Very Specific CT Fighter Sidebar

[aramis]

The off-axis thrust issue is a major bugaboo. Essentially, it amounts to the question of whether or not the G rating is just the main drive, or and such. But in general, yes, G's used to evade are not G's used for major vector change, BUT, keep in mind that on the scale we're talking, doding a shot after a ping is below the scale.

At 1 LS, that free trader is getting 2 seconds, and thus 20meters, and yes, can dodge on detecting a ping.

A real world laser, however, would be ineffectual at those ranges due to the diffraction limit. (See FF&S1). ISTR that the IR lasers would have a minimum diffraction at an LS of about half a kilometer.... and thus not do a whole terrible lot.

To get realistic ranges out of Bk2 combat, simply drop the penalty bands for lasers from 2500mm and 5000mm to 250mm and 500mm. (This puts the turrets in line with the best non-gravitic turrets in TNE... about 1/6 LS...)

 

[jawillroy]

I've always assumed that because the marker for the ship will be so much bigger than the actual ship that "contact" meant about a 5 cm zone of effect around the ship for programs like ECM originating from the center point of the marker. Any missile passing through that is effected.

I used to read "contact" as pretty literal point to point. Once I'd read SS3 I figured on a 25mm radius around the target, which is pretty much what I go with now. So if I were to apply that here, I'd say that a protected formation has to be within 2500km of the ECM ship.

 

[jawillroy]

keep in mind that on the scale we're talking, dodging a shot after a ping is below the scale.

Fair 'nuff. One less thing to fiddle with is one less thing to fiddle with.

At 1 LS, that free trader is getting 2 seconds, and thus 20meters, and yes, can dodge on detecting a ping.

A real world laser, however, would be ineffectual at those ranges due to the diffraction limit... To get realistic ranges out of Bk2 combat, simply drop the penalty bands for lasers from 2500mm and 5000mm to 250mm and 500mm.

For realism's sake, I suppose I'd have to agree with you. For the game's sake, I'd say that at military ranges missiles nerf lasers well enough as it is... I don't want to see lasers *forever* relegated to antimissile duty.

 

[jawillroy]

Another minor digression, but only minor: If one uses LBB1 CharGen as a guide, one is forced to conclude that the navy's going to rely very heavily on its computers to win fights - rolling 100 Navvies, I was able to spot:

5 starship pilots, skill level 1
9 ship's boat pilots, skill level 1
28 gunners, 1 at skill 3, 8 at skill 2, all the others skill 1.
Only 6 had both ship's boat and gunnery skill; of these, all were skill level 1 apart from one with gunnery 2.

None of these guys should be flying anything in combat that can't run predict 5 and M/E 6.

Now granted, these were all randomly generated: if I were trying specifically to create fighter pilots I'd be rolling all skills on that second table, and that'd maybe skew things up a bit.

It does tend to color my assessment of how fleets would be put together, though: the trouble with sky-darkening hordes of fighters is that you have to crew them, and they need to be skilled pilots if they're going to survive in a fight.

I suppose it leads me to wonder how many fighters with duff crews it takes to outfight a 400-ton starship with an elite crew.

 

[jawillroy]

There is always the Space Superiority fighter wing coupled with a Ship/Ground attack fighter wing idea.

You know, have an anti-fighter fighter design to suppress the opponents attack craft or to clear the missiles out of the way for your attack craft.

It occurs to me that a fleet might choose to employ its fighters/small craft exclusively in the superiority role, just to clear opposing fighter screens, and clear the way for the main fleet to engage the enemy. It might allow for more specialization in the fighter-killer role, if the screen weren't expected to carry the fight to the capital ships as well.

 

[boomslang]

Actually, even without the ECM rule fiddle, something like this might be a good way to go.

One issue that you seem to have glossed: how fast do your missiles move? 6-Gs? 12-Gs? 5-Gs?

This has a huge effect on tactics & design.

IMTU, I imported the Mayday rule that Maneuver/Evade eats 1-G of a ship's maneuver capacity, while presuming grav-propelled missiles fly at 6-Gs. This tends to keep Fighters' (and ground-based Boats') vectors rather long, and favors hit & run tactics (with reloading in between).

Also, do you consider any other anti-missile tactics? For example, do you allow regular laser fire to engage missiles individually outside Anti-Missile "contact" range (at perhaps a -3 DM To Hit)? Since Anti-Missile fire is automated, does it require a Gunner to man the turret?

