Central Supply Catalogue Update – Comments requested!

Geir

Cosmic Mongoose
Arkathan said:
Most of the LTL rounds that do not disperse need to have a reduced range when compared to normal ammunition.
Baton rounds are very heavy when compared with a bullet. They also tend to tumble, making them inaccurate quickly.
Taser rounds from a shotgun, could use near normal range.
At the lower tech range, the baton and foam rounds will need a 35mm grenade launcher to deliver the desired mass.
Pepperball sized chemical rounds will travel well for a long distance, if you can make them survive acceleration from a regular firearm. Impact and dispersal.

Good point on the range. I should decrease it by 25%.
The magic foam might combine with oxygen to add mass, so I don't know about increasing the calibre requirement. Plus many weapons don't actually have one.

What do you think about the half and half damage from baton rounds? Admittedly it's based on hearsay and Wikipedia research. But I like the idea of them not being 'safe'.
 

Annatar Giftbringer

Cosmic Mongoose
I misread the baton as regular damage plus half as stun first :oops:

I like it, a damaging component remains but the most important part is the stun! You will get bruised, and an unlucky hit can result in serious damage.

That’s how most non-lethal/stun weapons worked in Mongoose’s Judge Dredd rpg as well.
 

swampslug

Mongoose
john_q_traveller said:
Corrections to existing vehicle scale weapons:
There is no way that multiple autocannons or rotary autocannons should fit into a single small turret, or on a pintle or ring mount. The stats on the weapons themselves are not bad (aside from the problematic damage scaling), but these weapons require massive support systems to power, provide ammunition, and survive the recoil. 20mm+ ammunition would typically weigh in at > 1,000 lb per 1,000 rounds. So "magazines" (many of those weapons tend to prefer linkless feed systems) for those weapons should be huge.
Agreed, if we consider modern AFVs, the small turret should be the equivalent of the remote weapon stations/remote turrets of modern APCs/IFVs, which typically mount either a medium or heavy machinegun or grenade launcher for APCs, or a single 25/30mm autocannon for IFVs. The Vilkas variant of the Boxer appears to be more heavily armed with a 30mm cannon, coaxial 7.62mm machinegun and Spike-LR missile launcher, but presumably the additional weapons come at the cost of ammunition capacity for the 30mm.

Launchers besides missiles:
  • The idea that missiles are still a valid weapons system in the far future is kind of ridiculous (and one of my pet peeves in sci-fi). Even if they somehow are, they're boring. What we need is:
  • Lazooka (Laser bazooka)
  • Plasma Launcher (plasma bazooka)
    • The disposable plasma laucher doesn't count, as it's a missile launcher with a plasma warhead

While I agree with your premise that the efficacy of missiles as anti-tank weapons will diminish with TL (presumably due to improvements in armour and anti-missile tech), I would like to see a better range of missile launchers in the CSC for low-tech armies/settings.
The current CSC has the following missile launchers:
  • Disposable Plasma Launcher (TL12)
  • Rocket Launcher (TL6-9)
  • Tac Launcher (TL10)
These are fine as a starter but ideally I would like to see consideration of the differences between light shoulder-mounted launchers (think AT-4/Carl Gustaf/NLAW/Javelin) vs heavy vehicle/tripod weapons (TOW/Spike), disposable vs reusable and fire-and-forget vs launcher-guided. I would also like to see a wider range of warheads: anti-tank/bunker buster, anti-personnel, anti-air, smoke, EMP, plasma, stun etc. and an expansion/discussion on the concept of what "Tac" actually means.

I would also class your Lazooka and Plasma Launcher ideas as high-energy weapons rather than launchers as to me they don't seem to launch anything, in fact to me the "Plasma Launcher" sounds very similar to the concept of the PGMP or Plasma Jet.
 

Arkathan

Cosmic Mongoose
Geir said:
Arkathan said:
Most of the LTL rounds that do not disperse need to have a reduced range when compared to normal ammunition.
Baton rounds are very heavy when compared with a bullet. They also tend to tumble, making them inaccurate quickly.
Taser rounds from a shotgun, could use near normal range.
At the lower tech range, the baton and foam rounds will need a 35mm grenade launcher to deliver the desired mass.
Pepperball sized chemical rounds will travel well for a long distance, if you can make them survive acceleration from a regular firearm. Impact and dispersal.

Good point on the range. I should decrease it by 25%.
The magic foam might combine with oxygen to add mass, so I don't know about increasing the calibre requirement. Plus many weapons don't actually have one.

What do you think about the half and half damage from baton rounds? Admittedly it's based on hearsay and Wikipedia research. But I like the idea of them not being 'safe'.

Calibre requirement: I was just looking at what we have at this tech level, and a shotgun shell wouldn't cut it, where a grenade launcher might.

Half and half
Yes. They are as safe as being hit by a club moving faster than a MLB pitcher could throw it. The bean bag/rubber rounds are more LTL than the solid baton loads.
 

