Still confused by capital ship combat

[BP]

...I am struggling with this - I have both editions of high guard and cannot see where the individal weapon damage is added as a modifier, not on page 74 of either version of the book! It says 2d6 + range mod + fire control + dodging + skill + ship defences. When did we starting 12 for a 50 ton missile bay. Have I missed some errata?
...

The individual weapon damage in dice is basically the Attack DM! Subtract the defense protection total from that to get the final attack DM. (note: otehr modifiers may apply).

This is stated on pg 74 under Barrages & Defenses in the last sentence of the first paragraph.

...so my take 10 x 50 ton bays firing missiles is:

normal missiles 120-missile-long-1
...

Sorry, the last number - the number of damage dice you would be rolling for each flight of 12 missiles - should be 12 (12 x 1d6 if you handled these 10 missile bays seperately, not using barrage rules).

Look on pg 74, the very first paragraph should read:
For example, ... a barrage from ten missile 50 ton bays of multiple warhead missiles at long range would be noted as 10-Missile-Long-12.

Now, the 'multiple warhead missiles' refers to the fact that a missile bay fires 12 missiles in a round. (not to be confused with a 'Multi-warhead' missile - which is conspicuosly not covered IIRC).

Now page 73 covers this in more detail, where the definition is supplied.

(Note that the original edition HG printing had some errors, possibly different layout, but I don't recall them affecting this, however I never saw that edition.)

To me, this is the clearest thing in the Expanded Space Combat rules - and it fails to address certain exceptional cases (like Multi-warhead missiles, etc.).

 

[apoc527]

If that is the case, then missiles are VERY powerful weapons. I suppose this is somewhat offset by the ability to shoot them down with lasers, but still...a 100 dton particle beam bay is 9d6...a 100 dton missile bay is 24d6. That is NOT correct. It is, in fact, 24 missiles--not a magic unstoppable force of perfectly integrated missile death. To have it otherwise makes all weapons obsolete except missile bays.

There is no way that a 100 dton missile bay gets +24 DM on barrage attacks. I know "broken" gets tossed around too easily, but this would fit the bill and can't possibly be what was intended.

 

[smiths121]

First of all sorry ColHut - think I have managed to dereail the thread a bit. BP was trying to help you - and I hope his explanation has.

I am actually not fussed about 120-missile-long-1 or 10-missile-long-1 for 10 x 50 bays as the damage is the same. I think 120-missile-long-1 works better because it takes 142 pulse lasters to get -2 in the defensive dm section rather than 11 which even the smallest capital ship can muster. Which is why I opted for the 120-missile-long-1.

I agree with apoc - if you do add the individual weapon characteristics to the attack then the 100 ton bay, the cheapest lowest, tech bay in the game is actually the best weapon in the game. No need for spinal mounts then as they are harder to hit with to do this sort of damage.

Under Core Rulebook - which all the rules are trying to do are appoximate and allow much bigger ships and battles to take place, armour 12 completely negates missiles, regardless of how many you throw at the ship (negates the nuclear aspect as well). Now I do not mind a few hits through, as its a statistical system but the numbers being quoted for average dice rolling are way out of proportion.

We must be reading different books as I cannot see the fact you add it in the rules or the example on page 74. Not sure I can cut and paste from the actual rulebook, so from the SRD the paragraph on Barrage Attacks fro page 74 is:

A barrage does not ‘hit’ or ‘miss’ as a whole. Even an inaccurate barrage will usually score one or two minor hits. Instead, the more accurate the barrage is, the more damage it deals. An attack with a barrage roll is made by rolling two dice and with dice modifiers for range, fire control software, dodging, Gunner skill and ship defences. The modifiers for range, fire control software, dodging and skill are as normal spacecraft combat. The modifiers from the ship defences are worked out below. Note that the missile launch accuracy check and the help line up a shot check are not used in capital ship combat.


The example on page 74 ties in with this.

Is the rule to add the individual weapon characteristic somewhere else?

Sorry to quote rules but until this thread thought I had got the combat system OK.

 

[ColHut]

Talking to me still I'm getting lost but appreciate the pros and cons here.

I think importance of individual damage dice is to be inferred from the following:

The damage from each individual weapon must still be noted, though,
as armour is obviously much more effective against smaller weapons
than larger ones. The notation for a barrage is therefore:
(Number of Dice) – (Weapon Type) – Range – (Individual Weapon
Damage in dice).

The only way this IWD works like this is if it is added as a modifer to the score AND assuming missiles IWD is that for an individual missile rather than a group. (see comments on the d24 100 to bay as to why)

The following example ignores this nomenclature anyway and describes weapon mounts in one case and maybe die of damage from weapons in the other?:

For example, the fifty beam laser barrage mentioned above would be
noted as 50–Beam Laser– Medium–1 and a barrage from ten missile
50 ton bays of multiple warhead missiles at long range would be
noted as 10–Missile–Long–12.

