A suggestion for PD

[Chas]

Seeing this ship

Light Missile Cruiser 25 kT, GCr 37 including full load of nuclear missiles
J-3, 9G, Armour 15, streamlined and fuel purification for wilderness refuelling.
Armament: 55 medium missile bays, 75 missile turrets.
Defences: Armour 15, 120 PD Batteries, Type III.

in the cruiser design thread really really annoys me. That it's armed with nuclear missiles annoys me even more. (nothing personal AnotherDilbert :lol: ) Essentially it is saying the rules for torpedoes have failed, that torpedoes aren't worth having.

The problem is as discovered that having made, or to make PD missile effective, torpedoes are eliminated altogether.

I'd like to propose a concept direction that I think could be an improved rules balance. Please note it is a concept direction only, with the figured to assist understanding of the concept, the actual numbers to be reviewed.

Matt hasn't seemed to mind making PD a little more mechanical rather than 'human' and I'll take the lead from that.

If we make PD specifically highly missile effective and torpedo highly ineffective, we still have a reasonable game balance, as long as turret laser PD is properly matched to torpedoes. I like this general balance (with conditions I note below) as it allows missiles to be effective at small ship level and vs. fighters such that missiles are still needed, and we still need a mixed group of turrets and weapons.

I'd like to describe PD as a mesh of fast light lasers that form a web of slashing energy around a ship. The denser you make the web, the more effective it is. It's made of fast light lasers such that it can cut up missiles without having to target them specifically, while torpedoes are constructed to be able to bypass this light laser web, and as such need to be targeted and shot down by individual weapon powered lasers.

So

Option 1
Increase the intercept roll effect of missiles drastically in the current PD rules and make it very different from a lower torpedo roll.

Options 2

This could mean we allow a system of PD where (by whatever mechanism of rolls or flat %) the web forms around a ship whose effectiveness is determined by the % of hard points used, for example:
at 50% of a ships hard points used it is immune to missiles, at 25% of hard points 1/2 of missiles attack that turn penetrate.
This would then be upgraded through PD II and PD III so that
40% of hardpoints / 20% of hardpoints
30% / 15%

We then put in a base minimum to say a PD mesh much be of at least 10 hard points to function (i.e. a 2000 ton ship would have to spend 50% of its hardpoints for this to work). So small ships cannot carry this PD. We can push this up or down to taste.

Now hardpoint burn makes for good choices for a ship, whether to be effective or not at combat, and which forms of combat.

In this case we can drop the tonnage and power requirements a fair bit because we have a balancing mechanism in place in the hardpoints and don't need to be too concerned about this. However it should still have some weight, so how about 3tons/hardpoint and 5 power/hardpoint, still significantly more than the turret it is defending against and will impact big ship construction.

Now of course what this means in a maximized system is that you are only immune to missiles, not torpedoes or other weapons and you've still got issues to concern yourselves with. The key difference here in this mechanism is that missiles cannot overload it. Where as you can overload torpedoes vs turret PD. I like personally to have the two different structures. However, if you wanted another balancing mechanism we can have power burn for the missiles destroyed.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Careful...

I agree that both missiles and torpedoes should be viable.
Regular torpedoes are currently not viable, but multiple warhead torpedoes might still be viable against PD turrets, especially fighters.

Missiles and torpedoes are the most powerful weapon in the system. They are expected to be countered to some degree. All sizes and types of craft must be able to counter them somehow. Don't make it too difficult.

Making bays fire 1/3 as many torpedoes as missiles, rather than 1/4, might make multiple warhead torpedoes quite viable. That would be very simple and not contradict Core... I haven't done the math, yet.

 

[Nerhesi]

Careful...

I agree that both missiles and torpedoes should be viable.
Regular torpedoes are currently not viable, but multiple warhead torpedoes might still be viable against PD turrets, especially fighters.

Missiles and torpedoes are the most powerful weapon in the system. They are expected to be countered to some degree. All sizes and types of craft must be able to counter them somehow. Don't make it too difficult.

Very much agreed. PD is one of those precarious balance items because of how a relatively minor change can cause a ruckus. I think it's fine as is for Adventure Class/single or 2on2 scenarios.. and for bigger scenarios, I'm really holding out to see what is Capital Scale.

