Using Ocean Combat Systems for Space Combat
- Thread starter robject
- Start date
It's a historical hodgepodge isn't it? I mean there's bits from every naval era.
There's age sail bits like having to send messages by courier between systems and how you can see the enemy well before you can shoot at him.
Then there's WW2 and modern bits like sensors (radar, ladar, densitometers, etc.), speed of light communications (radio, masers, etc.)
At higher TLs it's Jutland with big ships/big guns duking it out. At lower TLs it's Midway with "fighters" duking it out.
There are missing historical bits too. Submarines really don't exist, black globes or not. And there's nothing like resembling one hit-one kill weapons like torpedoes or anti-ship missiles. Spinals can one hit-one kill but they don't "leave" the ship carrying them.
It's all a jumble. You can't look at just one naval era and hope it covers all the bases.
There's age sail bits like having to send messages by courier between systems and how you can see the enemy well before you can shoot at him.
Then there's WW2 and modern bits like sensors (radar, ladar, densitometers, etc.), speed of light communications (radio, masers, etc.)
At higher TLs it's Jutland with big ships/big guns duking it out. At lower TLs it's Midway with "fighters" duking it out.
There are missing historical bits too. Submarines really don't exist, black globes or not. And there's nothing like resembling one hit-one kill weapons like torpedoes or anti-ship missiles. Spinals can one hit-one kill but they don't "leave" the ship carrying them.
It's all a jumble. You can't look at just one naval era and hope it covers all the bases.
And thereare some major differences with any naval war:
You can only fight at any end of any route, not interception mid-route posible, as it would be in jumpspace.
While in jump, your units are out of touch of one another, not being able to share any tactics discussion, status reports, etc...
You don't have any information about the enemy until your arrival, when you cannot retreat (at least until you can refuel). no fleeing once you see the enemy from distance.
Your units will arrive (more or less) dispersed in time. Should you be unlucky enough as to arrive in the midle of an enemy concentration, your ships will fight piecemal as they arrive, without not even time to deploy BRs/fighters, while the enemy, once warned by the first arrivals, would be in full general quarters.
You can only fight at any end of any route, not interception mid-route posible, as it would be in jumpspace.
While in jump, your units are out of touch of one another, not being able to share any tactics discussion, status reports, etc...
You don't have any information about the enemy until your arrival, when you cannot retreat (at least until you can refuel). no fleeing once you see the enemy from distance.
Your units will arrive (more or less) dispersed in time. Should you be unlucky enough as to arrive in the midle of an enemy concentration, your ships will fight piecemal as they arrive, without not even time to deploy BRs/fighters, while the enemy, once warned by the first arrivals, would be in full general quarters.
When we talk about those SDB ambushing refuelling ships inside the GG atmosphere, I'm not sure a nuke missile would not be as much a killer as any torpedo in WWII, though this is not reflected (AFAIK) in any Traveller ship combat system.
I suppose on a strategic level I'm influenced actual Age of Sail history than wargame rules.
One I can think of as having a positive influence on the way I think about space combat is Harpoon. It highlights the offensive and defensive weapons radius as being important.
Flip that over to space as a 3D environment and its easy to imagine a range sphere or as it applies in T5 the range band which is centered on the ship.
Maneuver then becomes about placing the target on the edge of or within that sphere so it can be engaged.
Its probably a little hard to explain without some illustration but in my head it transformed space combat from flat chessboard moves to three dimensional jockeying for position.
One I can think of as having a positive influence on the way I think about space combat is Harpoon. It highlights the offensive and defensive weapons radius as being important.
Flip that over to space as a 3D environment and its easy to imagine a range sphere or as it applies in T5 the range band which is centered on the ship.
Maneuver then becomes about placing the target on the edge of or within that sphere so it can be engaged.
Its probably a little hard to explain without some illustration but in my head it transformed space combat from flat chessboard moves to three dimensional jockeying for position.
Timerover51
SOC-14 5K
Unless the ship in World War 2 was under about 2,000 tons or something like a magazine was hit, there were very few one shot kills by torpedoes in World War 2. Of course, you can also have utterly incompetent damage control as occurred with the Japanese carrier Taiho.
As for anti-ship missile, again the ship hit must be not be too large, or you get lucky with an uncontrolled fire like the Atlantic Conveyor during the Falkland Islands war.
For one shot kills in Traveller, a nuclear warhead would be more than adequate, and I assume that all military missiles would be carrying them.
Timerover51
SOC-14 5K
I have games covering all of those areas, also the Victorian Period, specifically the 1898 Jane's Naval Game, along with an earlier copy of Harpoon. About the only one that I might consider would be Harpoon, as that has quite a bit of coverage of detection probabilities, which could be applied to space combat. Aside from the communication lag and having to depend on the man on the spot for decisions, I cannot see any real application.
