Questions on starship combat

Tigleth Pilisar

Banded Mongoose
1. Initiative - if Tactics is used and the effect is negative, does it reduce the initiative roll. i.e. Tactics (naval)-1 rolls a 2. 2+1-8=-5 to initiative?

2. If a turret is a triple turret, does it fire three times separately and get three potential hits or fire once as a group and get three hits? Does the gunner's modification apply to all three rolls?

3. When in the phase does each side delare what software they will use? I would guess if you have a rating 15 computer, then you can use a total of 15 rating value of programs in a turn. I am guessing they use it up during the turn as they declare.

4. If a ship "dodges" does the sucessful dodge cause a -2 to only 1 attack against the ship or against all attacks against the ship in that round or against all the attacks from one turret? If a ship had 3 triple turrets, would it fire 9 times and a dodge would only help against one of them, buringing a thrust? Seems pretty weak to dodge.

5. When you line up a shot does it line it up for one turret with three weapons or only one shot on that turret?

6. How does the evade program work? Like a dodge I would guess. Do you add the pilot's skill to the evade program? Is there an intelligence or education DM as well for this manoeuver? Does using the evade program burn a thrust or just if the pilot does it?

7. ECM versus missles is done in the ship action phase, (after all attacks are resolved), while point defense is done in the combat phase as a reaction? This would mean no ECM if fired at adjacent or close range?

8. I don't see how a starship that is moving and evading can be boarded by astronauts/marines in another moving starship.


Ship design questions:

a. Why is no formula given for travel time?

b. I don't get the intellect program. If you want the ship computer to know pilot, engineering, astrogation, etc, then the computer has intellect (rating 10 running), and then do you leave the page on ship software (113) and go to page 92, general software and then buy "Expert" programs? For example "Expert/2" of Astrogation would cost 10,000, use 10 (ship intellect) plus 2 rating for a total of 12 (therefore model 3 or better computer) and would automatically provide the skill of Astrogation-1? Would you also get to use the pilot's education DM or because the computer is doing it, no education DM?

c. I don't think I understand missles right. Basic/smart missles only do 1d6 of damage, cost 15k to 30k a pop, the missle rack costs 250k more than a pulse laser that does 2d6 damage, and you have to use up one ton of space for every 12 missles! Firing 10 smart missles costs 300,000cr! And it wasted a bunch of ship space.

d. What is the game implication of a fixed mounting? I understand it can't move and can only fire one way but you just have to say it was pointed at the enemy. So you save half costs, but is it harder to hit with or something?

e. Can three particle Beams be on one turret? That does 9d6 damage plus three crew hits for a building cost of 1 MCr and 1 ton of space. A particle beam bay costs 20 MCr, uses 50 tons of space and only does 6d6 of damage with one crew hit. Why would anyone ever design a ship with a bay rather than the turrets? This is way out of whack.

f. In High Guard, does it actually say that two torpedoes take up 5 tons of space? A triple turret missle rack uses 1 ton of space and costs 3.25 MCr. Three missles go which can do 3d6 damage (unless nuclear). I can put 12x5 missles or 60 missles in 5 tons of space which means 60d6 of damage. High Guard says these torpedoes which take THIRTY times as much space do 4d6 damage! Is that a misprint. Plus no where in High Guard does it say the price of torpedoes, but is that because they are so inefficient on space and do such little damage that no one in their right mind would actually incorporate this into a ship design?

g. You can "harden" a bridge or computer against EMP. When does an EMP get used against you? How do you EMP someone? What does it cost and so on?

h. To confirm, using lasers is free as long as there is a power plant with rating as good as the better of manoeuver and jump, while missiles cost big? I also note that none of the High Guard new weapons seem to have ammunition costs: The new multi-warhead missle, shockwave missle, ortillery missle, torpedoes, railgun ammo, chaff, etc are all missing a cost. And I still can't believe a torpedo is 30x larger than a missile but only does 4x the damage. I mean you've made a single torpedo only slightly smaller than an entire stateroom.

i. If a missle bay (50 tons cost) is in a ship, can that bay hold 12x50=600 missiles or do you need to allocate more space?


Any insights into the above appreciated. Thanks.
 
Nicely spelled out Tigleth Pilisar, but that is a lot of questions and several of them have answers based on various 'interpretations'.

