Why are warships built without armored bulkheads, EM hardening, and backup power?

[Sigtrygg]

Do We have an expert on here? with the current rules?

I'm not convinced the people who wrote them are expert on their own rules. The screens, fleet combat rules, and number of fiddley rules for components like armoured bulkheads etc require you to have SFB expert level knowledge. Has anyone fought dozens of fleet engagements with any of the Mongoose HG fleet combat systems?

HG80 was straightforward, Battle Rider was a lot more complex but well written and quick to learn. I have played Attack Vector/tactical and Squadron Strike Traveller, Power Projection Escort and Fleet enough to comment on those, but I have never used MgT fleet combat.

 

[ottarrus]

I've been building the Warmonger Battle Tender and some battle riders (one new and a redesign of the Hadrian plus a supporting gunship) and had someone mention how expensive the battle riders and gunboat were. They and the spreadsheets are in the Warmonger thread. The cost difference was me adding armored bulkheads, EM hardening, and power backups to the battle riders I made and the gunboat auxiliary.

When I went looking in High Guard 2022 Update, I only saw that the Tigress and the Armored Cruiser were using them. There may be a few more as I didn't go looking at each, but there were a lot of warships that didn't bother.

My question is this: adding the above adds about 25% to the price tag. Is that really a hard stop for the Imperial Navy? I'd have figured all combat vessels would have the additions as they reduce critical and stop EMP damage. If you're going to make all these warships, shouldn't they be able to stand up to more punishment and smite the Imperium's enemies?

There is a WHOLE BUNCH of history behind maritime navies scrimping on important stuff. Likewise there is a whole bunch of science fiction that does the same thing.
Oftentimes, there is a tradeoff between getting the best possible ship for the intended role and increasing the number of hulls you have to deploy. There is the old adage, 'I don't care if it's an aircraft carrier or an admiral's barge, you shoot at a flagged [insert navy here] vessel and you take on the rest of us too.'
Military ship and vehicle design comes down to three factors that must balance out to make an effective weapon system: Role, Armor, Speed, and Firepower. Nowadays some people also add Stealth, but that's arguable. And it's been that way since Sargon the Great organized his Sumerian spearmen in 3000 BC. You must define the role of the vehicle, then decide how much armor, firepower, and speed that role requires. And remember, 'requires' and 'would very much like' are entirely different things. Examples include:
- PT Boats /MTBs from WWII... long on speed and firepower [for their size] but floating deathtraps otherwise... no armor, tissue thin hull, and every square inch has something flammable in it.
- Pre-WWII Dreadnoughts... LOTS of firepower, very good armor, but it was always a struggle to get enough speed in them. At one point, there was more military espionage regarding naval power plants than naval weaponry
And there is no reason to think that this struggle won't also be part of space vehicle design once Earth deploys its first purpose-designed military spacecraft.

 

[ottarrus]

I'm not convinced the people who wrote them are expert on their own rules. The screens, fleet combat rules, and number of fiddley rules for components like armoured bulkheads etc require you to have SFB expert level knowledge. Has anuyone fought dozens of fleet engagements with any of the Mongoose HG fleet combat systems?

HG80 was straightforward. Battle Rider was a lot more complex but well written and quick to learn. I have played Attack Vector/tactical and Squadron Strike Traveller, Power Projection Escort and Fleet enough to omment on thos, but I have never used MgT fleet combat.

That's a fair point, Sig. Mg High Guard 2 seems to be long on design and short on playability.
It might be worth somebody ginning up a 5FW naval battle using the current HG rules to see how that shakes out. LBB 5 was designed from Jump Street to be squadron /fleet warfare simulator and Mg HG2 clearly is not.

 

[Vormaerin]

That particular battle no longer exist, or at least needs an extensive retcon.

