Fleet Battles: Where?
- Thread starter CosmicGamer
- Start date
In the current game rules - nothing, really. As noted, the Trillion Credit Squadron Point Defence System, I guess.
Beam Lasers are very much point defence weapons - they can be used on other ships but even a trivial amount of armour (for a military ship, anyway) renders them next to useless.
Since the rules currently have no design space for an armoured missile, however, an Accurate Beam Laser is the best PD weapon available.
Beam Lasers are very much point defence weapons - they can be used on other ships but even a trivial amount of armour (for a military ship, anyway) renders them next to useless.
Since the rules currently have no design space for an armoured missile, however, an Accurate Beam Laser is the best PD weapon available.
Condottiere
Emperor Mongoose
Kamikaze drone would qualify, though you have to admit, it's a very expensive one shot way to gut a warship.
The point defense grid from TCS:
Point Defence Network: Point defence weaponry achieves the defence of the ship through pure weight of fire filling the space around a ship with lasers and sand in an attempt to shoot
down ordnance and block energy weapons. The point defence network allows for nearby ships to assist in these efforts by firing its own weapons, targeted and under the control of a command
system. Add each controlled ships point defence weapons to the total when defending against a barrage attack. This system also gives a +1 modifier to point defence rolls on any ship under
its effects. This system can affect 30 tons of friendly capital ship per ton of system and can only affect ships within short range (1250km). The ship equipped with the system is not included in the tonnage but does receive its benefits. They cost MCr. 4 per ton. A point defence network requires one crewman per 50 tons.
Continuing the example above the three cruisers are each armed with 100 beam lasers for the purposes of point defence. When attacked while linked by a point defence network each
can defend as if they were armed with 300 beam lasers, adding +1 to point defence rolls. A network capable of this would be 3,000 tons and cost 12,000MCr.
Now, contrast that with the anti-missile net from Space Stations:
Anti-missile Net
Most often seen on defence stations, this system deploys a score of football sized drones, each equipped with a laser system and gravitic drive. A dense field of them is strung out some distance from the station, attacking any incoming ordnance such as missiles or torpedoes. These nets are used to free up hardpoints on a station that would otherwise be used for point defence turrets, allowing them to mount significant quantities of offensive weaponry. When the station is attacked by ordnance weapons, the net will make a single point defence attack against each weapon that passes it at Short range. If a barrage of such weapons is used to attack the station, they are defended against as if there was an equivalent number of point defence weapons defending against them. The net suffers DM-2 to its defence rolls if the weapons are torpedoes, due to their larger size making it more difficult for the small drones to destroy them. The anti-missile net can only defend against attacks coming from a single 45 degree arc; attacks from other directions will not be defended against. The net uses 1.5% of a station’s tonnage and costs MCr2 per ton. It is available from TL 12.
The Point Defense Network defends against any weapon susceptible to sand or anti-missile fire. Not entirely sure how the system would work against say fighters or drones at close range, it's not listed as a potential aspect, and as written one could argue it's not capable of offensive actions (though that seems a little silly to me - if you can target a torpedo at close range you should be able to target a fusion-armed fighter using the same method. Though maybe the idea was to use the targetting networks and not point defense).
The anti-missile net sounds cool, but it breaks down logically and violates some basic core rules - first the football sized drones armed with lasers AND gravitic drives. Gravitic drives don't come that small. Secondly it talks about firing arcs, and Traveller combat doesn't have that. Now if I dug out my old SSD's from SFB that would work great - plus I'd get shields, Phaser-IV's, ADD's and photon torpedoes. Alas I think those violate Traveller rules too.
Point Defence Network: Point defence weaponry achieves the defence of the ship through pure weight of fire filling the space around a ship with lasers and sand in an attempt to shoot
down ordnance and block energy weapons. The point defence network allows for nearby ships to assist in these efforts by firing its own weapons, targeted and under the control of a command
system. Add each controlled ships point defence weapons to the total when defending against a barrage attack. This system also gives a +1 modifier to point defence rolls on any ship under
its effects. This system can affect 30 tons of friendly capital ship per ton of system and can only affect ships within short range (1250km). The ship equipped with the system is not included in the tonnage but does receive its benefits. They cost MCr. 4 per ton. A point defence network requires one crewman per 50 tons.
Continuing the example above the three cruisers are each armed with 100 beam lasers for the purposes of point defence. When attacked while linked by a point defence network each
can defend as if they were armed with 300 beam lasers, adding +1 to point defence rolls. A network capable of this would be 3,000 tons and cost 12,000MCr.
Now, contrast that with the anti-missile net from Space Stations:
Anti-missile Net
Most often seen on defence stations, this system deploys a score of football sized drones, each equipped with a laser system and gravitic drive. A dense field of them is strung out some distance from the station, attacking any incoming ordnance such as missiles or torpedoes. These nets are used to free up hardpoints on a station that would otherwise be used for point defence turrets, allowing them to mount significant quantities of offensive weaponry. When the station is attacked by ordnance weapons, the net will make a single point defence attack against each weapon that passes it at Short range. If a barrage of such weapons is used to attack the station, they are defended against as if there was an equivalent number of point defence weapons defending against them. The net suffers DM-2 to its defence rolls if the weapons are torpedoes, due to their larger size making it more difficult for the small drones to destroy them. The anti-missile net can only defend against attacks coming from a single 45 degree arc; attacks from other directions will not be defended against. The net uses 1.5% of a station’s tonnage and costs MCr2 per ton. It is available from TL 12.
The Point Defense Network defends against any weapon susceptible to sand or anti-missile fire. Not entirely sure how the system would work against say fighters or drones at close range, it's not listed as a potential aspect, and as written one could argue it's not capable of offensive actions (though that seems a little silly to me - if you can target a torpedo at close range you should be able to target a fusion-armed fighter using the same method. Though maybe the idea was to use the targetting networks and not point defense).
The anti-missile net sounds cool, but it breaks down logically and violates some basic core rules - first the football sized drones armed with lasers AND gravitic drives. Gravitic drives don't come that small. Secondly it talks about firing arcs, and Traveller combat doesn't have that. Now if I dug out my old SSD's from SFB that would work great - plus I'd get shields, Phaser-IV's, ADD's and photon torpedoes. Alas I think those violate Traveller rules too.
phavoc said:
I'm not talking physics. I'm talking the rules of the game. Per the rules of the game, missiles don't comport with either grav or chemical propulsion as spec'ed for design of space going vehicles. Per physics, the chemical propulsion rules in HG don't work. I don't care about that in this example (missiles).
Condottiere
Emperor Mongoose
I don't really interact with the vehicle design process, but you could make a case of developing an oversized missile that could be propelled that way, even if only near planetary orbit.
F33D said:
No, they just have missile drives. Teeny drive technology has never been very well defined, it just works. Since we've got some other hand-wavium areas it's ok in my book. It would be nice if there was more background discussing it (like maybe there really ARE teeny-tiny grav drives powering these puppies up). And yeah, there are some holes in the model (like how in the hell a 'smart' missile can go whizzing by it's target, then turn around and come back for another pass. Sounds neat as hell, but violates the laws of physics like hell, too.
CT Supplement 3 (missiles) classified missile drives as being solid, semi-solid, or liquid. The semi-solid (my term) was essentially a solid rocket motor with gaps in the fuel that allowed the missile to 'throttle' it's burn times. If you wade down into things like specific impulse and things, yeah, it breaks down fast. The thing to do is move along, move along... these aren't the broken rules we are looking for.
