Shooting "up" Tech Levels in High Guard

[The Oz]

As part of my HG/FFW conversion project I have just completed an analysis of how weapons effectiveness in HG varies with tech level. In particular, I checked which weapons are best to use when shooting at an enemy of higher or lower TLs.

I can post the math if ya'll would like, but basically I determined how many shots would hit and penetrate for each of three weapon systems: spinal meson guns, spinal particle accelerators, and f-9 nuclear missile bays. Meson guns had to penetrate meson screens (only), spinal PAWs had to "penetrate" armor (that is, roll =low= enough on the Damage tables to be a valid hit), and nuclear missiles had to penetrate nuclear dampers (only). I only did one defense each to keep things simple (and to keep meson guns and nuclear missiles even with spinal PAWs, which only have one defense to penetrate) but this does mean that meson guns and nuclear missiles are somewhat overvalued since the other defenses against them are not counted.

I assumed that each ship for each TL had the best equipment (armor=TL, max meson screen, nuclear damper, computer), Agility-6 and was size Q+ (75,000 tons) and was firing at the best range for that weapon (Close range for meson guns, long range for missiles).

For spinal meson guns the results are the chance to hit and penetrate per shot (out of 1.00), while results for spinal PAWs are effective hits (good Surface Explosion damage rolls) per shot, and the nuclear missile results are how many effective hits out of 100 factor-9 missile battery shots. You could also read that as the percent chance for any one battery to hit and penetrate.
</font><blockquote>code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;"> TL15>TL14 TL14>TL15 Ratio
Meson 0.82 0.42 1.95
PAW 10.77 6.25 1.72
Msl 60.14 4.86 12.38

TL15>TL13 TL13>TL15 Ratio
Meson 0.92 0.17 5.27
PAW 13.72 5.12 2.68
Msl 91.70 1.17 78.54

TL15>TL12 TL12>TL15 Ratio
Meson 0.97 0.05 20.94
PAW 17.42 2.78 6.26
Msl 97.20 0.00 NA

TL14>TL13 TL13>TL14 Ratio
Meson 0.83 0.42 1.98
PAW 12.63 5.91 2.14
Msl 70.18 24.31 2.89

TL14>TL12 TL12>TL14 Ratio
Meson 0.92 0.17 5.27
PAW 16.51 5.44 3.04
Msl 91.70 11.59 7.91

TL13>TL12 TL12>TL13 Ratio
Meson 0.82 0.17 4.73
PAW 15.15 4.82 3.15
Msl 83.30 48.56 1.72</pre>[/QUOTE]</font>

• TL15>TL14 means a TL15 ship shooting at a TL14 ship.</font>
• Ratio is the higher TL's value divided by the lower TL's value for that weapon. It is a measure of how more effective the higher TL is using that weapon on the lower TL.</font>
• Meson is the best spinal meson gun available at that TL.</font>
• PAW is the best spinal particle accelerator available at that TL.</font>
• Msl is 100 factor-9 nuclear missile batteries.</font>

The first thing that jumps out is that even one TL difference is really bad news, although it's not as bad at lower TLs (say, TL12 to TL13) as it is higher up the TL chart. The second thing I see is that if you have to shoot at someone 2 or more TLs up from you the best weapon is the spinal PAW since that's where you suffer the least disadvantage.

However, things aren't quite as bad as they look from these numbers. I used these weapon effectiveness values in a Lanchester "N-squared Law" combat simulator. For those who don't know, that's a mathmatical combat simulator that assumes losses are proportional to the enemy's strength and weapon effectiveness. Basically, it takes the number of one side's ships and multiplies that by the effectiveness of the weapons on those ships, and uses that value to inflict losses on the other side. Both sides do this to each other simultaneously.

The effect of all this is to show that a numerical edge, even a small one, can overcome even a drastic deficiency in weapons effectiveness. In gaming this is often called the "Fuzzy Wuzzy" effect: sufficiently superior numbers can overcome superior fighting quality. My Lanchester N-squared simulator has calculated just how large "sufficiently superior numbers" have to be to overcome a superior TL in High Guard. Again, I can show the actual math if anyone's interested, but here's the results.
</font><blockquote>code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;"> Superiority
Needed
TL14 vs. TL15 1.40
TL13 vs. TL15 2.33
TL12 vs. TL15 4.01

TL13 vs. TL14 1.41
TL12 vs. TL14 2.33

TL12 vs. TL13 2.20</pre>[/QUOTE]This calculation was done with just the effectiveness figures for spinal meson guns, to keep things simple. So a 1.4 superiority (14 to 10, for instance) is (barely) enough to overcome one TL (at TL13>14 and TL14>15) while overcoming two TLs needs 2.33. For TL12 forces to deal with TL15 requires more than a four-to-one superiority.

