High Guard Update 2022 - News

[paltrysum]

That's not really a good reason to have more computing power. What you are referring to is more of a data-link system. That's what the US Aegis-class cruisers/destroyers do. They literally take in all the sensor data being fed to them from the fleet and any other input, perform target identification/discrimination, and then they are able to control all of the weapons of the fleet, including the defenses.

Handing off targeting data is quite minimal and is accomplished today in platforms like fighters (With a thousandth the computer power of a Traveller starship).

This sounds like something that should be reclassified as a data link SYSTEM - with all the extra costs and tonnage associated with additional data links and operators.

As in all aspects of the game, players are welcome to house rule things as they wish. However, we're not talking about TL7 ocean-going ships handing off data from 100km away. We're talking about pin pricks of detectable heat up to 50,000km from each other, moving dozens of kilometers per second in divergent directions, using reactionless drives to minutely alter their courses to avoid being hit, and potentially using various stealth technologies to obscure their precise locations.

Furthermore, Traveller is a game, not a simulation. Trying to accurately translate Traveller sensory tech and computing power to current tech can be a bit like counting the number of angels who can stand on the head of a pin. As a game, things need to be quantified in ways that give players agency and choices. Computer bandwidth is one of many tools that we use to do this. Simply saying hand-offs work automatically is fine if that's the way you want to run it, but we design rules to make the game fun, providing players with the chance to make important decisions that affect their chances for success. I stand by the rule addition, but I sincerely appreciate you posting an opinion about it.

 

[MongooseMatt]

As in all aspects of the game, players are welcome to house rule things as they wish. However, we're not talking about TL7 ocean-going ships handing off data from 100km away. We're talking about pin pricks of detectable heat up to 50,000km from each other, moving dozens of kilometers per second in divergent directions, using reactionless drives to minutely alter their courses to avoid being hit, and potentially using various stealth technologies to obscure their precise locations.

That's what I was going to say

 

[Sigtrygg]

Except they are not pin pricks.

They are huge glowing balls of waste heat easily detectable - unless someone is going to finally describe an official gravitic heat sink...

Thermodynamics - it's amazing how many sci fi fans can't quote the four laws in simple terms, or can grasp the concept that without magic technology there is no such thing as stealth in space.

 

[phavoc]

That's not really a good reason to have more computing power. What you are referring to is more of a data-link system. That's what the US Aegis-class cruisers/destroyers do. They literally take in all the sensor data being fed to them from the fleet and any other input, perform target identification/discrimination, and then they are able to control all of the weapons of the fleet, including the defenses.

Handing off targeting data is quite minimal and is accomplished today in platforms like fighters (With a thousandth the computer power of a Traveller starship).

This sounds like something that should be reclassified as a data link SYSTEM - with all the extra costs and tonnage associated with additional data links and operators.

As in all aspects of the game, players are welcome to house rule things as they wish. However, we're not talking about TL7 ocean-going ships handing off data from 100km away. We're talking about pin pricks of detectable heat up to 50,000km from each other, moving dozens of kilometers per second in divergent directions, using reactionless drives to minutely alter their courses to avoid being hit, and potentially using various stealth technologies to obscure their precise locations.

Furthermore, Traveller is a game, not a simulation. Trying to accurately translate Traveller sensory tech and computing power to current tech can be a bit like counting the number of angels who can stand on the head of a pin. As a game, things need to be quantified in ways that give players agency and choices. Computer bandwidth is one of many tools that we use to do this. Simply saying hand-offs work automatically is fine if that's the way you want to run it, but we design rules to make the game fun, providing players with the chance to make important decisions that affect their chances for success. I stand by the rule addition, but I sincerely appreciate you posting an opinion about it.

Yes, any game purchaser is free to make their own rules up for a game - but one of the reasons for buying a game system is that you are paying a professional to come up with the set of rules. Otherwise why in the world would anyone ever buy an RPG or any other game? That's a "reason" often applied and it's always made me scratch my head in wonder because, to me at least, it makes no logical sense and defeats the purpose of ever buying a game if all you do is make up all your own rules.

As far as what you are discussing, you are mixing sensors and targeting up. Those are two different things. Just because you detect something at range doesn't mean you have a target lock on it. It does, sometimes, take computing power to determine what a blob is at range. Once something has been assigned to that target though it stays that unless there is new data coming in. These are basic targeting concepts that have already been solved, implemented and written about.

