Traveller Store CotI Features New Posts Mark Forums Read Register


Go Back TravellerRPG.com > Citizens of the Imperium > General Traveller Discussions > In My Traveller Universe

In My Traveller Universe Detail what parts of Traveller you do (or don't) use in your campaign.

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #31  
Old April 19th, 2019, 11:20 PM
Carlobrand Carlobrand is offline
Citizen: SOC-14
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 3,604
Gallery : 1
Visit Carlobrand's Blog
Carlobrand Respected CitizenCarlobrand Respected CitizenCarlobrand Respected CitizenCarlobrand Respected CitizenCarlobrand Respected CitizenCarlobrand Respected Citizen
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mike wightman View Post
...My solution is to treat nukes as factor A+ weapons so they don't get the +6DM on the damage table, but continue to get their -6DM.

They also get a number of hits equal to their factor.
I like that. Gives them a nice punch while not being too overwhelming for capital ships. Makes them behave like nukes when they hit something unarmored. If you're doing any kind of size-based armor adjustment, you almost have to have capital ships 'cause smaller craft are getting hit hard by the nukes, but the capital ships below TL14 are still finding nukes a significant factor. I presume rolls less than 2 equal 2.

Regarding armor, if the aim is to create a situation where the armor factor represents roughly the same armor thickness, I ran numbers based on the volume of a sphere and the volume of a sphere 1/2 meter smaller and then 1 meter smaller, and I hit pretty close with a 1/2/4/8/16 bit, which is to say whatever your starting point is, the L-P needs twice the percentage of the Q+, the B-K need four times as much, and so forth. I was thinking I'd set the Q+ to require 1/4* the indicated %, the L-P 1/2* the indicated %, the B-K 1* the indicated %, the 1-A 2* the indicated *%, the 0 4* the indicated %. Definitely makes fighters vulnerable, especially if you play with the "agility only applies to spinal mounts" bit.

(Still debating whether agility should apply to missiles.)

Quote:
Originally Posted by mike wightman View Post
<These are house rules for clarity.>

I have three lines for weapon USP.

Top line is for spinals and nuke bays,
second line is for bay weapons
third is for turrets.

Bays don't get the +6DM on the damage table either, this makes bay weapons a bit more dangerous than a turret battery of equivalent factor.
I like this. Also thought instead about giving bay weapons a bonus equal to their factor. Means they get more powerful as the armor gets more powerful with increasing tech levels, which is usually the way the contest between armor and weaponry goes. Also considered some sort of bonus for the particle accelerator barbette/turret, given its power consumption - maybe a -3 (i.e. a net +3 DM after the penalty).

Means you've got to up-power the particle accelerator spinal. I thought maybe give them a -1 damage bonus per 100 EP. That gives them some serious teeth, not as nasty as a meson but, given they're more likely to score a hit and don't have to deal with a meson screen or configuration, they're serious contenders, especially as cruiser weapons.

A lot depends on what you're doing about the armor because, if you play around with armor adjustment by any of the methods discussed, you get pretty heavily armored battlewagons.
__________________
Disclaimer
Comments made are for the purpose of offering alternative campaign settings for consideration. The writer acknowledges that Traveller is intended to emulate certain common science fiction tropes and that, in the course of emulating those tropes and providing a better playing experience, some liberties must be taken with science. No statement by the writer should be interpreted as constituting a criticism of the game on that basis ... except for that bit about Virus. Dude, really?!
Reply With Quote
  #32  
Old April 20th, 2019, 07:05 PM
aramis's Avatar
aramis aramis is offline
Administrator
 
Join Date: May 2001
Location: Anchorage, AK, USofA
Posts: 29,396
Gallery : 56
Visit aramis's Blog
aramis has disabled reputation
Send a message via ICQ to aramis Send a message via AIM to aramis Send a message via Yahoo to aramis
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mike wightman View Post
<These are house rules for clarity.>

I have three lines for weapon USP.

Top line is for spinals and nuke bays,
second line is for bay weapons
third is for turrets.

Bays don't get the +6DM on the damage table either, this makes bay weapons a bit more dangerous than a turret battery of equivalent factor.
That's canon in MT and T20 versions.
__________________
~ Aramis
aramis.hostman.us /trav
Smith & Wesson: The Original Point and Click interface!