Note this superiority is not in number or tonnage of hulls, it's superiority in large spinal meson guns. This is the underlying reason for the battlerider over the battleship; with battleriders you get more large meson guns per ton than you do with battleships.

 

[The Oz]

As part of my HG/FFW conversion project I have just completed an analysis of how weapons effectiveness in HG varies with tech level. In particular, I checked which weapons are best to use when shooting at an enemy of higher or lower TLs.

I can post the math if ya'll would like, but basically I determined how many shots would hit and penetrate for each of three weapon systems: spinal meson guns, spinal particle accelerators, and f-9 nuclear missile bays. Meson guns had to penetrate meson screens (only), spinal PAWs had to "penetrate" armor (that is, roll =low= enough on the Damage tables to be a valid hit), and nuclear missiles had to penetrate nuclear dampers (only). I only did one defense each to keep things simple (and to keep meson guns and nuclear missiles even with spinal PAWs, which only have one defense to penetrate) but this does mean that meson guns and nuclear missiles are somewhat overvalued since the other defenses against them are not counted.

I assumed that each ship for each TL had the best equipment (armor=TL, max meson screen, nuclear damper, computer), Agility-6 and was size Q+ (75,000 tons) and was firing at the best range for that weapon (Close range for meson guns, long range for missiles).

For spinal meson guns the results are the chance to hit and penetrate per shot (out of 1.00), while results for spinal PAWs are effective hits (good Surface Explosion damage rolls) per shot, and the nuclear missile results are how many effective hits out of 100 factor-9 missile battery shots. You could also read that as the percent chance for any one battery to hit and penetrate.
</font><blockquote>code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;"> TL15>TL14 TL14>TL15 Ratio
Meson 0.82 0.42 1.95
PAW 10.77 6.25 1.72
Msl 60.14 4.86 12.38

TL15>TL13 TL13>TL15 Ratio
Meson 0.92 0.17 5.27
PAW 13.72 5.12 2.68
Msl 91.70 1.17 78.54

TL15>TL12 TL12>TL15 Ratio
Meson 0.97 0.05 20.94
PAW 17.42 2.78 6.26
Msl 97.20 0.00 NA

TL14>TL13 TL13>TL14 Ratio
Meson 0.83 0.42 1.98
PAW 12.63 5.91 2.14
Msl 70.18 24.31 2.89

TL14>TL12 TL12>TL14 Ratio
Meson 0.92 0.17 5.27
PAW 16.51 5.44 3.04
Msl 91.70 11.59 7.91

TL13>TL12 TL12>TL13 Ratio
Meson 0.82 0.17 4.73
PAW 15.15 4.82 3.15
Msl 83.30 48.56 1.72</pre>[/QUOTE]</font>

• TL15>TL14 means a TL15 ship shooting at a TL14 ship.</font>
• Ratio is the higher TL's value divided by the lower TL's value for that weapon. It is a measure of how more effective the higher TL is using that weapon on the lower TL.</font>
• Meson is the best spinal meson gun available at that TL.</font>
• PAW is the best spinal particle accelerator available at that TL.</font>
• Msl is 100 factor-9 nuclear missile batteries.</font>

The first thing that jumps out is that even one TL difference is really bad news, although it's not as bad at lower TLs (say, TL12 to TL13) as it is higher up the TL chart. The second thing I see is that if you have to shoot at someone 2 or more TLs up from you the best weapon is the spinal PAW since that's where you suffer the least disadvantage.

However, things aren't quite as bad as they look from these numbers. I used these weapon effectiveness values in a Lanchester "N-squared Law" combat simulator. For those who don't know, that's a mathmatical combat simulator that assumes losses are proportional to the enemy's strength and weapon effectiveness. Basically, it takes the number of one side's ships and multiplies that by the effectiveness of the weapons on those ships, and uses that value to inflict losses on the other side. Both sides do this to each other simultaneously.