I'm not disagreeing at all with computing power, just the description and assignment. No, Traveller isn't a simulation, but its silly to incorrectly do something right up front when you can change it to make it both more plausible and more in line with actual reality. This will prevent having to clear it up later through revisions/errata. 99% of the functions of a starship (or any complex vehicle) are done automatically. Are we going back to CT where the gunner physically loads the missile again? Have we not figured out auto-loaders in the 52nd century? Assuming this gets done, let's make it so it passes the sniff test.

This is a data-link. It's already going to be automatic. But just passing data is meaningless unless it's interpreted and acted upon. That means you have the opportunity for a new crew station (s) (or even AI program). It's at least quasi-military, so yeah, you can justify a bigger computer to run it. The current description isn't there (yet).

 

[paltrysum]

You probably need to see the implementation before passing judgment. The Battle Network software package might fill the void you're describing.

 

[phavoc]

Considering I've only offered my opinion thus far, I will have to agree with you.

 

[Sigtrygg]

What will be the countermeasure to the battle network?

And how will it change as we go from TL8 to TL15+

I get the impression that you are falling into the trap of only thinking Third Imperium level technology here...

Speaking of which are Third Imperium technologies going to be clearly identified and technologies that do not exist within the setting also noted?

 

[Condottiere]

You probably want that encoded and using tight beam communicators.

 

[phavoc]

Except they are not pin pricks.

They are huge glowing balls of waste heat easily detectable - unless someone is going to finally describe an official gravitic heat sink...

Thermodynamics - it's amazing how many sci fi fans can't quote the four laws in simple terms, or can grasp the concept that without magic technology there is no such thing as stealth in space.

That's the conundrum we have today. Ships will generate heat, but heat management is an unknown to us. RTG's convert heat to electricity, though it's not 100% conversion rate. Could they convert routine heat into power? Insulation of the hull to minimize heat isn't unreasonable or impossible. Advanced sciences and materials would offer the 52nd century a wealth of choices we don't have today.

And, as much as thermal ID's are possible, it's still a challenging process to identify all that information and determine if it's a ship or not. And the further the distance the bigger the amount of the sky you have to continually scan or monitor. All sensors have a limitation to them (except maybe ST - they seem to do the impossible routinely - except when the script calls for a surprise).

I do agree with you that many don't understand the issues related to target detection and identification, limitations and countermeasures that can be used to obfuscate or eliminate useful data coming back to the detecting ship. It's a constant battle between the two sides to deny each other useful data.

 

[paltrysum]

Considering I've only offered my opinion thus far, I will have to agree with you.

When the PDF of the new version is posted – if you choose to buy the book – please have a look at the new Sensors section. We'd love to see your feedback.

 

[adzling]

Considering I've only offered my opinion thus far, I will have to agree with you.

When the PDF of the new version is posted – if you choose to buy the book – please have a look at the new Sensors section. We'd love to see your feedback.

Hey Paltry! Do the new sensor rules incorporate/ relate to the advanced sensors rules in JTAS 4?

IMHO they look really good and we are about to implement those into our game this Saturday.

 

[paltrysum]

Hey Paltry! Do the new sensor rules incorporate/ relate to the advanced sensors rules in JTAS 4?

IMHO they look really good and we are about to implement those into our game this Saturday.

I read and enjoyed the article. It was well-conceived and nicely written. However, it breaks away from the standard sensor rules in several ways and we cannot count on the average purchaser of High Guard to necessarily own JTAS #4, so the new rules do not directly coincide with those of the article. I would have had to copy the JTAS #4 rules more or less verbatim, which I chose not to do for various reasons. That said, I see no reason why an ambitious referee could not incorporate the JTAS #4 sensor rules with the new material provided in the High Guard update. There is a bit of overlap, but that just gives the referee some choices to make.

 

[Condottiere]

Recent events have given some food for thought.

We don't have energy shields, so besides piling on metres of armour, meson screening, and nuclear damping, the only other defence we would have is against missiles and torpedoes, and that may require a more layered defence.

 

[Sigtrygg]

repulsors were always the defensive countermeasure of choice...

 

[Condottiere]

Sure, if you're the Imperium Navy.

Though it may explain the recent bump up the technological level tree for the Confederation one.

 

[john_q_traveller]

We don't have energy shields, so besides piling on metres of armour, meson screening, and nuclear damping, the only other defence we would have is against missiles and torpedoes, and that may require a more layered defence.

High Guard already includes energy shields (2e, page 69).

The folks I play with and I all agree that missiles are not viable in an advanced technology setting, so I fixed them: https://github.com/johnny-b-goode/traveller/blob/main/doc/overhaul-missiles.md. Since the recent topic of this thread has been computers, we use house rules for that as well. There is a stop-gap set of rules for computers in the project linked as well. I have most of the overhaul for computers written, but have not cleaned it up enough to commit it yet.

 

[Welf]

The folks I play with and I all agree that missiles are not viable in an advanced technology setting, so I fixed them: https://github.com/johnny-b-goode/traveller/blob/main/doc/overhaul-missiles.md. Since the recent topic of this thread has been computers, we use house rules for that as well. There is a stop-gap set of rules for computers in the project linked as well. I have most of the overhaul for computers written, but have not cleaned it up enough to commit it yet.

Looking at the rules as written for missiles I agree: Missiles are basically explained as Warhead + Detonator + Guidance + Propulsion. But maybe the missile of the future will be just a little bit different? If a scifi setting tells me there is some kind of technology that doesn't seem to fit in for me I will not just omit it but will say: Okay, there has to be some reason why todays limitations did not result in this technology to become obsolete.

Therefore I would be careful with your assumptions on missiles and computers. We are talking about a future we can't really comprehend today. Hitting small fast moving things doing even minor evasive actions over large distances, while being in a fast moving spaceship doing evasive actions yourself, might still be quite complicated even with advanced technologies. And I don't think we have any real experience with those. You just need to take the margin of error into account: Your sensors might not be tuned perfectly, your acceleration has minor fluctuations, your point defence system might be off only a bit and if we still take into account most things run on electricity there always is some background noise ready to ruin your day. Your gun mustn't be a micrometre off, size, shape, relative velocity, relative acceleration, and heading need to be right on point and you have to shoot at the exact right moment. And why can't missiles carry basic countermeasures aimed at your sensors? Who knows what our sensors or missiles will be capable of or what their limitations might be?
Same goes for computers: Will computers really be that much more effective and if so, how complicated are the calculations they will need to do in space combat. How much data do we need to take into account at the same time and how fast do we need the result?

 

[john_q_traveller]

Therefore I would be careful with your assumptions on missiles and computers. We are talking about a future we can't really comprehend today. Hitting small fast moving things doing even minor evasive actions over large distances, while being in a fast moving spaceship doing evasive actions yourself, might still be quite complicated even with advanced technologies. And I don't think we have any real experience with those. You just need to take the margin of error into account: Your sensors might not be tuned perfectly, your acceleration has minor fluctuations, your point defence system might be off only a bit and if we still take into account most things run on electricity there always is some background noise ready to ruin your day. Your gun mustn't be a micrometre off, size, shape, relative velocity, relative acceleration, and heading need to be right on point and you have to shoot at the exact right moment. And why can't missiles carry basic countermeasures aimed at your sensors? Who knows what our sensors or missiles will be capable of or what their limitations might be?
Same goes for computers: Will computers really be that much more effective and if so, how complicated are the calculations they will need to do in space combat. How much data do we need to take into account at the same time and how fast do we need the result?

If you have read https://github.com/johnny-b-goode/traveller/blob/main/doc/overhaul-missiles.md#justification and would like to have an in-depth conversation rebutting any of the assertions made there, then I would be glad to take that up in another thread. Bear in mind that the vast majority of what is currently up is written for the average person, and does not include most of the technical discussion behind the assertions presented.

 

[Condottiere]

As with all previous editions, you have to parse through the current rules set to leverage any set of equipment or circumstances.

Or loopholes.

 

[Sigtrygg]

And then you have to consider their implications, advancements and the changing nature of the combat paradigm as you go through the TLs...

one of the genius things about the original CT HG was that the changing nature of the tech as you went through the TL scale actually had an effect on how combat would play out.

Ship designs at TL12 are very different to those at TL14.