Proto-High Guard 5, take three

[robject]

Decide on what you want to model and model it. If you want to base it on HG2 then learn HG2 - if you want to scrap HG2 then decide and define the new parameters.

What I take away from the above quote is that High Guard 1 and 2 have particular design choices that make certain designs optimal. There are enough of these choices to permit a variety of good solutions.

Contents
Introduction
Interstellar Navies
- TL
- C&C
- Strategic Command
- Squadron Designations
- Mercenary Squadrons
- Naval Doctrine
- Revolt Suppression
- Interdiction
- Quarantine and Eradication
- Naval Tactics
- Ships in Use
- Line of Battle
- Cruisers
- Auxiliaries
- Ship Lifespan
- Refit
- Stealth
- Environment
- Vehicles
- Bases
- System Defense
Starships
- Movement
- Design and Construction
-- Weaponry
-- Procedures
Capital Ships
- Capital Ship Construction
- Summary of Design Steps
- Refitting
- Importing Technology
- Maintenance
- Components
-- Main Weapon Systems
-- Payload
-- Hull Configuration
-- Support
- Design Evaluation
- Design Example (AHL)
Combat
- Jump Emergence
- The Combat Round
- Squadron Configuration
- Battle Formation
- Attack
- Boarding
- Frozen Watch
- Damage Control
- Planets
- Missile Salvo
- HEPlaR Drives as Weapons
- Jump Drives as Weapons


HG Design Elements
I think the most significant design elements in High Guard are:

1. Layered Defenses (including armor)
2. Spine Damage vs Hull Size Class
3. Meson Attacks vs Hull Configuration
4. TL


HG5 Design Overview

HG5 Design is primarily SpineMaker. It revolves around building major weapons, and building transportation around them.

There are alternative ways of designing ships, though. Sectioned Design requires selecting a hull volume, determining the percentages required for support, and then filling the remaining payload section. This lets us predefine our hull volume, but still cuts down the design churn a bit.

 

[robject]

TABLE A: MAIN WEAPON SYSTEMS
Mount codes: S = Spine, D = Dish, B = Bay
                      TL  Range   Mounts
Particle Accelerator  12  S=8     S - - 
Plasma/Fusion Gun	  11  R=8     S - - 
Meson Gun             14  S=8     S - - 
Rail Gun              13  R=8     S - - 
Inducer               17  R=8     - D B
Jump Damper           14  R=8     - D B
Tractor/Pressor       16  R=8     - D B
Disruptor             19  S=8     - D B
Missiles (var)         8  S=8     S - B
Ortillery             12  R=8     S - B
Fighter Launcher                  S – B

MAIN WEAPON TONNAGES
Basic Spine Volumes (in kilotons)
TL  Code    Spine   Dish    Bay
10  A       5.1	    9.5     8.0
11  B       4.8	    9.0     7.5
12  C       4.5	    8.5     7.0
13  D       4.2	    8.0     6.5
14  E       3.9	    7.5     6.0
15  F       3.6	    7.0     5.5
16  G       3.3	    6.5     5.0
17  H       3.0	    6.0     4.5
18  J       2.7	    5.5     4.0
19  K       2.4	    5.0     3.5
20  L       2.1	    4.5     3.0
21  M       1.8	    4.0     2.5

Enhanced Spines
TL      Code  Spine   Dish    Bay
10-21   N-Z   2x-100  2x-500  2x-500

Cost: RU 1 per kiloton per squadron.


TABLE B: STAGE EFFECTS (pp.338,500)
Code Stage      TL Cost Vol  Eff.  Fuel**
Exp  Exper.     -3 x10  x3   x2	   80%
Pro  Prototype  -2 x5   x2   x1.2  48%
Ear  Early      -1 x2   x1   x1.1  44%
Std  Standard    0 x1   x1   x1    40%
Imp  Improved   +1 x1   x1   x0.9  36%
Gen  Generic    +1 /2   x1   x1.1  44%
Mod  Modified   +2 /2   /2*	 x0.9  36%
Adv  Advanced   +3 x2   /3*	 x0.8  32%
Ult  Ultimate   +4 x3   /4*	 x0.7  28%
* NOTE: The minimum spine size is 2,000 tons.
** as % of Spine Volume


TABLE E: Power Requirements

Missiles: None.	
Data: 10 EP/Ton. 	
Fields: 15 EP/Ton. 	
Beams: 20 EP/Ton.


