Missile Launchers on Ships

[Gentleman John]

For small ships the hard point seems to be a turret socket to which you can add any standard turret. Presumably an old Vilani standard that has been warmed over by the Terrans ("IS-58658658-34356-36365 Starship ordnance Mounts" or whatever). This could be a slot in VLS system for a 3-missile launcher but is more likely just a turret as you can swap weapons relatively easily. Save VLS for the big boys of the navy.

Funnily enough, this is exactly the way hardpoints were depicted in FFS for TNE. The illustration in question shows a laser turret, which is depicted as a dish-like laser generator mounted on an articulated arm - nothing like what most people would describe as a turret ...

Based on this version of things, as I said before, the standard triple missile turret could just be a 3-bin VLS with internal reloading capability.

As any Hero referee knows, ignore the appearance, check the effects. It doesn't matter what you call it, if it does what the game designers say a turret does then buy it as a turret.

 

[Gentleman John]

What i find intresting here is that Starfire's 3rd novel has something very simular in the last big battle against the 'Bugs' as they are called.. (first book of Stars at war II)..

The ships have basically 1 shot launchers, this means of course that once they have shot their 'Wad' so to speak they have to withdraw to reload because it has to be done manually and externally, but it also means that they can fit a ton more launchers in because you don't have to worry about the 'reloading' equipment for reloading on the fly.. saves a lot of tonnage when all you have is a tube that basically lets the missile shoot.

As an ex-Starfire player, I have to ask, are these the XO missile racks from Starfire (which are one shot launchers for standard missiles) or are they the BIG single shot missile launchers deployed in the Terran Civil War that fired missiles as big as a corvette?

If it is the former, then these were restricted in the Starfire rules in that you could only have so many per hull space of the mounting vessel. While they did not take up space in the hull, the missiles were mounted on rails similar to those used on modern-day fighters, and so took up surface area of hull - or so the in-game rationale went. A Starfire vessel could still make warp-point transit, but it did suffer problems. In Traveller, these rails might not be desirable as the jump field only seems to be good for a certain volume of vessel. External mount missiles of the type described could add to the volume of the vessel as far as the jump field is concerned, with whatever consequences the referee sees fit.

The other thing is that unless i'm mistaken (and i just checked and I'm not) bays which are 'internal' for the most part still use a hardpoint.. this puzzels me slightly as how is a 'bay' really any diffrent to say an area for a landing craft etc? really it's not, all your doing is putting it on the hull and letting it face out..

If you take a hardpoint as being the required volume for fire control, power lines, whatever you need to target and activate a weapon, then it makes sense to me. Also, remember that a landing craft does require more than its dtonnage devoted to it if you want to do more than just enter/leave it via an airlock - or so earlier versions of Traveller had, IIRC.

 

[starfleet]

there are 2 used durring Starfire's set, one is the Star Union's one shot system the other is the Terran System.. even taking the Terran system into account with Traveller it shouldn't be a problem especially if you look at CT and the ships in it's supliment.. after all they had one ship that was capable of jumping itself + a giant net full of cargo...

But I still don't see how that changes/devalues the internal example I gave which keeps to the rules on all but the fact the OS missile launcher is slightly larger and weighs a ton or two more then a normal turrent.

edit: just checking the story again (I don't have the rules I have to go by the novels I've never been able to get star fire here saddly even though I wanted it) the Star Union system was designed to take out bug gunboats and suicide shuttles so i don't see that it'd be the big 'cruiser' sized version either.. it's the ones employed at the start of the destruction of the last hive system (The last system that must be defended)

 

[AKAramis]

What i find intresting here is that Starfire's 3rd novel has something very simular in the last big battle against the 'Bugs' as they are called.. (first book of Stars at war II)..

The ships have basically 1 shot launchers, this means of course that once they have shot their 'Wad' so to speak they have to withdraw to reload because it has to be done manually and externally, but it also means that they can fit a ton more launchers in because you don't have to worry about the 'reloading' equipment for reloading on the fly.. saves a lot of tonnage when all you have is a tube that basically lets the missile shoot.

As an ex-Starfire player, I have to ask, are these the XO missile racks from Starfire (which are one shot launchers for standard missiles) or are they the BIG single shot missile launchers deployed in the Terran Civil War that fired missiles as big as a corvette?

If it is the former, then these were restricted in the Starfire rules in that you could only have so many per hull space of the mounting vessel. While they did not take up space in the hull, the missiles were mounted on rails similar to those used on modern-day fighters, and so took up surface area of hull - or so the in-game rationale went. A Starfire vessel could still make warp-point transit, but it did suffer problems. In Traveller, these rails might not be desirable as the jump field only seems to be good for a certain volume of vessel. External mount missiles of the type described could add to the volume of the vessel as far as the jump field is concerned, with whatever consequences the referee sees fit.