I'll address only the ship design, since they are less controversial ;)

a) - the formulas were probably left out on the assumption that most folks don't care (for the math/unit conversions). If you need them they are easy enough to provide (D=(AT*T)/4 for transit, etc. - PM if desired).

b) - yeah this is bungered up IMHO...

c) cost isn't everything! Pulse lasers are short range (and -2 DM to boot - see HG pg 47). Missiles aren't effected by most screens. Missiles can result in opponent's weapons being used for defense rather than offense. Missile racks are available one TL lower than pulse lasers.

d) ref's privilege ;) (i.e. I don't recall a game mechanic - though I say that fixed mounts can only attack a single target in a round regardless of # of weapons mounted, where-as turrets can attack multiple targets, one per weapon mounted - YMMV).

e) three particle beams don't do 9d6 damage - only 3 x 3d6 - huge difference when one's opponent is armoured! The credit/ton cost imbalances become important based on the anticipated target type the class of ship is designed to take on.

f) it says 2.5 tons per torpedo - normally bought in 2-shot loads (HG top of pg 49). Again, don't confuse 3x1d6 with 3d6 (or 60d6) - would you want 60 useless missiles because they can't penetrate armour as compared to 2 torpedoes that can? Price for torps is on same page in the gray box (at the bottom - note: may be missing from SRD or original HG mis-print!).

g) EMP is assumed to be radiation damage. Technically this should perhaps be handled seperately with a different game mechanic (faciliating EMP devices) - but CT didn't and neither does MGT. For instance, nuclear explosions would generate an EMP (which will effect magnetic polarization, never mind...) while radiation weapons wouldn't unless designed to - however, shielding from radiation typically could provide protection for both.

h) actually, the lasers are 'free' as long as there is a working PP - even emergency (I think) - only G ratings and jump ratings suffer if the PP is too small/damaged. The costs are there - in the case of missiles and chaff they are the same as the TMB, with different balances is all. Ortillery, torps are in the boxes pg 48 & 49. Agian, punch is sometimes more important than amount of damage - a nuclear torp is equivalent to a 50 ton paricle beam in terms of damage, has variable range, and is less effected by most screens - at a fraction of the cost/tonnage (but limited number of shots).

i) no and partial yes = it is stated that no weapons come with munitions, and most of that bay is not the missiles - but the bay fires 12 at a time, so I assume that it can store 12 at the ready (YMMV).
 
Tigleth Pilisar said:
...8. I don't see how a starship that is moving and evading can be boarded by astronauts/marines in another moving starship.
Why not? Current TL has supported latching onto errant, out of control satellites - their 'evading' is unintentional, but the concept is the same.

Granted it is more difficult (pg 137 covers this - adding difficulty level to the task check). And if docking is achieved (see HG for breaching tube) then boarding is relatively easy (though ship defenses can make for bad times for the boarders). Even if docking is not, boarders can attach themselves to ship and make their way in (cutting/airlock breaching).

I personnally would add a mechanic to support higher G ships having an easier time of it.
 
d. What is the game implication of a fixed mounting? I understand it can't move and can only fire one way but you just have to say it was pointed at the enemy. So you save half costs, but is it harder to hit with or something?

Which is fine and dandy until you loose your ability to manouvre the ship due to damage to the engines - at which point a turret can still traverse to track a target but a fixed mount is screwed.

I can put 12x5 missles or 60 missles in 5 tons of space which means 60d6 of damage. High Guard says these torpedoes which take THIRTY times as much space do 4d6 damage! Is that a misprint.

As noted, remember that armour gets subtracted from each discrete hit - the difference between 4 x 1D6 weapon and 1 x 4D6 weapon is that armour counts four times. As a result your missile volley may be doing thirty times as much damage but it's wasting sixty times as much of it against a target's armour.....


Quick thought experiment: A triple turret of 3 D6 damage weapons (pulse lasers) versus one single turret with a 2 x D6 damage weapon (beam laser). We'll assume both gunners are perfect and both pilots are incompetent to make the maths easier.

Versus an unarmoured ship, the light guns are better, doing 10.5 damage compared to 7. Clearly, the pulse weapons are a better buy (as well they should be, costing half again the price!)

Add a layer of titanium steel armour to a target, though, and the average damage from a D6-2 drops to just over one-and-a-half. The upshot of this is that the weapons actually make out identical, both turrets inflicting an average of 5 damage per shot past the armour.

