Perhaps FGMP/PGMP need a nixing/modding...

Discuss the Traveller RPG and its many settings
sideranautae
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 1412
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2014 8:28 pm

Re: Perhaps FGMP/PGMP need a nixing/modding...

Postby sideranautae » Mon Oct 13, 2014 5:15 pm

Nerhesi wrote: If its a particle spinal mount, at TL12, it may not even penetrate at all. Mesons. well.. mesons will be meson - haha :)
A TL 12 (Type B) Particle Spinal lists enough damage to go right through armor of 15... In barrage damage dice. But, I could be wrong as I am not good at converting to that format.
Nerhesi wrote:As to thickness, I've wanted to get around to doing that but I have been thoroughly avoiding the not-so-difficult math (lazy). Here is a prime example, getting 12 armor from bonded superdense on a 40 ton fighter, will takes up 4 tons of space.

So what is the thickness of 4 dtons of armor, covering the remaining 36 dtons of "craft"?
That would be (if a sphere) almost 20cm thick. (almost 8 inches)
Image
Nerhesi
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 1525
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2013 3:46 pm

Re: Perhaps FGMP/PGMP need a nixing/modding...

Postby Nerhesi » Mon Oct 13, 2014 5:19 pm

hiro wrote:The arms race is alive and kicking int he 57th century!

Make something strong, I'll make something stronger. We are better at making bigger guns than we are at making bigger tanks (tho bigger tanks have their own problems like breaking bridges or sinking in mud).

Do you want that to be the case in YTU? If so then go for it! I've given up hoping for consistency in rules written by a variety of people over a period of many years with no central guidance. I hope Mongoose can forgive me for saying it on their forums but that's my take...

The danger with this discussion tho is we're getting back to the need for MgT to have a unified design process for weapons and vehicles that uses one scale for everything. Oh wait, I've said that before ;)
First, I think Mongoose has done an amazing job. The work required for internal consistency is a difficult one and you're always trying to balance the benefit of adding content, with the work required to vet every rule/option/addition in relation to the previously establish stuff (PS Matt, I'm available to moonlight as consistency-editor lol).

Second, I think with the new values in mercenary, theyve done an AMAZING job. In my current adventure, the semi-amateur merc company is running around with advanced combat rifles, with access to RAM AP grenades, Gauss weaponry, Magrail, and have just gotten their hands on Advanced Boarding Vaccsuits. When you compare this stuff, you end up with a fairly even exchange between protection and firepower. A good hit can instantly make you unconcious, but more often than not, you need 2-3 hits to go down. Prior to Mercenary second edition, the DSAP ammo and so on basically ended up making most armor completely redundant.

Thirdly, I dont think there is a big issue with the vehicle Fusion X/Y/Z or Rapid Fire Plasma guns and so on. These things weigh tons and arent' being carried around by some dude. :)

So the only issue I have is with these 10-12 kilogram babies :)
Nerhesi
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 1525
Joined: Thu Jan 24, 2013 3:46 pm

Re: Perhaps FGMP/PGMP need a nixing/modding...

Postby Nerhesi » Mon Oct 13, 2014 5:27 pm

sideranautae wrote:
Nerhesi wrote: If its a particle spinal mount, at TL12, it may not even penetrate at all. Mesons. well.. mesons will be meson - haha :)
A TL 12 (Type B) Particle Spinal lists enough damage to go right through armor of 15... In barrage damage dice. But, I could be wrong as I am not good at converting to that format.
From HighGuard,
"Particle Beam spinal mount damage is reduced by the amount of armour. Reduce Damage by 30 per point of armour. Damage can not be reduced below zero."

So 15 armor stops 450 points of particle damage.
Nerhesi wrote:As to thickness, I've wanted to get around to doing that but I have been thoroughly avoiding the not-so-difficult math (lazy). Here is a prime example, getting 12 armor from bonded superdense on a 40 ton fighter, will takes up 4 tons of space.
So what is the thickness of 4 dtons of armor, covering the remaining 36 dtons of "craft"?
sideranautae wrote:That would be (if a sphere) almost 20cm thick. (almost 8 inches)
So within range for a heavier battledress but definitely not something you'd be able to put on a vaccsuit or combat armor.
sideranautae
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 1412
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2014 8:28 pm

Re: Perhaps FGMP/PGMP need a nixing/modding...

Postby sideranautae » Mon Oct 13, 2014 5:32 pm

Nerhesi wrote: So 15 armor stops 450 points of particle damage.

