[[[Playtest Focus]]] New Missile Rules

Here's my stab at the rules. The italisized text is to be removed and replaced by the bolded text. Sorry for the confusion by the software is rather limiting.

Missile Combat
Unlike most weapons which travel at or close to the speed of light and so hit strike enemy ships almost instantly, missiles require time to reach their target. take time to cross the gulf of space. However, despite this drawback limitation, missiles are capable of doing a great deal of damage when they hit an enemy ship can inflict tremendous damage if they are able to hit the enemy.

Launching Missiles
Missiles cannot be used against targets within Adjacent or Close ranges, as there is not enough time for them to obtain a solid lock and safety protocols are engaged to stop the, turning back and hitting their own launch vessel. Missiles cannot target an enemy that is Adjacent or at Close range since due to safety protocols related to gaining a good target lock. (NOTE: These aren’t torpedoes in the water, and really this should not be explained as a technological issue, as it’s something that could be easily overcome or over-ridden). It might be a good place to put in here that missiles launched at Adjacent or Close range gain no modifiers, positive or negative, due to their very short flight time. Maybe they hit on a 10+, and can't be engaged by point defense? In the Starfire universe this would be launching missile in sprint mode, very deadly if you could survive long enough to close the range. Just a thought, or maybe an addition to the alternate rules section?

Missiles launches are tracked and treated as are launched in salvos. A salvo is all the missiles launched by a ship against a single target in the same combat round. This could be a single missile from one turret or dozens from multiple turrets or bays (see High Guard for more information on weapon bays).

Missile salvos effectively have a Thrust of 10 and will reach their target a number of combat rounds after they have been fired, as shown on the Missile Flight table. If a missile has not reached its target within 5 rounds, it will run out of fuel and become inert.

Missile Flight
Range Rounds to Impact
Close and Short Immediate
Medium 1
Long 2
Very Long 3
Distant 5

Note that while missile salvos can be fired at Distant ranges, the attacking ship must have detected its target before they can be launched. Given the limited information that can be gained from sensors at this range, friendly fire incidents may be common among Travellers who are too trigger happy with their missiles.

If a missile has not reached its target within 5 rounds, it will run out of fuel and become inert.

Missiles and Targets
When a missile salvo reaches its target, the missile makes an attack roll as normal. However, the Gunner skill of the Traveller(s) that fired the salvo is not used as a DM.

Instead, the number of missiles in the salvo greatly affects their chances of making a successful attack. Apply DM+1 to the attack roll for every full 5 missiles in the salvo. (NOTE- This is true, but clunky. You could get ridiculously high DM’s. A hundred missile salvo gives you a +20 DM. Unless we can scale up the defensive DM’s just as high, which in theory you should be able to do, this gives too much of an advantage to an attacker).

Note that missiles almost always have the Smart trait (see page 75). For missiles, use the TL of the missile itself or that of the attacking ship, whichever is greater.

Finally, missiles launched at Distant range expend most of their fuel just reaching their target, leaving little to counter the target’s manoeuvres. Missile salvos launched at Distant range suffer DM-6 to their attack rolls. (NOTE – Why the negative DM? By the ways the rules are constructed there should be no negative aspect to entering any range band. We already don’t give bonus G speed to launched missiles, so why do we give bonus to targets because the missile is ending it’s flight phase at long range? It should be 100% efficient till the END of turn 5, when it no longer has the capability of maneuvering)

Impact
If an attack roll for a missile salvo is successful, the target will sustain damage. If the salvo consists of just a single missile, this is performed as normal.

However, if a salvo consists of more than one missile, do not add the Effect to the damage caused. Instead, add 1D of damage for every point of Effect. This represents the increased damage of multiple missiles striking their target.(NOTE – This explanation, taken on it’s own doesn’t make much sense. If you are going to be referring to an Effect, you should define it here. Otherwise a player may ask, are we talking radiation, regular damage, etc?).

