Large Changes to Space Combat?

vladthemad

Mongoose
Nerhesi said:
First - it seems clearly defined in the rules. There is text complete with examples...

Second, you need to stop thinking about "shooting one missile" or firing "once" in a 6 minute period! Point defense is a drawn out activity... you are shooting at the incoming missiles! Not one shot, one missile! this is the root of your confusion here. A gunner with above average skill can easily shoot down several missiles. An elite gunner can easily shoot over a 10 missiles, while firing a small bay over a 6 minute period!

As above - I you'll notice the text specifically addressing multiple weapons, states MISSILES, pulse lasers, beam lasers. EDIT: I Found it - Page 158 Top left.

As I have already stated, it is not clearly defined. There is no confusion, there is only a lack of clarification in the written material. The only reference to missile in the Double and Triple Turrets section is in an example of a turret that those rules would not apply to. Missiles have all their own rules, missiles are a special case. If they you are going to deviate from that standard with regards to this one rule, than that needs to be stated directly. It should say something along the lines of "This rule includes both missiles and energy weapons.", it's as simple as that.

But, as I have already stated, missiles are a special case that use separate mechanics involving distance to target, ammunition, speed, and really two separate to hit rolls. To use them under the same mechanic as linked energy weapons smacks of an oversight that should be remedied. To be clear - I do not think missiles should work under the same rules as linked energy weapons.

As to your second point, you missed what I was driving at in what you are quoting me as saying. I am pointing out the fact that point defense is exactly what you are claiming it to be - shooting the same weapon multiple times in a six minute combat turn. The point is, if a gunner can do that, why can't he shoot all the weapons in a mixed weapon turret? This also seems to be an oversight and should be remedied or clarified.

An elite gunner can easily shoot over a 10 missiles, while firing a small bay over a 6 minute period!

TL still cap armour and this is a non-sequitur. They had 14 and 15 armour before (max). It doesn't change the logical fact that now, because of how multiple weapons work, THEY ARE TAKING MORE DAMAGE. This has nothing to do with barrage rules - you misunderstood that completely so we can drop it.

Repeating myself again, bay weapons, barrage rules, and rules TL caps for armor are not in the core rule book and I have made no comments about them, why are you referencing them again exactly?

Maybe a quick example will explain it a bit better for you. If your Fat Trader has 3 pulse lasers in one turret doing 2d6+4, and my Fat Trader has three turrets with one pulse each doing a total of 6d6, who do you think is going to win?

Actually? Maybe the 2D6+4 ( + effect too)? You have to take it in context of the new rules. The 2D6 x 3 required 3 to hit rolls, so you had to split fire control. Then you subtracted your armour once from each, and most importantly... all this resulted in single and double hits! Some of which could do hull!

Now your 2d6+4+2(to hit bonus)+EFFECT (you keep forgetting that), does damage directly to my hull. Everytime. I don't have the Fat trader infront of me, but it could b an interesting test. If you used missiles for this example, 2D6 x 3 vs 4D6+8? Pretty clear. How about a free or far trader with beam lasers? 1d6 vs armour 3 times? Or 1d6+2 vs 4 armour? Again pretty clear.

Regardless - let's separate fact and rules from preference. I agree that perhaps something is required to denote difficulty when hitting multiple flight of missiles (or maybe not they are super powerful now). The fact stands however that multiple weapons are clearly defined, with an example, and that we have more tactical option now because your armour cannot simply ignore attacks (EFFECT + Multiple weapons).[/quote]

You are mixing in a lot of variables and muddling the point. My example was simply to point out that due to the loss of the "damage roll->hits caused->hit location table" system, lower damage but more total from multiple shots is more valuable now than higher damage but less total from a single shot. I did note that if you wanted to split hairs you could circumvent that extra equipment and what not, but I wanted a clear and easy to follow example.

If the linked weapon rule had been in the old core rule book, it would have been a huge advantage. In the new rule system, not so much...with caveats. :)

TrippyHippy said:
ShawnDriscoll said:
This game will have a few core books. Not just this one.

It may seem to be a quibble, but this is not right. There is one Traveller Core Rules book (the one we are currently playtesting). There is a 'core range' of books that follow, which will be important too, but it needs to be clear that someone only needs the 'Core Rules Book' alone to play the game.

If you lose that, you lose a lot of potential customers.

It also expressly states that on p. 4 under Further Reading. No other books are required or needed.
 

Nerhesi

Cosmic Mongoose
I'll defer regarding the missile point - while the rules are clear, they do not seem logically sound. So even with 4D+8 for triple missile turret, how does that simulate 3 missiles and point defense accordingly. :)

Your conclusion regarding less rolls = less hits = less damage isn't factual. You can't take the rule of multiple weapons from MGT2, without taking all the rules with it, which includes straight hull damage. We shouldn't compare a hodgepodge of a bit of MGT1 and a bit of MGT2. To maintain integrity, we should compare them both as a whole.

So you compare multiple weapons doing multiple attacks of 2d6, but resulting in single and double hits (MGT1)
VS
Multiple weapons doing a single attack, but damage going straight to hull with a possibility of a crit (MGT2).
 

Strithe

Mongoose
allanimal said:
On my reading of the changes to space combat, I have to agree with Vlad.
I like the critical effects table, but I feel like critical hits will rarely happen, and that will dramatically change the flavor of space combat.

Though, Beam lasers at short range with a good gunner will crit frequently, it seems.

But maybe that is not true in practice. I have my weekly Traveller session tomorrow night, and if they happen to get into a space combat (somewhat likely with where we left off last time) maybe we will try it out.