Thanks. (God I hate how those rules are written.)

sideranautae wrote:That would be (if a sphere) almost 20cm thick. (almost 8 inches)
Nerhesi wrote:So within range for a heavier battledress but definitely not something you'd be able to put on a vaccsuit or combat armor.
8" is not anywhere close to what you could put on for heavy battle dress. Not by a mile. Maybe a couple inches of pure armor. You have inches of other layers under that dealing with suit environmental control, life support, powered movement equipment, etc.

Hold out your arm and imagine sticking it inside a tube with walls ~10 inches thick! Expand that to a whole suit. That isn't Trav Battle Dress.
Last edited by sideranautae on Mon Oct 13, 2014 5:38 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Image
hiro

Re: Perhaps FGMP/PGMP need a nixing/modding...

Postby hiro » Mon Oct 13, 2014 5:33 pm

I've not yet purchased Merc 2, in all honesty I didn't like the way the discussions were going here and on CotI so it dropped off my wish list - money to buy things and time to read them aren't in limitless supply! I'm also a gun nut (in case you didn't notice) but don't really like running or playing in merc themed games...

Now granted, the discussion is far from the final product so maybe I'll add it back to my DTRPG wish list but I'm a little way into my house rules that I think have diverged sufficiently from MgT to make Merc 2 redundant but as ever, the more sources one can use (or discard!) the better the house rules can be refined.

When I first played Traveller many moons ago the default was to carry a RAM grenade launcher. It made mince meat of just about everything and the niceties of grenades taking time to arm or the proximity of the explosion were over looked.

I'm curious now tho, I'll go ahead and purchase Merc 2 and see how the AP rules have been tweaked.
Last edited by hiro on Mon Oct 13, 2014 6:06 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Annatar Giftbringer
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 717
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 10:35 am
Location: Uddevalla, Sweden

Re: Perhaps FGMP/PGMP need a nixing/modding...

Postby Annatar Giftbringer » Mon Oct 13, 2014 6:06 pm

I don't see a problem with Battledress being vulnerable to dedicated anti-armour weaponry. It is more or less immune to small-arms fire, explosions and shrapnel, all very real dangers to non-armoured infantry. Equipped with gravbelt and stealth you won't even spot it, and even if you do, it moves too fast for you to shoot it down. Worse, he brought his buddies, and heavy weaponry!

Yes, combat armour can also cloak, and fly, but the added strength and dexterity, and 'unlimited' endurance, from the battledress means it can keep moving and fighting when the combat armour-troopers get tired, and it can carry enough weapons and ammo to be a much larger threat than any opposing infantry - and we're not talking about a single BD soldier, we're talking full platoons!

So, in my eyes, the main advantage of BD is speed, endurance and the ability to use weapons that would otherwise need vehicles or fixed mounts. It is survivable against most secondary dangers on the battlefield, and thanks to stealth and speed it will be very difficult to take them all down before they succeed in their mission. Sure, BD can't survive a direct hit from its own (PGMP) weapon, but it can and will survive everything below that. Besides, PGMP (and especially FGMP) can hurt starships, so why shouldn't they hurt BD?
Annatar Giftbringer
Lesser Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 717
Joined: Wed Jul 25, 2007 10:35 am
Location: Uddevalla, Sweden

Re: Perhaps FGMP/PGMP need a nixing/modding...

Postby Annatar Giftbringer » Mon Oct 13, 2014 6:09 pm

hiro wrote: When I first played Traveller many moons ago the default was to carry a RAM grenade launcher. It made mince meat of just about everything and the niceties of grenades taking time to arm or the proximity of the explosion were over looked.
Ah, the RAM launcher, a weapon I'm getting to appreciate more and more... It can be a mega-shotgun, a grenade launcher, an anti-armour gun.... Especially for a BD-equipped user, that can carry enough spare mags for an extended firefight (plus a backup gauss rifle, just in case).
hiro

Re: Perhaps FGMP/PGMP need a nixing/modding...

Postby hiro » Mon Oct 13, 2014 6:17 pm

and all at TL8...

All you really need to defend are a bunch of the sentry guns from Aliens up gunned to RAM GLs with HUGE magazines and Bob's your mother's brother... OK, you'd need the TL15 sensors to see the BD troops approaching but...