Variant Missiles
High Guard introduces different types if of missiles that have increased accuracy, increased range or higher thrust ratings are more accurate, carry more fuel or are faster, but these These rules suit apply to all missiles included in this Core Rulebook. If a ship launches different types of missile at the same target in the same round, then all the missiles of each type are counted as a different considered individual separate salvoes.

Electronic Warfare
A Traveller performing sensor operator duties on a spacecraft can use the Electronic Warfare action to destroy jam or misdirect incoming missiles before they impact his vessel or another ship within Close range.Missiles that are successfully jammed or misdirected automatically self-destruct and are immediately removed from the salvo.

The sensor operator must succeed at a Difficult (10+) Electronics (sensors) check (1 round, INT) in order to destroy jam or render inert incoming missiles within a single salvo. The Effect of this check is applied as a negative DM to the salvo’s attack roll when it reaches the target. A sensor operator may only attempt to jam a salvo once per round.

Note that a negative Effect on the Electronics (sensors) check will give the salvo a bonus to hit – the sensor operator has made a critical mistake and effectively broadcast the position of his ship, giving the missiles a better electronic profile to attack!(NOTE – This shouldn’t occur. If the effort fails, it fails and the missiles are no more effective than they would have been to start.)

Electronic warfare may be performed upon a salvo multiple times over several rounds, with the effects being cumulative. However, an individual salvo may only be subjected to a single electronic warfare once per round, no matter how many sensor operators are available.

Long Range Launches
At extreme ranges, combat involving missiles creates a very different atmosphere. The target spacecraft will likely have detected the launches and its crew will have several tense minutes to watch the blips on their sensor screens gradually get closer and closer.

Fortunately, the crew need not be idle as they await their destruction as there are several countermeasures that can be taken against incoming missiles.

Electronic Warfare: A sensor operator may engage in electronic warfare once every round, following the rules above.

Flee: A spacecraft under missile attack may simply turn around and engage its manoeuvre drive, thrusting away from the missiles. Missiles are extremely long-ranged weapons and so it is not normally possible to outrange a missile in this way, but it can perhaps buy enough time to prolong electronic warfare or make a jump.

Point Defence: Finally, just as a salvo is about to strike, gunners may engage in point defence, as detailed on page 160.

[[[ Replace text on page 160 ]]]

Point Defence (Gunner)
Using a turret-mounted laser (beam or pulse), a gunner can destroy incoming missiles. Note that a weapon used for point defence cannot be used to also make an attacks in the same combat round, and vice versa. Weapons may only be used once a single instance per round in either the offensive or defensive role. (NOTE – Put in the rule here on how mixed-weapons turrets can function in the point defense role) Point defence may only be performed against missile salvos (see page 161) as they are about to make their attack roll against a target – missiles are too small and too fast to be targeted at greater ranges.

The gunner must succeed at a Gunner (turret) check against any missile salvo that is about to make its attack roll against his their spacecraft. If the salvo consists of a single missile, a successful check will automatically destroy it. Otherwise, the Effect of the check is used as a negative DM applied to the missile salvo’s attack roll. Note that, unlike electronic warfare (see page 162) a failed Gunner (turret) check will not provide the missile salvo with a bonus to its attack roll. A successful check will reduce the number of missiles in a salvo by the number of lasers controlled by the gunner in a turret.
 
AnotherDilbert said:
Nerhesi said:
So PD is no skill, just remove 1 missile per PD.
No, not really.

Example:
I fire 10 missiles.
...
I achieve an attack roll of 9, so 90% hit = 9 missiles.
the enemy has a laser turret with a skilled gunner, shooing down 5 missiles
so 4 missiles do damage

So thats 2 rolls then? Ho do you determine how many missiles are shot down with that 1 skilled gunner? Or is it just you shoot down your [Skill Level x # of turrets on PD]? So skill level 4 crew, 2 turrets on PD = 8 missiles?
 
