Space Combat

[mike wightman]

Hi Oz,
some thoughts on a fleet level game.

How about converting the ships to the counter ratings in Fifth Frontier War or Invasion Earth (thhe T4 supplements Pocket Empires and Imperial Squadrons could help with this), or somthing slightly more detailed?
Each ship could have a primary weapons attack value, secondary weapons attack value, bombardment factor, defence value, armour value, maneuver, agility, jump, power plant and computer ratings.
Secondary weapons damage would degrade these ratings, while primary weapons (spinal mounts and nuclear missiles) would knock out whole systems. Or you could have damaged ratings on the back and flip the counter as in FFW.

Use the sensor rules above, substituting crew quality for individual skills, and keep vector movement. Ships could be moved as individual units, fighter squadrons, task forces, squadrons, however you want to group them.

Possilbly change the scale to 15cm per light second?

 

[mike wightman]

Hi Oz,
some thoughts on a fleet level game.

How about converting the ships to the counter ratings in Fifth Frontier War or Invasion Earth (thhe T4 supplements Pocket Empires and Imperial Squadrons could help with this), or somthing slightly more detailed?
Each ship could have a primary weapons attack value, secondary weapons attack value, bombardment factor, defence value, armour value, maneuver, agility, jump, power plant and computer ratings.
Secondary weapons damage would degrade these ratings, while primary weapons (spinal mounts and nuclear missiles) would knock out whole systems. Or you could have damaged ratings on the back and flip the counter as in FFW.

Use the sensor rules above, substituting crew quality for individual skills, and keep vector movement. Ships could be moved as individual units, fighter squadrons, task forces, squadrons, however you want to group them.

Possilbly change the scale to 15cm per light second?

 

[Badbru]

Have "Snapshot" & "Mayday" come out in the recent CT reprints? I've never had or seen these.

 

[Badbru]

Have "Snapshot" & "Mayday" come out in the recent CT reprints? I've never had or seen these.

 

[daryen]

Yes, in FFE 005 The Classic Games.

Also included are Imperium, AHL, 5FW, I:E, Dark Nebula, and Striker.

Do note, of course, that only reproductions of the counters and maps are included, so it could be very difficult to play, for example, I:E.

 

[daryen]

Yes, in FFE 005 The Classic Games.

Also included are Imperium, AHL, 5FW, I:E, Dark Nebula, and Striker.

Do note, of course, that only reproductions of the counters and maps are included, so it could be very difficult to play, for example, I:E.

 

[The Oz]

Originally posted by Sigg Oddra:
Hi Oz,
some thoughts on a fleet level game.

How about converting the ships to the counter ratings in Fifth Frontier War or Invasion Earth (thhe T4 supplements Pocket Empires and Imperial Squadrons could help with this), or somthing slightly more detailed?
Each ship could have a primary weapons attack value, secondary weapons attack value, bombardment factor, defence value, armour value, maneuver, agility, jump, power plant and computer ratings.
Secondary weapons damage would degrade these ratings, while primary weapons (spinal mounts and nuclear missiles) would knock out whole systems. Or you could have damaged ratings on the back and flip the counter as in FFW.

Use the sensor rules above, substituting crew quality for individual skills, and keep vector movement. Ships could be moved as individual units, fighter squadrons, task forces, squadrons, however you want to group them.

Possilbly change the scale to 15cm per light second?

That's more or less what I have in mind, Sigg. I'd like to reduce every ship to a few numbers, and then aggregate them. Damage would then still be assigned to individual ships, but moving/seeing/shooting would be handled at a squadron/flotilla/wing level.

Ideally, you'd be able to create an entire navy using HG/TCS/PE/IS and then come up with stats for them in this game system.

Such a system would make the strategic and operational levels easier to game by reducing the number of units you have to track. You might even be able to handle those levels on a map with counters.

On the tactical level what I'd like to emphasize is the electronic warfare (EW) battle. Being able to locate, track and target the enemy will be key in space warfare, I think. But at the same time, you'd want to keep things simple. I think some abstraction into "EW points" that are part of a squadron's assets would be necessary. These "EW points" would represent things like computer ratings, sensor decoys, jamming capability, perhaps even the presence of purpose-built EW ships. The "EW points" would be expended to see the enemy, or to keep him from seeing you, or to deceive the enemy as to what he thinks he's seeing. They could also be spent to improve your own targeting or hinder the enemy's.

Another mechanism I'd like to see is having the ability to divert part of your own firepower to temporarily destroy part of the enemy's EW spent against you. This would represent a serious attempt to hunt and kill enemy sensor drones or decoys. You'd give up a good-sized chunk of your own firepower, but for that turn you would damage his EW effort in some area.

I've also thought of a mechanism for "overs:" having missiles that are decoyed from their initial targets by EW possibly find other targets in the enemy formation. Missiles that lose their lock don't just vanish; they will search for new targets and might find them.

