Squadrons

[Shadow Bear]

On the bottom of page 178 is a heading for Squadrons. It consists of two paragraphs and leads to some troubling questions.

The first paragraph defines a squadron to be up to 10 ships of the same type and armorment. It gives no limitation on the size of the vessels. That seems to indicate anything from 10 ton fighters to capital ships can use these rules. This paragraph also states the weapons are organizied into batteries. Yet there are no tables for organizing bay weapons or spinal mounts into batteries.

I suggest a limit on the size of vessels to be used as squadrons under these rules be impossed. Either that or give us some tables for organizing bay weapons and spinal mounts into batteries.

 

[themink]

your PC's have GROUPS of ships with spinal mounts!

Sounds as if you are after a set of wargame rules for t20 ships rather than roleplaying ones

 

[Commonman]

The idea behind squadrons is to speed combat involving large number ship so sqaudrons could include fighter, as a matter of fact this is probably the only way to handle large numbers of fighter flights. Also, the way I read it, the sqaudron moves as a single ship, takes damage as a single ship but each ship fires all of its weapons as per the batterie rules, so you would fire all your laser weapons as 1 weapon, all missles as 1 weapon, and so on each ship in turn. I would think this would be quicker then moving each ship, then firing each ships batterie then figuring and tracking damage for each ship.

 

[snrdg082102]

Originally posted by Shadow Bear:
On the bottom of page 178 is a heading for Squadrons. It consists of two paragraphs and leads to some troubling questions.

The first paragraph defines a squadron to be up to 10 ships of the same type and armorment. It gives no limitation on the size of the vessels. That seems to indicate anything from 10 ton fighters to capital ships can use these rules. This paragraph also states the weapons are organizied into batteries. Yet there are no tables for organizing bay weapons or spinal mounts into batteries.

I suggest a limit on the size of vessels to be used as squadrons under these rules be impossed. Either that or give us some tables for organizing bay weapons and spinal mounts into batteries.

Evening Shadow Bear,

First, a USN squadron would be ships of the same ship type, DD, DE, CG. A Submarine squadron would be made up of subs, usually of the same class, Los Angeles. So limiting a squadron by size is not a viable option.

Next, THB page 278 discusses how vessel weapons are grouped into batteries. This would be similar to what would occur with a squadron.

 

[Shadow Bear]

Evening Shadow Bear,

First, a USN squadron would be ships of the same ship type, DD, DE, CG. A Submarine squadron would be made up of subs, usually of the same class, Los Angeles. So limiting a squadron by size is not a viable option.

Next, THB page 278 discusses how vessel weapons are grouped into batteries. This would be similar to what would occur with a squadron.

Agreed, ships that form a squadron should be of the same type and hopefully the same class. I am not saying that larger ships cannot or should not be formed into squadrons, rather that the rules I mentions I believe are designed to make fighters and other smaller craft more useful in battle.

The rules you mention addresses turrets only. Bay weapons and spianl mounts are not set up to formed into batteries.

 

[Shadow Bear]

Originally posted by Commonman:
The idea behind squadrons is to speed combat involving large number ship so sqaudrons could include fighter, as a matter of fact this is probably the only way to handle large numbers of fighter flights. Also, the way I read it, the sqaudron moves as a single ship, takes damage as a single ship but each ship fires all of its weapons as per the batterie rules, so you would fire all your laser weapons as 1 weapon, all missles as 1 weapon, and so on each ship in turn. I would think this would be quicker then moving each ship, then firing each ships batterie then figuring and tracking damage for each ship.

Yes I agree that this is the best way to use fighters in a large battle and about the only way the would be of any use against larger vessels.

 

[Shadow Bear]

Originally posted by The Mink:
your PC's have GROUPS of ships with spinal mounts!

Sounds as if you are after a set of wargame rules for t20 ships rather than roleplaying ones

You are jumping to confusion! No one ever said my PC's had even one vessel with a spinal mount or bay weapons.

I like to do ship design and the combat rules do have something to do with how ships are designed. I do not envison my PC's forming squadrons anywhere in the near future, however I do see my PC's encountering Imperial Navy vessels on many different sizes and functions. Naval practices and traditions need to be considered by a refree when designing an encounter.

 

[themink]

If your traveller universe is one in which large numbers of ships which have spinal mounts engage in battles, then you need to decide :-

i) Whether they will be fighting as squadrons. If so, do they fire weapons as squadrons. If so then you do need rules for the effect, what results would you like.

ii) Is there a "step up" - are there ships out there bigger than the Tigress? If so, does it have something better than a "spinal" mount. In which case, which gives out first, bigger ships or squadrons.

iii) Do you like the rules for squadrons as written?

Fundamentally, I like the squadrons rules, but I will only be allowing them for "small craft". Given that only massive military ships in MTU use bays, this isn;t a problem. (Yes it's small ship trav)

 

[Shadow Bear]

Originally posted by The Mink:
If your traveller universe is one in which large numbers of ships which have spinal mounts engage in battles, then you need to decide :-

i) Whether they will be fighting as squadrons. If so, do they fire weapons as squadrons. If so then you do need rules for the effect, what results would you like.

ii) Is there a "step up" - are there ships out there bigger than the Tigress? If so, does it have something better than a "spinal" mount. In which case, which gives out first, bigger ships or squadrons.

iii) Do you like the rules for squadrons as written?

Fundamentally, I like the squadrons rules, but I will only be allowing them for "small craft". Given that only massive military ships in MTU use bays, this isn;t a problem. (Yes it's small ship trav)

i) I am happy with the way large vessels function under the present rules and while I will have a squadron organization for larger vessels they will not use the squadron rules as written.

ii) At the present time I see no need for a step up for vessels larger than the Tigress class (I have designed larger vessels but they function more as a stations or star ports rather than a ship of the line).

iii) Yes but some limitation on size should be addressed. I suggest some where less than 1000 dtons.

IMTU fleet engagements of spinal mount class vessels may occur during war. While it is VERY unlikely that PC's would be commanding such forces they could end up near by for some reason or other. I must state that you never know what a PC will do at any given situation and would at least want to know what tactics other forces in the area would or could use. Also former Naval PC's would know these things.

 

[graden1]

Originally posted by Shadow Bear:
The rules you mention addresses turrets only. Bay weapons and spianl mounts are not set up to formed into batteries.

Right. Each bay weapon *is* a battery. So is a spinal mount. This rule is, as you said, intended for large groups of fighters. (Ten fighters w/dual fusion guns = trouble!)

For ships with large numbers of bays, I use the "Primary MOS" feat, so the gunners can "take 10", and I don't get tendonitis from rolling dice. But those 16d20 damage rolls are still a royal pain!

Later,

DGv2.0