*shrug* You might be right on 'while' and 'and,' I don't know. Personally I think they have somewhat different connotations, anyway. Either way, the sentence doesn't say that battleships are only better against small craft and missiles, nor does it suggest that they can only absorb tremendous amounts of damage from missiles and small craft, but rather that they can absorb tremendous amounts of damage, with no qualifiers. The sentence structure suggests that these are the two advantages of battleships: that their secondary batteries make them virtually immune to missiles and small craft, and that they can absorb tremendous amounts of damage. I fail to see how the sentence suggests that their ability to absorb damage only applies to missiles and small craft.
The Compleat Battleship
- Thread starter robject
- Start date
*shrug* You might be right on 'while' and 'and,' I don't know. Personally I think they have somewhat different connotations, anyway. Either way, the sentence doesn't say that battleships are only better against small craft and missiles, nor does it suggest that they can only absorb tremendous amounts of damage from missiles and small craft, but rather that they can absorb tremendous amounts of damage, with no qualifiers. The sentence structure suggests that these are the two advantages of battleships: that their secondary batteries make them virtually immune to missiles and small craft, and that they can absorb tremendous amounts of damage. I fail to see how the sentence suggests that their ability to absorb damage only applies to missiles and small craft.
Right you are. I don't know why my memory told me the Plankwell was 300,000T. My mistake.
This is not necessarily the case. Although LDAM does show a picture of the 100,000T Sylea class battleship, it doesn't say that it's a current (Clasic Era) design. It could be a battleship from back in the days when ships were smaller. Other than the Syleas, the only battleships I know of are 200,000T or above. (Note that there may be battleships detailed in places that I don't know about, such as FSotSI; if so, please tell me about them).
Be that as it may, the distinction is by vulnerability. A Cruiser is too lightly armored to stand in the line of battle. A battleship is well enough armored to stand in the line of battle.
EDIT: And just to add to the confusion, none of the three battleship classes in Fighting Ships are fully armored. The Tigress has armor-15, but only a factor-7 meson screen, the Plankwell has armor-10 and meson screen three (The Atlantic is actually slightly better off, with the same armor and screen-6), and the Kokirrak has armor-12 and screen-8.
Hans
Last edited:
All things being equal, a larger ship will generally have a higher armor rating than a smaller ship. That might be what they are talking about.
A T-Meson is 14% of the tonnage of a 50k ship, but only 7% of a 100k ship. That would lead to 7 extra levels of armor, which is significant in High Guard.
pendragonman
Absent Friends Margrave
But those extra 7 levels of armor are just so much tissue paper against a Meson Spinal.
It is what it is. I don't know. But it does not mention Meson Guns, it is true for Particle Accelerators it seems. However basing everything on one sentence is not good reasoning. There are possibly other considerations to take into account.
Remember, a Batron of Tigresses is not only 8 ships, but 2400 Fighters, so there is the dice rolling madness; plus fleets are composed of multiple squadrons. What we know is that there are BB's in the OTU IN, how they are used is not well defined. I would say that masses of fighters, missile ships such as the Valor and other classes to absorb and cause initial damage before the bigger ships move in. There are no examples of tactial engagements to draw information from, afaik. If tenders can be kept out of the battle line, then so could BB's until the time one wishes to commit them. There isn't a solid definition of the "Main Line of Battle"; FFW may be used to describe the disposition and composition of fleets, but not the actual tactical engagements HG-wise.
What we know is that BB's exist, that will not change, paper arguments don't necessarily have relevance. It is better to try to find the reason for their existence, rather than to say they shouldn't exist.
Armor for the ship. (HG p 28)
No armor, and missiles, lasers, PA's, and Fusions will eat you.
Assuming that a BB may absorb Meson Gun hits because it's said to be able to absorb tremendous amount of damage is (IMO) like saying that an Iowa BB can sustain a nuke because is made to sustain a tremendous amount of damage.
I see the MG moe or less as nukes would be in modern ship combat, a weapon against wich most deffenses are useless, tha main difference in this comparison would be a political matter: while you need a political decision (nuclear release) for the nukes on earth (and accept the consequences), the release to use mesons in space combat is given already, asa no collateral damage is expected and no danger for the space is feared, as is for the whole planet (refearing to the life on it) with nukes.
That's not the point. The point is, if cruisers have 7 less points of armor, the secondary weapons of a battleship are effective against them. This has the effect of rendering the cruisers more fragile than the battleships.
Bad analogy. An Iowa isn't expected to face nukes as the main weapon against it in normal deployment. A Traveller battleship is expected to face meson spinals.
It's not just because of that sentence. It's also because the Imperium builds 200,000+T battleships in large numbers. Also, a bit more nebulous, because of the whole Napoleonic Warfare analogy that you get from cruisers (~frigates) being perceived as smaller and weaker and not suitable to stand in the line of battle and battleships (¨line-of-battleships) being bigger and tougher and able to stand in the line of battle.
It was only this afternoon that I realized that while cruisers are explicitly said to be between 20,000 and 100,000T, the size of battleships is not actually defined (at least not in Fighting Ships). I've always assumed that battleships have sizes of 200,000T and up because the only examples of battleships we have stats for are 200,000T and more.
