Screens

[Nerhesi]

I think we definitely need to have them affect DD weapons - the fact that we have DD weapons in space is punishment enough, so lets consider our types first:

Meson screens - well in-light of recent rulings, these will really only work on Spinal Weapons, which are DD weapons. This is a must have as well - you need a defense versus Meson anyways!

Nuclear screens - the only DD nuclear are the fusion bays really.


Now the mechanics

a) Basic usage - each screen reduces damage by 2D, (previously you'd add the Screen operator skill, do we want this? yes no?)

b) What would the mechanic by vs DD? - we know it removes the radiation trait - great. I actually think the mechanics can continue to be as is.. each screen reduces the damage by 2D, but you need 5 operational screens to remove 1DD - dead simple.

c) Maximum number of screens. Screens used to be like point-defense before (which was good), you would use them against separate attacks at cumulative -1s. But we still need a maximum numbers of screens usable on a single attack? Or do we? They have a power-draw.. so do we even have a worry? consider:

You want to use 10x nuclear dampeners (200 tons...) to reduce that incoming fusion bay blast by 2DD - great - thats 200 (yes 200) power!... Oh here comes the second attack? Thats 200 power again, and now your check is at -1..

I think this actually adds a LOT of customization and flavour/options to ship design. We dont have artificial limits, but instead we allow players to have full freedom with their defensive options.

e) Added bonus - you need to do absolutely nothing at all to allow screens to be used versus spinal weapons. Same exact system (granted, God help you unless you're basically a screen-ship... oh snap, new strategic option!)

 

[FallingPhoenix]

I second the motion to have screens able to have some kind of combinatory (is that a word?) effect.

 

[MongooseMatt]

I like that. Just a single sentence needed for each screen.

Done. Check the coming update (a little later today).

 

[Sir Rath]

Are there going to be any other kinds of meson weaponry that don't have the Destructive characteristic? If not, what's the point of saying meson screens can reduce damage by 2D when they only affect Spinal Weapon damage in the form on -1DD/5 screens? Can meson screens reduce the damage of tachyon cannons?

 

[Nerhesi]

Are there going to be any other kinds of meson weaponry that don't have the Destructive characteristic? If not, what's the point of saying meson screens can reduce damage by 2D when they only affect Spinal Weapon damage in the form on -1DD/5 screens? Can meson screens reduce the damage of tachyon cannons?

I think screens will be reducing DD (as they ought too now). DD is just a notation for simplification.

 

[AndrewW]

Can meson screens reduce the damage of tachyon cannons?

Nope, they have no effect on tachyon cannons.

 

[Chas]

Just looking a bit more that this, and you're going to need especially careful definition of the numbers of screens allowed. These are going to define weapons systems carried by ships in a very significant way. (and conversely without the clarification of screen number limits it makes final capital ship design difficult)

For nuclear dampers for the rules as written now my suggestion is to allow these to scale by tonnage. If you don't nuclear screens will become essentially redundant in larger ships of the line, where the numbers of fusion bays and nuclear attacks will overwhelm a low number tech limit. In fact you may want them to have no limit, and allow that to be factor to simply stop every ship being a fusion bay platform.

Meson screens are complicated by the fact meson bays are no longer canon in this rules set. This makes them spinal weapon only defenses. Where even a few meson screens are going to throw off the balance between particle spinal weapons and meson spinal weapons. Allow too many and meson spinal weapons are going to be useless. So this number is going to have to be determined exactly right by tech level.

Is it really worth having meson screens at all in the core rule book, driving spinal weapon balance purely by direct feature comparisons? You could move the meson screen into the high tech chapter, with a low damage reduction, so they're balanced against meson bay weapons and a defense against them, and save a lot of design headache.

 

[Nerhesi]

I have a couple of takes on this:

a) Dont limit screens at all (which is how it stands now absent any limiting table I believe). Power is a massive limiting factor now. Go ahead and do a couple of tests and make a ship with a ton of screens - compare the weight and power usage to replacing that with offensive weaponry. You'll notice that even without some arbitrary, adhoc "limit", they are still very well balanced. If anything, I think we should be on the lookout to see if perhaps screens aren't too weak now...

You may want to limit how many "ships" in a fleet action can be covered by one-ship with screens though.

b) You definitely need Meson screens in - otherwise you may as well remove stats from a Meson Spinal and simply label it as "instant death" due to radiation damage and the inability to screen against it. Some of the bigger ships can maybe survive some hull hits, but that won't matter. Considering in OTU Mesons are still in - we should keep screens in. Even if they're only good vs spinals

 

[Chas]

I have a couple of takes on this:

a) Dont limit screens at all (which is how it stands now absent any limiting table I believe). Power is a massive limiting factor now. Go ahead and do a couple of tests and make a ship with a ton of screens - compare the weight and power usage to replacing that with offensive weaponry. You'll notice that even without some arbitrary, adhoc "limit", they are still very well balanced. If anything, I think we should be on the lookout to see if perhaps screens aren't too weak now...

