Missiles and other starship weapons

[hdan]

I know this has been hashed over elsewhere (I think I'm even on a few of the threads) but I was wondering if we ever got a definitive answer to these questions about the main rulebook's spaceship combat:

1) Does the Gunnery check's Effect add to the weapon's damage?

1a) Do you add up all the damage from a single attack, or apply each weapon individually? The rules *do* say to only roll damage after all hits are determined, so it's not as crazy as it sounds, but it would make a triple turret at least as effective than a weapon bay on average, so that doesn't feel right to me. Possibly if each hit's damage were reduced by armor THEN added together for the final tally....

2) Are standard missiles really d6*d6 damage, or 1d6 as listed? In CT, missiles did 1d6 times as much damage as lasers. This feels like a transcription error to me.

3) Is the HG laser damage the new official? The gamer in me likes the trade offs in laser choice, but frankly Pulse lasers don't need to be balanced against beam lasers - they cost half as much.

Some thoughts:

#1 makes some sense if #1a is not the case, though I'd be inclined to do something like allowing an exceptional success to pick their hit location or double damage instead. That would allow ships with good sensors, fancy targeting software and highly competent crews to "shoot for the drives only" rather than have them vaporize the target all the time.

Let's say you have a target lock (+2), good gunner (+3), pilot assist (+1), and some targeting software loaded (+1 for argument's sake). At optimum range, you should be able to get an exceptional success half the time.

 

[DFW]

1a) Do you add up all the damage from a single attack, or apply each weapon individually? The rules *do* say to only roll damage after all hits are determined, so it's not as crazy as it sounds, but it would make a triple turret at least as effective than a weapon bay on average, so that doesn't feel right to me. Possibly if each hit's damage were reduced by armor THEN added together for the final tally....

This ONE I can answer from a strictly logical point of view. The ONLY reason you'd put more than one laser in a turret (engineering point of view since a turret can only target one ship at a time) is to focus all of them onto the same point of a target. Therefore, if you hit, you add the damage together from the 2 or 3 lasers.

 

[hdan]

This ONE I can answer from a strictly logical point of view. The ONLY reason you'd put more than one laser in a turret (engineering point of view since a turret can only target one ship at a time) is to focus all of them onto the same point of a target. Therefore, if you hit, you add the damage together from the 2 or 3 lasers.

Right, my thoughts exactly.

My only reservation is that would make a triple particle turret more effective than a particle bay. Which makes me wonder if maybe multiple weapons in the same turret should add a +DM to the damage instead.

CT's HG had a system where you could compute a firepower factor based off of the number of actual weapons in a "battery" (a collection of weapons that had to fire at the same target). That's a Capital Ship concept IMHO, but it still applies on a small scale to turrets. Of course the CT/HG hits system is not compatible with MgT's "roll for damage" system, so the same solution isn't likely to fit very well.

 

[DFW]

Right, my thoughts exactly.

My only reservation is that would make a triple particle turret more effective than a particle bay.

A triple beam does 3d6 A Particle bay does 6D6 + crew hit
(radiation). A Particle Barbette does 4D6 + crew hit. Also, optimum range is long as opposed to a BL. Pulse lasers are better at damage than Beam but don't hit as well.

 

[AndrewW]

My only reservation is that would make a triple particle turret more effective than a particle bay. Which makes me wonder if maybe multiple weapons in the same turret should add a +DM to the damage instead.

Note the High Guard Errata and LBB2: High Guard updated this to only allow one particle beam per turret, though it still requires a triple turret.

 

[BP]

Another way to look at triple turrets for directed energy weapons...

• 6 minute rounds = one 'shot' (or batch) = time on target + recharge time.
  
  Where recharge time is ~ 2x the time on target requirement.

A multi-weapon turret could take advantage of the recharge time to fire separate weapons at different targets...

Besides facilitating multi-target point defense, it facilitates for more dramatic RP.

 

[hdan]

Note the High Guard Errata and LBB2: High Guard updated this to only allow one particle beam per turret, though it still requires a triple turret.

Thanks, I did not know that, and it makes a lot of sense. I don't have MgT:HG yet, so I haven't been keeping up with the errata properly.

 

[Rikki Tikki Traveller]

I think just adding the up doesn't work with MGT. The number of dice rolled PER WEAPON is important in rolling for damage.

a 2d6 weapon will inflict more damage (on average) than 3x1d6 weapons. Remember each weapon has to go through armour, so if a ship as 3 points of armour it will block 50% of the individual laser damage and then you have figure out how much damage the ship actually took from the damage table (1-3 points - three times) vs a 2d6 weapon which will do an average of 4 points on the damage table and could do up to 9 points. That is a lot more damage to the ship.

You can't merge the smaller weapons together to add up damage, the system is non-linear between points of damage from a weapon and actual ship damage on the Damage Table.

 

[DFW]

I think just adding the up doesn't work with MGT. The number of dice rolled PER WEAPON is important in rolling for damage.

