WW1

Discuss the Traveller RPG and its many settings
Skaran
Stoat
Posts: 50
Joined: Thu Nov 08, 2007 5:57 pm
Location: Forest Hill, Western Australia
Contact:

WW1

Postby Skaran » Thu Sep 19, 2019 3:41 am

I have been going through the Traveller Vehicle Handbook. I have been able to reproduce the TL4 Terror-Roc patrol fighter (the illustration is a large biplane) which based on the tech descriptions is late nineteenth early twentieth century, though looking at the Liberty class ironclad this goes back to the 1860s. The TL5 Vanguard is clearly a WW2 fighter. So where do I get my WW1 artillery and naval guns from? The period is obviously a transitional one from black powder cannon to more 'modern' types but where are they? There is a TL4 field gun in the Central Supply Catalogue and a TL3 black powder mortar and cannon as well.
Any ideas on how to arm a pre-dreadnought with 8 and 12" TL4 breech loading guns? etc. For example the Royal Sovereign class pre-dreadnoughts built from 1889 - 1894 had
2 × twin 13.5 in (343 mm) guns
10 × single 6 in (152 mm) guns
10 × single 6 pdr 2.2 in (57 mm) guns
12 × single 3 pdr 1.9 in (47 mm) guns
7 × 18 in (450 mm) torpedo tubes

I need these for some of my more primitive worlds.
And when one dreams dark dreams dark days shall follow
Linwood
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 518
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2017 12:41 am

Re: WW1

Postby Linwood » Thu Sep 19, 2019 9:32 am

The quick but not necessarily accurate way would be to take the TL 4 weapons that you have and create scaled versions to meet your needs. For example you could take the TL 4 field gun example and decrease its Damage and Range (and change the crew?) to create smaller versions. Worry less about historical accuracy and more about creating a consistent feel to scale the game stats.
AnotherDilbert
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3868
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 2:49 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: WW1

Postby AnotherDilbert » Thu Sep 19, 2019 11:24 am

The Bombardment Guns (CSC, p126) probably represent e.g. heavy ships guns of WWII.
The 67 tonne BL13.5" is clearly smaller and earlier, so perhaps 1DD?

The TL4 Field Gun and TL6 autocannons gives us an idea of caliber vs. damage.

How about something like:
1DD _ 13.5 in (343 mm) guns [Lighter Bombardment Gun]
8D __ 6 in (152 mm) guns [TL4 Field Gun]
6D __ 6 pdr 2.2 in (57 mm) guns
5D __ 3 pdr 1.9 in (47 mm) guns
1DD _ Torpedo [VH,p43]
Jackstar
Weasel
Posts: 27
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2018 11:42 am

Re: WW1

Postby Jackstar » Thu Sep 19, 2019 4:20 pm

AnotherDilbert wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 11:24 am
The Bombardment Guns (CSC, p126) probably represent e.g. heavy ships guns of WWII.
The 67 tonne BL13.5" is clearly smaller and earlier, so perhaps 1DD?

The TL4 Field Gun and TL6 autocannons gives us an idea of caliber vs. damage.

How about something like:
1DD _ 13.5 in (343 mm) guns [Lighter Bombardment Gun]
8D __ 6 in (152 mm) guns [TL4 Field Gun]
6D __ 6 pdr 2.2 in (57 mm) guns
5D __ 3 pdr 1.9 in (47 mm) guns
1DD _ Torpedo [VH,p43]
I would put the 13.5 in at 2DD (if nothing else to leave space between 6in and 13.5 in)

You also need to consider Rate of Fire and AP.

Rate of Fire is something like: 1 or 2 per minute for the 13.5 in; 5 per minute for the 6 in; 10 per minute ( 1 per round) for the 6 and 3 pdrs.

AP should be good (equal to the ship's armour) for the 13.5 in; poor (1 or 2) for the 6 in and 0 for the 6 and 3 pdrs.
As you increase the caliber from 8 in to 18 in the main change will be to the AP.
AnotherDilbert
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3868
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 2:49 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: WW1

Postby AnotherDilbert » Thu Sep 19, 2019 5:08 pm

Jackstar wrote: I would put the 13.5 in at 2DD (if nothing else to leave space between 6in and 13.5 in)
I agree in principle, but the TL5 220 tonne Bombardment Gun is 2DD (heavier than a WWI 18" gun). A TL4 67 tonne gun should do less damage. I could go for 15D or 1½DD, but that is a bit clumsy.

Jackstar wrote: You also need to consider Rate of Fire and AP.

Rate of Fire is something like: 1 or 2 per minute for the 13.5 in; 5 per minute for the 6 in; 10 per minute ( 1 per round) for the 6 and 3 pdrs.

AP should be good (equal to the ship's armour) for the 13.5 in; poor (1 or 2) for the 6 in and 0 for the 6 and 3 pdrs.
Remember that we probably fire AP ammunition with additional AP.

The combat system is not all that fine-grained; all weapons generally RoF 1/round, unless they have a very high fully automatic RoF like autocannon.

