The Lowly Sandcaster- Unleashed!

[kilemall]

I would tend to believe that fire control is a mater of software rather than a dedicated piece of hardware, speaking in the sense of command input-monitoring tasks not physical connections.

If the above is correct, then any terminal-device with the proper authorization codes should be able to act as fire control to the ship's computer network.

Mind there would likely be a hard-wired terminal-input device for use with fire control in the event of damage preventing normal-standard protocols.

If you are referring to my mention of the placement of the workstations, that's because I am assuming a gunner that is loading missiles would want to be able to control the rack and run diagnostics after the missile is placed, to make sure it and the data feeds are all functional before moving onto the next one, without having to communicate to someone on the bridge. I've otherwise never been a fan of the turret station many plans show.

 

[Patron Zero]

..... I've otherwise never been a fan of the turret station many plans show.

Short answer yes, but taking up the banner for missiles to be relocated to VLS-type placements to free turrets-hardpoints to other tasks and applications.

Anyone else think this should be considered as a canonical revision-option to the rules in general ?

 

[wbyrd]

I would happily take up that banner..along with a few other weapon system related tweak/fixes...

I have the idea of VLS/canister systems...the notes are actually open on my desktop right now of course that means i have to wait till I get the chance to do more work for Mongoose, and get the idea approved.

the issue is basically trying to do it without making the missile bay obsolete, or making the while idea of the missiles systems more...complex.

If you make missiles VLS then it's hard to explain why you can combine them with other weapons systems. Meaning that if the ship has only a handful of hardpoints you cant mix and match systems on that hardpoint.

when I went to write up my notes for canister/VLS systems the write up went from a paragraph, to three pages.....with reloading, damage,different fire modes...etc, included.

 

[kilemall]

I would happily take up that banner..along with a few other weapon system related tweak/fixes...

I have the idea of VLS/canister systems...the notes are actually open on my desktop right now of course that means i have to wait till I get the chance to do more work for Mongoose, and get the idea approved.

the issue is basically trying to do it without making the missile bay obsolete, or making the while idea of the missiles systems more...complex.

If you make missiles VLS then it's hard to explain why you can combine them with other weapons systems. Meaning that if the ship has only a handful of hardpoints you cant mix and match systems on that hardpoint.

when I went to write up my notes for canister/VLS systems the write up went from a paragraph, to three pages.....with reloading, damage,different fire modes...etc, included.

I've already done the conceptual work for you, free of charge.

The 1 ton of turret is just really an access closet to either a big glowing exciter tube for the lasers or rotating racks for the missile, the only part sticking up is a laser lens and otherwise you just have an opening port for the missiles.

I would stick with the pop-up box for the sandcasters, so they can be directional, just a tad inconvenient if they are dorsal, but hey low-G/zero-G/G oriented to the ceiling would fix that.

Say, am I missing out on money spewing ideas like crazy?

 

[atpollard]

Well, as this isn't edition specific, you might like to know that T5 has Firmpoints. A vessel can have 3 Firmpoints per 100 tons in place of a Hardpoint. The Firmpoint reduces the range and are perfect for point defense systems.

Just thought I drop that here and see what folks thought.

Oh, and VLS come pre-packaged, you just replace the whole box when it runs dry. It is not some hole that you stuff things in like a P-3, more like a destroyer's missile launcher. Or that is how I run them, but I mostly stick to turrets, barbettes and bays.

It makes perfect sense and is almost exactly what I would have done using the original LBB2.

• If 100 dTons of hull will support 1 hardpoint ...
• and one hardpoint will mount a turret with 3 missile launchers / sandcasters / lasers (in any combination) ...
• therefore, I should be able to mount 3 mini-turrets (able to hold 1 missile launcher, sandcaster or laser) per 100 tons of hull.

Which means that a 34 dTon small craft should be able to mount a single mini turret, and a 67 dton small craft should be able to mount two mini-turrets.

Any small craft of 33 dtons or less is too small for a mini-turret and should hard mount 1 missile launcher, sandcaster or laser like a micro-spinal mount.

 

[Enoki]

Personally. I think more should go into fire controls and sensors in relationship to weapons as these are what really count in the end. If you have great weapons that can't hit anything then they are worthless. On the other hand a few mediocre weapons with good fire controls that hit almost every time are really dangerous.
While a balance is necessary of course, right now more is put into weapons than how they are aimed or how targets are detected. It doesn't have to be a complicated system but rather one that has a good range of choices for players to select from for their ships and ship designs.