 

[Chas]

Yes. Still I think the basic premise is correct / a good one though right? Missiles for small craft, torpedoes for big. Then we get that nice cyclic balance, and don't have nuclear missiles ruling the heavens.

 

[phavoc]

Under old Traveller nuclear missiles were a constant. However the advent of dampers meant that nuclear missiles were pretty much useless until you could get the dampers offline.

PD is pretty basic and should be fiendishly effective. But remember PD gets ONE ATTEMPT at an incoming salvo, and that's it. If you want to balance things out look at the EW rules, and make it so that fewer missiles can be jammed by a ship. There should be combination of both for defenses (heck, there should be counter-missiles too).

I'd just get a couple of ships and see how the combat goes against them, tweaking the rules till it seems you get to something that seems fair. But to define "fair" you first have to start with a premise of what should ship combat be like? Do you want it so that defenses can counter offenses, so you get a slugging match, or do you want it so that after a few rounds, one ship could be smoldering hulk? Once you can answer those basic questions you can build up from there.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Under old Traveller nuclear missiles were a constant. However the advent of dampers meant that nuclear missiles were pretty much useless until you could get the dampers offline.

Well, if by old you mean CT & MT, dampers were mandatory on TL12+ and simply meant you launched more missiles to achieve the same effect. Nuclear missiles were always a nuisance (except for high tech planetoids).

 

[phavoc]

Yup, that was what I was getting at. Most of the weapon systems had a defense against them.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

I looked a little closer at PD probabilities.

Average missile kills, assuming skill DM +5 (skill+2, augmentation+1, DEX+1, augmentation+1):

           Single    Triple    PDBatt    
Missile      4.0       6.0      10.5
Torpedo      1.8       2.8       5.0
MW Torp      0.9       1.8       4.0

Average Damage:

Adv Missile     5D-15 ≈ 3.09
Nuclear Miss    6D-15 ≈ 6.13
Adv Torpedo     7D-15 ≈ 9,53
Nuclear Torp    8D-15 ≈ 13
MW Nuc Torp     3.5*(6D-15) ≈ 21.47

So, if we take a single small bay firing one salvo for simplicity, assuming all hits and nuclear:

Av Hits      No def   Single    Triple    PDBatt    
12 Missile    12        8         6       1,5
 3 Torpedo    3         1,2       0,2     ~0
 3 MW Torp    3         2,1       1,2     ~0

Av Damage    No def   Single    Triple    PDBatt    
12 Missile    73,56    49,04     36,78     9,195
 3 Torpedo    39,00    15,6       2,6      0
 3 MW Torp    64,41    45,09     25,76     0

And to at least my surprise torpedoes are always worse even with no PD!
And to no ones surprise multi warhead torpedoes are always much better than regular torpedoes.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Now assume we can launch 1 torpedo for each 3 missiles instead of for each 4 missiles:

Av Hits      No def   Single    Triple    PDBatt    
12 Missile    12        8         6        1,5
 4 Torpedo     4        2,2       1,2      ~0
 4 MW Torp     4        3,1       2,2      ~0

Av Damage    No def   Single    Triple    PDBatt    
12 Missile    73,56    49,04     36,78     9,195
 4 Torpedo    52,00    28,6      15,6      ~0
 4 MW Torp    85,88    66,56     47,23     ~0

Regular torpedoes are still too bad, multi warhead too good?

Lets try 1 torpedo for each 2 missiles, and let's see what happens if we limit multi warhead torpedoes to 5D:

Av Hits      No def   Single    Triple    PDBatt    
12 Missile    12        8         6        1,5
 6 Torpedo     6        4,2       3,2      1
 6 MW Torp     6        5,1       4,2      2

Av Damage    No def   Single    Triple    PDBatt    
12 Missile    73,56    49,04     36,78     9,195
 6 Torpedo    78       54,6      41,6     13
 6 MW Tor6D  128,82   109,50     90,17    42,94
 6 MW Tor5D   64,8     55,08     45,36    21,6

If we ignore he 6D multi warhead torpedoes that looks quite good. 5D multi warhead torpedoes becomes the weapon of choice to overcome PD. Small ships will launch missiles and large ships will launch torpedoes.