Arkathan

Cosmic Mongoose
john_q_traveller said:
Launchers besides missiles:
  • The idea that missiles are still a valid weapons system in the far future is kind of ridiculous (and one of my pet peeves in sci-fi). Even if they somehow are, they're boring. What we need is:
  • Lazooka (Laser bazooka)
  • Plasma Launcher (plasma bazooka)
    • The disposable plasma laucher doesn't count, as it's a missile launcher with a plasma warhead

See the Mongoose Traveller 1 supplement Hammer's Slammers.
Orbital Defense laser bazooka's on a hover tank.
 

Geir

Cosmic Mongoose
A note on the plasma bazooka idea. I tried making one, and I just couldn't come up with something compelling that wasn't either unnecessary equipment for the disposable round or already in existence, like a gun or flamer.
I did add a cartridge plasma gun similar to 2300 weapons, though. Also a bit marginal, with a magazine of only 6 and no better range than a powerpack-fed plasma gun, but it starts at TL11, so there's that.
 

Arkathan

Cosmic Mongoose
Geir said:
A note on the plasma bazooka idea. I tried making one, and I just couldn't come up with something compelling that wasn't either unnecessary equipment for the disposable round or already in existence, like a gun or flamer.
I did add a cartridge plasma gun similar to 2300 weapons, though. Also a bit marginal, with a magazine of only 6 and no better range than a powerpack-fed plasma gun, but it starts at TL11, so there's that.

That sounds cool.
 
swampslug said:
I would also class your Lazooka and Plasma Launcher ideas as high-energy weapons rather than launchers as to me they don't seem to launch anything, in fact to me the "Plasma Launcher" sounds very similar to the concept of the PGMP or Plasma Jet.

That's fair. To be a bit more clear, I'm thinking of shoulder fired higher powered versions of equivalent weapon technologies (ie, gauss, grav, laser, plasma, etc.). Perhaps they could even require some type of pack to provide power, plasma, cooling, whatever, or require very low round count "magazines" (or different versions with either). I do recall seeing some type of "plasma launcher" different from what is currently in the CSC in an older version of... something (I cannot recall what).

Geir said:
A note on the plasma bazooka idea. I tried making one, and I just couldn't come up with something compelling that wasn't either unnecessary equipment for the disposable round or already in existence, like a gun or flamer.
I did add a cartridge plasma gun similar to 2300 weapons, though. Also a bit marginal, with a magazine of only 6 and no better range than a powerpack-fed plasma gun, but it starts at TL11, so there's that.

For the purpose of such a thing, I would focus on either AP capability and / or splash damage. The idea would be a human portable threat to armor, air support, and fortified positions.

Arkathan said:
john_q_traveller said:
Launchers besides missiles:
  • The idea that missiles are still a valid weapons system in the far future is kind of ridiculous (and one of my pet peeves in sci-fi). Even if they somehow are, they're boring. What we need is:
  • Lazooka (Laser bazooka)
  • Plasma Launcher (plasma bazooka)
    • The disposable plasma laucher doesn't count, as it's a missile launcher with a plasma warhead

See the Mongoose Traveller 1 supplement Hammer's Slammers.
Orbital Defense laser bazooka's on a hover tank.

That sounds like just the ticket :D
 

Surge

Mongoose
CrusaderWarden said:
adzling said:
please resolve the poorly worded inexplicit rules on what armors stack.

for example what can be worn under a vacc-suit or battledress (tl 12 cloth? other stuff)?

please ensure the changes to the small arms rules in the mercenary supplement make it into the broader ruleset (specifically how Armor piercing rounds works).
Yes yes yes! This is very important.
All of this, please.
 

Surge

Mongoose
Surge said:
CrusaderWarden said:
adzling said:
please resolve the poorly worded inexplicit rules on what armors stack.

for example what can be worn under a vacc-suit or battledress (tl 12 cloth? other stuff)?

please ensure the changes to the small arms rules in the mercenary supplement make it into the broader ruleset (specifically how Armor piercing rounds works).
All of this, please.
Yes yes yes! This is very important.
 

Geir

Cosmic Mongoose
Surge said:
Surge said:
CrusaderWarden said:
All of this, please.
Yes yes yes! This is very important.

The forum's Reply seems to have eaten all the content of "all of this" - maybe it only nests so deep. But I'll try to address some things.

Well, TL12 cloth went away in the new Core book, so that won't be a problem.
I think I've made stack limitations clearer (in general, you can't stack unless its explicitly stated) but I'm still editing myself.
For instance: diplovest does not explicitly stack; I thought about adding it, but since it's only a vest, then it doesn't make sense to stack it with better amour that covers more of the body, so I left it alone as non-stackable.
Also trying to deal Combat Arm armour by saying its for the arm only, but lets you use the arm like a shield.
Any armour that works as an environment suit or similar, regulating temperature, adding biometric sensors, urine collection, external radiators or other such things have little ability to stack, but available modifications to the armour can achieve the effect.