"Battle of Two Suns, 1084: The final battle between Imperial forces and the barbarians in the Fourth Frontier War. Losses on both sides were heavy, but the lmperium held the field and the barbarians were unable to continue their advance due to their lengthening supply lines. Had the battle gone the other way, the loss of both Yres and Menorb (the encounter occurring midway between those two locations) would have forced the evacuation of Efate and meant the collapse of the entire coreward end of the Regina subsector.
Allamu (BC-9516)(*) was caught in the van at the Battle of Two Suns, 1084, and withstood over four hours of steady attack before suffering screen failure. Lost with all hands. On 117-1085, the Emperor personally memorialized the name Allamu, which will henceforth be assigned to dreadnaught-class ships and above(**). To date, no ship bearing the name has been constructed.
The battlefield is still posted as a dangerous area, littered with debris, and avoided by interstellar transportation."

* a Kinunir class battlecruiser equipped with a black globe
** the things you notice after 40 years - what do the Imperium have dreadnaught-class ships and above?

Well, the whole Kinunir adventure was clearly written during the "small ship universe" phase. It is extremely unlikely that the Imperium would put it's most valuable and experimental tech (AI, Black Globes) on what is barely a coast guard cutter these days. And they certainly wouldn't be calling any such ship "the pride of the Fleet".

The smallest 'battleworthy' vessels in the current paradigm are 5000 tons for the little escorts. 1200 tons is definitely NOT a battlecruiser. heh.

 

[Condottiere]

It did get redefined as a colonial cruiser.

Which, historically, would be a third rate cruiser.

 

[Terry Mixon]

Two identical-ish TL fleets, but one fleet with a 25% number advantage - you have 4 capital spinal armed ships I have 5, you have 8 cruisers with light spinals I have 10, you have 20 escorts I have 25...

I'll take you on no problem.

Even with the reduction of crit severity, neutralizing ion hit, and so on?

 

[ottarrus]

Yeah, the Kinunir was designed from the keel up to be the Type C Mercenary Cruiser killer.
Then High Guard happened.
Game over.
And as a warship it wasn't any great shakes even back then.

 

[Vormaerin]

Yeah, if it was done today, it would be an order of magnitude larger. 120,000 battle cruiser built around a spinal mount. Reliant on speed, firepower, and experimental technology (super computer, black globe generator) for survivability rather than armor or size (relative to battleships, of course).

And then we'd be saying that the reason the Imperium doesn't like battlecruisers overall is the way the Kinunir class worked out (or didn't). It would also make more sense as to why the failure of their Kinunir production line drove the largest shipbuilder in the Regina subsector out of the military shipbuilding business entirely.

 

[Condottiere]

The distaste for battlecruisers may be a recent development, for the Imperium.

 

[Terry Mixon]

Two identical-ish TL fleets, but one fleet with a 25% number advantage - you have 4 capital spinal armed ships I have 5, you have 8 cruisers with light spinals I have 10, you have 20 escorts I have 25...

I'll take you on no problem.

I've taken your advice to heart. I wonder how the Warmonger Battle Tender loaded with 50 Crossbow-Class Battle Riders (my own design) would fit into your engagement style.

The Warmonger-Class Battle Tender

I was browsing the ships in High Guard 2022 Update and was reading about the Hadrian-Class Battle Rider. It mentions it is most often carried by the one-million-ton Warmonger-Class Battle Tender. Sadly, the latter doesn't seem to have been published anywhere. Are there plans to do so? It would...

forum.mongoosepublishing.com

 

[J. L. Brown]

Right. Isn't that 1,000 of Rad Protection enough to basically ignore Radiation from Weapons? Or am I mistaken?

Not from Meson weapons; they entirely ignore the Armor & Hull Features -- the radiation & damage come from inside. You need Meson Screens to reduce the damage, and/or Nuclear Dampers to negate the radiation, or a Black Globe.

 

[MasterGwydion]

Not from Meson weapons; they entirely ignore the Armor & Hull Features -- the radiation & damage come from inside. You need Meson Screens to reduce the damage, and/or Nuclear Dampers to negate the radiation, or a Black Globe.

You do realize, that as written, this means that the firing ship will also take radiation damage, correct?