I've read repeatedly (multiple popular media science articles) that a number of US DoD projections are that vacuum detonations of fission warheads will have MUCH reduced kinetic effect. A contact detonation is likely to melt off large chunks, but the standoff detonation is supposedly not going to be too bad... hence the decision for SDI to be based upon detonation laser technology.
Is there good data? The results from the pre-testban era seem... inconclusive on the direct short-term stuff, but the radiation belts they create lasted for months (D+4 months, and they were putting 60 rads/day on other satellites!)
http://glasstone.blogspot.com/2006/03/starfish-fireball-photograph.html
I've heard similar. The explanation was that most of the damage came from a concussion wave caused by superheated air. No air means no concussion wave.
If true then nuclear warheads should do a lot more damage against a target in an atmosphere, something not modeled in ship combat which assumes everything happens in open space. Correct this oversight with some house rules and suddenly missile equipped SDBs hiding in a gas giant look more dangerous.
If true then nuclear warheads should do a lot more damage against a target in an atmosphere, something not modeled in ship combat which assumes everything happens in open space. Correct this oversight with some house rules and suddenly missile equipped SDBs hiding in a gas giant look more dangerous.
I started thinking about what ERA of sea warfare could possibly map to space combat.
Hulls have armor, but that's always been true. On the other hand, the early ironclad era has a wider than typical range of armor levels, which may be useful.
Ships attack at ranges with accuracy, but accuracy is the only variable to tweak here, I think. Two pentekonters with catapults might (in a stretch) be thought of as dreadnoughts with spinal guns. It is a stretch, though.
Everybody moves. The rules for Age of Sail movement tend to be complicated, and tends to form a key part of tactics, so that rules out many pre-steam systems, though perhaps not all.
So today I'm thinking about late age of sail, where ironclads and steam power is coming in and clippers are on their way out.
Hulls have armor, but that's always been true. On the other hand, the early ironclad era has a wider than typical range of armor levels, which may be useful.
Ships attack at ranges with accuracy, but accuracy is the only variable to tweak here, I think. Two pentekonters with catapults might (in a stretch) be thought of as dreadnoughts with spinal guns. It is a stretch, though.
Everybody moves. The rules for Age of Sail movement tend to be complicated, and tends to form a key part of tactics, so that rules out many pre-steam systems, though perhaps not all.
So today I'm thinking about late age of sail, where ironclads and steam power is coming in and clippers are on their way out.
The whole of the 3I is very much based on the need to empower local leaders to make decisions due to the extensive travel times back to the primary decision -making centre. So as in the age of sail, distant wars can drag on for a long time without someone having plenipotentiary powers to command and negotiate.
I just dusted off my copy of Harpoon this afternoon would you believe. Harpoon was a well organised system, which had a lot to offer to other games in terms of how it handled EW and missile combat. There's elements of BR that are just as well developed.
Commander Bond was part of the revision to the training wargames at the Naval War College of the USNA... Harpoon is fundamentally the same process model.
The rules for vector movement in space tend to be complicated (individual tastes vary) and, if used, can form a key part of tactics. Unfortunately, more than a few people find vector movement anathema, or so it seems.
One useful paradigm from the age of sail is the whole issue of sensors and stealth. An oft repeated nubbin is there ain't no stealth in space, well, there ain't much on the open ocean either when both sides are using unaided vision and movement rates are so slow. It could easily take hours to bring two forces into combat range and stealth (during periods of good visibility) was almost impossible on the open ocean.
Combat tended to be a wearing down process and most ships are rendered unfit for combat long before they're in actual danger of sinking.
In fact, the more I think about it, the more it sounds like Book 2 combat.
The Oz
SOC-14 1K
That's not a bad analogy, Piper. The differences between Age of Sail combat and Book 5 combat that I see are:
1. The "one-shot-zot" capability of spinal meson guns
2. Carriers/Battle tenders with fighters/battle riders
3. The ease of tactical communications with radio/maser/meson comms
Enoki
SOC-14 1K
I will say this: Just about anything is preferable to what MT offered for space combat. That was one of the most generalized systems I've ever seen.
I think particularly for playing with a party and just a few ships or small ships it is a real disservice to the game.
Do I have an alternative? Not really, but I would devise one rather than just use what was published.
I think particularly for playing with a party and just a few ships or small ships it is a real disservice to the game.
Do I have an alternative? Not really, but I would devise one rather than just use what was published.
Well, any analogy will only stretch so far. The real Jewel of the Nile (as I see it) is to identify those things that make space combat unique (our best guess at space combat that is) and model those in a playable manner.
No small order, that.
pendragonman
Absent Friends Margrave
Did anyone mention "Battlewagon"? Small rulebook, worked ok. Maybe it could be mined for ideas?