So to balance missiles and torpedoes:
Bays fire 1 torpedo for each 2 missiles, so a small bay fires 6 torpedoes or 12 missiles.
Multi warhead torpedoes does 5D damage.


This is for TL15, lower TL with lower armour will be better for missiles and multi warhead torpedoes. The same calculation for TL12 would look like:

Average Damage 
Nuclear Miss    6D-12 ≈ 9,017
Nuclear Torp    8D-12 ≈ 16
MW Nuc Torp     3.5*(5D-12) ≈ 19,67

Av Hits      No def   Single    Triple   2 Triple      
12 Missile    12        8         6         ~0
 6 Torpedo     6        4,2       3,2       0,4
 6 MW Torp     6        5,1       4,2       2,4

Av Damage    No def   Single    Triple   2 Triple   
12 Missile   108,20    72,17     54,10      ~0
 6 Torpedo    96       67,2      51,2       6,4
 6 MW Tor5D  118,02   100,32     82,61     47,21

And we see that multi warhead torpedoes runs completely riot. I think we discussed banning multi warhead missiles because of a similar effect, lets ban multi warhead torpedoes too...

So missiles are the low TL choice and torpedoes are the high tech choice. I can live with that.


So to balance missiles and torpedoes:
Bays fire 1 torpedo for each 2 missiles, so a small bay fires 6 torpedoes or 12 missiles.
Multi warhead torpedoes are too good, ban them.

 

[Nerhesi]

The 3 to 1 missile to torp ratio is a bit of a mathematical head scratcher when torp damage is less than double and PD effectiveness is only halved.

It's like the multipliers weren't applied evenly across the board.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

It's 4 to 1 now. Something radical has to happen to boost torpedoes.

 

[Nerhesi]

Woops yup 4 to 1

 

[Chas]

Thanks for that AnotherDilbert.

It's 4 to 1 now. Something radical has to happen to boost torpedoes.

Aye. Thus the thread. PD is one way, or other defences. Increasing torp fire rates is another. Increasing torp protection against PD is another.

Not sure if the +5 for PD would carry over onto fleet action.

So missiles are the low TL choice and torpedoes are the high tech choice. I can live with that.

Yep, this is fine if it pans out this way. As missile defences and Armor get better torps are made better as the preferred high tech weapon. A good game transition. Similarly the nuclear damper should make the nukes redundant by say TL14 and the plasmas and whatnot be the weapon of choice.

 

[Nerhesi]

Agreed accept for the part about making nukes redundant. I don't know why we would need to make anything redundant - reducing the effect sure, but not redundant. Probably why I dont agree with just increasing nuclear dampeners to achieve that affect.

 

[Chas]

Agreed accept for the part about making nukes redundant. I don't know why we would need to make anything redundant - reducing the effect sure, but not redundant. Probably why I dont agree with just increasing nuclear dampeners to achieve that affect.

I'd said previously they won't ever be completely be redundant - nuclear missiles'll still have a extremely valuable place in small ship combat. But they'll remain a constant balance problem if they're not trimmed for large ship combat. Capital jump ships just have too many turrets spare. I don't think we're disagreeing... reduced effect is what I'm aiming for for nukes, I'd hope to see the ease of reducing the effect made painless by high TL such that there will be preferred weapons at high TL, for big ship battles. Like the torpedo.

 

[Nerhesi]

Then yeah we're aligned

As stated earlier though, with more clarity on Matt stating salvo was good for base rules, I'm really interested in seeing what will be the fleet rules. That will better help us better understand torps/missiles in that context.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Oh, how embarrassing, I didn't read the torpedo table to the end. Plasma torpedoes completely outdates nuclear torpedoes at TL12. I have to redo all calculations... Ortillery missiles and torpedoes are very abusable, but I do not like their slow acceleration, so let's leave them out (The DM-6 is of course irrelevant, except for fighters).

