What do you think a space battle...

[PFVA63]

Hi, I suspect this may have been asked in the past, but based on some recent discussions here, I'm interested in seeing what everyone thinks a space battle in Traveller might look like?

Will everything happen at such great distances that enemy ships are really no more than blips on a computer screen?

Will speed & acceleration be significant factors, or not?

Will fleets try and maintain some semblance of a fixed formation?

Will things break into close range melees?

In previous posts I listed some of my thoughts. Specifically for me, since distances are so great, I would suspect that battles would mostly only occur if each side does something to allow it to occur, such as knowingly entering into an area where you know that the enemy is located.

However, I suspect that there will a fair bit of pre-battle prep by both sides as they close to battle distances (unless one side decides to jump blindly into an areas where the enemy might be, etc). Part of this prep would likely include setting formations and such, and because of the distances to be covered I'm not fully sure the two sides would necessarily close at a slow speed. And, because each side may be composed of both high-g, medium-G, and low-G vessels, I could see each side being broken into relatively small(er) sub units which may try and use their relative accelerations to their benefit.

In the end then, I could see the potential for some units to maybe try and make sweeping strikes, while others maybe might hold back and try and use their heavy weaponry to effect, and maybe other ships might try to help act as a screen and/or interrupt the other sides moves.

To me then my thoughts are maybe that maybe a battle might end up looking a bit like a cross between "Napoleonic" type maneuvers, with some units acting as "infantry in formations", others acting as "heavy artillery", and others acting as a swift striking force like a form of "cavalry", all trying to engage the enemy while trying to make best use of their own capabilities and advantages while trying to exploit the enemy's potential weaknesses, while also trying to protect their own "backfield/reserves".

In this respect than, I can also see the operations also maybe even looking a bit like American rules football, where each sides front "lines" engage and grapple, potentially trying to over power and/or draw enemy vessels out of position (or into disadvantageous positions), while either protecting their own "backfields" and/or penetrating into the enemy's "backfield" in an attempt to eliminate or disrupting the enemy's cohesion, etc.

In addition to all that though, because of the potential 'grappling" going on in the font "lines" as well as potential slashing attacks by higher-G units, I'd also suspect that some of the actual action may also end up looking either like WWII era aerial combat and/or maybe some later jet-age "slashing-type" attacks (though medieval "jousting' may also be an applicable type analogy).

Anyway, I'm curious to see other peoples thoughts are here.

Regards

PF

 

[samuelvss]

IMTU, a technology making it possible to hit a ship 30 meters or less across at a range of 2 light seconds will make hitting any visible target a forgone conclusion. Therefore, a space battle does not look like anything, any more than a modern artillery duel looks like anything. The ships will be maneuvering like heck, but more towards the goal of making a difficult target, while at the same time working out the 3 dimensional geometry of keeping the right ships close and far.

The ships on the same side of a battle will maneuver in concert, but typically not in close proximity or in unison. Dispersion is, and will continue to be, an important facet of the nuclear battlfield.

 

[HG_B]

Hi, I suspect this may have been asked in the past, but based on some recent discussions here, I'm interested in seeing what everyone thinks a space battle in Traveller might look like?

Will everything happen at such great distances ...

There is no possible answer unless you present a detailed scenario. Just like IRL, battles are as different as the combatants, physical layout, objectives of both sides, et al.

 

[Enoki]

I'd think there are a number of variables here:

How many ships are involved. Is it one on one, or few on a few or are we talking Jutland or a bomber raid on Berlin with hundreds or thousands of ships and craft involved?

The next thing would be how maneuverable are the ships involved? I'd think very maneuverable ones would make it look more like an aerial dogfight while less maneuverable ships, or ones that could take punishment might more resemble a naval battle at sea.

Then there are what weapons are being used. Obviously a ship using a spinal mount cannot radically maneuver and aim it whereas some ship firing self guided missiles can be all over the place.

What other sensor platforms are available would make a difference along with other types of weapons. Satellites for remote detection, space mines, all sorts of things would change the nature of such an action.

 

[Greylond]

Actually, at less than 300,000 Km I would think that a missile that is "semi-guided" would work. You could build a missile with a smart computer with Fire Control software and run updates every few seconds. Telemetry could travel one way in a second, plus a fraction of a second or full second for the actual data, so call it 4 seconds for a Telemetry update plus some time for a human or master computer on the ship to provide some steering guidance. A missile like that could do course changes until it gets too close to the target. You could guide the missile fairly close and then do terminal guidance based on the onboard FC computer. That way you really wouldn't be firing at a small target at a long range.

 

[Omnivore]

gone_in_60_seconds

 

[PFVA63]

There is no possible answer unless you present a detailed scenario. Just like IRL, battles are as different as the combatants, physical layout, objectives of both sides, et al.

Hi,

Any input is welcome, so I'd suggest picking any scenario that you're interested in and giving your two cents on how you think it might turn out/look like.

