Speaking of Ship weapons....
- Thread starter Infojunky
- Start date
Does a particle beam (much less a laser beam) barbette even make sense?!? - Barbettes at 5 tons would be equivalent to 5 triple turrets (so 15 particle beams) and become an all-or-nothing hit...
So possible 15 x 3d6 versus 4d6 - and one system to be destroyed versus 5 separate ones? Just doesn't add up - or I'm missing/mis-reading something here [HG pg 48-49, 65 all I found]!
The barbettes for torpedoes and ortillery I can see (different tech). The railgun at only 3d6 is perhaps not very cost effective - but its different tech at least (i.e. doesn't have turret mount).
This looks like a rule added for 'coolness' factor - without being thought through. A better change, IMHO, would have been variable size turrents (and bay) weapons - so one could increase the power/rounds/autofire as tonnage was used/credits applied (and apply TL modifiers/upgrades as well).
So possible 15 x 3d6 versus 4d6 - and one system to be destroyed versus 5 separate ones? Just doesn't add up - or I'm missing/mis-reading something here [HG pg 48-49, 65 all I found]!
The barbettes for torpedoes and ortillery I can see (different tech). The railgun at only 3d6 is perhaps not very cost effective - but its different tech at least (i.e. doesn't have turret mount).
This looks like a rule added for 'coolness' factor - without being thought through. A better change, IMHO, would have been variable size turrents (and bay) weapons - so one could increase the power/rounds/autofire as tonnage was used/credits applied (and apply TL modifiers/upgrades as well).
Barbette only takes a hardpoint, so you could have 5 (or whatever). The damage amount seems to be to get through armor and/or have harder (or more) hits (per hit gah), right? So unless everyone is mega-armouring their ships, 6d whether in one hit or 2x2d should prolly be 'bout the same in damage.
Is a particle weapon *really* TL8 like it says? used to be like TL14 (sigh). There ain't no such thing as a laser barbette. If so, would prolly (fer sure!) use a lot more energy like a PA one, so have the power plant stuff apply. I always used to view multiple lasers as being interpreted as just a better-bigger one rather than a buncha same lil ones, ie:
a triple beam laser is a single mount (turret costs more = to triple 'cause it need more capacitators or whatever) Bigger laser that fires three times, or else cuts more deeply (three attacks possible, granted not all-in-one-blow thing but meh who cares, all at one target). Two triple lasers equivalent, again bigger mount (2t, 2MCr) for 6x blammo.
There's still some unresolved issues as regards gunner skills, number of mounts per turret, how fire control software applies, line up shot, etc. Would help for there to be a sweet legit combat example somewhere (heh maybe there is)
Is a particle weapon *really* TL8 like it says? used to be like TL14 (sigh). There ain't no such thing as a laser barbette. If so, would prolly (fer sure!) use a lot more energy like a PA one, so have the power plant stuff apply. I always used to view multiple lasers as being interpreted as just a better-bigger one rather than a buncha same lil ones, ie:
a triple beam laser is a single mount (turret costs more = to triple 'cause it need more capacitators or whatever) Bigger laser that fires three times, or else cuts more deeply (three attacks possible, granted not all-in-one-blow thing but meh who cares, all at one target). Two triple lasers equivalent, again bigger mount (2t, 2MCr) for 6x blammo.
There's still some unresolved issues as regards gunner skills, number of mounts per turret, how fire control software applies, line up shot, etc. Would help for there to be a sweet legit combat example somewhere (heh maybe there is)
BP said:
When things like armor and a ships inherent damage resistance are taken into account yes the do make sense. A heavier laser makes sense in that it can damage in pl;ace where a PA is ineffective, such as making ground strikes and within Gas Giants Atmosphere.
BP said:
Ok, Turrets and Barbettes are equivalent mounts, in the lasers case it would be 3x1d6 for beam turret vs. 1x3d6 for a laser Barbette.
