Possible OPTIONAL one-dimensional vector movement

[AnotherDilbert]

Possible OPTIONAL one-dimensional vector movement.

Allow a vector based movement system where you can only accelerate directly towards or directly away from the enemy. You would only need to keep track of each ship/squadron speed and the distance between them (or distance from chosen reference point). Leave missiles out of this...

This would allow you to get some feel of vector movement, but without the mapping/bookkeeping nightmare.

Implication: It will be difficult to match vectors for boarding and dogfighting. It will be very easy to overshoot an enemy and just whip past him at high speed.


I realize that this is probably unworkable and will not be offended if you laugh at me or ignore this...

 

[wbnc]

I have always found the lack of a maneuver system in the game, with facing, relative velocity etc something I would love to change. But there are some serious hurdles to clear with that system.

For one there is no maximum velocity, or accurate way to determine initial velocity for various ships, if two ships were at greatly different velocities somme serious math would be involved to figure out if Ship A, could catch Ship B...and how long it would take.

 

[Infojunky]

Possible OPTIONAL one-dimensional vector movement.

Allow a vector based movement system where you can only accelerate directly towards or directly away from the enemy. You would only need to keep track of each ship/squadron speed and the distance between them (or distance from chosen reference point). Leave missiles out of this...

Hint, you have just reinvented the range band system from Starter Traveller.... It works....

 

[Infojunky]

I have always found the lack of a maneuver system in the game, with facing, relative velocity etc something I would love to change. But there are some serious hurdles to clear with that system.

For one there is no maximum velocity, or accurate way to determine initial velocity for various ships, if two ships were at greatly different velocities somme serious math would be involved to figure out if Ship A, could catch Ship B...and how long it would take.

Ok there have been several Vector based combat systems for Traveller, Starting with the combat system in Book 2 of CT. The real question about figuring out the relative vectors is more a matter of drawing them out on paper then doing the math. One thought I have been having recently is adapting a Naval Warfare gaming trick of using different scaled turns, A Larger Longer turn for Maneuvering and then a smaller shorter turn for close order combat....

Consider this; 100 minute turn where a 1 gee vector covers 1 light second, and a 10 minute turn where said vector covers 1/10th of a light second. The idea being that when you step down in time/distance scale your speed stays the same.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Well, it is a rather obvious idea. I was hoping someone who has actually used such a system could tell us if it works, or not.

 

[Infojunky]

Well, it is a rather obvious idea. I was hoping someone who has actually used such a system could tell us if it works, or not.

Again, yes it works.... It comes out looking somewhat like the one in the CRB.....

 

[ShawnDriscoll]

If my players can describe the ship maneuver their characters are attempting to do, I can tell them what skill check to roll. If you've watched The Expanse TV show, that is the kind of ship travel being done.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Again, yes it works

Is it fun or just boring bookkeeping?

 

[Infojunky]

Again, yes it works

Is it fun or just boring bookkeeping?

Sure, Go ask a question like that.....

It works, it works a lot like the System in the TMB. Neither are what we say is fun.... They get the job done. My favorite system is the hex sheet and counter system from Mayday for vector. I am seriously considering bringing out the hex sheet for the TMB system for my next session with starship combat.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

OK, I tried a few scenarios.

For single ship/squadron the bookkeeping is simple enough, about as simple as the standard system. OK.
If you are not familiar with vector movement (or basic maths) things like decelerate to intercept will be unintuitive and difficult? Bad.

If you start the combat at 200 000 - 300 000 km you get something like the standard system, if you start with both sides stationary.
If you start the combat closer, say 100 000 km, or with approaching speed, Distant range passes by very quickly.
High thrust (9 - 25 G) makes a mockery of the range bands. You could simplify into Adjacent, (Very) Long, and Distant.

You can do scenarios that the standard system can't handle, such as a high speed drive by lasting just one or a few rounds. Good.


If we assume a standard scenario: An intruder force jumps into system, refuels at a gas giant, and moves towards the main world where the defender waits.
The defender can choose to remain at the main world, or accelerate towards the intruder.
If the defender stays put, the intruder can choose a high speed approach, or go for a zero speed intercept with the main world.
So we can have a combat with
1) both sides having high approaching speeds,
2) one side stationary other side high speed approach,
3) one side stationary other side decelerating to intercept, or
4) both sides stationary (as is assumed by the standard system).
This gives us different approach speeds, i.e. different times to closer range. Since different weapons system prefer different ranges, this makes it more difficult to choose an optimal weapon mix. Good.


So, this system can handle scenarios the standard system can't handle. It makes a difference. It adds complexity. The bookkeeping overhead is not overwhelming.
I see no reason to reject the system out of hand.

 

[phavoc]

It would be something like how SFB worked, except that you have to keep track of your G-turns in every direction. If you have been accelerating for a while you'd need a really BIG map to account for everything. But essentially you just need to keep track of the cumulative thrust you have been expending, starting with your arrival in system. I would say you should have at least two different maps, set a different scales, to account for the vastness at the 100D limit, and then when/if ships get close enough you can switch to a closer scale and allow for actual maneuvers. Newtonian movement CAN be fun sometimes, as you will continue on your original path and you can flip and bring all your forward armament to bear on someone chasing you (not that Traveller cares about weapons facing really) while they still close with you. In that sense B5 space combat has much the same flavor.

Has anyone tried converting a B5 Starfury into Traveller specs?