I guess that depends on whether you think the 2 or 3 lasers would be targeted at different parts of a ship (bad engineering) or, aimed at the same point (intelligent engineering)...

 

[Bense]

1) Does the Gunnery check's Effect add to the weapon's damage?

It does in my games. The basic armor on ships like the Type S or the Free Trader makes them pretty invulnerable against beam lasers and missiles otherwise. If the effect modifies the damage then you can still have fights between these player-level ships that don't last hours and hours.

1a) Do you add up all the damage from a single attack, or apply each weapon individually? The rules *do* say to only roll damage after all hits are determined, so it's not as crazy as it sounds, but it would make a triple turret at least as effective than a weapon bay on average, so that doesn't feel right to me. Possibly if each hit's damage were reduced by armor THEN added together for the final tally....

I do not add them up. Each weapon is compared to armor independent of the others.
Adding them up would also make sandcasters pretty useless against anyone with a triple turret.

2) Are standard missiles really d6*d6 damage, or 1d6 as listed? In CT, missiles did 1d6 times as much damage as lasers. This feels like a transcription error to me.

I never like single lucky die rolls deciding a battle, so 1d6 does fine with me. Of course, I allow the effect of the missile hit to add to damage as well, so set of good missile rolls might get you 8+ damage.

3) Is the HG laser damage the new official? The gamer in me likes the trade offs in laser choice, but frankly Pulse lasers don't need to be balanced against beam lasers - they cost half as much.

The -2 to hit at all ranges that a Pulse laser suffers from makes a huge difference. Consider that your average gunner is probably only skill 1 or 2, with only very rare individuals at 3 or higher. Fire control programs are expensive and take up a lot of computer capacity, and good pilots and sensor locks only get a +1 each.

 

[DFW]

Adding them up would also make sandcasters pretty useless against anyone with a triple turret.

How so?

 

[captainjack23]

I think just adding the up doesn't work with MGT. The number of dice rolled PER WEAPON is important in rolling for damage.

I guess that depends on whether you think the 2 or 3 lasers would be targeted at different parts of a ship (bad engineering) or, aimed at the same point (intelligent engineering)...

Well, although its semi-moot given the MGT ranges, another issue is this: are you firing one laser at several high probability target solutions (maximizing hit liklihood) or all at the single highest probability solution (maximizing damage).

 

[DFW]

Well, although its semi-moot given the MGT ranges, another issue is this: are you firing one laser at several high probability target solutions (maximizing hit liklihood) or all at the single highest probability solution (maximizing damage).

Given the the to hit roll is the same for a single or triple B-laser, it would be the latter.

 

[captainjack23]

Well, although its semi-moot given the MGT ranges, another issue is this: are you firing one laser at several high probability target solutions (maximizing hit liklihood) or all at the single highest probability solution (maximizing damage).

Given the the to hit roll is the same for a single or triple B-laser, it would be the latter.

....right. Its getting to the point where I can't distinguish rules from various editions.

That said, I do recall tha a previous incarnation gave a + to hit for each extra laser -I think it was +1/+3-but only one roll for damage. If I felt like houseruling, and I usually do, I think I'd allow the gunner to choose one roll to hit with combined damage, or one roll to hit for single weapon damage, but with the increased to hit. Maybe also allow multiple targets to be engaged at diminishing to hit......sure gives turrets a bit more flexibility.

I'd want to jigger the yield (liklihood of hit x expected damage) for the choices a bit to make sure it didn't produce a broken result, but that aint gonna happen right now.

 

[DFW]

....right. Its getting to the point where I can't distinguish rules from various editions.

Tell me about it >30 years playing with 1/2 dozen different versions...

I too remember something along those lines. Can't remember which version though.

 

[locarno24]

1) Does the Gunnery check's Effect add to the weapon's damage?

In theory, no. In practice, a lot of people either say yes, or else say that if you get an effect above a certain value you do a single hit regardless of the target's armour.

1a) Do you add up all the damage from a single attack, or apply each weapon individually? The rules *do* say to only roll damage after all hits are determined, so it's not as crazy as it sounds, but it would make a triple turret at least as effective than a weapon bay on average, so that doesn't feel right to me. Possibly if each hit's damage were reduced by armor THEN added together for the final tally....

The whole point of big guns is to increase their ability to punch through sand clouds/screens/armour. Smaller weapons are more cost-effective for damage against unarmoured targets (or else targets which have taken several external hits to the armour). The downside is that they each have to subtract the armour seperately. Otherwise, as noted, a triple laser turret does the same damage as a turret mount particle beam for less than half the cost. So yes, figure out the damage from all hits, subtracting armour from each hit, then total up the damage from that ship's fire and convert that into single and double hits to be rolled on the target ship.

2) Are standard missiles really d6*d6 damage, or 1d6 as listed? In CT, missiles did 1d6 times as much damage as lasers. This feels like a transcription error to me.