HG pg 31,

"THE RADIATION TRAIT When a spacecraft weapon with the Radiation trait is fired, it inflicts 2D x 60 rads on everyone within 10 metres of the point of attack. It should be noted that radiation weapons have shielding and other safeguards that prevent them from affecting the gunners who fire the weapon and other crew in the vicinity. However, Travellers on the hull of the attacking ship do risk being affected if they are near the weapon when it fires." and later on in the same blue box, "If meson weapons are used, ignore radiation shielding – regardless of the protection the ship has, the crew gets a full dose of radiation from these weapons."

So, Meson weapons just became, not just useless but, suicidal to use in Traveller.

 

[Terry Mixon]

You do realize, that as written, this means that the firing ship will also take radiation damage, correct?

HG pg 31,

"THE RADIATION TRAIT When a spacecraft weapon with the Radiation trait is fired, it inflicts 2D x 60 rads on everyone within 10 metres of the point of attack. It should be noted that radiation weapons have shielding and other safeguards that prevent them from affecting the gunners who fire the weapon and other crew in the vicinity. However, Travellers on the hull of the attacking ship do risk being affected if they are near the weapon when it fires." and later on in the same blue box, "If meson weapons are used, ignore radiation shielding – regardless of the protection the ship has, the crew gets a full dose of radiation from these weapons."

So, Meson weapons just became, not just useless but, suicidal to use in Traveller.

Better have meson screens.

 

[ottarrus]

The distaste for battlecruisers may be a recent development, for the Imperium.

In the Charted Space milieu, battlecruisers are offensive raiders. They go after soft targets [merchant convoys, low defense worlds, etc.] and do very poorly when fighting within their weight class. Imperial doctrine thinks that they can get two or three very capable cruisers for the price of one battlecruiser and that those cruisers will put an Imperial Naval presence in several systems instead of just one over the life of the hulls in question.
Essentially they see battlecruiser warfare as being valid during an active war, but a waste of credits otherwise.

 

[ottarrus]

Better have meson screens.

Which virtually all Imperial warships have....

 

[Condottiere]

That's sort of opposite of my opinion.

Battlecruisers are great in peacetime, and in the opening stages of a conflict.

 

[MasterGwydion]

Better have meson screens.

Yep. Based on this, I will no longer be designing ships with Meson Weapons. They will only be used by militaries with suicidal tactics.

 

[Geir]

You do realize, that as written, this means that the firing ship will also take radiation damage, correct?

HG pg 31,

"THE RADIATION TRAIT When a spacecraft weapon with the Radiation trait is fired, it inflicts 2D x 60 rads on everyone within 10 metres of the point of attack. It should be noted that radiation weapons have shielding and other safeguards that prevent them from affecting the gunners who fire the weapon and other crew in the vicinity. However, Travellers on the hull of the attacking ship do risk being affected if they are near the weapon when it fires." and later on in the same blue box, "If meson weapons are used, ignore radiation shielding – regardless of the protection the ship has, the crew gets a full dose of radiation from these weapons."

So, Meson weapons just became, not just useless but, suicidal to use in Traveller.

This is where the intent is clear (at least to me) but the wording is non-ideal. Add one word and change another:

regardless of the protection the target ship has, its crew gets a full dose of radiation from these weapons.

 

[MasterGwydion]

This is where the intent is clear (at least to me) but the wording is non-ideal. Add one word and change another:

regardless of the protection the target ship has, its crew gets a full dose of radiation from these weapons.

Although now, you have made meson guns use different Radiation Rules from every other radiation weapon in the game. Every other radiation weapon will irradiate its own crew without protection. The only reason other Radiation weapons on ships don't do this is shielding, which is clearly stated to not work on meson weapons.

The intent may be clear, but the execution doesn't make sense. What protects the crew from the radiation of a meson weapon? It can't be shielding as it is clearly stated that doesn't work, since if you are on the hull of your ship while the meson weapon is firing, you take full radiation damage. It can't be meson screens since those need to be actively used by crew members and you need a ton of them per gun.

 

[J. L. Brown]

This is where the intent is clear (at least to me) but the wording is non-ideal. Add one word and change another:

regardless of the protection the target ship has, its crew gets a full dose of radiation from these weapons.

That would make a great entry into the Errata; and is a perfect example of how referee's are sometimes required to House-Rule around obvious shortfalls in the text of the rules.