Starship Power System Defective?

[tbeard1999]

If merchant ships can stand a chance against dedicated warships then it IS space fantasy. Not realistic at all.

Since we don't actually have starships, there is no basis whatsoever for this assertion other than that you want it to be so.

There's plenty of historical precedent for warships and merchant ships to have similar capabilities. The fleet that smashed the Spanish Armada was largely a fleet of armed merchant craft (as was the Armada). Indeed, until the 17th century, the trend was for warships to be little more than armed merchantmen. Given that the designer of MGT didn't even recognize that an assault rifle is less powerful than a standard rifle, I'm in no mood to be lectured that the designer of MGT knows much about military matters.

And Marc Miller has explicitely stated that Traveller is meant to be a sci-fi analogue to the 16th century sailing era. So trying to retro-shoehorn a modern naval analogue into Traveller is going against 30 years of established background. For no good reason.

In any case, this is a strawman. The starship energy and combat system sucks for numerous reasons that have nothing to do with the relative capabilities of warships and merchantmen.

Nor is anyone arguing that merchant ships should be identical in combat capability to warships. Certainly High Guard allowed dedicated military ships that could out fight any similar sized merchant ship. But in Traveller smaller merchant starships do have a chance against small warships.

 

[tbeard1999]

Now I'm not against the idea of Traders or upgraded Corsairs having to rely on power storage to put up a fight for a few turns, but I think military ships shouldn't have to. Their only purpose is to blow things up... not ship cargo or passengers. :wink:

So ignore the power system. Of course then only weapons worth taking are tripple turrets with TL15 particle beams or from bay weapons fusion guns. None other matters. And space battles will be determined by who shoots first. Fun fun fun. Not!

Well, "not" is right, but "not" for the reasons you suggest.

The only reason the system would become a "sudden death" system like you suggest is because the designer of MGT made sweeping changes to the way things have been in Traveller for 30 years. So an energy system is not somehow required for a reasonable game.

Of course, the current energy system is astonishingly flawed, so it's academic to complain about eliminating it. It's pretty much eliminated itself.

 

[jtfc]

If merchant ships can stand a chance against dedicated warships then it IS space fantasy. Not realistic at all. Miles off the realism target and therefore totally off from game I'm looking for. Dedicated warship superior to merchant. If that isn't true then game isn't even trying some semblance of realism but instead is extreme fantasy(heck even STAR WARS didn't go that far and that's pure fantasy in space).

thebeard has touched on this, but I think you're dead wrong.

For one thing, how do you think merchant ships are designed? Take a military ship, take off the guns, the redundancies so it can continue to fight in combat, the space for marines, etc. What do you have left? A merchant ship. Want to know what one of the biggest, toughest, and fastst ships out there right now is? The Queen Elizabeth II. A passenger liner.

For another, this is space opera. Transports have no chance against capital ships 100 times their size, sure. But they take on ships their own size all the time, and sometimes they even win. If they didn't, it wouldn't be Opera. Why even bother arming a merchant ship at all if it couldn't make a pirate Corsair decide to look for easier prey.

Lastly, corsairs are not 'military vessels', in the classic sense. Corsairs are there to police the spacelanes. They're law enforcement, not ships of the line. Think Hummers or Jeeps with gun mounts. Can a civillian vehicle take those out? You'd better believe it.

 

[tbeard1999]

Sand casters sure but missiles? Inferior damage capability, takes longer to hit...By the time missile hits you have hit the target with several particle gun attacks already....

Using what system? I have not looked at missiles in MGT. Also, while playing CT for years, I don't recall any of the 100 to 400 tons ships (typical for players) mounting particle guns, even after months of adventuring.

In the current version of the starship combat rules, missiles do less than half the damage of the beam laser, which is yet another significant deviation from Traveller. In Classic Traveller, missiles did 1d6 points of damage, compared with 1 point of damage from beam lasers.

I was comparing like sized ships, and I meant that the merchant version stood a chance, not that they were exactly even. Sorry, but that was the way of the Traveller universe many of us know and love.