Yes. Missiles are the lowest tech and one of the cheapest weapons going. If you really want them to hit harder, put a Very High Yield nuclear warhead on the end (since they're so low-tech, you can always take lots of High Guard TL upgrades). With a minimum of 6 damage and an average of 8, plus radiation, they're a lot scarier.

3) Is the HG laser damage the new official? The gamer in me likes the trade offs in laser choice, but frankly Pulse lasers don't need to be balanced against beam lasers - they cost half as much.

As per High Guard:
1) Lasers are now swapped in function. The pulse laser is pretty naff because it's so ludicrously innacurate, but at least there is now a weapon available at TL7 which can hurt an armoured ship.
2) Turret Particle beams can only be taken as a single mount in a triple turret.
3) Bay weapons are limited by your power plant rating
4) Higher TL versions of weapons can be reduced in tonnage, or improved.

#1 makes some sense if #1a is not the case, though I'd be inclined to do something like allowing an exceptional success to pick their hit location or double damage instead. That would allow ships with good sensors, fancy targeting software and highly competent crews to "shoot for the drives only" rather than have them vaporize the target all the time.

Depends on the situation. At adjacent, maybe close range, fine, possibly short if you're really good. Beyond that, no matter how good you are, what you're doing is firing a six-minute long barrage of shots into a volume that the computer says should contain the target ship at the point the laser fire passes through it. Hitting an evading target that's a few tens of metres across at 25,000 km is an exceptional success, equivalent to hitting a running, man-sized target in central Germany from London. Asking the gunner to pick out a specific point on the target is a bit over-optimistic.

 

[Rikki Tikki Traveller]

Regarding 'aiming' for a part of the ship. In the Capital Ship combat rules, you can aim at a particular Section.

I don't allow "aimed" shots in space combat (no matter what Star Trek might do). The distances are too great and the ships are just too small to have that kind of accuracy.

YMMV

 

[BP]

If one were using the Mark I eyeball or accelerations were faster... sure, for certain weapons.

I prefer roleplayed battles to set-piece. Most game mechanics are setup for non-roleplayed combat, and so, justifying game mechanics that neglects roleplay is common.

For directed energy weapons, given the normal max thrust in traveller, aiming is generally trivial within the distances used. Required time on target is what could be considered that makes hitting (for effect) a challenge.

The rationales of distance and accuracy also go completely out the window when one considers smart missiles - especially when the thrust ratio between target and missile is great.

'Aiming' allows for more strategic combat and more interesting roleplay (ex: 'Let's stop those Vargr droppings from getting away - Weps! Target their jump drive!').

 

[rinku]

1) Does the Gunnery check's Effect add to the weapon's damage?

No, but it's a common house rule.

1a) Do you add up all the damage from a single attack, or apply each weapon individually? The rules *do* say to only roll damage after all hits are determined, so it's not as crazy as it sounds, but it would make a triple turret at least as effective than a weapon bay on average, so that doesn't feel right to me. Possibly if each hit's damage were reduced by armor THEN added together for the final tally....

The rule (p.147) is to roll damage after all attacks in the round have been made. That's not just all attacks from a particular turret or a particular ship. The rules have nothing to say regarding rolling a turret's beam weapons as one damage roll, but it has a certain logic. However, it would only make sense to me if one attack roll was used for all lasers as well. In a standard 3 lasers = 3 attack rolls you increase your average chance of at least one hit at the expense of spreading fire, which I assume to be standard practice.

In regards to triple beam lasers vs particle beams... the beam still does a radiation hit and is immune to sand, plus has longer range. It may not be quite as cost effective, but it does outperform the cheaper alternative - and the price difference for the two assemblies (including turret) is MCr4 vs MCr5, so the pricing looks okay to me. Note that the sand rule specifically says that it reduces each beam separately.

2) Are standard missiles really d6*d6 damage, or 1d6 as listed? In CT, missiles did 1d6 times as much damage as lasers. This feels like a transcription error to me.

Correct, but note that High Guard sort of fixes things by adding the multiwarhead missile which does do D6xD6 hits but has a reduced endurance. Also, note that nukes are normally only illegal to use close to planets and other inhabited places (though your campaign may vary this). Out in space they're just another radiation hazard, really.

3) Is the HG laser damage the new official? The gamer in me likes the trade offs in laser choice, but frankly Pulse lasers don't need to be balanced against beam lasers - they cost half as much.

It's official, but if you don't like it, use the old rules. The MG High Guard rules reflect for almost the first time ever how the two kinds of lasers were described originally (i.e. pulse lasers do more damage when they hit, but are less accurate).

There's nothing preventing any Referee introducing a range of lasers, anyway. Who says they all have to be the same energy output? Laser bays were never introduced (though the way TNE operated would have allowed this), but there's no technical reason why not. One big laser with a big diameter focussing array is an excellent design concept.

Actually... thinking about it, one way of assessing the single, double, triple laser issue is to rule that each extra laser isn't a separate weapon, but an upgrade of the existing one. So a triple beam laser turret is simply a 3D6 beam laser (one attack roll).