I did not intend any difference from your PD suggestion, so I took the number from your example.

Nerhesi said:
I've done the opposite. Because a skilled PD-Operator can take out 5 missiles. So launching all missiles ontarget is "no skill", but the roll determines how effective the PD is.

Two rolls, yes. Attack roll, automatic PD, Damage roll.
It will be difficult to get around damage per missile and armour with only one roll, I think.
 
AnotherDilbert said:
I did not intend any difference from your PD suggestion, so I took the number from your example.

Nerhesi said:
I've done the opposite. Because a skilled PD-Operator can take out 5 missiles. So launching all missiles ontarget is "no skill", but the roll determines how effective the PD is.

Two rolls, yes. Attack roll, automatic PD, Damage roll.
It will be difficult to get around damage per missile and armour with only one roll, I think.

One-roll! :)

Actually very easy - why are you rolling to hit with missiles? They're course correcting, self guided missiles, in the year 5000 AD! If you wait then they hit you. Simply remove your first roll. If the enemy has no point defense, then all missiles will hit - just as Matt had originally indicated in this post (granted, you would roll - but without any PD or EW, you're getting hit by everything pretty much).

So basically, we have a "defense table". You roll on it, with modifiers for EW, PD gunnery skill, range, etc.. whatever we want. The result is how many missiles don't make it.
Then simply roll for each missile damage as per any attack striking armour :)

For mass-combat/capital scale/whatnot.. I dont think we'll be rolling for damage per weapon. It would either be a base value or you would roll per Salvo/barrage. The same would apply here :)
 
Okey-dokey....

Let's take this a step at a time.

Percentages are not going to work as a blanket rule for all sorts of reasons (1,000 missiles are going to be harder to jam or shoot down 10% of than 10 missiles). For fleet/capital combat this may be the solution, but let's ;eave that aside for now.

With the proposed rules, there is (and I was expecting this :)) a potential issue with massive DMs coming from hordes of missiles.

The first question is: Is this a problem? If a 1,000 missiles (hell, a hundred) come towards a scout, he is going to be toast no matter what. Against (much) bigger ships, more defensive actions are possible and the difference between a missile and a beam is that you have time to do multiple things against them, reducing their effect. However, if a 1,000 missiles are launched, that is going to be an issue for anyone - and it should be.

So, we need to wind things back a bit.

The first thing we need to look at are the ships in the Core Rulebook and how missiles affect them. The big daddy here is the Merc Cruiser who could, potentially, have 24 missile racks.

That is giving just DM+4. Doesn't seem amazingly game breaking, and while this gives an interesting 'first strike' capability, who is going to go around with nothing but missile racks? You have nothing for defensive work, nothing to target enemies who get close to you and, at some point, you are going to run out of ammo. And we have not touched on just how expensive this will be (I did figure that these salvo rules might require missiles to become a tad cheaper - may be wrong there).

So, first step...

1. Are these rules an issue with Core Rulebook ships, and Core Rulebook ships alone? Do they, in fact, need a bit of a boost (I have a feeling skill needs to be a thing for the attacker with missiles, though not necessarily Gunner - or perhaps his sensors should be a factor...)?

2. Are missiles going to be too expensive when used as salvos?

3. How do these rules hold up as we go up to circa 2,000 ton ships? Are ships going to completely obliterate similar vessels or, alternatively, are they going to just bounce off one another's defences?

Let's figure these out, and then we'll worry about ships with five and six figure tonnages who unleash an ungodly amount of firepower...
 
msprange said:
Okey-dokey....

Let's take this a step at a time.

Percentages are not going to work as a blanket rule for all sorts of reasons (1,000 missiles are going to be harder to jam or shoot down 10% of than 10 missiles). For fleet/capital combat this may be the solution, but let's ;eave that aside for now.

With the proposed rules, there is (and I was expecting this :)) a potential issue with massive DMs coming from hordes of missiles.