The starship operations and combat rules have significantly changed the Traveller background (for the worse). The tragedy is, I don't think these changes were made per any organized plan. Rather, it's a case of a bunch of amateurish notions being thrown together willy-nilly and dumped into the playtest.

I've always thought that playtesters should at least be given the benefit of a system that's been analyzed for glaring faults. Apparently the MGT design team disagrees.

I think you missed my point completely. I think (hope) that at least the old time Traveller players here might have understood what I was attempting to point out.

Yep. I think it's reasonable to ask that the designer respect the basic assumptions of 30 years of Traveller.

 

[tbeard1999]

Want to know what one of the biggest, toughest, and fastst ships out there right now is? The Queen Elizabeth II. A passenger liner.

Interestingly, the original Queen Elizabeth and Queen Mary were so fast that they sailed without convoy protection. They could outrun any German U-Boats and commerce raiders.

And yes, the size of these liners is staggering. I have a miniature of the original Queen Elizabeth in 1/2400 scale. It dwarfs even the Yamato (a little longer and MUCH taller).

Anyhow, as noted before, the notion of dedicated naval warships came about in thew 17th century, when cannon got too heavy for the frames of merchantmen to handle.

But at the end of the day, the MGT design team is making serious changes to establish Traveller canon.

Which raises the issue of whether this can honestly be called "Traveller".

 

[jtfc]

Interestingly, the original Queen Elizabeth and Queen Mary were so fast that they sailed without convoy protection. They could outrun any German U-Boats and commerce raiders.

And history repeated itself during the Falkland Islands war. The QEII was sent without escort to get troops from England to Argentina. It could outrun the Argentine ships, and the Mirage missiles that took out the Sheffield would bounce off the QEII (aluminum hull vs. steel hull).

People tend to seriously underrate merchant vessels.

 

[tneva82]

For another, this is space opera. Transports have no chance against capital ships 100 times their size, sure. But they take on ships their own size all the time, and sometimes they even win.

Even star wars didn't go that far and it was space fantasy at it's extreme.

Why even bother arming a merchant ship at all if it couldn't make a pirate Corsair decide to look for easier prey.

Corsair ships aren't military vessels either...And in MgT armed merchant can actually fight off corsair vessel(though since corsair is more dedicated to warfare than merchant will be rather hard but that's what you get with dedication. You are worse off elsehwhere) so what's the problem?

In terms of power military vessel>corsair>merchant. Armed merchant can take out smaller ships and can even take corsairs in MgT rules so point is?

What they can't do is take on warship and good thing too. No space fantasy thanks. I like sci-fi RPG that atleast tries to be semi-believable.

 

[tneva82]

Interestingly, the original Queen Elizabeth and Queen Mary were so fast that they sailed without convoy protection. They could outrun any German U-Boats and commerce raiders.

And history repeated itself during the Falkland Islands war. The QEII was sent without escort to get troops from England to Argentina. It could outrun the Argentine ships, and the Mirage missiles that took out the Sheffield would bounce off the QEII (aluminum hull vs. steel hull).

People tend to seriously underrate merchant vessels.

And what can it do against enemy? Have it duel with enemy capital ship and see which one gets sunken first. I bet it won't be the capital ship.

 

[Zowy]

Good luck haveing Particle Accelerator weapons on a merchant ship, under CT rules. The barbettes are TL 14 and 5 dTons, the turret ones are TL 15 and 3 dTons. You can put only 1 weapon in each mount. Then you have the problem of geting your ship impounded for haveing Naval grade weapons on it and the IN wanting to know where you got them from :?

The IN allso does not let Merchant ships use Bay weapon mounts, so don't even think of trying to build a non-Imperial Navy ship with Bay weapons on it. In CT it is as much what the laws of the 3rd Imperium allow, as what can be built at a planets TL. :wink:

In MGT armor is way to good and not caped by TL. Allso missiles have been downgraded alot. Then add in a bad energy system that will not let your Armed merchant fight for more than a few rounds and you have just killed of 90% of your Tramp and Free Traders. When a Corsair can just laugh at the missiles plinking against his armor, small merchant ships become way to temping prey and pirates become common in fringe and border regions........ :twisted:

 

[tneva82]

When a Corsair can just laugh at the missiles plinking against his armor, small merchant ships become way to temping prey and pirates become common in fringe and border regions........ :twisted:

Bah ATM merchants can fight off corsairs though it's not easy task by far. Which is how it should be. When corsair ships struggle against meagre merchants you know that by all logic there won't BE corsairs since it won't be profitable at all to be corsair when every merchant can simply blow your ship up if you try to rob them...