 

[kilemall]

It makes perfect sense and is almost exactly what I would have done using the original LBB2.

• If 100 dTons of hull will support 1 hardpoint ...
• and one hardpoint will mount a turret with 3 missile launchers / sandcasters / lasers (in any combination) ...
• therefore, I should be able to mount 3 mini-turrets (able to hold 1 missile launcher, sandcaster or laser) per 100 tons of hull.

Which means that a 34 dTon small craft should be able to mount a single mini turret, and a 67 dton small craft should be able to mount two mini-turrets.

Any small craft of 33 dtons or less is too small for a mini-turret and should hard mount 1 missile launcher, sandcaster or laser like a micro-spinal mount.

This rule I like lots.

 

[wbyrd]

Personally. I think more should go into fire controls and sensors in relationship to weapons as these are what really count in the end. If you have great weapons that can't hit anything then they are worthless. On the other hand a few mediocre weapons with good fire controls that hit almost every time are really dangerous.
While a balance is necessary of course, right now more is put into weapons than how they are aimed or how targets are detected. It doesn't have to be a complicated system but rather one that has a good range of choices for players to select from for their ships and ship designs.

It would make for a much more detailed system, but then you add layers of extra material that need to be written and absorbed. For a quick lightweight system the degree of detail in hat you mentioned basically changes Traveller into another game entirely..

It makes perfect sense and is almost exactly what I would have done using the original LBB2.

• If 100 dTons of hull will support 1 hardpoint ...
• and one hardpoint will mount a turret with 3 missile launchers / sandcasters / lasers (in any combination) ...
• therefore, I should be able to mount 3 mini-turrets (able to hold 1 missile launcher, sandcaster or laser) per 100 tons of hull.

Which means that a 34 dTon small craft should be able to mount a single mini turret, and a 67 dton small craft should be able to mount two mini-turrets.

Any small craft of 33 dtons or less is too small for a mini-turret and should hard mount 1 missile launcher, sandcaster or laser like a micro-spinal mount.

Unfortunately Hulls only come in ten ton increments, In MgT anyway...unless you went to a different construction system.

 

[atpollard]

Unfortunately Hulls only come in ten ton increments, In MgT anyway...unless you went to a different construction system.

Which changes nothing ...
10, 20 or 30 ton hulls = rigid mount of 1 weapon
40, 50 and 60 ton hulls = 1 mini-turret
70, 80 and 90 ton hulls = 2 mini-turrets
100+ ton hulls = 3 mini-turrets per hardpoint.

 

[wbyrd]

Say, am I missing out on money spewing ideas like crazy?

not at all, The trick is to figure out how this fits into the game mechanics, implement the idea in a usable form, and then write all up and submit it....that's how I got my stuff accepted...and that's what I wish more people would do..too many good ideas floating around as house rules that never see the light of day outside of one gaming group.

Honestly sharing ideas is what threads like this are for...If someone gets inspired and comes up with usable material then everyone wins..at least everyone who plays with the new toys.

Before i switched over to Mongoose Rules for my desings...seeing how they wanted to pay me for them..I used a more elaborate weapon slot scheme.

It took more time, and more head scratching. A ship could carry a lot more weapons than it had active..but only so many could be powered up and linked into the fire control system at once.

projectile and payload weapons like cannons and missiles ate up fire control slots but not power system slots....Turreted weapons used only one fire control slot, but burned up the same energy as single mount weapons..of course they couldn't split their fire between multiple targets, all the weapons in a turret or bay ht or missed the same target.

so a mix of weapons, and mounts, made sense depending on how they were to be employed.


of course that's a lot of mechanics to work up, and integrate without breaking something..so I decided to go with something a but less detailed but a lot easier to work up.That and the odds of me successfully writing, and publishing, a complete system and setting on my own were about the same as a snowball in..well....you get the idea.

 

[Condottiere]

You can stick a weapon system on a pintle mount, which would give you a limited traverse, plus a more hands on feel.

 

[mike wightman]

The CT rule is a small craft can carry up to three weapons, the limitation is on number of lasers (a power issue).

Any of them could have 3 sandcaster launchers, or three missile racks.

 

[kilemall]

Infojunky, this is the thread in question.

I should probably work out a list and prices.

 

[infojunky]

Infojunky, this is the thread in question.

I should probably work out a list and prices.

I just read through it again, and I am still circling around the some of the same issues. i.e. the whole Hard point /turret issue. My current feeling is that a power and Surface area solution would be more elegant. But the question of the number of Missile Tubes and Sandcasters pops it's head.