TABLE F: MAIN WEAPON POWER PLANT FORMULAS

Power Plant Volume (tons) = EP x 3 / 100.  
- RU 1 per kiloton.  
- Fuel (tons) = 40% main weapon volume.

Antimatter Volume (tons) = EP / 100.  
- RU 2 per kiloton.

Hull Configuration is ordered according to how difficult the ship is to damage with a meson gun. It's a straight DM.

1 Lifting Body
2 Airframe
3 Streamlined
4 Unstreamlined
5 Planetoid
6 Braced (less dispersed but still messy)
7 Cluster (the old "Dispersed" structure)

Ship Size Codes are very nearly exponential, and based on divisions between smallcraft, ACS, cruisers, and battleships.

0 Small Craft
1 ACS
2 2,500 tons+
3 20 ktons+
4 200 ktons+
5 2 mtons+

 

[mike wightman]

You could just divide the BCS up into payload sections. The following are HG numbers:
Jump: 2-66% (or 0%)
Maneuver and power: 0-100%
Defence: 0-100%
Offence: 0-100%
Carried craft, troops, cargo could all be % too.

 

[mike wightman]

Defence could then be subdivided into armour % from which an armour rating could be derived, point defence, and a screen rating which is used to derive...

Similarly the offensive % can be subdivided into spine, bays, turret batteries.

%, hull size and TL all feed into the derived factors.

Energy available would likewise be derived from %, hull size and TL.

 

[robject]

Battery Attack. If not used in defense, a battery can attack one target at full strength or N targets at half strength, rounded down. N is probably 4 (lots of things to think about here). When attacking several targets, a single to-hit roll is made.

Battery Defense. If not used in an attack, a battery defends against all appropriate incoming attacks at half strength, rounded down.


HG5 Combat Model
Combat in T5 shows its High Guard roots. Layered defense is king. That won't change.

To Hit
Range < Attacking Weapon Factor - Target Agility

With the attacking task, difficulty is probably related to range, somehow.

Each attack potentially faces layers of defense. This is still the best way for ships to protect themselves. So each defense rolls to block an attack. With defending tasks, range is probably exactly the way to go, with Range=1 (1D) being the typical choice when the advantage is clear.

Missile Attacks
v Disintegrator or Repulsor:
Range < Missile Factor - Defense Factor

v Nuclear Damper (for nukes) or Proton Screen (for antimatter):
Range < Missile Factor - Screen Factor

v Beam, Missile, or Sand Defenses:
Range < Missile Factor - Defense Factor

Beam Attacks
v Sandcasters:
Range < Beam Factor - Sand Factor

Meson Gun Attacks
v Meson Screen:
Range < Meson Gun Factor - Meson Screen Factor

To Pen
Damage(meson guns) > Target Hull Configuration
Damage(all else) > Target Armor Factor + Ship Size Code

Excessive damage causes multiple hits, e.g. spines. This is analogous to HG2's spines inflicting multiple crits.
Spines always inflict crits.


Boarding actions are "required" (because I think they're interesting).

Although I like the HG1 critical hit table, the HG2 table has useful depth.

2 Ship Vaporized.
3 C&C Disabled.
4 One Secondary Battery Disabled.
5 Maneuver Drive Disabled.
6 One Screen/Globe Disabled.
7 Jump Drive Disabled.
8 Hangars/Boat Deck Disabled.
9 Power Plant Disabled.
10 Fuel Tanks Shattered.
11 Spinal Mount Disabled.
12 Frozen Watch/Ship’s Troops Disabled.

 

[flykiller]

describe a capital ship's conglomerate Defenses

sounds like what I set up in the "ship design" spreadsheet for the in-system game thread. specified "defense" and "offense" values at a fixed cost per unit, add maneuver and jump capability for multiplied costs, for a final value, applied towards a construction budget.

makes for a good generic ship, but part of the value of hg2 is the interplay between specific offenses and specific defenses. e.g. a ship may have armor 15, but this will have little effect on meson weapons.

 

[robject]

You're right. Defenses have to be differentiated by type, because layered defense is how things work in Traveller.

Conglomerating by type, on the other hand, somewhat similar to High Guard 1, with exceptional rules for dividing factors when needed, is attractive. I think I'd always want to treat spines individually though.

 

[robject]

I get distracted by High Guard versus ACS combat. They're completely different things -- attacking with four bay weapons is different than attacking with three hundred bay weapons.

But I still get hung up on range. In particular with layered defense.

HG2 used two dice for defense pseudo-tasks.

What would happen if BCS used one die for defensive tasks? Weapon/defense factors would become more important, and the game would become more sensitive to them.

e.g.

