Sandcasters.... How do they WORK?
- Thread starter Supplement Four
- Start date
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
I have a sandcaster provide a -3DM to being hit, each laser that is fired through the cloud degrades its effects by 1 on the following turn (so if you fire a triple laser turret each laser gets the -3DM, but the next turn the sand is gone).
Every sandcaster after the first adds 3 to the number of laser hits needed to degrade it.
So a triple sandcaster turret will give you a -3 DM to be hit, it will take 3 laser hits to reduce its DM by 1, and will take a total of nine laser hits to degrade completely.
A missile flying through a heavy sand cloud must make its 12+ throw for each sand cannister fired.
Every sandcaster after the first adds 3 to the number of laser hits needed to degrade it.
So a triple sandcaster turret will give you a -3 DM to be hit, it will take 3 laser hits to reduce its DM by 1, and will take a total of nine laser hits to degrade completely.
A missile flying through a heavy sand cloud must make its 12+ throw for each sand cannister fired.
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
I have a sandcaster provide a -3DM to being hit, each laser that is fired through the cloud degrades its effects by 1 on the following turn (so if you fire a triple laser turret each laser gets the -3DM, but the next turn the sand is gone).
Every sandcaster after the first adds 3 to the number of laser hits needed to degrade it.
So a triple sandcaster turret will give you a -3 DM to be hit, it will take 3 laser hits to reduce its DM by 1, and will take a total of nine laser hits to degrade completely.
A missile flying through a heavy sand cloud must make its 12+ throw for each sand cannister fired.
Every sandcaster after the first adds 3 to the number of laser hits needed to degrade it.
So a triple sandcaster turret will give you a -3 DM to be hit, it will take 3 laser hits to reduce its DM by 1, and will take a total of nine laser hits to degrade completely.
A missile flying through a heavy sand cloud must make its 12+ throw for each sand cannister fired.
IMTU both sandcasters and missile use the same type of launcher, or just Launcher (actually I call them MMD or GMD for magnetic mass driver and gravitic mass driver respectively). The Launcher is bascially just something that flings things into space, and can retrieve them as well if they are not too big or moving too fast.
IMTU both sandcasters and missile use the same type of launcher, or just Launcher (actually I call them MMD or GMD for magnetic mass driver and gravitic mass driver respectively). The Launcher is bascially just something that flings things into space, and can retrieve them as well if they are not too big or moving too fast.
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
My explaination is just "color" for the GM...decribing how the "shield" of the sand cloud is kept in position no matter which way the ship rotates during space combat, held there by the invisible electro-magnetic arms of the ship's hull grid.
Game-wise, I play it pretty much as written in CT.
Lasers firing into the sand cloud, through it, at the ship, receive a -3DM to hit (from Book 2).
Lasers firing out of the sand cloud at enemy vessels receive a -1 DM to hit (from Mayday).
Missiles passing through a sand cloud roll 12+ or are incapacitated by the sand (from Spec Sup 3).
Now, color-wise, the magnetic grip the hull grid has on the sand cloud is pretty weak. (It's not the hull grid...it's that the fine floating sand particles are hard to grip this way.)
The ship's gunner lops the sand cannister in the general direction that will need defending. The ship's hull grid grabs as much of the sand cloud as it can, fine-tuning the sand's position.
As the ship orients itself in space (maybe the aft of the ship is where the bow usually is as the ship attempts to slow down...or maybe the pilot rolls the hull in order to bring a different turrent to bear on the target), the hull grid is computer controlled to move with it, always keeping the sand in the same direction towards the enemy.
If the hull grid is switched off, then the sand disappates.
Also, if the ship changes vector, the hull grid's grip is weak enough to loose enough of the sand that it is not protective anymore. Changing vector means that you'll have to fire another sand cannister.
Where things get interesting is when two or more enemies are engaged. That will require one sand cloud for each direction covered.
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
My explaination is just "color" for the GM...decribing how the "shield" of the sand cloud is kept in position no matter which way the ship rotates during space combat, held there by the invisible electro-magnetic arms of the ship's hull grid.
Game-wise, I play it pretty much as written in CT.
Lasers firing into the sand cloud, through it, at the ship, receive a -3DM to hit (from Book 2).
Lasers firing out of the sand cloud at enemy vessels receive a -1 DM to hit (from Mayday).
Missiles passing through a sand cloud roll 12+ or are incapacitated by the sand (from Spec Sup 3).
Now, color-wise, the magnetic grip the hull grid has on the sand cloud is pretty weak. (It's not the hull grid...it's that the fine floating sand particles are hard to grip this way.)
The ship's gunner lops the sand cannister in the general direction that will need defending. The ship's hull grid grabs as much of the sand cloud as it can, fine-tuning the sand's position.
