AnotherDilbert said:
phavoc said:
This assumes you are hitting the target and their defenses (lasers, EW) are rendering your salvos ineffective. 12 rounds (4 salvos per turret) doesn't leave much room for error.
Each missile rack carries 12 ready-rounds, so a turret or fixed mount can carry 36 missiles. Without magazines we can carry 12 battery rounds. Except missile barbettes.
That's a physical impossibility. A hardpoint sets aside 1 ton, supposedly for fire control gear. 12 missiles require 1 ton. This is taking the Tardis concept of bigger on the inside way too far. This means our 1 ton hardpoint now occupies 4 tons of space - 1 ton for fire control and 3 tons for missiles. Who needs magazines when you can magically get 300% free room?
AnotherDilbert said:
Hitting isn't much of a problem when launching over 10 missiles.
Even PD isn't much of a problem; just make sure several salvoes reach the target simultaneously.
Hi-tech military ECM with optimised crew would make short work of such salvoes, standard small ships with civilian crews will not.
If we are fighting ships with hi-tech military ECM (such as Imperial destroyers) we lose anyway...
I would assume that any pirate crew that is going to prey on others (and in the Traveller universe basically every ship is armed) that they would have sufficient defenses to survive in their preferred line of work. Thus it would make sense for them to have an all-laser armament for maximum offense/defense. Plus at least one extra sensor operator to do ECM on missiles salvos.
The other advantage for pirates is that without the need for spare missiles they aren't as dependent upon outside sources for supplies. A helpful thing if you don't have a local pirate paradise you can dock at for resupply of expendables.
AnotherDilbert said:
Agreed, it becomes a game of who has the more launchers and missiles. No standard ship at remotely similar cost to the Planetoid Trader will have four hardpoints, so they will have less launchers.
.
Hardpoints are a function of tonnage. Most ships will have four hardpoints if they mass 400 tons. Whether or not they utilize them is another thing. I agree that the cheaper you make your vessel the less likely you'll find heavy armaments.
AnotherDilbert said:
Pulse lasers are the standard choice at MCr 1 per weapon. Beam lasers are cheaper, but have far shorter range.
You are right. I had reversed the pricing.
AnotherDilbert said:
Agreed, but:
Sandcasters only work against lasers, not missiles.
Sandcaster ammo runs out. It may take an hour or two, but eventually the lasers burns through.
But I agree that Laser,Laser,Sand-turrets would win over Laser,Laser,Laser-turrets, ceteris paribus.
Sand is cheap. And you get 20 barrels to the ton. If you haven't gotten where you need to be (planetside or at your 100D) or help hasn't come in an hour, then you are probably doomed anyways.
AnotherDilbert said:
Lasers and sandcasters are still quite well within the civilian grasp, IMHO.
Indeed. However that's not what was being referred to. Civilians would use missiles, sand, beam, pulse lasers. Beyond that (particle beams, fusion weapons, anti-missile-missiles, jammers, torpedoes, etc, etc) are up in the military arena.
As was pointed out, if you spend MCr40 for a ship you'd expect defenses. However reality has ships worth $100 million today going through the Indian ocean without even armed guards or weapons being provided to the crew. In the Traveller universe that MCr40 is the cost of a semi-truck. Plus we have a cheap merchant ship. Which means cost is the primary factor in the ships operations. Weapons cost a lot, as does the crew and maintenance for said weapons. If you are already paying insurance for the ship an operator fixated on costs will not pay for armaments until the cost of insurance becomes too great. Simple merchant economics.
So both our proposals would probably be oriented towards an owner-operator who works on the fringes.
AnotherDilbert said:
We have to be able to threaten death or destruction to be an inconvenient prey. Fusion or Particle barbettes doing radiation damage should work, unless the pirates have rad shielding, but they are big and expensive. Large missile salvoes are quite dangerous, and certainly something pirates have to look out for.
This is definitely getting into the realm of military-grade weapons. Even though there are no clear indicators regarding where the line is drawn (other than nuclear weaponry being retained exclusively for governments), radiation-based weaponry is getting to be a close second. Plus the costs increase rather dramatically over laser-based weapons.
Example:
Let's say Long range and we launch 12 standard missiles in round 1, then 12 Frag missiles in round 2.
Both salvoes arrive and attack round 2. Average 11 missiles from each salvo hit, for a total of 22 missiles.
The enemy does PD with four triple laser turrets with skill-2, average 3 missiles killed by each turret for a total of 12 missiles killed.
22 - 12 = 10 missiles does damage so 10 × ( 3D - Armour ) for an average of 65 damage, assuming Armour 4 like a Patrol Corvette.
A standard 400 Dt ship has 160 Hull, so that is 40% of its total Hull (and four crits). We destroy such a ship in 6 rounds using 72 missiles costing MCr 1.35. Cheap and effective. (We could do it quicker with more expensive missiles.)
After such an attack the pirate is worried, and looking to disengage (immediately).
[/quote]
So the merchant has just tossed out about half a million credits. The pirates could turn and plink the missiles down (the frag missiles have thrust 15 and standard missiles are thrust 10). A pirate ship would be expected to have better thrust than the average merchant, so around 2-4G. This assumes no attempts at using ECM to break the missile locks either. Depending on the range a good sensor operator (if they have two they can each do this per salvo, per round) might be able to get rid of half the missiles before they engage at range. If the merchie waits for the ship to close the pirate will have fired numerous times already. Until the ship is disabled or they know more about it's defenses they will probably keep the range open - especially if they are just interested in cargo and not the ship itself.
Missiles are a good option for many ships, especially ones that don't want the added expense of a gunner for a laser turret. But they have distinct drawbacks as well (e.g. even if you just scare the opponent away you've blown through months worth of profits). Sand is useful for people who just want to run away, and lasers can be picked up cheap, too, if you search long and hard enough (all the prices we are quoting are new).
There's also the open question of how much maintenance does a missile require? Everything else requires annual maintenance on a ship, and missiles should require servicing regularly as well to ensure the seekers are working, the thrusters function, etc. Boxed missiles today are the same - they have a shelf life. Naval missiles (like SM-3) get removed from VLS storage cells about once every two years and get a complete overhaul. So a true cost comparison requires knowing how often Trav missiles need the same.
More than likely a cheap merchie isn't going to carry much armament because it's a budget ship to begin with. Over time, depending on where it goes and local conditions, we might see some adding some weapons, probably sand and/or missiles to start because cost. And depending on how things are they might get some lasers as well.