 

[HG_B]

Actually, at less than 300,000 Km I would think that a missile that is "semi-guided" would work.

IR homing + computer that "knows" the targets location and ship ID at time of launch would be the best probably. As the missile closes it can ID the ship by its shape/type.

 

[Greylond]

IR homing + computer that "knows" the targets location and ship ID at time of launch would be the best probably. As the missile closes it can ID the ship by its shape/type.

Yes, exactly what I was talking about except for the ability to tell the missile to switch targets, abort, or even fine tune the intended target to counter decoys/spoofing.

 

[mike wightman]

Which ship combat rules are you assuming to be your base line?

LBB2 and Mayday have some subtle but telling differences, HG is a completely different paradigm.

Then there is TNE Battle Rider, which is an often overlooked but really good ship combat game.

 

[aramis]

Which ship combat rules are you assuming to be your base line?

LBB2 and Mayday have some subtle but telling differences,

Like an order of magnitude difference in scale.

At least the expected results are usually pretty much the same mechanically, even if the covered time is hugely different.

HG is a completely different paradigm.

Aside from including all the Bk 2 systems, it's unrecognizably different.

Bk2 is cumulative damage; Bk5 is cumulation of function losses. Throughout the range of covered ships from Bk2, Bk5 produces very different expected results.

Then there is TNE Battle Rider, which is an often overlooked but really good ship combat game.

Which is even less resolution than Bk 5...

And as with Bk2/mayday vs Bk5, the difference between Brilliant Lances and Battle Rider is very different expected results, but this is even less acceptable, as both BL and BR use the SAME rules for design. Not that the smaller ships in BR are even marginally practical to play out in BL... too big...

 

[HG_B]

or even fine tune the intended target to counter decoys/spoofing.

If the missile was loaded with a 3D image of the ship, its IR sensors couldn't be fooled by decoys as they would have to be the wrong size and almost certainly the wrong 3D shape. Good idea

 

[Greylond]

If we can do Ground Tank decoys at our TL, ever wonder what kind of decoys could be produced at TL12 or TL13?

http://www.military-decoy.com/tank.php

 

[HG_B]

If we can do Ground Tank decoys at our TL, ever wonder what kind of decoys could be produced at TL12 or TL13?

http://www.military-decoy.com/tank.php

Well, if you want to haul around a starship decoy that is the size of a real starship... I don't see that as practical though

 

[Dragoner]

Aircraft deploy decoys that mimic radar signature.

 

[Greylond]

Well, if you want to haul around a starship decoy that is the size of a real starship... I don't see that as practical though

I'm thinking a decoy missile that uses a combination of EM/IR Spoofing and Holograms for Visual Illusions...

 

[HG_B]

I'm thinking a decoy missile that uses a combination of EM/IR Spoofing and Holograms for Visual Illusions...

A missile ( a couple meters long) that creates an IR holo as large as a large starship? That would require as much energy as the total heat output of the large starship in wattage. There's no free lunch...

 

[Greylond]

A missile ( a couple meters long) that creates an IR holo as large as a large starship? That would require as much energy as the total heat output of the large starship. There's no free lunch...

That depends on how much heat is being produced by the ship...

Unfortunately, I don't know of any Traveller ruleset that goes into IR/Heat given off by a ship. There is discussion in MgT on range of IR Sensors detecting ships and other objects but in the same ruleset there are rules for CounterMeasures. Not really a lot of details.

But when it comes to IR, you'd also have to go into detail on how much detail your IR Sensors actually "See." Do they read very detailed pictures, i.e. can they tell the difference between sizes of ships? can they tell the difference in classes of ships? can they actually give a solid ID between two individuals of the same ship class? Lots of things involved in CM and CCM that aren't covered. You could argue it for days and not get anywhere, kinda like we are here, unless you provide a baseline for the arguement...

 

[HG_B]

But when it comes to IR, you'd also have to go into detail on how much detail your IR Sensors actually "See." Do they read very detailed pictures, i.e. can they tell the difference between sizes of ships? can they tell the difference in classes of ships? can they actually give a solid ID between two individuals of the same ship class? Lots of things involved in CM and CCM that aren't covered. You could argue it for days and not get anywhere, kinda like we are here, unless you provide a baseline for the arguement...

Using TL 7 IR imaging, they can do all of the above. (two identical ships would of course, look identical...) I can't imaging the capabilities going down at higher TL's...

So, the baseline is TL 7 + minimal improvements for a couple thousand years of DSP & image capture and, no violating thermodynamics in that sphere

 

[Greylond]

Using TL 7 IR imaging, they can do all of the above. (two identical ships would of course, look identical...)

IR Missiles used in RL can't tell the difference between a flare and any other object, mostly because the "computer" running the sensor isn't built for it. All they detect is IR. You'd have to have a computer built to distinguish between a ship shape and a point IR source like a flare.