Smallest legal fighter using CT/HG2
- Thread starter Vladika
- Start date
That's close to the same thing I came up with back in the day when HG2 came out. Mine was 6 tons, but I might have added back the .5 ton to keep the numbers even when figuring out launch tubes and hangar space.
I couldn't get it lower than 10 tons for a laser-armed fighter, though.
I couldn't get it lower than 10 tons for a laser-armed fighter, though.
Vladika
SOC-14 1K
At 5.55555dtons you can do the laser at the expense of agility. Not a good trade though.
I use this in the role of ground support for Marine landings and finishing off crippled ships. Keeps your opponent from salvaging loses.
Nice little configuration 7 Carrier (1600dt Agility 6) at TL11 hauls 40 of them around. These things stay around all the way up to TL15 Fleets doing Convoy escort at J2.
Vladika
SOC-14 1K
I'm not really familiar with the Solomani fixed mounts though I've heard them mentioned several times on this board and elsewhere. It was my understanding that there was a penalty in the form of a negative DM for using them, that they were strictly Solomani use and lastly, I like the advantage of 3 firing missiles at TL13+.
Please correct me if I'm wrong on these points. Also, would you kindly send me the reference source for the Solomani weapons use? I'm not doubting you at all, just would like to know where to look for it.
Maybe I could work in a refugee Solomani weapons maker.
CT:AM6 (solomani) page 42. Fixed weapons may have doublé weapons per hardpoint, but have a -2 to hit.
In Bk2 combat, this can be quite important, as you throw more missiles, with more TH chances, more probablity to overload defensive lasers, and more damage.
In HG through, the TH numbers for factor 3 and 4 missiles (3/6 launchers respectivelly) are the same (5+), but the penentrate number uses to be one less for factor 4 tan 3.
I'm not sure this advantage offsets the -2 TH, though, and less so in a ship with such small computer...
Vladika
SOC-14 1K
Yeah, I never put these up against a ship able to maneuver with a functioning computer. As I said earlier, they are strictly mop up and ground support. (Though at the lower TLs they get by.)
Thanks for the reference. I'm going to look it up just as soon as possible. Looks likes I'm going to read those Alien Modules more carefully!
Better say they are not intended for it, but I'd not bet they'll never be.
As former militry officer, you must know better than myself that operational realities take precedence over desgn intent some times, and in Traveller, where closer reinforcements are 2 weeks from call, I guess some flexibility must be taken into account, as you never know what circumpstances will your fleet meet.
Last edited:
Vladika
SOC-14 1K
Quite right. There are a few other uses, even against TL13-15 fleets. A failing of mine though is to never use units as cannon fodder unnecessarily and I prefer not to deploy units in suicide missions. You are correct though, occasions can arise where the unavoidable becomes all to real.
Still, mission depending, I'd rather maneuver and save assets for a more opportune fight later...
If using Bk2 combat, they're not at a disadvantage other than for lacking the bridge. Bk2 combat, however, also lacks significant effects of Agility and computer model.
A fighter with a model 1 is running either:
Maneuver or Maneuver-Evade (1 slot) - required for use of the MDrive
When shooting missiles, it cannot maneuver - because it has to load Target (1) and Launch (1)
Use a 1/bis instead, and it's far more variable... and interesting
| Ace | Defensive | Assault |
| (1)Maneuver/Evade 1 | (2)Maneuver/Evade 2 | (1)Maneuver/Evade 1 |
| (1) Target | (1) Target | (1) Target |
| (1) Launch | (1) Launch | (1) Launch |
| (1) Gunner Interact | (1) Selective |
BlackBat242
SOC-14 1K
In HG there is no penalty for fixed mounts on small craft (fighters)... in fact the default is for fixed weapons!
HG2 page 34 said:
Quite right. There are a few other uses, even against TL13-15 fleets. A failing of mine though is to never use units as cannon fodder unnecessarily and I prefer not to deploy units in suicide missions. You are correct though, occasions can arise where the unavoidable becomes all to real.