The effect of all this is to show that a numerical edge, even a small one, can overcome even a drastic deficiency in weapons effectiveness. In gaming this is often called the "Fuzzy Wuzzy" effect: sufficiently superior numbers can overcome superior fighting quality. My Lanchester N-squared simulator has calculated just how large "sufficiently superior numbers" have to be to overcome a superior TL in High Guard. Again, I can show the actual math if anyone's interested, but here's the results.
</font><blockquote>code:</font><hr /><pre style="font-size:x-small; font-family: monospace;"> Superiority
Needed
TL14 vs. TL15 1.40
TL13 vs. TL15 2.33
TL12 vs. TL15 4.01

TL13 vs. TL14 1.41
TL12 vs. TL14 2.33

TL12 vs. TL13 2.20</pre>[/QUOTE]This calculation was done with just the effectiveness figures for spinal meson guns, to keep things simple. So a 1.4 superiority (14 to 10, for instance) is (barely) enough to overcome one TL (at TL13>14 and TL14>15) while overcoming two TLs needs 2.33. For TL12 forces to deal with TL15 requires more than a four-to-one superiority.

Note this superiority is not in number or tonnage of hulls, it's superiority in large spinal meson guns. This is the underlying reason for the battlerider over the battleship; with battleriders you get more large meson guns per ton than you do with battleships.

 

[kaladorn]

Nice. I always like to see someone take a gaff at Lanchester Equations.

Now, a 1.41 numerical advantage is not insignificant

from either a strictly numerical standpoint nor from a shipyward (hull production) standpoint.

An interesting extension of the analysis would be:
Given higher costs of upper TL ships, is there a point at which 1.41 of a lower TL ship is actually more cost effective than the higher TL ship? That is to say, if you can buy 1.41 of TL X or more for the cost of 1.00 TL X+1, then TL X is more cost effective...

I'm betting at TL12 -> TL13, this might not be the case, but perhaps at TL14 -> TL15, it might prove that the TL14 ships are the 'better deal'.

This of course ignores shipyward capacities for hulls, logistical issues, etc. But it might also be interesting from an analysis point of view.

 

[kaladorn]

Nice. I always like to see someone take a gaff at Lanchester Equations.

Now, a 1.41 numerical advantage is not insignificant

from either a strictly numerical standpoint nor from a shipyward (hull production) standpoint.

An interesting extension of the analysis would be:
Given higher costs of upper TL ships, is there a point at which 1.41 of a lower TL ship is actually more cost effective than the higher TL ship? That is to say, if you can buy 1.41 of TL X or more for the cost of 1.00 TL X+1, then TL X is more cost effective...

I'm betting at TL12 -> TL13, this might not be the case, but perhaps at TL14 -> TL15, it might prove that the TL14 ships are the 'better deal'.

This of course ignores shipyward capacities for hulls, logistical issues, etc. But it might also be interesting from an analysis point of view.

 

[The Oz]

From what I've seen of HG ship construction, costs for fully-equipped warships tends to be about MCr 0.75 per ton, with larger ships ranging up to MCr 1.00/ton and smaller ships somewhat less. Costs also tend to go =down= slightly with TL, mostly thanks to smaller power plants.

So I would expect that a TL15 gov't can actually slightly outbuild a TL14 empire assuming the same economic base (and remember that TL15 empires should have a higher per capita income, just to make matters worse).

 

[The Oz]

From what I've seen of HG ship construction, costs for fully-equipped warships tends to be about MCr 0.75 per ton, with larger ships ranging up to MCr 1.00/ton and smaller ships somewhat less. Costs also tend to go =down= slightly with TL, mostly thanks to smaller power plants.

So I would expect that a TL15 gov't can actually slightly outbuild a TL14 empire assuming the same economic base (and remember that TL15 empires should have a higher per capita income, just to make matters worse).

 

[hcobb]

Two problems I see are that you are neglecting that missiles always need lots of hits to degrade a ship, PAWs have a sharp knee at size+armor/2 factor and that meson hits are always very bad news.

Finally, what the fnord would anybody be doing with a Tigress sized ship in High Guard?

Try in again with 1.2 kdton missile boats and 12 kdton battleriders and you will see the power of TL15.

-HJC

 

[hcobb]

Two problems I see are that you are neglecting that missiles always need lots of hits to degrade a ship, PAWs have a sharp knee at size+armor/2 factor and that meson hits are always very bad news.

Finally, what the fnord would anybody be doing with a Tigress sized ship in High Guard?

Try in again with 1.2 kdton missile boats and 12 kdton battleriders and you will see the power of TL15.

-HJC

 

[The Oz]

Originally posted by Henry J Cobb:
Two problems I see are that you are neglecting that missiles always need lots of hits to degrade a ship, PAWs have a sharp knee at size+armor/2 factor and that meson hits are always very bad news.

I didn't "neglect" any of the things you mention.

This analysis wasn't intended to show that you need lots more missiles than meson guns to kill a big ship but rather that you need a lot more TL14 missiles to kill a TL15 ship than TL15 missiles to kill a TL14 ship, assuming the ships are of equal size.