One of the things to consider is the average number of hits each weapon inflicts as the dice tend to obscure the results. Take the average of the number of dice thrown and divide by 4, round up this will give the average number of hits.
1d6 => 1 hit
2d6 => 2 hit
3d6 => 3 hit
4d6 => 4 hit
And so on....
I don't assume that damage is linear scale either.
BP said:
Well yes, that is kinda what I am looking for too, I'm not changing anything just adding chrome and options.
Good point - but if you are limited on hardpoints due to smaller ship size then the extra 4 tons for barbette is gonna hurt more than 1D6 extra damage can account for (speaking of the particale barbette). As you said, it only matters in special situations...Maccat said:
Not following you here - 1 barbette versus 5 turrets = 1 critical point of failure versus 5 independent ones!Infojunky said:
The heavier laser will have to be much heavier except for in extremely armoured targets (and even then...)
But they are not equivalent tonnage - so I can have 5 times the overall firepower/chances to hit with the turrets versus the barbettes...
And the probabilities are still greater with the 5 versus 1...
Understood - just saying that balance would mean, to me, that the barbette for 5 times the tonnage should have way better something (power, accuracy, rate, etc - not linear, but still worthwhile). 3D6 versus 15D6 and 5x better survivable plus 4 more to hit chances?
Of course, if the hardpoints aren't available - that does provide a better balance - but give it some more punch...
Unfortunately, the damage can't be modified too much (since Bay weapons at 50 tons would become undesirable). So better armour, rate of fire, etc.
For lasers - there are no laser bay weapons, so a pumped up laser makes even more sense, though it shouldn't break the bay vs. turret vs. spinal 'balance'...
Maybe increase optimal range (pulse laser to medium) and lower rate of fire or accuracy (4d6 but only every other turn, or worse DMs). So a cheaper, slightly shorter range option opposed to particle barbette..
P.S. - I haven't tried MGT space combat yet, so I could be totally out in left field in all this... just collating data as they say... :wink:
snrdg121408
Mongoose
Hello BP,
From the turret Weapons Table on page 111 of the Core rule book there is a range difference between lasers and particle beams:
Pulse Laser - short range
Beam Laser - medium range
Particle beam - long range
A standard particle beam turret does 3d6 + crew hit damage. Neither laser type has the extra damage.
HG pp. 50-51 has weapons tables which shows the following information
Weapons Tonnage and Cost table (HG p. 50)
Particle Barbette Damage 4d6, Range Long.
Capital Ship Barrage Attack Table (HG p 50)
Pulse Laser Range Short, Damage per weapon 2, Attack roll DMs -2
Beam laser Range Medium, Damage per weapon 1
Particle Bean Barbette Range Long, Damage per weapon 4 + 1 radiation damage.
If I can beat the stuffings out of the enemy at long range I'd prefer that to a medium of close range fight any day. Not to mention the damage to the oppositions crew.
Moving to medium range the combined attack of 5 beam laser turrets and particle beam barbattes should really knock the stuffings out of the target. Of course this all hinges on the roll of the dice being with the firing ship.
Actually the particle accelerator barbette was introduced in CT: HG.
From the turret Weapons Table on page 111 of the Core rule book there is a range difference between lasers and particle beams:
Pulse Laser - short range
Beam Laser - medium range
Particle beam - long range
A standard particle beam turret does 3d6 + crew hit damage. Neither laser type has the extra damage.
HG pp. 50-51 has weapons tables which shows the following information
Weapons Tonnage and Cost table (HG p. 50)
Particle Barbette Damage 4d6, Range Long.
Capital Ship Barrage Attack Table (HG p 50)
Pulse Laser Range Short, Damage per weapon 2, Attack roll DMs -2
Beam laser Range Medium, Damage per weapon 1
Particle Bean Barbette Range Long, Damage per weapon 4 + 1 radiation damage.
