it's mentioned drives generate a repulsion field...

 

[simonh]

It's not a lot of heat, tho', at 1 PSL - it's only about 9 calories per square meter per hour. It's still a major abrasion, tho', and why in Beltstrike, it's mentioned drives generate a repulsion field...

This is a real issue, but as you say we can hand-wave it away using gravitic repulsors to sweep space clean in front of the vessel. You could also use the same explanation for clearing larger objects such as sand and gravel if you're worried about that in interplanetary space. Actualy though you probably shouldn't. Interplanetary space is incredibly empty, even of things like sand grain-sized partcles. Most of that stuff has been gravitationally captured by planets, asteroids and commets. Jupiter is like a giant hoover sweeping interplanetary space clean, and most planetary systems appear to have gas giants. We've been launching interplanetary probes for decades and not once had any failure attributable to a collision with debris, and aren't likely to any time soon either. We've even sent Cassini through a gap between the rings of Saturn, no problem.

Some proto-planetary discs would have dangerous amounts of gas and dust around, but you'd just not visit those systems. There's be nothing much there of use, and they'd be easy to identify with conventional telescopes anyway.

Simon Hibbs

 

[aramis]

This is a real issue, but as you say we can hand-wave it away using gravitic repulsors to sweep space clean in front of the vessel. You could also use the same explanation for clearing larger objects such as sand and gravel if you're worried about that in interplanetary space. Actualy though you probably shouldn't. Interplanetary space is incredibly empty, even of things like sand grain-sized partcles. Most of that stuff has been gravitationally captured by planets, asteroids and commets. Jupiter is like a giant hoover sweeping interplanetary space clean, and most planetary systems appear to have gas giants. We've been launching interplanetary probes for decades and not once had any failure attributable to a collision with debris, and aren't likely to any time soon either. We've even sent Cassini through a gap between the rings of Saturn, no problem.

Some proto-planetary discs would have dangerous amounts of gas and dust around, but you'd just not visit those systems. There's be nothing much there of use, and they'd be easy to identify with conventional telescopes anyway.

Simon Hibbs

It's not all that empty - about a gram per cubic kilometer of solids if I read the math right - in the inner solar system.

The gas data's pretty solid (no pun intended), but the solids data is only a handful of probes. It's sufficiently high as to be a problem for mars capsules.
And, at 16,000km/s, you're getting 16 cubic km/second per square meter of frontage. If we use 1 gram in 1e-10 g units, it still adds up to the same energy level... 16g/s at 16,000,000 is about 160 kJ per second per square meter. 38,240 calories per second, if I used the correct conversions. which is enough to heat 38kg by one degree.

dust heating gets to be a problem, but we're still talking more abrasive force than heat damage.

And a single large chunk in the 10g range is going to be catastrophic.

 

[McPerth]

And, at 16,000km/s, you're getting 16 cubic km/second per square meter of frontage. If we use 1 gram in 1e-10 g units, it still adds up to the same energy level... 16g/s at 16,000,000 is about 160 kJ per second per square meter. 38,240 calories per second, if I used the correct conversions. which is enough to heat 38kg by one degree.

Just to put another example, accoridng 2300AD (classic, not MgT) explanation for lasers, 1 kg of TNT produces about 5 Mj when it explodes.

So, if Aramis numbers are correct (and I assume they are) the damaging possibility would be about the same as 1 kg of TNT per 30 seconds per square meter...

 

[simonh]

And a single large chunk in the 10g range is going to be catastrophic.

Sure. The largest, longest duration spacecraft we've had in operation so far is the ISS. I know it's in LEO, not interplanetary space, but I'd have though that would increase the risk of collision with objects like this as Earth's gravity is going to sweep them in towards it.

It's not apparently taken a hit so far, but that doesn't prove anything. Also it's not hauling ass through the solar system, but just following a planetary orbit, so the expected energies of any collision would be lower than a ship of a high energy trajectory might expect. I wonder what the expected risk of an
impact like that is though. I'm sure NASA must have done studies.

