HG80, page 34 (about small craft design):
So, I guess they don't need to be an integer, though, AFAIK, there's not so clear notation about spaceshios/starships...
What works? How are ships and vehicles armed?
- Thread starter Badenov
- Start date
HG80, page 34 (about small craft design):
So, I guess they don't need to be an integer, though, AFAIK, there's not so clear notation about spaceshios/starships...
The singleminded USP factor focus suggests the RAW intent is simple values, but any house rules in a storm.
Spinward Flow
SOC-14 5K
3:10 (already cued below) to 10:06 on the topic of The Black Pearl might be of interest to people who enjoy the notion of "old" technology in "new" high tech forms.
@ 7:05 (link to timepoint in the above video)
Portuguese Coastal Station: "Black Pearl. Black Pearl. Can you please confirm that you are you a sailing vessel?"
Black Pearl: "Yes, we are a sailing vessel."
{ ... }
Portuguese Coastal Station: "Black Pearl. Black Pearl. Are you actually sailing?"
Black Pearl: "Yes, we are actually sailing."
At the time, the Black Pearl was making ~22 knots under wind power alone ... and passing all other traffic at sea in the area.
The nautical engineers want to dial in the design spec details in the hopes of being able to reach 28-30 knots (or more) with this ~350ft yacht.
Condottiere
SOC-14 5K
What was it, better understanding of fluid dynamics, and new materials?
One of the reasons that steam gained primacy was reliable performance.
In the end, it comes down to what has cheaper operating costs.
One of the reasons that steam gained primacy was reliable performance.
In the end, it comes down to what has cheaper operating costs.
Vestas Sailrocket 2: 65.45kts (121.1km/h), Nov. 2012. Winds were about 25kts.
"Because in Character Generation, no one can hear you scream . . . "
Badenov
SOC-12
So in digging around, I dug up this thread, https://www.travellerrpg.com/threads/destroyers-and-other-escorts.35317/, which explores similar questions with ultimately no real conclusion. I have also been churning through the CT Book 5 rules and I do have a few general conclusions:
1. Buffered Planetoid Hulls with max armor (at TL15) can ignore anything smaller than a spinal, and spinal particle bays. The bumper to damage from nukes and spinal particles is offset by the additional armor from the Buffered Planetoid configuration. It's a pain to refuel, but that's the breaks.
1a. Other craft with max armor can ignore anything smaller than a spinal, but take minor damage from spinal particle bays and nuclear missiles. With Nuke Dampers and Repulsors in place, it can require a lot of Missile Bays to get that minor damage. Shooting back can be difficult depending on how those missile carriers are armored, and has run me around in circles for weeks working out counter-craft and counter-counter craft. Ultimately, though, you can just take it on the chin if your opponent wants to hurl dozens of smaller ships at you that can ultimately do very little.
2. I am unable to make a Buffered Planetoid hull Jump 2 capable - the space taken by each X% of hull required for various bits is too much with the other requirements I have included. I can make it Jump 1 capable, but the tonnage required for that is large, on the order of 170,000 tons and still loses Agility. SDB Buffered Planetoids are fine and pretty effective.
2a . Meson Spinals (and Meson bays, for no clear reason) are subject to a penalty to hit based on the target's agility, where other weapons are not. This makes agility 6 a critical design factor, and Meson Bays, which top out at 6+ to hit, basically useless against agility 6 targets. So Meson Spinals are the only thing that can hurt Buffered Planetoid hulls, and need a 9 or better on 2d6 to hit, based on a 4+ for a Meson Spinal, -6 for Agility, and +1 for target size, since the smallest I can make this is 39990 tons. So with a 9+ needed to hit and a 7+ needed to beat the Meson Screen 9, and the 6+ needed to beat the buffered planetoid configuration, that gives an incoming shot about a 12% chance to hit my SDBs, given all other things equal (Computer, Crew Skill, etc). The above-mentioned Meson-Spinal-armed Buffered Planetoid at 170,000 tons with agility 5 is 7+ to be hit. With Meson Screen 9 and Config 9, that's a bit over 24% chance of scoring a hit. Fairly safe, but twice as likely to take the hit as the smaller, more agile SDBs. And the cost difference is high enough I wouldn't go there.