Jackstar wrote: As you increase the caliber from 8 in to 18 in the main change will be to the AP.
I'm not sure that is consistent how the combat system work.
Annatar Giftbringer
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 753
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 10:35 am
Location: Uddevalla, Sweden

Re: WW1

Postby Annatar Giftbringer » Thu Sep 19, 2019 5:13 pm

Regarding 1 1/2 DD, how about 1DD+3 or something like that?

For slower RoF, you could give them a longer reload-time?
Moppy
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 924
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 12:42 pm

Re: WW1

Postby Moppy » Thu Sep 19, 2019 5:34 pm

World War 1 and 2 naval guns were not that dissimilar. There were some advances in AP shell design.

British 15" from 1915-1965; 880kg shell at 800m/s to 35km, theoretical rate 2/minute

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BL_15-inch_Mk_I_naval_gun

German 15" from 1940; 800kg shell at 820m/s to 36km, theoretical rate 2.5/minute

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/38_cm_SK_C/34_naval_gun

Pre-WW1 guns, such as from American Civil War, were much lesser beasts, and were unreliable as well (In game, maybe it breaks if you roll double 1 to hit?)
AnotherDilbert
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3868
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 2:49 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: WW1

Postby AnotherDilbert » Thu Sep 19, 2019 5:43 pm

Moppy wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 5:34 pm
World War 1 and 2 naval guns were not that dissimilar. There were some advances in AP shell design.

British 15" from 1915-1965 https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BL_15-inch_Mk_I_naval_gun
Agreed, but the BL 13.5" gun was designed in 1880 and obsolete before WWI.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BL_13.5_i ... _Mk_I_-_IV

E.g. it had a maximum range of ~11 km, versus ~30 km for the newer WWI-II BL 15" gun.
Moppy
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 924
Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2015 12:42 pm

Re: WW1

Postby Moppy » Thu Sep 19, 2019 5:48 pm

Yea world war 1 is around the start of modern guns, and before that is dodgy, but the thread title is WW1 and I think it's relevant.
AnotherDilbert
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3868
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 2:49 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: WW1

Postby AnotherDilbert » Thu Sep 19, 2019 6:05 pm

Annatar Giftbringer wrote: Regarding 1 1/2 DD, how about 1DD+3 or something like that?
That would be better, but we must also define how it interacts with AP ammunition; AP 10, AP15 ?

Annatar Giftbringer wrote: For slower RoF, you could give them a longer reload-time?
Sure, but note that even old manually muzzle-loaded guns have no RoF, so can fire every round of 6 s by RAW... (CSC, p128)

The MgT2 system is very simple, it just doesn't handle such detail.
Jackstar
Weasel
Posts: 27
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2018 11:42 am

Re: WW1

Postby Jackstar » Thu Sep 19, 2019 7:10 pm

AnotherDilbert wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 5:08 pm
Jackstar wrote: I would put the 13.5 in at 2DD (if nothing else to leave space between 6in and 13.5 in)
I agree in principle, but the TL5 220 tonne Bombardment Gun is 2DD (heavier than a WWI 18" gun). A TL4 67 tonne gun should do less damage. I could go for 15D or 1½DD, but that is a bit clumsy.
The 18 in gun is 151 tonne but in its turret it's 839 tonne (admitily including some armour). More like the TL5 500 tonne Heavy Bombardment Gun (3DD).
Annatar Giftbringer
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 753
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 10:35 am
Location: Uddevalla, Sweden

Re: WW1

Postby Annatar Giftbringer » Thu Sep 19, 2019 7:15 pm

AnotherDilbert wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 6:05 pm
Annatar Giftbringer wrote: Regarding 1 1/2 DD, how about 1DD+3 or something like that?
That would be better, but we must also define how it interacts with AP ammunition; AP 10, AP15 ?

Annatar Giftbringer wrote: For slower RoF, you could give them a longer reload-time?
Sure, but note that even old manually muzzle-loaded guns have no RoF, so can fire every round of 6 s by RAW... (CSC, p128)

The MgT2 system is very simple, it just doesn't handle such detail.


Well, AP is based on number of dice rolled, so 1DD and 1DD+3 should get the same effect from AP ammo?

I thought there were more weapons that took longer to reload, but apparently my memory is slightly imperfect... :)

The only ones I found was antique rifle that requires a gun combat check to reload successfully and the auxiliary grenade launcher that requires three minor actions to reload.

Screw up the musket check and it’ll be another combat round before you can fire, and aux grenades can fire every other round at best, assuming you do nothing but reload with all your actions.