This does open up the possibility of cruiser-sized battleships, but I'm not at all sure how I like that. It would certainly mess up my guesstimates of IN budgets if the quarter of the combat vessels (the battleships) that I thought averaged five times more expensive than the rest (the cruisers) actually cost only half again or twice as much.
Right now, small battleships just don't set right with my instincts. But I'll certainly have to think about it some more.
Meanwhile, large or small, the rules still don't allow battleships to be better armored against meson weapons than cruisers.
Hans
Last edited:
The only reason that Meson guns are seen as the be-all, end-all is that it is assumed the target ship has 15 armor. If the target ship has less than 15 armor (8 armor on a cruiser?) then other weapons are dangerous as well.
That would lead to BB's being better able to stand in the line of battle than CA's.
I should run some simulations. I do believe that, for the Imperium, Jump-4 is a prerequisite for the combat designs. I know it's hard to get an armor level 15 cruiser when it requires a meson (even a J) and Jump-4.
Just crunching some numbers...
TL15
_2% Bridge
_5% J4 drive
11% M4 drive
_4% PP4 drive
16% AV 15
40% 1J4 fuel
_4% 4wk PP Fuel
82% total
So, payload plus quarters needs to be under 12%.
Service crew is 0.2% of hull times accomodation size; we'll use 2td for Half a Stateroom, for 0.4% of hull
Drive Crew is 1% tonnage, doubled for 1/2SR, so... 2% of 26%
So, we can count drive and maint crew at 1% of hull (2% if Single occ.)
Ships Troops: 3 per 1000Td, DO, gives 0.6%
_2% Bridge
_5% J4 drive
11% M4 drive
_4% PP4 drive
16% AV 15
40% 1J4 fuel
_4% 4wk PP Fuel
_2% Crew Quarters
84% total
Which leaves 10% for major weapon and power for it, and defenses.
That Factor T meson needs 7000 Td for the weapon, 1200 Td for the additional PP to power it, 1200 Td for the fuel for said PP (but only because of HG not allowing multiple active PP's...), and 140 Td for the 70 gun crew, and 24 for the 12 additional power plant crew. So it's a net 9564 Td weapon. Fitting that in, a 100KTd cruiser could mount one, and a couple of bays.
The TL15 Factor 9 Meson Screen is 1.8% hull in EP... which means 1.8% fuel and 1.8% power plant and 1.8%*2% crew tonnage, and a flat 40 ton install. for said 100KTd cruiser, it's 1800+1800+36+40=3670 tons...
Fixed non-tonnage related costs run to under 100 Td; command crew SR's, Computer, PP tonage, fuel and crewman to supply computer.
Includes NO defenses nor weapons other than armor.
Edit: Forgot to power for M6; reduce to M4 for size
Edit 2: correcting totals
TL15
_2% Bridge
_5% J4 drive
11% M4 drive
_4% PP4 drive
16% AV 15
40% 1J4 fuel
_4% 4wk PP Fuel
82% total
So, payload plus quarters needs to be under 12%.
Service crew is 0.2% of hull times accomodation size; we'll use 2td for Half a Stateroom, for 0.4% of hull
Drive Crew is 1% tonnage, doubled for 1/2SR, so... 2% of 26%
So, we can count drive and maint crew at 1% of hull (2% if Single occ.)
Ships Troops: 3 per 1000Td, DO, gives 0.6%
_2% Bridge
_5% J4 drive
11% M4 drive
_4% PP4 drive
16% AV 15
40% 1J4 fuel
_4% 4wk PP Fuel
_2% Crew Quarters
84% total
Which leaves 10% for major weapon and power for it, and defenses.
That Factor T meson needs 7000 Td for the weapon, 1200 Td for the additional PP to power it, 1200 Td for the fuel for said PP (but only because of HG not allowing multiple active PP's...), and 140 Td for the 70 gun crew, and 24 for the 12 additional power plant crew. So it's a net 9564 Td weapon. Fitting that in, a 100KTd cruiser could mount one, and a couple of bays.
The TL15 Factor 9 Meson Screen is 1.8% hull in EP... which means 1.8% fuel and 1.8% power plant and 1.8%*2% crew tonnage, and a flat 40 ton install. for said 100KTd cruiser, it's 1800+1800+36+40=3670 tons...
Fixed non-tonnage related costs run to under 100 Td; command crew SR's, Computer, PP tonage, fuel and crewman to supply computer.
Includes NO defenses nor weapons other than armor.
Edit: Forgot to power for M6; reduce to M4 for size
Edit 2: correcting totals
Last edited:
pendragonman
Absent Friends Margrave
Aramis has shown that one could reasonably build a 100-125 kdton "Self Propelled Meson Gun" fleet support vessel.
The Question is: Is a battery of 2-4 of these a useful AND survivable part of a battle fleet? Not necessarily taking on the political rolls of show the flag and other peacetime mission, but strictly as a fleet combat support vessel. Kind of like the modern self propelled artillery guns that modern armies use.
