Traveller Store CotI Features New Posts Mark Forums Read Register


Go Back TravellerRPG.com > Citizens of the Imperium > Other Versions of Traveller > T4 - Marc Miller's Traveller

T4 - Marc Miller's Traveller Discussion of T4 - Marc Miller's Traveller from Imperium Games and the Milieu 0 setting.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old April 5th, 2017, 04:48 PM
Able Baker Able Baker is offline
Citizen: SOC-10
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 66
Gallery : 0
Able Baker Citizen
Default Imperial Squadrons Bombardment Factor Question

Hi guys!

Revisiting the old PE and IS rules currently. One question arose: In IS it says ScoutRons do not get a Bombardment Factor. Obviously, looking at FFW shows that ScoutRons actually have rather large BFs. So how/where in IS can I assign BF to ScoutRons? Or can the BF be echanged at the 2:1 ratio given for BR and CRs? And what does that say about the badass 0-8-4 J3 Imperial ScoutRons in FFW?

Couldn't find any errata for IS. Also sad to hear the keeper of the T4 flame is an absent friend now. Clear Skies, Don!
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old April 5th, 2017, 05:49 PM
Whipsnade's Avatar
Whipsnade Whipsnade is offline
Citizen: SOC-14
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Dover, New Hampshire, USA
Posts: 5,916
Gallery : 5
Visit Whipsnade's Blog
Whipsnade Citizen+Whipsnade Citizen+Whipsnade Citizen+
Default

I used to wonder why the panzer division's in Avalon Hill's The Russian Campaign had different movement and combat factor from the panzer divisions in Avalon Hill's Stalingrad. Same company, same scale, and even the same campaign, right?

Then I remembered they were two different games.
__________________
"The beauty of CT LBB1-3 is that the ref is free to make such decisions for themselves." - Mike Wightman
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old April 5th, 2017, 06:18 PM
Able Baker Able Baker is offline
Citizen: SOC-10
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 66
Gallery : 0
Able Baker Citizen
Default

Point taken.

In all fairness, IS is taking many things verbatim from FFW, and has been shown to model FFW quite well.

Moreso, it says "ScoutRons cannot get Bombardment Factors at this time." So I wondered if this was an omission or sth. similar.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old April 5th, 2017, 06:34 PM
Whipsnade's Avatar
Whipsnade Whipsnade is offline
Citizen: SOC-14
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Dover, New Hampshire, USA
Posts: 5,916
Gallery : 5
Visit Whipsnade's Blog
Whipsnade Citizen+Whipsnade Citizen+Whipsnade Citizen+
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Able Baker View Post
In all fairness, IS is taking many things verbatim from FFW...

So does Invasion:Earth. Your point being?

Quote:
... and has been shown to model FFW quite well.
Sez who? Among many, many, many other things, IS builds fleets while FFW uses squadrons and IS has logistic rules where FFW doesn't.

Quote:
Moreso, it says "ScoutRons cannot get Bombardment Factors at this time." So I wondered if this was an omission or sth. similar.
Don't focus on a fragment of a sentence. Look at the context of the entire sentence.
__________________
"The beauty of CT LBB1-3 is that the ref is free to make such decisions for themselves." - Mike Wightman
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old April 5th, 2017, 06:42 PM
Able Baker Able Baker is offline
Citizen: SOC-10
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 66
Gallery : 0
Able Baker Citizen
Default

Exactly. It does not say: "ScoutRons never can have BF". It suggest there might be another time in the desing process were they can get some Bombardment Factors. Canon ScoutRons have BFs, many of them, so where do they come from?

I see your points, but I think the question is still legit.

Regarding Squadrons: I do think IS is for creating exactly the counters for FFW, as the WAR-Rules are basically the FFW rules and so on.
ADD: PE is only concerned with Fleets.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old April 5th, 2017, 06:45 PM
whartung whartung is offline
Citizen: SOC-14
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,640
Gallery : 0
whartung Citizen+whartung Citizen+whartung Citizen+
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Able Baker View Post
Point taken.

In all fairness, IS is taking many things verbatim from FFW, and has been shown to model FFW quite well.

Moreso, it says "ScoutRons cannot get Bombardment Factors at this time." So I wondered if this was an omission or sth. similar.
Then perhaps you can simply lift the bombardment factors from FFW and apply them here.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old April 5th, 2017, 07:04 PM
Whipsnade's Avatar
Whipsnade Whipsnade is offline
Citizen: SOC-14
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Dover, New Hampshire, USA
Posts: 5,916
Gallery : 5
Visit Whipsnade's Blog
Whipsnade Citizen+Whipsnade Citizen+Whipsnade Citizen+
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Able Baker View Post
Exactly. It does not say: "ScoutRons never can have BF".
It also says "Having no armament and very little bombardment capability, Scout Squadrons are typically used for scouting out the opposition..."

Quote:
It suggest there might be another time in the desing process were they can get some Bombardment Factors.
Suggest? Not in IS it doesn't . ScoutRons have a specific role in this specific game. Other games need not apply.

