Ion Weaponry

[Nerhesi]

Needs a severe beating with the nerf-bat.

Currently it is trivially easy to disable a ship with a few ion barbettes. With a few Ion bays, a capital ship can easily disable an entire fleet.

As we had discussed, rather than making ion-weaponry the must have of space combat, and changing the feel from destructive engagements to boarding-battles and capture fests, some changes are required. Consider:

a) Reducing range significantly (this alone wont do the trick)
b) Military vehicles having some sort of near-foolproof defense. You shouldn't have military vessels being so easily disabled - perhaps Radiation shielding makes them immune to Ion-weaponry.

I honestly dont think it has place in main-stay engagements, it should be that sneaky pirate tool but not something that is guaranteed to work - let alone in a single hit.

 

[MongooseMatt]

Yeah, Ion weapons have bothered me from the start.

What we really need is an Ion trait to handle it smoothly, one that scales up (like AP does, for example).

Needs thought...

 

[Sir Rath]

Yeah, Ion weapons have bothered me from the start.

What we really need is an Ion trait to handle it smoothly, one that scales up (like AP does, for example).

Needs thought...

Why not just add a hull modification that hardens equipment against EMP? It wouldn't have to be throughout the entire ship, just for certain sections, like armoured bulkheads or the (fib) option for computers.

 

[wbnc]

I believe the "hardened" trait for a hull, the ships is given protection from EMP/Ion attacks along the lines of armor. each point of hardening negates one hit from an Ion/EMP attack
tonnage 1% of hull per point
cost. .5 Mcr Per ton

or an "EM sponge" would work nicely. might be useful ...the energy from an EMP attack is shunted to the ships systems( jump capacitors) as usable power. each absorbed hit stores 1 pt of ships power in the ships jump capacitors.( power absorption rate can be tweaked.)

same cost, and tonnage, as a collector from the starship options rules.

these systems could be used to defend against not only Ion weapons but EMP weapons as well.

this allows the EMP/Ion weapons to still ye very scary for merchant ships. However, it allows military vessels to operate with a reduced chance of being knocked out by a single EMP type attack.

a massive wave of EMP missiles however would still be ...bad.

I'd also suggest an ION spinal mount...something that can knock through any hardening, and take down even capital ships with a single hit....

"Ah our first catch of the day..." BLAM! Sizzle.....Klaxons blaring....

 

[Nerhesi]

Yeah, Ion weapons have bothered me from the start.

What we really need is an Ion trait to handle it smoothly, one that scales up (like AP does, for example).

Needs thought...

Why not just add a hull modification that hardens equipment against EMP? It wouldn't have to be throughout the entire ship, just for certain sections, like armoured bulkheads or the (fib) option for computers.

That was previously radiation shielding - Radiation shielding had previously automatically hardened you vs EMP as well.

 

[Jeff Hopper]

Yeah, Ion weapons have bothered me from the start.

What we really need is an Ion trait to handle it smoothly, one that scales up (like AP does, for example).

Needs thought...

Needs rethinking and renaming, honestly. If you want the effect of scrambling a ship's electronics, then use either a particle beam tuned to produce EMP effects, or a microwave frequency tuned laser, or some form of ECM/ECCM to "spoof" the electronics. Electronics are "spoofed" at long ranges and disabled at short ranges. If you want to borrow from T5, then use Datacasters.

Ion Cannon sounds very Star Wars and not very Traveller.

 

[Condottiere]

While it's cold comfort against Star Destroyers, you'll be covered by our Ion Cannon, and our no fault insurance.

 

[wbnc]

While it's cold comfort against Star Destroyers, you'll be covered by our Ion Cannon, and our no fault insurance.

"Hey frank I hear your in the first wave after the ION guns fire...can I have your music player???"

 

[Nerhesi]

Tachyons, Mesons turret, molecular bonded armour, linked weaponry... we can deem many things not-traveller.

Fortunately we need to balance our grognardism (is that a word?) with forward momentum, appeal to new players, design best practices. Options and change is good

We don't necessarily have to call em Ions - but it really doesn't matter if they are. Just because they are historically traveller, shouldn meant they don't become traveller

 

[Jeff Hopper]

Tachyons, Mesons turret, molecular bonded armour, linked weaponry... we can deem many things not-traveller.

Fortunately we need to balance our grognardism (is that a word?) with forward momentum, appeal to new players, design best practices. Options and change is good

I seem to recall that WotC tried to appeal to new players with the forward momentum of D&D 4E and ended up having Paizo swoop in and eat their lunch with Pathfinder. Why appeal to new players if it costs you your current customer base and associated revenue?

 

[NOLATrav]

But are ion cannons that much of a threat to the game?

