Smaller weapons on space craft

[Nerhesi]

This area needs a couple of minor additions Matt to avoid abuses:

a) All weapons are limited to Adjacent range (cannot be modified). Weapons with a range that is normally less than 1km suffer a -6 to hit in space combat. (e.g. PGMPs, FGMPs)
b) Artillery weapons suffer a -6 to hit and can only hit stationary targets.
b) For weapons greater than 250kg, in addition to consuming their weight in tonnage they will each require 1 Firmpoint on smallcraft. Larger craft exchange 1 Hardpoint for 3 Firmpoints (alignment)

I was thinking of this because of those potential abuses (read: me) who would want to put 4 sets of quad linked FGMPs on a smallcraft, then perhaps add a Fusion Gun-Z or a Meson Accelerator or something nutty like that. You want to stop those silly guys

This allows the customization, without the pitfall of having space dominated by vehicle-weapon using craft.

 

[MongooseMatt]

I think I will let these pass, actually...

What might be an abuse in the 3I universe might be perfectly acceptable in, say, Mega-City One. High Guard needs to cover all universes, not just the 3I.

At the end of the day, this is what refs are for I think we should count on them to decide what is permissible in their universe, rather than imposing a hard rule that limits everyone (got something in the Intro chapter about this).

 

[Nerhesi]

I'm actually concerned regarding all settings, otherwise it would become redundant to even have turrets at all in some scenarios.

If you consider turrets or barbettes take tonnage, power, etc... meanwhile for 4-tons I can put has a short-range, 3D6 fusion gun with a 10km (short) range

Anyways, something for you gents to consider

 

[MongooseMatt]

If you consider turrets or barbettes take tonnage, power, etc... meanwhile for 4-tons I can put has a short-range, 3D6 fusion gun with a 10km (short) range

Power hungry

And, given that it is in the High Technology chapter, I am okay with that, I think...

 

[Nerhesi]

If you consider turrets or barbettes take tonnage, power, etc... meanwhile for 4-tons I can put has a short-range, 3D6 fusion gun with a 10km (short) range

Power hungry

And, given that it is in the High Technology chapter, I am okay with that, I think...

Think we just spoke past eachother. Not talking about the Fusion gun in the High technology chapter.

I'm saying that a "smaller weapon", the fusion gun from Vehicle Weapons, which has Short range and Weighs 4 tons, is now the biggest and best weapon for small-craft - it does NOT take a firm point slots, has longer ranger than any other weapon (on small craft), and out damages a pulse laser

I think the simplest way here is universally limiting the range of any "smaller weapon" to Close, and forcing them to take up a firm point slot in addition to the internal space. This applies to any weapon that is >1 ton

 

[Dracous]

Even worse, the vehicle mounted plasma and fusion guns have Armour piercing. My fighters will mount these in instead of star ship scale weapons because the Armour piercing makes them better. Plus the 4 tons are 4 vehicle scale tons, which is smaller than star ship scale. (By more than half), freeing up more room for mounting more armour.

Fighters have just become close range armour peircing heavily armoured awesome death dealing machines.
To paraphrase protoss from Starcraft, "Carriers have arrived!"

 

[Nerhesi]

Even worse, the vehicle mounted plasma and fusion guns have Armour piercing. My fighters will mount these in instead of star ship scale weapons because the Armour piercing makes them better. Plus the 4 tons are 4 vehicle scale tons, which is smaller than star ship scale. (By more than half), freeing up more room for mounting more armour.

Fighters have just become close range armour peircing heavily armoured awesome death dealing machines.
To paraphrase protoss from Starcraft, "Carriers have arrived!"

To be accurate though:

a) We know from last conversations that AP from Traveller Scale will not scale upwards. So the Fusion Cannons are just 3D. (unless Matt weighs in on otherwise , regardless, they will at least be divided by 10, so at most AP 3)
b) Weapons over 250kg (any of the crazy ones), take up space equal to their tonnage. Flat out equal. So 4 tons = 4dtons. So that is a good inefficiency.
c) Weapons over 250kg need to be mounted in turrets or fixed mounts. Which means, they will take up hardpoints - which don't exist on small craft. Even if you were to interpret they take up firmpoints, you'd have to apply firmpoint rules so they lose range and so on.

Still needs clarity though

 

[Dracous]

The rules, as they are currently written, do not support what you are saying.

a) It is not stated in the core rules (or anywhere else that I can find) that AP does not scale. The closest I can find is on page 157 of the core rules which states

Note that the multiplication or division of damage due
to scaling is performed after all other modifiers for
damage have been applied, including Effect and the
Destructive trait.

