Travellers Needed - Missiles (check our numbers)

[Randalthor66]

The rules for Electronic Warfare in Core and the first post:

Electronic Warfare:
...
The sensor operator must succeed at a Difficult (10+) Electronics (sensors) check in order to destroy or render inert incoming missiles within a single salvo. The Effect of this check will immediately remove that many missiles from the salvo.

OK. Sorry, it looked like the -10 was a modifier of some kind, but you were just using it in the final equation.

He had very good gunners?

A triple laser turret operated by a Gunner-2 and no other mods should kill
2D +2[three lasers] +2[skill] -8[difficulty] ≈ average Effect 3.11,
so about 3 missiles per round on average.

I think you forgot the +4 for Beam Lasers. That takes it up to 7, I more than they needed. We were also generous and both of our crews had 2 skill and +1 stat bonus, so a total skill of +3. Nothing crazy. So, an 8, two more than needed, and a bit of a buffer in case of a lower than average roll.

Depending on range, you could have launched missiles with different speeds, so that several salvoes arrived in the same round, overwhelming PD.

Example:
Assume Long range.
Round 1: Launch Multi-Warhead missiles, will arrive after 1 round, so in Round 2.
Round 2: Launch Long Range missiles, will arrive Immediately, so Round 2.

His PD will now have 12 missiles to stop, and the Multi-Warhead missiles will be more difficult to kill. Quite a few are likely to get through...

The first salvo of missiles would have been subject to EW which would have knocked out some of them. I highly doubt it would be 12 they had to deal with. But even so, just tossing the other turret would have meant no missiles for sure.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

I think you forgot the +4 for Beam Lasers. That takes it up to 7, I more than they needed. We were also generous and both of our crews had 2 skill and +1 stat bonus, so a total skill of +3. Nothing crazy.

The DM+4 is only used for Attacks, not PD Reactions.

With a total +3 skill it becomes:
2D +2[three lasers] +3[skill] -8[difficulty] ≈ average Effect 4.02.

The first salvo of missiles would have been subject to EW which would have knocked out some of them. I highly doubt it would be 12 they had to deal with. But even so, just tossing the other turret would have meant no missiles for sure.

Quite:
EW: 2D + 3[skill] + 0[military sensors] - 10[difficulty] ≈ average 0.97 missiles killed.

On average about one missile would be killed by EW.

Remains:
5 MW missiles + 6 Long Range missiles.

PD targets MW missiles (since they do a lot more damage per missile):
2D +2[three lasers] +3[skill] -2[multi-warhead] -8[difficulty] ≈ average Effect 2.27.

Two turrets kill, on average, 2 × 2.27 = 4.54 MW missiles, let's call that all 5 remaining MW missiles.

Remains:
6 Long Range missiles:
Salvo Attack: 2D + 6[# of missiles] + 1[smart] - 3[evade] - 8[difficulty] ≈ average 3 missiles hitting.
3 Long Range missiles do ( 3D - 3 ) × 3 = average 22.5 damage.

With the new missile damage they would make ( 6D - 3 ) × 3 ≈ average 54 damage, killing a Gazelle in three or four attacks.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

But that was only two turrets, launching 6 missiles per round. Put the Gazelle up against, say, a Patrol Corvette with four missile turrets, launching 12 missiles per round:

Round 1: Launch 12 MW missiles, arriving in Round 2.
Round 2: Launch 12 Long Range missiles, arriving in Round 2.
(Note: only civilian low tech missiles, there are much better missiles available.)

The first salvo is subject to EW once, killing about 1 missile on average, as above.

Remains: 11 MW missiles + 12 Long Range missiles.

PD from the Gazelle's two laser turrets kills about 5 MW missiles, as above.

Remains: 6 MW missiles + 12 Long Range missiles.

MW missiles:
Salvo Attack: 2D + 6[# of missiles] + 1[smart] - 3[evade] - 8[difficulty] ≈ average 3 missiles hitting.
3 MW missiles do ( 3D - 3 ) × 3 × 3 = average 67.5 damage.

Long Range missiles:
Salvo Attack: 2D + 12[# of missiles] + 1[smart] - 3[evade] - 8[difficulty] ≈ average 8.89 missiles hitting.
8.89 Long Range missiles do ( 3D - 3 ) × 8.89 = average 66,67 damage.

Total average 134 damage and 7 crits from sustained damage. The Gazelle is almost killed in one attack.


With the new missile damage it becomes:
3 MW missiles do ( 6D - 3 ) × 3 × 3 = average 162 damage.
8.89 Long Range missiles do ( 6D - 3 ) × 8.89 = average 187 damage.

Total 349 damage and 19 crits from sustained damage. The Gazelle is destroyed, twice, in one attack.


