Ship Design Philosophy

Discuss the Traveller RPG and its many settings
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 7857
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Wed Feb 12, 2020 7:34 pm

The Mouse tends towards three seasons, with few exceptions; sort of an early concept for having content. Don't know what the current policy is with Disney Plus and the existential wars against Netflix and whatever streaming services are and will be popping up.

Pretty sure that Star Trek Discovery was supposed to have at least five seasons, probably more, especially how much money and prestige was invested, to the point that money allocated for Picard was diverted to the second season after Netflix refused to write another black cheque.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 7857
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Wed Feb 12, 2020 7:55 pm

Inspiration: (Episode 111) Truth OR Myth? Romulan Starships- The D'deridex Class Warbird (UPDATED)

In today's episode of Truth OR Myth we're taking ANOTHER Look at The Romulan D'deridex Class Warbird... Hope you Enjoy!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hgT0o44HQo8



Image

I always liked the design, though the configuration is too flimsy for Traveller.

Arguably, you could cheat with breakaways, thereby maintaining structural strength and armour without undue penalty.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 7857
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Thu Feb 13, 2020 9:11 am

Inspiration: How A Secret Star Wars Show Was Cancelled After 7 Years

There is a very strange, cancelled Star Wars TV show that has recently made its way online known as Underworld. Star Wars Underworld was an attempt to accomplish what the Mandalorian is doing but in a different era. Lucas wanted to create something that was big, that filled in holes in the canon, and that featured characters from Vader, all the way to Han Solo. Star Wars Underworld had the budget and scope of the Mandalorian long before the television world was ready for it. This is a story that starts well before the Skywalker Trilogy.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QK8ApVcguM4


Fifty completed scripts.


Star Wars Detours

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=VSVCemArNS8

What ifs.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 7857
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Sat Feb 15, 2020 1:30 pm

Spaceships: Armaments and Smaller (Ground Vehicle) Weapons

1. You need a firmpoint to attach these smaller weapons to, externally.

2. Each firmpoint can take upto four weapon systems with a maximum weight of a quarter of a tonne, each, or a single weapon system weighing upto one tonne.

3. Shipboard weapon systems are essentially more powerful that those designed for dirtside combat, so usually pointless to attempt this with anything larger than a tonne.

4. However, you could assume you could stuff anything five tonnes and below into a barbette, and we'll assume that upto five examples one tonne and below.

5. Next up would be default fifty, hundred and five hundred tonne bays, though again, it's probably hit diminishing returns.

6. These smaller weapon systems hardly draw any power at all, so it's ignored.

7. You can exchange one hardpoint for three firmpoints.

8. Any weapon system that's attached to a firmpoint, would have to abide by it's restrictions on power usage and range.

9. Barbettes consume two firmpoints; in theory, a thousand tonne warship could exchange ten hardpoints for thirty firmpoints, and have fifteen barbettes, not that I find this a worthwhile exercise.

10. Well, depending on how you interpret how barbettes actually function while firmpointed, you could take two hard points/six firmpoints/three barbettes and for fifteen tonnes, launch a salvo of fifteen missiles or six torpedoes.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 7857
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Sat Feb 15, 2020 1:46 pm

Inspiration: Adam Savage Meets the Expanse's Key Stunt Rigger!

Filming a show that takes place in space is no easy feat. Adam Savage talks to key stunt rigger Steve "Shack" Shackleton about how he juggles costumes, sets and actors to create the illusion of zero gravity, then sees for himself what working with wires is like!

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=FBtP35yIUQo



A perpetual cycling cable could be attached along one side of a corridor, that the crew could grab and be moved along during zero gee.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 7857
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Sat Feb 15, 2020 6:10 pm

Inspiration: ASTEROIDS Size Comparison 🌑

These are the sizes of some asteroids compared to New York City.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bSkPNMjRRio



Image
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 7857
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Sun Feb 16, 2020 10:35 pm

