Weapons for a special-operations ship

[Old School]

The ships in HG is just carbon copies of ships from CT Fighting Ships, they make no more sense under MgT2 rules than they did under CT rules.

Right. I take that as an unwritten rule that 6G is the max for starships.

Otherwise, you have to redesign damn near every ship you come across in a campaign. SDBs, for example, would all be 9G. Ships already have to choose between a high jump number and high armament. 9G m drives add to that math, if only slightly.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

Right. I take that as an unwritten rule that 6G is the max for starships.

Makes sense, but we have to wait for a 3I sourcebook for confirmation.

 

[AnotherDilbert]

edit: i think your calculation looks fine but it's not resolved this way in the combat rules.

Dear God, I hope not. If I had to make such calculations for each salvo fired I would choose a different combat system.

 

[baithammer]

Might be better to have the ship as a tender and deploy stealth shuttles to do the covert operations instead.

 

[Anonymous]

The ships in HG is just carbon copies of ships from CT Fighting Ships, they make no more sense under MgT2 rules than they did under CT rules.

Right. I take that as an unwritten rule that 6G is the max for starships.

Otherwise, you have to redesign damn near every ship you come across in a campaign. SDBs, for example, would all be 9G. Ships already have to choose between a high jump number and high armament. 9G m drives add to that math, if only slightly.

Today we're building vehicles with much less than the maximum possible speed. If you were to look in a current Jane's aircraft you might be "fooled" into thinking that mach 3 planes aren't possible.

If you're a wargamer (e.g. for Trillion Credit Squadron) you will need to re-design the ships anyway. If not, then everything's fine in RPG land.

 

[phavoc]

If your ships primary mission is to sneak in to drop off small units then it should be equipped to be stealthy and fast. If it has to engage an enemy then it's covert mission is blown. It should have sharp teeth to take out a small patrol vessel that stumbles upon it, but otherwise it should choose to run from anything approaching its size since that ship is probably optimized for combat and not stealth.

Think more beam weapons than nukes. Beams can potentially disable or kill somewhat silently, but nukes are a giant "here I am!" beacon, especially out-system. Max out your ecm and electronics since that's defensive and sneaky in nature.

 

[Old School]

I agree with Phavoc. This thing can't carry a company of marines, all their gear, and deployment shuttles and still be heavily armed. Missiles are great if you can fire them in huge quantities, which takes space you might not have. Barbettes and triple turrets maximize firepower/space used.

One of my players designed a 200 ton stealth ship to be used to insert / retrieve small teams or cargo. Externally it looks like a free trader. Has M4 and J4 drives, and 4 staterooms. Stealth hull and stealth jump. It has about 2 tons of cargo space, plus a 30 ton module like a modular cutter would carry. That module can be swapped out for different missions. The favorite module holds a 20 ton launch and 2 more staterooms. Another holds 5 staterooms, a med bay and some cargo. Another holds a G-Carrier and barracks.

The "launch" is also stealthed, heavily armored, and can do 9Gs.

It ain't cheap, but it's cool.

 

[Condottiere]

You might either have to enlarge the vessel and use it as a mothership with a bigger selection of secondary craft, or shrink it with a smaller complement but more usable to sneak in and out.

 

[WingedCat]

The ships in HG is just carbon copies of ships from CT Fighting Ships, they make no more sense under MgT2 rules than they did under CT rules.

Right. I take that as an unwritten rule that 6G is the max for starships.

Otherwise, you have to redesign damn near every ship you come across in a campaign. SDBs, for example, would all be 9G. Ships already have to choose between a high jump number and high armament. 9G m drives add to that math, if only slightly.

I take it more that 6G is a general standard. You certainly can build faster; it's just that this is usually not done (precisely because ships have to choose between other things).

9G maneuver drive plus 16G reaction drive yields 25G...likely only used by smallcraft that need to cross large distances quickly, and can return to a mothership to refuel between sorties.

 

[Anonymous]

I take it more that 6G is a general standard. You certainly can build faster; it's just that this is usually not done (precisely because ships have to choose between other things).

9G maneuver drive plus 16G reaction drive yields 25G...likely only used by smallcraft that need to cross large distances quickly, and can return to a mothership to refuel between sorties.

i have a sniper ship design with a rocket drive booster. if you don't match its weapon range, you don't get to shoot at it ever unless you pull some kind of ambush.

 

[WingedCat]

I take it more that 6G is a general standard. You certainly can build faster; it's just that this is usually not done (precisely because ships have to choose between other things).

9G maneuver drive plus 16G reaction drive yields 25G...likely only used by smallcraft that need to cross large distances quickly, and can return to a mothership to refuel between sorties.

i have a sniper ship design with a rocket drive booster. if you don't match its weapon range, you don't get to shoot at it ever unless you pull some kind of ambush.

Indeed, but this is not common. Also, this is one of the cases that missiles are for.

 

[Condottiere]

If you pass through the range of a light speed weapon system, you're going to need a cloaking device and ambush them.

Outside the obvious kamikaze tactic, dive bombing comes to mind with an ortillery missile or torpedo.

In case you're wondering what's the difference, torpedo bombers slow down.