For combat I'd keep it pretty simple: the enemy assigns so many points of firepower to a target or targets which then use active and passive defenses to stop the incoming and then take damage depending on what gets through and how tough the targets are.

 

[The Oz]

Originally posted by Sigg Oddra:
Hi Oz,
some thoughts on a fleet level game.

How about converting the ships to the counter ratings in Fifth Frontier War or Invasion Earth (thhe T4 supplements Pocket Empires and Imperial Squadrons could help with this), or somthing slightly more detailed?
Each ship could have a primary weapons attack value, secondary weapons attack value, bombardment factor, defence value, armour value, maneuver, agility, jump, power plant and computer ratings.
Secondary weapons damage would degrade these ratings, while primary weapons (spinal mounts and nuclear missiles) would knock out whole systems. Or you could have damaged ratings on the back and flip the counter as in FFW.

Use the sensor rules above, substituting crew quality for individual skills, and keep vector movement. Ships could be moved as individual units, fighter squadrons, task forces, squadrons, however you want to group them.

Possilbly change the scale to 15cm per light second?

That's more or less what I have in mind, Sigg. I'd like to reduce every ship to a few numbers, and then aggregate them. Damage would then still be assigned to individual ships, but moving/seeing/shooting would be handled at a squadron/flotilla/wing level.

Ideally, you'd be able to create an entire navy using HG/TCS/PE/IS and then come up with stats for them in this game system.

Such a system would make the strategic and operational levels easier to game by reducing the number of units you have to track. You might even be able to handle those levels on a map with counters.

On the tactical level what I'd like to emphasize is the electronic warfare (EW) battle. Being able to locate, track and target the enemy will be key in space warfare, I think. But at the same time, you'd want to keep things simple. I think some abstraction into "EW points" that are part of a squadron's assets would be necessary. These "EW points" would represent things like computer ratings, sensor decoys, jamming capability, perhaps even the presence of purpose-built EW ships. The "EW points" would be expended to see the enemy, or to keep him from seeing you, or to deceive the enemy as to what he thinks he's seeing. They could also be spent to improve your own targeting or hinder the enemy's.

Another mechanism I'd like to see is having the ability to divert part of your own firepower to temporarily destroy part of the enemy's EW spent against you. This would represent a serious attempt to hunt and kill enemy sensor drones or decoys. You'd give up a good-sized chunk of your own firepower, but for that turn you would damage his EW effort in some area.

I've also thought of a mechanism for "overs:" having missiles that are decoyed from their initial targets by EW possibly find other targets in the enemy formation. Missiles that lose their lock don't just vanish; they will search for new targets and might find them.

For combat I'd keep it pretty simple: the enemy assigns so many points of firepower to a target or targets which then use active and passive defenses to stop the incoming and then take damage depending on what gets through and how tough the targets are.

 

[mike wightman]

Is there any need to keep a vector movement system at this scale? A simple movement points system would give you the maneuver element.
The EW rating is a good idea.

About resolving sensor attempts and combat, would you go for point allocation only or include a random element (the roll of 1d?)?

 

[mike wightman]

Is there any need to keep a vector movement system at this scale? A simple movement points system would give you the maneuver element.
The EW rating is a good idea.

About resolving sensor attempts and combat, would you go for point allocation only or include a random element (the roll of 1d?)?

 

[The Oz]

I think keeping vector movement would keep the proper TRAVELLER/"realistic" space warfare feel. The system used in Mayday/BR is the way to go here. No math, no paper records, just some counters.

And I certainly would include a random element (either 1d6 or 2d6) in all conflict resolution (sensor, combat, etc). There are few things more random than combat. Whether to use 1d6 or 2d6 would be best found by playtesting to see if the greater variability of the 2d6 roll was worth rolling all those extra dice. 2d6 would mesh better with the role-playing system.

I suspect I would like the 2d6 resolution myself. It would reduce (but not eliminate) the effect of die roll modifers from TL, EW, etc, so that forces of widely varying capability could still engage with some hope of sucess. This has been one of my gripes about 1d6-based systems: lower TL forces find they can't do any damage to the enemy and usually receive maximum damage in return. I like the way PP:F has handled things here so that the TL differences are there, but not overwhelming.

I'd use a statistical method to handle combat, since there's be a lot of weapons firing. Basically you'd find out percentages of weapons that score hits, or get decoyed, or whatever, and then use a table to convert percentages into actual points of firepower that do or do not get applied to targets.

 

[The Oz]

I think keeping vector movement would keep the proper TRAVELLER/"realistic" space warfare feel. The system used in Mayday/BR is the way to go here. No math, no paper records, just some counters.

And I certainly would include a random element (either 1d6 or 2d6) in all conflict resolution (sensor, combat, etc). There are few things more random than combat. Whether to use 1d6 or 2d6 would be best found by playtesting to see if the greater variability of the 2d6 roll was worth rolling all those extra dice. 2d6 would mesh better with the role-playing system.