Archduke of Sylea (CORE 2118)
Duke of the Third Imperium (SPIN 0534)
Count Terra (SOLO 1827)
Count Gorod (REFT 1302)
Count of the Third Imperium (SPIN 2232)
Viscount of Adabicci (SPIN 1824)
Marquis of the Solomani Rim (SOLO 0606)
Marquis of the Third Imperium (SPIN 2410)
Baron of the Third Imperium (SPIN 2231)
Knight of the Iridium Throne (CORE 1434)
Sir William Hostman (OLDE 0512)
Sir William Hostman (DAGU 0622)
Knight of Deneb (REFT 2239)
Knight of Deneb (Spin 2532)
SEH w/Diamonds for Extreme Heroism - Battle of Boughene
MCG - Battle of Boughene
TAS: William Hostman (CORR 2506)
TAS: Bearer (DAIB 1326)
IMTU ct+ tm++ tne tg-- tt+ tmo+ t4- t20+ to ru+ ge+ 3i+ c+ jt au ls pi+ ta he+ st+
Wil Hostman 0602 C539857-9 S A724
OTU: 95% 3i an+ au+ br- cpu± dt± f+ fs++ ge± ih- inf± j± jf+ jm+ jt+ ls- n= nc+ pi+ pp-- tp+ tr+ tv- vi-- xb+-
Unless there is bold red text, presume my posts to be my personal material only.
Reply With Quote
  #33  
Old April 20th, 2019, 10:24 PM
Carlobrand Carlobrand is offline
Citizen: SOC-14
 
Join Date: Feb 2012
Posts: 3,604
Gallery : 1
Visit Carlobrand's Blog
Carlobrand Respected CitizenCarlobrand Respected CitizenCarlobrand Respected CitizenCarlobrand Respected CitizenCarlobrand Respected CitizenCarlobrand Respected Citizen
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by aramis View Post
That's canon in MT ...
Did I miss a supplement or an erratum? MT inverted the table and then gave bonuses only to the spinals and nukes, which as near as I can tell gave the same results as High Guard's table with the penalties to weapons of factor 9 or less.
__________________
Disclaimer
Comments made are for the purpose of offering alternative campaign settings for consideration. The writer acknowledges that Traveller is intended to emulate certain common science fiction tropes and that, in the course of emulating those tropes and providing a better playing experience, some liberties must be taken with science. No statement by the writer should be interpreted as constituting a criticism of the game on that basis ... except for that bit about Virus. Dude, really?!
Reply With Quote
  #34  
Old April 21st, 2019, 05:14 AM
AnotherDilbert AnotherDilbert is offline
Citizen: SOC-14
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Stockholm 🇸🇪
Posts: 2,133
Gallery : 0
AnotherDilbert Citizen+AnotherDilbert Citizen+AnotherDilbert Citizen+
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carlobrand View Post
Did I miss a supplement or an erratum? MT inverted the table and then gave bonuses only to the spinals and nukes, which as near as I can tell gave the same results as High Guard's table with the penalties to weapons of factor 9 or less.
No, you are correct. In MT only spinals and nukes get DM +6, not bays even if they are factor-A.
Reply With Quote
  #35  
Old April 21st, 2019, 05:34 AM
McPerth's Avatar
McPerth McPerth is offline
Citizen: SOC-14
 
Join Date: Dec 2010
Location: Barcelona
Posts: 7,709
Gallery : 0
Visit McPerth's Blog
McPerth has disabled reputation
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Carlobrand View Post
Did I miss a supplement or an erratum? MT inverted the table and then gave bonuses only to the spinals and nukes, which as near as I can tell gave the same results as High Guard's table with the penalties to weapons of factor 9 or less.
In fact, I guess Aramis means that what is canon in MT is the fact you can have spinals, bays and turrets of the same weapon in diferent lines (in fact ,the only weapon you can have all three is PA, but you can have Spinal and bay MG in the same ship, or Fusion bays and turrets in the same ship, just to give some examples).