If I can beat the stuffings out of the enemy at long range I'd prefer that to a medium of close range fight any day. Not to mention the damage to the oppositions crew.
Moving to medium range the combined attack of 5 beam laser turrets and particle beam barbattes should really knock the stuffings out of the target. Of course this all hinges on the roll of the dice being with the firing ship.
Actually the particle accelerator barbette was introduced in CT: HG.
snrdg121408
Mongoose
Hello Maccat,
Per CT:HG Major Weapons table p. 24 a Particle Accelerator/Beam is intorduced as a spinal mount at TL 8. The Turret Weapons table p. 25 has the barbette at TL14 and a turrent mount at TL 15.
Per MgT Core p. 111 turret mounted particle beams are available at TL 8, which is applied to the spinal mount too.
Of the two rule sets I prefer MgT since this makes more sense. However, I'd have the barbette at say TL 9 or TL 10 and then turrets at TL 10/11.
Oops, I think my diner is getting ready to the very well done be back later to finish up.
Well dinner was not charcoal but was a little more well done than I wanted. Of course the smoke detector going off while getting the stuff out of the oven was that perfect added touch. :lol:
An interesting way to look at how laser turrets work. The only way I can see that a single large laser equals three smaller lasers is using the weapons design sequences found in CT: Striker, TNE, T4, and GT + GURPS Vehicles. Of course the downside is that with the increase in dtons space is lost for other goodies to blast the opposition out of space.
Per CT:HG Major Weapons table p. 24 a Particle Accelerator/Beam is intorduced as a spinal mount at TL 8. The Turret Weapons table p. 25 has the barbette at TL14 and a turrent mount at TL 15.
Per MgT Core p. 111 turret mounted particle beams are available at TL 8, which is applied to the spinal mount too.
Of the two rule sets I prefer MgT since this makes more sense. However, I'd have the barbette at say TL 9 or TL 10 and then turrets at TL 10/11.
Oops, I think my diner is getting ready to the very well done be back later to finish up.
Well dinner was not charcoal but was a little more well done than I wanted. Of course the smoke detector going off while getting the stuff out of the oven was that perfect added touch. :lol:
An interesting way to look at how laser turrets work. The only way I can see that a single large laser equals three smaller lasers is using the weapons design sequences found in CT: Striker, TNE, T4, and GT + GURPS Vehicles. Of course the downside is that with the increase in dtons space is lost for other goodies to blast the opposition out of space.
Sorry, misunderstanding here - I wasn't intending to compare particle beam to laser - the former are definitely preferred (and this is reflected in TL/cost)!snrdg121408 said:
What I was pointing out is that the Particle Beam Barbette gets only 4d6 (+crew) while 1 Triple Mount Particle Beam Turret can have 3 x 3d6 (+crew) damage for 1/5 the tonnage (though it costs more).
Add the fact (if you have the hardpoints) you can have 4 more triple mounts besides for 4 more hit tries for the same tonnage (ok - and a much higher cost)!
I mention this so that it is factored into building Laser Barbettes... as you say - pounding at a greater distance could be worth the added cost even if the damage can't be significantly raised (that Particle Beam barbette would be more attractive if besides the +1d6 damage it could also be optimal at Very Long range or autofire)...
P.S. - Isn't the smoke detector supposed to be for letting you know when your food is done (or does it have some other unfathomable purpose)?
ok...
so would a bomb-pumped torpedo count? or does it have to contact like other missile/torpedoes. it mentions "stand-off" Can you just off load it and once clear from frying your own ship it shoots? 6D6 laser hm? That's not a torpedo, it's my XRay Laser Barbette! heh.
Also any great increase in the lasers and you're in PA range. Immune to sand, add radiation. requires more oomph in the power plant department.