You may want to limit how many "ships" in a fleet action can be covered by one-ship with screens though.

Which is essentially what I've said above, the system needs to be self scaling, not an arbitrary tech limit.

b) You definitely need Meson screens in - otherwise you may as well remove stats from a Meson Spinal and simply label it as "instant death" due to radiation damage and the inability to screen against it. Some of the bigger ships can maybe survive some hull hits, but that won't matter. Considering in OTU Mesons are still in - we should keep screens in. Even if they're only good vs spinals

But in this case what is the difference between meson and particle spinal weapons? Both are equally "instant death". With the rules as written by including meson screens all you are doing is just making the more expensive and heavier meson weapons totally redundant.

 

[Nerhesi]

b) You definitely need Meson screens in - otherwise you may as well remove stats from a Meson Spinal and simply label it as "instant death" due to radiation damage and the inability to screen against it. Some of the bigger ships can maybe survive some hull hits, but that won't matter. Considering in OTU Mesons are still in - we should keep screens in. Even if they're only good vs spinals

But in this case what is the difference between meson and particle spinal weapons? Both are equally "instant death". With the rules as written by including meson screens all you are doing is just making the more expensive and heavier meson weapons totally redundant.

Radiation is 2D x 20. Multiple by 5 for Space-scale. This means a range between 200 to 1200.
Basic Hull stops 500. Radiation shielding for the hull, increases that to, or by (unclear) 1000.

So basically, you are immune to radiation from Particle Weaponry (spinal or otherwise) - which is good and it makes sense. Even if you assume Radiation shielding increases shielding TO 1000 - you'd be immune to most hits, with the remaining causing minor or zero damage depending on the vaccsuits worn by the crew.

Meson radiation however ignores your armour and rad-suit, and hence a meson spinal hitting a 1 million ton behemoth, would wipe out the entire crew on an average roll (700 rads dealt).

A quick comparison on offense vs defense for Spinals (thanks for bringing it up, I'm doing it on the fly!)

Meson-A weapon: 7DD, 550 power. and 5000 dtons. 37 tons of TL<15 Fusion plant.
35 Meson screens: 7DD total, 1050 power, 700 dtons. 70 tons of TL<15 Fusion plant.

Yup - There is a gap still - because unlike fusion screens, your Meson screens dont have to worry about blocking anything but the spinal. I would still want to pack, on average, double the screens of the largest spinal damage available.

So without Meson Bays, everyone will pack around 200 meson screens to be able to stop a Meson-D. However, by doing so, you shut down more than triple the tonnage your opponent put into getting that meson screen in the first place.

Side-notes:
1) I've pointed out to Matt that the AP values on Particle Spinals is redundant. You're doing ridiculous damage - no reason to add 50 or even 10 AP.
2) Also, I do wish Meson bays make an appearance somewhere - as someone has pointed out, they are apparently part of the OTU as per Traveller 5th edition. I can't be bothered to reach down 3 feet and check the book however Without this - you're absolutely right in that meson screens completely absolute Meson Spinals - because they dont have to worry about stopping anything else.

 

[Chas]

Meson radiation however ignores your armour and rad-suit, and hence a meson spinal hitting a 1 million ton behemoth, would wipe out the entire crew on an average roll (700 rads dealt).

? Meson spinal mounts ignore armor, that's clearly stated. It's a special AP effect (only). It's not the same though as their radiation effect being different from any other radiation effect. The radiation effect of meson spinals is just that, a radiation effect, the same as particle weapons. At least that's how I read it. :lol:

 

[Nerhesi]

Meson radiation however ignores your armour and rad-suit, and hence a meson spinal hitting a 1 million ton behemoth, would wipe out the entire crew on an average roll (700 rads dealt).

? Meson spinal mounts ignore armor, that's clearly stated. It's a special AP effect (only). It's not the same though as their radiation effect being different from any other radiation effect. The radiation effect of meson spinals is just that, a radiation effect, the same as particle weapons. At least that's how I read it. :lol:

Hmm.. I can't seem to find the reference in MGT2 now. I could have sworn it was carried over.. if this is a change by design, then you're even more correct in that toss Mesons and Meson screens altogether, since there is functionally zero difference between them and Particle weaponry..