Meanwhile Gazelle fired its Particle barbettes twice (assuming initiative):
Attack: 2D + 3[skill] +1[Fire Control] -2[range] - 3[evade] - 8[difficulty], hitting on 9+ for a chance of 28%, with an average effect of 1.
Damage: 4 attacks × 28% chance × ( 4D + 1[av. effect] - 4[armour] ) ≈ average 12 damage to the Patrol Corvette.

 

[MongooseMatt]

As a quick note, we have made the decision to keep missiles at 4D (though the nuclear option will remain at 1DD).

 

[Annatar Giftbringer]

As a quick note, we have made the decision to keep missiles at 4D (though the nuclear option will remain at 1DD).

Thank you, good call!

8d regular missiles was too much, but 1DD nukes sounds fine. They were a bit on the weak side before.

 

[Ursus Maior]

That is an option for a slightly different weapon system introduced in the Traveller Companion.

I have that book and I don't know which weapon you are referring to. Could you tell me? Pretty-please? *bats eyes*

My pleasure. That would be the "Container-Launchers" from p. 161 in the Traveller Companion.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

As a quick note, we have made the decision to keep missiles at 4D (though the nuclear option will remain at 1DD).

That makes sense for a civilian setting. The nuclear missile is a doomsday machine, a single nuclear missile can destroy a Scout, but you can't really have them.

But in a naval setting, where you regularly throw around nukes, everything but nukes will become irrelevant. I know I have left Core far behind, but HG will have to change as a consequence. A single Multi-Warhead Nuclear Torpedo (presumably also at 1DD) will do ( 1D × 10 - 15 ) × 3 = average 60 damage against Armour 15, far more than any bay weapon, and it will do it at Distant range.


Example:
A simple Imperial-type battleship:
200 kDt, J-4, M-9, Armour 15, 10DD meson spinal, 1662 laser turrets, GCr 124.5

An equal cost Torpedo battleship:
220 kDt, J-4, M-9, Armour 15, 130 large torpedo bays, 1550 triple missile fixed mounts, GCr 123

At Distant range the Torpedo ship launches a salvo of 3900 MWN torpedoes and 4560 Nuclear missiles. The missiles are halved every 5 rounds, so 25% arrives or 1140 missiles. At that range the Meson spinal can't return fire, even with a range upgrade.

When the missiles arrive the meson ship uses its 1662 laser turrets for PD. With good, augmented crew:
PD torpedo: 2D +2[three lasers] +5[skill] +1[sub-command] -2[multi-warhead] -8[difficulty] ≈ average Effect 5 kills 2 torpedoes.
PD missile: 2D +2[three lasers] +5[skill] +1[sub-command] -8[difficulty] ≈ average Effect 7 kills 7 missiles.

1140 missiles are killed by 1140 / 7 = 162 turrets.

The remaining 1500 turrets kills 3000 torpedoes.

After PD 900 torpedoes and 0 missiles attacks. Each torpedo does average 60 damage for a total of 54000 damage, doing 37% damage to the meson ship. The third salvo finishes off the meson ship, without it ever having the chance to return fire.

Note that I didn't even have to play tricks to consolidate several turns worth of missiles arriving in the same round to easily kill the meson ship...

 

[MongooseMatt]

Torpedoes will likely be changing in a future High Guard - they will become true ship-killers...

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Torpedoes will likely be changing in a future High Guard - they will become true ship-killers...

OK, but how will that keep spinals relevant?

 

[MongooseMatt]

OK, but how will that keep spinals relevant?

Beyond the scope of this thread - don't worry, we will bring you all in on the debate closer to the time

 

[Condottiere]

Presumably, torpedoes revert back to their old size, and carry a rather hefty nuclear warhead.

In regards to the balance with spinal mounts, torpedoes may be thought of more as finishers, or delivering the coup de grace, since I'll assume they would be more vulnerable to nuclear dampers.

I expect putting on a stealth coating would qualify them as surprise attack.

 

[Melbourne Accords]

In my view, increasing the destructive power of nuclear missiles to 1DD is a positive change. Our group recently experimented with increasing the damage caused by nuclear missiles and the result was some great (and tense) gaming. The increase to 1DD underscores that such weapons form part of an exclusively military tier of weaponry, well beyond the realm of tramp traders and scouts.

 

[PsiTraveller]

Is a discussion of what is and is not available to a tramp trader in terms of weapons something that should be added to the book? I know that each GM can change things to suit their game, but for baseline concepts, where is the line drawn? No nukes? but ortillery capacity is ok? Another thread on these forums mentions using a ship as a suicide bomb by accelerating into a planet. The Moon is a Harsh Mistress by Heinlein points out what happens when you throw rocks down a gravity well.

Can a far trader have a turret with a Particle Weapon? or is that too powerful? And out in the Sindal sector where a lot of 2nd edition is located, there is no Imperium to lay down the law, and Theev is available for all your naughty upgrades. What sort of weaponry does Mongoose think is a reasonable baseline for a ship?