The first question is: Is this a problem? If a 1,000 missiles (hell, a hundred) come towards a scout, he is going to be toast no matter what. Against (much) bigger ships, more defensive actions are possible and the difference between a missile and a beam is that you have time to do multiple things against them, reducing their effect. However, if a 1,000 missiles are launched, that is going to be an issue for anyone - and it should be.

The issue here is that capital ship combat and adventure-class ship combat are wholly different. You really need to split the rules up so that scale can be properly applied. A 1,000 missile salvo at a Type-S is ludicrous. You should just say their dead and call it a day.


msprange said:
So, we need to wind things back a bit.

The first thing we need to look at are the ships in the Core Rulebook and how missiles affect them. The big daddy here is the Merc Cruiser who could, potentially, have 24 missile racks.

This isn't sound logic. Players aren't going to be limited to the stock starships, and making rules that make sense for the stock starships in the Core Rulebook but break elsewhere is just a big problem waiting to blow up in players and referee's faces. Whatever rule system is established needs to make sense for the classic starships as well as the variants that players WILL build (or WILL encounter in space somewhere).

msprange said:
That is giving just DM+4. Doesn't seem amazingly game breaking, and while this gives an interesting 'first strike' capability, who is going to go around with nothing but missile racks? You have nothing for defensive work, nothing to target enemies who get close to you and, at some point, you are going to run out of ammo. And we have not touched on just how expensive this will be (I did figure that these salvo rules might require missiles to become a tad cheaper - may be wrong there).

So, first step...

1. Are these rules an issue with Core Rulebook ships, and Core Rulebook ships alone? Do they, in fact, need a bit of a boost (I have a feeling skill needs to be a thing for the attacker with missiles, though not necessarily Gunner - or perhaps his sensors should be a factor...)?

See my comment above. I HIGHLY suggest you don't go down this path. The old rulebooks allowed for "smaller" starships of 2,000 tons. Either split the combat systems up where "capital" ship combat takes the player out of the mix and uses only high-level concepts, or make a system that fairly scales UP and/or DOWN logically and easily usable.

msprange said:
2. Are missiles going to be too expensive when used as salvos?

No. Their cost should be reasonable. Anyone who wants to use them is going to foot a high bill, but they are also going to be able to engage the enemy from a distance. An equitable trade-off. They shouldn't be so cheap that there is no thought or consequence towards using them.

msprange said:
3. How do these rules hold up as we go up to circa 2,000 ton ships? Are ships going to completely obliterate similar vessels or, alternatively, are they going to just bounce off one another's defences?

Assuming someone invests heavily in missiles, they will probably have a distinct advantage in throw-weight. But they will pay for it in reduced defenses. Missiles (and torps) are going to be weapons that you cannot ignore because of their damage capabilities, but also concentrating on just offensive firepower means you have other limitations built into your ship. Which means it would require other ships to escort it for protection. All of that is reasonable from a war fighting position. But the existing salvo rules will make heavy missile-armed ships quite formidable if they get a hit.[/quote]

msprange said:
Let's figure these out, and then we'll worry about ships with five and six figure tonnages who unleash an ungodly amount of firepower...

Where do you draw the line at the standard-sized Traveller starship? Should we only consider CRB-class starships for this discussion?
 
msprange said:
1. Are these rules an issue with Core Rulebook ships, and Core Rulebook ships alone? Do they, in fact, need a bit of a boost (I have a feeling skill needs to be a thing for the attacker with missiles, though not necessarily Gunner - or perhaps his sensors should be a factor...)?

As it stands for the Core-rulebook Matt. You still dont want binary you either hit with 10 missiles or miss with 10 missiles. Thats going to create a lot of "wtf" moments and how it seems to be a step back from MGT1.