None of the examples actually show you using the IWD as I have described.

The final example gratuitously increases the damage by 2 which also happens to be the weapons IWD value. I cannot tell if this is coincidence or a failure to multiply the weapons by IWD at the start. That 200 missile strike should have been a 400 missile barrage maybe????

A net dice roll of 5 gives 50%, so Victory is hit by 100 nuclear missiles for
a total of 200 points of damage.

:?:


Considering the core rules I think that adding IWD in the way described at the top makes the *most* sense.

Thanks all heaps as this needs to be sorted out.

regards

 

[BP]

If that is the case, then missiles are VERY powerful weapons. I suppose this is somewhat offset by the ability to shoot them down with lasers, but still...a 100 dton particle beam bay is 9d6...a 100 dton missile bay is 24d6. That is NOT correct. ...

Ignoring the Expanded Ship Comat rules this is exactly the case. Normally - 24 missiles is 1d6 per. So 24 possible 1d6 damage impacks in the same (future) round. The particle beam bay is still only 9d6 - but has unlimited 'ammuniton' and can fire each round. So by the time the missiles finally hit the beams may have fired 5 times.

Though cheap/low tech - missiles have some important balancing issues:
a) normally take many rounds to impact - so even if they succeed, the firing ship may already be space dust
b) are limited by ammunition
c) point defense can neutralize (as stated)

Are missiles cheap - yep - low tech - yep - unrealistic - ???. Lookup IEDs and Iraq. Lookup fishing line and billion rubble russian helicopters. Lookup hand held missile launcher. Low tech/low cost does not mean ineffective. It often means a lot higher tech/cost is required to defeat it (and conversely without such the consequences can be deadly costly).

There is no way that a 100 dton missile bay gets +24 DM on barrage attacks. I know "broken" gets tossed around too easily, but this would fit the bill and can't possibly be what was intended.

This may very well be what was intended. Your interpretation / perspective may very easily not match the authors - mine often don't. 'Unclear' might be a better term than broken (as you say - it gets tossed around a lot - and mostly because of simply missing something that to the author and others is 'obvious').

I actually agree and disagree - or taken another way - I think the point defense lasers DM to the Individual Weapon Damage Dice is unbalanced (1d6 with +3 to -2 can never negate the missiles). So if a ship has sufficient point defence it should be able to completely negate missile and torpedo attacks - but if it doesn't things could be very bad. Of course, this doesn't address the armour completely nuetralizing missiles for individual attacks, but not for barrage of same (although concentration could account for this). The problem being that because torpedos do more damage, point defense may be rendendered completely useless (even assuming that the last number shouldn't be multiplied by the number of torpedos).

Unfortunately the book only provides one example of missile bays. And it ends in '-12'. The text preceeding also indicates that the last number is to differentiate weapons.

However, the text doesn't really cover things well, and the example even appears erroneous IMHO (the missile bays are 10-Missile-Long-12, when perhaps they should be 120-Missile-Long-12 or 120-Missile-Long-1).

To me, this is a complex set of balances - and I think they might have been accommodated well, but the explanations and examples may be in error and insufficient to cover all circumstances. This is in the errata I will be sending regard High Guard (see sticky).

BTW: Consider a car (armoured shall we say) that has 24 grenades thrown at it (in a bundle in the case of bays) versus being shot 1 to 10 times by a laser (that may not be able to penetrate the armour).

 

[BP]

...The final example gratuitously increases the damage by 2 which also happens to be the weapons IWD value. I cannot tell if this is coincidence or a failure to multiply the weapons by IWD at the start. That 200 missile strike should have been a 400 missile barrage maybe????

A net dice roll of 5 gives 50%, so Victory is hit by 100 nuclear missiles for
a total of 200 points of damage.

Ah - that one seems simple - 50% of the 200 nuclear missiles launched hit. That means 100 nuclear missiles at 2d6 each (IWD=2) - hence the 200 points of damage.

Of course, then there is the whole issue of Attack DM vs Barrage Score (appear to be interchange-able to me) and how the heck to use the Barrage Damage table 'Dice Barrage' figures (assume this might be for non-capital ships, but then why not just pre-multiply by 3?).

I read and re-read this section and finally came to the conclusion it is incomplete and probably inaccurate. Since I would use a computer program for this scale of combat anyway, the only applicable difference I would apply to combat being the bearing - though I think that is kinda silly/ignorant given six minute rounds (i.e. it is based on spaceships = water ships - which can't just spin around on all three-axis on a dime).

I don't really see how one 'roleplays' capital ship combat, so much as simulates it (i.e. the individual player's skills don't really contribute to any significant degree). Kinda like the TCS tournament - its nice with descriptions and all, but I can't really see playing it.

 

[apoc527]

Well, it appears that reasonable people can have lots of different interpretations of the rules. Let's hope that convinces Mongoose to address this in the HG errata!

 

[BP]

Yes - I must admit to cracking a smile when I saw the title of this topic - Still confused by capital ship combat - my first thought being 'and you still will be...'

My recent poll says it all - 2/3 responding where interested in HG combat - but only 1 out of 31 total thought they actually played it correctly (and I wouldn't give that answer much stock, unless it was the author - even then )

 

[ColHut]

Oh well back to a coherence theory of truth and wait for later correspondence!

I await the errata with interest.

regards

 

[Rikki Tikki Traveller]

Clarification of the barrage rules and examples was one of the big things that I submitted in my Errata list to Matt.

I also think the rules can work, but are not explained well enough for us to understand exactly what is meant.

I would actually like to see an example fight run completely through. Have 2 ships with a variety of weapons go through a complete combat (do the death). We would get to see how changing barrage numbers affect the dice rolls and damage and all that good stuff. I suspect it would clear up a lot of the questions that everyone has (me to).

I have decided that I will not EVER run Capital ship combat. In my last game, the players were junior officers aboard a 100Kton Cruiser. I didn't have HG at the time and just "made it up" using cinematic descriptions and giving the players time to roleplay through the 6 minute combat rounds. I already knew how I wanted the battles to end in general, and let the players actions dictate some of the details. For example, one of the players was the Assistant Weapons Officer in charge of the Missile Bays, so I let him roll for the hits (but not the damage) for his bays.

If I had had the Barrage Rules, I would have used them as GUIDES for how the battle went (again letting the players roll for the barrages that they controled), but not showing them the tables.

It worked REALLY well and we all had a good time.

Having said that, I LOVED Trillion Credit Squadron back in the day and played in several local tournements. But it is NOT roleplaying.

 

[smiths121]

Well, it appears that reasonable people can have lots of different interpretations of the rules. Let's hope that convinces Mongoose to address this in the HG errata!

Never considered myself reasonable.... oh you did not mean me :lol:

Was trying to figure out how the old high guard did missiles, really different system and my head started to hurt, a little like it did earlier in the thread. Only thing I did not is it takes 30 missile hardpoints to equal the attack factor of a 100 ton bay, not 24.

Think I have my head well enough around the combat now. Look forward to the LBB version and seeing how wrong I am

 

[BP]

Well, it appears that reasonable people can have lots of different interpretations of the rules. Let's hope that convinces Mongoose to address this in the HG errata!

Never considered myself reasonable.... oh you did not mean me :lol:

This is almost as confusing as Expanded Space Combat - who was he referring to?! :lol:

 

[apoc527]

You're all reasonable!

 

[BP]

Well, let's not be jumping to conclusions now :lol:

 

[ColHut]

We are also struck with the oddity that a 5000 ton cruiser can be equipped with 50 triple particle beam turrets doing a 450 point barrage which on even dice will inflict enough damage to destroy itself with a single salvoe. ( 50 H and 50 s per section) Assuming say high tech version (TL wpn mods, with good fire control and ships crew modifiers even for average crew would add +8 and even ignoring possiple "+IWD" will negate a dodge "-2" and 6 points of armour!. All you need is a power plant 5+.

Although the rules are for capital ship combat - they are not for fleet actions as ships will rapidly run out of reactions needed to trigger screens, sandcasters, point defence lasers, and dodge (limited to 3 anyway by evade tech).

Why is the action phase (in which you attempt sensor locks) after the combat phase?

The rules clearly indicate (p.73) that movement is a combat action, and you loop through all ships in initiative order until all actions are exhausted - presumably you can still only move once? or more to the total limit of your MVR rating??. .

Are repairs (like sensor locks) an ships' action, and so NOT part of the looping combat system (pace p. 79).

Mystified
:?:

regards

 

[BP]

Ah - good questions/points, but rather than addressing them directly, especially as they deal with the expanded comabt system - which my poll indicated may not be at all clear to the majority of folks interested in it (including myself) - I would suggest you direct your efforts into the HG Errata (see the sticky at the top of the forum page).

That's were I'll be focusing my own efforts for the next couple of days.


(P.S. - I've been on this board for over a year and haven't seen much of any real explanations in this area - only lots of questions. The errata is a chance to solicite some direct attention to the unclear issues.)

 

[smiths121]

We are also struck with the oddity that a 5000 ton cruiser can be equipped with 50 triple particle beam turrets doing a 450 point barrage which on even dice will inflict enough damage to destroy itself with a single salvoe. ( 50 H and 50 s per section) Assuming say high tech version (TL wpn mods, with good fire control and ships crew modifiers even for average crew would add +8 and even ignoring possiple "+IWD" will negate a dodge "-2" and 6 points of armour!. All you need is a power plant 5+.