Upgrade that to crystaliron, and matters get even worse. The pulse weapons are now splashing 12 damage over the enemy ship's armour - as much as the beam laser can inflict in total! - resulting in only 1.5 damage compared to the beam laser's 3.1, less than half as much actual damage.

Finally, replace that with bonded superdense, like you might see on a proper light warship, and suddenly the pulse lasers can't even scratch it. Ok, the beam laser is still only doing 1.5 damage per shot, but it has all the time in the world - and the range advantage to boot - to take out the enemy ship.

That's why bigger guns seem to get proportionately more expensive - spinal mounts and torpedoes are there to lay the smackdown on capital ships that will quite simply ignore anything short of a particle beam.
 
Don't forget that in HG the damage for Pulse and Beam lasers was corrected from the TMB.

Per HG:
Pulse Lasers do 2d6 damage (-2 to hit)
Beam Lasers do 1d6 damage

So pulse lasers are better against a little armour provided you can hit the ship, and beam lasers are basically worthless as an offensive weapon against a ship with any decent amount of armour.
 
Thanks so far, but the first numbered questions still need an answer.

On starship construction, your point is that a 1ton space weapon that does 1d6 or 2d6 damage is not so great if a ship is armoured, possibly doing no damage. Therefore 4d6 torpedoes make sense to punch through armour, even though each missile takes the size of a crew cabin to store. That's ok, but I just don't buy the storage space. No way a missile should take 1/12th of a ton of space and a torpedo should take 2.5 tons of space unless the damage is a lot different. And the 50 tons for a torpedo bay can't even store any torpedoes?

My version of High Guard doesn't have prices for the things I listed, which is why they are questions. I know there are new versions. My HG for example has the Mercenary table of contents. I'm kind of disappointed because I bought the books 2 months ago, and in the threads on here it looks like six months ago this was identified. I live in Canada and dealings with the US are tough right now. Not sure if shipping some of my books there makes sense.

Thanks on explaining EMP. I never would have guessed what you put.
 
Tigleth Pilisar said:
My version of High Guard doesn't have prices for the things I listed, which is why they are questions. I know there are new versions. My HG for example has the Mercenary table of contents. I'm kind of disappointed because I bought the books 2 months ago, and in the threads on here it looks like six months ago this was identified. I live in Canada and dealings with the US are tough right now. Not sure if shipping some of my books there makes sense.

Your supplier probably had some old stock.
 
Tigleth Pilisar said:
Thanks so far, but the first numbered questions still need an answer.
You're welcome, but wouldn't hold my breath on all of those ;)

Tigleth Pilisar said:
... No way a missile should take 1/12th of a ton of space and a torpedo should take 2.5 tons of space unless the damage is a lot different. ...
Uhm, I think that is sorta based on RW - torpedoes are huge (propellent?) compared to say aircraft/hand launched missiles. It probably doesn't really equate in space - but a lot of Traveller spaceship stuff seems to be adopted from sea going vessels (and is weak because of it, but that is another story ;) ). The damage, though, is worth it - no damage at all when armour is sufficient means that the missiles are a total waste in certain circumstances where the likelyhood of enough armour to defend against even the whimpiest torpedos is minimal at best. Hence in the TCS style tourney, I outfitted my ships with enough armour to nuetralize missiles, despite the tradeoffs in credit and tonnage budgets - as missiles are cheap and effective if one lacks the armour.

Tigleth Pilisar said:
... And the 50 tons for a torpedo bay can't even store any torpedoes?
Who says? They come with no munitions - don't see explicit mention that one cannot store some 'in the tubes' as it where. This is an assumption being thrown about, that hopefully the errata will clarify one way or another (the text is vague).

However, I do believe the 5-ton barbette with 1 torp versus the 50-ton 3 torp bay is a bit unbalanced. However, given the power of torpedos, too many in a bay would make these weapons too unbalancing for their costs. My recommendation would be to make it take 2 rounds for the barbette to fire.

Tigleth Pilisar said:
... My HG for example has the Mercenary table of contents.
Shoot Matt Sprange a PM - MGP has straightened this out and made things right - and IIRC, Matt stated that there was no time limit on MGP shipping a replacement (I don't believe you have to ship anything to them, either).