 

[rje]

I don't see where the problem is with having...horror of horror...reload things time to time. In our world we have to reload stuff and can't keep firing every second ;-)

Since combat turns in ship combat are actually six minutes, I had kind of taken that into account. Each turret gets one shot every 360 seconds, which does indicate having to recharge between shots!

Now I'm not against the idea of Traders or upgraded Corsairs having to rely on power storage to put up a fight for a few turns, but I think military ships shouldn't have to. Their only purpose is to blow things up... not ship cargo or passengers. :wink:

Six minutes? That actually helps moderate things a bit, doesn't it?

I mean, CT used 30-minute turns. So there's actually five rounds of power generation in MGT to one round of CT. Multiply the values by five, and do you have something similar to CT?

Aramis, can you help me out here? Does it help?

 

[rancke]

In CT at least a small merchant ship could fight back some and did not fall apart when someone looked the wrong way at it. With these new power and armor rules. They will be lucky to scrach the armor on even a small 300-400 ton escort or Corsair, before they go b00m........

Ah sorry, I thought Traveller at least tried to have SOME sense of realism instead of star wars fantasy. MERCHANT's should have about as good chance against proper warship as snowball has in hell.

Zowy didn't say that a merchant had much of a chance against a proper warship. Just that it had an excellent chance against small escorts and corsairs. This is a "historical" fact. It's simply an artifact of ships being unable to carry more than one turret per 100T. If you change that, you're ignoring 30 years worth of previously published material. That's not bad per se -- some of that old stuff ought to be changed -- but it's certainly not something to be done without a really good reason and careful consideration of the ramifications.

But hey feel free to ignore power plants and power. That's easy enough. Of course then there's no point to choose any weapons than biggest, meanest you can(and only triple turret makes sense. Why choose single turret with weak gun when for same tonnage you can get triple turret with 3 best guns out there?) and space battles will be "he who shoots first wins" without anything else to do but determine who shoots first.

Well, there's always the question of cost. Even laser guns cost money. Fusion guns costs more, and particle accelerators even more.

Here's a novel idea: How about sticking to the old CT PP rules? Or, if they are self-contradictory (ISTR some problems with them), how about working out a set of rules that works AND keeps the old balance of power? It's been a long time since I designed CT ships, but IIRC I frequently had to fall back on missile launchers because I couldn't fit in enough power plant to put in lasers or fusion guns or PA barbettes.


Hans

 

[rje]

Here's a novel idea: How about sticking to the old CT PP rules? Or, if they are self-contradictory (ISTR some problems with them), how about working out a set of rules that works AND keeps the old balance of power? It's been a long time since I designed CT ships, but IIRC I frequently had to fall back on missile launchers because I couldn't fit in enough power plant to put in lasers or fusion guns or PA barbettes.


Hans

Given that CT combat is in 30-minute turns, and MGT is in 6-minute terms, doesn't that mean the things you can do in both games are closer than it looks at first?

I mean, I understand that MGT's power plants are a bit strange looking and seem to do more or require some thought. But besides that, the potential generated for moving and firing is more like CT than not, perhaps.

 

[rancke]

Given that CT combat is in 30-minute turns, and MGT is in 6-minute terms, doesn't that mean the things you can do in both games are closer than it looks at first?

I mean, I understand that MGT's power plants are a bit strange looking and seem to do more or require some thought. But besides that, the potential generated for moving and firing is more like CT than not, perhaps.

