Revisiting Fighters in a Post High Guard Era

Discuss the Traveller RPG and its many settings
baithammer
Mongoose
Posts: 108
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 2:21 am

Re: Revisiting Fighters in a Post High Guard Era

Postby baithammer » Thu Jul 13, 2017 5:18 am

Doing some more checking and the dual barbette isn't as overpowered as it sounds as it still has the limitations of being attached via firm points. ( 2 per barbette)

This would allow a differentiation between a medium fighter and a heavy one, while giving the light fighter a place in space combat.
arcador
Banded Mongoose
Posts: 243
Joined: Sun Oct 11, 2015 10:34 pm

Re: Revisiting Fighters in a Post High Guard Era

Postby arcador » Wed Jul 19, 2017 7:20 am

SSWarlock wrote:
Wed Jul 05, 2017 11:43 am
Pulse lasers can be serious threats, especially when three of them built with the Very High Yield tech advantage are placed in a triple turret. Turret damage jumps from the standard TL single turret's range of 2-12 to the triple turret's range of 10-16 (i.e. 2D+4 plus VHY effects).
You can place high-intensity upgrade which grants AP2 to lasers. That is, in the situation with a lot of armour, effectively 2 more damage. Sh*t gets real from the pulses.
baithammer
Mongoose
Posts: 108
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 2:21 am

Re: Revisiting Fighters in a Post High Guard Era

Postby baithammer » Wed Jul 19, 2017 7:32 am

Just when attached to firm points your fixed at a maximum range of close with a prohibition on range increases, which gives the hard point mounted pulse lasers a bit of time to apply damage before the fighter can reach both the range of its pulse lasers and dog fight range. ( One up sides is a 25% reduction on power usage when on firm points.)

If fighters start standardizing on high-intensity then reflec armor will be more common as well, +3 Armor vs lasers with the disadvantage of not being able to use stealth hulls. ( But still able to use Emissions Absorption Grid.)

Which makes adding a firm point to each class of fighter less problematic.
SSWarlock
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 985
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 3:26 pm
Location: Fulacin/Rhylanor/Spinward Marches

Re: Revisiting Fighters in a Post High Guard Era

Postby SSWarlock » Wed Jul 19, 2017 11:28 am

arcador wrote:
Wed Jul 19, 2017 7:20 am
You can place high-intensity upgrade which grants AP2 to lasers. That is, in the situation with a lot of armour, effectively 2 more damage. Sh*t gets real from the pulses.
I thought about that Intense Focus upgrade but it seemed to me that going with the Very High Yield would be more effective. Both upgrades requires 2 Advantage slots but Intense Focus works only with lasers and particle beams and is useful only when the target is armored. VHY's "change 1's and 2's to 3", on the other hand, works with any weapon and in every situation whether the target is armored or not.

Example:
Two scoutships with inexperienced gunners (Gunnery 0) encounter a pirate, SS Blackbeard, which has 5 points of armor.

HMS Ranger has Intense Focus on a pulse laser giving 2D + 2AP penetration. Ranger hits, rolls a mighty 3 (a 2 and a 1) for damage and its Intense Focus bonus makes that essentially a 5 versus Blackbeard's armor, causing the shot to do no damage.

HMS Explorer also has a pulse laser but with VHY. Rolling the same 2 and 1 for damage, VHY upgrades the rolls to two 3's for 6 points of damage. 5 of these points are absorbed by Blackbeard's armor leaving 1 to punch through Blackbeard's armor.

If the pirate didn't have any armor, the IF pulse laser would have done 3 points of damage. However, the VHY's damage rolls would still have been upgraded to 6 points of damage to make the hit even more effective. Essentially, VHY provides the armor piercing capability of IF by increasing the minimum possible damage per damage die by two points. Because VHY is increasing pure damage, it will always come into use. Against unarmored targets, IF's bonus is never used, essentially wasting two Advantage slots.

At least, that's the way I perceive it to work. I admit I may be missing something.
Sir Dhaven Hevelin, IOD, Baronet of Fulacin
Owner/Captain - S.S. Warlock

Playing Traveller/RQ/D&D since 1978
SSWarlock
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 985
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 3:26 pm
Location: Fulacin/Rhylanor/Spinward Marches

Re: Revisiting Fighters in a Post High Guard Era

Postby SSWarlock » Wed Jul 19, 2017 11:54 am

baithammer wrote:
Wed Jul 19, 2017 7:32 am
Just when attached to firm points your fixed at a maximum range of close with a prohibition on range increases, which gives the hard point mounted pulse lasers a bit of time to apply damage before the fighter can reach both the range of its pulse lasers and dog fight range. ( One up sides is a 25% reduction on power usage when on firm points.)

If fighters start standardizing on high-intensity then reflec armor will be more common as well, +3 Armor vs lasers with the disadvantage of not being able to use stealth hulls. ( But still able to use Emissions Absorption Grid.)

Which makes adding a firm point to each class of fighter less problematic.
Hmm. Good point about lasers forcing the use of Reflec over Stealth.

