Merchants weapons

[Sigtrygg]

Horsell Common is a good vantage point from which to do this, or so I am told by my fellow intellects, vast, cool and unsympathetic.

Uooh laaahhh

 

[Sigtrygg]

Are free traders akin to 57th century East Indiamen vessels?

 

[swordtart]

Also, you get three launchers in a one tonne turret, plus twelve missile ready reloads (which add up to a tonne).

You don't even need the 1DTon for the turret if you go fixed mount and I believe you still get the 12 missile capacity without dedicating additional Dtons.

 

[Condottiere]

Although missile racks require ammunition and the warheads take time to reach distant targets, they can be very powerful weapons and, when a range of warheads is available, extremely versatile too. Each turret with one or more missile racks holds 12 missiles (missile racks on Firmpoints hold four missiles). The missile rack listed in the table is equipped with standard missiles.



Vaguely defined for fixed mounts, since it's a loophole that doesn't mention volume for turret weapon systems, which makes them virtual.

Implication is that the twelve missile reloads follow the same rules as for one tonne turrets, but not actually stated.

God knows why firmpoints suddenly have less, considering they still have to use the same one tonne turret, or similar mounting.

 

[Anstett]

 

[tytalan]

Can you cite an in-game reference to support this view or is this just YTU?

Traveller Companion simply lists them in the same legality class as pulse lasers (and submachine guns).

I wouldn't put too much stock on the definition of WMD, it varies politically depending on who the "enemy" of the day is.

.

Your statement doesn’t make sense you don’t believe that weapons that can kill a city in a single strikes are classified as Weapons of Mass Destruction and think every civilian should have a bunch. You also think that the only consideration for the game setting is the rule mechanics not every conversation is about rules some like this one are about the setting and common sense.

 

[tytalan]

What is your definition of WMD? Mine for Traveller is a weapon system that can in and of itself destroy a city regardless of timescale. Note that there is as yet no internationally recognised meaning for the term.

Than in your Traveller universe a black powder field gun is a WMD that stupid.

Absolute tosh, the amount of acid you would need would fill a tanker not a missile warhead

You apparently don’t know anything about chemistry. Here’s a clue some acids only need a minuscule amount to kill you like the one I stated which can kill you with less than a drop on your skin. There are other chemicals that are even worse.

Are Bio weapons wmds by your defintion? They can take months...

You only have to release them once. Quit twisting things and try to apply some common sense

In your opinion, yet you have blinkered yourself from accepting that a starship is in of itself a WMD, and a single ship scale laser is a WMD,

Your hovering ship can be attacked once it’s started and according to your own statement it can takes weeks to kill a city. How is that ships laser more powerful than the typical field gun? It’s actually by stats weaker and the field gun has never been considered a WMD. Maybe use a little common sense

 

[tytalan]

You are using a word that doesn't mean what you think it means. If I hover a ship over a city and use its single laser to destroy that city over the course of a week that is a weapon of mass destruction. We obviously disagree on the meaning of the term.

You want to ban civilian missiles and have a reason for doing so in univers. Great. It is your game, do it, But don't expect other people to say "oh my Tytalan is right I have been wrong for fifty years the OTU needs to be changed right now"

You are now repeating yourself and others have already provided the counterpoint.

Apparently your the one that are using a word that doesn’t mean what you think it means. If you define a laser as a WMD because over a week it can kill a city than every artillery gun is a WMD. WMD is not about potential damage over time it’s about massive potential damage on a single firing. The fact that by you own definition black powder artillery is a WMD show a real lack of understanding the concept.

 

[Sigtrygg]

Than in your Traveller universe a black powder field gun is a WMD that stupid.

No, your ridiculous statement is stupid. Saying that the gunpowder barrels that were secreted under parliament would have caused a lot of destruction, s severla hundred metre crater in the middle of London.

You apparently don’t know anything about chemistry.

My first degree is in chemisty, you don't have a clue what you are talking about.

Here’s a clue some acids only need a minuscule amount to kill you like the one I stated which can kill you with less than a drop on your skin.

Utter tosh.

There are other chemicals that are even worse.

Yes, nerva gents and the like, bit not the acid you cited, which you postulated would be vaporised above the city. Most of that would react with gases in the air.

You only have to release them once. Quit twisting things and try to apply some common sense

I am applying common sense, and historical definitions.

Your hovering ship can be attacked once it’s started and according to your own statement it can takes weeks to kill a city.

And your missile armed merchant can be destroyed by unicorns

How is that ships laser more powerful than the typical field gun?

The energy of a ship mounted laser is orders of magnitude higher than that of a field gun.

It’s actually by stats weaker and the field gun has never been considered a WMD. Maybe use a little common sense

Not if it is fired continuously for a week into the city. A beam laser continuously dumps 1EP into the buildings around it every combat round. Common sense says that that is a lot more energy than a field gun For comparison if a laser can be fired ever round for a week then use the same rate of fire for a field gun, either mass enough field duns to do it in one turn, you would need thousands of them, of fire a field gun continuously at its fastest rate of fire, The laser wins for destructive potential.

 

[Sigtrygg]

Apparently your the one that are using a word that doesn’t mean what you think it means.

What an impressive retort.

If you define a laser as a WMD because over a week it can kill a city than every artillery gun is a WMD.

That is a potential defintion.

WMD is not about potential damage over time it’s about massive potential damage on a single firing.

That is your definition, not the accepted definition. Because there isn't one. Read the link.

The fact that by you own definition black powder artillery is a WMD show a real lack of understanding the concept.

I posted the link. You are wrong. You are inventing a definition that is not recognised internationally by anyone. Read the link. Massed artillery could be a weapon of mass destruction, it would take a lot of guns, the term was originally used for aerial bombardment.

 

[tytalan]

The energy of a ship mounted laser is orders of magnitude higher than that of a field gun.

Not by game definition a heavy field gun does 1DD AP 8 Blast 15 while your ships laser does 1DD (ship scale converted to vehicle scale) Blast 10. Which does more damage?

That is your definition, not the accepted definition. Because there isn't one. Read the link.

Here the FBI def “ A WMD is defined by U.S. law (18 U.S.C. § 2332a) as any of the following:
a weapon that is designed to cause death or serious injury through toxic or poisonous chemicals
a weapon that contains a biological agent or toxin
a weapon that is designed to release dangerous levels of radiation or radioactivity
WMD often refers to all chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear. These weapons can have a large-scale impact on people, property, or infrastructure.”

That is your definition, not the accepted definition. Because there isn't one. Read the link.

Seems like the FBI has one.

My first degree is in chemisty, you don't have a clue what you are talking about.

You got a lot of first degrees. You do realize that the acid I mentioned is only neutralized by magnesium and calcium not a lot of those elements in the atmosphere plus if you knew chemistry you would also know that it’s the concentration that matters. But even if that wasn’t the case it only takes 2 liters of sarin gas to kill a city the size of New York.

 

[tytalan]

Not if it is fired continuously for a week into the city. A beam laser continuously dumps 1EP into the buildings around it every combat round. Common sense says that that is a lot more energy than a field gun For comparison if a laser can be fired ever round for a week then use the same rate of fire for a field gun, either mass enough field duns to do it in one turn, you would need thousands of them, of fire a field gun continuously at its fastest rate of fire, The laser wins for destructive potential.

No you wouldn’t need thousands of them 1 field gun does more damage than 1 ship laser. Yes the laser can firer every round as long as it has power so can the field gun as long as it has ammo. 1 need ammo the other needs a power plant.

 

[tytalan]

I have a suggestion for you Sigtrygg buy your self a freighter put an obvious missile launcher on its bow and try pulling up to any major port in the US with out getting boarded by the coastguard. Hell I bet you don’t even get out of international waters.

 

[Sigtrygg]

I have a suggestion for you Sigtrygg buy your self a freighter put an obvious missile launcher on its bow and try pulling up to any major port in the US with out getting boarded by the coastguard. Hell I bet you don’t even get out of international waters.

you do know this is a game...

and in the game merchant vessels with missile launchers have been landing at starports for 50 years.

A nuclear missisle is 1DD, that is 1dx10 damage.

1000 turns of firing the laser is 1000D, how long is a week in combat turns?

 

[Sigtrygg]

Not by game definition a heavy field gun does 1DD AP 8 Blast 15 while your ships laser does 1DD (ship scale converted to vehicle scale) Blast 10. Which does more damage?

The field gun with a rate of fire of...

while the laser does 1DD every combat turn, which does the most damage per minute?

Here the FBI def “ A WMD is defined by U.S. law (18 U.S.C. § 2332a) as any of the following:
a weapon that is designed to cause death or serious injury through toxic or poisonous chemicals
a weapon that contains a biological agent or toxin
a weapon that is designed to release dangerous levels of radiation or radioactivity
WMD often refers to all chemical, biological, radiological, nuclear. These weapons can have a large-scale impact on people, property, or infrastructure.”

Seems like the FBI has one.

But it is not universally accepted is it. There is no international definition. Local laws can be anything you want in your universe.

You got a lot of first degrees.

I have only ever mentioned my first degree in chemistry. Could you quote a contrary statement?

You do realize that the acid I mentioned is only neutralized by magnesium and calcium

utter tosh, it is neutralised by many reactions involving many bases.

not a lot of those elements in the atmosphere

in the dust that swirls around a city there is.

plus if you knew chemistry you would also know that it’s the concentration that matters.

and what is the concentration of you 50g of acid when spread out over the entire city?

But even if that wasn’t the case it only takes 2 liters of sarin gas to kill a city the size of New York.

do you ever stick to the talking point or do you move the goalposts at every opportunity?

As to your 2 litres of sarin fantasy which reddit user told you that?

The reality is very different, and is a real world occurrence:

Tokyo subway sarin attack - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

it killed 14 and injured a thousand or so.

 

[Sigtrygg]

No you wouldn’t need thousands of them 1 field gun does more damage than 1 ship laser. Yes the laser can firer every round as long as it has power so can the field gun as long as it has ammo. 1 need ammo the other needs a power plant.

What is the rate of fire of the field gun? How many rounds until its barrel has to be replaced?

Given time a single field gun could destroy every building in a city, military's prefer to use more than one gun at a time to get the job done quicker - see the Ukrainian cities reduced to rubble (mass destruction) by continuous artillery bombardment.

 

[AndrewW]

There was also:

Commercial Service: Of the eight ships purchased at surplus and placed in commerical service, the most interesting is the Emissary (ex-Sparkling DIstress) operated by Oberlindes Lines in the Varg Extents. Taking advantage of a bureaucratic loophull, the ship never shed its weaponary, and was operated from a base just beyond the Imperial border, at Pandrin/Uthe. The weaponary projects the proper attitude of power to the Vargr, and while never actually used, it was made the Oberlindes commercial expeditions highly successful.

Now, as a bonus who can say which ship class that is?

 

[phavoc]

Again this depends on the pirate. If we are talking about a professional pirate that wishes to establish a reputation to protect their profit margins this is an entirely credible approach. In order to have a reputation however you need to be identifiable. That pirate however will attract the attention of the Merchant service and Imperial Navy and as their reputation grows will become higher priority target (or be offered employment by disreputable polities).

If the pirate is a desperado then they might still baulk at murder. A pirate that can claim to have been desperate but merciful might get a lesser sentence. If they only occasionally extort a few tons of cargo out of a vessel then they might well be seen as a nuisance, declared outlaw and have a bounty put out on them. No dedicated military resources will be sent to track them down, but anyone who encounters them can legitimately destroy them with impunity.

This also all depends on if in your game you can intrinsically identify the crew of a ship that attacks you.

Your encounter might consist of a ship appearing on your sensors at distant or long range without a corresponding transponder signal and you get a pulse laser shot across your bow. It orders you to drop 5 Dtons of cargo. You are told you will not be harmed unless you try to run or engage. If you do not comply they will destroy you. You comply, it lets you go and presumably picks up your cargo shortly after. You might know the rough shape and size of the ship from RADAR/LIDAR or some other vague sensor readings. You might pick up some clues from the interaction, maybe identifying a Vargr intonation for example. "We were attacked by an armed free trader and the was a vargr aboard" and turning over your sensor logs might not give authorities much to go on. It could be a Vargr pirate crew using a free trader converted for use as a raider, it could be a normal free-trader with a single Vargr aboard or it could be a ship with a morphable hull that just looked like a free trader this time and the human captain happens to speak Vargr.

Blackbeard was hunted to death, Morgan was made governor of Jamaica and Kidd might well have been retrospectively declared pirate for political reasons, he certainly believed he was safe landing in Boston where he was arrested. We know about the famous ones, but vast numbers of pirates were never identified or caught.

A lot will also depend upon the sophistication of the pirates themselves. In ye olde days of sail pirates sometimes knew ahead of time what they were after using intelligence (i.e. loose lips in ports about special cargos and such). Or they knew ships sailing from certain areas had a higher chance of valuable cargo aboard. History is replete of tails of pirates taking jewels, gold and silver... but rarely did they brag they took a cargo of grain and salted fish.

So piracy would have two basic types - those where their victims are targeted ahead of time knowing what they had onboard, and just random targets of opportunity. A pirate won't have much interest in a load of raw metallic ore (or even semi-processed ore) since it's high bulk and low value. The ship itself may be worth more, but obviously it could also be damaged if there was combat in taking of the ship and therefore useless to them.

Which leaves us with the question of how much would a crew put up a fight if they knew the pirates will eventually win? Will they surrender once it's clear the pirates can catch them and there is no hope for rescue? Will they capitulate after putting up a token resistance? Or will they fight till their ship is unable to fight?

Similar questions go for the pirates themselves. Are they bloodthirsty curs who will rape and pillage the ships company and then space them after capture? Are they gentlemanly raiders who will offer no harm unless provoked, ransoming the crew at a later date?

Multiple issues here that could vary between races, sectors and game settings. Pirates who develop a reputation for killing will find crews and ships fighting for literal survival vs. pirates who will fight, but not randomly kill unless needed.

 

[phavoc]

Rods from god have been thoroughly debunked. or maybe that's just what they are telling us...

By the power of Zeus! Or the pen of Pournelle...

 

[Endie]

Can I remind people once more that they are spending the only life they will ever have arguing with Tytalan.

If he disagrees with you, that’s effectively proof that you’re right. Accept the win and move on.