Core 2 & High Guard 2 rules check - EW, mssiles, armor

Discuss the Traveller RPG and its many settings
AnotherDilbert
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3817
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 2:49 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: Core 2 & High Guard 2 rules check - EW, mssiles, armor

Postby AnotherDilbert » Tue Mar 05, 2019 7:08 pm

Moppy wrote: effect is 2d + crew dm + 2 (pulse) + range dm - 8 (not counting other factors)

damage is 2d + 4 (triple turret) - armor + effect (unless effect < 0, in which case 0)

crit is effect >= 6 and damage > 0
Agreed.

I get:
Image

Attack roll on horizontal axis, damage roll on vertical axis, matrix of inflicted damage.
Average damage 0.93, crit chance 13%.

Basically we crit on a roll of 10+, and almost always does damage with that high Effect.
baithammer
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 912
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 2:21 am

Re: Core 2 & High Guard 2 rules check - EW, mssiles, armor

Postby baithammer » Tue Mar 05, 2019 8:51 pm

I generally use skill-2, charDM +1 for normal professional military crew. For warships from competent navies I also assume skill augmentation (+1) and expert system support (+1) and perhaps DEX/INT/EDU augmentation (+1) despite expense.

So a total skill of 6 = 2[skill] +1[char] +1[aug] +1[expert] +1[char aug].
Which isn't the assumptions for the system, an interesting layout for a homebrew though.

Figured out the +1 char given in the npc generation is +1 to the stat with a base 7 across the board.
More
experienced characters have modified characteristics,
adding +1 to a single characteristic if they are Average,
and another +1 to any two characteristics if they are
Experienced, and so on, as shown on the Experience
table. The characteristics increased in this way should
relate to the occupation of the character (so, a scientist
would likely have increased INT and EDU, while a
mercenary would likely have increased DEX and END).
Hence why the Capital ships only assume skill 2 for an average crew.
Old School
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 773
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2018 1:41 pm
Location: Florida

Re: Core 2 & High Guard 2 rules check - EW, mssiles, armor

Postby Old School » Tue Mar 05, 2019 10:53 pm

AnotherDilbert wrote:
Tue Mar 05, 2019 5:23 pm

A 4DD spinal does 4D × 1000 ≈ 14,000 points of damage. The Plankwell has 146,666 Hull. It takes about 10 hits to kill it.

About 2000 Dt meson screens will stop the attack completely, negating a 12000 Dt spinal.

Spinals do a lot of damage, but they are not invincible.
Lol. You’re right. I was looking a chart for fleet combat, which reduces the hull points by a factor of 10. So I think spinal weapons may actually be balanced under standard space combat rules.

just re-read the fleet combat section as well. I see that total damage for any weapons system is determined on the tsble, then divide by 10. Why the hell didn’t they just divide by ten on the table rather than make you find it in the text? Seems to be a disconnect between large and medium bay damage as well.
AnotherDilbert
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3817
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 2:49 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: Core 2 & High Guard 2 rules check - EW, mssiles, armor

Postby AnotherDilbert » Tue Mar 05, 2019 10:58 pm

baithammer wrote: Which isn't the assumptions for the system, an interesting layout for a homebrew though.

Figured out the +1 char given in the npc generation is +1 to the stat with a base 7 across the board.
Sure, we can use that system, but then I would consider a reasonable naval crew mostly Average (skill-1, char +1) and Experienced (skill-2, char +2) and hence gunners for major weapons and chief engineers would be Experienced and have +7 = 2[skill] +1[augm] +2[charDM] +1[char augm] +1[expert] with augmentation.

Turrets with probably Average gunners would be a little less effective. So, PD and anti-fighter fire would worse and consequently missiles and fighters would be better. I don't think that is needed or desirable.


Or, if I really wanted to break the system, I would look in CSC for better augmentation...
AnotherDilbert
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3817
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 2:49 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: Core 2 & High Guard 2 rules check - EW, mssiles, armor

Postby AnotherDilbert » Tue Mar 05, 2019 11:11 pm

Old School wrote: just re-read the fleet combat section as well. I see that total damage for any weapons system is determined on the tsble, then divide by 10. Why the hell didn’t they just divide by ten on the table rather than make you find it in the text? Seems to be a disconnect between large and medium bay damage as well.
The choice of dividing both damage and Hull by ten, instead of leaving them unchanged is a bit strange. Using the same scale would avoid this kind of confusion.

