A ship Manifesto

[Gray Pennell]

First I want to remind everyone this is IMTU thread so I am looking for some help but not worried about OTU.

Traveller is about space travel and any campaign has to have at least an understanding of this for the game. This means one has to understand ship size, purposes/type and fleet strength. After reading the debates I have developed this view.

OTU issues

1. The population number for Traveller is so extermine you have to toss it out completely or fiddle with it to near fantasy level.

2. Without a solid population model you cant really develop an economic model.

3. Without an economic model ship size and fleet strength cant be set by "trillion credit or Striker models"

4. I see I can reduce population and the economy to lead to my ideas without feeling guilty about Canon because canon numbers dont work.

So IMTU I am going with these concepts.

1. I am using the WWII model to create a meduim size ship size campaign

• WII Aircraft Carriers are the largest area at 30-50K
• Mega Corp/Merchant marine are based on liberty ships to fuel tankers of 10K-30K
• Subsector "coast" guard/Meduim merchant privateers 1K-10K
• Science, Patrol, Support uber rich private/pirates yachts 500-1000
• Private jump Ships 100-500
• SDB non jump cargo/cutters 50-200
• Fighters/shuttles etc 20-50

2. Sensors and ECM create a horizon allowing for patrols, sneaking and "over the horizon" fighter strikers

3. Pirates exist operating in low population systems in the 500-1000ton range
of ships

4. While there are a canon number of fleets these are actually operating as squadrons needing at the time of war Subsector and mothball ships to bring them up to fleet strength.

With this manifesto I need help with rules. What system or combination of systems would allow this to work? I am hoping for T5 and HG1. In reducing population by what UWP should I look at? At roughly 100 billions I think it would be best to drop the high end by 3 codes so a C becomes an A and keep 3-1 the same. This should give me low to medium billions. What other issues do I need to address?

 

[far-trader]

Not sure this is along the lines you're looking for, or even if it makes much sense (my explanation of it that is, the idea twigs as sound but my brief is not going into details) but point 2 triggered a thought that might be interesting. A very rough draft outline of the ideas...

Shortened Sensor Horizons:

A side effect of the standard gravitic space thruster is a localized field effect that bends space around the ship. This makes ships more difficult to detect and track as range increases. The effect increases with the application of power.

Game Effects:

First off detection range is much shorter and less reliable than would be expected for the size of the target, WITHOUT changing detection ranges for normal targets. Choose your level of reduction and difficulty.

Second, (and I really like the thought that hit of relating it to the power applied because that takes care of "agility") ships can actively apply this horizon effect to be more difficult to target. Replacing agility, it's no longer jigging and jinking, it's more of a "cloaking" effect.

The whole effect requires being actively maneuvering or dumping power into the thrusters. Detection ranges and difficulty depend on ship Gs in use or the extra power (replacing agility) applied (up to equal to Gs). Yes, faster ships are harder to detect and target. I think that's cool. They "come over" the "horizon" quicker and are closer to you when detected because of it. And they are better able to "evade" shots.

 

[DangerousThing]

Shortened Sensor Horizons:

A side effect of the standard gravitic space thruster is a localized field effect that bends space around the ship. This makes ships more difficult to detect and track as range increases. The effect increases with the application of power.

I like it! I may use this IMTU along with partial normal agility.

 

[Ishmael]

In my own ATU, I used my own UWP procedure where atm relates to pressure only ( main worlds are assumed to be breathable mostly and that the liquid is water ).
(atm^2)/49 is surface pressure in atmospheres.

For pop, I use; 2d6-1 - abs(atm-7)/2 - abs(hyd-7)/2
the '7's are for humans, but other races may have other optimal values based on their homeworlds... Aslan would use atm-7 and hyd-6, for example ( as Kusyu is A876986-E )

essentially, for every 2 steps from human optimum, subtract 1 from the 2d6-1.
The more hostile to shirt-sleeve humans, the less humans should live there.

For economics, I am using a modified PE scheme.