The Question is: Is a battery of 2-4 of these a useful AND survivable part of a battle fleet? Not necessarily taking on the political rolls of show the flag and other peacetime mission, but strictly as a fleet combat support vessel. Kind of like the modern self propelled artillery guns that modern armies use.
You need a minimum of a 6 PP for the M6 so you are looking at an additional 4% used just for PP and fuel.
mmmm....
Armour 15 16%
M6 17%
J4 5%
PP7.8 (must be equal to M +1.8 for Meson screen) 7.8%
Engineering crew 0.596%
J fuel 40%
PP fuel 7.8%
purification 0.717%
Bridge 2%
Command Crew 0.1%
Service Crew 0.6%
equals 97.613% payload = 2.387%
plus
9fib computer 26T
command staterooms 6T
T Meson 8000T
factor 9 Meson screen 40T
gun crew 176T
Power for 1200 ep 1200T
Fuel 1200T
Purification 18T
Payload equals 10666T
Therefore Min ship with agility 6 armour 15 T meson and factor 9 meson screen equals 10666/0.02387 = 446,838T
(or to put it another way, isn't going to fly)
So since armor is useless against the primary threat it is going to face, make the armor less and surround it with escorts to take out fighters and missiles before they can hit it.
Yes, I know HG combat doesn't allow a ship to be screened by escorts while still being able to fire its spinal, but in "reality" that must be a viable tactics. If there's an escort placed between a fighter and the battleship, the fighter can't hit the battleship. Same for missiles. The only secondaries that could shoot throgh an escort would be meson guns.
Hans
I think HG assumes that combat is happening at such a high speed that this isn't a viable tactic. Either you are in the fight or you are out of the fight.
Actually, it's more akin to a pocket battleship than a self-mobile artillery piece.
At 150KTd, it's a PBB with secondary weapons and full set of non-turret defenses. (As weapons, weapon crew, and additional power have 15KTd to work with... and the Meson and MeScreen eat a combined 13.1KTd.
At TL15... (max one of these per 1000 Td hull)
A Repulsor-9 bay is 124 Td (100Td bay, 10Td PP, 10Td fuel, 4 Td for 2 crew)
A PA-9 bay is 224 Td (100Td Bay, 60Td PP, 60Td Fuel, 4 Td for 2 crew)
A Missile 9 bay is 54Td (50Td Bay, 0 PP/Fuel, 4Td for 2 crew)
A Fusion 9 bay is 94Td (50Td bay, 20 PP, 20 Fuel, 4Td for two crew)
A Fusion 9 Battery is 93 Td (10x Dual 2Td turrets, +40 Td PP +40Td Fuel, +3 Td for 1 Gunner & 1/2 drive tech)
Damper-9 is 210Td (20Td + 90 Td PP +90 Td Fuel +10Td for 5 crew)
Sand-9 is 12Td (10x trip SC turr +2Td for one crew)
BLas-9 is 72Td (10x trip BLas turr, +2Td for crew, +30 Td PP +30 Td Fuel)
At TL 14... things get much uglier
_2% Bridge
_5% J4 drive
_8% M3 drive
_8% PP4 drive
30% AV 14
40% 1J4 fuel
_4% 4wk PP Fuel
_2% Crew Quarters
99% total...
At 150KTd, it's a PBB with secondary weapons and full set of non-turret defenses. (As weapons, weapon crew, and additional power have 15KTd to work with... and the Meson and MeScreen eat a combined 13.1KTd.
At TL15... (max one of these per 1000 Td hull)
A Repulsor-9 bay is 124 Td (100Td bay, 10Td PP, 10Td fuel, 4 Td for 2 crew)
A PA-9 bay is 224 Td (100Td Bay, 60Td PP, 60Td Fuel, 4 Td for 2 crew)
A Missile 9 bay is 54Td (50Td Bay, 0 PP/Fuel, 4Td for 2 crew)
A Fusion 9 bay is 94Td (50Td bay, 20 PP, 20 Fuel, 4Td for two crew)
A Fusion 9 Battery is 93 Td (10x Dual 2Td turrets, +40 Td PP +40Td Fuel, +3 Td for 1 Gunner & 1/2 drive tech)
Damper-9 is 210Td (20Td + 90 Td PP +90 Td Fuel +10Td for 5 crew)
Sand-9 is 12Td (10x trip SC turr +2Td for one crew)
BLas-9 is 72Td (10x trip BLas turr, +2Td for crew, +30 Td PP +30 Td Fuel)
At TL 14... things get much uglier
_2% Bridge
_5% J4 drive
_8% M3 drive
_8% PP4 drive
30% AV 14
40% 1J4 fuel
_4% 4wk PP Fuel
_2% Crew Quarters
99% total...
So a half million ton one would be able to pack a couple secondary weapons
I thought a T meson was 7k tons.
Wonder what it would take for a J and/or an N meson.
The meson gun itself is. It requires 1200 EP, tho, adding 1200 Td PP and 1200 Td Fuel, plus 70 crew at 2 Td each for the weapon crew, plus 12 crew at 2Td each for the power plant chunk.
The Meson gun and all it's associated goodies and crew total out to 9564 tons.
Similar threads