Rc (Capital Missile) ammo on XO. Everything bigger than Rc is only mountable on XO racks.

XO have no effect on warp-point transition, unless carrying gunboats. At least, not under SF 3r

 

[Gentleman John]

But I still don't see how that changes/devalues the internal example I gave which keeps to the rules on all but the fact the OS missile launcher is slightly larger and weighs a ton or two more then a normal turrent.

edit: just checking the story again (I don't have the rules I have to go by the novels I've never been able to get star fire here saddly even though I wanted it) the Star Union system was designed to take out bug gunboats and suicide shuttles so i don't see that it'd be the big 'cruiser' sized version either.. it's the ones employed at the start of the destruction of the last hive system (The last system that must be defended)

It doesn't devalue the example - it just works differently under Traveller than it does in Starfire, that's all. You can still have the external rails, but you will need bigger J-Drives in Traveller to run the things. The example ship you quote was a 1000 dton craft capable of J6 (iirc) without the cargo nets, but had its jump capacity reduced for every 1000 dtonnage dragged behind it. Hence, I would assume the same for external rails unless they were figured into the design beforehand. The ROF and tonnage they can carry was not a concern, just the fact that I read your explanation as allowing them to be put on without restriction.

As for Starfire, you used to be able to get the 3rd ed as a download. The full version was generally reckoned to be better than 4th ed.

 

[Gentleman John]

Rc (Capital Missile) ammo on XO. Everything bigger than Rc is only mountable on XO racks.

XO have no effect on warp-point transition, unless carrying gunboats. At least, not under SF 3r

Ta. I've only read up on the Terran Civil War and the Theban War. I never managed to get hold of the Bug War novels.

I think that the XO limits may apply in SF4/GSF as that was the last set of Starfire I used. I may be wrong as it has been some years and I am not going to the storage depot to dig it out. However, the point about gunboats is interesting. Would that be if the gunboats were mounted on the racks that first appeared in the J'Rill rules for their carriers (Jump Racks, or something like that)?

 

[AKAramis]

Rc (Capital Missile) ammo on XO. Everything bigger than Rc is only mountable on XO racks.

XO have no effect on warp-point transition, unless carrying gunboats. At least, not under SF 3r

Ta. I've only read up on the Terran Civil War and the Theban War. I never managed to get hold of the Bug War novels.

I think that the XO limits may apply in SF4/GSF as that was the last set of Starfire I used. I may be wrong as it has been some years and I am not going to the storage depot to dig it out. However, the point about gunboats is interesting. Would that be if the gunboats were mounted on the racks that first appeared in the J'Rill rules for their carriers (Jump Racks, or something like that)?

No, only GB mounted on XO, instead of XOg or @. XOg and @ are designed to keep the mounted craft inside the drive field.

 

[SSWarlock]

In MT as it currently stands, there are only two types of missile: ship guided and smart. That's it. Apart from that they are identical. I haven't seen the new High Guard yet, so I can't comment on what that adds.

If by "MT" you mean Mongoose Traveller rather than MegaTraveller, you're correct. However, Mongoose's first High Guard preview download describes a new missile, called a "torpedo", as taking up two and a half tons. They're purchased in two-shot loads of 5 tons each and are loaded 2 per single barbette (larger turret). There are different kinds of torpedoes with the damage of each being much more than a Core Book missile.

The preview is well worth downloading (IMO, of course) and has juicy details on military ship weaponry, the use of space fighters, and point defense options. It can be found near the bottom of the webpage at http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/home/series.php?qsSeries=51

 

[Gentleman John]

If by "MT" you mean Mongoose Traveller rather than MegaTraveller, you're correct. However, Mongoose's first High Guard preview download describes a new missile, called a "torpedo", as taking up two and a half tons. They're purchased in two-shot loads of 5 tons each and are loaded 2 per single barbette (larger turret). There are different kinds of torpedoes with the damage of each being much more than a Core Book missile.

The preview is well worth downloading (IMO, of course) and has juicy details on military ship weaponry, the use of space fighters, and point defense options. It can be found near the bottom of the webpage at http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/home/series.php?qsSeries=51

I've got my copy of High Guard on order from my F not-so LGS. It hasn't come through yet as they getting in the non-faulty copies, so I suppose I will just have to download that preview to keep me happy for a while ...