Like you said, most of the interplanetary material is an abrasion issue rather than a penetrating impact risk, but Traveller doesn't take it into account. Ships don't include abrasion shields in their design, and there's no mention of replacign such protective shields in annual maintenance. You could assume that it's there anyway, just not mentioned. Alternatively we could assume the ship's manoeuver drive includes a gravitic field generator to sweep space clean in front of the vessel. Presumably sand clouds are too large and are generally off-axis so the sweeps aren't useful in dispersing them; or we could assume that they are used to disperse sand and that's already taken into account in the lifetime and effectiveness of sand clouds.

Simon Hibbs

 

[aramis]

Like you said, most of the interplanetary material is an abrasion issue rather than a penetrating impact risk, but Traveller doesn't take it into account. Ships don't include abrasion shields in their design, and there's no mention of replacign such protective shields in annual maintenance. You could assume that it's there anyway, just not mentioned. Alternatively we could assume the ship's manoeuver drive includes a gravitic field generator to sweep space clean in front of the vessel. Presumably sand clouds are too large and are generally off-axis so the sweeps aren't useful in dispersing them; or we could assume that they are used to disperse sand and that's already taken into account in the lifetime and effectiveness of sand clouds.

Simon Hibbs

Actually, it's kind of included in both TNE and MGT.

In TNE, it's minimum armor based upon G's, and in MGT, it's in the space hazards. Which are firmly into anime-level weird, but it does include impacts and such.

 

[kilemall]

Sure. The largest, longest duration spacecraft we've had in operation so far is the ISS. I know it's in LEO, not interplanetary space, but I'd have though that would increase the risk of collision with objects like this as Earth's gravity is going to sweep them in towards it.

It's not apparently taken a hit so far, but that doesn't prove anything. Also it's not hauling ass through the solar system, but just following a planetary orbit, so the expected energies of any collision would be lower than a ship of a high energy trajectory might expect. I wonder what the expected risk of an
impact like that is though. I'm sure NASA must have done studies.

Like you said, most of the interplanetary material is an abrasion issue rather than a penetrating impact risk, but Traveller doesn't take it into account. Ships don't include abrasion shields in their design, and there's no mention of replacign such protective shields in annual maintenance. You could assume that it's there anyway, just not mentioned. Alternatively we could assume the ship's manoeuver drive includes a gravitic field generator to sweep space clean in front of the vessel. Presumably sand clouds are too large and are generally off-axis so the sweeps aren't useful in dispersing them; or we could assume that they are used to disperse sand and that's already taken into account in the lifetime and effectiveness of sand clouds.

Simon Hibbs

Funny thing you gents should talk about that. They are called deflectors, and deal with both debris AND solar flares. But thats jumping a bit ahead.

 

[kilemall]

An easier method then my individual ship one would be the HG way.

Simply put, treat object impacts as missile attacks, and solar flares/coronal mass ejections as particle accelerator attacks.

Object impact resolution is simple- have impact events be VERY rare, especially out in the extrasolar void, determine if there is an object on collision course, then use the to hit missile attack chart.

Use the computer and agility rating of the ship as a negative to hit, every .1C of the evading ship reduces the agility rating.

Strength of the bulk of most 'attacks' would be 1, add 1 for every .01C (or 300Gs) of the combined closing speed of target craft and object. Once the strength reaches A or B, count the attack as an over 9 strength (no +6 modifier, surface hit only) and start over with another 'hit' count. Roll once on the 9 strength table to resolve all hits- a miss negates all strength hits, a hit applies them all.

So if a 6G ship is getting a high space strike check and is traveling at .53C, the avoid agility rating would be at -1, a hit would resolve at 5 hits with no modifier (as a spinal weapon against surface only) and 1 hit at 4 strength which would get the +6 modifier.

Armor obviously is a Good Idea for a high-C craft.

The normal defenses for missiles apply, as you will see with the charts repulsors are the most useful 'defense'.

For a regular LBB2 ship, set the ship to either Auto/Evade-Pilot Evasion or Anti-Missile and pick one to be the priority (the ship will have time to do one or the other, not both).

However, starting with .5C time dilation plus speed means the defenses get little time to detect then impact the incoming objects.

Add +1 to overcome ship defenses for every .1C at .5 or over.