Tigleth Pilisar said:
... Thanks on explaining EMP. I never would have guessed what you put.
I'm pretty sure what I stated was unclassified, so there's no need to eliminate you :D
 
BP said:
Tigleth Pilisar said:
... My HG for example has the Mercenary table of contents.
Shoot Matt Sprange a PM - MGP has straightened this out and made things right - and IIRC, Matt stated that there was no time limit on MGP shipping a replacement (I don't believe you have to ship anything to them, either).

Offer is you ship back High Guard (either to the US or UK address) and get a replacement + free book shipped back to you.

See:

http://www.mongoosepublishing.com/phpBB2/viewtopic.php?t=37991
 
I guess I'll have to look into this shipping thing. Since I am trying to play a lot, I hate giving up my books. It also looks like another new version of HG is coming based on the first thread in this forum? Also, is the core rules subject to this offer as well? I know there has been several errata there too.

I would have thought my numbered questions to start on this thread were pretty easy to answer for any veteran of the game. (I obviously am a rookie, still trying to learn the rules and making them up as I go). For example the "dodge" thing I would think people who have played this a bunch would have an answer right away.
 
Best to shoot Matt or someone else at MGP a PM or email (look at last entry in the thread AndrewW posted) - IIRC there may be other ways than snail mail that they will accept = at any rate they are the only ones that can work anything out with you - best to go staight to the horses mouth on that one. ;)


As for getting your posts answered, well first since MGT has been out only a short time (Traveller wise), its a little soon to have true veterans. Second, you seem to be a reasonably literate person :) - if it ain't clear to you it probably isn't real clear to everyone else either, and the authors rarely clarify (some changes are in edits and etc.). As I mentioned (and I did respond to a number of your items), many items on your list are 'contentious' and have had numerous, differing, unofficial clarifications.

Now, I like lists, but many people don't - just scares them away. And forum posts get real confusing when people try to answer various questions of a technical game mechanics nature simultaneously. Even one question often results in a derailed mess of unrelated posts - several, well...

I'd suggest posting each one of your questions seperately (and not all at once - let people respond - otherwise they lose attention and the posts go unobserved). There are plenty of opinions out there, but responses like this take more time than most people are willing, or have the chance to, undertake.
 
Thanks BP. I do appreciate all of your feedback. I probably have a great story for how I got into MGT that you might hear sometime. Suffice it to say I'm GMing for my teen boys and their friends and their friend's dad with not a lot of experience with this RPG. It is amazing since we are competing with video games, and these teens repeatedly say this is the best thing they have ever played and beg nearly daily to play.

It sounds like really there is no (consensus) answer for some of my questions, and the material itself is not yet going to be clarified. That's fine. I do like that I can ask things on this forum and I will try to confine questions to be a single concept.

I'll see if I can send an email to someone (Andrew) regarding my books. I see your developers pack does have some of the errata like prices on ammo not in HG.

I'm likely a buyer of many of your Traveller books for a long time. I can see earlier in life people might have to be cautious with $10 to $40 purchases, but I think games are the cheapest thing on earth. I've probably spent $150 or so on Mongoose Traveller stuff so far which probably means I'm paying $2/hour for entertainment to date - in only 2 months. Over the year, its probably going to work out to be pennies an hour - can't get much cheaper. I think what these teens like is that their imagination is engaged in Traveller in a way video games can't create. (Although I like strategy video games myself). They almost believe they are the characters IN the environment. One kid was saying how he was just sweating and nervous when they were investigating a strange derilict ship, and then again had his heart was beating fast during a shootout in a warehouse. All imagined.

BTW I am probably going to get Merchant Prince when it comes out (maybe it is out already). One of the teens seems to be quite interested in the trading aspect.
 
Tigleth Pilisar said:
Thanks BP. I do appreciate all of your feedback. I probably have a great story for how I got into MGT that you might hear sometime. Suffice it to say I'm GMing for my teen boys and their friends and their friend's dad with not a lot of experience with this RPG. It is amazing since we are competing with video games, and these teens repeatedly say this is the best thing they have ever played and beg nearly daily to play.
Oh, you're welcome and I know you appreciate it - just trying to help you get more responses from others on the board...

It's great that you got your teens and others introduced to RPGs - done right I doubt any teenager (nor adult) could find a better form of pure entertainment. Video games really don't compete, despite what the majority of people might think (as with most things in fact).

BTW: it seemed in your post you might think I work for MGP - I don't (the Mongoose thing under my BP handle just means I post too much ;)), though it would be nice!
 
I have no idea if these are correct, but here are my interpretations of the rules for those first questions:

1. Initiative - if Tactics is used and the effect is negative, does it reduce the initiative roll. i.e. Tactics (naval)-1 rolls a 2. 2+1-8=-5 to initiative?

I would use a negative Effect. Haven't had this come up in an actual combat yet, but Effect is Effect, good or bad. Make sure you use the table on page 50 of the TMB where appropriate.

2. If a turret is a triple turret, does it fire three times separately and get three potential hits or fire once as a group and get three hits? Does the gunner's modification apply to all three rolls?

No good answer for this one. I have allowed the gunner to decide how he wants to do it. Given that he has 6 minutes of time, he can split his fire however he wants, or combine it however he wants. He can apply his Gunner skill to each attack, 1, 2 or 3. After HG came out, I would NOT allow a gunner to combine the damage into a single 3d6 attack, that is too powerful. If a gunner fires all three weapons at the same target and they are the same type of weapon, then he rolls 1 hit roll and 3 damage rolls. Alternately, he can choose to fire at the same target but at 3 different times, so he could roll 3 hit rolls and then damage for each hit.

I give the Gunner a lot of options here to pick from.

3. When in the phase does each side delare what software they will use? I would guess if you have a rating 15 computer, then you can use a total of 15 rating value of programs in a turn. I am guessing they use it up during the turn as they declare.

I make them declare software during the Ship Action Phase. Really though, just pick a phase and be consistant. Ship Action Phase make the most sense to me since it is the Computer Operator/Navigator's action for that turn. Just me though.

4. If a ship "dodges" does the sucessful dodge cause a -2 to only 1 attack against the ship or against all attacks against the ship in that round or against all the attacks from one turret? If a ship had 3 triple turrets, would it fire 9 times and a dodge would only help against one of them, buringing a thrust? Seems pretty weak to dodge.

I have interpreted this rule to mean all attacks from that ship for that turn. So if a ship has 3 triple turrets and fires 9 times, a successful dodge would be give that -2 DM to all 9 attacks. It would NOT however, give any DMs against the OTHER ships (if any) firing on them.

5. When you line up a shot does it line it up for one turret with three weapons or only one shot on that turret?

I interpret this as lining up ALL of your weapons against another ship. So if you had multiple turrets, the DM would apply to all shots against that ship for that turn.

6. How does the evade program work? Like a dodge I would guess. Do you add the pilot's skill to the evade program? Is there an intelligence or education DM as well for this manoeuver? Does using the evade program burn a thrust or just if the pilot does it?

Evade is like a computer pilot. The program can make a specific number of dodges equal to it's rating, provided you allocate adequate Thrust. I allow these dodges to be IN ADDITION to the Pilot's actions. Thus Evade can dodge incoming fire (with it's -1 DM) while the Pilot lines up a shot. This effectively gives the pilot multiple actions, but the Evade program only gives the -1 DM, not the -2 DM that a Pilot would give.

7. ECM versus missles is done in the ship action phase, (after all attacks are resolved), while point defense is done in the combat phase as a reaction? This would mean no ECM if fired at adjacent or close range?

The rules specifically state that missiles cannot be used at Adjacent or Close range, so this is not an issue. See TMB page 147, just below the "Turns to Impact" table.

8. I don't see how a starship that is moving and evading can be boarded by astronauts/marines in another moving starship.

Per the section on "Dock with Another Vessel" under the Maneoeuvre Actions, it says that if the opposing ship does not want to be docked with, it becomes an Opposed Pilot Check. I would also allow Thrust to be used as a DM on that check (either positive for the docker, or negative for the dockee) as well as the automatic -2 DM that the docker receives. If the Dockee does not have any thrust left, then I would just make this an Easy Pilot Check (or even just say that it is automatic and not roll).


As I said above, these are MY interpretations, hope it helps!
 
Thanks Rikki Tikki! Those are great responses! And BP I did thought you worked for MGT with all the posts and knowledge you have.

On EMP, do you make the computers have a "saving throw" or something? Otherwise what is the point of a fib computer or hardened bridge?
 
I see RTT is not afraid of tackling lists :D

My own interpretations are similiar to his - and I will be snagging his Thrust mods for number 8! ;)

For number 6 (Computer Evade), I do have a variant - applying the negative DM of evade program to pilot actions other than evade (i.e. a pilot trying to line up a shot while evade is running and being used will have a negative DM equal to the evade number). It can be rationalized either way - given the 6 min combat rounds - I just like the added challenge making it harder to gain a shooting advantage while the computer is 'automatically' assisting you in defense.