Back to topic:

It's always good to see individual weapons (whether an HMG, ACR or PGMP) in the context of what they would be used next to. If you have BD infantry riding grav belts toting PGMPs will they have a swarm of automated grav drones mounting the next heavier weapon accompanying them for fire support? The volume of fire would be scary. Doing the one on one comparison can leave something looking neutered but for full on military use, how often is a weapon used in isolation?
Rick
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 1452
Joined: Wed Mar 02, 2005 9:13 am
Location: Lincoln, UK

Re: Perhaps FGMP/PGMP need a nixing/modding...

Postby Rick » Mon Oct 13, 2014 8:08 pm

David Weber actually has a decent use of Battledress in his book "In Fury Born", lots of very good ideas on how to equip an entire empires military force with different types of armour for different mission profiles.
"Understanding is a 3-edged sword" bit like a toblerone, really.
msprange
Site Admin
Posts: 14752
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2003 4:25 pm

Re: Perhaps FGMP/PGMP need a nixing/modding...

Postby msprange » Tue Oct 14, 2014 9:06 am

Just to chip in...

If Battle Dress was made such that it could shrug off just about anything (or require many sustained hits to bring it down), that would be a very different game.

Now, that game is perfectly valid, and we can always do a setting down the road where people are wearing this kind of armour as a matter of course but for your 'average' Traveller game, Battle Dress needs an Achilles' Heel. Players need to respect what can be thrown at them even after they have marched through a hail of rifle bullets.

As for the argument about major powers overspending on their military... sounds a bit like the real world :)

Oh, and FGMPs, at least, have their own balancing mechanisms for the user!
Matthew Sprange

Mongoose Publishing
http://www.mongoosepublishing.com
wbnc
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 1552
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2014 7:57 pm

Re: Perhaps FGMP/PGMP need a nixing/modding...

Postby wbnc » Tue Oct 14, 2014 11:17 am

weapons generally tend to be more effective than armor. Which is why until recently armor had fallen out of favor with military planners. Any armor that could withstand the energy being delivered by a bullet was too heavy, or too expensive per unit to be "effective".

the average US infantryman in world war two had a rifle that fired a 30.06 caliber round. the heavy metal plate needed o stop that round and cover enough of the body to give protection was so heavy the enemy would be exhausted very rapidly.
German infantry armed with a Panzerfaust could destroy a much more expensive and complex tank with a weapon that probably cost less than the months pay of an infantryman to make. An Insurgent in modern conflicts can carry an RPG, and a dozen projectiles for less than a single payment on the junker I Drive. and One RPG can bring down a Multi-million dollar transport chopper, or gunship if ya hit it just right.

Even if a Set of combat armor was available that could stop the standard weapons of an era, someone would quickly find a way to negate it. If not all rivals to the first army to make use of that armor would cease to be a viable military threat.

The Plasma weapons of the Traveller setting always struck me as the equivalent of something along the lines of a very heavy caliber, man portable machine gun. it is there to suppress enemy positions, and deliver concentrated fire on high priority targets. Something along the lines of a .50 caliber M-2.

Now the Plasma Gun has a huge surplus of raw damage over most weapons in it's Tech Level, but it's heavy, expensive, and will draw fire from anyone who sees it brought into action. Which is about the same limitations as a .50 M-2 machine gun. (maybe a full auto version of a 20mm anti-tank rifle) If carried by a normal infantryman the weapon is too heavy, and draws too much return fire to be practical outside of a vehicle or fixed position.

The Fusion gun, while powerful has it's own limitations, it's about the same as having a leaky reactor setting next to you when it's fired. It cant be used in close proximity to unprotected troops, and it is a massive threat to the poor soul firing it. the raw firepower of the weapon is hobbled by the radiation leakage

anytime I have my players come up against a PGMP,( usually in a military, or Merc Campaign) I tend to deploy it the same way you would a heavy machine gun. It lays down suppression fire, or concentrates on a single target which has made the mistake of drawing the full attention of the shooter. i have yet to ave a PGMP gunner last more than three or four rounds before someone hits him with a RAM, or other bit of man portable artillery.

They tend to be real fond of Rocket launchers and RPGs....go figure they cost less than an assault rifle and can hurt a guy in Battle dress.( they also cost less than ten percent the cost of a PGMP)
DickTurpin
Banded Mongoose
Posts: 237
Joined: Wed Oct 07, 2009 7:49 pm

Re: Perhaps FGMP/PGMP need a nixing/modding...

Postby DickTurpin » Tue Oct 14, 2014 4:06 pm

There are a couple of things to remember when discussing troops using PGMP and FGMP weapons to defeat troops wearing Battle dress. They are probably wearing Battle dress themselves!