Me I like lasers so that bugs me <s>
The stuff about the large lasers was my reaction to HG batteries, where lots of the larger ships inevitable had batteries of 10xtriple laser turrets. OK for a BSG style but one freaking BIG laser cannon using the battery rules (maybe still the case for the new HG battery stuff lol haven't gotten to that yet!)
so would a bomb-pumped torpedo count? or does it have to contact like other missile/torpedoes. it mentions "stand-off" Can you just off load it and once clear from frying your own ship it shoots? 6D6 laser hm? That's not a torpedo, it's my XRay Laser Barbette! heh.
Also any great increase in the lasers and you're in PA range. Immune to sand, add radiation. requires more oomph in the power plant department.
Me I like lasers so that bugs me <s>
The stuff about the large lasers was my reaction to HG batteries, where lots of the larger ships inevitable had batteries of 10xtriple laser turrets. OK for a BSG style but one freaking BIG laser cannon using the battery rules (maybe still the case for the new HG battery stuff lol haven't gotten to that yet!)
snrdg121408
Mongoose
Hello again BP,
My bad, I somehow read 5 Triple laser turrets and not Triple Particle beam.
Since I'm now comparing the right weapons I agree there should be a little more umph to the barbette. I think part of the problem is when Mongoose converted from the CT: HG using the USP Rating code to determine damage, or I'm not remembering the rules right.
The nice fire fighters that stopped by implied that a smoke detector is a warning device to let one know that the house is on fire and not a timer to let you know dinner is done. :shock: They even made me promise to stop using the device to time my cooking :lol:
I think I better hit the rack my eyelids are getting heavy.
Yep, I needed to go to bed I had some corrections to make. :wink:
My bad, I somehow read 5 Triple laser turrets and not Triple Particle beam.
Since I'm now comparing the right weapons I agree there should be a little more umph to the barbette. I think part of the problem is when Mongoose converted from the CT: HG using the USP Rating code to determine damage, or I'm not remembering the rules right.
BP said:P.S. - Isn't the smoke detector supposed to be for letting you know when your food is done (or does it have some other unfathomable purpose)?
The nice fire fighters that stopped by implied that a smoke detector is a warning device to let one know that the house is on fire and not a timer to let you know dinner is done. :shock: They even made me promise to stop using the device to time my cooking :lol:
I think I better hit the rack my eyelids are getting heavy.
Yep, I needed to go to bed I had some corrections to make. :wink:
In general, a larger mount would provide you more damage for a particular hit. The use is there, as it has been throughout naval history - bigger guns give you more damage and longer range. I'm not sure a heavier laser would have longer range (perhaps if you justified it by having a tigher focus that kept it together farther than a regular laser, I dunno), but it would/should definitely have more utility.
Yes, having more triple laser turrets would provide potentially more beams to apply towards something, but they would also be less powerful and provide less armor penetration and less damage when hit. If you were to compare the standard laser turret to a naval 5" gun, and the heavy laser to a 16" gun... yes you could mount more 5" guns on your ship, but it could take you hours, maybe if ever, to penetrate the armor on your opponents battleship. But just 1-2 hits from a 16" gun could severely damage or cripple almost any opponent.
Bigger doesn't always mean better, just depends on form/function. I've often wondered why the game system never really got around to capital-class weapons systems beyond spinal mounts. I suppose its to keep the RPG aspect of it, but if you are gonna build ships, then lets build ships!
Yes, having more triple laser turrets would provide potentially more beams to apply towards something, but they would also be less powerful and provide less armor penetration and less damage when hit. If you were to compare the standard laser turret to a naval 5" gun, and the heavy laser to a 16" gun... yes you could mount more 5" guns on your ship, but it could take you hours, maybe if ever, to penetrate the armor on your opponents battleship. But just 1-2 hits from a 16" gun could severely damage or cripple almost any opponent.
Bigger doesn't always mean better, just depends on form/function. I've often wondered why the game system never really got around to capital-class weapons systems beyond spinal mounts. I suppose its to keep the RPG aspect of it, but if you are gonna build ships, then lets build ships!
