Spaceship vs. Starship

Discuss the Traveller RPG and its many settings
AnotherDilbert
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 4137
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 2:49 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: Spaceship vs. Starship

Postby AnotherDilbert » Mon Oct 28, 2019 11:16 am

A simple Attack +1 for each additional turret in the battery would have a large effect, at least against heavy armour:

Single Triple laser:
Image

Ten turret battery (attack +3 +9 [additional turrets] = +12):
Image

Note that both average damage and crit chance is more than ten times as large, in this particular case, so a ten-turret battery would do more damage than ten individual turrets. Reasonably we would also need fewer gunners, saving a lot of space (or BW).

The difference would be smaller for higher to hit chance and less armoured ships.



Note that such a battery would be better than a bay (here small particle bay):
Image
Moppy

Re: Spaceship vs. Starship

Postby Moppy » Mon Oct 28, 2019 1:24 pm

At some point your laser emitters may become a phased array and then concept of individual turrets is meaningless.

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Phased_array

One thing that needs to be defined regarding conventional Traveller turrets is whether a laser shoots a small burst almost all of which hits, or whether they spray everywhere and the damage is just from the small % of the beam that hit.

I wondered if this explains the dogfight rules. In dogfight they pewpew for a few seconds and it hits. In regular they pewpew for 20 minutes and only 1 burst hits.

Anyway this matters for combining turrets. If it can actually fire once and hit, there is no reason why you can hit at thousands of kilometres but can’t fire link weapons for simultaneous superimposed impact when the emitters are 50 meters apart.

If on the other hand they’re spraying randomly I can see why you can’t get the precision to put 2 lasers into the same hole.
GamingGlen
Mongoose
Posts: 181
Joined: Fri Oct 02, 2009 5:59 am

Re: Spaceship vs. Starship

Postby GamingGlen » Mon Oct 28, 2019 5:59 pm

Gadzooks, give someone a micron and they make it into a kilometer. :D

Thanks for the analysis. I'm still not going to bother putting some disadvantage to quad turrets. Just because it wasn't in previous editions of Traveller makes it a bad idea now.
Glen
Sigtrygg
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 1340
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 9:23 am

Re: Spaceship vs. Starship

Postby Sigtrygg » Mon Oct 28, 2019 10:44 pm

Quad turrets are now in T5 which means they exist in the OTU.
AnotherDilbert
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 4137
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 2:49 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: Spaceship vs. Starship

Postby AnotherDilbert » Mon Oct 28, 2019 11:01 pm

Sigtrygg wrote: Quad turrets are now in T5 which means they exist in the OTU.
Quite, but just like in MgT they exist in some sort of limbo, since all the familiar example ships use triple turrets max, even the vaguely military ones.
Moppy

Re: Spaceship vs. Starship

Postby Moppy » Mon Oct 28, 2019 11:44 pm

Gatling laser when? That seems like a more efficient way to get more firepower.
AnotherDilbert
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 4137
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 2:49 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: Spaceship vs. Starship

Postby AnotherDilbert » Tue Oct 29, 2019 3:03 am

Moppy wrote: Gatling laser when? That seems like a more efficient way to get more firepower.
Pulse laser is pulse laser?
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 7955
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Spaceship vs. Starship

Postby Condottiere » Tue Oct 29, 2019 3:09 am

Multi pulse, depending on the number of lenses.
Linwood
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 620
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2017 12:41 am

Re: Spaceship vs. Starship

Postby Linwood » Tue Oct 29, 2019 10:53 am

I’ve been assuming that Gatling lasers were created in part to resolve cooling issues, whereas pulse lasers have those issues resolved in other ways.
Moppy

Re: Spaceship vs. Starship

Postby Moppy » Tue Oct 29, 2019 1:08 pm

Maybe quad turrets aren’t enough anymore?

Image

Anti-tank Missiles, 81mm smoke grenades, 7.62mm machinegun, 30mm machinegun, and 30mm grenade launcher. It’s like someone read a Battletech TRO and said “we should build that”.

Source: http://deftechph.blogspot.com/2014/06/k ... ystem.html

Edit: This isn’t an anti-missile point defence, it is for gunboat duels, speedboat swarm protection, and shore targets.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 7955
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Spaceship vs. Starship

Postby Condottiere » Thu Oct 31, 2019 6:43 am

As I understand it, gatling lasers or equivalents were meant as point defense, or anti personnel.

Probably both.
Linwood
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 620
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2017 12:41 am

Re: Spaceship vs. Starship

Postby Linwood » Thu Oct 31, 2019 10:29 am

If they weren’t designed with that dual role in mind someone would eventually repurpose them.
baithammer
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 914
Joined: Wed May 31, 2017 2:21 am

Re: Spaceship vs. Starship

Postby baithammer » Fri Nov 22, 2019 3:55 am

Moppy wrote:
Tue Oct 29, 2019 1:08 pm
Maybe quad turrets aren’t enough anymore?