Also, in the past, we were able to target systems to disable a ship rather than destroy it. I don't see a possibility to do this now.

A quick & dirty fix would be to just ignore the Effect part of critical hits occurring and simply base it on damage (i.e. 1 severity point of critical hit per 10 points of damage). If you're adding Effect to damage high Effect will still come into play.
 

Nerhesi

Cosmic Mongoose
Strithe said:
allanimal said:
On my reading of the changes to space combat, I have to agree with Vlad.
I like the critical effects table, but I feel like critical hits will rarely happen, and that will dramatically change the flavor of space combat.

Though, Beam lasers at short range with a good gunner will crit frequently, it seems.

But maybe that is not true in practice. I have my weekly Traveller session tomorrow night, and if they happen to get into a space combat (somewhat likely with where we left off last time) maybe we will try it out.

Also, in the past, we were able to target systems to disable a ship rather than destroy it. I don't see a possibility to do this now.

A quick & dirty fix would be to just ignore the Effect part of critical hits occurring and simply base it on damage (i.e. 1 severity point of critical hit per 10 points of damage). If you're adding Effect to damage high Effect will still come into play.

Agreed. Or even per 5 points for spacecraft, and per 50 points for capital or something like that.

We did some testing last night and 700-ton advanced merc craft still only has 140 hull - thats a total of 14 "possible" crits... probably low for an extended battle. Especially if you're doing 10 points AFTER armour reduction. I really like the idea of crit per X damage after armour.
 

vladthemad

Mongoose
Nerhesi said:
I'll defer regarding the missile point - while the rules are clear, they do not seem logically sound. So even with 4D+8 for triple missile turret, how does that simulate 3 missiles and point defense accordingly. :)

Your conclusion regarding less rolls = less hits = less damage isn't factual. You can't take the rule of multiple weapons from MGT2, without taking all the rules with it, which includes straight hull damage. We shouldn't compare a hodgepodge of a bit of MGT1 and a bit of MGT2. To maintain integrity, we should compare them both as a whole.

So you compare multiple weapons doing multiple attacks of 2d6, but resulting in single and double hits (MGT1)
VS
Multiple weapons doing a single attack, but damage going straight to hull with a possibility of a crit (MGT2).

I only brought up the old system for comparison purposes, and to point out that the new turret rule fits the old system a lot better than it fits the new. I'm curious at what point was the rule regarding turrets created, at what point were the rules regarding damage changed, and were the two changes considered together as to how they interact?

Crits are a separate matter all together, as they really have nothing to do with damage caused or number of weapons fired.

Nerhesi said:
We did some testing last night and 700-ton advanced merc craft still only has 140 hull - thats a total of 14 "possible" crits... probably low for an extended battle. Especially if you're doing 10 points AFTER armour reduction. I really like the idea of crit per X damage after armour.

Where the heck are you getting stats for that craft?
 

Nerhesi

Cosmic Mongoose
Far trader 200 tons, 40 hull
Free trader 200 tons, 40 hull
Lab ship 400 tons, 80 hull
merc cruiser - typo
patrol corvette 400 tons, 80 hull
safari ship, safari ship - typo
subsidized liner 600 tons, 120 hull
subsidized merchant 400 tons, 80 hull
yacht 200 tons, 40 hull
launch 20 tons, 4 hull
light fighter 10 tons, 2 hull
modular cutter 50 tons, 10 hull
pinance 40 tons, 8 hull
ships boat 30 tons, 6 hull
shuttle 95 tons, 18 hull,

2 points of hull per 10 displacement tons (fractions dropped). 20 hull per 100 tons.

Also - effect adds to damage, so whenever you hit with effect 6+, you're doing even more damage, so the target dies faster. So even though you crit, you're also removing even more hull! So what this generally translates into is that most craft usually will take only 1-2 crits per 100 dtons before actually losing all your hull...
 

Samcollins

Mongoose
I think Nerhesi has it nailed and his posts have cleared up a lot of my initial objections/misconceptions about the new system. MgT1 ship combat went on forever and it was tough to penetrate heavy armor. Heck sometimes 4 armor was tough to get past when a couple of small ships with crystaliron armor were duking it out. This system is really starting to make a lot of sense to me. I'd still like to see more critical hits, tying them to damage somehow. The effect 6 to trigger one just seems clunky to me.
 

Strithe

Mongoose
Nerhesi said:
Strithe said:
allanimal said:
On my reading of the changes to space combat, I have to agree with Vlad.
I like the critical effects table, but I feel like critical hits will rarely happen, and that will dramatically change the flavor of space combat.

Though, Beam lasers at short range with a good gunner will crit frequently, it seems.

But maybe that is not true in practice. I have my weekly Traveller session tomorrow night, and if they happen to get into a space combat (somewhat likely with where we left off last time) maybe we will try it out.

Also, in the past, we were able to target systems to disable a ship rather than destroy it. I don't see a possibility to do this now.

A quick & dirty fix would be to just ignore the Effect part of critical hits occurring and simply base it on damage (i.e. 1 severity point of critical hit per 10 points of damage). If you're adding Effect to damage high Effect will still come into play.

Agreed. Or even per 5 points for spacecraft, and per 50 points for capital or something like that.

We did some testing last night and 700-ton advanced merc craft still only has 140 hull - thats a total of 14 "possible" crits... probably low for an extended battle. Especially if you're doing 10 points AFTER armour reduction. I really like the idea of crit per X damage after armour.


One thing I forgot to add was "Round fractions down, not up."
 
Top