Since AP has not been specifically rules out of the equation, taking the rule above, it seems that damaged is divided by 10 after AP is taken into account.

b) I can't find that rule in either high guard, CSC or the vehicle rules. The only thing I can find that is is the following rule in the vehicle weapon rules

Any spacecraft weapon (see High Guard for a full range) can, in theory,
be mounted upon a vehicle. In order to do this, a vehicle needs two things –
enough room to physically fit the weapon and sufficient power to operate it.
To place a spacecraft weapon into a vehicle, simply multiply the tonnage of
the weapon by ten. This is how many Spaces it will consume, to a minimum
of 10 Spaces. Unless it is to be placed in a fixed mount, it will also need a
spacecraft style turret which, at one ton on a spacecraft, will mean another
10 Spaces is required.

Ok, my earlier calcualtion was way off because the vehicle mounted plasma or fusion weapon takes up 16 spaces. So the weapon is larger. I'll assume that if attached to a starship it will still need the firmpoint, which needs 1 ton, plus 1.6 tons for the weapon. So 2.6 tons taken with the Fusion cannon as opposed to 1 ton for a spacecraft scale weapon. But, the fusion cannon does not need to be supplied by the power plant, so that saves me 9 PowerPoints which means I don't need that extra ton of powerplant space. ..... ok.. I am not ahead here.
Maybe I'll use the Heavy Gauss Cannon. AP15, Autofire of 2, that will turn enemy ships into Swiss cheese all for 1.08 tons of installed space.... ok.. now I am ahead.

c) I will grant you this one, but grudgingly, since if i kept the weapon on a vehicle and used it in space combat it would not have the "firmpoint" modifiers applied for range. But in the end it does not really change the range anyway so it's all good.

 

[Nerhesi]

The rules, as they are currently written, do not support what you are saying.

a) It is not stated in the core rules (or anywhere else that I can find) that AP does not scale. The closest I can find is on page 157 of the core rules which states
Since AP has not been specifically rules out of the equation, taking the rule above, it seems that damaged is divided by 10 after AP is taken into account.

I should have been clearer. The rules dont specify on AP. This is based on conversations with Matt.
Of course, by your logic - APDS ammo on a Gauss Rifle would have more AP than a Tachyon Bay... - so obviously that is not the case.

b) I can't find that rule in either high guard, CSC or the vehicle rules..

The rule is in high guard, Weapons word document.
"Weapons of a mass of 250 kg or more will consume an amount of space equal to their mass, to a minimum of 1 ton. They are required to be mounted in turrets (if they mass one ton or less) or fixed mounts and again, will consume no power"

Space = mass. So weight of weapon I would think takes equal dtons. I think.

 

[Dracous]

I should have been clearer. The rules dont specify on AP. This is based on conversations with Matt.
Of course, by your logic - APDS ammo on a Gauss Rifle would have more AP than a Tachyon Bay... - so obviously that is not the case.

Actually, I'd say it's not obvious. A tachyon bay could have pretty crap penetration, the gauss rifle is great at short range, tachyon bay has the range.
It is also far less obvious than you imply when we use the Heavy Gauss Cannon, a vehicle mounted weapon with a 2km range.
What is needed is a clarifying statement in the rules, otherwise the passage I quoted seems to be all we have. Matt needs to get his conversation into print

The rule is in high guard, Weapons word document.
"Weapons of a mass of 250 kg or more will consume an amount of space equal to their mass, to a minimum of 1 ton. They are required to be mounted in turrets (if they mass one ton or less) or fixed mounts and again, will consume no power"

Space = mass. So weight of weapon I would think takes equal dtons. I think.

Dammit... I looked and looked. I must have passed that passage every time . OK... but.. now I read that a hardpoint is not needed... looks like I am back in business with my Heavy Gauss Cannon, 2 tons, no power needed, no hard-point needed, AP15 and auto fire. A superior weapon for fighter combat.

 

[Condottiere]

This should be fun, I'm looking forward as to how the sandcaster fares, since my calculation gives it a range of two hundred metres in normal gravity.

 

[Nerhesi]

Actually, I'd say it's not obvious. A tachyon bay could have pretty crap penetration, the gauss rifle is great at short range, tachyon bay has the range.

Oh no no no - God no. This can't be happening - you can't be serious!

An Ak47 or 1950s sniper rifle, with APDS ammo,are guaranteed to damage a battleship! Meanwhile a triple pulse laser, a fusion barbette, a particle barbette, etc... You know -- Garage sized weapons, have a real change of bouncing off? So I stand infront of that several inches thick.. perhaps even half a meter thick wall of armour of a TL12 battleship.. and I'm guaranteed to hit the guy on the other side. But the garage sized space weapons, still have a good chance to bounce off - even when both are fired from adjacent range? It doesn't get more obvious than that. Especially since RAW doesn't address it at all - so yes it need clarity, but I doubt any Referee would let AP carry over un-reduced.

Our last conversation with Matt (when we were designing the vehicle streamlining damage and hull rules) was however to make AP disappear when it goes up a scale (this further balanced the Fusion Canon and the like so it's not 3D AP3, but rather just 3D).