BP said:
I don't follow this reasoning, Volume usually is not a problem for most ships.
BP said:
Where do you get the 5 from? Or tonnage isn't the appropriate metric for this decision process. As you tend to run out of available hardpoints before you run out of tonnage.
BP said:
Balance? Explain? Frome where I am sitting there is no consistent internal metric.
BP said:
Oh..... I am playing some of these out...
snrdg121408
Mongoose
Morning (PDT) Maccat,
The bomb-pumped laser (BPL) torpedo counts a separate weapon with
two types of damage. Basically what happens is that the torpedo closes
with the target and ideally at a point just before impact with hull detonates
a small nuclear warhead to charge a one shot pulse x-ray laser. This
laser pulse has the causes potential to damage to armor, hull, and
structure. Because a nuclear warhead and x-rays are used radiation
damage occurs affecting the crew. The closer to the target before the
torpedo detonates the nuclear device the better the chance of inflicting
damage that might win the engagement or at least give you the chance
to pound the target into submission or into a debris field . Of course
there are situations where you want to cripple the target so you set the
warhead to detonate at the next range band or bands out. In theory this
means the targets point defence has a lower chance of destroying the
torpedo and the torpedo getting the critical damage hit that destroys
the target.
Sure you could but that would actually be equal to two 3d6 laser
barbettes. The downside is that you still only get one shot.
The laser would have the range and to hit DMs as a Particle Beam
weapon. From the captial ship design example HG p. 71 there appears
to be cost increase associated with the upgrades.
MCr1,680/240 = MCr7 per triple turret/3 = MCr2.3333 per beam laser.
The text states each laser costs MCr2. Unfortunately, I can't seem to find
an associated cost in HG. Of course the triple laser turret is still less
expensive than a particle beam weapon.
Lasers and particle beams have different properties that cause different
damage. The laser beam focuses light somehting like a magnifying glass
causing hull armor, plating, and structure to melt. Of course the type of
light energy used has additional effects. The particle beam accelerates
one of the three pieces of matter (electron, neutron, or proton) at the
target like a bullet. The bullet smashes into the target buckling the armor
and causing radiation damage. In the Traveller variants that has a power
requirement the amount of energy required to power a laser increases
with the beam output. This results in not enough space to for other
systems because the power plant or plants required doesn't leave any
room. I tried designing the uber beam laser using GT and GURPS VE2
and ran out of space.
Having a more powerful laser would not make them immume to sand,
per CT: Book 2 Starships p. 18
The bigger the weapon the fewer can be installed which means fewer
batteries. In CT spinal mounts and bays = 1 battery of 1 weapon. Also
remember that a capital ship has fewer weapons that can be brought
to bear in a barrage, similar to batteries in CT, of the same type of
turret and/or bay weapon.
Of course with my luck at rolling I frequently get pounded just as badly
as the target. :wink:
The bomb-pumped laser (BPL) torpedo counts a separate weapon with
two types of damage. Basically what happens is that the torpedo closes
with the target and ideally at a point just before impact with hull detonates
a small nuclear warhead to charge a one shot pulse x-ray laser. This
laser pulse has the causes potential to damage to armor, hull, and
structure. Because a nuclear warhead and x-rays are used radiation
damage occurs affecting the crew. The closer to the target before the
torpedo detonates the nuclear device the better the chance of inflicting
damage that might win the engagement or at least give you the chance
to pound the target into submission or into a debris field
. Of coursethere are situations where you want to cripple the target so you set the
warhead to detonate at the next range band or bands out. In theory this
means the targets point defence has a lower chance of destroying the
torpedo and the torpedo getting the critical damage hit that destroys
the target.
Sure you could but that would actually be equal to two 3d6 laser
barbettes. The downside is that you still only get one shot.
The laser would have the range and to hit DMs as a Particle Beam
weapon. From the captial ship design example HG p. 71 there appears
to be cost increase associated with the upgrades.