Personally - I think as a missile is self correcting and self guided, gunner skill is bupkiss. However, if you want to make it count, then there is a simple manner that matches your current system:

1) Launch Missiles (no initial roll)
2) Determine point defense (roll as per current core rules - gunnery checks, successively harder with -1s)
2b) Determine if missile hits with negative penalty for TL difference, EW, wahtever want (could be as simple as roll 8+, adding gunner skill, subtracting defender sensor ops skill).

Voila - 2 rolls instead of the current 3. EW is taken into account seamlessly. And you have the gunner-skill being a key modifier. Keep in mind you can implement steps 2 and 2b in whatever order you wish. (Do you jam missiles and check to see if they'll hit, then do PD? or vice versa?)

This will work for Core-rulebook ships without issue. It's not that much more intensive than 10x triple turrets.

My personal opinion is do away with roll 2b completely - but you know this already :)

2. Are missiles going to be too expensive when used as salvos?
Nope :) Especially when one salvo can potentially annihilate something several times your own size.

3. How do these rules hold up as we go up to circa 2,000 ton ships? Are ships going to completely obliterate similar vessels or, alternatively, are they going to just bounce off one another's defences?

The above rules that you originally put in this post could either easily obliterate vehicles 4x their size, or could completely bounce off - all depends on what the vehicle is armed with. Both of which are undesirable and unrealistic in my honest opinion. A 2000-ton ship could potentially be launching 100s of missiles... and a 2000-ton ship can potentially be giving a good -200 DM or so if it's armed with many triple beam lasers...
 
msprange said:
Percentages are not going to work as a blanket rule for all sorts of reasons (1,000 missiles are going to be harder to jam or shoot down 10% of than 10 missiles). For fleet/capital combat this may be the solution, but let's ;eave that aside for now.

Matt - its not a blanket percentage - it is percentage multiplied by the number of Point Defence weapons. So whether you end up with 10% or 500%, you multiply that.

1 PD turret? 0 to 5 missiles down.
200 PD turrets? 20 to 1000 missiles down.

I wouldn't propose something that wouldn't be so logically frail as to allow 1 turret on PD to take out 1000 missiles! :)
 
Nerhesi said:
So basically, we have a "defense table". You roll on it, with modifiers for EW, PD gunnery skill, range, etc.. whatever we want. The result is how many missiles don't make it. Then simply roll for each missile damage as per any attack striking armour :)

For mass-combat/capital scale/whatnot.. I dont think we'll be rolling for damage per weapon. It would either be a base value or you would roll per Salvo/barrage. The same would apply here :)

For Traveller-operated ships, I'm ok with separating out certain things. But I'm a fan of the idea that all offensive and defensive systems have an ATT or DEF value, and you put that all together to get your OFF/DEF attack values at each range band. Makes fighting with multiple ships pretty easy to handle. And at that scale you aren't going to be engaging 2-4 targets at a time, you are going to concentrate your fire as much as possible to take it out.
 
Nerhesi said:
As it stands for the Core-rulebook Matt. You still dont want binary you either hit with 10 missiles or miss with 10 missiles.

Oop, back up - that is not what is happening...

We are no longer tracking specific missiles with these rules, but the overall effect of the salvo. That translates into how many dice you roll for damage, which now rests on the base damage for a missile, with extra dice representing additional missiles piling in/getting through the defences.

It is not binary - I am now worried that you think it is...
 
phavoc said:
Players aren't going to be limited to the stock starships, and making rules that make sense for the stock starships in the Core Rulebook but break elsewhere is just a big problem waiting to blow up in players and referee's faces. Whatever rule system is established needs to make sense for the classic starships as well as the variants that players WILL build (or WILL encounter in space somewhere).?

You are not wrong - but the process is approaching problems one step at a time. The first thing we need to look at is a small self-contained group, which we have in the Core Rulebook. Once things are working there, we can expand outwards.
 
msprange said:
So, first step...

1. Are these rules an issue with Core Rulebook ships, and Core Rulebook ships alone? Do they, in fact, need a bit of a boost (I have a feeling skill needs to be a thing for the attacker with missiles, though not necessarily Gunner - or perhaps his sensors should be a factor...)?