Quote:
Canon ScoutRons have BFs, many of them, so where do they come from?
They come from other games designed to do other things.

Quote:
I see your points, but I think the question is still legit.
The "question" is an application of semantics on one sentence fragment in search of loopholes while ignoring the rest game as a whole. It's akin to those people who passionately argued that the sub-1000dTon weapon bays were legal in HG2, they violate the spirit of the rules because they can "argue" for different semi-plausible interpretations of the letter of rules.

Quote:
Regarding Squadrons: I do think IS is for creating exactly the counters for FFW, as the WAR-Rules are basically the FFW rules and so on.
IS USqP: 1234-56-789-A

FFW counter: 6-2-4, B4, refueling code

That's the same?

Quote:
ADD: PE is only concerned with Fleets.
Typo and brain fart on my part. I wanted to write "IS builds squadrons while FFW uses squadrons."
__________________
"The beauty of CT LBB1-3 is that the ref is free to make such decisions for themselves." - Mike Wightman
Reply With Quote
  #8  
Old April 6th, 2017, 04:00 AM
Able Baker Able Baker is offline
Citizen: SOC-10
 
Join Date: Jan 2008
Posts: 66
Gallery : 0
Able Baker Citizen
Default

Again, Larsen, I saw your point from the beginning. I am just not 100% sure this might not be an editorial oversight instead of a conscious design decision to have all ScoutRons with 0-0-X.

And re: counter-stats, the design sequence for Squadrons in IS does go through exactly those stats that are to be found on an FFW-counter sans it's backside.

Be that all as it may.

IFF it was a conscious design decision and the FFW ScoutRons model something different, what do they model? The counter depiction looks like they allude to Scout/Courier type of vessels, for example.
Is BF in FFW then a function of many (MANY) small turreted weapons?
Why would ScoutRons in in IS not have them then?
Or does the Imperial Scout Service have some other element that was modelled by the BFs in FFW?
Reply With Quote
  #9  
Old April 6th, 2017, 01:27 PM
mike wightman's Avatar
mike wightman mike wightman is offline
Noble
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Newcastle
Posts: 16,711
Gallery : 0
mike wightman Respected Citizenmike wightman Respected Citizenmike wightman Respected Citizenmike wightman Respected Citizenmike wightman Respected Citizenmike wightman Respected Citizenmike wightman Respected Citizenmike wightman Respected Citizen
Default

HG1e for CT may help fill in a gap.

In those rules a bombardment factor was derived for a ship with missile bays and a missile magazine.

It could be argued that the scouts of IS are not high enough TL to make use of the 50t bay and magazine that is required for a bombardment factor, while higher TL scouts may.

The IS rules are set within the framework of the early 3I, by the time of IE and FFW scouts are higher TL and may be equipped with the missile arrays needed to gain a bombardment factor.

I always thought carried fighter squadrons should be included in the derivation of bombardment factors, as should the much later meson bay weapons.
__________________
The beauty of CT LBB1-3 is that the ref is free to make such decisions for themselves.
Reply With Quote
  #10  
Old April 6th, 2017, 02:55 PM
whartung whartung is offline
Citizen: SOC-14
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Posts: 2,640
Gallery : 0
whartung Citizen+whartung Citizen+whartung Citizen+
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Able Baker View Post
IFF it was a conscious design decision and the FFW ScoutRons model something different, what do they model? The counter depiction looks like they allude to Scout/Courier type of vessels, for example.
On a lark, I'd say they model small ships equipped with Rank A Observers equipped with Mark 1 eyeballs and, perhaps, a Model 301 set of binoculars. "Hey Frank, I see a bunch of ships in orbit here." "Perhaps we should phone it in".

Quote:
Is BF in FFW then a function of many (MANY) small turreted weapons?
Why would ScoutRons in in IS not have them then?
Or does the Imperial Scout Service have some other element that was modelled by the BFs in FFW?
I imagine it's just the fleet yanking out the air/raft, and filling the 8 tons of hold with dead fall ordnance that the crew can kick out the back hatch to mess with the locals.
Reply With Quote
Reply

Bookmarks

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
So how many Squadrons are in an SDB Factor? Commander Truestar The Fleet 41 April 27th, 2016 01:48 AM
Factor Drives Sir Brad The Fleet 3 June 8th, 2013 07:00 PM
Let The Bombardment Begin Easterner9504 The Lone Star 10 November 13th, 2009 05:55 PM
Bombardment jayouzts T20 - Traveller for the D20 System 8 February 21st, 2003 12:02 AM
The Imperial Factor's Office womble The Lone Star 5 February 9th, 2003 09:04 PM

This website and its contents are copyright ©2010- Far Future Enterprises. All rights reserved. Traveller is a registered trademark of Far Future Enterprises .
Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.4
Copyright ©2000 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright (c) 2010-2013, Far Future Enterprises. All Rights Reserved.