 

[Anonymous]

i have a sniper ship design with a rocket drive booster. if you don't match its weapon range, you don't get to shoot at it ever unless you pull some kind of ambush.

Indeed, but this is not common. Also, this is one of the cases that missiles are for.

Not common?

Traveller is like one of those sci-fi books where Earth and aliens fight and the aliens are like "We lost because didn't know humans would build new space craft after we destroyed theirs. That is so dishonorable we would rather be conquered than do it, and we assumed Humans were the same"

You know that type of book if you've read a bit of military sci-fi. It's the sort of book I throw across the room and never manage to finish. Then again, it's happened in Earth's history a few times and in the Traveller universe, too.

Your RPG world though, your rules apply.

 

[phavoc]

I take it more that 6G is a general standard. You certainly can build faster; it's just that this is usually not done (precisely because ships have to choose between other things).

9G maneuver drive plus 16G reaction drive yields 25G...likely only used by smallcraft that need to cross large distances quickly, and can return to a mothership to refuel between sorties.

i have a sniper ship design with a rocket drive booster. if you don't match its weapon range, you don't get to shoot at it ever unless you pull some kind of ambush.

For every 'super-weapon', there is a counter. The enemy would deploy an anti-sniper sniper ship to counter this. The advantage lies in the surprise and how long you have an advantage (and whether or not it's a tactical or strategic ones).

The mongols often used the tactic of feigning a retreat, then turning and pouncing on the enemy. They were (in)famous for it. And the mamluks used the same tactic on the mongols, who fell for it and were destroyed, and the mongols never again attempted to attack the middle east/egypt area.

 

[Condottiere]

The Mongols didn't come back because their uberEmpire broke up into successor states, sort of like the Second Imperium.

And you have to remember that under the right leadership, they took on the Chinese and Persians. The Russians don't count.

 

[phavoc]

The Mongols didn't come back because their uberEmpire broke up into successor states, sort of like the Second Imperium.

And you have to remember that under the right leadership, they took on the Chinese and Persians. The Russians don't count.

Partially. But the mamluks had also handed the Mongols their first real decisive defeat ever. This was 1260 and Persia and Russia had already been conquered, Bagdhad had been destroyed. Mongols were already raiding as far west as Poland by this time. Mongols later returned, but unlike past times they never came back with the horde to decimate the area as punishment for their defeat.

Seems rather stupid to get so far, have your leader die and then have to go all the way back to the homeland to elect a new leader, only to then go BACK to the battlefield. But that was the Mongol way. They were fearsome warriors of the steppe, but they also had numerous faults - like most empires.

 

[Condottiere]

Three things really stopped the Mongols: amphibious operations, jungle warfare and probably congested European terrain.

As regards the fragility of their institutions, it worked as long as you had a Khan of khans that all respected, probably the reason everyone had to return home, do some politicking, and repledge fealty.

The thing about the Mongols was that they only had to win once, because they weren't averse as to wiping out the tax base and scourging the earth, that eight centuries later, you could say Baghdad really hasn't recovered from. And the Russians are still paranoid.

 

[phavoc]

Three things really stopped the Mongols: amphibious operations, jungle warfare and probably congested European terrain.

As regards the fragility of their institutions, it worked as long as you had a Khan of khans that all respected, probably the reason everyone had to return home, do some politicking, and repledge fealty.

The thing about the Mongols was that they only had to win once, because they weren't averse as to wiping out the tax base and scourging the earth, that eight centuries later, you could say Baghdad really hasn't recovered from. And the Russians are still paranoid.

That only stopped them from invading Japan. Horses don't do as well in jungles, so their spread there would be limited by terrain, and Europe they were going as far as modern-day Poland/Germany, Czech Republic & Bulgaria and Hungary. Probably the two things that stopped them was their silly having to go back to Mongolia every time the Great Khan died, infighting and rain (trees from that era show an increase in rainfall, causing more marshy terrain instead of dry grassland). Horses don't do so well in marsh. Lot's of speculations, but that's all there is, speculation.

Mongols were actually decent rulers if you surrendered. They could care less about what religion you were, and Ghenghis supposedly was thoughtful about ruling (as far as a bloodthirsty Mongol could be). So for their time if (you surrendered) it wasn't as bad as some of the other zealots who would kill and/or tax you to death for having a different religion. But yeah, if you didn't surrender you were pretty much toast and they would have no mercy.

Russians paranoia seems to be more of a genetic thing I'd say. Even today they have an, ah, different social and historical climate than most.

 

[Anonymous]

I highly doubt differences in paranoia are genetic, and it's probably cultural.

I know a small number of Russians from video games (they are close enough to EU servers to not have severe lag) and they're less paranoid about geo politics than the KKona brigade.

 

[phavoc]

I highly doubt differences in paranoia are genetic, and it's probably cultural.

I know a small number of Russians from video games (they are close enough to EU servers to not have severe lag) and they're less paranoid about geo politics than the KKona brigade.

I didn't mean for that to be taken literally. It was a mixture of sarcasm and facetious. To the best of my knowledge, unless a person is mentally ill, paranoia is not a genetic condition in any human.