For ships, I use the cube/square law to determine max accelerations/agility possible. This puts some fairly strict limits on huge ships' performance without forbidding them with arbitrary rules.
Sandcasters are actually chaff/flares which act against sensor locks in MT variant. I do hulls completely differently from Trav. Sensors and ECM are big parts of combat.
I use a houserule variation of computer rules from MT.
Ship Combat is a variant based on Bruce MacIntosh's "Fusion Guard"

 

[Rigel Stardin]

Modeling fleet size:

I picked up my copy of Jane's Warship Recognition Guide from 1996 and counted the number of Aircraft Carriers in use at that time. World wide there was only 25 active Aircraft carriers. Using this as a model a planet with a population in the billions range supports this number of ship's of this size. You can also determine how many sector fleets or major governments are in that sector using population in this manner by simply saying, planets with a billion plus population can build this number of ships based on their global economy/resource/work force.

I'm not going to count out the numbers for each type of ship in Jane's but as you can imagine larger tonnage ships have smaller number than ships simply use for patroling and coastal defense. Bottom line of what I'm saying here is fleets could be built around the larger ships while the small craft (which by the way extremely out number the larger tonnage ships in Jane's) are used in system defense and patrol duties. You would also get some idea of how many auxilary and support craft are in your navy as well.

Dividing the smaller vessel among the world surround the billion + pop worlds and you basically come up with how many vessel are defending each system (a tweak in this model would be assigning larger numbers of these small ships acording to population of those world.) It would also allow you to map out the area controlled by the government of the High pop world.

This is a ruff outline of a model base on real world wet navies...

 

[Carlobrand]

...

4. I see I can reduce population and the economy to lead to my ideas without feeling guilty about Canon because canon numbers dont work.

... In reducing population by what UWP should I look at? At roughly 100 billions I think it would be best to drop the high end by 3 codes so a C becomes an A and keep 3-1 the same. This should give me low to medium billions. What other issues do I need to address?

I don't know of any C pop code world, but I'm a denizen of the Marches.

Spinward Marches: 439 systems, population 382 billion per SMC

11 systems with populations in the 10s of billions, totaling 190 billion
31 systems with populations in the billions, totaling 166 billion.

In other words, 93% of the population lives on those 42 worlds.

Option 1: If you dropped each of those 42 worlds back a single pop code and do nothing with anyone else, the population of the Marches would drop by 328.5 billion, becoming 53.5 billion, and you don't have to mess with any other systems or rethink the Marches too much. Fleet shrinks to ~1/7 size - figure 140 warships, say about 8 to 10 squadrons of capital ships all told, concentrated in a fleet at Mora and a fleet at Rhylanor, with a few score individual Kinunir and Gazelle sized ships patrolling elsewhere and sending word to a fleet if the enemy shows up in numbers or sizes large enough to warrant their attention. Still suffers from the tech problem, but most of the Marches sees only escort-sized ships or smaller - and not many of those - so the fleet size problem is addressed.

Option 2: You could drop everybody back a pop code and call it Spinward Marches circa the Third Frontier War, advantage being the Imperium's about TL 13 and the Zho's about TL12, which makes carriers and battlewagons a lot more practical, but that involves a lot more homework, recalculating trade classes for all the systems you plan to work with. Only cuts another 15 billion off, but the tech level drop's attractive. Might be worth it - in fact, I'm tempted to run that as a special project.

Option 3: Drop everybody back TWO pop codes and call it Spinward Marches circa the First Frontier War. Marches total pop under four billion! Whole Imperial fleet consists of an understrength squadron, perhaps three or four cruisers with a half-dozen escorts at Mora. This is the small-ship universe: those few ships represent the largest warships in the sector, with the greater bulk of patrol and defense handled by colonial ships of a few hundred tons sent out by the larger worlds, and with the promise that the Imperial Navy will dispatch a destroyer or cruiser to help of the tiny Colonial force finds itself overmatched. In this scenario, the Imperium's about TL 12 and the Zho's about TL11, I think. Maximum ship size is 199 kilotons, but there isn't budget for more than that half-squadron of big ships. Power plants are bulky, and reasonable-sized fighters are definitely a factor in battle. However, there are more unpopulated and lightly populated worlds, and a lot of the published adventures can't be run very easily here. Again, a lot more homework, recalculating trade classes for all the systems you plan to work with, but this is definitely a frontier Marches model.