To block a nuclear missile attack with nuclear dampers:

1D < Damper Factor - Missile Factor


Pros: Close range a la T5 is emulated. Defenses may be rolled in parallel. It's a simpler roll. And it's quite clear when a defense has no chance against an offense, and vice versa. And... it's possible to permit defenses to fire at "longer" ranges, e.g. Short Range as a 2D task.

Cons: Battery factors may far outstrip the 1D roll, which may make combat a bit of a farce. Defense loses a bit of statistical strength.

 

[robject]

Next question from something Wil said in the High Guard threads:

As long as fighter weapons can penetrate screens, they're a nuisance to kill and likely to be used. It's only when they cannot get hits that they will disappear from the fleets - tho', due to the ability to hit civvies, they're likely to remain in system patrol duty well after leaving the fleets.

Likewise, the OTU uses fighters even at TL15, so something is missing from the game to make them worthy. (Most likely, that being that a squadron should count as a battery, rather than 12 separate much smaller batteries)

The OTU uses fighters, even at TL15. This means they have value.

Maybe they don't have direct value against capital ships -- say, their ability to tote nuclear missiles or torpedos or whatever isn't great enough to penetrate capital ship screens -- but they can kill escorts, and might have a shot against cruisers. I assume it's a substantial role worth filling.


Consider: Let fighter wing size map its guns on the battery factor table, but halve the result. Thus we are essentially defining a mobile battery.

Pro: Fighters are not as powerful as ship batteries; this limitation can be tuned so that capital ships are typically immune except in outlier cases.

Pro: This also works hand-in-hand with the ability to split a battery in half, with two attacks at half factor. I.E. we automagically get the ability to combine and split fighter groups.

 

[flykiller]

The OTU uses fighters, even at TL15

the imperium's primary opponents are the zhodani at tech 14 and the aslan/vargr at tech 13 (?). yeah, fighters have utility against lower tech levels.

 

[aramis]

the imperium's primary opponents are the zhodani at tech 14 and the aslan/vargr at tech 13 (?). yeah, fighters have utility against lower tech levels.

The effects of fighters on capitals above TL 12 is problematic - they are not cheap enough to allow attrition if they can hit, and not able to hit if cheap enough.

A single TL15 fighter with a chance to hit a TL14 ship of the line is at least MCr250. Well more than a Tramp Freighter. But it can be killed by a tramp freighter.

 

[robject]

Testing Layered Combat
I had to tweak the formulas. Expect churn.

Consider a Factor-8 secondary non-nuke missile battery with C&C 7 attacking a cruiser (call it Size 3, C&C 7) with Agility 6, Beam defense 5, Armor 4. We attack at Range 2, defend at Range 1.

To Hit:
2D < 8 + 8 [Attack] - 6 [Target Agility] - 0 [C&C delta] - 0 [Size delta]. 92% chance to hit.

Defender tries to stop them with Beam Defenses:
1D < 5 [Beams] - 8 [Missile]. No chance to block.

To Pen:
4D [Attack/Range] > 4 [Armor] + 3 [Size Code]. High chance to pen.


Fighter Squadron

Now consider a Factor 4 non-nuke missile fighter squadron (Size 0, C&C 5, same cost and hangar volume as a Factor 8 secondary):

To Hit:
2D < 8 + 4 [Attack] - 6 [Agility] - 2 [C&C delta] - 3 [Size delta]. No chance to hit.

Defender bears Beams:
1D < 5 [Beams] - 4 [Missile]. 16% chance to block.

To Pen:
2D [Attack/Range] > 4 [Armor] + 3 [Size]. 50% chance to pen.


Close Range

Now move the fighters in closer.

To Hit:
1D < 12 - 11. 16% chance to hit.

Defend with Beams: 16% chance to block.

To Pen:
4D > 7. High probability of pen.

 

[robject]

I need to tune this so that

• Primaries (spines) take out everything. So, cruisers can take out capitals.
• There is such a thing as a "primary" missile/torpedo launcher.
• Secondary weapons (bays) take out everything except ships of the line. So, escorts can take out cruisers, but not capitals.
• Small missiles take out escorts & cruisers. So, fighters can take out escorts and possibly cruisers.

 

[aramis]

Powerful Fighter Squadrons

Now assume that the most powerful Fighter Squadron with OTU capital ships is a Factor 6. That would put it in line with a decent secondary weapon. If Factor 6 weapons could not penetrate battleship defenses, even at close range, then fighters are not a direct threat to same.