2. Are missiles going to be too expensive when used as salvos?

3. How do these rules hold up as we go up to circa 2,000 ton ships? Are ships going to completely obliterate similar vessels or, alternatively, are they going to just bounce off one another's defences?

1) All Core book ships have small computers, weak sensors, and basically no armour. They are civilian designs.

Free Trader:
Two Free Traders with two turrets with 2 missile racks and a laser each.
Civilians so less skilled gunners and less software.
Fire 4 missiles, EW, EW, EW, PD, PD, Attack, Damage
Launch is 2D +1(skill) +1(DEX) +1(FireControl) -8(Average) ≈ 2 Effect
EW is 2D +1(skill) +1(INT) -2(Sensor) -10(Difficult) ≈ -3 Effect, so don't...
PD is 2D +1(skill) +1(DEX) -8(Average) ≈ 1 Effect
Attack is 2D +2(Launch effect) -1(PD) -1(PD) -2(EvasiveAction) ≈ 7 +2 -4 ≈ Effect 5, almost crit
Damage is 4D +3D +5(Effect) -3(Armour) ≈ 26 around 33% of structure, so a few more crits. Deadly.

Patrol Corvette:
Better skill:
Fire 6 missiles, EW, EW, EW, PD, PD, Attack, Damage
Launch is 2D +2(skill) +1(DEX) +3(FireControl) -8(Average) ≈ 5 Effect
EW is 2D +2 (skill) +1(INT) +0(Sensor) -10(Difficult) ≈ 0 Effect
PD is 2D +2(skill) +1(DEX) +2(triple) -8(Average) ≈ 4 Effect
Attack is 2D +1(many missiles) +5(Launch effect) -0(EW) -0(EW) -0(EW) -4(PD) -4(PD) -2(EvasiveAction) ≈ 7 +6 - 10 ≈ Effect 3
Damage is 4D +5D +3(Effect) -4(Armour) ≈ 30, almost 20% of structure so 1-2 crit

Damage will not go out of control since you only add 1D per missile. We see no effect of EW.


2) Economy:
A full salvo of standard missiles would cost MCr 0.75 per turret.
A full load of missiles would MCr 9 per turret
A full load for a large bay would cost MCr 360 (MCr 648 for nukes)

Traders will not like this cost and they will not fill up their turrets, but a few missiles are cheaper than getting killed.
Militaries will take the cost, but look for alternatives.

3) 2000t semi-military ship

2000t = 800 struct. 1 Large Missile bay + 19 Laser turrets. Good sensors. Better computer. Heavy Armour. MCr ~1000.
Fire 120 missiles, EW, EW, EW, 19 * PD, Attack, Damage
Launch is 2D +2(skill) +1(DEX) +5(FireControl) -8(Average) ≈ 7 Effect
EW is 2D +2 (skill) +1(INT) +6(Sensor) -10(Difficult) ≈ 6 Effect
PD is 2D +2(skill) +1(DEX) +2(triple) -8(Average) ≈ 4 Effect
Attack is 2D +24(many missiles) +7(Launch effect) -6(EW) -6(EW) -6(EW) -19*4(PD) -2(EvasiveAction) -2(Evasion software) ≈ 7 +31 - 98 ≈ Effect -60, no hope of hitting... Problem!
Damage is 4D +119D +0(Effect) -15(Armour) ≈ 430, around 50% of structure so ~5 crits. Here even heavy armour is irrelevant. Problem!

Each 2 turrets of missiles (6 missiles) gives Attack +1
Each 1 turret of PD Laser gives Attack -4
Hence to hit chance will go down for larger ships.
 
Yeah the biggest issue with this topics proposal solution matt, is the lack of armour being applicable to each missile.