As the ship orients itself in space (maybe the aft of the ship is where the bow usually is as the ship attempts to slow down...or maybe the pilot rolls the hull in order to bring a different turrent to bear on the target), the hull grid is computer controlled to move with it, always keeping the sand in the same direction towards the enemy.
If the hull grid is switched off, then the sand disappates.
Also, if the ship changes vector, the hull grid's grip is weak enough to loose enough of the sand that it is not protective anymore. Changing vector means that you'll have to fire another sand cannister.
Where things get interesting is when two or more enemies are engaged. That will require one sand cloud for each direction covered.
fredofmars
SOC-12
How then do you account for the launchers being different prices (MCr 0.75 for missiles and MCr 0.25 for sandcasters)? They also have different TL modifiers in HG. Those two pieces of data suggest to me that they are separate and distinct pieces of equipment. What is left completely unspecified is whether the missiles and sand cannisters are dimentionally identical (though IMTU they are not).
fredofmars
SOC-12
How then do you account for the launchers being different prices (MCr 0.75 for missiles and MCr 0.25 for sandcasters)? They also have different TL modifiers in HG. Those two pieces of data suggest to me that they are separate and distinct pieces of equipment. What is left completely unspecified is whether the missiles and sand cannisters are dimentionally identical (though IMTU they are not).
WJP,
Yup, I very much agree. Traveller is artfully vague concerning sandcasters.
You, on the other hand, specifically referred to a 'hull grid'.
True. It doesn't exactly fit any CT canon either.
While CT is mum on the issue, MT, as CT's heir, shed a little light. MT mentions magnetic and gravity manipulated sand clouds at higher tech levels, which implies that lower tech level sand isn't manipulated in that manner.
From 'special field cables' to 'flexible hull grid lines' to 'hull grid' is quite a jump, IMHO. Then again, the idea of a hull grid was not very well thought out. As some Great Old Ones have pointed out, DGP never quit their day jobs.
MT added the hull grid to Traveller's box of tricks and then, as Aramis pointed out, failed to allow for surface hits to damage and/or degrade a vessel's ability to jump. I can hit your vessel's surface hard enough and long enough to rupture every fuel tank, destroy every turret, and knock out your m-drive but, despite the presence of a 'hull jump grid', the only way I can disable and/or degrade your ability to jump with a surface hit is to trigger an internal explosion.
Odd, no?
In the end, the vague, few canonical statements regarding sandcasters mean that we must step into the breach with our own explanations. However, we do need to take care when presenting those explanations to point out what bits are known from the OTU and what bits are opinion and conjecture from our personal TU.
Have fun,
Bill
WJP,
Yup, I very much agree. Traveller is artfully vague concerning sandcasters.
You, on the other hand, specifically referred to a 'hull grid'.
True. It doesn't exactly fit any CT canon either.
While CT is mum on the issue, MT, as CT's heir, shed a little light. MT mentions magnetic and gravity manipulated sand clouds at higher tech levels, which implies that lower tech level sand isn't manipulated in that manner.
From 'special field cables' to 'flexible hull grid lines' to 'hull grid' is quite a jump, IMHO. Then again, the idea of a hull grid was not very well thought out. As some Great Old Ones have pointed out, DGP never quit their day jobs.
MT added the hull grid to Traveller's box of tricks and then, as Aramis pointed out, failed to allow for surface hits to damage and/or degrade a vessel's ability to jump. I can hit your vessel's surface hard enough and long enough to rupture every fuel tank, destroy every turret, and knock out your m-drive but, despite the presence of a 'hull jump grid', the only way I can disable and/or degrade your ability to jump with a surface hit is to trigger an internal explosion.
Odd, no?
In the end, the vague, few canonical statements regarding sandcasters mean that we must step into the breach with our own explanations. However, we do need to take care when presenting those explanations to point out what bits are known from the OTU and what bits are opinion and conjecture from our personal TU.
Have fun,
Bill
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
Well, whatever the GOO's said about DGP, I'm a firm believer that DGP did Traveller better than ANY other producer to date, including GDW.
IMO, most other Traveller items fade in comparison to DGP's stuff.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, of course, but from where I'm standing, I think it fits canon nicely. It fills in the vague holes with something that is Traveller-esque plausible.
Aramis is incorrect (not entirely unusual, from what I've seen). The SOM specifically speaks to damaged hull grids. Up to 10% of a ship's hull grid can be damaged, and the ship can still jump.
More than that, and we're either talking about a misjump or, more likely, no jump at all.
Supplement Four
SOC-14 5K
Well, whatever the GOO's said about DGP, I'm a firm believer that DGP did Traveller better than ANY other producer to date, including GDW.
IMO, most other Traveller items fade in comparison to DGP's stuff.
Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, of course, but from where I'm standing, I think it fits canon nicely. It fills in the vague holes with something that is Traveller-esque plausible.
Aramis is incorrect (not entirely unusual, from what I've seen). The SOM specifically speaks to damaged hull grids. Up to 10% of a ship's hull grid can be damaged, and the ship can still jump.
More than that, and we're either talking about a misjump or, more likely, no jump at all.
far-trader
SOC-14 10K
Well in MTU sandcasters and launchers operate on the same prinicpal, just at different power levels and with different targeting requirements. I do have a combination launcher for MCr1 that can handle either type of munition as they are dimensionally identical in MTU.
And that's what they are in MTU, munitions. I don't see how a 50kg "missile" can hold all the supposed thrust and warhead and electronics, and I also have a hard time with the ranges and time involved. So my "missiles" are fired by the launcher at very high velocity, basically it's a big gun and the "missiles" are big bullets.
"Missiles" come as (civilian) kinetic munitions, (paramilitary) explosive munitions, and (military) nuclear munitions.
Sand fired by a "missile" launcher is a low impact kinetic munition. Great for wargames, target practice and scaring the odd merchie into surrendering. Think giant paintballs. No real damage but the guy knows he's been hit.
Sand cannisters fired by the sandcaster operate a little differently. The Gunner chooses the threat to defend against and fires the sand cannister(s) at the threat. At a short range they pop and spill the cloud of highly charged particulate. The charge holds the "sand" in a cloud long enough to provide cover from that threat for that turn. It does not interfere with the ship's own "missiles" or lasers. It does stack for effectiveness. The "sand" is not effective against "missiles".
Basically, for my Cr2 worth.
And that's what they are in MTU, munitions. I don't see how a 50kg "missile" can hold all the supposed thrust and warhead and electronics, and I also have a hard time with the ranges and time involved. So my "missiles" are fired by the launcher at very high velocity, basically it's a big gun and the "missiles" are big bullets.
"Missiles" come as (civilian) kinetic munitions, (paramilitary) explosive munitions, and (military) nuclear munitions.
Sand fired by a "missile" launcher is a low impact kinetic munition. Great for wargames, target practice and scaring the odd merchie into surrendering. Think giant paintballs. No real damage but the guy knows he's been hit.
Sand cannisters fired by the sandcaster operate a little differently. The Gunner chooses the threat to defend against and fires the sand cannister(s) at the threat. At a short range they pop and spill the cloud of highly charged particulate. The charge holds the "sand" in a cloud long enough to provide cover from that threat for that turn. It does not interfere with the ship's own "missiles" or lasers. It does stack for effectiveness. The "sand" is not effective against "missiles".
Basically, for my Cr2 worth.
far-trader
SOC-14 10K
Well in MTU sandcasters and launchers operate on the same prinicpal, just at different power levels and with different targeting requirements. I do have a combination launcher for MCr1 that can handle either type of munition as they are dimensionally identical in MTU.
And that's what they are in MTU, munitions. I don't see how a 50kg "missile" can hold all the supposed thrust and warhead and electronics, and I also have a hard time with the ranges and time involved. So my "missiles" are fired by the launcher at very high velocity, basically it's a big gun and the "missiles" are big bullets.
"Missiles" come as (civilian) kinetic munitions, (paramilitary) explosive munitions, and (military) nuclear munitions.
Sand fired by a "missile" launcher is a low impact kinetic munition. Great for wargames, target practice and scaring the odd merchie into surrendering. Think giant paintballs. No real damage but the guy knows he's been hit.
Sand cannisters fired by the sandcaster operate a little differently. The Gunner chooses the threat to defend against and fires the sand cannister(s) at the threat. At a short range they pop and spill the cloud of highly charged particulate. The charge holds the "sand" in a cloud long enough to provide cover from that threat for that turn. It does not interfere with the ship's own "missiles" or lasers. It does stack for effectiveness. The "sand" is not effective against "missiles".
Basically, for my Cr2 worth.
And that's what they are in MTU, munitions. I don't see how a 50kg "missile" can hold all the supposed thrust and warhead and electronics, and I also have a hard time with the ranges and time involved. So my "missiles" are fired by the launcher at very high velocity, basically it's a big gun and the "missiles" are big bullets.
"Missiles" come as (civilian) kinetic munitions, (paramilitary) explosive munitions, and (military) nuclear munitions.
Sand fired by a "missile" launcher is a low impact kinetic munition. Great for wargames, target practice and scaring the odd merchie into surrendering. Think giant paintballs. No real damage but the guy knows he's been hit.
Sand cannisters fired by the sandcaster operate a little differently. The Gunner chooses the threat to defend against and fires the sand cannister(s) at the threat. At a short range they pop and spill the cloud of highly charged particulate. The charge holds the "sand" in a cloud long enough to provide cover from that threat for that turn. It does not interfere with the ship's own "missiles" or lasers. It does stack for effectiveness. The "sand" is not effective against "missiles".