I suspect I would like the 2d6 resolution myself. It would reduce (but not eliminate) the effect of die roll modifers from TL, EW, etc, so that forces of widely varying capability could still engage with some hope of sucess. This has been one of my gripes about 1d6-based systems: lower TL forces find they can't do any damage to the enemy and usually receive maximum damage in return. I like the way PP:F has handled things here so that the TL differences are there, but not overwhelming.

I'd use a statistical method to handle combat, since there's be a lot of weapons firing. Basically you'd find out percentages of weapons that score hits, or get decoyed, or whatever, and then use a table to convert percentages into actual points of firepower that do or do not get applied to targets.

 

[scrane]

Sigg,

Would it be possible for you to post your PP mods for Traveller-scale (i.e. player character scale) starships? I'd be very interested.

Scott

 

[scrane]

Sigg,

Would it be possible for you to post your PP mods for Traveller-scale (i.e. player character scale) starships? I'd be very interested.

Scott

 

[mike wightman]

The first mod is to change the scale of the damage boxes(db).
Hull
10t..........3db
every +10t..+1db up to 100t
i.e a 100t scout has 12db
every +50t..+1db
i.e. a 400t Patrol Cruiser has 18db

I have added four extra system icons, passive sensors, active sensors, grav plates and inertial compensators.
If grav plates are lost the ship has no internal gravity field and the crew operates with a penalty of 2 to rolls unless they have zero G skill.
If the inertial compensators are knocked out then the crew suffers a penalty equal to the maneuver rating used in the turn.

Chang the PP game scale to the Book 2 scale.

Treat one laser in a turret as a light laser, a triple turret is a heavy laser.

Missiles that hit cause 1d3 hits per hit generated on the damage chart.

Nuclear missiles that hit cause 2d6 hits per hit generated on the damage chart.

Use (character skill-1)/2 round down in place of crew quality modifiers.

Alternatively you can use the Book 2 rules for rolls to hit with all the modifiers for range and computer programs etc. and have one laser do 1 damage box of damage on a hit, pulse lasers 2 db, missiles 1d6, nuclear missiles 3d6, other weapons see earlier. Thenuse the PP rules for damage to systems and effects thereof.

 

[mike wightman]

The first mod is to change the scale of the damage boxes(db).
Hull
10t..........3db
every +10t..+1db up to 100t
i.e a 100t scout has 12db
every +50t..+1db
i.e. a 400t Patrol Cruiser has 18db

I have added four extra system icons, passive sensors, active sensors, grav plates and inertial compensators.
If grav plates are lost the ship has no internal gravity field and the crew operates with a penalty of 2 to rolls unless they have zero G skill.
If the inertial compensators are knocked out then the crew suffers a penalty equal to the maneuver rating used in the turn.

Chang the PP game scale to the Book 2 scale.

Treat one laser in a turret as a light laser, a triple turret is a heavy laser.

Missiles that hit cause 1d3 hits per hit generated on the damage chart.

Nuclear missiles that hit cause 2d6 hits per hit generated on the damage chart.

Use (character skill-1)/2 round down in place of crew quality modifiers.

Alternatively you can use the Book 2 rules for rolls to hit with all the modifiers for range and computer programs etc. and have one laser do 1 damage box of damage on a hit, pulse lasers 2 db, missiles 1d6, nuclear missiles 3d6, other weapons see earlier. Thenuse the PP rules for damage to systems and effects thereof.

 

[Golan2072]

Originally posted by Sigg Oddra:
To penetrate armour roll over the armour factor on 1d, DMs + weapon damage.

So, you mean that an armor of 1 doesn't help at all? roll over 1 on 1d6 with a minimum +1 DM... always a minimum of 2, right? (or would an armor of 1 protect only against "small-scale" weapons, such as PGMP's, ground vehicle plasma guns and tac missiles?

 

[Golan2072]

Originally posted by Sigg Oddra:
To penetrate armour roll over the armour factor on 1d, DMs + weapon damage.

So, you mean that an armor of 1 doesn't help at all? roll over 1 on 1d6 with a minimum +1 DM... always a minimum of 2, right? (or would an armor of 1 protect only against "small-scale" weapons, such as PGMP's, ground vehicle plasma guns and tac missiles?

 

[mike wightman]

Sorry, you're right. This isn't very clear - I know what I mean but...

By plus weapon damage I meant over the basic 1 hit of the beam laser. So a pulse laser is +1 to penetrate, etc.

I'll edit accordingly

 

[mike wightman]

Sorry, you're right. This isn't very clear - I know what I mean but...

By plus weapon damage I meant over the basic 1 hit of the beam laser. So a pulse laser is +1 to penetrate, etc.

I'll edit accordingly