Spaceships: Armaments and Smaller (Ground Vehicle) Weapons

Image

. Gauss Cannon
.. technological level
... twelve
.. range
... let's say closeish
.. tonnage
... one
.. damage
... one dice
.. cost
... hundred kay bux
.. ammunition
... magazine
.... two hundred slugs
.... cost
..... one kay bux
... reloading
.... provision could be made for the hopper to get fed from an internal magazine
.. (ground) effect traits
... armour piercing
.... ten
... automatic
.... three
Last edited by Condottiere on Mon Feb 17, 2020 2:01 pm, edited 1 time in total.
locarno24
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3146
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 7:46 pm
Location: Wildly Variable

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby locarno24 » Mon Feb 17, 2020 8:29 am

Condottiere wrote:
Sun Feb 16, 2020 10:35 pm
Spaceships: Armaments and Smaller (Ground Vehicle) Weapons

. Gauss Cannon
.. technological level
... twelve
.. range
... let's say closeish
.. tonnage
... one
.. damage
... one dice
.. cost
... hundred kay bux
.. ammunition
... magazine
.... hundred slugs
.... cost
..... one kay bux
... reloading
.... provision could be made for the hopper to get fed from an internal magazine
.. (ground) effect traits
... armour piercing
.... ten
... automatic
.... three
So basically the Gauss Cannon from CSC?

I'd say a firm 'no'.

Mounting a light weapon requires Cr1000, so this will cost Cr101,000 - fine, albeit with a slight cost increase
2km is close range on spacecraft scale - fine
1DD damage in personal scale is 1D damage on ship scale - fine


The problem is that the Roci's turrets are primarily point defence weapons; the gauss cannon won't have the ability to engage incoming missiles, and if it's given that ability it really, really needs a cost increase. For that matter it lacks the Track trait like the Orbital Defence Cannon, meaning in theory you'll have to deal with a serious speed-of-target DM when engaging a ship in a different orbital path. You would get the ground-weapon-targeting-spacecraft bonus, but that's only DM+2.
Understand that I'm not advocating violence.
I'm just saying that it's highly effective and I strongly recommend using it.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 7857
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Mon Feb 17, 2020 11:21 am

It's within the rules, and within my guidelines to limit a firmpoint to one tonne; though combining two opens that up, since you can slot a five tonne barbette on them.

As for range, for all intents and purposes there's no gravity nor atmosphere in space, so the effective range should be longer that two kilometres.

All hell breaks loose, once the Dungeon Master has determined that combat is now in dogfight mode.
locarno24
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3146
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 7:46 pm
Location: Wildly Variable

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby locarno24 » Mon Feb 17, 2020 1:22 pm

Agreed. My concern - sorry if I'm not being clear - is that the PDC's main job is dealing with missiles - with a secondary roll of killing small craft and providing extra punch in CQB (which is basically dogfighting in Traveller terms).

A Gauss Cannon from Central Supply Catalogue does not have the ability to be used in a Point Defence reaction, so using it as a PDC leaves it unable to do one of the key in-universe jobs of the weapon.

Alternatively if you declare it to be able to do so, it should go up significantly in cost, volume, or both.

I agree on an extended range, but even if you double, triple or even quadruple a 2km range, you're still inside the 10km limit for Close range, so just say it can be used at close range and leave it at that. It's unlikely to have the muzzle velocity to aim accurately at something further away that's accelerating at a meaningful number of gravities.


https://expanse.fandom.com/wiki/PDC
Understand that I'm not advocating violence.
I'm just saying that it's highly effective and I strongly recommend using it.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 7857
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Mon Feb 17, 2020 1:48 pm

I agree that games and their systems need to be balanced, and I suspect I share your concern as to the exploitative nature, or at least it's possibility, of weapon systems that I suspect no one ever thought could be viable in such applications.

I disagree as to the point defence aspect of an automaticized weapon, what it needs is to be linked up to the appropriate fire control and sensor array.

The Roscinante is a pretty mild demonstration, especially once you scale it up to Jupiter class battlestars.

I was considering linking up eight Fusion Guns Man Portables together on a firmpoint, and creating a pom pom.