Anti-tank Missiles, 81mm smoke grenades, 7.62mm machinegun, 30mm machinegun, and 30mm grenade launcher. It’s like someone read a Battletech TRO and said “we should build that”.

Source: http://deftechph.blogspot.com/2014/06/k ... ystem.html

Edit: This isn’t an anti-missile point defence, it is for gunboat duels, speedboat swarm protection, and shore targets.
There are only 2 anti-vehicle weapons on that turret, the rest are anti-personnel, so still fitting in the triple mount frame. :)
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 7955
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Spaceship vs. Starship

Postby Condottiere » Fri Nov 22, 2019 9:06 am

I don't think tanks go fast enough for the velocity to rip out the external machine gun from the mounting.

Having said that, spaceship turrets and barbettes (or even bays) aren't actually restricted to their legacy volumes.
Linwood
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 620
Joined: Thu Jun 29, 2017 12:41 am

Re: Spaceship vs. Starship

Postby Linwood » Fri Nov 22, 2019 11:52 am

To that point - when fitting vehicle-scale weaponry to spacecraft maybe we should increase required volume to allow the weapons to be retracted when entering atmosphere?
Moppy

Re: Spaceship vs. Starship

Postby Moppy » Fri Nov 22, 2019 4:20 pm

Condottiere wrote:
Fri Nov 22, 2019 9:06 am
I don't think tanks go fast enough for the velocity to rip out the external machine gun from the mounting.

Having said that, spaceship turrets and barbettes (or even bays) aren't actually restricted to their legacy volumes.
Don't know about tanks (they probably get bounced around a lot and stuff gets scraped on trees) but that is a boat turret and a few hours of heavy sea will break a lot of things. Not uncommon to see 5cm (2") and thicker windows, and I've seen a trawler with 10cm (4") thick porthole glass.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 7955
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Spaceship vs. Starship

Postby Condottiere » Fri Nov 22, 2019 7:06 pm

Gravitational waves?
phavoc
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 4893
Joined: Tue Nov 04, 2008 6:13 pm

Re: Spaceship vs. Starship

Postby phavoc » Sun Dec 01, 2019 5:03 pm

There's no real reason why you should not be able to link turrets to fire as a group (I believe the barrage rules are a similar concept). But this idea of having hundreds of smaller weapons taking the place of one really big one, and the need to NOT do this as it negates reasons for larger weapons and bay weaponry, kind of points towards a need to correct the design system.

One of the reasons you build bigger ships is to mount bigger weapons and more armor/defenses. Modelling this along the lines of the big-gun era of ships at the beginning of the 20th century would fit well within Traveller. It would also toss out the very silly idea that you can armor a small fighter to be equivalent to the same level as a dreadnought. This should drive design concepts to be more balanced rather than min-maxed. Larger ships would be modeled more along the lines of wet navy capital ships - bigger guns to take on their similarly-sized opponents with smaller weapons to target the smaller ships and fighters that may attack them. Think of the Argo from Star Blazers. It had a spinal mount, main guns to engage larger targets, missile tubes, and smaller guns to engage smaller ships, and point-defense batteries for fighter and missile defense. Traveller posits a setting that is more equivalent to the era of big guns than today's era of missiles, with guns and armor as an afterthought.

Along the same lines, as your armor factor increased, so too would damage resistance. So the hordes of smaller weapons would be able to only do minimal, if any, damage to heavily armored ships, thus making the need to balance your weapons out. This would also help with mission design for a ship, though I would suspect that most navies would build balanced ships for maximum flexibility.

I don't see these ideas as changing within the rules, but since many play with a IMTU it's something to think about.
Moppy

Re: Spaceship vs. Starship

Postby Moppy » Sun Dec 01, 2019 6:33 pm

Weapon bays might be large mounts. This would give Traveller ships a spinal, large mounts, turret mounts, missiles, and (in Mongoose) a point defense system.

I get what you're saying about armor thickness on small craft, but hit points that ensure they are disabled faster. (Mongoose gives 1 hit point for every 2 or 2.5 dtons).

Note that heavy armor is no guarantee of protection from lighter weapons. On a space craft at space battle ranges, your sensors are very important. You won't hit jackshit manually aiming at space speeds and ranges. Those sensors are going to need to be exposed to do their job, and probably don't like it when their fancy antennas get hit by lasers.

From history, Leyte Gulf saw battleships taking heavy damage from cruiser gunfire and being sunk by destroyer torpedos. I won't count HMS Hood as that was an outdated design.
AnotherDilbert
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 4137
Joined: Wed Dec 23, 2015 2:49 pm
Location: Sweden

Re: Spaceship vs. Starship

Postby AnotherDilbert » Sun Dec 01, 2019 8:50 pm

phavoc wrote: Modelling this along the lines of the big-gun era of ships at the beginning of the 20th century would fit well within Traveller. It would also toss out the very silly idea that you can armor a small fighter to be equivalent to the same level as a dreadnought. This should drive design concepts to be more balanced rather than min-maxed.
TNE FF&S did all of this. It didn't stop anyone from min-maxing, rather the opposite...

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 12 guests