3. So, the final battle map in what has become my view is fleets of ~40,000-ton Meson Spinal-armed Buffered Planetoid SDBs duking it out, trying to hit that 12% chance. (With the Spinal Mount bonus damage, any Spinal N hit is going to get enough rolls to have a very good chance of fuel tanking its target and between the direct damage and the radiation, will almost certainly kill the whole crew, leaving the ship's marines the task of manning up the damage control stations while the sides finish each other off.). Even with a repair, though, with a Fuel Tank destroyed hit, there's no way to power anything back up. All they can do is try to repair the fuel tank and hope their side wins, so someone can give them enough fuel to limp back to a repair yard. The Lurenti carrier can be repurposed to carry 3 of these SDBs plus a 20,000-ton refuelling SDB.
4. Non-Planetoid Jump-2 Spinal Meson N craft are completely workabke and cost about the same as the buffered planetoid SDB. They are, as mentioned above, vulnerable to nuclear missiles and Particle Spinals plinking down the weapon ratings but are otherwise pretty solid, and a bit smaller/lighter than the Buffered Planetoids.
5. Non-Spinal Buffered Planetoid SDBs can be made at under 9000 tons. They are, like the above buffered planetoids, basically invulnerable to anything other than Meson Spinal hits, and at their comparitively small size, are a bit harder to hit. The drawback is they can't hurt anyone except the above-mentioned Non-Planetoid Jump-2 Spinal Meson N craft, so they may not have a role depending on the fight. That's not really a huge niche to fill unless you know your opposite number has gone with that Non-Planetoid Jump-2 Spinal Meson N option.
So now I am puzzled at a much deeper level: have I concluded wrong, was this some secret of the sages of CT, or did no one actually work this through before?
1. Buffered Planetoid Hulls with max armor (at TL15) can ignore anything smaller than a spinal, and spinal particle bays. The bumper to damage from nukes and spinal particles is offset by the additional armor from the Buffered Planetoid configuration. It's a pain to refuel, but that's the breaks.
1a. Other craft with max armor can ignore anything smaller than a spinal, but take minor damage from spinal particle bays and nuclear missiles. With Nuke Dampers and Repulsors in place, it can require a lot of Missile Bays to get that minor damage. Shooting back can be difficult depending on how those missile carriers are armored, and has run me around in circles for weeks working out counter-craft and counter-counter craft. Ultimately, though, you can just take it on the chin if your opponent wants to hurl dozens of smaller ships at you that can ultimately do very little.
2. I am unable to make a Buffered Planetoid hull Jump 2 capable - the space taken by each X% of hull required for various bits is too much with the other requirements I have included. I can make it Jump 1 capable, but the tonnage required for that is large, on the order of 170,000 tons and still loses Agility. SDB Buffered Planetoids are fine and pretty effective.
2a . Meson Spinals (and Meson bays, for no clear reason) are subject to a penalty to hit based on the target's agility, where other weapons are not. This makes agility 6 a critical design factor, and Meson Bays, which top out at 6+ to hit, basically useless against agility 6 targets. So Meson Spinals are the only thing that can hurt Buffered Planetoid hulls, and need a 9 or better on 2d6 to hit, based on a 4+ for a Meson Spinal, -6 for Agility, and +1 for target size, since the smallest I can make this is 39990 tons. So with a 9+ needed to hit and a 7+ needed to beat the Meson Screen 9, and the 6+ needed to beat the buffered planetoid configuration, that gives an incoming shot about a 12% chance to hit my SDBs, given all other things equal (Computer, Crew Skill, etc). The above-mentioned Meson-Spinal-armed Buffered Planetoid at 170,000 tons with agility 5 is 7+ to be hit. With Meson Screen 9 and Config 9, that's a bit over 24% chance of scoring a hit. Fairly safe, but twice as likely to take the hit as the smaller, more agile SDBs. And the cost difference is high enough I wouldn't go there.
