I have problems with this sort of analysis. It is not enough to simply go for the average. Did you include the Effect number in the damage calculation? I make the average damage after armour 7.2 (they are triple turrets so 3D+6+Effect?).
Yes, I counted every case, with effect and armour:
The distribution is not linear or symmetric, so median damage is not a good clue to average damage.
Dodge imposes a negative DM to the attack roll. If we assume a high pilot skill it might impose an additional -5, but I think it is like dodge and is declared after the attack is declared, not after you see how effective the attack was (otherwise you would save them to negate crits). At best it would negate 6 attacks per boat but needs to include those that would have missed anyway.
Agreed, declared before the attack roll.
I just assume we dodge the first attacks, and they are reduced to irrelevance. Hence the first few attacks produce no significant damage, then when there are no more dodges we get real attacks.
Since 6 in 36 miss it seems fair to assume that 1 dodge was against a shot that missed anyway.
72 hull requires 10 hits of 7.2 average damage plus the 5 that were negated for 15 total each.
Minus the crit cascade... If we reduce a small ship to 80-90%, plus a few crits, plus eight cumulative crits, it's done...
2023 salvos of 24. Not sure what the 6 nukes refers to.
High Guard rules that the number of missiles in a salvo halves every five rounds. It takes ten rounds to reach a target at Distant range, so a quarter of the missiles make it there.
I am not sure where you get 350 salvos from. Most of your crew seem to be gunners. With the military ECM suite plus ECM officers you could be getting pretty high Effect rolls. This represents 8400 missiles (which is a admittedly a lot).
400 Sensor Operators performing one action each: 350 EW the incoming missiles, 50 locks sensors on the missiles boats.
A few sensor locks will potentially be broken by the missile boats, we shoot at the good sensor locks next round. DM+2 is significant at Distant range...
I am not sure here that I would be spending all my gunners on the boats. By now you know you are facing 1000's of Salvos. I would probably not have been sitting still waiting for the attack
Half particle turrets (fighter defence), half laser turrets (missile defence). All have enough gunners.
The particle turrets shoots at the missile boats, the laser turrets do PD, all they can do at Distant range.
Whilst it is simpler to consider entirely destroyed Salvos, in reality what would really be the case is that there would be more salvos that were partially depleted.
Sure, but PD with DM+2 for triple turret and a good gunner, it's not much left.
The sad remains won't do significant damage or crits so I can't be bothered.
I think this says more about the target than the effectiveness of the missile salvo. With more Sensor Ops (or droids with that capability) none of the missiles need even have arrived. It would have been a walk over for the BC.
Sensor Operators need staterooms, meaning less weapons...
I don't do droids, that defeats the purpose of Traveller: People.
In round 11 you could have moved most of your gunners to additional point defence and just plugged at the boats them one at a time until they ran out of ammunition.
All laser turrets did PD, they can only act once per round. There is no lack of gunners.
One less missile in the final attack would have completely prevented an Effect 6+ critical. In thinning all the salvos rather than removing them entirely you might have taken more normal damage but you would would probably only have suffered a single sustained damage critical.
One PD action is against one salvo only.
PD batteries can spread, but they take a lot of space, hence less weapons...
But of course there were no criticals as there were no Large Bays.
No bay attacked, just missile salvoes from a variety of sources.