At .9C + the energy weapons and repulsors become useless, simply no reaction time, only sand works. So the typical high C voyage will include a shield of sand racing ahead, occasionally being replenished and then the ship backs off so as not to run into it's own defensive cloud.

Incidentally this also suggests how space stations or O'Neill colonies like my Cities defend themselves against the frac-C rock gambit- a shell of rock and sand that would destroy the incoming short of their targets.

 

[kilemall]

Solar flares are near light speed affairs, CME is a relatively slow 20-300G roiling mass of incoming charged plasma. Haven't worked out specific probabilities and strengths, but definitely particle accelerator 'attacks'.

In lieu of a more formalized system low probability of an event coming near ship, if it happens resolution as per above re: evading, roll 1d6 to determine number of die to roll then roll those dice and add up, that is storm strength applied as a hexadecimal value to the PA table (so a roll of 10 is A, 16 is G etc.), minus strength per light minute out from star due to dispersion.

Roll 1d6 for number of die then roll that die and total- that is the number of hours the storm will continue, for every turn the ship is in the cone of the storm an 'attack' should be resolved. I have not found how wide these storms are for player ships to avoid/leave, so for now use the 1d6/1d6 to determine width, the result is in light seconds.

I particularly want to have variable stars be the life killing horror shows they should be, really reinforce the idea that all non-atmo protected human shelters should be on the lee side of asteroids and other objects or burrowed into rock, and ships that operate in near-solar space regularly would be heavily armored. Remember the idea is to convey 'you are in space and it's damn dangerous if you don't respect it'.

Solar events don't go out in a uniform wave from a star, more like a very specific narrow direction from an eruption. Use the 1d6/number of dice result with each point being 10 degrees to determine a direction.

As such, a lot of traffic that isn't armored could still operate, especially with warning. Solar Event warning systems will be a function of starport grade.

Starport A, B, naval bases and scout bases will maintain such a service, and the state of the science has allowed for prediction, although more like the state of current weather prediction.

Starport type C would have spottier service and gaps and privatized service of dubious scientific merit, Type D would be little more then perhaps a downport automated observatory that may or may not be working, E and X or unexplored, you are on your own.

Scout, general exploratory, close solar space commercial and science ships would be equipped to detect solar events as well, solar probe missiles would be standard on an initial system survey ship.

 

[kilemall]

Which direction would you gentle beings like me to go in? I can go into more starship systems, UPP/task resolution including a very beefed up education and social standing package, or more setting material.

 

[kilemall]

Hmmm, that fleet discussion on HG reminded me of the critical hits rule, which would make this rock hit rule much more devastating to typical Traveller player sized ships.

Well, time to define the deflectors.

The deflector array is a defensive system that is on the ship precisely to handle the solar flare and rock problems in space, without incurring the specter of a whole shield add-on component gumming up the combat game, LBB2 OR HG.

The idea is that it's too much power/fuel to have shields that stop an incoming laser strike/missile warhead burst, armor continues to be the cost-effective solution per ton for combat damage reduction, but incidental small rocks and smaller solar events can be deflected to reduce or avoid damage at little cost.

The deflectors have two TL9+ components-

* a mini-repulsor array, too weak to seriously damage or defray missiles, but enough to deflect a small dust cloud or a small rock and

* an energy field that is actually part of the jump drive (as my jumps have a large energized plasma cloud around the ship as part of its functionality), but which can be used to deflect charged particles such as a solar event.

They are at the strength of the highest drive in use, the energy field is retrofitted to small craft for their safety, and they are 1% tonnage of both of the drives or 2% of the M-drive alone for non-jump boats/ships integral to the drives, no additional cost or space. The deflectors are built into the hull skin, the tonnage would be for the power and high-speed capacitors firing them off at need.

Deflectors have their own local sensors to automatically deflect most of the time without the computer although there is a penalty without the main sensor feed, they may be set to manual values to prevent automatic engagement or special purposes, especially the energy field for handling unusual events or EW.

Want to still convey that maybe little civilian ships should not play in the .5C arena and make everyone's hair stand on end if the captain orders ludicrous speed, without making frac-C flights back from a misjump impossible.