 

[Condottiere]

Probably anything that causes secondary radiation damage.

And bay weapons.

 

[AndrewW]

Is a discussion of what is and is not available to a tramp trader in terms of weapons something that should be added to the book? I know that each GM can change things to suit their game, but for baseline concepts, where is the line drawn? No nukes? but ortillery capacity is ok? Another thread on these forums mentions using a ship as a suicide bomb by accelerating into a planet. The Moon is a Harsh Mistress by Heinlein points out what happens when you throw rocks down a gravity well.

Think it would vary based on where you are. The Zhodani Consulate for example might have tighter restrictions then the Third Imperium.

Well, not much for all those they threw at NORAD.

 

[Archangel1207]

A lot of good points have been raised here. I mostly worry about the significant escalation in modifiers once military grade software and equipment is brought in from High Guard and elsewhere.

I think you forgot the +4 for Beam Lasers. That takes it up to 7, I more than they needed. We were also generous and both of our crews had 2 skill and +1 stat bonus, so a total skill of +3. Nothing crazy.

The DM+4 is only used for Attacks, not PD Reactions.

With a total +3 skill it becomes:
2D +2[three lasers] +3[skill] -8[difficulty] ≈ average Effect 4.02.

Can you let me know where this comes from? Point defense is one of my main concerns, as with all of the modifiers that seem relevant (DM+4 for beams, DM+2 for a triple turret, DM+1-3 for advanced fire control software, DM+2 for a typical turret gunner, potentially a dex modifier), it seems that the average effect would be around 8-10, so that many missiles per turret per turn. And I don't see why you wouldn't add those modifiers. Has that been clarified somewhere?

 

[Annatar Giftbringer]

The point defense reaction is not an attack roll, and the laser to hit-bonus and fire control software specifically adds to attack rolls.

The point defense reaction, as detailed on p.160 is a gunner (turret) skill check, but not an attack. As a skill check, you add skill level and characteristic bonus as usual, but as you can see on p.160 the only additional bonus mentioned is DM+1 per additional laser in the turret.

Note that the DM+1 for dual turrets does not apply for attack rolls, its purely For point defense. When attacking, multiple weapons of the same type within a turret gives a damage bonus instead.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Can you let me know where this comes from? Point defense is one of my main concerns, ...

The point defense reaction is not an attack roll, and the laser to hit-bonus and fire control software specifically adds to attack rolls.

Exactly.

An attack is defined on p156:

When a ship attacks another [ship], it declares it is going to attack and selects a target.

This is just an extension of the ground combat rules on p71:

Attack
The most common Significant Action used in combat is to attack. An attack is an attempt to damage or injure an enemy with either a melee or ranged weapon, such as a knife or a rifle.

The Traveller declares he is going to attack and selects a target. The target may then choose a Reaction. The Traveller then makes an appropriate skill check and, as normal for any Average skill check, if he scores 8+, the attack is successful and damage is dealt to the target (see Damage on page 73).

The PD reaction is explicitly not an attack (p160):

REACTIONS
...
Point Defence (Gunner)
Using a turret-mounted laser (beam or pulse), a gunner can destroy incoming missiles. Note that a weapon used for point defence cannot be used to make attacks in the same combat round, and vice versa.

The DM+4 for beam lasers comes from a table labeled (p156):

Common Modifiers to Spacecraft Attacks
The following modifiers are commonly used to influence Gunner checks when attacking.

They are not used for other checks or rolls.


Fire Control software gives bonuses to attacks, and only attacks (p151):

Alternatively, it can give a positive DM to an attack equal to the listed number,

So, it does not apply to reactions, neither PD nor Disperse Sand.


Both Attacks and PD Reactions are resolved using skill checks with the Gunnery skill, so anything applying to Gunnery or checks in general would apply to both, such as anything boosting Gunnery skill or the chosen characteristic DM.

 

[First Age]

OK, but how will that keep spinals relevant?

Beyond the scope of this thread - don't worry, we will bring you all in on the debate closer to the time

Hey Matt, are there a lot of mechanical changes coming? If there are to be key changes to mechanical effects, such as income amounts, or spacecraft weapon damage, will the new core rulebook be compatible with current?

 

[MongooseMatt]

Hey Matt, are there a lot of mechanical changes coming? If there are to be key changes to mechanical effects, such as income amounts, or spacecraft weapon damage, will the new core rulebook be compatible with current?

Completely compatible - this is not a new edition. So, if you want to stick with the current rulebook, you will be able to play all future releases 'as is'. At the same time, the Update Rulebook will be playable with all previous releases 'as is'.

The way it works is this - the 'input/output' of the different mechanics will remain the same, but there may be changes to what happens within those mechanics. Most things are extremely minor though, such as mass changes for equipment and elevated rad protection levels on ships, for example.