Image
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 7857
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Mon Feb 17, 2020 1:55 pm

Spaceships: Armaments and Smaller (Ground Vehicle) Weapons

Image

. Heavy Automatic Cannon
.. technological level
... six
.. range
... let's say adjacentish
.. tonnage
... one
.. damage
... one dice
.. cost
... forty five kay bux
.. ammunition
... magazine
.... hundred rounds
.... cost
..... two kay bux
... reloading
.... provision could be made for the hopper to get fed from an internal magazine
.. (ground) effect traits
... automatic
.... three
Sigtrygg
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 1335
Joined: Sat Aug 12, 2006 9:23 am

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Sigtrygg » Mon Feb 17, 2020 4:03 pm

Rapid fire autocannon, mass drivers, and VRF gauss guns have been capable of point defence ever since LBB4 and Striker.
TL 8 Rapid fire radar directed auto-cannons provide most point defense.
TL10 The premier point defense weapon becomes the VRF gauss gun, with much medium range work done by beam and pulse
gatling lasers.
If MgT doesn't allow for this guess which one is wrong...
locarno24
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3146
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 7:46 pm
Location: Wildly Variable

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby locarno24 » Mon Feb 17, 2020 4:28 pm

Condottiere wrote:
Mon Feb 17, 2020 1:48 pm
I agree that games and their systems need to be balanced, and I suspect I share your concern as to the exploitative nature, or at least it's possibility, of weapon systems that I suspect no one ever thought could be viable in such applications.

I disagree as to the point defence aspect of an automaticized weapon, what it needs is to be linked up to the appropriate fire control and sensor array.

The Roscinante is a pretty mild demonstration, especially once you scale it up to Jupiter class battlestars.
It's not just sensors and fire control, though; it's also the nature of the weapon mount and the weapon itself. A fair proportion of starship weapons cannot be used for point defence, despite having the accuracy to engage a starship target at Very Long Range - a Particle Beam has an effective* range of 50,000km but unlike a laser a standard particle barbette either can't slew fast enough or cycle fast enough to engage a smaller missile at a few tens or hundreds of km, whose 'angular size' as seen from the ship is probably about the same.

It's also worth noting that the CSC gauss cannon is firing comparatively small solid slugs; Battlestar Galactica generates its awesome flak barricades not just because of the sheer number of weapon mounts but also because those mass drivers are throwing out fragmentation shells designed to produce overlapping detonation patterns.



* for a given value of effective! - there is a DM-4 at Very Long Range.


If MgT doesn't allow for this guess which one is wrong...
The one not being used by the GM.

I'm not saying this is wrong so much as it's an option which is missing. But I also think it's not an option which should be free.

The only rules we have about normal scale weapons on a starship are Spacecraft Damage Scale (P158, Core Rulebook) and Smaller Weapons (P32, High Guard), neither of which mention Point Defence.
Meanwhile the Point Defence Reaction explicitely mentions "turret-mounted laser (beam or pulse)", and High Guard does not expand the list of weapons which can perform this reaction (for that matter it specifically says Point Defence Batteries are "short-ranged laser turrets").

I have no absolute problem with any given rapid-firing weapon system with a decent range being available in a configuration which can be used for point defence.
But if the weapon does not, in its standard configuration, have at least the Track trait when used in ground combat, I think that asking it in space combat to engage a 10-15G missile is a bit of an ask, and therefore it should need something else - in terms of a 'fast-tracking' mount or whatever, and hence increased volume and/or cost.
Understand that I'm not advocating violence.
I'm just saying that it's highly effective and I strongly recommend using it.
Jeraa
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 542
Joined: Thu Feb 24, 2011 10:01 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Jeraa » Mon Feb 17, 2020 5:26 pm

The Vehicle Handbook has an anti-missile system on page 49. It includes a minigun and gauss version, and also doesn't indicate that it only applies against ground-scale missiles. In theory, it applies against spacecraft scale missiles as well. At the very least, it shows that more than lasers can be used.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 7857
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Mon Feb 17, 2020 6:46 pm

If we follow Traveller spacecraft design sequence, having a powered turret is not really a problem.
locarno24
Cosmic Mongoose
Posts: 3146
Joined: Mon Jun 13, 2005 7:46 pm
Location: Wildly Variable

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby locarno24 » Tue Feb 18, 2020 7:31 am

Jeraa wrote:
Mon Feb 17, 2020 5:26 pm
The Vehicle Handbook has an anti-missile system on page 49. It includes a minigun and gauss version, and also doesn't indicate that it only applies against ground-scale missiles. In theory, it applies against spacecraft scale missiles as well. At the very least, it shows that more than lasers can be used.
Agreed. And, as I said, I've no problem with a non-laser weapon doing point defence. However, a 'stock' weapon can't without an appropriate mounting.