MCr1,680/240 = MCr7 per triple turret/3 = MCr2.3333 per beam laser.
The text states each laser costs MCr2. Unfortunately, I can't seem to find
an associated cost in HG. Of course the triple laser turret is still less
expensive than a particle beam weapon.
Lasers and particle beams have different properties that cause different
damage. The laser beam focuses light somehting like a magnifying glass
causing hull armor, plating, and structure to melt. Of course the type of
light energy used has additional effects. The particle beam accelerates
one of the three pieces of matter (electron, neutron, or proton) at the
target like a bullet. The bullet smashes into the target buckling the armor
and causing radiation damage. In the Traveller variants that has a power
requirement the amount of energy required to power a laser increases
with the beam output. This results in not enough space to for other
systems because the power plant or plants required doesn't leave any
room. I tried designing the uber beam laser using GT and GURPS VE2
and ran out of space.
Having a more powerful laser would not make them immume to sand,
per CT: Book 2 Starships p. 18
The bigger the weapon the fewer can be installed which means fewer
batteries. In CT spinal mounts and bays = 1 battery of 1 weapon. Also
remember that a capital ship has fewer weapons that can be brought
to bear in a barrage, similar to batteries in CT, of the same type of
turret and/or bay weapon.
Of course with my luck at rolling I frequently get pounded just as badly
as the target. :wink:
Tonnage (on this scale) is not a problem for most Capital ships! However, I'm designing smaller ships and then it becomes 1 barbette versus 1 turret and a stateroom! Or 4 tons of munitions.Infojunky said:
So a 400 ton merchant ship that needs some pirate protection would get significantly more firepower with say 4 triple turrets than 4 barbettes and still have 16 more tons of revenue making space...
By balance - I simply mean that a Particle Turret is less powerful than a Barbette one which is less than a Bay one, etc. with costs in tonnage and Cr going up. And that a laser barbette shouldn't be more 'powerful' than a Particle Beam Barbette or Bay.
Cool! (Curious your experience/opinions on how 'enjoyable' the details of the MGT space combat are - esp. using the Damage/Effect table - love to see a different post or a PM)!Infojunky said:
Agreed! In the case of the Particle Beam Turret vs the Particle Beam Barbette we are not talking 5" shell to 16" - we are talking THREE five inchers (3 per turret) versus one 5.77 incher (30% extra area if same density/length)! Its not only not much of a change - in most cases the Triple Plasma Turrent will do more damage (and for 1/5 the tonnage).phavoc said:
Only in the very special cases where the extra 1d6 was absolutely required to penetrate armor would this be an advantage.
Granted the cost of the Triple Turrent is 13 MCr vs 8 MCr and the Turret is TL 9 vs the TL 8 of the Barbette (the double turret is TL 8 and 30% less damage ave. than the triple - but again for 1/5 the tonnage and a +6.25% cost).
A Bigger GunEDG said:
Actually a bigger turret - more like what exists in a shipboard weapon which has bulk of its ammunition mechanics below the deck. CT HG had them as slightly more powerful particle accelerator weapons for 2/3 more tonnage.
Of course, CT only allowed 1 particle accelerator per turret as opposed to MGT triple option...
Which is why I question the Particle Beam Barbette's value in MGT...
Classic BSG - My Favorite (voice overlay from Fifth Element following flamethrower demonstrationEDG said:
)Battlestar Galactica Tech Manual said:
I seemed to recall two types - and the one I most remember would have been more like a multi-turret...
The old CT had barbette because Particle Accelerator (now called Beam) would have taken up more space... so the turret was bigger and only could sport one and the barbette was even bigger an increase in USP at a slightly lower tech level.
In the 90's I worked with an outfit with a 5 GW laser that was built though 3 stories (and I saw punch through two plates of 1" titanium once) today such a device probably fits on a tabletop - in fact in Texas last year a >1,000,000 GW tabletop laser was demonstrated (though for very short pulse).
