CT Only: What is High Guard's best design feature?

[robject]

High Guard ship design's appeal.

I might as well make this a poll, too, but it's supposed to be a thread where I muse on what High Guard did right. I'll be hardnosed about it, too, and force you to pick the number one thing you like about it.

I think these things contribute to High Guard ship design's popularity:

• it's Classic Traveller, and it came first
• represented the OTU more fully than Book 2
• it enumerated and codified the weapons used by all military ships in the Imperium
• it downplayed or ignored non-critical features
• its drive formulas are compact and not complicated
• excellent abstraction in battery factors
• all that in a concise set of design tables

Note: I'm trying to vote, but it's hard to choose! But I consider that a good thing.

 

[mike wightman]

You missed a couple of really important points.
It can be used to construct ships at TLs from 7 to 15 and be used to resolve conflicts between forces of different TLs (too many people get hung up on TL15 vs TL15).
The nature of the most effective ship/weapon combo changes with TL (i.e. what works as a BB at TL11 doesn't work very well at TL12).
It maintains a rock/paper/scissors type resolution at all TLs (although the nature of the rocks, paper and scissors change as mentioned above).

There are a few rough spots that should have been corrected over the years, but you have to be really careful that a tweak doesn't invoke the law of unintended consequence.

 

[robject]

It can be used to construct ships at TLs from 7 to 15 and be used to resolve conflicts between forces of different TLs (too many people get hung up on TL15 vs TL15).

...

The nature of the most effective ship/weapon combo changes with TL (i.e. what works as a BB at TL11 doesn't work very well at TL12).

[FONT=arial,helvetica]Full TL and equipment support for the published OTU[/FONT]

It maintains a rock/paper/scissors type resolution at all TLs (although the nature of the rocks, paper and scissors change as mentioned above).

Invalid because a vanishingly small number of people use High Guard space combat.

Yes, I'm invoking that rule.

 

[esampson]

It supports the building of ships of ships without locking them into completely arbitrary values for tonnage. While you rarely see people design 150 ton ships it is quite possible to do so.

About the only thing that should have real arbitrary values (imo) are jump drives, and that's because of how Traveller maps and drives have worked for a very long time. A Jump-1.5 doesn't make a whole lot of sense unless you want to redo the maps so that some stars are in the range of greater than jump-1 but less than or equal to jump 1.5 (although even then it could be argued that there is some use since I can cover a Jump-3 distance in 2 jumps if I use drop tanks or have enough fuel).

In theory I would even be a fan of allowing manuever drives that accelerate in fractional increments (even below 1G since there are lots of ways to still reach space in such a vessel on an Earth-like planet) and that can exceed 6 Gs. However, it is at least somewhat possible (though it stretched credulity a bit) to make an argument concerning the current maneuver drive limitations based upon the odd way that they work.

 

[McPerth]

IMHO CT:HG rules are of little use in Roleplay (as most specific people is not important, only the OC and the Pilot have any effect on it), and yet I see them too detailed for large fleet opperations, haging so many rolls featured on it as to make stastical results the best option.

While this can be even realist, it's not my cup of tea.

The main use I've done of HG is CharGen, and when I designed ships in its rules, they still use to be adventure class ships (to use a name seen often in this board), and if any combat arises, I use other rules (mostly a modified LBB2 system).

BTW, all this also applies to MT, as even if the use of some sliks is told about, it's quite problematic to try to use them as explained, but that's for another thread...

 

[Supplement Four]

High Guard, in the simplest terms, is a set of dice rolls used to govern narration of grand space battles.

It's really not unlike those early GDW adventures, like Exit Visa, where dice rolls help govern the direction of roleplaying encounters.

With HG, instead of the Ref just describing whatever pops into his head, describing a space battle scene, there are rules and dice rolls to help govern the description. Players have input. HG is a simple set of abstract rules that the Ref takes and turns into a grand space battle in the minds of the players.

 

[kilemall]

It has a TL progression that is much like the Striker/Merc 'techline' to allow you to build very different capability ships with very different feels and doctrines. Even if a laser is never fired in anger, the ships make sense and can readily plug into CT.

 

[Magnus von Thornwood]

Derp.

I forgot, actually the greatest use I put HG to was indeed creating characters.

But it does have some nifty stuff for building too.

 

[aramis]

The appeal for me is purely in the elegance of the design system.

I hate the HG resolution system.

While I have tended to use the HG designs, I converted HG USP values to MT weapons, using the page 75 tables, and used the vehicle rules (not the MT HG adaptation).

I grafted in stuff I needed from MT, too. Namely, shops, labs.

I prefer the T20 implementation of the design system. (And I'll note that resolution using T20 is a wholly different feel, and is easily ported to other editions.)

The new MGT2 draft looks pretty decent; I've been crunching numbers on it.

 

[CliffBates]

The appeal for me is purely in the elegance of the design system.

I hate the HG resolution system.

While I have tended to use the HG designs, I converted HG USP values to MT weapons, using the page 75 tables, and used the vehicle rules (not the MT HG adaptation).

I grafted in stuff I needed from MT, too. Namely, shops, labs.

I prefer the T20 implementation of the design system. (And I'll note that resolution using T20 is a wholly different feel, and is easily ported to other editions.)

The new MGT2 draft looks pretty decent; I've been crunching numbers on it.

By MGT2 do you the HG 2 edition comming out by Mongoose?

Their use of torpedos are something I thought was missing from CTs treatment of missles. Maydat and the special missle suplimemt was a good start but launching torpedos are different birds than missles. Torpedoes should offer bigger punches but because of size you can shoot less of them. But they could give Frigates and Destroyers an anti-cruiser anti-carrier role.

 

[mike wightman]

No they shouldn't - because the point defence lasers of such ships would destroy them before they get within detonation range

This is why in TNE and T2300 they went with x-ray detonation missiles.

 

[aramis]

By MGT2 do you the HG 2 edition comming out by Mongoose?

Their use of torpedos are something I thought was missing from CTs treatment of missles. Maydat and the special missle suplimemt was a good start but launching torpedos are different birds than missles. Torpedoes should offer bigger punches but because of size you can shoot less of them. But they could give Frigates and Destroyers an anti-cruiser anti-carrier role.

Given real world targeting and tracking, no missile should ever survive to impact.

Mind you, daily, they hit the moon with a laser. More accurately, the hit the apollo reflector daily. A 2m square. At 1.25 LS.

Missiles should almost never penetrate a laser screen.

And by that same token, torpedoes are (1) easier to hit, (2) not significantly harder to take out, and (3) much more expensive, so they should not be used, because they're just throwing good money after bad.

 

[aramis]

By MGT2 do you the HG 2 edition comming out by Mongoose?

Their use of torpedos are something I thought was missing from CTs treatment of missles. Maydat and the special missle suplimemt was a good start but launching torpedos are different birds than missles. Torpedoes should offer bigger punches but because of size you can shoot less of them. But they could give Frigates and Destroyers an anti-cruiser anti-carrier role.

Essentially, MGT 2E is a 3 book core - MHG2 is part of that three book core.

 

[aramis]

Full TL and equipment support for the published OTU

It hasn't had this since release. It's missing the TL16 and 17 needed for a handful of parts of the OTU.

 

[mike wightman]

CT world generation could throw out TL20 worlds...

 

[kilemall]

Given real world targeting and tracking, no missile should ever survive to impact.

Mind you, daily, they hit the moon with a laser. More accurately, the hit the apollo reflector daily. A 2m square. At 1.25 LS.

Missiles should almost never penetrate a laser screen.

And by that same token, torpedoes are (1) easier to hit, (2) not significantly harder to take out, and (3) much more expensive, so they should not be used, because they're just throwing good money after bad.

Armor/reflec/sand/spoofing penaids for one thing- moreso for missile bay sized missiles.

Missiles datalinked together and acting as an intelligent formation.

 

[flykiller]

Armor/reflec/sand/spoofing penaids for one thing

not to mention a six-inch wide high-agility dot for a target, sporting a massively-armored warhead. a 6 inch wide 2 foot long steel shield could double as a warhead if it's moving at 2 miles a second.

there is also the issue of the lasers themselves. are they wide-beamed and continuous fire? if so then they cannot be high-powered. are they narrow-focused and pulsed? if so then the cannot continuously engage an area where a missile might be upon arrival of the beam.

there is also the issue of sensors/countermeasures/gunnerySkill. a wwii battleship's anti-air defenses are no match for a 1980's harpoon, and a 1980's harpoon probably couldn't get within a quarter mile of a modern russian destroyer.

 

[aramis]

not to mention a six-inch wide high-agility dot for a target, sporting a massively-armored warhead. a 6 inch wide 2 foot long steel shield could double as a warhead if it's moving at 2 miles a second.

there is also the issue of the lasers themselves. are they wide-beamed and continuous fire? if so then they cannot be high-powered. are they narrow-focused and pulsed? if so then the cannot continuously engage an area where a missile might be upon arrival of the beam.

there is also the issue of sensors/countermeasures/gunnerySkill. a wwii battleship's anti-air defenses are no match for a 1980's harpoon, and a 1980's harpoon probably couldn't get within a quarter mile of a modern russian destroyer.

We can hit a 5cm target with a 1cm slug at about a kilometer in atmosphere with ≥90% accuracy from a ship on 1m seas, and can track 1cm bits to 1 mile from same said ship's CIWS in 2m seas.

The only way missiles logically should survive, given the current (TL 7-8) capabilities, is to overwhelm with massive numbers of missiles. The intercept with a laser CIWS with a 30 Mm focal range (1 TNE hex, 0.1ls), should require about 10 simultaneous missiles to overcome one laser on point defense role, assuming they're doing 0.01C... for slower missiles, up the number.

Current CIWS TAq Radar is freaking incredible stuff. It can tell a bird from a missile by the nature of the return. (It does so mostly to prevent ammo waste.) It can hit 1cm parts, but they don't because by the time it's down to 5cm parts, it's usually toasted.

A laser on point defense is taking a sensor that can hit 30m at 300,000,000m, and applying it at ranges of 30,000m which means it can resolve 0.03m or less, with a beam diameter bigger than that. And a lag of no more than 0.2 seconds. which means even at 10g, it's getting less than 1.9m away from predicted. and that only if it isn't actively seeking to impact. If it is, it's optimal course is easily plotted in milliseconds, and the fire is intercepting.

And, given the beam power levels, and firing rates, as established in TNE.... even a graze totals a missile.

Which is why TNE switched to detlaser missiles. Because kinetic/explosive missiles just are not practical inside 0.1 LS when you have 1LS focal length combat laser capability.

 

[flykiller]

We can hit a 5cm target with a 1cm slug at about a kilometer in atmosphere with ≥90% accuracy from a ship on 1m seas, and can track 1cm bits to 1 mile from same said ship's CIWS in 2m seas.

a drill instructor decided to check on his boot sentries. he walked up to one, started grilling him on his general orders. the boot did good.

the drill instructor decided to trip him up a bit and asked the boot, "suppose you see a battleship coming down the road? what do you do?"

the boot said, "hit it with a torpedo."

the drill instructor was taken aback. "where are you going to get a torpedo?"

the boot answered, "same place you got the battleship."

hey, you got anti-grav and jump, I've got effective missiles.

 

[robject]

It hasn't had this since release. It's missing the TL16 and 17 needed for a handful of parts of the OTU.

You're right, but I think those parts aren't needed to run a super-majority of Traveller games.