As to the EMP/fib model computers - unless I missed something - I don't recall any place computer damage is specifically handled in Space Combat :o. I have considered a number of options, but tested none.

P.S. - sadly, I don't work for Mongoose - there are a few who post on the forum though, from time to time - I just happen to post a lot (and my 'knowledge' should come with a disclaimer ;) )
 
Opinions are free...so :)

On EMP, do you make the computers have a "saving throw" or something? Otherwise what is the point of a fib computer or hardened bridge?

As I understand it, computer hits generally are handled per p.78, that source can include radiation hits (p.79). The core rules (p.108) state that:
Hardened Systems ( fib): A computer and its connections can be
hardened against attack by electromagnetic pulse weapons. A
hardened system is immune to EMP, but costs 50% more.

The inference to be drawn is that they are immune to radiation hits (but not normal damage). This is consistent with below:

Your hardened bridge -

p.44 -
Hardened Bridge: A hardened bridge is shielded against radiation attacks. The ship’s computer systems are immune to EMP and the number of rads absorbed by the bridge crew is reduced by 1,000.
Hardening a bridge adds 25% to the cost of the bridge. If a ship has
radiation shielding installed, it is assumed to be hardened.

so at a cost I'd suggest it works as above, also see below makes it clear that ships with radiation shielding gives both global amelioration of radiation damage AND provides the benefits of hardened bridge

(p.42)
Radiation Shielding: Radiation shielding improves the ship’s
protection against radiation from both natural sources (solar flares,
pulsars) and artificial (nuclear bombs, meson hits). A ship with
radiation shielding decreases the amount of rads absorbed by all
crew by 1,000, treats the bridge as if it is hardened and provides
6 extra armour points against radiation damage from nuclear
weapons, particle beams and fusion guns. ...

Ships with ... radiation shielding will suffer no radiation damage from nuclear weapons or fusion guns.

I'd suggest this still leaves particle beams(?) (protection offered by armour) - and meson guns. BUT NOTE additional protection offered even there at p.42 HG.

There seems some room for movement here :)

4. If a ship "dodges" does the sucessful dodge cause a -2 to only 1 attack against the ship or against all attacks against the ship in that round or against all the attacks from one turret?

That seems right - "a" dodge is "a" reaction, and strictly limited.

If a ship had 3 triple turrets, would it fire 9 times and a dodge would only help against one of them, buringing a thrust? Seems pretty weak to dodge.

p.147:
A gunner may fire any or all of the weapons in his
turret or bay but each turret or bay may only fire once per round.

So you can fire three times - once with each turret, and you can choose to fire all three weapons in each together or only one. And then that's it for the round. Also if you use one weapon of the three to attack a ship, you cannot use the remaining two to attack incoming missiles later, as you have had your chance.

Note "Trigger Screens" is also clearly a "reaction", of which you only have so many...

YMMV here :)
 
ColHut said:
... As I understand it, computer hits generally are handled per p.78, that source can include radiation hits (p.79). ...
Unfortunately, that is for Capital Ships and works off the Section Hit Tables on pg 68 of High Guard in relation to Expanded Space Combat - I was hoping you had found something in the Core rules to cover computer damage. ;)

BTW: I'll accept VISA, MasterCard, or Diners Card for that opinion, but sadly am unable to accept Discover or American Express at this time...
 
Anyone know if the Orders section applies to Core book combat? Obviously some are not relevant to non capships, but some are small craft only. It seems like some could be used by spacecraft. Yes?
 
Unfortunately, that is for Capital Ships and works off the Section Hit Tables on pg 68 of High Guard in relation to Expanded Space Combat - I was hoping you had found something in the Core rules to cover computer damage.
Well done Sherlock! I am afraid that all this is brought over from CT, TNE etc. I think the best way is to read HG back into the core rules, and add COMPUTER as a system taking damage to the normal damage table (substitute for something occuring more than once internally). Also add it and SENSORS to the table showing the chance of crew taking radiation hits. Use the HG modifiers as appropriate for radiation shielding and hardening and allow fib computers to be immune. It does need to be added into an errata.

Hope this helps - invoice sent.
 
Back
Top