 

[Gray Pennell]

Carlobrand

Great work I like the first option to deal with populations. Again I am not to worried about justifying my choice of limiting size of fleet etc since everything is off anyways. I ll stick with my WWII based limits on ship designs.

 

[Gray Pennell]

Since I am focused on the Five Sisters Subsector the first ship I redid is the Tigress

BB - P 3 3 5 B J 3 - C 9 7 9 0 9 - 9 9 7 N 9 Mcr 25014.42 50K Tons
Batteries Bearing 8 8 8 R 8 1 K TL 15
Batteries A A A X A 1 T Crew 446
Fuel=20,500 EP= 5500 Agility=5 Troops=0 (X=50M=R=40 T=30 K=24)

Tonnage: 50,000 Tons 700,000 cubic meters
Crew: 27 Officers 411 Ratings 8 pilots
Performance: Jump-3 5-G Power Plant B 5500 EP Agility 5
Electronics: Model 9 Fib Computer
Hardpoints: One Spinal Mount, 10 100 ton bays 30 50 ton bays 400 Turrets
Armament: One meson gun spinal mount (Factor N). 30 50 ton missile bays 100 triple beam laser turrets organized into 10 batteries. 100 dual fusion gun turrets organized into 50 batteries. 100 particle accelerator turrets organized into 10 batteries
Defenses: 10 100 ton repulsor bays, 100 triple sandcaster turrets organized into 10 batteries. Nuclear damper (factor-9). Meson scree (factor 7). Armoured hull (factor-12)
Craft: 8 cutters used as lifeboats
Fuel Treatment: Integral fuel scoops; on-board fuel purification plants.
Cost: 33,352.55 Mcr in quantity 25,014.42 Mcr.
Construction Time:48 months and 34 months in quantity


Crew work out to 10% of the original though I think thats just luck.

Performance had to be reduced to make it an effective ship. I lost one jump and one 1G which isnt that bad. Also OTU has the USP at jump 3 with the comments saying 4 so I might be right with a jump 3. The ship still makes max agility of 5.

Electronics: I kept the 9/fib computer because going to an E didnt give me that much advantage.

Hardpoints: Lost many of the bay HPs but kept many of the turrets

Armants: I discovered putting anything more than a N Factor Mason gun was not effective. So in my world thats the best tech 15 can do. I also lost a good percentage of missile bays but all the other weapons stayed the same. Interesting the big advantage at 50K ton this Tigress brings more guns to bears increasing firepower on target.

Defenses: Lost 3 factors of armor but all the other defense stayed the same. I think I can live with this. Wont know till combat tested.

Crafts: In this version I kept the ball of death as a true battleship and did away with the fighter squadrons. Though I did included 8 cutters to be used as life boats and space to shore services for the crew. These are launched from the rear like the fighters to keep the general esthetics of the Tigress.

Cost is now only 25 billion.

I feel that this ship could actually stand toe to toe with OTU ships because defenses stayed the same and it barely lost its offensive punch.

 

[Enoki]

Modeling fleet size:

I picked up my copy of Jane's Warship Recognition Guide from 1996 and counted the number of Aircraft Carriers in use at that time. World wide there was only 25 active Aircraft carriers. Using this as a model a planet with a population in the billions range supports this number of ship's of this size. You can also determine how many sector fleets or major governments are in that sector using population in this manner by simply saying, planets with a billion plus population can build this number of ships based on their global economy/resource/work force.