CT combat turns were 20 minutes. But, yes, such a difference could well be a reason for some tweaking. Say, that the chance of scoring a hit in one turn was only one third as high in MGT than in CT. Then again, maybe not. It also has to be fun. Self-consistency is important for verisimilitude, but playability trumps verisimilitude.

But as regards power points, a CT power point was so much energy for 20 minute. Just redefine a a MGT power point to be the same amount of energy for 6 minutes and you should be good.

Mind you, there may be good reasons to change some things. ISTR that the power points the jump drive generated were very much smaller than the power points the power plant generated. Or was it the other way around? There was a nasty discrepancy, anyway.


Hans

 

[jtfc]

Interestingly, the original Queen Elizabeth and Queen Mary were so fast that they sailed without convoy protection. They could outrun any German U-Boats and commerce raiders.

And history repeated itself during the Falkland Islands war. The QEII was sent without escort to get troops from England to Argentina. It could outrun the Argentine ships, and the Mirage missiles that took out the Sheffield would bounce off the QEII (aluminum hull vs. steel hull).

People tend to seriously underrate merchant vessels.

And what can it do against enemy? Have it duel with enemy capital ship and see which one gets sunken first. I bet it won't be the capital ship.

Neither. The capital ship would never get enough shots to sink the cruise liner before the liner got out of range. Since the cruise liner is unarmed, the liner would not be able to sink the capital ship. I suppose eventually the capital ship would run out of fuel and then after the crew of the capital ship starved to death the QEII could board it and sink it with hand drills.

I really couldn't care less what a military vessel vs. a merchant ship can do if the captian of the military vessel is a moron. If it's a military ship designed to take on capital ships, it'll have bay weapons, which can rip the trader to pieces before the trader gets in range. If it's a carrier, it'll launch dozens of fighters, which will (again) rip the merchant apart before it can get in range of the carrier. Sure, if the military vessel lets the merchant come close before it decides to attack, the result is likely to be mutual anhilation. So what? We had a destroyer taken out by a rubber freakin' raft because we let it get alongside. It doesn't shock me any that a merchant can do the same to an equal sized capital ship that lets it come in close.

 

[tneva82]

Just that it had an excellent chance against small escorts and corsairs.

And merchant in MgT can fight off small escorts and corsairs. So where's the problem? Too hard? It shouldn't BE that easy as otherwise corsair life makes no sense. Low profit with very short life expectancy. First time you end up in situation you were looking for merchant to be(helpless victim) is the last moment of your life as next you'll be killed...So you can calculate chance of merchant overpowering corsair ship and see life expectancy of pirate...10% chance merchant overpowers? Ok any pirate doing more than 5 such attacks is more than seriously pushing his luck. Actually to not make risk/reward too hard 1-3 robberies should allow pirate to retire in luxury or it's simply too risky to keep up missions as first failure will also be your last one...Then you are dead.

But since you can just forget power point rules if you don't like them easily(more easily than you can create them from scratch) MgT caters for everybody. Those who like realistic sci-fi and those who want fantasy in space with magic swords and fireballs ;-) Everybody covered!

 

[AKAramis]

It seems like there is a difference in opinion regarding power usage between old Traveller players, and new players wishing to play a new Traveller game.

On a system with no energy units becoming "who shoots first wins" or, "there is no limiting factor on numbers of weapons": First off, the ships weren't so weak in earlier versions of Traveller, they could take a few blows. Second, I never once saw a player start out with a ship with all turrets filled up with triple-lasers. We/they had to slowly make some credits before upgrading to double turret, then a triple turret farther down the road. Third, you didn't want all of your turrets filled with lasers: missiles and defensive sand casters come to mind. From what I recall, a Free Trader with two triple-laser turrets would not be smart in a tactical sense.

In my old Traveller experience, a merchant ship, fully armed, could stand a chance against like sized military ships. There wasn't a large difference in strength per ton (the military ship had an advantage in manuveur and powerplant due to less cargo space). Small ships did not have glass jaws, they could last a while in a battle with a highly armed pirate vessel. Realistic? Possibly no, but it was one of the many parts of Traveller that made it what it is. You are hearing some groans from old players due to rule changes possibly affecting what Traveller IS.