I think they do need to be balanced a bit, but I love them - and tachyons too. They are options - if players gravitate to them, let the game grow with them. If not, then hey, all good. It's hard to sell teenagers on beam and pulse lasers. But ion cannons, tachyon streams and rapid fire rail guns... Now I got their attention.

 

[Nerhesi]

Tachyons, Mesons turret, molecular bonded armour, linked weaponry... we can deem many things not-traveller.

Fortunately we need to balance our grognardism (is that a word?) with forward momentum, appeal to new players, design best practices. Options and change is good

I seem to recall that WotC tried to appeal to new players with the forward momentum of D&D 4E and ended up having Paizo swoop in and eat their lunch with Pathfinder. Why appeal to new players if it costs you your current customer base and associated revenue?

Then they did 5E and realised you could appeal to new players and to your core feel.

You can always appeal to new without decimating your loyal customers.

4E didn't add a new weapon called ion weapons - 4E did the equivalent of changing traveller from 2d6, to a d20 miniature game.

 

[Jeff Hopper]

But are ion cannons that much of a threat to the game?

As a single individual change? No. However as one more part of a number of changes, it could very well matter to the bottom line as they all add up.

I think they do need to be balanced a bit, but I love them - and tachyons too. They are options - if players gravitate to them, let the game grow with them. If not, then hey, all good. It's hard to sell teenagers on beam and pulse lasers. But ion cannons, tachyon streams and rapid fire rail guns... Now I got their attention.

If you want to target teenagers as your demographic, then make the game more appealing to the anime and cosplay crowd. Which is easy enough to do since there is a lot of anime that can be reproduced with Traveller as it is. The kids aren't so dumb that they will be goshwowed by terminology that went out of style in science fiction in the 60s.

Traveller's appeal to teenagers is that it is iconic to SFRPGs. Any game that has survived multiple publishers for over 38 years has got to have been doing something right.

 

[Jeff Hopper]

Tachyons, Mesons turret, molecular bonded armour, linked weaponry... we can deem many things not-traveller.

Fortunately we need to balance our grognardism (is that a word?) with forward momentum, appeal to new players, design best practices. Options and change is good

I seem to recall that WotC tried to appeal to new players with the forward momentum of D&D 4E and ended up having Paizo swoop in and eat their lunch with Pathfinder. Why appeal to new players if it costs you your current customer base and associated revenue?

Then they did 5E and realised you could appeal to new players and to your core feel.

You can always appeal to new without decimating your loyal customers.

4E didn't add a new weapon called ion weapons - 4E did the equivalent of changing traveller from 2d6, to a d20 miniature game.

How long of an economic boondoggle did WotC go through between 4E and 5E? How much revenue was lost during that time? Could WotC have survived as a business if it did not have Magic CCGs and Hasbro as a parent company during that time? How many customers went over to Pathfinder because it maintained a game system that they were familiar with from D&D 3.0/3.5D? How many D&D players were uninterested in trying 5E because they felt burned by WotC with D&D 4E?

Ion weaponry and tachyon cannons are only symptoms of a larger issue to consider while moving forward with a new edition.

 

[wbnc]

ION weaponry, or similar weapons are well established in sci-fi outside of Starwars. adding them isn't an issue, or a symptom of a larger problem. The new additions are purely optional for a ref to allow, or disallow.

To me it looks like they are trying to give players who have asked for expanded weapons and options what they have been asking for.

The fact the writers are giving players a chance to give feedback suggest changes, or objections shows they are taking core players seriously and not just trying to add things to attract new players.

On top of that If the creator didn't feel the additions were in line with his vision of the world, it wouldn't get into the game.

 

[Jeff Hopper]

ION weaponry, or similar weapons are well established in sci-fi outside of Starwars. adding them isn't an issue, or a symptom of a larger problem. The new additions are purely optional for a ref to allow, or disallow.

To me it looks like they are trying to give players who have asked for expanded weapons and options what they have been asking for.

The fact the writers are giving players a chance to give feedback suggest changes, or objections shows they are taking core players seriously and not just trying to add things to attract new players.

On top of that If the creator didn't feel the additions were in line with his vision of the world, it wouldn't get into the game.

So explain how it works.

Not the effect mind you, but explain how the weapon achieves its effect. How reasonable and believable the explanation is, will determine whether or not it is science fiction or science fantasy.

And yes, credibility of technology is pretty important.

 

[Nerhesi]

I'm not sure if the book explains 'screens', how m-drives actually function, how armour can apparently with shrug off kinetic weapons that are hitting with effective power that is many magnitudes above that of nuclear or fusion or particle weapons, a slew of other items.