 

[Patron Zero]

Maybe just semantics but referring to a projectile used exclusively for ship to ship combat, in regards to naval vessels (wet or vac), as a torpedo seems to make more sense.

 

[Gentleman John]

Plus, it has a long and honourable history in science fiction.

 

[klingsor]

Maybe missiles are just the dinky little things merchants use whereas torpedoes are the sit up and take note ship killers? The distinction works for me.

 

[SSWarlock]

Maybe missiles are just the dinky little things merchants use whereas torpedoes are the sit up and take note ship killers? The distinction works for me.

Same here. And allowing an entire flight of fighters to engage with barrage fire with each carrying 3 torpedoes or a triple particle beam turret suddenly gives Traveller fighters teeth they've lacked in previous editions (not counting TNE).

Yep, works for me very well.

 

[Patron Zero]

I would agree that fighters in Traveller have been under gunned when perceived as a threat to larger vessels, that being a general observation than a fully inclusive edict.

I go back to WW2 naval engagements, in particular the war in the Pacific when aircraft truly were the deciding factor on how many engagements concluded. George Lucas has made commentary how such gave influence to his depicting space battles in the earlier Star Wars films to include small craft harassing 'capitol' ships.

Seldom do I refer to SW to support a position but dedicated torpedo bombers and fightercraft armed with such ordnance did exploit obvious design weaknesses in bigger vessels, I see that 'plot' device also being applicable in Traveller.

Perhaps the above more reinforces discussions of CIWS than might be thought.

 

[SSWarlock]

...Perhaps the above more reinforces discussions of CIWS than might be thought.

Hmm. I thought that's what railgun bays were for.

For anyone not familiar with MongTrav's railgun bay autofire capabilities, see Highguard Preview 1, page "49" (actually the 4th page), located at http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/pdf/travhgpre1.pdf

Admittedly, smaller warships won't dedicate (much) space to such emplacements but the big boys (10k+ dtons displacement) would. At least IMTU they would (and will).

 

[klingsor]

Fighters always did seem a bit pointless for large scale actions in Traveller. Dangerous against merchants though so good for things like anti-piracy or a mercenary action. So you might see them in local navies but in a fleet action they are just wasted tonnage.

Now whether you like this or not depends on the model you use for starship combat. If yours is Star Wars or the Pacific naval battles of WW II they you are not a happy bunny but if you are like me and your model is the Great War or pre-dreadnought era then you will be quite happy.

 

[collins355]

Fighters always did seem a bit pointless for large scale actions in Traveller. Dangerous against merchants though so good for things like anti-piracy or a mercenary action. So you might see them in local navies but in a fleet action they are just wasted tonnage.

Now whether you like this or not depends on the model you use for starship combat. If yours is Star Wars or the Pacific naval battles of WW II they you are not a happy bunny but if you are like me and your model is the Great War or pre-dreadnought era then you will be quite happy.

Quite agree. This was a recurring issue on TML over the years and much bandwidth has already been consumed debating the relative merits. Suffice to say that in Traveller (up until MGT) space combat has had more in common with pre-20th Century naval combat than it has with naval combat since the invention of the aircraft. Design decisions pushing it in this direction have included limiting communication to the speed of travel, small craft not being any faster than large vessels, the ship size limit for jump drives (abandoned in T4 IIRC), restrictions on small craft armament, the importance of large ship computers which small craft could not carry, and so on.

Based on the TML debates, these design decisions ticked off some people and pleased others.

I expect that MGT's reversal of the previous situation (to now make fighters something important in fleet actions), will generate a mixed response.

 

[Valarian]

I've seen fighters in Traveller working in large scale combat in one of two roles. As additional point defence for the larger ships, shooting down incoming missiles. Or, as a way of extending missile range - the fighters going out to deliver a missile barrage to the enemy fleet and then returning to base to rearm.

You may get the fighter on fighter combat in large scale fleet actions as well with one side trying to deny fighters for one of the two roles above to the other side.

 

[SSWarlock]

...Based on the TML debates, these design decisions ticked off some people and pleased others...

In other words, the TML responded with its standard response. :lol:

 

[Patron Zero]

Mind this might belong as an entirely new thread but have 'space' mines become an accepted instrument of warfare in Traveller ?

I bring this up because a group of fighters solely tasked to plow clean the path ahead of a fleet or battle group of such hazards being a good justification for carrying and supported the diminutive craft.

Pardon my ignorance of HG and other naval engagement related subjects, the games set in MTU have been more commonly character-based adventures than large scale engagements. No opinions inferred about either style of campaign, just speaking from my own experiences.