3. So, the final battle map in what has become my view is fleets of ~40,000-ton Meson Spinal-armed Buffered Planetoid SDBs duking it out, trying to hit that 12% chance. (With the Spinal Mount bonus damage, any Spinal N hit is going to get enough rolls to have a very good chance of fuel tanking its target and between the direct damage and the radiation, will almost certainly kill the whole crew, leaving the ship's marines the task of manning up the damage control stations while the sides finish each other off.). Even with a repair, though, with a Fuel Tank destroyed hit, there's no way to power anything back up. All they can do is try to repair the fuel tank and hope their side wins, so someone can give them enough fuel to limp back to a repair yard. The Lurenti carrier can be repurposed to carry 3 of these SDBs plus a 20,000-ton refuelling SDB.
4. Non-Planetoid Jump-2 Spinal Meson N craft are completely workabke and cost about the same as the buffered planetoid SDB. They are, as mentioned above, vulnerable to nuclear missiles and Particle Spinals plinking down the weapon ratings but are otherwise pretty solid, and a bit smaller/lighter than the Buffered Planetoids.
5. Non-Spinal Buffered Planetoid SDBs can be made at under 9000 tons. They are, like the above buffered planetoids, basically invulnerable to anything other than Meson Spinal hits, and at their comparitively small size, are a bit harder to hit. The drawback is they can't hurt anyone except the above-mentioned Non-Planetoid Jump-2 Spinal Meson N craft, so they may not have a role depending on the fight. That's not really a huge niche to fill unless you know your opposite number has gone with that Non-Planetoid Jump-2 Spinal Meson N option.
So now I am puzzled at a much deeper level: have I concluded wrong, was this some secret of the sages of CT, or did no one actually work this through before?
That is not what my copy of Book 5 says, and I've never seen that mentioned elsewhere. Everything has to hit DMs for size, for relative computer size, and for target agility. Some weapons have DMs for range as well. Agility 6 is always very important.
One other thing - critical hits reduce armour, so big spinals can grind a ship down until it's vulnerable to damage.
Badenov
SOC-12
I had assumed they used the same thing, but when I read the tables more closely, I was surprised. My copy of LBB5/80 says:
I have circled where the agility is mentioned for Mesons and pasted the table where it's not mentioned for Missiles. I assume that Beam Weapons 'using the DMs shown above' mean that they use the Missile DMs. I can only assume that because Meson Decay is so touchy, that ship agility matters? Is my copy of LBB5 in error?
It kind of doesn't matter, because even if the other weapons hit, they can't hurt the Armored Buffered Planetoid hulls anyway. And it can't hurt the other Armor 15 ships much. The autocrits kind of don't matter because there's zero reason to fly anything less than a battleship. About the only thing it means is that unarmored small craft can be hit with non-meson weapons without having to roll a 12 on 2d6 to hit.
When the spinals do hit, the additional hits from page 39 at the top, is generally enough to get 1-2 hits on Fuel Tanks Shattered, and between the Internal table and the Radiation table, there's generally enough 'crew-1' hits to kill the whole crew. So with no crew and no ability to use systems that require EP, the surviving Marines are left to do what Damage Control they can and hope their side wins the battle, because even if they get the fuel tank repaired, they can't make fuel appear in it. But if their side wins, they can get enough fuel from an ally to limp into whatever Naval station orbial facility is present.
I have circled where the agility is mentioned for Mesons and pasted the table where it's not mentioned for Missiles. I assume that Beam Weapons 'using the DMs shown above' mean that they use the Missile DMs. I can only assume that because Meson Decay is so touchy, that ship agility matters? Is my copy of LBB5 in error?