Quote:
Originally Posted by AnotherDilbert View Post
No, you are correct. In MT only spinals and nukes get DM +6, not bays even if they are factor-A.
I'm afraid you're wrong here. The damage tables DMs (RM, page 94) says:

Quote:
If the weapon inflicting the hit has a UCP factor of 9 or less, apply a DM of -6
So, it's not being a bay or a Spinal what gives this DM, but being factor 9-. If you have a bay with factor A+ (e.g. TL16 100 dton meson bay), or even if you have a turrets battery with a factor A+ (only posible with 30 TL16 blasers), you don't have the DM.

What is only given to spinals, no matter the factor of any bay, is the multiple damage rolls.
__________________
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
  #36  
Old April 21st, 2019, 05:59 AM
mike wightman's Avatar
mike wightman mike wightman is offline
Noble
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Newcastle
Posts: 16,605
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

Note you can get high TL factor A missile bays too, which get both the bonus for being a nuke and a bonus for being factor A...

this is pretty much what inspired my house rules, grant bays the bonus regardless of factor and they become more effective than a battery of turret weapons of equivalent factor.

The disadvantage I gave them is they are affected by target agility.

So IMTU HG80

spinals - affected by target agility
bays - affected by target agility but get the bonus on the damage table (nukes being the special case already discussed)
turrets - unaffected by target agility.
__________________
The beauty of CT LBB1-3 is that the ref is free to make such decisions for themselves.
Reply With Quote
  #37  
Old April 21st, 2019, 09:43 AM
AnotherDilbert AnotherDilbert is offline
Citizen: SOC-14
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Stockholm 🇸🇪
Posts: 2,133
Gallery : 0
AnotherDilbert Citizen+AnotherDilbert Citizen+AnotherDilbert Citizen+
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by McPerth View Post
I'm afraid you're wrong here. The damage tables DMs (RM, page 94) says:
Quote:
If the weapon inflicting the hit has a UCP factor of 9 or less, apply a DM of -6
This sentence has an erratum:
Quote:
Page 94, left column, DMs for Ship Damage Tables, second entry (correction): Replace “If the weapon inflicting the hit has a UCP factor of 9 or less...” with “If the weapon inflicting the hit has a UCP factor of A or more, apply a DM of +6.”
This seems to be corrected in late printings, like my printed copy of the RM:


Yet the scans I have shows:


Is my computer pranking me?
Reply With Quote
  #38  
Old April 21st, 2019, 10:17 AM
mike wightman's Avatar
mike wightman mike wightman is offline
Noble
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Newcastle
Posts: 16,605
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

Depends on which version you have electronically...
__________________
The beauty of CT LBB1-3 is that the ref is free to make such decisions for themselves.
Reply With Quote
  #39  
Old April 21st, 2019, 10:32 AM
AnotherDilbert AnotherDilbert is offline
Citizen: SOC-14
 
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Stockholm 🇸🇪
Posts: 2,133
Gallery : 0
AnotherDilbert Citizen+AnotherDilbert Citizen+AnotherDilbert Citizen+
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mike wightman View Post
Depends on which version you have electronically...
MT CD-ROM Issues (Aug 2010)?
Reply With Quote
  #40  
Old April 21st, 2019, 02:26 PM
mike wightman's Avatar
mike wightman mike wightman is offline
Noble
 
Join Date: Jun 2003
Location: Newcastle
Posts: 16,605
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

The other thing you need to 'unbreak High Guard' is a tactical movement system, not as detailed as Newtonian (although it has it be compatible) but allowing for some maneuvering. High Guard 79 had more rules for this than High Guard 80 - my own house rules use range bands...
__________________
The beauty of CT LBB1-3 is that the ref is free to make such decisions for themselves.
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
High Guard > TL 15 skyth Classic Traveller 4 April 5th, 2009 07:28 PM
HIGH GUARD ... I need it really? rsitalyct Classic Traveller 11 December 8th, 2008 12:01 PM
High Guard 3 robject Classic Traveller 521 July 3rd, 2007 08:31 AM
High Guard & FF&S de_mentor161 T4 - Marc Miller's Traveller 15 March 6th, 2004 04:07 PM
High Guard 1 mike wightman The Fleet 5 October 5th, 2003 04:07 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 - 2020, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Copyright (c) 2010-2013, Far Future Enterprises. All Rights Reserved.