(It could also be argued that the gun combat check is a separate action from “reload” and that antique weapons thus require minimum two minor actions (assuming the gun combat check is a minor action), lowering its RoF)

I agree on the designed level of detail, but there are tools available if one wants more detail, like “takes two full rounds to reload”, damage xD+Y and so on :)
Jackstar
Weasel
Posts: 27
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2018 11:42 am

Re: WW1

Postby Jackstar » Thu Sep 19, 2019 7:30 pm

AnotherDilbert wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 5:08 pm
Jackstar wrote:
AP should be good (equal to the ship's armour) for the 13.5 in; poor (1 or 2) for the 6 in and 0 for the 6 and 3 pdrs.
Remember that we probably fire AP ammunition with additional AP.
From VH page 35 we get max Protection of 10 for TL 3-5 (ignoring the fact that it is called "Iron" armour) with*3 for AFV (A Battleship must be an AFV) so max 30 Protection . Nowhere near enough for Royal Sovereign let alone Yamato.( A 1DD AP shell has 10 AP and does average damage of 35.)
AnotherDilbert
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3868
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 2:49 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: WW1

Postby AnotherDilbert » Thu Sep 19, 2019 8:04 pm

Jackstar wrote: From VH page 35 we get max Protection of 10 for TL 3-5 (ignoring the fact that it is called "Iron" armour) with*3 for AFV (A Battleship must be an AFV) so max 30 Protection . Nowhere near enough for Royal Sovereign let alone Yamato.( A 1DD AP shell has 10 AP and does average damage of 35.)
Here is where things break down a bit.

Ships have no AFV trait (VH, p21), so Armour is max 15 (VH, p34).

A 14 kDt Royal Sovereign would be about 40 000 Spaces so has 160 000 Hull.

A 1DD AP10 shell would do average 30 damage, so it would take about 5300 capital gun or torpedo hits to sink the battleship. Hence the ship is nearly unsinkable.

The problem is certainly not that the guns do to much damage.
AnotherDilbert
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3868
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 2:49 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: WW1

Postby AnotherDilbert » Thu Sep 19, 2019 8:06 pm

Jackstar wrote: The 18 in gun is 151 tonne but in its turret it's 839 tonne (admitily including some armour). More like the TL5 500 tonne Heavy Bombardment Gun (3DD).
The 500 tonne bombardment gun is gun only, armoured turret would be extra...
AnotherDilbert
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3868
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 2:49 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: WW1

Postby AnotherDilbert » Thu Sep 19, 2019 8:17 pm

Annatar Giftbringer wrote: Well, AP is based on number of dice rolled, so 1DD and 1DD+3 should get the same effect from AP ammo?
Quite, but if we used 1DD+3 to model 1½DD (≈15D) it would be fair to give it AP 15 from AP ammunition?

Annatar Giftbringer wrote: I thought there were more weapons that took longer to reload, but apparently my memory is slightly imperfect... :)
Agreed, the mechanism exists, but is barely used. See e.g. Black Powder Gun (CSC, p128).

Edit:
"Under favourable circumstances, the 13.5 in guns on the Anson could fire once every two minutes. Garbutt, Naval Gunnery, p123"
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BL_13.5_i ... cteristics

Once every 2 minutes would be once every 12 rounds.
AnotherDilbert
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3868
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 2:49 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: WW1

Postby AnotherDilbert » Thu Sep 19, 2019 8:41 pm

Jackstar wrote: The 18 in gun is 151 tonne but in its turret it's 839 tonne (admitily including some armour).
Source?

The BL 15" were mounted in twin towers of about 800 (±50) tonnes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BL_15_inc ... n#Mounting
Jackstar
Weasel
Posts: 27
Joined: Sat Dec 29, 2018 11:42 am

Re: WW1

Postby Jackstar » Thu Sep 19, 2019 8:59 pm

AnotherDilbert wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 8:41 pm
Jackstar wrote: The 18 in gun is 151 tonne but in its turret it's 839 tonne (admitily including some armour).
Source?

The BL 15" were mounted in twin towers of about 800 (±50) tonnes.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BL_15_inc ... n#Mounting
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BL_18-in ... naval_gun

Note that a single 18 was about the same as a twin 15 in in size. HMS Courageous and HMS Furious were the same size.

What is not clear is how much of the turret is armour and how much the gun carriage.
AnotherDilbert
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3868
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 2:49 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: WW1

Postby AnotherDilbert » Thu Sep 19, 2019 9:46 pm

Jackstar wrote:
Thu Sep 19, 2019 8:59 pm
What is not clear is how much of the turret is armour and how much the gun carriage.
Thanks.

We can guess, look at the German 38 cm (15") SK L/45 naval gun.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Langer_Max
It weighs 270 tonnes apparently including mobile land mount. This compares with the Bombardment Gun (CSC, p126) of 220 tonnes.

A fixed (but rotating) mount should be lighter?

I would set a WWI-II roughly 15" battleship gun at 2DD.
The lighter pre-dreadnought guns at 1DD - 1½DD.
AnotherDilbert
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3868
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 2:49 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: WW1

Postby AnotherDilbert » Fri Sep 20, 2019 12:08 am

Jackstar wrote: Note that a single 18 was about the same as a twin 15 in in size. HMS Courageous and HMS Furious were the same size.

What is not clear is how much of the turret is armour and how much the gun carriage.
The 15" was 100 tonnes, the 18" was 150 tonnes (gun only).

The single turret on Furious was 840 tonnes, the fixed mount on monitors were 390 tonnes. http://www.navweaps.com/Weapons/WNBR_18 ... urret_Data

I think we can assume that armour is a considerable part of the 450 tonne difference.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 14 guests