It kind of doesn't matter, because even if the other weapons hit, they can't hurt the Armored Buffered Planetoid hulls anyway. And it can't hurt the other Armor 15 ships much. The autocrits kind of don't matter because there's zero reason to fly anything less than a battleship. About the only thing it means is that unarmored small craft can be hit with non-meson weapons without having to roll a 12 on 2d6 to hit.
When the spinals do hit, the additional hits from page 39 at the top, is generally enough to get 1-2 hits on Fuel Tanks Shattered, and between the Internal table and the Radiation table, there's generally enough 'crew-1' hits to kill the whole crew. So with no crew and no ability to use systems that require EP, the surviving Marines are left to do what Damage Control they can and hope their side wins the battle, because even if they get the fuel tank repaired, they can't make fuel appear in it. But if their side wins, they can get enough fuel from an ally to limp into whatever Naval station orbial facility is present.
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
You must have an early printrun version of HG. I have a first printrun edition that only has agility as a DM for mesons guns.
It was changed for later editions, agility is a blanket DM for all weapons. Both my later printrun editions and the electronic pdf version have the blanket agility DM.
Trillion Credit Squadron stated it explicitly:
"Agility serves as a defensive DM on the throw to hit for all weapons. Agility also assists (or hinders) in pursuit actions."
This is something I have long wondered about reverting to the original rule.
It was changed for later editions, agility is a blanket DM for all weapons. Both my later printrun editions and the electronic pdf version have the blanket agility DM.
Trillion Credit Squadron stated it explicitly:
"Agility serves as a defensive DM on the throw to hit for all weapons. Agility also assists (or hinders) in pursuit actions."
This is something I have long wondered about reverting to the original rule.
Badenov
SOC-12
Well, okay. I wonder what other changes I have to worry about in my copy of the game? It may invalidate everything I have worked out, which would be frustrating. The -DM for Agility for other weapons just means Rating 1 weapons are just about completely useless for anythiing.
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
I can't remember if I posted this earlier.
Badenov
SOC-12
So I have dug up the errata in https://www.travellerrpg.com/threads/ct-errata-compendium.20051/ dated 2009 and am pen-and-inking my copy now.
This is a super-useful summary. My conclusions only apply at TL15, which I realize is a limited scope, and I should have mentioned in my post. I can only dig through so many rules at a time.
Badenov
SOC-12
So, the errata mentioned above is copious, but does not include that line from TCS. Still, it seems reasonable. It also changes little, though it does hinder smaller adventure-class ships and nerfs their weapons. What's the point of mounting a Rating 1 weapon, it's impossible to hit fast ships without an overwhelming advantage in some other area, like Computer. The small weapons are only meant to be effective against other marginal operators, it seems.
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
I think it is missed because it was "corrected" in the later print runs - and the electronic version.
Badenov
SOC-12
Interestingly, I just worked out the reason why some ships have small armor amounts. They don't want to use up huge tonnage with max armor, but the armor they do have pushes hits on the surface table up past where the damage passes to the interior table. I can see where that's better than nothing.
Badenov
SOC-12
snipped for space
Yep, I apparently have an old printing. The errata and updates don't seem to correct it, either, or even mention, 'hey, this old version is out there, be alert'. I can't be the only one with this version? Is there an old LBB5/80 to new LBB5/80 errata sheet? I did not find that.
It makes the nuclear option so much less viable, though. The nuclear option being nuclear missile bays at Rating 9 being able to do Weapon-1 hits to Max-armored non-planetoids if you can stack enough of them against Rating 9 dampers (which allow 1 in 6 through) and Rating 7+ repulsors (which are guaranteed stoppers). But a rating 9 missile bay is basically autohit, so it was 6x your repulsor bay count to get missiles past you. Now that you have a harder to-hit roll, half of your starting count of missile bays miss, and you now need -2- craptons of bays to score basically trivial hits.
Similar threads
