Ship ammunition
- Thread starter FentonGib
- Start date
far-trader
Mongoose
DFW said:
I think you need to reread them, it actually doesn't state ANY ready load. Or quote page and text that states the ready load. That there is ANY ready load is an assumption. One I also made (felt forced to) from reading the lack of ANY stated capacity. The additional ammo storage is stated clearly and not at issue.
The actual rules as written most strongly suggest that one has to load the missile launcher, from storage, BEFORE firing it. Which frankly seemed too silly to accept for me. The best assumption was that one could at least have ONE ready round in the launcher.
I'm not assuming anything. Just wondering why it wasn't clearly stated what the ready capacity actually is.
E.D.Quibell
Banded Mongoose
far-trader said:
Cheers Dan, I completly missed it.
Best regards,
Ewan
far-trader
Mongoose
DFW said:
There's nothing in the rules about turrets holding ANY! That's the problem. And a bit frustrating
I'd rather not make up rules where it shouldn't be necessary, like something as basic as this. And even the logic of being able to have ONE ready round is not supported by the rules as written. THAT has to be a mistake. I'd hope...
far-trader said:There's nothing in the rules about turrets holding ANY! That's the problem. And a bit frustrating
I'd rather not make up rules where it shouldn't be necessary, like something as basic as this. And even the logic of being able to have ONE ready round is not supported by the rules as written. THAT has to be a mistake. I'd hope...
It can be a mistake to hold additional ammo (above what is locked and loaded) in a turret. For obvious reasons that I don't think require elaboration...
far-trader said:There's nothing in the rules about turrets holding ANY! That's the problem. And a bit frustrating
Wow, I hadn't noticed MgT doesn't have the "3 per" rule. It's so ingrained into my view of Trav turrets that I hadn't even stopped to look for it. That's crazy, and is almost certainly an editing oversight.
Oh well, IMTU (as in CT), they hold 3 missiles or canisters per weapon mount. If you want reloads, you need to allocate cargo space. When I'm playing with Adults (I run games w/my kids mostly) I would probably make it illegal to keep your turret launchers loaded (or your turrets powered up) within some distance of a class C or better starport. (Subject to local LL enforcement, of course.)
I don't think it's unreasonable to have the launcher loaded - i.e. the ammunition will take up cost but no tonnage - if you want.
As a result one salvo will be at 'stand-ready'. Anything else requires you to buy ammunition.
Also, I'd note that (at least when designing a ship rather than using an 'off-the-peg' one) you should specifically identify the volume being used as the magazine - simply because ammunition storage should be somewhere where it can be connected either directly or by some feeder mechanism to the weapon.
Equally, things do occasionally end up being bought in 0.5 dTon lots - there's no reason you can't have a smaller quantity of ammo than a full dTon.
In theory, all launcher-type weapons should be able to store their ready round in the launching position with no space penalty. Think of it like torpedoes in a tube - they can be stored there for immediate launch, but typically are not left loaded.
As someone pointed out, the rules are extremely horrible about talking about ammunition storage, and in the rare cases that they do (such as railguns) the rules specifically talk about on-mount storage for railguns, but ignores other weapons. It's a horrible inconsistency that should be addressed in errata.
My personal feeling is that there is probably should be some on-mount storage capability. The classic one-ton for 'fire control' should accomodate loading mechanisms that would allow for onmount storage of ammo before they start accessing the ammo stored in the magazine. Classic traveller did talk about the 3 ready-rounds for each launcher being available. I can't imagine anyone installing a turret and not allocating some ammo storage space, but in theory... if you think your combat will be over in three rounds, hey go for it!
So how does one go about getting an offical errata response from MgT?
As someone pointed out, the rules are extremely horrible about talking about ammunition storage, and in the rare cases that they do (such as railguns) the rules specifically talk about on-mount storage for railguns, but ignores other weapons. It's a horrible inconsistency that should be addressed in errata.
My personal feeling is that there is probably should be some on-mount storage capability. The classic one-ton for 'fire control' should accomodate loading mechanisms that would allow for onmount storage of ammo before they start accessing the ammo stored in the magazine. Classic traveller did talk about the 3 ready-rounds for each launcher being available. I can't imagine anyone installing a turret and not allocating some ammo storage space, but in theory... if you think your combat will be over in three rounds, hey go for it!
So how does one go about getting an offical errata response from MgT?
In the case of my players they have a ship with Thrust-6 and Crystaliron armour - their normal tactic is to outrun/outfly any trouble rather than outfight it. 3 rounds would be ideal, but them taking a ton of sandcaster and a ton of missile ammo means they'll only fire a couple of shots but be using 2 tons of space for it (and their ship has only 6 tons storage, so that would give them +30%).
Though I understand the principles of setting a standard rule, I do fail to understand how a beam weapon would take up the same fire-control tonnage as a missile launcher... since I'd have thought that the latter would need more space for ammo loaders etc... though I digress that's probably factored into the ammo tonnage.
Bense
Cosmic Mongoose
Why do you need an official errata response? Just do what works best for your game.
In mine the turrets come with no ammo (except the railgun barbettes) - you have to allocate what was previously cargo space to a magazine for missiles or sand barrels.
This doesn't mean that someone has to go manually haul the missiles from the cargo bay in my games - I judge that the turret and ammo space includes the stuff needed to set up an automatic feed.
In mine the turrets come with no ammo (except the railgun barbettes) - you have to allocate what was previously cargo space to a magazine for missiles or sand barrels.
This doesn't mean that someone has to go manually haul the missiles from the cargo bay in my games - I judge that the turret and ammo space includes the stuff needed to set up an automatic feed.
I for one hate doing house-rules - for me a house-rule signifies either a percieved error in the rules or something I strongly disagree with. If I have to make umpteen house rules, then frankly I might as well make up my own ruleset in stead of spending money buying one.
I'm thus keen on erratas and updates over house-rules.
I'm thus keen on erratas and updates over house-rules.
FentonGib said:
A laser needs to be able to send a precise beam over a great distance, while missile just needs a fuzzier lock on until it gets close, when its onboard electronics are more important than the ship's. I could see lasers needing more fire control, with missile fire control being smaller but offset by loading gear.
AndrewW said:
Well, *all* weapons are doing that, so it's a common denominator. But with a missile you can just eject it and let it match vectors with the target. A laser is going to have to be very precisely aimed to have any hope of hitting. I think the fire control tonnage also covers the gunner's station, power linkages, machinery to rotate the turret etc.
Actually, the need for any kind of turret (as opposed to a fixed mount) for a space missile is debatable... The main reason I can see is for modular weapon capacity (i.e. switch out a laser for a missile). That might have a lot to do with the fire control business, now that I think of it.
Well that would make sense for smart missiles, but not (at least as much) for basic missiles... but my point is that the rule is a one-for-all rule that has room for more accuracy. A beam weapon would require room for capacitors, focussing stuff, etc... whilst, missile launchers may rely on the missile or ship's sensors but need room for loading equipment.
Both can round off to the same, I agree. But to me a beam weapon's power thingies are like it's in-built never-ending ammo supply, whilst a missile would rely on missiles. I'd have thought that if an energy weapon can be bought and used without extra tonnage, that a missile likewise should bring at least one shot or more without requiring tonnage (though u can still charge cost).
