small craft as extra turrets

[PsiTraveller]

I have not slogged through the 96 pages of ship design philosophy thread so if this is a repeated question I apologize.

Assume a 200 ton ship with engines sized for 300 tons.
The ship has 9 1 ton Docking clamps on it. Each Docking clamp has a ten ton fighter or drone on it. The fighters have a computer that can run EW defensive software. The firmpoint on the small craft has 4 missiles on it.

Missiles do not suffer the range restrictions of other firmpoint weapons if I understand correctly. This means that a 200 ton ship could attack with 2 Hardpoints of weapons (6 missiles if we went with 2 triple missile turrets), plus 7 missiles as another salvo.

In addition the small craft could be used to perform EW defense against incoming salvos. This could allow the reduction of a large number of missiles from incoming salvos.

Another option is to have beam weapons on some of the smallcraft to allow point defense against incoming missiles, in addition to the EW defense.

The small craft could be drones with computers large enough to run the virtual software to act on their own. Or they could be manned with pilots.

Has anyone done builds with this type of thing in mind?

 

[phavoc]

I would not allow the EW defense, but I would allow the laser PD. No massed EW defense because it would skew things too much, in my opinion.

There's no reason you couldn't put computers instead of a person. The cost wouldn't be cheap though.

 

[Condottiere]

Fratricide is a possibility.

The downside would be the vulnerability to long range energy weapon exchanges.

 

[Reynard]

If I understand the architecture presented, the small craft remain attached. They would be a target to hull hits on the larger craft. They can't use manuevers other than what the main ship performs. EW wouldn't help as they would suffer attacks directed at the ship just like drop tanks and external cargo pods. They depend on the ship when firing weapons as they can not fly or manuever. Sounds more a headache.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Even if still attached I would consider the fighters separate craft.

Missiles do not suffer the range restrictions of other firmpoint weapons if I understand correctly.

Correct.

This means that a 200 ton ship could attack with 2 Hardpoints of weapons (6 missiles if we went with 2 triple missile turrets), plus 7 missiles as another salvo.

Yes. Form a squadron and you can launch a single large salvo.

In addition the small craft could be used to perform EW defense against incoming salvos. This could allow the reduction of a large number of missiles from incoming salvos.

Each enemy salvo can only be attacked with EW once per round. EW drones offer no advantage.

Another option is to have beam weapons on some of the smallcraft to allow point defense against incoming missiles, in addition to the EW defense.

Yes, but it would require PD software that is quite expensive, making it impractical.

The small craft could be drones with computers large enough to run the virtual software to act on their own. Or they could be manned with pilots.

Yes.

Has anyone done builds with this type of thing in mind?

Yes, I have tried it. Generally it is uneconomical.


If you ignore the minimum size restriction you can make very small (<1 dT) battery powered missile drones that are quite effective.

 

[PsiTraveller]

My thought was to have the ships disengage from the ship for combat Reynard.

The Point Defence usage for a squadron of ships is covered on page 85 of Highguard, and EW counter missile work is covered on pg 162 of the Core book. Having a 3 ton cockpit and 2 man crew could allow an attack and a sensor action each turn from the ship, or a computer running virtual crew to do the same tasks.

The idea behind the ships is to overload a smaller ship sensor defence and allow a salvo to get in unscathed to inflict maximum damage.

The economics of the ship are obviously problematic. I will mess around with it when I get a chance and post something.

 

[Reynard]

Essentially then you created a small craft battlerider.

"The idea behind the ships is to overload a smaller ship..."

Hmm, seems a bit of overkill even as a pirate or commerce raider. Not too many 100-200 ton ships to give it a challenge at all especially credit for credit. Better to test such a design against something that matches its cost. You do show why carries are valuable.

 

[Condottiere]

Missile pods would be an alternative, problem being that according to the rules, all firmpointed weapon systems are capped at close range, though this view isn't universal.

 

[PsiTraveller]

How do you cap a missile to Close range? The limit of 4 missiles per firmpoint is the limitation for missiles.

 

[Reynard]

"A weapon mounted upon a Firmpoint has the following changes applied to it.
\Weapons of Medium range or less are reduced to Adjacent range.
Weapons of greater range are reduced to Close range.
A weapon on a Firmpoint may not have its range increased beyond Close by any means."

No exclusion given to missiles.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

The counter-argument is that missile racks don't have a range...

Nerhesi confirmed that missiles launched from firmpoints do not have limited range:

Since unlike direct-fire weapons, they dont have decreased range..

 

[AnotherDilbert]

The Point Defence usage for a squadron of ships is covered on page 85 of Highguard, ...

I had missed or forgotten about that...

Any fighter or squadron equipped with pulse or beam lasers may use the Point Defence action (see page 160 of the Traveller Core Rulebook) to defend either themselves or any ship being attacked by missiles that is within Adjacent or Close range.

I think this mean a squadron PD fighter needs neither a turret nor PD software. This looks promising...