I agree that Large Bays should probably do a little more damage.
Moppy
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 861
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 12:42 pm

Re: Core 2 & High Guard 2 rules check - EW, mssiles, armor

Postby Moppy » Tue Mar 05, 2019 11:28 pm

I'm not sure what the numbers mean in real terms, but if you're already into "can't fail an average task" before we even get into real expert territory, then it seems like the numbers are shifted too far over towards the high end?
Last edited by Moppy on Tue Mar 05, 2019 11:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.
baithammer
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 912
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 2:21 am

Re: Core 2 & High Guard 2 rules check - EW, mssiles, armor

Postby baithammer » Tue Mar 05, 2019 11:41 pm

AnotherDilbert wrote:
Tue Mar 05, 2019 10:58 pm
baithammer wrote: Which isn't the assumptions for the system, an interesting layout for a homebrew though.

Figured out the +1 char given in the npc generation is +1 to the stat with a base 7 across the board.
Sure, we can use that system, but then I would consider a reasonable naval crew mostly Average (skill-1, char +1) and Experienced (skill-2, char +2) and hence gunners for major weapons and chief engineers would be Experienced and have +7 = 2[skill] +1[augm] +2[charDM] +1[char augm] +1[expert] with augmentation.

Turrets with probably Average gunners would be a little less effective. So, PD and anti-fighter fire would worse and consequently missiles and fighters would be better. I don't think that is needed or desirable.


Or, if I really wanted to break the system, I would look in CSC for better augmentation...
Wasn't saying you were breaking the system, more pushing it in the direction of maximal effect.

As for crew, the capital scale doesn't callout individual crew members its the average across the stations. ( Hence, average is considered skill 2 at that scale.)

As for turret point defense, it brings it inline with point defense systems where type II and III give a better value where the number of hardpoints isn't limited. ( Even then close escorts around 600dt can mount a type III and still have some punch left.)

For fighters at scale, small or medium missile bays are a great way of swatting them as they have limited point defense options.

Also on that chart is that +4 to hit the bonus from the pulse laser, if so shouldn't it be a +2.
AnotherDilbert
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3817
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 2:49 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: Core 2 & High Guard 2 rules check - EW, mssiles, armor

Postby AnotherDilbert » Wed Mar 06, 2019 12:00 am

Moppy wrote: I'm not sure what the numbers mean in real terms, but if you're already into "can't fail an average task" before we even get into real expert territory, then it seems like the numbers are shifted too far over towards the high end?
Agreed, but defensive DMs are equally high, e.g. Evasive Action (aka dodge).


This is one reason I prefer to initiate combat at extended range, to get a general negative DM to hit, to slow down the slaughter a bit.
AnotherDilbert
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3817
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 2:49 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: Core 2 & High Guard 2 rules check - EW, mssiles, armor

Postby AnotherDilbert » Wed Mar 06, 2019 12:27 am

baithammer wrote: As for crew, the capital scale doesn't callout individual crew members its the average across the stations. ( Hence, average is considered skill 2 at that scale.)
The system says that skill 0-3 is normal, and 4+ is very rare. I assume a native skill of 3 (plus augmentation) for professional naval crews from competent navies such as the Imperial Navy.

baithammer wrote: For fighters at scale, small or medium missile bays are a great way of swatting them as they have limited point defense options.
Enough missiles can kill everything, but fighters are surprisingly difficult to hit. It takes quite a few missiles in a salvo to hit a dodging fighter. A 35 Dt fighter with a couple of single laser turrets and good gunners is rather good at killing missiles.

baithammer wrote: Also on that chart is that +4 to hit the bonus from the pulse laser, if so shouldn't it be a +2.
The char uses total attack DM, so +4 = +2 for skill and +2 for Pulse, as specified by Moppy.
Moppy
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 861
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 12:42 pm

Re: Core 2 & High Guard 2 rules check - EW, mssiles, armor

Postby Moppy » Wed Mar 06, 2019 12:49 am

AnotherDilbert wrote:
Wed Mar 06, 2019 12:00 am
Moppy wrote: I'm not sure what the numbers mean in real terms, but if you're already into "can't fail an average task" before we even get into real expert territory, then it seems like the numbers are shifted too far over towards the high end?
Agreed, but defensive DMs are equally high, e.g. Evasive Action (aka dodge).
Is dodging supposed to work easily? You get one attempt per thrust point. If it was easy, the subsidised merchant would be doing it all the time with its one attempt. The patrol cruiser makes it work because it gets multiple attempts.
AnotherDilbert
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3817
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 2:49 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: Core 2 & High Guard 2 rules check - EW, mssiles, armor

Postby AnotherDilbert » Wed Mar 06, 2019 1:12 am

Moppy wrote: Is dodging supposed to work easily?
Yes? It's a 8+ check, even with skill-1 it succeeds 58% of the time.