I can also see this forcing the move to larger, armoured, particle beam barbette-based fighters by those who can afford to do so. A particle beam barbette with the Very High Yield advantage would have a damage range of 12-24 plus radiation effects as well as automatically having the longest range possible for smallcraft. If the builder's Tech Level and budget allows, the weapon could also have the Energy Efficient advantage to reduce the weapon's power requirements by another 25%, making the weapon even more viable for medium-sized fighters.

A minimum displacement of 35 tons (i.e. two firmpoints) is required for any craft wanting to mount a particle beam barbette but the resulting additional empty tonnage can always be used for more armour or a more powerful Manoeuvre Drive. Possibly both.
Sir Dhaven Hevelin, IOD, Baronet of Fulacin
Owner/Captain - S.S. Warlock

Playing Traveller/RQ/D&D since 1978
locarno24
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 2925
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 7:46 pm
Location: Wildly Variable

Re: Revisiting Fighters in a Post High Guard Era

Postby locarno24 » Wed Jul 19, 2017 3:00 pm

SSWarlock wrote:
Wed Jul 19, 2017 11:28 am
arcador wrote:
Wed Jul 19, 2017 7:20 am
You can place high-intensity upgrade which grants AP2 to lasers. That is, in the situation with a lot of armour, effectively 2 more damage. Sh*t gets real from the pulses.
I thought about that Intense Focus upgrade but it seemed to me that going with the Very High Yield would be more effective. Both upgrades requires 2 Advantage slots but Intense Focus works only with lasers and particle beams and is useful only when the target is armored. VHY's "change 1's and 2's to 3", on the other hand, works with any weapon and in every situation whether the target is armored or not.

Example:
Two scoutships with inexperienced gunners (Gunnery 0) encounter a pirate, SS Blackbeard, which has 5 points of armor.

HMS Ranger has Intense Focus on a pulse laser giving 2D + 2AP penetration. Ranger hits, rolls a mighty 3 (a 2 and a 1) for damage and its Intense Focus bonus makes that essentially a 5 versus Blackbeard's armor, causing the shot to do no damage.

HMS Explorer also has a pulse laser but with VHY. Rolling the same 2 and 1 for damage, VHY upgrades the rolls to two 3's for 6 points of damage. 5 of these points are absorbed by Blackbeard's armor leaving 1 to punch through Blackbeard's armor.

If the pirate didn't have any armor, the IF pulse laser would have done 3 points of damage. However, the VHY's damage rolls would still have been upgraded to 6 points of damage to make the hit even more effective. Essentially, VHY provides the armor piercing capability of IF by increasing the minimum possible damage per damage die by two points. Because VHY is increasing pure damage, it will always come into use. Against unarmored targets, IF's bonus is never used, essentially wasting two Advantage slots.

At least, that's the way I perceive it to work. I admit I may be missing something.
Correct.
Very High Yield is better when you roll low, because it increases the minimum damage.
Intense Focus is better when you roll high, because it increases the maximum damage.



A VHY pulse laser improves minimum damage, boosting the damage of 20/36 possible 2D6 results (any roll including at least one '1' or '2'). The amount added varies; 2 for each roll of 1, 1 for each roll of 2. In a 6x6 grid of possible results, This adds a total of (12x2+12x1)/36 damage (1 damage)


An IF pulse laser reduces the damage reduction on all possible results by 2 - meaning that if you were within 1 hit of doing damage anyway, it improves the shot - which is any roll of 4 or better; i.e. all but 3 possible damage results (11, 12, 21) - this means you're adding (33x2)/36 damage (1.83 damage) to the roll.

More importantly, the total theoretical maximum damage is increased - a double-6 from the IF pulse laser does more than the VHY pulse laser.


More importantly, the fact that IF is dependent on total roll for it's usefulness, whilst VHY depends on the individual die rolls, means that as effect comes into play, the better your attack (and the higher the effect) the more proportionately effective IF will become, because even a damage roll of a 3, or a 2, will cause damage (and hence get a 'useful' bonus) whilst the VHY will only ever give the same bonus, whatever you roll.
Understand that I'm not advocating violence.
I'm just saying that it's highly effective and I strongly recommend using it.
AnotherDilbert
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 2248
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 2:49 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: Revisiting Fighters in a Post High Guard Era

Postby AnotherDilbert » Wed Jul 19, 2017 9:04 pm

Take a look at Accurate before you decide if IF or VHY is better.

If you are at all limited by chance to hit, I have generally found Accurate to be better.
SSWarlock
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 985
Joined: Wed Jun 27, 2007 3:26 pm
Location: Fulacin/Rhylanor/Spinward Marches

Re: Revisiting Fighters in a Post High Guard Era

Postby SSWarlock » Wed Jul 19, 2017 10:35 pm

AnotherDilbert wrote:
Wed Jul 19, 2017 9:04 pm
Take a look at Accurate before you decide if IF or VHY is better.

If you are at all limited by chance to hit, I have generally found Accurate to be better.
I tend to use Fire Control software of some kind to help mitigate accuracy problems. Doesn't mean that's the best way though. I'll look at Accuracy again.
Sir Dhaven Hevelin, IOD, Baronet of Fulacin
Owner/Captain - S.S. Warlock

Playing Traveller/RQ/D&D since 1978

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 13 guests