SDB, FFW, & HG
- Thread starter Hal
- Start date
FFW has Regina listed as TL10 and FFW is intended to be a stand alone game AND an RP aide for GMs setting a campaign in the Marches during the FFW.
Of course, when we have contradictions like this, people will choose what works best for them and their campaign, so, in a way, there is no "correct" answer
Of course, when we have contradictions like this, people will choose what works best for them and their campaign, so, in a way, there is no "correct" answer
BetterThanLife
SOC-14 1K
In most cases when it comes to vector movement you are dealing with right triangles so your formula is much simpler. a^2+b^2=c^2 You will find if you limit yourself to movement in 6 directions that the movement system in Mayday works well for 2d movement.
Further if you are playing with such high velocities you are dealing with one pass only, so movement hardly matters. It is a high speed passing engagement and each side gets off one to three shots before they are out of range. Or a high velocity but one that is matched so a fairly low relative velocity. When dealing with starship combat as opposed to a snapshot engagement, total velocity has very little effect, relative velocity is the important numbers. Unless you are maneuvering close to a heavenly body then absolute velocity only matters if you are going to impact that body and for the gravitational effects of that body. Otherwise absolute velocity has very little impact on starship combat.
Further if you are playing with such high velocities you are dealing with one pass only, so movement hardly matters. It is a high speed passing engagement and each side gets off one to three shots before they are out of range. Or a high velocity but one that is matched so a fairly low relative velocity. When dealing with starship combat as opposed to a snapshot engagement, total velocity has very little effect, relative velocity is the important numbers. Unless you are maneuvering close to a heavenly body then absolute velocity only matters if you are going to impact that body and for the gravitational effects of that body. Otherwise absolute velocity has very little impact on starship combat.
As it turns out - you'd be mostly right when it came to HG combat or any other. For GURPS however, closing velocity matters a GREAT deal when it comes to missile combat. In GURPS TRAVELLER, a single fighter, launched from a carrier at high speed, launching a 10G missle after accellerating another 12G's over two turns, will deliver a punch with its missile not unlike that of a spinal mount.
There is another situation where high closing speeds will matter - and that is for an "oiler" type ship returning to the mainworld from its Gas Giant - with its load of processed hydrogen fuel. The general "business" plan that I opted for was a 3.3 (IIRC) G run from its outer gas giant to the inner mainworld - taking three days in, and three days out - with 1 day for slip-ups. I didn't account for the fact that such a ship would have to go near or through the sun during periods when the sun was directly between the gas giant and the mainworld.
Another point of interest is that with these rules - snapshot engagements can be played out
Of course, there would have to be a REASON for such engagements. Hmmm. We may have stumbled onto why System Defense Boats can engage in warfare within a system and still survive even though the main enemy fleet is still in system. Have the SDB's make high speed runs against the peripheral of the enemy fleet instead of going through the main heart and concentration of the enemy fleet... hmmmmm.
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
CT also had missile vector damage additions in the Missiles Special Supplement.
Using the rules from that book missiles can be capital ship killers, something that didn't carry over into High Guard very well. Which is odd since the supplement came out 4 years after High Guard 2nd edition
Using the rules from that book missiles can be capital ship killers, something that didn't carry over into High Guard very well. Which is odd since the supplement came out 4 years after High Guard 2nd edition
<dreamy expresion on face mode engaged>
Wouldn't it be nice to run something like Trillion Credit Squadrons based on the whole of the spinward marches? Each of the world's budgets defined based on what they can do, based on what they are supposed to have in the way of ground forces and naval forces as well as things like sensor satelite arrays within systems (so they can see what shit is going down and where) and so on? Wouldn't it be nice to have a plausible and rational universe where the following is true:
1) the squadrons presented in FFW are present in the history
2) the budgets are rational? Ie, planetary forces get what it takes to run the business of government as well as run their military machine.
3) that once and for all, we can have a game where people agree "Hey, these basics make sense - lets concentrate on something like a good old fashioned piracy scenario and prove or disprove that games mechanics wise, piracy is or is not possible.
<dreamy face mode disengaged>
Wouldn't it be nice to run something like Trillion Credit Squadrons based on the whole of the spinward marches? Each of the world's budgets defined based on what they can do, based on what they are supposed to have in the way of ground forces and naval forces as well as things like sensor satelite arrays within systems (so they can see what shit is going down and where) and so on? Wouldn't it be nice to have a plausible and rational universe where the following is true:
1) the squadrons presented in FFW are present in the history
2) the budgets are rational? Ie, planetary forces get what it takes to run the business of government as well as run their military machine.
3) that once and for all, we can have a game where people agree "Hey, these basics make sense - lets concentrate on something like a good old fashioned piracy scenario and prove or disprove that games mechanics wise, piracy is or is not possible.
<dreamy face mode disengaged>
BetterThanLife
SOC-14 1K
Given standard active sensor ranges. (Passive sensors are not generally accurate enough for a shooting engagement.) At the speeds you are talking about in general you will be past the target before you can go through the target aquisition, location, identification, lock and fire sequence. Part of this, of course, would depend on which version of Traveller Sensors you are using.
Both sides banging away with active sensors would allow passive aquisition much easier than if each side was passively looking for the other before locking them up with firecontrol, which is why modern Navy's and Aircraft are back to using passive sensors to look for each other. I can't see Traveller being much different. (One of the big reasons the F-14 has the long range TV camera under the nose with the Thermal Imager.)
People are still trying to work out ways to use Active sensors to find a target without giving away your position. (Low Probability of Intercept radar for the F-14D and the latest generation Phoenix missile being one way.) The other thing that is used is using a seperate active sensor platform that is out of range of enemy fire but can direct friendly units under passive sensors to the target. (the AWACS concept) The F-117 and the B-2 rely heavily on GPS and Satelite imagery for target aquisition because they can't go active without giving up their biggest advantage (Stealth).
In general though the Firing platform is going to need an active lock on the target to kill it effectively. (Or someone needs an active lock.) So you need time for the aquisition to firing sequence to take place. If you are closing at around .5c you will easily be past the target before you can shoot at it.
Both sides banging away with active sensors would allow passive aquisition much easier than if each side was passively looking for the other before locking them up with firecontrol, which is why modern Navy's and Aircraft are back to using passive sensors to look for each other. I can't see Traveller being much different. (One of the big reasons the F-14 has the long range TV camera under the nose with the Thermal Imager.)
People are still trying to work out ways to use Active sensors to find a target without giving away your position. (Low Probability of Intercept radar for the F-14D and the latest generation Phoenix missile being one way.) The other thing that is used is using a seperate active sensor platform that is out of range of enemy fire but can direct friendly units under passive sensors to the target. (the AWACS concept) The F-117 and the B-2 rely heavily on GPS and Satelite imagery for target aquisition because they can't go active without giving up their biggest advantage (Stealth).
In general though the Firing platform is going to need an active lock on the target to kill it effectively. (Or someone needs an active lock.) So you need time for the aquisition to firing sequence to take place. If you are closing at around .5c you will easily be past the target before you can shoot at it.
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
Put the active sensor in the missile and shoot it as soon as passives allow. As more data is gathered on the target the missile can be vectored into a probable intercept path and then go active for terminal guidance.
Of course at these speeds the missiles aren't going to be able to maneuver much, But then, neither iis the target.
I'm begining to think of Traveller missile as more of a direct fire round with some slight terminal guidance ability. Maybe it would be a good idea to launch the missiiles from rail guns to impart a different vector from the firing ship, but even that is going to be limited.
Of course at these speeds the missiles aren't going to be able to maneuver much, But then, neither iis the target.
I'm begining to think of Traveller missile as more of a direct fire round with some slight terminal guidance ability. Maybe it would be a good idea to launch the missiiles from rail guns to impart a different vector from the firing ship, but even that is going to be limited.
The Oz
SOC-14 1K
When running TRAVELLER combat I have always treated missiles just the way you say, Sigg: effectively as direct-fire weapons with a really long effective range, but subject to ECM and point defense. It speeds things up (no need to track the missiles and figure intercepts, just assume that the missiles have the G's and delta V to make the intercept) and got the combat over with so we could go on with the adventure.
I'm thinking of running missile combat that way in PP:F, given the number of missile batteries present in a typical game of PP:F.
I'm thinking of running missile combat that way in PP:F, given the number of missile batteries present in a typical game of PP:F.
That where you and I differ in our approach to the game. I agree with you 100% that there is no single correct answer for all those many private Traveller Universes. Hey, even though I try to keep my TU as close to the OTU as I can, there are still quite a few answers that are correct for the OTU but incorrect for the OTU (the X-boat routes to name but one example).Originally posted by PBI:
Of course, when we have contradictions like this, people will choose what works best for them and their campaign, so, in a way, there is no "correct" answer
But for any single universe there are lots of issues where only one answer can be correct. And the OTU is, IMO, a single universe [Insert usual caveat about the GTU before 1116]. If you give Regina a TL of 10 IYTU, that's the correct answer - for your TU. And if I give Regina a TL of 12 IMTU, that's the correct answer - for my TU. And if Hal decides to give Regina a TL of 15 IHTU, that will be the correct answer - for his TU.
But those three answers can't all three be correct for any single TU. And unless someone specifically says otherwise, I always assume that the OTU (or the GTU on the JTAS boards) is the universe under discussion. The default value, as it were.
I can't say that Regina's TL (in the OTU) is really 12 (in 1105) and that the various books that says otherwise is wrong. Only Marc and his authorized viceroys can do that. But I do feel entitled to claim that it seems a mistake that Regina can both be TL 10 and nevertheless able to build jump-4 ships.
Hans
I'd like to play out the whole 5FW as a double-blind macro game and resolve all ship engagements using PP:F! (Of course you'd need a large hall and a dozen players to play out any major fleet engagement.)
