Traveller Store CotI Features New Posts Mark Forums Read Register


Go Back TravellerRPG.com > Citizens of the Imperium > Other Versions of Traveller > Mongoose Traveller

Mongoose Traveller Discussion forums for the Traveller rules from Mongoose Publishing.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old October 31st, 2014, 03:24 PM
HG_B HG_B is offline
Citizen: SOC-14
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 3,049
Gallery : 3
HG_B Citizen+HG_B Citizen+
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aramis View Post
Beltstrike makes it clear that the drives generate a screening force of some kind, preventing that.
I don't have that MT supp. I'll have to look up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by aramis View Post
Note that I use the x0.1 damage to structure... which makes it take a LOT of fire to harm the ship in a significant way. In an average trip to the jump point, you should have a couple hits... and that means needing to do some partchwork, but it's well within mechanical 1 capabilities to repair.
The velocities reached at mid point of 100D completely dwarf (by many factors) the speed (& k.e) of a Guass rifle ammo. The ship would be damaged (most likely explosive decompression if a crew or passenger compartment is hit). NO question about that without hand wave so violent that you cause a gale force wind COMPLETELY forgoet about interplanetary travel using the travel formula in the RAW. You'd likely die.


So, as I indicated, forget about loans. Ships would be too expensive to operate. Too dangerous also.
__________________
The shortest distance between two points isn't a straight line. It does involve precisely folding the graph paper.
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old October 31st, 2014, 03:35 PM
McPerth's Avatar
McPerth McPerth is online now
Citizen: SOC-14
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Barcelona
Posts: 7,461
Gallery : 0
Visit McPerth's Blog
McPerth has disabled reputation
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by pendragonman View Post
QUOTE=HG_B;494320]In MgT Merc Book: "Because starship-scale weaponry is so lethal to
ground force targets
it is not often that a vehicle or heavy infantry would ever want to
make a stand against a starship. Most ground force weaponry
simply cannot muster enough damage potential to do anything
but scratch the paint of a starship.
Starships are shielded from the
void of space and layered in armour designed to withstand raw star
radiation and absolute zero temperatures"

So that carries over what you noted from CT and MT. So the armor you give in MgT is to protect against ship scale weaponry. As in past editions, the example ships are not always well (read wisely) designed.

Gypsy, good catch. My spread sheet had a glitch. Add MCr.0.8 for streamlining. Total is MCr.43,287,300
instead of MCr.42,467,300 In the grand scheme no significant change.
So, by your own quote, Starships are not completely immune to ground fire like your original assertion. MOST is not ALL. MOST weapons won't penetrate a tank. Some will. Like the Missile I originally proposed.

A zero armor value gives you nothing to use to degrade the performance of an inbound anti armor missile, or an inbound anti aircraft missile. Or a PGMP-15 hit. OR...

It will withstand small arms fire. But kinetic energy kill weapons like a sabot round? Specifically designed to penetrate several inches of armor, when your ship has NONE?

All your armor-0 means is that the hull is thick enough to stay pressurized and has anti radiation properties. Does not protect against EVERY ground weapon. Therefore I am maintaining that the design is not a good one for a frontier shipping craft. After all, anti armor missiles are available to purchase readily for settlements to protect themselves from rogue Merc units.[/QUOTE]

According that (MgT:LBB1: Mercenary, page 73), in MgT, the damage from personal to starships change by a factor of 50. Even so, in the example it gives, the damage of various weapons is commulative , as it tells about firing various wepons (9 FMGP, 15 lasers, and one AT gun) that sum 122d6 damage, and then divide it by 50, so making 2d6 damage to the ship.

That surprised me, for this way, even a company of flintstock muskets (or archers, or even throwing stones, if enough of them) firing at a ship could seriously damage it...
__________________
Duke of ShaiaVland 3215 B64A998-E
Marquis of Ashtagz Tyui SR 1818C548786-8
SEH for actions in Extolay

I'm not afraid about bullets, what scares me is the speed at which they're incoming.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old October 31st, 2014, 03:39 PM
HG_B HG_B is offline
Citizen: SOC-14
 
Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 3,049
Gallery : 3
HG_B Citizen+HG_B Citizen+
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by McPerth View Post
A zero armor value gives you nothing to use to degrade the performance of an inbound anti armor missile, or an inbound anti aircraft missile. Or a PGMP-15 hit. OR...

It will withstand small arms fire. But kinetic energy kill weapons like a sabot round? Specifically designed to penetrate several inches of armor, when your ship has NONE?
An unarmored MgT hull can withstand (per the interplanetary travel rules vs. small particles * speed) about 10X the k.e of a 120mm MBT APDS round. Is that enough for you to do your calcs on?

Now, if you had a 6G ship doing interplanetary travel...

hitting 1/10 gram particle during 6G trip to Saturn. Top speed 9160 km/s

= 4,195 Mj
= 4.19528E+16 erg
= 4,195,280,000 newton-meter
= 3,976,358 BTU

120mm APDS 9 Mj muzzle (M1 MBT gun)

Now as to MT. The design rules state: "Spacecraft require a minimum armor value of 40 for protection against micrometeroids and radiation" THUS, there is no drive force field. (see also Starship Op Man.) And, that value would utterly stop any man portable weapon. So, the PEN rules are screwed. Need to at least amend to require a Pen value LARGER than the armor value to do damage to ship hull.
__________________
The shortest distance between two points isn't a straight line. It does involve precisely folding the graph paper.

Last edited by HG_B; October 31st, 2014 at 03:57 PM..
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
[Shipyard] Speculative Trader (Spice Trader, Flat Trader) robject Traveller 5 0 May 29th, 2013 11:14 PM
Type A trader or A2 Far Trader options madmike The Fleet 24 January 30th, 2012 04:19 AM
Book 7 Reprint, Free Trader/Far Trader/Fat Trader Details Missing? ebullient Classic Traveller 2 April 29th, 2009 06:29 PM
Free trader vrs far trader Jamus Mongoose Traveller 12 December 9th, 2008 06:19 PM
t20 trader jim?? Nurd_boy Recruiting Office 4 October 30th, 2002 01:26 AM

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 - 2019, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright (c) 2010-2013, Far Future Enterprises. All Rights Reserved.