Although the rules are for capital ship combat - they are not for fleet actions as ships will rapidly run out of reactions needed to trigger screens, sandcasters, point defence lasers, and dodge (limited to 3 anyway by evade tech).

Why is the action phase (in which you attempt sensor locks) after the combat phase?

The rules clearly indicate (p.73) that movement is a combat action, and you loop through all ships in initiative order until all actions are exhausted - presumably you can still only move once? or more to the total limit of your MVR rating??. .

Are repairs (like sensor locks) an ships' action, and so NOT part of the looping combat system (pace p. 79).

Mystified
:?:

regards

In your example, the best defence is actually not to get closer than medium range, firing missiles before going in would be good as it should tie up some fo the pesky lasers.


The DM for High yield and Very high yield are Attack Modifiers not damage modifiers. You can get a max of +3 Attack Mod from TL as far as I can see (Very High Yield, Accurate).

Damage from pulse lasers is split between the 2 sections (page 77) doubling the amount of structure you get to subtract from.

You also forgot about bearing, not all you 50 turrets can bear, the best is 80% = i.e 40 of them.

My quick maths at short range and medium range.

Assuming expensive hull with 80% bearing:

150-pulse laser-short-2
or
50-pulse laser-short-6 (not fussed which way!)

fire control/4 = +4
crew/2 = 2 (average sort of crew)
pulse lasers get -2
Accurate, Very High Yield = +3

Before Range =7
Pulse Lasers are short range so get +0 at short.

Assume a roll of 7 total attack before defence =14

Defenses
dodge =2 (you would dodge this in a 5000 ton ship!)
armour = 6 (from your example)
sandcasters =2 (all ships need pulse lasers and sandcasters for defence)

Total Defence = 10

Net Attack Roll is 4 = 25%

Damage is 300 (6*50 or 150*2) x 80% bearing * 25% barrage
= 60 damage.

Damage from pulse lasers onto capital ships is split between 2 locations at 5000 tons we only have 2 locations each with 50 structure and 50 hull.

So that is -30 hull from each section.
Net barrage result was less than 8 so no criticals.

If you do the maths above at medium range there was no damage at all as the net barrage result is 0.

Putting it in context, my free trader is attacked by pirates. If one gets to short range with a triple pulse laser turret I reckon I have about the same odds of being crippled/toast - and that is one turret. Sandcasters, I need sandcasters!

Any escort armed with just 50 pulse lasers is going to be dust, no sandcasters makes it vunerable to energy weapons, and its weapons are only effective out to short range. Better give it man: 6 as it needs to rush into combat and get to short before it is destroyed, as missiles, particle beams and fusion beams all operate beyond short range quite well.

It might be useful as a true escort though if you use the "Escort Defence" order to allow it to protect another ship. Or you could sacrifice +1 Attack Mod from weapons TL to add Long Range instead, forcing the enemy to tie up its laser or fight at long.

Your proposition with triple particle beam holds very well, but is a lot more expensive.

 

[ColHut]

The DM for High yield and Very high yield are Attack Modifiers not damage modifiers. You can get a max of +3 Attack Mod from TL as far as I can see (Very High Yield, Accurate).

There is no difference between attack modifers and damage modifiers for barrages (sorry if not clear - I meant firing barrages). HY adds +1 Accurate adds 1, Very high yield adds 2 to the dice.

Damage from pulse lasers is split between the 2 sections (page 77) doubling the amount of structure you get to subtract from.

Agreed- doesn't help though. At 5000 tons you still only get 100H and 100S in total. ( 50 of each in each section, and both are always hit with half for non-spinal weapon damage)

I would stay at long range with these - why get closer? save the energy for evasion or if somehow a capital ship action starts in close the open the range asap.

You also forgot about bearing, not all you 50 turrets can bear, the best is 80% = i.e 40 of them.

I did simplify - but you can get +10% more if you use the optional orders, and otherwise 80% for most configurations.

Damage from pulse lasers is split bet...

Pulse lasers? - I was referring to Particle Weapons... I think that's where our maths starts to diverge

I assumed +5 fc btw, +1 crew, +2 wpn mods,

Regards

 

[smiths121]

Serves me right for reading and responding to your post while I'm still waking up! :roll:

Only defence against particle beams appears to be more ship and as much armour as you can fit. At 25% per point each point of armour reduces the damage by... well some.

 

[ColHut]

I think the ability to put triple particle weapons in a 1dt turret is unfortunate. I cannot really see the point of bay mounted weapons on capital ships, a spinal mount and particle weapons turrets will do fine.

Maybe limit them to one per turret?