Moppy wrote: You get one attempt per thrust point. If it was easy, the subsidised merchant would be doing it all the time with its one attempt. The patrol cruiser makes it work because it gets multiple attempts.
The Subbie may prefer Aid Gunner that also uses a thrust point. A single dodge is against a single attack, not a very convincing defence against four turrets. Dodging is most useful against a few powerful attacks, such as spinals.
baithammer
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 912
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 2:21 am

Re: Core 2 & High Guard 2 rules check - EW, mssiles, armor

Postby baithammer » Wed Mar 06, 2019 3:39 am

AnotherDilbert wrote:
Wed Mar 06, 2019 12:27 am
baithammer wrote: As for crew, the capital scale doesn't callout individual crew members its the average across the stations. ( Hence, average is considered skill 2 at that scale.)
The system says that skill 0-3 is normal, and 4+ is very rare. I assume a native skill of 3 (plus augmentation) for professional naval crews from competent navies such as the Imperial Navy.
Professional doesn't mean your average crew in this context, they would be veterans in the capital scale and there aren't that many with skill 3 let alone 4.
For the sake of simplicity, referees
can assume a skill level of 0 or 1 represents a green
or inexperienced crews, skill level 2 represents trained
or experienced crew, while skill level 3 is suitable for
veterans. Skill levels of 4 or higher should be extremely
rare –
The system was designed around this basis and if you look at most npcs they don't have augmentations, when you do this at a large scale you end up with little room to grow for a game.
baithammer wrote: For fighters at scale, small or medium missile bays are a great way of swatting them as they have limited point defense options.
Enough missiles can kill everything, but fighters are surprisingly difficult to hit. It takes quite a few missiles in a salvo to hit a dodging fighter. A 35 Dt fighter with a couple of single laser turrets and good gunners is rather good at killing missiles.

Only if your using veteran level skills, augmentations and a fighter with more than thrust 12.

Small bays got 12 missiles, Medium Bays got 24 and a large bay 120 missiles, not to mention missiles don't use a lot of penalties or bonuses that a normal gunnery roll would.
baithammer wrote: Also on that chart is that +4 to hit the bonus from the pulse laser, if so shouldn't it be a +2.
The char uses total attack DM, so +4 = +2 for skill and +2 for Pulse, as specified by Moppy.
Ah, just used to not noting skill as part of the DM.
Moppy
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 861
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 12:42 pm

Re: Core 2 & High Guard 2 rules check - EW, mssiles, armor

Postby Moppy » Wed Mar 06, 2019 11:29 am

I'm certain that the system was designed to work with crew DMs around the +2 mark. Things just get very strange otherwise, and many dice rolls become redundant.

Is there a reason why published ship stats don't include the standard loads of ammunition and small craft in the cost? Adding that in changes the costs of systems very significantly. A full load of advanced missiles for a 100 dt missile bay is 100 MCr.
AnotherDilbert
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3817
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 2:49 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: Core 2 & High Guard 2 rules check - EW, mssiles, armor

Postby AnotherDilbert » Wed Mar 06, 2019 12:02 pm

baithammer wrote: Professional doesn't mean your average crew in this context, they would be veterans in the capital scale and there aren't that many with skill 3 let alone 4.
...
The system was designed around this basis and if you look at most npcs they don't have augmentations, when you do this at a large scale you end up with little room to grow for a game.
Skill-2 & charDM+1 isn't extreme, but a skilled professional.
Core, p56 wrote:Each level represents several years of experience using that skill, and grants DM+1 per level to all skill checks using that skill. A Traveller with level 2-3 in a skill is a skilled professional in that field. A Traveller with level 4 or 5 is probably both well-respected and well-known in his field.
Each crew-member on a warship handles MCr 50-100 of equipment. I assume they are trained more like current fighter jocks than naval ratings. That would mean a term or so of intense training before being deployed on a warship.

baithammer wrote: Only if your using veteran level skills, augmentations and a fighter with more than thrust 12.
Two single turrets are as effective as a single triple turret even with skill-2, and more effective with higher skill.