Still, mission depending, I'd rather maneuver and save assets for a more opportune fight later...
But a Little larger fighter might have more flexibility in action, whhile still being able to be used as you say. I guess in Traveller, where you go to space combat with outdaed intelligence, flexibility is paramount.
A larger fighter may have a bridge (so keeping the true rating of the computer), larger computer, and a gunner (thus allowing both crewmwmbers to use their full skills).
And see that your missile armed fighters lose most of their punch if ordnance limits (ammo) are used (one of the greatest flaws in HG, IMHO)....
I understand HG cometer model as an abstraction of both, sensors/jamming capabilities and the use of more programs at once.
It would be a good idea if not for the second paragraph in the bridge and computer section of the small craft design rules (CT:HG, page 34): Standard models only are available, bis and fib models are not allowed (emphasis is mine).
As Bk2 has no small crafts design rules, I guess HG must be used to design them, even if you're using Bk2 rules for combat...
Sure, but those fixed weapons told in the AM6 are a specific Solomani feature, and, while the book still shows its ships as Bk2 ones, nothing is said about not available for HG ships. It can be interpreted both ways, IMHO.
Condottiere
SOC-14 5K
Having investigated viabilities in Mongoose, it comes down to cost. The larger the craft, the more the drive and the power plant cost.
Also, there's a minimum power plant requirement for energy weapons, so that missile/projectile weapon systems become attractive.
If you take a larger view, militaries need to allow their pilots actual flight time, and giving them access to a high performance but low operating cost fighter helps accomplish this.
Also, there's a minimum power plant requirement for energy weapons, so that missile/projectile weapon systems become attractive.
If you take a larger view, militaries need to allow their pilots actual flight time, and giving them access to a high performance but low operating cost fighter helps accomplish this.
If we want to get the fighter a tiny bit smaller. The Solomani alien module mentions that the solomani don't mind even smaller accommodation and staterooms etc. only need to be 0.8 the size of imperial ones. You might be able to shrink that 0.5 tn control couch down to 0.4 tns.
Cheers
Richard
Cheers
Richard
Vladika
SOC-14 1K
I think, in answer to a question McPerth had, that HG requires fixed mounts but with no negative DMs. In the HG situation you are "paying" the 1dt for a hardpoint and associated fire control. In the Solomani version this is "free" therefore less, or no, fire control. Therein we find the rational for the difference:
Get the weapons station "free" in the Solomani version or pay the 1dt in the HG version and avoid the penalty.
Vladika
SOC-14 1K
Again, this isn't a front line fighter; it is mission specific. I build up to 80dt fighters for front line use. (Costly? YES! But built for a very real purpose under HG combat rules.)
As for missile use the "Midge" has exactly three combat volleys before returning to the carrier for reload. The carrier is always in the reserve and therefore only one squadron out of three is in direct combat at a time. One coming, one going and one in. You can still commit ALL at once for an Alpha Strike.
As CT/HG is clear on missile load out for fighters I do account for their ammo usage. I enjoy enjoy "realism" this adds. (I'm a strong believer that HG should track missile use all the way around and that magazines, reloads and resupply need be considered!)
Vladika
SOC-14 1K
Interesting thought for Solomani craft only. AM6 wasn't out when the 5.5dt "Midge" was designed though. The Solomani version could then come in at 4.4dt and still fulfill the intended mission requirements.
Then again, given the later fuel requirement in the Errata, fuel no longer requires a one tonne minimum either. For a fighter 12hrs fuel would be more than enough.
Vladika
SOC-14 1K
what's the point of tiny fighters that can only launch missiles?
Are they "manned sand" meant to soak up laser shots?o:
No, they are mission specific designed to destroy crippled ships, thus deigning the owning side the ability to salvage them. They are VERY cost effective even allowing for their carrier. A crippled ship (No ability maneuver and no longer covered by it's fleet is easy pickings.)
Also, even though there is no HG rule or need, I justify them as used for Marine Ground Support.
Similar threads
