couple starship damage questions

[MountainMan]

During a recent starship battle (our first in this campaign), the enemy starship suffered damage to their sensor array and fuel tank. The sensor array eventually was destroyed with multiple hits over time, but the GM claimed it could be repaired during the fight by the opposing crew. Our group argued that it would have taken external repair (ie, a spacewalk) to fix; something we think anyone would not choose to do in the middle of a battle. How would your campaign determine repair matters?

The other issue was that the enemy ships fuel tank was eventually destroyed. What effect besides loss of propulsion would occur? Could the ship spin or turn facing? How about power to laser turrets or missle racks? Could the ship even self destruct if there is no fuel to detonate?

In the end, our ship was badly damaged,but victorious. However, the enemy ship was lost as our group chose not to close to board the ship, since even without sensors or fuel, it appeared to be rather dangerous (active turrets)to approach. The enemy crew decided to scuttle rather than surrender.

 

[locarno24]

The sensor array eventually was destroyed with multiple hits over time, but the GM claimed it could be repaired during the fight by the opposing crew. Our group argued that it would have taken external repair (ie, a spacewalk) to fix; something we think anyone would not choose to do in the middle of a battle. How would your campaign determine repair matters?

Depends. Two things to bear in mind are that repairs doesn't necessarily mean a spacewalk because it's not necessarily a replacement or welding job; the fact that the main sensors are wrecked doesn't meant that it's not possible to reroute systems electronically and get some sort of capability back. Equally, many ships will carry AI or remote operations repair drones, who can go out and look at the wreck of the sensor arrays. Equally, the damage need not necessarily be entirely to the protruding bits; it could be that the signal processors have been hammered by a shot that breached the hull.

Equally, fuel damage doesn't necessarily mean 'blown off the ship' - it could just as easily be the web of piping and pumps damaged; so the fuel's still physically there but you can't get to it. Which is fixable. Ish.


The Mechanic skill check for repairs is fine. Bear in mind that these only last so long; and break down again (permenantly) afterwards. Also that a check restores a certain number of hits, which may not help. For example, a sensor array which is destroyed (3 hits) and repaired by 1 hit (2 hits) is still counted as disabled, so it doesn't help you unless you roll a very good effect and push it back up by 2 or more hits.

The other issue was that the enemy ships fuel tank was eventually destroyed. What effect besides loss of propulsion would occur? Could the ship spin or turn facing? How about power to laser turrets or missle racks? Could the ship even self destruct if there is no fuel to detonate?

In order:

1) Spinal weapons or weapons in fixed mounts (rather than turrets) should probably become useless as you need to align the ship to fire them.

2) Assuming the ship draws J-Drive and P-Plant fuel from a common pool, then loss of all fuel means that eventually it will lose power. It'll take a while for that to happen, though - you've still got the fuel within the reactor system itself, and that will last a while; if a plant only burns through a few dTons in a timescale of weeks, it'll quite happily keep going for a few hours on the leftovers elsewhere to the main tanks. Also, missile racks are generally considered to not draw much in the way of power - that's why they're not listed as "energy using weapons" in High Guard (where it lists what a ship can and can't do when operating off emergency batteries)

3) If the p-plant is still functional, then it could still self destruct. Wait long enough for it to burn through the remaining fuel and you wouldn't be able to set off the plant, but certainly within a short timescale you could. Also, a missile equipped ship could detonate its magazines, and some ships might carry specific scuttling charges.

enemy crew decided to scuttle rather than surrender.

Interesting. That suggests some serious motivation - either they were certain you were going to kill them anyway, or they didn't dare let anyone on board the ship for some reason. I smell conspiracy...

(as a footnote, if the crew were prepared to suicide, then they'd definitely be prepared to attempt a combat EVA spacewalk)

 

[GJD]

IIRC Fusion power plants won't go critical if damaged or breached, they just splutter and die as the plasma loses containment and gets too rarefied to continue fusing. Of course a breach may release toxic chemicals, coolant and such, or radiation.

G.

 

[phavoc]

The acutal sensors may have not been destroyed, just the leads running to them. Or perhaps the dorsal sensor array was damaged beyond repair, but the ventral only suffered damage internally and some judicious wiring will lead to its being able to be brought back online. Or maybe it was a junction box that can be replaced/bypassed/jury-rigged, etc.

For many systems, keep in mind that not only are they going to be redundant, but they are also most likely replicated in different parts of the ship. Sensors give you a 360 sweep, and therefore must have arrays on top, bottom, port, starboard, fore and aft. Together they make up your sensor array. One could be damaged but by judiciiously spinning the ship during a combat phase you could bring your other sensors to bear and get the necessary sensor readings.

Plus there is the simple fact that starships need a highly redundant set of systems because if something critical fails, you are dead. Some things, like the fusion plant, can't often be replicated. However you are goign to have alternatives, like batteries, to supply power for a short period.

Not sure about the fuel, but I would tend to agree with what has already been said. Fuel tanks are going to have baffles built into them, just in case there IS a leak, you want to be able to shunt off the fuel to another tank before you lose everything. Think how airplanes have multiple tanks storing fuel all over the aircraft.

Fixable(ish) would be a good start. And don't forget... the same reasoning the GM gave you for combat against NPC's can be used in your favor when YOU are the ones taking fuel hits...

 

[rust]

How would your campaign determine repair matters?

There are no hard and fast rules for this, as the referee I usually take
the option which best fits the plot, although I normally give military and
scout ships a better chance of combat repairs than merchant ships.

Could the ship spin or turn facing?

Whether the ship can still spin or turn facing depends on your concept
of the drive system. In our campaign all minor movements of a ship are
done with independent small auxiliary systems which use some inert gas,
not with the main maneuver drive.

 

[BP]

Sounds like you got some useful 'technical' answers to your questions.

... but the GM claimed it could be ... Our group argued ... How would your campaign determine repair matters?

By whatever the GM declared.

Arguing with a GM on the elements of a fictional setting is generally counter-productive and rather irrational when all is said and done. Not to say questioning things is out of line - though in this case it possibly was disruptive to the plot and roleplay (hence this topic?).

... The other issue was that the enemy ships fuel tank was eventually destroyed. What effect besides loss of propulsion would occur? Could the ship spin or turn facing? How about power to laser turrets or missle racks? Could the ship even self destruct if there is no fuel to detonate?

Again - it is a fictional setting. Anything can happen. What does happen is up to the Referee. Even if it contradicts the 'official' rules or your 'suspension of disbelief'.

...In the end, our ship was badly damaged,but victorious. However, the enemy ship was lost as our group chose not to close to board the ship, since even without sensors or fuel, it appeared to be rather dangerous (active turrets)to approach. The enemy crew decided to scuttle rather than surrender.

All in all, it sounds like the referee created an otherwise enjoyable gaming session. The group was presented with a challenge that was kept interesting and challenging (not to easy) without over-rewarding (you lived but didn't directly profit). Net result sounds 'believable'.

The key question - was it enjoyable for you?