Thrust 12 is not necessary to dodge a single salvo.

In the general case a fighter would use Evade software and dodge to avoid getting hit. Depending on fighter it might add PD, EW, or even Dampers to avoid damage. Note that small salvoes, one for each fighter, are very sensitive to EW.

Even if it only takes one or two missiles to kill a fighter, we may have to launch 10-20 missiles in a salvo to get a good chance of hitting with a few and killing the fighter. Increasing skill in dodging, PD, and EW of course makes the target more elusive, making it necessary to launch more missiles to kill it. Hence it is cost effective to augment crew.

To take a concrete example: Take a fighter with a 5 Dt weapon module containing 2 single laser turrets, Enh Signal Processor, and a workstation for a single sensor operator giving a sensor DM of +2. Assume skill 5 (with augments).
EW kills average 4 missiles.
PD kills average 4 missiles each, for a total of 8 missiles.
So, 12 missiles are removed from the salvo before the attack roll.
Attack: 2D +#Missiles +1[smart] -2[Evade] -5[dodge] -8[difficulty] = 2D +#Missiles - 15 => 9 missiles needed to get a 50% chance of killing the fighter or 14 missiles for a very good chance.
In total we need to launch 12 + 14 = 26 missiles to get a good chance of killing a single fighter. Some will still have luck with the rolls and survive.
If the fighters have supporting ships with good EW many more missiles would be required.
AnotherDilbert
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3817
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 2:49 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: Core 2 & High Guard 2 rules check - EW, mssiles, armor

Postby AnotherDilbert » Wed Mar 06, 2019 12:20 pm

Moppy wrote:
Wed Mar 06, 2019 11:29 am
I'm certain that the system was designed to work with crew DMs around the +2 mark. Things just get very strange otherwise, and many dice rolls become redundant.
That is reasonable for the average Free Trader, but not the average many-billion-credit warship.

Moppy wrote:
Wed Mar 06, 2019 11:29 am
Is there a reason why published ship stats don't include the standard loads of ammunition and small craft in the cost? Adding that in changes the costs of systems very significantly. A full load of advanced missiles for a 100 dt missile bay is 100 MCr.
I believe small craft generally are included, but not ammunition. Note that small craft are generally cheaper than their garages. Example (HG, p134, "Lab Ship"):
Image

Ammunition is not that expensive. A medium bay contains 24 × 12 = 288 missiles at around MCr 0.5 per twelve (1 Dt), so about 288 / 12 × MCr 0.5 = MCr 12. Compare standard missiles on HG, p30 with Core, p157.
baithammer
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 912
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 2:21 am

Re: Core 2 & High Guard 2 rules check - EW, mssiles, armor

Postby baithammer » Wed Mar 06, 2019 1:24 pm

Skill-2 & charDM+1 isn't extreme, but a skilled professional.
It is extreme when you consider average crew is skill 2 with no mods, and skill 4 is considered a leader in that area of expertise ( Elite). ( Especially with an average of 1 stat at 9 and another stat at 8.)
Each crew-member on a warship handles MCr 50-100 of equipment. I assume they are trained more like current fighter jocks than naval ratings. That would mean a term or so of intense training before being deployed on a warship.
Skill 0 is inexperienced, skill 1 is green, skill 2 is average, skill 3 is veteran and skill 4 is elite.

The crew of the average warship is going to be a mix of different skill levels, with skill 2 being the typical skill level. ( Remembering that skill 0 is considered trained but inexperienced.)
Thrust 12 is not necessary to dodge a single salvo.
You also need to keep your target in range and they will be expending thrust either to pull range or to close range, so you don't have a large amount of thrust left over. ( Fighters having a slight edge with average m-drive at thrust 9.)

Also dodging only deals with a single attack and doesn't stack with itself or characteristic mods. ( 1 Thrust = - skill per attack dodged.)
Each point of unspent Thrust will allow the spacecraft
to attempt to dodge one attack. The attack suffers a
negative DM equal to the pilots skill.
That is reasonable for the average Free Trader, but not the average many-billion-credit warship.
Military simply has a higher admittance standard, the actual skill level isn't that much greater than civilians but they get access to skills not normally available to civilians. ( Such as Capital gunnery.)

Not to mention the average enlistment is 4 years.
phavoc
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 4768
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2008 6:13 pm

Re: Core 2 & High Guard 2 rules check - EW, mssiles, armor

Postby phavoc » Wed Mar 06, 2019 1:39 pm

If you want to reflect reality the average merchant gunner will have a skill level of one, and the average military no more than two. Military personnel are human and aren't going to get implants unless they are the norm. That's human nature.