So the following changes are in order-

Deflector strength is highest drive factor plus 1 for every TL above 9. The drive(s) can be damaged and deflectors still fully functional. The strength is halved if the computer is offline, rounding down.

Deflectors can operate once without the power plant, then will discharge and be non-functional after that.

Deflectors are applied to the strength level of the rock hit or solar flare 'attack' level on the missile or PA tables respectively, but cannot reduce it below 1. Deflectors affect both to hit and damage effects.

The system is rated to be able to handle 100 grams of rock striking at .01C, or 300Gs, at Deflector-1, or deflect a Force 1 solar storm. CMEs tend to be associated with larger storms, and as noted would normally be moving at a speed that could be avoided by maneuver. Of course this might not be possible for a variety of reasons.

Deflectors can only handle one hit per turn, they are intended to be a low energy use emergency system against a relatively low probability but catastrophic event, most to be avoided by maneuver or avoidance.

If a ship designer or operator wants to be able to have constant deflectors because they like the option of plowing through thick asteroid belts or planetary rings at speed, or is going to execute near-solar mining/rescue/military/transport operations or as an escape maneuver, there will have to be a serious redesign as the system is 'baked' into the hull and power system conduits, all over the ship.

If a retrofit, charge 10% of cost and tonnage of the maneuver and jump drive plus 20% of the hull.

If built into the design initially, charge 2% for the drives only, no additional tonnage or hull costs.

Constant deflector use for multiple hits will use the same cost as using the maneuver drives. Other systems such as weapons, shields or maneuver itself may need to be shut down in order to power the deflectors to this level.

If the strength of the deflector is desired to be increased past the default maneuver/jump, use the desired drive levels as the base for calculating the above build/retrofit costs.

Solar flares are adjusted from the above posts to a strength of 1d6, with each 6 rolled prompting another die to be rolled. So most storms will be strength 1-5, with the possibility of much stronger ones.

The above missile hits are actually underpowered, adjust to treating the strength as though missiles were spinals, with a count that can go past the alphanumeric spinal values vs. hull comparison for purposes of the HG overstrength value critical hit rule. The to hit remains at value 9.

Therefore large ships start taking critical hits and are more likely to given the higher to hit for ship size.

 

[kilemall]

HG resolution is by computer size of course, for LBB2 the deflectors require the Deflector program to be running in conjunction with Maneuver and/or Auto/Evade, so the deflectors are operating at maximum efficiency to charge the right repulsors/energy field for the incoming threat.

Otherwise the Deflectors operate as though the computer is down, on local sensors, at half value.

The Deflector program is

Space-1
MCr- .5
Program Title-Deflector; allows control, sensor feed for ship deflectors
Skills- 2, Navig-1/Engineer-2
Throw- 11+

For the small ships, destruction of the rocks are a good option if evasion or deflection will not work, Anti-Missile continuously running can be set to fire on impact course objects. Of course, this allows for evil referee events to be imposed, such as an anti-missile program that was left on when the ship's boat was approaching for docking......

Deflectors can also be used for electronic warfare- the same energy field manipulation that can deflect solar particles can also be configured to deflect or send back confusing returns from active radar or maser sets. Lidar will not be affected, sand is typically used for this purpose, passive sets have to be defeated by other approaches.

IF the deflectors are to be used in this manner, they must be retrofitted for continuous use as per the above rules.

A difficulty roll must be made against INT, with electronics skill and deflection strength and HG size of deflecting ship as modifier, in order for deflection to take effect, per turn.

The difficulty level is calculated by distance, deflector strength, power of the active sets, and the HG size modifier.

Routine skill roll at edge of extreme detection range (2 LS mil/scout, .5 LS civ).

Challenging at half distance (1 LS mil/scout, .25 LS civ).

Difficult at 1/4 distance (.5 LS/.12 LS)

Impossible at 1/8 distance (.25 LS/.05 LS)


If it does succeed, an extra difficulty level is imposed against Active Sensors in Detection and Lockon. Failure means the opposing ship rolls as per normal.

An EW program and a Target program on the ship to be confused must be running (because a precise location must be known in order to adjust the returns for effect).

The EW program is identical to the ECM program for cost, resources, throws etc. but is used only for using the deflectors in this manner.