As an example; the Gauss Anti-Missile System is not the same as, say, a Gauss Rifle.
It has the same basic technology (magnetic coil fling bullet at target), but a Gauss AMS mount is 3D damage (compared to the 4D of a rifle), so it's less powerful despite occupying 3 spaces, whilst a pair of gauss rifles (to get the same effective Auto score of 6), even in a powered turret with a 360' traverse, would only require 2 spaces despite being more powerful guns.

The difference in size is associated with a sufficiently fast-tracking mount to allow it to target grenades and missiles.
If we follow Traveller spacecraft design sequence, having a powered turret is not really a problem.
Not if you set aside the dTons and MCr for it, but if it's called a 1 dTon/Cr100,000 weapon, that hasn't been done.

If you're just using the Smaller Weapons rule, then you're essentially taking a 1 Tonne Gauss Cannon, and attaching it to a ship for a 1 dTon volume. Fine for a weapon to provide local coverage whilst on the ground, a la star wars pop-out blasters on the Falcon or Black One.

It's in a "small pop-up turret" but if you want it to have any properties it wouldn't have had if it was an equivalent weapon mount on a ground vehicle, there should be more volume or cost associated; you can fit a gauss cannon on an APC but the standard weapon can't engage missiles - and for that matter without Track can't even engage aircraft very well.

You can produce a gauss cannon which can (which is what the Gauss AMS is) but you'd need a turret mount able to do so, which would need some space in addition to the 1 Tonne/1dTon for the gun itself.
Understand that I'm not advocating violence.
I'm just saying that it's highly effective and I strongly recommend using it.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 7857
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Tue Feb 18, 2020 8:03 am

Spaceships: Armaments and Smaller (Ground Vehicle) Weapons

Image

. Light Automatic Cannon
.. technological level
... seven [note one]
.. range
... let's say adjacentish
.. tonnage
... 225 kilogrammes [note one]
.. damage
... six dice divided by ten
.. cost
... eleven kay bux [note two]
.. ammunition
... magazine
.... five hundred rounds
.... cost
..... one kay bux [note two]
... reloading
.... provision could be made for the hopper to get fed from an internal magazine
.. (ground) effect traits
... automatic
.... three

Notes
one default technological level six, advanced size reduction; arguably long range or accuracy at technological level nine.
two longer range or accuracy might actually be more dependent on ammunition, though the quality of the barrel would be a factor.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 7857
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Tue Feb 18, 2020 1:57 pm

Spaceships: Armaments and Smaller (Ground Vehicle) Weapons

. Vulcan machine gun
.. technological level
... eight [note one]
.. range
... let's say closeish
.. tonnage
... 225 kilogrammes [note one]
.. damage
... four dice divided by ten
.. cost
... thirteen point two kay bux [note two]
.. ammunition
... magazine
.... one thousand rounds
.... cost
..... one and three eights kay bux [note two]
... reloading
.... provision could be made for the hopper to get fed from an internal magazine
.. (ground) effect traits
... automatic
.... six

Notes
one default technological level seven, advanced size reduction; arguably long range or accuracy at technological level ten.
two longer range or accuracy might actually be more dependent on ammunition, though the quality of the barrel would be a factor.
Condottiere
Warlord Mongoose
Posts: 7857
Joined: Mon Sep 23, 2013 8:23 pm

Re: Ship Design Philosophy

Postby Condottiere » Wed Feb 19, 2020 9:24 am

Spaceships: Armaments and Sandcasters

I think that sandcasters have tremendous potential to be a weapons delivery system for a great range of payloads.

Unfortunately, there are not enough details to figure out how they function, and the actual performance: it's possible that the range is close.

Also, you used to be able to sandblast armour plating and damage spacecraft, well, pebblicize.

I do understand how mortars work.

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot] and 24 guests