We can make a 10 dT fighter at TL15 with a laser, 9G, and Armour 15 for about MCr 5, including its own grappling hook (so it can attach itself to any ship). With a good gunner it would kill about 4 missiles per round, or 40 missiles for a 100 dT squadron.

We can add a 100 dT squadron to a warship for about 90 dT and MCr 20 (+MCr 50 for the fighters) for added jump drive, fuel, and staterooms.
We can add 7 triple laser turrets (that kill the same amount of missiles) for about 37 dT, MCr 54, and 7 hardpoints.
We can add 4 PD batteries for about 79 dT, MCr 119, and 4 hardpoints.

We can see that the fighters is not very cheap, but they save hardpoints. Since the fighters can be used for other tasks, they are probably better than PD batteries.

 

[Condottiere]

While I tend to agree ammunition is separate from launcher, it opens up an interesting can of worms.

In the ecosystem of Mongoose Second ship design system, it means that we can tweak the launcher and ammunition separately in regards to the advanced and primitive options.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

I think not:

The advantages/disadvantages are meant for the weapon systems not the ammunition. They may not apply to all types of weapon systems (such as long range really wouldn't apply to missiles/torpedoes).

 

[PsiTraveller]

Edit: Thanks to AnotherDilbert pointing out ships are 10 ton minimum, I had 7 in first draft. oops

TL 14 Missile/EW Drone
Tons 10: Cost 0.35
M Drive: Thrust 9 Tons 0.63
Power Plant: TL 12 Tons 1 Cost 1
Fuel: 1 Ton: 4 weeks operation
Bridge : 3 tons Cost 0.5
Computer: Bandwidth 20 Tl 12 Cost 5
Software: Manoeuvre (bw 0 ),
Virtual Crew 1bw 10) Cost 5
Evade 1 (bw 10 ): Cost 1

Weapons: 1 Firmpoint Missile Rack Cost 0.75
Extra ammo magazine and feeder mechanism Cost 0.35 for 12 TL 14 missiles
Feeder mechanism: 0.15
Energy needs: 15 produced: 15
Total tons 9.93
Cost: 16.26

This allows EW rolls at +3 and Evade rolls at +1 every turn.
The ammo and magazine feeder allows for extended combat duration. Cost of feeder was put at 150 000 Credits as a guess. Not even sure auto feeders are allowed.
Added bridger in an edit, ships are 10dt min. Added 3 ton bridge to allow pilots, otherwise this could act as a drone.

As it stands the 10 ton drone would allow a ship to have 12 tons of docking clamps on it, and 12 ships and 96 total tons extra on the outside of the ship. Once released for combat this would add a 12 missile salvo for 4 rounds or 16 rounds if the magazine idea is acceptable.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

I would accept missile auto-loading from dedicated magazines at no cost.

The reloading rules is for schlepping missiles from the cargo hold to a turret on a standard design w/o magazines, in my opinion.


Minimum size of space-craft is 10 dT.
You leave about 3 dT unspecified, probably for a sensor package?
I don't understand your power budget, you seem to have plenty of surplus power?
A missile rack on a fixed mount costs 0.75 + 0.1 = MCr 0.85.


You have plenty of sensor actions available with this design, but I still do not understand what you are going to do with them?

 

[PsiTraveller]

I edited the design to reflect your correction, thanks for pointing out the 10 dt minimu, I had forgotten.

I added a bridge to allow a pilot and sensor operator to work as well. A better design is in the works (but I am at work so cannot spend too much time on this.)

The sensor actions I want to use to attack missile salvos in multi ship combat. If there are only a couple of ships fighting the actions could be wasted, but it allows extra tries if on attempt fails. That is my thought anyway.

Another design would be to have a laser to act as point defence close to the ship, as well as EW attack incoming missiles.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

The sensor actions I want to use to attack missile salvos in multi ship combat. If there are only a couple of ships fighting the actions could be wasted, but it allows extra tries if on attempt fails. That is my thought anyway.

Electronic Warfare may be performed upon a salvo multiple times over several rounds, with the effects being cumulative. However, a salvo may only be subjected to Electronic Warfare once per round, no matter how many sensor operators are available.

You only get one try per salvo. Unless the enemy is deliberately launching many small salvoes (lowering his hit percentage) all the sensor actions are likely wasted.

Without a skilled sensor operator or expensive sensor package you are unlikely to have much effect on the salvoes, I believe you are better off having extra sensor operators on the carrying ship (presuming it has a better EW DM).

 

[Condottiere]

It's something you have to figure out yourself as to the ratio of outlay to your benefit.

It's quite possible that the care and feeding of the pilot is worth more than the spacecraft.

 

[Condottiere]

Oh, and speaking of weapon platform and ammunition.

Sandcanisters and railgun ball bearings rely on the launcher for range, missiles and torpedoes are reliant on their propellant, so range is pretty much dependent on that.