 

[Chas]

Side-notes:
1) I've pointed out to Matt that the AP values on Particle Spinals is redundant. You're doing ridiculous damage - no reason to add 50 or even 10 AP.

Yes, the only thing I could think of this applying to is when you start getting into bombardment. Firing at asteroid, moon or planet bases, which is not the same as typical fleet combat.

 

[AndrewW]

2) Also, I do wish Meson bays make an appearance somewhere - as someone has pointed out, they are apparently part of the OTU as per Traveller 5th edition. I can't be bothered to reach down 3 feet and check the book however Without this - you're absolutely right in that meson screens completely absolute Meson Spinals - because they dont have to worry about stopping anything else.

Meson bays should be appearing in the 'High' Technology chapter.

 

[Chas]

Just putting this here from the paradigm thread as I suspect my post might have been in the tl;dr category.

Screens

A suggestion for nuclear dampers: make these work without any gunner role (we really don’t need another dice roll in combat!). You either have enough of them to cover the ship and they work all the time, or you don’t have them. You can control their size and effectiveness by tech level. So that by TL15 every ship can afford to carry them, just like sensors, and they automatically reduce the nuclear affect. Scaled so you don’t destroy the missile paradigm completely, but you do need to bring a bunch more to the fight.

 

[Chas]

Will the screens see further modification per your previous comments Matt?

As it is capital fight ships will carry say 10-20 meson screens to make the meson spinal weapons effectively redundant, only used for planetary bombardment. While nuclear screens won't be employed at all, you're much better off adding more offensive power than spending weight on the screens as designed. They would need to be at least half the weight us current so the equivalent 100 ton weight would negate a 100t fusion bay 2DD. If they are only negating 1DD for the same weight, then ship designers will only want to put in more bays - and that's not even beginning to take into account nuclear missiles.

 

[Nerhesi]

Well - currently, due to the re-use potential, in adventure class ships Nuclear screens would be very useful. For example, 5 Nuclear screens could potentially reduce 1DD of damage per successful angle screen roll (so a skilled operator could potentially stave off a half dozen torps or missiles a round - or even fusion bay hits). However, when it comes to fleet engagements or ships launching hundreds of nuclear torpedoes and missiles at one another, there needs to be a .. more efficient use of screens.

So.. pretty much what you said Chas - and I think the best fit may be to fit it into Capital/barrage system. So in "adventure mode", it can continue to be used as is - while in the barrage system, it can be translated as a "reduce nuclear/fusion damage taken per turn by X, where is X is the # of screens"

Do we really need to make screens unmanned for that though? Or is this just a "secondary mode" for screens?

 

[Nerhesi]

Looks like this snuck in through the new section Chas!

Screen Optimiser: The Screen Optimiser package takes control of any screens mounted on a ship, and automatically configures them on the fly to best degrade enemy attacks. It automatically performs the Angle Screens (Gunner) action (see page XX) against any attack and can use any number of screens simultaneously.

Screen Optimiser-TL10-MCr5-Bandwidth(10)

So this is automatic Screen usage - guaranteed to function. Lets do a quick test:

Small Fusion Gun Bay - 1DD - 50 power - 50 tons
Medium Fusion Gun Bay - 2DD - 80 power - 100 tons

Nuclear Damper 2D - 20 power - 20 tons.
5 Nuclear Screens 1DD - 100 power - 100 tons.

Ok so if screens are always working and always available for use, it means:
A ship with 10 Nuclear screens can reduce 2DD from each incoming hit, however, the cost of doing so (200 power) is basically more than double the cost of of actually firing that 2DD damage.

This isn't necessarily a bad thing - it just means the captain/crew have to manage power, but perhaps the power cost is too excessive as it stands?

 

[Chas]

I saw this but I'm not sure I understand how it is supposed to work.

Doesn't the software still need to make the Gunner screens action, the equivalent of a roll? And does it get a negative on successive rolls?

The actual mechanic in terms of needing power points diverted to screens vs. damage I like and is a good rationale.

 

[MongooseMatt]

Doesn't the software still need to make the Gunner screens action, the equivalent of a roll? And does it get a negative on successive rolls?

No - keyword in that sentence 'automatically'. Always works.

With regards meson screens, meson bays are in the high tech chapter.

However, with the new rules for spinal weapons, I am not sure anything will stop them...

I keep switching my views on screens, either allowing scaling or adding a bigger version. Not sure we need the complication.

I don't, however, think they need scaling based on ship size - they are not designed to cover an entire ship (that would be Trek-style shields) but target a single attack.

Happy to hear all your thoughts on screens!