Years ago, I used Striker to design IR flare missiles to be used to decoy incoming missiles away. A simple tool like this, alluded to in the original rules about heat sources, lets one well-aimed missile counter whole swarms of incoming ones, and again, creates new tactical possibilities...

 

[jawillroy]

One issue that you seem to have glossed: how fast do your missiles move? 6-Gs? 12-Gs? 5-Gs? This has a huge effect on tactics & design.

Why, yes, I did, and yes, it does.

IMTU, I imported the Mayday rule that Maneuver/Evade eats 1-G of a ship's maneuver capacity, while presuming grav-propelled missiles fly at 6-Gs.

Do you limit the burn time on your grav missiles? So far, I've been modeling on missiles that can go at 6G for 6 turns, but I'm not entirely decided. I don't mind superfast missiles as long as they have to burn fuel. I'm thinking of cherrypicking SS3 and Mayday to see what makes sense.

Also, do you consider any other anti-missile tactics?

Sure. Out at around a light second, it becomes possible for a fast ship to outrun a missile as long as its launching ship hasn't too long a vector relative to the target. I haven't decided totally, but I think I'd allow sand a chance to stop missiles, maybe SS3's 12+; I don't use long range laser fire for missiles, although maybe I should.

Since Anti-Missile fire is automated, does it require a Gunner to man the turret?

I'd say no.

Years ago, I used Striker to design IR flare missiles to be used to decoy incoming missiles away. A simple tool like this, alluded to in the original rules about heat sources, lets one well-aimed missile counter whole swarms of incoming ones, and again, creates new tactical possibilities...

I like that: it gives a little more value to missile guidance systems other than IR, which would otherwise be kind of superfluous.

 

[boomslang]

Do you limit the burn time on your grav missiles? So far, I've been modeling on missiles that can go at 6G for 6 turns, but I'm not entirely decided. I don't mind superfast missiles as long as they have to burn fuel. I'm thinking of cherrypicking SS3 and Mayday to see what makes sense.

I limit the burn time for safety and engineering considerations.

I figure there's a "crazy Ivan" gyroscopic sensor/switch that kills the drive and the fuse if the missile turns more than 180 degrees from its original launch vector -- this prevents "own kills". Likewise, because they are battery-powered 6-G grav units IMTU, 6 to 8 turns seems like a reasonable thrust limit to me; my preferred 36 turns would be an absolute outside maximum.

I'd allow sand a chance to stop missiles, maybe SS3's 12+

Which is also B2 canon, of course. Note that the roll is per sand canister's-worth passed-through and includes any sand the launching ship has itself cast.

I don't use long range laser fire for missiles, although maybe I should. I'd say no.

Given that missiles aren't usually running M/E-n, they're effectively computerless small craft for targeting purposes. Very, very small craft. I'm looking at the DMs for Select Fire for inspiration; that program allows pretty focussed shooting. And my proposed -3 DM is non-trivial -- it could of course, be even bigger, as may be desired. PC Gunners will usually want to take the shot, no matter how long the odds, since Anti-Missile fire occurs in a different phase anyway. (BTW, ECM or Anti-Missile fire rolled first? I prefer ECM first, simply because it can save a bunch of wasted die-rolling; OTOH, it creates more dramatic tension to roll A-M first and save ECM as a "last resort". Target's Choice, perhaps?)

...it gives a little more value to missile guidance systems other than IR, which would otherwise be kind of superfluous.

The flipside of which is that any guidance (and command) system other than IR is going to be more susceptible to ECM jamming/scrambling/spoofing, and therefore will perform less reliably against ECM as well as being more expensive. And the Cr5K price point is important to stick to for budgetary considerations, I should think; given the inability to effectively mask IR emissions in the Black, IR never becomes obsolete as a sensing method no matter how far TL advances.

 

[jawillroy]

B2 canon, of course. Note that the roll is per sand canister's-worth passed-through and includes any sand the launching ship has itself cast.

I know it's in Mayday and SS3, but I don't recall it from LBB2. Maybe the BBB? It's useful though. If your missile fighters give up one rackspace for sand, then they can launch missiles, then start decelerating while popping out sand; or even have one missile rack and two sandcasters! With any kind of distance between the fighters and their targets, they'll have anywhere from 3-6 sandfields for incoming missiles and laser fire to go through that weren't there when the outgoing missiles were. For that matter, since this ISN'T High Guard, there's nothing to prevent the fighters from having a dedicated sandcaster fighter providing screen for the whole wing.

Given that missiles aren't usually running M/E-n, they're effectively computerless small craft for targeting purposes. Very, very small craft. I'm looking at the DMs for Select Fire for inspiration; that program allows pretty focussed shooting. And my proposed -3 DM is non-trivial -- it could of course, be even bigger, as may be desired.

That's a good argument, and makes it worthwhile to have a mix of missile fighters and laser fighters, or a crowd of missile fighters shepherded by a few big laser-heavy craft to whittle down incoming salvos. It also makes it possible for a group of laser fighters with good gunners to be able to fight through a missile salvo and get to the fighters that launched it.

The way SS3 works it, ECM only works on radio guidance systems, proximity fuses, and command fuses. (they also make the roll more difficult to beat, 9+ instead of 7+) So an IR missile with an Intelligent fuse would be impervious to ECM... I don't think that should be the case across the board.

I'm thinking of sticking with the LBB2 ECM roll, except that there would be a DM based on the difference in the tech of the defending ship's computer and the attacking missiles. How big a spread would you use? Straight difference, or a fraction? Or maybe just give a +1/-1 regardless of the tech difference?

And the Cr5K price point is important to stick to for budgetary considerations, I should think; given the inability to effectively mask IR emissions in the Black, IR never becomes obsolete as a sensing method no matter how far TL advances.

For commercial missiles, certainly. Military standard missiles, I'm thinking, can clock in around 10-20k; nukes push close to 1mcr.

 

[boomslang]

For that matter, since this ISN'T High Guard, there's nothing to prevent the fighters from having a dedicated sandcaster fighter providing screen for the whole wing.

Which might be a better solution, since remember that any given multiweapon Fighter will need a second crewman aboard if you intend to use more than one type of weapon in a turn.

So an IR missile with an Intelligent fuse would be impervious to ECM... I don't think that should be the case across the board.

Indeed; IMTU, I use SS3 for its Radiation Damage Table and its reloading rules and nothing else.

I'm thinking of sticking with the LBB2 ECM roll, except that there would be a DM based on the difference in the tech of the defending ship's computer and the attacking missiles. How big a spread would you use? Straight difference, or a fraction? Or maybe just give a +1/-1 regardless of the tech difference?

I would not bother with a TL-differential-based DM -- heat is heat, and EM emissions are EM emissions; "contact fusing" isn't really feasible given the closing speeds and detonation ranges -- it's all proximity fusing in the end, and there's no reason for a kinetic energy "impact" bonus since actual impacts against accelerating targets will most likely be nearly impossible to achieve. Also note that Tactics skill (or Ship Tactics depending on CharGen rules applied) is worth its weight in iridium as a DM on that "bet the farm" single ECM roll...

Hacking up software to add, for example, a DM based on Gunnery skill to the ECM roll is an obvious Adventure Hook, as well.

Military standard missiles, I'm thinking, can clock in around 10-20k; nukes push close to 1mcr.

Striker and SS3 produce tactical (a few KT or less) nuke warheads in the MCr1 range IIRC; just realize what that does to the cost of the vessel carrying them...

 

[aramis]

Boomslang: given that curreng missiles (Sidewinder ≅ 22G's) intercept current combat aircraft (F-16 ≅ 10G due to airframe use), anything with more accelleration than the target should be able to intercept for KKM purposes.

 

[boomslang]

Boomslang: given that curreng missiles (Sidewinder ≅ 22G's) intercept current combat aircraft (F-16 ≅ 10G due to airframe use), anything with more accelleration than the target should be able to intercept for KKM purposes.

Ah, but that's the point: missiles in the vacuum of space do not have the acceleration of missiles in atmo -- space combat missiles have much longer vectors and much lower agility than the sprinty, aerodynamic short-range things used in modern air combat... break turns to evade long-relative-vector incoming are much easier in space, especially when you have similar performance envelopes between target and missile. And it's CT canon that missiles are proximity by default (at 2500 km range in fact, which is quite a "proximity" if you ask me, but hey, there it is)...

Conversely, there's no point in putting a warhead on a long-range KE missile in Trav space combat if designing under SS3; the extra damage rolls from the enormous impact velocity will do the job nicely by themselves, and you might as well just cram more engine in there for even more speed, range, & subsequent damage...