Sure a 1-liner can be added to state "disrupts power from systems" - but really, thats going above and beyond.

 

[wbnc]

ION weaponry, or similar weapons are well established in sci-fi outside of Starwars. adding them isn't an issue, or a symptom of a larger problem. The new additions are purely optional for a ref to allow, or disallow.

To me it looks like they are trying to give players who have asked for expanded weapons and options what they have been asking for.

The fact the writers are giving players a chance to give feedback suggest changes, or objections shows they are taking core players seriously and not just trying to add things to attract new players.

On top of that If the creator didn't feel the additions were in line with his vision of the world, it wouldn't get into the game.

So explain how it works.

Not the effect mind you, but explain how the weapon achieves its effect. How reasonable and believable the explanation is, will determine whether or not it is science fiction or science fantasy.

And yes, credibility of technology is pretty important.

Artificial ball lightening....take a packet of highly ionized gas, or low temperature plasma. Contain it in a gravitic or magnetic bubble/channel. Fire it out of a large magnetic accelerator..on impact the ionized gasses releases a powerful electrical charge disrupting electrical systems of the target vehicle.

Or, use a focused pules of microwaves to excite any metal in it's path to generate electrical surges...lower energy than a MASER, or a particle beam firing in a more sustained beam

Another option, a low energy electron particle accelerator firing a stream of particles which achieve the same goal. The electron beam causes an electrical charge to build up in the target.

An additional approach is to use the term ion cannon as a slang term for a highly focuses beam type EMP weapon. the "beam" is the effective area of the weapon. outsie of that all you get is low energy EM noise.

that's off the top of my head.

And I would like to point out Vargr, Aslan, Grandfather, low berths, psionics , half the drugs in the medical supplies section, and anti-gravity ..are not hard sci-fi either. Traveller is an intermediate setting...not quite Hard Science fiction, but not completely sci-fantasy, space opera or pulp sci-fi...

 

[Jeff Hopper]

ION weaponry, or similar weapons are well established in sci-fi outside of Starwars. adding them isn't an issue, or a symptom of a larger problem. The new additions are purely optional for a ref to allow, or disallow.

To me it looks like they are trying to give players who have asked for expanded weapons and options what they have been asking for.

The fact the writers are giving players a chance to give feedback suggest changes, or objections shows they are taking core players seriously and not just trying to add things to attract new players.

On top of that If the creator didn't feel the additions were in line with his vision of the world, it wouldn't get into the game.

So explain how it works.

Not the effect mind you, but explain how the weapon achieves its effect. How reasonable and believable the explanation is, will determine whether or not it is science fiction or science fantasy.

And yes, credibility of technology is pretty important.

Artificial ball lightening....take a packet of highly ionized gas, or low temperature plasma. Contain it in a gravitic or magnetic bubble/channel. Fire it out of a large magnetic accelerator..on impact the ionized gasses releases a powerful electrical charge disrupting electrical systems of the target vehicle.

Or, use a focused pules of microwaves to excite any metal in it's path to generate electrical surges...lower energy than a MASER, or a particle beam firing in a more sustained beam

Another option, a low energy electron particle accelerator firing a stream of particles which achieve the same goal. The electron beam causes an electrical charge to build up in the target.

An additional approach is to use the term ion cannon as a slang term for a highly focuses beam type EMP weapon. the "beam" is the effective area of the weapon. outsie of that all you get is low energy EM noise.

that's off the top of my head.

So why aren't any of these possible explanations in the playtest and eventual book?

And I would like to point out Vargr, Aslan, Grandfather, low berths, psionics , half the drugs in the medical supplies section, and anti-gravity ..are not hard sci-fi either. Traveller is an intermediate setting...not quite Hard Science fiction, but not completely sci-fantasy, space opera or pulp sci-fi...

So, since some of it is not hard sci-fi, all of it should be science fantasy?

 

[wbnc]

So why aren't any of these possible explanations in the playtest and eventual book?

Thats why you do a playtest. If there is a significant demand for information like that you add it...even if it's just a line or two describing it as " artificial ball lightening." " or fires a charge of electrically charged Ionized gas"

So, since some of it is not hard sci-fi, all of it should be science fantasy?

[/quote]
No, but there is some wiggle room.I prefer a bit of "fluff" text to provide the basic support for a device..such as a line or two on how it works...But From experience I know that sometimes to make room you start paring down explanations/fluff text.

I cant speak to the decision making process of the writers editors of the playtest/final release...so all I can say is make the suggestions you feel are needed..and perhaps suggest a way to move the weapon from sci-fantasy..to sci-fi.

what sort of text addition would you require to accept it as sci-fi? write up what you would accept, and offer it as a suggestion...who knows they might like it.