An energy-allocation system? No problem, let me give it a try. Just don't make such a glaring change that the style of Traveller changes, or us old players may not recognize it anymore.

Don't get what I mean? Here is an exaggerated example. Everyone who has played Traveller before recognizes the fact that you need some very large weaponry to attempt to take out an Imperial Marine in battle dress. If a damage system included new penetration rules which allowed players with only assault rifles to rip these same Marines apart, you would scream. Why? Because not just the rules would be changing, but the Traveller universe itself.

Want a game where a small merchant ship doesn't have a fighting chance? Want a game where the Imperial forces drop like Stormtroopers? Fine by me, just don't call it Traveller.

Mongoose, some corrections please before release, or my house rule document will be adding a couple more paragraphs. Please keep it Traveller on the inside, not just printed on the cover.

THe new system makes traveller ships as tough as they were in Bk2, that is, small ships can take on small ships, and big shipps can get very annoyed by small ships...

HG was either no effect, or major effect, with little in between...

In practice, the system needs a proper movement system (we used mayday's, which is the best one I've seen), 1 point per drive letter for MD and PP, and the rest was pure draft 3.1. It worked well. Quite well in fact, since for a merchantman, you have to choose: jump out or fight.

A 2000Td "Small-ship Cruiser" with a couple bays and the power to run them is a frightening thing then... because it can fight AND jump.

 

[rje]

Mind you, there may be good reasons to change some things. ISTR that the power points the jump drive generated were very much smaller than the power points the power plant generated. Or was it the other way around? There was a nasty discrepancy, anyway.

Sounds horrible. Did jump drives generate excess, usable power?

 

[barasawa]

As you might know from my previous posts, I don't like the current power issues with this version of Traveller.

This argument where people think civilian ships should be total dead meat insta-coffins against military ships is something I will comment on. After all, it's main issue is the power available to the ships.

I've always thought of the starships in Traveller as being similar to the Sailing ships from the age of discovery. Often the only difference between military ships and civilian ships was some reinforcement, extra guns, and more crew. Many ships used in military engagements were merchant ships before they were beefed up for combat. I've always thought of Traveller as the same, especially since you have pirates. There's got to be a reasonable ground to have that situation.

For a merchant to have a gun (not fully decked out, but still armed) was very common. To be able to fight attackers until help arrives, or to make it not worth attacking would be the strategy. Move or shoot limitations, or 3 rounds till out of power is not going to work. You might as well just get bigger engines and try to outrun them. Of course with the current ratios, you need to increase powerplant so much, you loose all cargo benefits you once had, and even have to loose more, just to cover the increased generator and drives. Not a good situation.

Now when you look at the previous Travellers, a Military ship and a civilian ship of the same size, were very similar. The military tended to have more firepower and better armor, balanced by less cargo and more crew. If a civilian ship upgraded, they could put up a good run for the money. Thus piracy and smuggling became viable. If they could get a sneak attack in, they could very well beat the military vessel. After all, do you really think the pirate corsair was actually a military ship? It was a civilian ship upgraded for combat. (Shoot, Loot, Scoot) The biggest limitation for retrofitting a ship for combat, other than cost, was that you couldn't change the hull material.

Here's another really big thing to look at. Are your players going to have fun if their only viable combat option is to surrender? Of course they could find some way to get a military ship that has a cargo hold the size of a glove compartment, and staterooms smaller than my closet, but again, are they going to have fun like that?

 

[tneva82]

After all, do you really think the pirate corsair was actually a military ship?

No. But pirate corsairs don't hunt military ships either but cargo ships instead. Which one is the one carrying cargo? Warship or cargo ship? Hint available in the name...

Here's another really big thing to look at. Are your players going to have fun if their only viable combat option is to surrender?

So here's a thought: Don't go mess up with military ship in your puny merchant ;-) Your merchant can fight off(especially with skilled crew that can make every shot count) pirate ships in MgT. Problem comes with full blown military vessels. But if players are starting to have delusions of grandeur and start a war against Imperial navy one could think they would upgrade from merchant ship to warship of their own ;-)