The use of active sensors, radio/laser communications on a cone that an enemy ship is in position to receive, or firing engines constantly at any speed or bursts past 1G/Agility-1, or firing weapons, provides a precise fix and voids any EW deflection success.

Obviously, there are too many 'eyes' and too many chances for failed stealth for this technique to be in play for HG. It is more for 1-3 ships in player-sized actions.

 

[kilemall]

Speaking of computer systems, like virtually everyone else the CT computer system rules drove me crazy.

I was operating mainframe computers in the early 80s and it already looked dated to me even back then.

So when I came back last year for my big redo, upon reviewing I got reminded of the whole mess.

However, looking at it with old/new eyes I could see that there would be problems making it 'cheaper' or more capable per se, the computer programs literally can make a small ship much more powerful then a larger but less 'smart' opponent.

Then it hit me, a justification for why the computers and their programs cost like they do.

This is like avionics for aircraft, the last thing anyone wants is an out of control starship, even a small free trader, plowing into a planet out of control or killing passengers. Similar standards for a traffic control system, power grids, healthcare support, and other high life or death requirements.

So our standard model computers and software are worked up to levels of absolutely cannot fail tolerances, which shows up on the incredible levels of abuse they will take before starting to fail.

Which led me to a really great opportunity to once again inject atmosphere and player choice/consequences.

What I came up with is our high end as in the book fault-tolerant avionic (astronic?) computer, and then something more affordable.

So I now have four levels of computers available for players to install into their ships.

4. Astronic (as is)
3. Data Center/Bulk Freighter/Merc
2. Small Business/Small Craft
1. Personal/Desperate Frontier Ops

For each level of computer below Astronic, the cost for both hardware and software is 1/10th of the proceeding level.

So an Astronic computer or program that costs 4 million costs 400,000Cr at the Merc level, 40,000Cr at the Small Craft level and 4,000Cr at the desperate/personal level.

The new model software credit is reduced proportionally.

The models are referred to by their level and basic hardware design. An astronic model/1 would be referred to as an M-1000, a merc one would be M-100, a small craft model/1 Bis would be a B-10, an astronic model/2 fiber optic would be an F-2000, etc.

 

[kilemall]

Well. That seems drastic, I'm sure.

But the price is steep to go cheap.

For one, the pricing of the standard passenger passages and cargo is predicated on an artificial standard fee schedule, part of which is justified by safety concerns, laws and regulation.

So a ship will not be certified for passenger travel or hazardous cargo unless it has astronics computers, and not certified for the standard cargo/mail rates unless it has data center level computers.

No certification, no boarding or loading at TC A and B starports (not without extensive bribery admin or liaison play). C starports may be looser depending on planetary politics, and D and E will often turn a blind eye.

So there is a brutal bottom line to cutting computer corners.

Another difference that justifies the rule is the reliability issue that undergirds the regulations.

Astronic computers fail at the 1+ two die level (in other words never), each hit imposes a -1 DM, and player compiled programs have bugs at 11+.

But each level below is less reliable.

Bulk freighter computers fail at 2+ but impose a -2 operating DM per hit, compile at a throw -1 easier and have bugs at 10+.

Small Craft computers fail at 3+, impose a -3 operating DM per hit, compile at a throw -2 easier and have bugs at 9+.

Personal computers fail at 3+, impose a -4 operating DM per hit, compile at a throw -3 easier and have bugs at 8+.

So the cheaper machines are easier to program for, but are less reliable and more fragile both physically and logically.

Recently figured out how to define at HG resolution.

Astronic computer hits are 1:2 (takes 2 hits to do 1 computer damage), rounded down (so Computer-3 is still Computer-1).
Bulk/Merc computer hits are 1:1.
Small Craft hits are 2:1 (Computer-1 hit is Computer-2, Computer-3 hits are Computer-6 etc.).
Personal computer hits are 4:1.

Note that the small craft and below systems can flat out fail without a hit, which is fine in normal space, but is rather a bad idea during jump. If one were to use this level of computer for jump, they would require a computer operator on duty 24x7 during the jump to provide the necessary DM to avoid failure.

 

[Adam Dray]

Love it.