CRB p. 102: "The Plasma Gun, Man Portable . . . is so heavy and bulky that it can only be used easily by a trooper with a Strength of 12 or more - usually attained by wearing battle dress. . ."

". . . the Fusion Gun, Man Portable is more like a piece of artillery. . . .Those without radiation protection who are nearby when a FGMP is fired will suffer a lethal dose of radiation. . ."

So from the rulebook text, it appears that battle dress was not designed to protect against the PGMP and FGMP, but instead to enable their use.
Infojunky
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 2202
Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 10:19 pm
Location: North of Center California

Re: Perhaps FGMP/PGMP need a nixing/modding...

Postby Infojunky » Tue Oct 14, 2014 11:02 pm

wbnc wrote:
They tend to be real fond of Rocket launchers and RPGs....go figure they cost less than an assault rifle and can hurt a guy in Battle dress.( they also cost less than ten percent the cost of a PGMP)
Hint: A burst or two of Gauss Rifle fire usually does the trick as well.
Evyn
dragoner
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 1715
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2012 8:37 pm
Location: Indiana, US

Re: Perhaps FGMP/PGMP need a nixing/modding...

Postby dragoner » Wed Oct 15, 2014 12:46 am

Gauss Rifles were the BD killer in original LBB Traveller.

There was body armor used in ww2:

Image
Infojunky
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 2202
Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 10:19 pm
Location: North of Center California

Re: Perhaps FGMP/PGMP need a nixing/modding...

Postby Infojunky » Wed Oct 15, 2014 5:02 am

dragoner wrote:Gauss Rifles were the BD killer in original LBB Traveller.
Right alongside Laser Rifles
Evyn
wbnc
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 1552
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2014 7:57 pm

Re: Perhaps FGMP/PGMP need a nixing/modding...

Postby wbnc » Wed Oct 15, 2014 5:29 am

dragoner wrote:Gauss Rifles were the BD killer in original LBB Traveller.

There was body armor used in ww2:

Image

Most of the armor was for protection from shell splinters, and shrapnel.
dragoner
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 1715
Joined: Sat Sep 29, 2012 8:37 pm
Location: Indiana, US

Re: Perhaps FGMP/PGMP need a nixing/modding...

Postby dragoner » Wed Oct 15, 2014 5:44 am

wbnc wrote:Most of the armor was for protection from shell splinters, and shrapnel.
Pistol type rounds as well (SMG's); same up until recently, Vietnam era stuff up through the Kevlar we had wouldn't stop a rifle round.
Infojunky
Duck-Billed Mongoose
Posts: 2202
Joined: Sun May 11, 2008 10:19 pm
Location: North of Center California

Re: Perhaps FGMP/PGMP need a nixing/modding...

Postby Infojunky » Wed Oct 15, 2014 5:52 am

dragoner wrote: Vietnam era stuff up through the Kevlar we had wouldn't stop a rifle round.
Stopping Bullets? That's what Marines are for.....
Evyn
Egil Skallagrimsson
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 838
Joined: Mon May 24, 2010 6:59 pm

Re: Perhaps FGMP/PGMP need a nixing/modding...

Postby Egil Skallagrimsson » Thu Oct 16, 2014 7:40 pm

Coming a bit late to this discussion, though I think its one we have had before. :D

Basically, have always felt the stats for battledress work fine, but, in a world where a light space fighter can be bought for just under 10MCr, felt that battle dress (and, for that matter, combat armour) was grossly over-priced.

So, reduced price of Battledress to 200,000Cr for the TL13 version, and 350,000Cr for the TL14 version. When the new Vehicle book came out, a little tinkering with the cost in the build rules for battledress can produce similarly cheaper battledress.

BTW, the new Vehicle book had the right idea about treating battle dress as a vehicle.

Egil
Alles fur Gram - Official motto of Gram's 3rd Grenadier Regiment
Wein, Weib und Gesang - Unofficial motto of Gram's 3rd Grenadier Regiment
sideranautae
Greater Spotted Mongoose
Posts: 1412
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2014 8:28 pm

Re: Perhaps FGMP/PGMP need a nixing/modding...

Postby sideranautae » Thu Oct 16, 2014 7:49 pm

Egil Skallagrimsson wrote: Basically, have always felt the stats for battledress work fine, but, in a world where a light space fighter can be bought for just under 10MCr, felt that battle dress (and, for that matter, combat armour) was grossly over-priced.


Egil

I always looked at those prices as Black market pricing.
Image

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 10 guests