I'm not going to count out the numbers for each type of ship in Jane's but as you can imagine larger tonnage ships have smaller number than ships simply use for patroling and coastal defense. Bottom line of what I'm saying here is fleets could be built around the larger ships while the small craft (which by the way extremely out number the larger tonnage ships in Jane's) are used in system defense and patrol duties. You would also get some idea of how many auxilary and support craft are in your navy as well.

Dividing the smaller vessel among the world surround the billion + pop worlds and you basically come up with how many vessel are defending each system (a tweak in this model would be assigning larger numbers of these small ships acording to population of those world.) It would also allow you to map out the area controlled by the government of the High pop world.

This is a ruff outline of a model base on real world wet navies...

I would say that WW 2 and the interwar period would be a better model in a "universe" where wars and warfare are ongoing and relatively common. That is, a model where there are several major naval powers, each is prepared or preparing for a major conflict, and construction is not overly limited by some treaty.
Navies tend to get much larger when there is an on-going conflict and there is more than one naval power that is at odds with another. This holds true throughout history too. When there is just one naval power their fleet tends to shrink to keep down costs. The Romans did this after beating the Carthigenians, the US and Western navies have too since WW 2.

In the conflict model you would have hundreds of carriers. The most limited type would be first line battleships. These would be expensive and slow to build. Smaller ships like destroyers, frigates, and even smaller auxiliaries would abound.
That's generally what I put as naval forces in a system: A small squadron of frigate / destroyer escort type ships (2 to 4) armed with just a few turrets and a bay or two, along with some auxiliaries converted from small merchants like a free trader hull, some non-jump capable smaller ships, and a scout or three.
A cheaper and more readily built alternative would be "coast defenses." That is a large orbital station or stations that might double as a high port. These might even be scattered through the system defending things like gas giants against predatory skimming as well.

 

[Tobias]

Since I am focused on the Five Sisters Subsector the first ship I redid is the Tigress

The problem is that under HG2, fighters will remain ineffective, and I guess that is the opposite of what you want.

One thing you could try is to design ships using HG2, but use HG1 for combat. The one point where the systems are incompatible is armor: It's only rated up to 9 in HG1. You could solve this by:
a) Extend the tables. This is easy - they are linear - but it will be a disadvantage for small batteries, again leaving your fighters out in the rain.
b) Compress the tables by 1/2. So instead of 1, 2, 3 you'd have 1-2, 3-4, 5-6 etc. - this is possible and scales reasonably well, but it's inelegant in that even armor values are worthless. You could change the even/odd rythm for different weapon types, but this feels a little forced.
c) Use the tables as they are, ending at 9, and apply armor factors above 9 as an additional +DM on the damage table. This gives back some of HG2's resilience to heavily armored ships, but since HG1's tables are not as linear as HG2's, it actually isn't too bad. Your Tigress, for example, would still be vulnerable to potentially catastrophic maneuver drive hits even on the surface table.

One other thing which HG1 does not have and which can really alter the balance is any sort of to hit DM based on agility or size. This does create a very different paradigm than in HG2 - and one which again is unfavourable to your fighters.
One solution would be simply to use HG2's DMs and apply them for the hit (against the hull) roll - but this would also recreate the problem HG2 has with unhittable ships.
Another idea: For the hit roll (against the hull) do apply the attacking ship's computer (but <b>not</b> the defending ship's) as a positive DM, and agility and size as negative DMs.
However, this only helps fighters if you also give them some form of armor, which the default designs don't have. But this should be easy enough if you design them with HG2.

I'd also rescale the size DMs a little for your desired universe, for example:
10+ tons: DM -3
100+ tons: DM -2
1000+ tons: DM -1
10000+ tons: No DM

As icing on the cake, to address one of <i>my</i> pet peeves, I'd apply the same DM to the damage table, so that smaller ships have a somewhat higher chance of undesireable results.

If you add the ability of a Fighter Squadron of 10 fighters to bundle its weapons as a single battery, you should be set with fighters being viable combatants and having a more workable system than HG2.

One thing you might want to consider is whether to allow HG2's multiple weapon batteries or to break down everything to single factors HG1 style or to use a compromise approach.