As for the "knee" in the destructive capability of spinal PAWs, that wasn't applicable to my analysis because the ships were specified as being of size Q+ and also of armor=TL, so that no spinal PAW would reach the "size + armor/2 knee" that you mention.

Finally, in the analysis, I did assume that any spinal meson gun hit that penetrated the meson screen would kill the target. I didn't explicitly state this assumption, and perhaps I should have.

Finally, what the fnord would anybody be doing with a Tigress sized ship in High Guard?

No doubt about this: in strict HG combat a Tigress is nothing but a waste of a whole lot of MCr.

Try in again with 1.2 kdton missile boats and 12 kdton battleriders and you will see the power of TL15.

-HJC

I will. I'll build a test of your missile boats vs some TL15 BBs and some TL15 BRs and see what happens. I have the HG stats for your missile boats off the ct-starships Yahoo!Groups page.

 

[The Oz]

Originally posted by Henry J Cobb:
Two problems I see are that you are neglecting that missiles always need lots of hits to degrade a ship, PAWs have a sharp knee at size+armor/2 factor and that meson hits are always very bad news.

I didn't "neglect" any of the things you mention.

This analysis wasn't intended to show that you need lots more missiles than meson guns to kill a big ship but rather that you need a lot more TL14 missiles to kill a TL15 ship than TL15 missiles to kill a TL14 ship, assuming the ships are of equal size.

As for the "knee" in the destructive capability of spinal PAWs, that wasn't applicable to my analysis because the ships were specified as being of size Q+ and also of armor=TL, so that no spinal PAW would reach the "size + armor/2 knee" that you mention.

Finally, in the analysis, I did assume that any spinal meson gun hit that penetrated the meson screen would kill the target. I didn't explicitly state this assumption, and perhaps I should have.

Finally, what the fnord would anybody be doing with a Tigress sized ship in High Guard?

No doubt about this: in strict HG combat a Tigress is nothing but a waste of a whole lot of MCr.

Try in again with 1.2 kdton missile boats and 12 kdton battleriders and you will see the power of TL15.

-HJC

I will. I'll build a test of your missile boats vs some TL15 BBs and some TL15 BRs and see what happens. I have the HG stats for your missile boats off the ct-starships Yahoo!Groups page.

 

[hcobb]

Here are the numbers for the N meson gun against a TL15 agility 5 missile boat at long range.

To hit: 17%
No meson screen.
Configuration: 92%

Total chance of kill: 15%

Nancy class battlerider vs another one at long range.

To hit: 17%
Vs Meson screen 9: 58%
Configuration: 92%

Total chance of kill: 9%

The S factor TL14 PA vs Nancy.

To hit: 58%

Nancy vs huge TL14 dreadnaught that mounts the factor S PA at short range.

To hit: 72%
Meson screen 6: 83%
Configuration: 97%

Total chance of kill: 59% (And it costs much less).

-HJC

 

[hcobb]

Here are the numbers for the N meson gun against a TL15 agility 5 missile boat at long range.

To hit: 17%
No meson screen.
Configuration: 92%

Total chance of kill: 15%

Nancy class battlerider vs another one at long range.

To hit: 17%
Vs Meson screen 9: 58%
Configuration: 92%

Total chance of kill: 9%

The S factor TL14 PA vs Nancy.

To hit: 58%

Nancy vs huge TL14 dreadnaught that mounts the factor S PA at short range.

To hit: 72%
Meson screen 6: 83%
Configuration: 97%

Total chance of kill: 59% (And it costs much less).

-HJC

 

[mike wightman]

How much armour does your Nancy class carry?

Build a rider with armour factor 14 and it is protected from the extra damage and auto criticals of the factor S PAW.

 

[mike wightman]

How much armour does your Nancy class carry?

Build a rider with armour factor 14 and it is protected from the extra damage and auto criticals of the factor S PAW.

 

[RainOfSteel]

Originally posted by Henry J Cobb:
Finally, what the fnord would anybody be doing with a Tigress sized ship in High Guard?

Tigress-sized vessels are immune the extra damage dealt by spinal weaponry to ships with USP Size smaller than the USP Code of the spinal mount.

IMTU, anyway, I allow "Massed Battery Fire". On a Tigress class vessel, with 215 bearing batteries of Missile Bays, heh . . . you can pretty much kiss small vessels goodbye (which is the way it should be).

If we add in that fighters can do the same thing, (i.e. can group by squadron into a battery, and then mass the squadrons), that further allows the Tigress to takes its rightful place as the terrifying leviathan it really is.