Just as large Matt, is the concept of adding up many DMs from PD and EW rolls (multiple EW rolls over several rounds too), subtracting it from a large effect (# of missiles in salvo) and then making another roll . Resulting in some big crit high damage blah.

I see what you're trying to do bossman, and I'm thinking on a less problematic implementation. Will post a couple of options when I'm at my laptop.
 
Mercenary Cruiser with 8 triple missile turrets shooting at
Patrol Corvette with 2 triple laser turrets and upgraded sensors

Fire 24 missiles, EW, EW, EW, PD, PD, Attack, Damage
Launch is 2D +2(skill) +1(DEX) +3(FireControl) -8(Average) ≈ 5 Effect
EW is 2D +2 (skill) +1(INT) +4(Sensor) -10(Difficult) ≈ 4 Effect
PD is 2D +2(skill) +1(DEX) +2(triple) -8(Average) ≈ 4 Effect
Attack is 2D +4(many missiles) +5(Launch effect) -4(EW) -4(EW) -4(EW) -4(PD) -4(PD) -2(EvasiveAction) ≈ 7 +9 - 22 ≈ Effect -6, highly unlikely to hit.
Damage is 4D +23D +0(Effect) -4(Armour) ≈ 90, around 55% of structure so 5 crit

Basically you can always get good enough missile defenses to overpower any reasonable missile attack.
 
AnotherDilbert said:
Basically you can always get good enough missile defenses to overpower any reasonable missile attack.

This - plus it may flip totally around when you get into small/medium bays launching 12/24 missile per.

I think it's basically because on average, each PD is pretty much between 2 and 4 missiles gone. Add to that EW and so on... each missile only adds +1 to effect, while defences are subtracting a lot more.
 
So Matt, your proposal in this original post aimed at the following:

1) Launch missile salvo - no roll
2&3) make rolls for PD and EW, determine modifiers based on effect
4) Make gunnery for missile salvo with modifiers from (b) and # of missiles from (a). Determine damage dice at 4D+1D per effect being damaged etc etc
5) Roll damage dice and subtract armour once.
Issues:
Many rolls for (b).
Armour not playing out like how it should (per missile).
Roll with lots of bonuses and penalties at the end (not so bad on it's own).

Alternate option #1:

1) Launch missile salvo. Note if you had lock-on at the time of launch or not. (no change - no roll)
2) EW jamming effect (mandatory) = Skill Ranks of Sensors Operator + DM bonus of electronics package. Remove that many missiles.
Example: Sensors 2 and Very Advanced Electronics (+2). 4 Missiles removed.
3) PD = Multiply gunnery (turret) skill rank average, by # of hardpoints (or firmpoints/3) on PD duty. Remove that many missiles.
Example: 3 x triple beam turrets, being used by average gunners (2 skill ranks). 6 Missiles removed.
4) Roll to hit for the remaining missiles - each missile. Modified by fire control, lockon-on boon bonus, gunner skill, evasion software, dodge thrust, and the TL differences as per smart rules .
5)Damage as per normal, subtracting armour from each connecting missile.

Benefits:
Rather than having rolls for each point defense weapon, AND each EW attempt, AND then one to determine the total numbers of missiles to hit. You just forgo the defensive rolls (as you indicated would be your preference), for flat reductions. You now just have one-roll per missile. This is perfectly fine for Corebook scale fights.

A merc cruiser with 8x triple missile turrets = 24 missiles.
A target with 8 turrets with (skill 3) gunners on PD, no sensor ops (N/A - effective skill 0), using standard electronics (+0), successfully intercepts all missiles.
A target with 6 turrets with (skill 3) gunners on PD, and a sensors ops (skill 2) using standard electronics (+0) intercepts 20 / 24 missiles. 4 missiles roll to hit and damage.
A target with 6 turrets with (skill 2) gunners on PD, and a sensors ops (skill 2) using advanced/military electronics (+1) intercepts 15 / 24 missiles. 9 missiles roll to hit and damage.
A target with 4 turrets with (skill 3) gunners on PD, and sensor ops (skill 3) using basic electronics (-4), intercepts 11 / 24 missiles. 13 missile roll to hit and damage.