Average missile kills, assuming skill DM +5 (skill+2, augmentation+1, DEX+1, augmentation+1):

           Single    Triple    PDBatt    
Missile      4.0       6.0      10.5
Torpedo      1.8       2.8       5.0
MW Torp      0.9       1.8       4

Average Damage:

Nuclear Miss    6D-15 ≈ 6.13
Plasma  Torp    1DD-5 ≈ 30
MW Nuc Torp     3.5*(6D-15) ≈ 21.47

So, if we take a single small bay firing one salvo for simplicity, assuming all hits:

Median Hits  No def   Single    Triple    PDBatt    
12 Missile    12        8         6       1,5
 3 Torpedo    3         1,2       0,2     ~0
 3 MW Torp    3         2,1       1,2     ~0

And damage:

Av Damage    No def   Single    Triple    PDBatt    
12 Missile    73,56    49,04     36,78     9,195
 3 Torpedo    90,00    36,00      6,00     ~0
 3 MW Torp    64,41    45,09     25,76     ~0

Then we see that the problem is not so much the number of torpedoes or damage as the effectiveness of PD against torpedoes.

Let't try giving all torpedoes -2 vs PD (-4 for multi warhead):

Av kills   Single    Triple    PDBatt    
Missile      4,0       6,0      10,5
Torpedo      0,9       1,8       4,0
MW Torp      0,4       0,9       3,0

That degrades turret PD too much, and PD Batteries not enough...

Let's try dividing PD hits by 3 instead of 2:

Av kills   Single    Triple    PDBatt    
Missile      4,0       6,0      10,5
Torpedo      1,0       1,7       3,2
MW Torp      0,5       1,0       2,5

Av Hits      No def   Single    Triple    PDBatt    
12 Missile    12        8         6       1,5
 3 Torpedo    3         2         1,3     ~0
 3 MW Torp    3         2,5       2       0,5
 
Av Damage    No def   Single    Triple    PDBatt    
12 Missile    73,56    49,04     36,78     9,195
 3 Torpedo    90,00    60,00     39,00    ~0
 3 MW Torp    64,41    57,97     49,38    10,74

This is not completely unreasonable?

TL12:

Av Damage    No def   Single    Triple    2 Triple    
12 Missile   108,20    72,17     54,10     ~0
 3 Torpedo    99,00    66,00     42,90     ~0
 3 MW Torp    94,50    78,75     63,00     31,5

This is not completely unreasonable? Even the plasma torpedo can't compete with the multi warhead nuclear torpedo.

Given that torpedoes are slightly more vulnerable to EW and negative to hit modifiers they need to do slightly more damage.

Small ships would launch small salvoes of missiles.
Large ships would launch medium salvoes of MW torpedoes.

The proposed change is:
Divide the number of PD kills by 3 for torpedoes (instead of 2).

 

[Nerhesi]

Agreed on your recommendation - made it earlier. Let's see if Matt concurs this time as we're closing the chapter on this.

PS - have you compared with advanced missile/torps?

 

[AnotherDilbert]

I started to compare advanced missiles, but at half the damage (TL15) it's a non-starter.
Advanced torpedoes does a third of the damage of the plasma torpedo, so no.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

In the "Escorts!" thread I belatedly realised that torpedoes are much cheaper than missiles. The budget equal launch rate is 3 missiles for 1 torpedo.

We have redo the average damage calculation for the budget equal torpedo rate.

Average missile kills, assuming skill DM +5 (skill+2, augmentation+1, DEX+1, augmentation+1):

           Single    Triple    PDBatt    
Missile      4.0       6.0      10.5
Torpedo      1.8       2.8       5.0
MW Torp      0.9       1.8       4

Average Damage:

Nuclear Miss    6D-15 ≈ 6.13
Plasma  Torp    1DD-5 ≈ 30
MW Nuc Torp     3.5*(6D-15) ≈ 21.47

So, if we take a single small missile bay firing one salvo and a budget equal amount of torpedoes, assuming all hits:

Median Hits  No def   Single    Triple    PDBatt    
12 Missile    12        8         6       1,5
 4 Torpedo    4         2,2       1,2     ~0
 4 MW Torp    4         3,1       2,2     ~0

And damage:

Av Damage    No def   Single    Triple    PDBatt    
12 Missile    73,56    49,04     36,78     9,195
 4 Torpedo   120,00    66,00     36,00     ~0
 4 MW Torp    85,88    66,56     47,23     ~0

We see that torpedoes do more damage than missiles, but are completely stopped by slightly fewer PD Batteries than missiles. Of course we use multi warhead torpedoes. The system might be fine as is?