AP: As I mentioned early, Mercenary design rules and existing CSC items and the way various forms of armour piercing works makes it difficult to directly compare. For better or worse, this was NOT an exercise in redoing all Core and CSC weapons with Mercenary Field Guide rules. That would take a long time, potentially contradict many Core descriptions, and basically require duplicating a lot of that content to explain it. And likely give me a little bit of breakdown. I did 'fix' ADPS to lower damage by 1 Hit per damage dice (die?, dice?, neither one seems entirely correct, oh well). Low Pen is another thing. CSC says certain weapons are only half as good at penetrating armour and archaic armour is only half as good at dealing with more modern weapons. Low Pen multiplies armour effect for the weapon, so again, a different approach, complementary, but not necessarily compatible. If you're sniping with AP ammunition at troops in chainmail or firing shotgun pellets at the same, mileage may vary - that's what referees are for - pick an answer and use it consistently and most players will accept it. And if it turns into a mess, bring it up in the forum.

I can't predict (and have no knowledge) of the future, but the second edition of first Mongoose edition Mercenary presaged second edition Mongoose rules (say that three times fast). It's a bit of an evolution and comments in this forum on what works, what doesn't, and what is just plain confusing (like the previous sentence) is valuable input.
 

agentwigggles

Banded Mongoose
While this is probably way to late but what the hell.
The INTERNAL AUTO-INJECTOR pg 89. Its price is listed at 50m credits. Is that what its suppose to cost? And not like 50k? 50k makes more sense, as its in line with the 10k to expand upon the augment.
 

Geir

Cosmic Mongoose
agentwigggles said:
While this is probably way to late but what the hell.
The INTERNAL AUTO-INJECTOR pg 89. Its price is listed at 50m credits. Is that what its suppose to cost? And not like 50k? 50k makes more sense, as its in line with the 10k to expand upon the augment.
You meant 50K, right? Because 'm' would mean millions (okay little m would mean 1/1000 and a big M could also mean the Roman numeral M for a thousand), but it is Cr50000 in my copy of the old, or, currently published, book.

Sort of too late - for me turning in the manuscript, but certainly not for changes prior to printing - it's not even on schedule yet. But the good news is that I already changed it to Cr10000 in what I handed it - but then I also changed the addition part to only Cr5000.
(or wait, I might have read your comment completely wrong, but really, my CSC PDF copy say Cr50000 and now that I double-checked, so does my print copy)
 

agentwigggles

Banded Mongoose
On the discord, this question was thrown out there.
Were the ballistic weapons redone with the field catalog weapon making system?
We assume the answer is no, as the timeline for when that book came out and when this was being worked on, doesn't align well.
 

Geir

Cosmic Mongoose
agentwigggles said:
On the discord, this question was thrown out there.
Were the ballistic weapons redone with the field catalog weapon making system?
We assume the answer is no, as the timeline for when that book came out and when this was being worked on, doesn't align well.

The answer is no. I messed with some of the special ammunition settings and made RAM and rifle grenades a subset of tiny artillery as opposed to subsets of thrown grenades. But it wasn't an effort to redo all the weapons. Those weapons added came from pre-Mercenary sources.
 

Geir

Cosmic Mongoose
Any thoughts on an ETA for this book?
Thoughts, yes, clue no. I'll defer to management. It's not on the schedule as far as I can see and the pinned release thread doesn't seem to have remained pinned after the forum upgrade. All I can say is that it took a year for robots to go through edit and art, and if they're going to do a lot of new art, it's going to be a while.
 

Technetium 98

Banded Mongoose
I'd like to see a couple more 250kg weapons, for the sake of my beloved flying gun robots & tripods. Maybe some massive anti-tank rifle serving as the mother of all crunch guns, and some higher TL options beyond the VRF Gauss.
 

Condottiere

Emperor Mongoose
If that's a reference to High Guard vehicle weapon option:

Any weapon with a mass less than 250 kg can be mounted on a spacecraft at a cost of Cr1000 (the cost of the actual weapon is in addition to this).

So in theory, two hundred forty nine and nine tenths of a kilogramme.
 

Technetium 98

Banded Mongoose
If that's a reference to High Guard vehicle weapon option:

Any weapon with a mass less than 250 kg can be mounted on a spacecraft at a cost of Cr1000 (the cost of the actual weapon is in addition to this).

So in theory, two hundred forty nine and nine tenths of a kilogramme.
It's a reference to the Heavy Tripod in the current CSC;

Any weapon of up to 0.25 tons may be mounted and used upon a tripod.

And the Vehicle mount option in the Robot Handbook.

A vehicle mount may hold any weapon of mass 250 kilograms or less...


High Guard has plenty of options for packing Big Guns™, I'm already spoiled for choice on that front.
 
Top