Several spinal mounts?

[AnotherDilbert]

When I read the rules I found no limitation on spinal mounts. In another tread Nerhesi pointed out that I was wrong.

Nope. The language implicitly references a single spinal per ship. A ship is built around the spinal weapon.

In many cases, a ship will be built around the weapon itself (hence the term ‘spinal’)

I interpreted that as fluff, not a hard limitation.

This probably needs clarification?

 

[AndrewW]

When I read the rules I found no limitation on spinal mounts. In another tread Nerhesi pointed out that I was wrong.

In many cases, a ship will be built around the weapon itself (hence the term ‘spinal’)

There isn't a rule limit on the number of spinal mounts per ship. In many cases doesn't mean all cases. But who says it couldn't be built around more then one spinal mount?

 

[phavoc]

When I read the rules I found no limitation on spinal mounts. In another tread Nerhesi pointed out that I was wrong.

In many cases, a ship will be built around the weapon itself (hence the term ‘spinal’)

There isn't a rule limit on the number of spinal mounts per ship. In many cases doesn't mean all cases. But who says it couldn't be built around more then one spinal mount?

If you ever watched Star Blazers, the Andromeda class battleships, deployed by Earth at Saturn against the Comet Empire, had dual Wave Motion Guns (http://worldofjaymz.wikia.com/wiki/SBB_Andromeda_Class). But of course the "old" Yamato saved the day - as usual.

Spinal mounts are a bit of a misnomer. While they might be massive enough to require the entire ship built around it, that doesn't mean it might not be able to accommodate multiple ones built at the center of mass. Most of the limitation has to deal with (A) power, and (B) not wanting to put all your eggs in one basket. If you had two spinal mounts in a single ship, it's just as vulnerable as a single ship, and you would lose TWO spinal mounts if it was disabled or destroyed, instead of just a single one in two separate ships.

 

[Nerhesi]

If you had two spinal mounts in a single ship, it's just as vulnerable as a single ship, and you would lose TWO spinal mounts if it was disabled or destroyed, instead of just a single one in two separate ships.

However, you would completely toss balance out the window here. Considering each spinal lets say can annihilate 10x it's weight. Allowing a ship to carry 2-3 spinals means there is even less reason to have bigger ships.

Why would anyone risk large ships and the massives losses associated with losing one, if you could take out a tigress from a single 40k destroyers that has 2-3 TL14 spinals? You wouldn't. Even multi-role ships you would simply make smaller versions of them Maybe the Varge are geniuses after all! Raiders for life!

 

[AnotherDilbert]

The biggest spinals do around 20 000 damage, enough to kill 50 000 dTons of ship. A Tigress wouldn't worry about a few such hits.

You could see multiple spinals as a single bigger spinal.

There is basically no reason to build big ships, but severe disadvantages, so I do not see how this changes anything. I've been waiting for the mythical Capital Ship Combat System to comment on this.

 

[MongooseMatt]

It is getting that way

I want to see how the current round of updates (due later this week!) shake out, and then we'll unleash the capital system.

 

[Chas]

Even if you do just throw in an one spinal/ship rule it won't stop a ship of the line carrying break away hull parts or tenders that carry spinals only. The rules do need to balance driving a bigger bang for your tonnage of a single spinal mount. I too look forward the mythical Capital Ship rule book.

 

[Nerhesi]

Even if you do just throw in an one spinal/ship rule it won't stop a ship of the line carrying break away hull parts or tenders that carry spinals only. The rules do need to balance driving a bigger bang for your tonnage of a single spinal mount. I too look forward the mythical Capital Ship rule book.

In HG, definitely not standalone! I think it'll be our last great hump...

 

[AndrewW]

Even if you do just throw in an one spinal/ship rule it won't stop a ship of the line carrying break away hull parts or tenders that carry spinals only.

You left out docking clamps.

 

[wbnc]

Even if you do just throw in an one spinal/ship rule it won't stop a ship of the line carrying break away hull parts or tenders that carry spinals only.

You left out docking clamps.

Oh yes those are fun...build a ship just big enough to hold a spinal mount, power system, bridge, armor and other required bits and pieces. no maneuver drive or jmp drive..then use a docking clamp t mount it on a ship that's rated to carry it's own weight, and the weapon pods tonnage....now build a ship that's rated to carry say six of these weapons units...and you have the equivalent one large ship, firing seven spinal mounts. No need for multiple mounts on a single ship, no rule broken,bent. or even seriously scuffed up.....everything is paid for in tonnage, and credits....now just add some sharks with frikking lasers attached to their heads.

 

[Nerhesi]

I believe this exact kind of ship, battle-tender, is in trillion credit squadron (or was it sector fleet?)

It carries like 6 x 5000 tonners which have a high-end spinal each.

 

[Chas]

That's what battle tenders are, carriers that simply lug along the battle riders.

The issue that we're trying to avoid is having battle ships that are glorified tenders, capital ships having their own spinal mount, but then carrying or bolting on with docking clamps, a bunch of additional spinal mounting vessels of effectively equal power. If you allow that then pretty much every big ship design ever previously made for Traveller needs to be thrown out as non-sensible with only 1 spinal mount/ship. The balance should be there such that the capital ship is better getting one big thumper rather than a bunch of little ones. I'd hope to see the spinal mount damage curve increase rapidly with size...

We can easily find a balance point here where say a 5kton spinal mount does X, a 10k ton spinal mount does 2X (the rider also having to pay for the rest of the ship gives an advantage to the 2X build) or as suits.

Let's see when the release comes out.