Something based on GDW's Third World War series would be about right for planetary operations ...
Regards PLST
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
Doesn't help much
Using book 2 the Kinunir would need drives rated as V up to Y, depending on rounding its hull down to 1000t or up to 2000t.
Checking the TL chart in book 3 gives these drives a TL of 15.
Therefore the book 2 version of the Kinunir is a TL15 design
far-trader
SOC-14 10K
Predates Book 5 2nd edition yes, but actually came out the same year as Book 5 1st edition, part of my reasoning im my own rework noted above.
Rancke, I honestly don't know how our positions differ. You said that you disagreed with me, then proceeded to say that you, me, and Hal could all have different answers for our own campaigns and that those answers would be perfectly fine, because they're for our campaigns.
That's exactly what I was saying.
That's exactly what I was saying.
I was trying to point out that we seem to be discussing two different things. You're discussing yours, mine, and Hal's Traveller Universes whereas I'm discussing the Official Traveller Universe. And in the OTU only one answer (at a time) can be true. I have no problem with someone disagreeing with me about which answer is the best. Either he convinces me, or I convince him, or we end up agreeing to disagree. In the process the different arguments get a thorough going over and sometimes new and exiting ideas crop up. All good clean fun.
But I have no desire to try to convince anyone of what is best for his universe.
Hans
Actually, I wasn't discussing my own Traveller universe. I was trying to point out that the OTU seems to be so muddled on this issue (and certain others) that unless there is a proclaimation from the Creator, there can be no correct answer. That's all. I don't mind dicussing the points at all, I was just pointing out that because of the ambiguity, unless a solution is officical, folks will go on using what solutions they have been using already.
The thing is? With all of the ambiguity involved - there can't even be one OTU either... It is like building a V-8 engine and having the thing run on 4 pistons the right size, 2 pistons too small, 1 piston too large, and one piston missing entirely. If you expect that engine to run at all - you have to remove the piston that is too large. After you've done that, the engine runs poorly because it is now missing TWO pistons. If you put in two pistons - what you've done in effect is remove "canon" (the piston that is too large) and replaced it with the proper sized piston. The Missing piston is the information that is needed but as yet unsupplied. The ill fitting pistons can either be left alone - or they can be upgraded and replaced with pistons that are almost identical, but with minor fixes that make it 100% perfect in fit.
That's how I see OTU. It doesn't exist because of the inconsistencies that will always continue to divide rather than unify players of the Traveller game...
That's how I see OTU. It doesn't exist because of the inconsistencies that will always continue to divide rather than unify players of the Traveller game...
BetterThanLife
SOC-14 1K
Problem there is size. You missile is going to be more sensor than warhead. Now granted in CT, sensors were rolled into the bridge tonnage, so we can't use those numbers, in T20 they are rolled into your computer, waste of time there too. MT has them seperate. IN MT at TL14 an EMS active array with a 500,000KM range has a volume of .06Tons. Missiles have a volume of .1 ton each. And we haven't put the computer on board to deal with the ECM yet.
About the only option you would have is a semipassive system like the early radar homing missiles. (AIM-7 Sparrow equivalent) Then it would need to be able to receive the lock from the ship, either be command directed or receive the bounce of the sensors from the target. (Which would require an active lock before firing.) Command guided missiles don't work against fast moving targets at relatively close ranges, at these ranges and speeds, where the speed of light is a factor, command guidance has too much lag, even if it were wire guided.
Then there is of course jamming.
In currnet combat, snapshots in this kind of passing engagement are generally gun shots not missile shots, missiles tend to wind up facing away from the target instead of aquiring it. A snap shot in this kind of space engagement would probably be best handled by a lightspeed weapon or near lightspeed weapon. (IE a Laser, PA, Meson Weapon, Energy weapon.)
I agree about handling missiles as direct fire weapons when dealing with Traveller starship combat, but that is generally a low speed engagement, at least relative to each other.
Brings up an interesting thought though. What speed are the discharges of these weapons and how fast is a missile? Lasers are by definition Light Speed weapons. One would think that a PA is near lightspeed. Fusion and Plasma being a bit slower. Is Meson FTL?
How fast is a missile? Most traveller canon has a missile with a 6G drive. Anyone see anything different?
In currnet combat, snapshots in this kind of passing engagement are generally gun shots not missile shots, missiles tend to wind up facing away from the target instead of aquiring it. A snap shot in this kind of space engagement would probably be best handled by a lightspeed weapon or near lightspeed weapon. (IE a Laser, PA, Meson Weapon, Energy weapon.)
I agree about handling missiles as direct fire weapons when dealing with Traveller starship combat, but that is generally a low speed engagement, at least relative to each other.
Brings up an interesting thought though. What speed are the discharges of these weapons and how fast is a missile? Lasers are by definition Light Speed weapons. One would think that a PA is near lightspeed. Fusion and Plasma being a bit slower. Is Meson FTL?
How fast is a missile? Most traveller canon has a missile with a 6G drive. Anyone see anything different?
Similar threads