The rule is in high guard, Weapons word document.
"Weapons of a mass of 250 kg or more will consume an amount of space equal to their mass, to a minimum of 1 ton. They are required to be mounted in turrets (if they mass one ton or less) or fixed mounts and again, will consume no power"

Space = mass. So weight of weapon I would think takes equal dtons. I think.

Dammit... I looked and looked. I must have passed that passage every time . OK... but.. now I read that a hardpoint is not needed... looks like I am back in business with my Heavy Gauss Cannon, 2 tons, no power needed, no hard-point needed, AP15 and auto fire. A superior weapon for fighter combat.[/quote]

Actually you still do need hardpoints, I've bolded the other part of the sentence... Turrets and Fixed mounts, are by definition, Hard Points.

 

[AndrewW]

Actually you still do need hardpoints, I've bolded the other part of the sentence... Turrets and Fixed mounts, are by definition, Hard Points.

You can have a turret on a firmpoint.

 

[Nerhesi]

Actually you still do need hardpoints, I've bolded the other part of the sentence... Turrets and Fixed mounts, are by definition, Hard Points.

You can have a turret on a firmpoint.

Yeah covered that above in the previous reply Basically, your >250kg weapons just aren't "free"

 

[Dracous]

Oh no no no - God no. This can't be happening - you can't be serious!

I'm basically predicting the arguments my players will put forward when this does come up. So, I am semi-serious... call me a tongue in cheek devil's advocate. :twisted:
Consider this, when they shoot the vehicle mounted heavy Gauss cannon at that starship, they are going to ask why the AP does not apply.

An Ak47 or 1950s sniper rifle, with APDS ammo,are guaranteed to damage a battleship! Meanwhile a triple pulse laser, a fusion barbette, a particle barbette, etc... You know -- Garage sized weapons, have a real change of bouncing off? So I stand infront of that several inches thick.. perhaps even half a meter thick wall of armour of a TL12 battleship.. and I'm guaranteed to hit the guy on the other side. But the garage sized space weapons, still have a good chance to bounce off - even when both are fired from adjacent range? It doesn't get more obvious than that. Especially since RAW doesn't address it at all - so yes it need clarity, but I doubt any Referee would let AP carry over un-reduced.

That is a decent argument for hand weapons, but I have to ask, what about the vehicle mounted Heavy Gauss Cannon? Why does that have to drop it's AP? That is a big shell, designed to penetrate the Armour you describe above. Yes the hand rifle makes no sense, but the vehicle weapon, well.. what is going on here? I find it harder to argue that the AP is dropped.

So we really really need this stated in the rules. AP is dropped, no arguments, that is what happens. Stops all this speculation in it's tracks. Alternatively the AP could be divided by 10 and fractions dropped, just like the damage. That way the Orbital Defence Cannon, a weapon designed to engage spacecraft in low orbit, does not lose its AP when it takes on a spacecraft, just reduces it, and the Meson Accelerator can keep it's special Armour defeating properties.

Actually you still do need hardpoints, I've bolded the other part of the sentence... Turrets and Fixed mounts, are by definition, Hard Points.

Yes... I read this last night an took it to mean vehicle turrets and fixed mounts, not starship turrets and fixed mount. In the context of the high guard rules it makes sense to to assume the hardpoint is needed.

 

[Chas]

I'm having similar issues going the other way, putting space weapons, and then multiple personal weapons, on a vehicle.

http://forum.mongoosepublishing.com/viewtopic.php?f=148&t=118304

One thing the rules are going to need is well described examples of actual builds, the how and why, to help newbies!!!

 

[Dracous]

I am starting to consider building orbital grav vehicles with multiple Plasma Gun-C fixed mounts, they will make excellent planetary defense fighters against starships. We just need to work out what happens to the AP.

I wonder how high a grav vehicle can fly? Hmm... I could put them in carriers and transport them from world to world... wonder how they fly in space?

:twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted: :twisted:

 

[Annatar Giftbringer]

Regarding AP values and space-scale targets, p.75 of the rulebook has some info on the AP trait and how it does not apply to spacecraft scale targets at all, unless the weapon firing is also spacecraft scale... So no penetrating starship hulls with gauss rifles.

Nothing for the opposite though, as far as I can see (space weapon fires at personal scale target). My guess would be that the AP value gets multiplied by 10, just like damage.

 

[Nerhesi]

Oh - Well thank you. That makes the entire half of this thread moot and thanks again for answering it

Yes it clearly says on Page 75 that AP values dont apply vs spacecraft scale unless it is from a spacecraft scale weapon! Awesome!

 

[Dracous]

Oh... so it does. Excellent.

Now to festoon my grav vehicle with fusion-X guns, should roll occasionally high enough damage to get past the even the best Armour. :twisted: