Missile Barrages (Sorry)

locarno24

Cosmic Mongoose
I apologise. I realise that Religion, Politics and the Barrage rules for missile flights are the three subjects not to start discussing in polite conversation, but I've been going through High Guard again and I'm still not convinced I've got it right.


With particle beams, it's easy to understand (I think).

40 Particle Beam Turrets, 30 Particle Beam Barbettes and 20 Particle Beam Bays all do the same gross damage - 120d6

As a result, all of these would produce a nearly identical barrage:

120-Particle Beam-Long-3
120-Particle Beam-Long-4
and
120-Particle Beam-Long-6

respectively, so their only difference is the improved DM, which should result in more of those 120 dice becoming barrage damage.


The common complaint is that whilst a barbette or bay-mount particle beam represents a single humungous cannon, missile racks are a multiple launcher firing many missiles of the same size.

The missile bay damage-per-weapon entry of "12 missiles" doesn't help.

The example given - of 10 bays firing multiple warhead missiles, doesn't make this any easier either.

The original example claimed this should be 10-Missile-Long-12, which makes little sense as 1d6 weapons would be better at punching through TL14 bonded superdense plate than a heavy bay-mounted particle beam, which is ridiculous.

The suggestion that only 10d6 are involved is quite clearly wrong too - a 'perfect' barrage of 120 multi-warhead missiles, worked out long-hand for each missile, could result in landing 720 single hits on an unprotected target. Even with a 500% score, 10-missile-long-12 gets only 50 hits, or 150 damage - rather than more than 2000 damage you could get working it out longhand.


This was updated in the errata - but the result doesn't seem to make any more sense: 10-Missile-Long-1d6*1d6
Firstly, what does 1d6*1d6 mean? If it's multiplied together that gives a range between 2 and 36....
According to the barrage damage rules, a multi-warhead missile's barrage damage characteristic is 1d6 per missile. Which doesn't seem to make sense either - a multiwarhead missile doesn't inflict d6d6 damage in one blow, it inflicts d6 seperate hits of d6 damage each - i.e. each individual strike is no more or less effective than a normal missile.

The (many) possible versions are, as understand it:

120-Missile-Long-d6
120-Missile-Long-12d6 (Damage DM seems wrong)
10-Missile-Long-12d6 (Number of missiles seems wrong)

I'd be inclined to go with the first version (so you get no real benefit from missiles being launched from bays rather than turrets, which is how it works in normal combat).

The problem is that the other examples in the rules disagree. Multiple weaker strikes from multi-warhead missiles are summed up, with a multi-warhead missile on average behaving like a 3d6 damage weapon like a turreted particle beam mount.

Railgun bays are multiple autofiring mounts, not bigger railguns, yet a railgun bay generates a barrage damage of 12, and a large bay 18 - the most powerful barrage damage stat that listed unambiguously (unlike missiles and torpedos). These are multiple 3d6 slugs, yet they are being combined into a single 'hit' for the purposes of the barrage.


I haven't seen an official version of this, and being but a bear of little brain, am getting quite puzzled. I was hoping to get some sort of clarification before dumping big missile barrages on the players and getting them as confused as me.
 
locarno24 said:
I apologise. I realise that Religion, Politics and the Barrage rules for missile flights are the three subjects not to start discussing in polite conversation, but I've been going through High Guard again and I'm still not convinced I've got it right.

You left out canon...
 
locarno24 said:
I haven't seen an official version of this, and being but a bear of little brain, am getting quite puzzled.
The same here. :?

Fortunately the problem will not come up soon in my setting, which leaves
me the time required to come up with my own space combat system tailo-
red to my setting - much of Mongoose Traveller's system simply does not
make much sense for me.

In my view the simultaneous launch of a high number of missiles saturates
the enemy's point defense and so increases the chance of missiles getting
through the enemy's defense and doing damage, but I see no way how
this could increase the damage done by the individual missiles - the pro-
bability that they could do so by hitting anywhere near the same spot on
an enemy ship bigger than a small craft seems negligible.

Therefore my version of multiple missile attacks, whether the missiles are
launched by one ship or in a coordinated way by several ships or by mis-
sile pods, will only increase the hit probability based upon the relation be-
tween the number of missiles and the enemy defense, but will not change
the damage done by individual missile hits.

Currently I am thinking of a simple table that compares the number of at-
tacking missiles with the target's "point defense factor" to give a modifier
to each missile's hit chance, then to take the average number of hits ac-
cording to this modified hit chance, and use the average damage for each
actual hit ... or something like that ... if I still have the impression that it
makes sense in a few weeks ...
 
Each missile does individual damage.

Which is, as I said, how I would rule it if I was Mongoose.

However, that begs the question of why the salvo of seperate railgun slugs, and the seperate warheads of a multi-warhead missile unambiguously do not do individual damage....


In my view the simultaneous launch of a high number of missiles saturates the enemy's point defense and so increases the chance of missiles getting through the enemy's defense and doing damage

That much is covered by the tables, though - since the effectivenes of PDLs is based off the number of PDLs relative to the number of incoming missiles.
 
If you want the simple answer, here it is. The writer screwed up. Same way the writers screwed up when giving chemical batteries twice the energy density of a Fusion reactor. MGT has MANY of these same type of mistakes. Just apply commonsense and/or known science and rule accordingly.
 
locarno24 said:
That much is covered by the tables, though - since the effectivenes of PDLs is based off the number of PDLs relative to the number of incoming missiles.
Yep, I forgot to mention that there are no lasers in my setting, so I will
need a different evaluation of point defense.
 
locarno24 said:
The suggestion that only 10d6 are involved is quite clearly wrong too - a 'perfect' barrage of 120 multi-warhead missiles, worked out long-hand for each missile, could result in landing 720 single hits on an unprotected target. Even with a 500% score, 10-missile-long-12 gets only 50 hits, or 150 damage - rather than more than 2000 damage you could get working it out longhand.

.....................
The (many) possible versions are, as understand it:

120-Missile-Long-d6
120-Missile-Long-12d6 (Damage DM seems wrong)
10-Missile-Long-12d6 (Number of missiles seems wrong)

I think most people are with you as 120-Missile-Long-d6. If you ignore the example it is what the rules and table say in High Guard. Variable damage based on a d6 roll to represent the multi-warhead.

This could give a maximum damage of 720 in "High Guard" scale. When comparing against core rules you need to remember to times by 3 (for small craft and space craft as per page 75 for a total of 2160 points, nearer to what you had in mind. Curiously if you calculate the damage for this from the table on page 150 of the core rulebook this becomes 469 triple hits.

Given you have avoid 120 dice rolls for lock on, 120 dice rolls to hit (not to mention the defensive fire), and 120 rolls for damage not a bad estimation in my book.

If you opponent has armour 12, he would feel a bit annoyed with the above hit I think.
 
Back
Top