Basically, for my Cr2 worth.
WJP,
SOM can talk about damaged hull grids all it wants. SOM is not a rule book and it's comments regarding damaged hull grids don't show up in MT's ship combat results. You can inflict surface hit after surface hit, prang a hull into swiss cheese, and not damage a vessel's ability to jump one whit. To do that you must either roll for an internal explosion on the surface damage table or use a weapon that already causes internal damage.
Show me the same SOM/hull grid comments in MT's ship combat rules and we'll all take notice. Until then, SOM is simply a nice book with wonderful details and illos and no rules.
SOM says a lot of things a lot of people ignore. Do you, as SOM suggests, 'overpower' your thruster plates to 400% to provide lift perpendicular to the plate's orientation? Do your thruster plates glow blue and, while they can be mounted anywhere and provide thrust, are they installed aft because installing them forward wouldn't let the Navy sneak up on pirates? SOM speaks directly to those practices too.
And why is a fellow who routinely trumpets his "I Use CT Canon Only" stance quoting a MegaTraveller book in the first place?
Anyway, what you claim works IYTU is your business. What you claim works in the OTU is another kettle of fish entirely.
Have fun,
Bill
WJP,
SOM can talk about damaged hull grids all it wants. SOM is not a rule book and it's comments regarding damaged hull grids don't show up in MT's ship combat results. You can inflict surface hit after surface hit, prang a hull into swiss cheese, and not damage a vessel's ability to jump one whit. To do that you must either roll for an internal explosion on the surface damage table or use a weapon that already causes internal damage.
Show me the same SOM/hull grid comments in MT's ship combat rules and we'll all take notice. Until then, SOM is simply a nice book with wonderful details and illos and no rules.
SOM says a lot of things a lot of people ignore. Do you, as SOM suggests, 'overpower' your thruster plates to 400% to provide lift perpendicular to the plate's orientation? Do your thruster plates glow blue and, while they can be mounted anywhere and provide thrust, are they installed aft because installing them forward wouldn't let the Navy sneak up on pirates? SOM speaks directly to those practices too.
And why is a fellow who routinely trumpets his "I Use CT Canon Only" stance quoting a MegaTraveller book in the first place?
Anyway, what you claim works IYTU is your business. What you claim works in the OTU is another kettle of fish entirely.
Have fun,
Bill
TheEngineer
SOC-14 1K
Hi !
I don't mix hull jump grid stuff and sandcasters. If so non jump capable ships e.g. like SDBs might have a problem
Too much afford for a traditional but crude defense like sand.
Far Traders description is just fine with a little difference, that regrading to HG2 and MTs space combat rules both beam and sand are effective against missiles.
I always assumed, that the sand is just released from the slowly moving sand pod on its way heading to attackers direction, thus forming a slowly expanding cigar shaped sand cloud.
On higher tech levels the sand pod itself becomes a bit more controllable (short time locomotion control, better release control...) but still no things like grav or magnetic focussing.
Regards,
Mert
I don't mix hull jump grid stuff and sandcasters. If so non jump capable ships e.g. like SDBs might have a problem
Too much afford for a traditional but crude defense like sand.
Far Traders description is just fine with a little difference, that regrading to HG2 and MTs space combat rules both beam and sand are effective against missiles.
I always assumed, that the sand is just released from the slowly moving sand pod on its way heading to attackers direction, thus forming a slowly expanding cigar shaped sand cloud.
On higher tech levels the sand pod itself becomes a bit more controllable (short time locomotion control, better release control...) but still no things like grav or magnetic focussing.
Regards,
Mert
TheEngineer
SOC-14 1K
Hi !
I don't mix hull jump grid stuff and sandcasters. If so non jump capable ships e.g. like SDBs might have a problem
Too much afford for a traditional but crude defense like sand.
Far Traders description is just fine with a little difference, that regrading to HG2 and MTs space combat rules both beam and sand are effective against missiles.
I always assumed, that the sand is just released from the slowly moving sand pod on its way heading to attackers direction, thus forming a slowly expanding cigar shaped sand cloud.
On higher tech levels the sand pod itself becomes a bit more controllable (short time locomotion control, better release control...) but still no things like grav or magnetic focussing.
Regards,
Mert
I don't mix hull jump grid stuff and sandcasters. If so non jump capable ships e.g. like SDBs might have a problem
Too much afford for a traditional but crude defense like sand.
Far Traders description is just fine with a little difference, that regrading to HG2 and MTs space combat rules both beam and sand are effective against missiles.
I always assumed, that the sand is just released from the slowly moving sand pod on its way heading to attackers direction, thus forming a slowly expanding cigar shaped sand cloud.
On higher tech levels the sand pod itself becomes a bit more controllable (short time locomotion control, better release control...) but still no things like grav or magnetic focussing.
Regards,
Mert