 

[RainOfSteel]

Originally posted by Henry J Cobb:
Finally, what the fnord would anybody be doing with a Tigress sized ship in High Guard?

Tigress-sized vessels are immune the extra damage dealt by spinal weaponry to ships with USP Size smaller than the USP Code of the spinal mount.

IMTU, anyway, I allow "Massed Battery Fire". On a Tigress class vessel, with 215 bearing batteries of Missile Bays, heh . . . you can pretty much kiss small vessels goodbye (which is the way it should be).

If we add in that fighters can do the same thing, (i.e. can group by squadron into a battery, and then mass the squadrons), that further allows the Tigress to takes its rightful place as the terrifying leviathan it really is.

 

[hcobb]

Here's my Nancy, and she is indeed proof against Factor-S PA crits.

A TL15 Battlerider example.

BR-1981 Nancy BR-K106KJ3-F99905-853N9-0 MCr13,153 11,000 tons
Bearing 1 4 11114 Crew=143
Batteries 1 4 11114 TL=15
Passengers=0 Low=72 Cargo=13 Fuel=2,090 EP=2,090 Agility=6 No Marines
One backup for each of Nuc Damp, Meson screen and computer.

"Tigress-sized vessels are immune the extra damage dealt by spinal weaponry to ships with USP Size smaller than the USP Code of the spinal mount."

So? It still takes 13 unmodified interior explosion and 13 unmodified Rad damage rolls from a factor-N meson gun and after that it is dead, dead, dead.

How many times do you have to roll Fuel Tanks Shattered?

-HJC

 

[hcobb]

Here's my Nancy, and she is indeed proof against Factor-S PA crits.

A TL15 Battlerider example.

BR-1981 Nancy BR-K106KJ3-F99905-853N9-0 MCr13,153 11,000 tons
Bearing 1 4 11114 Crew=143
Batteries 1 4 11114 TL=15
Passengers=0 Low=72 Cargo=13 Fuel=2,090 EP=2,090 Agility=6 No Marines
One backup for each of Nuc Damp, Meson screen and computer.

"Tigress-sized vessels are immune the extra damage dealt by spinal weaponry to ships with USP Size smaller than the USP Code of the spinal mount."

So? It still takes 13 unmodified interior explosion and 13 unmodified Rad damage rolls from a factor-N meson gun and after that it is dead, dead, dead.

How many times do you have to roll Fuel Tanks Shattered?

-HJC

 

[The Oz]

I don't think there's any doubt that under strict HG rules, the best thing to do is to put your firepower into as many small hulls as you can.

My test of BB vs. Missile Boat showed that. As anyone would expect, an equal-cost force of MBs defeated the BB, losing 40% of the MBs in the process.

What I find interesting is just how strong the TL differences are, especially with missiles. 125 TL14 MBs do not defeat the BB, in fact the BB handily kills them losing only 5 missile batteries. It takes a swarm of around 300 TL14 MBs to kill the BB. And that swarm costs far more than one TL15 BB.

It make me wonder just what gives the Zhos (or the Vargr, and especially the Swordies) the confidence to attack the 3rd Imperium. I know some people think that the FFW optional rule about squadron quality is overdone and shouldn't be used, but according to the HG stats, that rule should be required and might even need to be strengthened.

Only the Zhos have the numerical superiority to defeat the 3rd Imperium and that's only at the start when the Zhos are concentrated and the Imperium isn't. At least FFW does have the Zhos hoping for a short war. That much is accurate: it's their only chance.

 

[The Oz]

I don't think there's any doubt that under strict HG rules, the best thing to do is to put your firepower into as many small hulls as you can.

My test of BB vs. Missile Boat showed that. As anyone would expect, an equal-cost force of MBs defeated the BB, losing 40% of the MBs in the process.

What I find interesting is just how strong the TL differences are, especially with missiles. 125 TL14 MBs do not defeat the BB, in fact the BB handily kills them losing only 5 missile batteries. It takes a swarm of around 300 TL14 MBs to kill the BB. And that swarm costs far more than one TL15 BB.

It make me wonder just what gives the Zhos (or the Vargr, and especially the Swordies) the confidence to attack the 3rd Imperium. I know some people think that the FFW optional rule about squadron quality is overdone and shouldn't be used, but according to the HG stats, that rule should be required and might even need to be strengthened.

Only the Zhos have the numerical superiority to defeat the 3rd Imperium and that's only at the start when the Zhos are concentrated and the Imperium isn't. At least FFW does have the Zhos hoping for a short war. That much is accurate: it's their only chance.