This is pretty balanced now (requiring 8 gunners with 3 skill to successfully counter 24 missiles all on their own).
This is also a LOT quicker now. The more effective your PD and EW, the less rolls you need to do. It is the opposite of the initial post here matt - which required more rolls for the more PD and EW you had :)
It is slower for 1 turn, for targets being overwhelmed by missiles - but faster overall, as those targets are dead anyways! :) :D :lol:

I will post option 2 soon. Just rather drained at the moment :)
 
Chas said:
Is the lock on boon still applicable? Or not?

Thats what I was thinking about that I'd forgotten half way through, and when I was wracking my brain at the end.

Yes absolutely - lock-on boon bonus can be determined either at launch time or at time of impact, - whatever Matt prefers. The actually mechanical affect only changes the last roll from 2D to 3D drop lowest. This should apply to entire salvo though.. so either you had a lock-on when you launched, or you didn't :) (as an example of lock-on bonus on launch)

I've updated the post above.
 
Alternate option #2:

1) Launch missile salvo. Note if you had lock-on at the time of launch or not.
2) EW jamming effect = Skill Ranks of Sensors Operator + DM bonus of electronics package. Remove that many missiles.
Example: Sensors 2 and Very Advanced Electronics (+2). 4 Missiles removed.
3) PD = Roll 2D and consult table below:

33xfoyd.jpg


4) Multiply result by the # of turrets on PD duty. Subtract this value (rounded down) from the # of incoming missiles.
5) Any thrust that was kept back can be used to dodge. Simply remove 1 missile for each thrust used to dodge (very inefficient, but it would be remiss if we just removed someone's ability to dodge missiles)
6) Remaining missiles hit automatically. Damage as per normal, subtracting armour from each connecting missile.

Benefits:
You make 1 roll, to determine the amount of missiles that will hit you this turn. 1 roll no matter how many missiles, PD, or flying bunnies there are. 1 roll that scales with everything and takes it all into account.
Once again - one roll solves the entire scenario whether it is 3 missiles and 1 PD turret, or 40 missiles and 20 PD turrets :)

I know some of you may be thinking, but wait there is 1 more step, that dodge step. That is a half-second step that still gets nowhere near the rolling to hit per missile or per Point defense.

Using the examples from before Matt:

A merc cruiser with 8x triple missile turrets = 24 missiles.
A target with 8 turrets with (skill 3) gunners on PD using triple beam laser turrets, no sensor ops (N/A - effective skill 0), using standard electronics (+0), would destroy between 14 and 36 missiles.
A target with 6 turrets with (skill 3) gunners on PD using double pulse laser turrets, and a sensors ops (skill 2) using standard electronics (+0) jams 2 missiles. Then PD would destroy between 7 and 19 missiles.
A target with 6 turrets with (skill 2) gunners on PD using single pulse laser turrets, and a sensors ops (skill 2) using advanced/military electronics (+1) jams 3 missiles. Then PD would destroy between 4 and 16 missiles.

This is the quickest of the options, and as you can see I took the liberty to include modifiers in the table above that give good reason to warships and smallships alike to carry beam lasers and so on. We can ofcourse simplify by removing those options from the table and just flatten it out more so the only modifier is crew-skill, but I think they're meaningful.
 
Greatest Common Factor

Matt, it would seem we could have a great benefit from just pulling out the EW step completely and have it as part of the Action Phase, a sensor-ops action that is simply:

"Each Turn, the Sensor Ops crew member can make a Difficult (10+ roll). The effect renders inert that many missiles (or half as many torpedos)"

Quick way to make missile combat and PD take even less steps. Divorce it completely from the Point-defense/missile impact step. Ok - definitely time to crash :)
 
Back
Top