Consider a battleship (Size 4) with Agility 6, Repulsor 9, Beam defense 9, Armor 4. We attack at Range 1 and defend at Range 1.

To Hit:
1D < 8 + 6 [Attack] - 4 [Size] - 6 [Agility]. 67% chance of a hit.

Defender tries to stop them with Repulsors:
1D < 9 [Repulsors] - 6 [Missile]. 50% chance to block.

Defender tries to stop them with Beams:
1D < 9 [Beams] - 6 [Missile]. 50% chance to block.

To Pen:
6D [Attack/Range] > 4 [Armor] + 4 [Size Code]. Very likely to pen.



So a large capital ship fighter squadron (call it 1000 fighters) can hurt a capital ship.

Not what I want.

I need to account for TL/C&C in here. I think I want to tune this so that a "peer" fighter squadron cannot hurt a capital ship. The implication is that "peer" secondaries might not be able to hurt capital ships, either. This might not be a bad thing.

Fighters, to be useful, SHOULD be a threat to even the largest capital ship.

but let's look at your numbers.
2/3 * 1/2 * 1/2= 1/6
For a squadron.

Let's compare, with a standard of 12 for a squadron (3× flights of 4× fighters) under HG. Using 40 Td 6G Comp nine factor 4 laser fighters... the best possible individual fighter under CT bk 5.
The hit rate is good. The pen rate sucks. And, once it hits, it does no damage.

Under HG, fighters are a waste versus a defensive minded ship. Even with a measly Armor 12, that's a +18 on the roll, leaving only 1/12 chance of hit, and then hitting only weapons.

HG breaks at the damage system.

 

[flykiller]

Expect churn.

sounds like a good life lesson.

they are not cheap enough

actually when I looked at construction costs it became clear that the imperium had more naval budget money (tcs) than it could spend on naval construction. the real limitation is in yard capacity, to the point that there is no need to pay any attention to ship costs. now it's possible that vast hordes of 250MCr fighters might reach the monetary limit before the yard limit, but it's unlikely that fighters would play a role sufficient to support approaching this limit.

 

[mike wightman]

Spinals should struggle to hit fighters and escorts, my fix in one HG variant is to apply agility as a DM for spinals only - but in that variant I also had more range bands with more DMs for other weapons based on range.

 

[robject]

Fighters, to be useful, SHOULD be a threat to even the largest capital ship.

My starting assumption is that they're an indirect threat, rather than a direct one. That is, they could kill cruisers which protect capitals.

I start from there, and then maybe tell Marc he's wrong, but first I want to exhaust my options.

HG breaks at the damage system.

So abandoning HG's damage system isn't the worst thing I've done.

 

[kilemall]

My starting assumption is that they're an indirect threat, rather than a direct one. That is, they could kill cruisers which protect capitals.

I start from there, and then maybe tell Marc he's wrong, but first I want to exhaust my options.

Unless you want to recreate or enshrine Imperium which has that 'too small to matter' paradigm, my design choice would always be 'multiple potential paths to victory', never the perfect solution either way (so fighters could be absolutely stopped, but at a price of losing some other capability).

So abandoning HG's damage system isn't the worst thing I've done.

Depending on how different T5 is- making the break likely is a requirement.

 

[robject]

Fighters in T5 can carry at most a firmpoint with turret weapons... that would mean short range and a maximum damage in ACS of 4D for beams or four small missiles (which can be configured in various ways)... or one large missile (again, which can be configured in various ways).

ACS space combat is already High Guardish in its combat system: roll to hit, then applicable defenses try to block it, then roll to pen and inflict damage.

ACS even has batteries. They're ad hoc, but they're there.

Something else ACS has is the "Massive Explosion" table... something that's suitable for taking out ships on a BCS scale. It also has kinetic kill missiles which appear to inflict damage as the square of its impact velocity. Also suitable for BCS.

 

[aramis]

My starting assumption is that they're an indirect threat, rather than a direct one. That is, they could kill cruisers which protect capitals.

I start from there, and then maybe tell Marc he's wrong, but first I want to exhaust my options.




So abandoning HG's damage system isn't the worst thing I've done.

At present , anything over 50 kTd is immune under CT HG. And MT.

But not T20. The damage cumulation prevents that.

Under TNE & T4, it was too much work to even try to build big ships for most, so, despite the cumulative damage, it was never well established... but a big ship could mount AVs sufficient to survive anything short of a contact nuke.

MGT suffers a bit from too much work as well. Not nearly as bad, but bad enough.