A quick review of all the major navies, and experience being a soldier, marine, seaman or aviator will prove this. The difference is going to be wartime crews. There you have a constant pressure to be better because your life depends on it.

Other than that naval crews will typically have better Tha civilian, but not over the top better. They aren't going to train as crack troops because they aren't. Only a few select people will get that extra bump due to human nature. People serve for all kinds of reasons, but most don't serve for life. They never have across all the major militaries.

Those crews who are constantly at action with smugglers and pirates will be more likely to have higher skills than main fleets because they actually see action instead of just another drill.

If you want real world examples they are lying around. The USN is considered to be a very well trained fleet, yet it experienced a rash of stupidity over the last few years.

Regardless of how many billions are spent on that Uber ship the crews are going to follow the same path as all the navies before them.
Moppy
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 861
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 12:42 pm

Re: Core 2 & High Guard 2 rules check - EW, mssiles, armor

Postby Moppy » Wed Mar 06, 2019 3:37 pm

High Guard has missile price at 0.35 MCr for the advanced and 0.25 for basic. You're saying this is for 12? on mobile internet can't easily check.

long wartime also brings losses and rapid recruitment, both of which can lower the average crew quality. The wartime recruitment drive for Afghanistan and Iraq at the turn of the millennium brought street gangers into the army, and caused them some problems.

I'd agree that war gets rid of the obviously incompetent so maybe raises 1s to 2s, perhaps not so many 2s become 3s. I suspect the duration of the war matters - is it long or short? if short you don't need to recruit fast.

anyhow i can go with +2 dms for a navy, possibly +3s for an elite unit. if you get a whole boat of +4 they're an instructor corps and too valuable to risk. civvies can vary randomly, most gunners are probably ex-forces but out of practise.
Last edited by Moppy on Wed Mar 06, 2019 3:53 pm, edited 1 time in total.
AnotherDilbert
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3817
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 2:49 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: Core 2 & High Guard 2 rules check - EW, mssiles, armor

Postby AnotherDilbert » Wed Mar 06, 2019 3:48 pm

phavoc wrote: If you want to reflect reality the average merchant gunner will have a skill level of one, and the average military no more than two.
I respect your experience and I agree. Note that is basically the raw skill ranks I assume.

But I also assume that at least military gunners and pilots have a DEX DM of +1 as about 28% of all young people have according to the characteristic rolls.

Traveller warships are much more expensive than current warships and consequently far lower percentage of the population serves aboard, and hence the crews can be much more select than currently. I don't see much problem with the Navy (and Marines) being selective and only recruiting in the top third of the population. The Army may well be much less selective.

My assumptions may be based on Swedish tradition where military service is generally long time since the system with short time enlistment was abandoned in the 17th century.

Again, I consider all shipboard personnel more like current combat pilots than current mass-recruited naval ratings. The advantage of highly skilled crew is to great not to be vigorously pursued.

phavoc wrote: Military personnel are human and aren't going to get implants unless they are the norm. That's human nature.
I don't believe non-visible augments such as skill augment or wafer jacks that clearly makes you better at your job and are mandatory for your career (warship deployment) will be all that unpopular. It's not at all like replacing a functioning limb with a prosthetic.
AnotherDilbert
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3817
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 2:49 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: Core 2 & High Guard 2 rules check - EW, mssiles, armor

Postby AnotherDilbert » Wed Mar 06, 2019 4:07 pm

Moppy wrote: High Guard has missile price at 0.35 MCr for the advanced and 0.25 for basic. You're saying this is for 12? on mobile internet can't easily check.
I believe so. The table in HG does not mention quantity, but comparing missile prices in Core and Sand it seems the prices are per Dt (12 missiles). I assume the same goes for torpedoes (price per Dt, three torpedoes).

Moppy wrote: long wartime also brings losses and rapid recruitment, both of which can lower the average crew quality. The wartime recruitment drive for Afghanistan and Iraq at the turn of the millennium brought street gangers into the army, and caused them some problems.
Quite, but not many street thugs became badly trained naval fighter pilots?


I assume a competent Navy has a lot more trained crew than shipboard billets and training organisation continuously training more. The job of the Navy in peacetime is to prepare for war. If the Navy is incapable of training the personnel needed for a major war it can hardly be considered a competent Navy?

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 7 guests