Grav Tanks

[TheDS]

Note the listing of the Trepida and the Astrin as anything less that TL15 are incorrect.
The original author designed them as TL15 and then for some reason they were edited to be TL14 in the DGp Book 101 Vehicles - this makes zero sense.

Canon has the Imperial Army and Imperial Star Marines circa FFW as being TL15 (there are a couple of Imperial Army units still at TL14 but they are a very small minority of the Imperial Army order of battle).

The advantages of TL14 over TL13 are significant. The advantages of TL15 over TL14 are minor. Considering the Imperium has a lot more TL14 worlds available than TL15, it makes sense that the bulk of the military would be manufactured at TL14, both to keep up with demand, and because it's probably a lot cheaper. Furthermore, the Imperium's enemies are all TL14. Whatever advantages TL15 might confer will be handled sufficiently with a relative handful of shock units, which can take point in critical battles, and then turn over the grunt work to the regulars.

The question is, then: are the Trepida and Astrin shock units, or common units?

OTOH, there's no reason there can't be two versions of them, a Trepida-14 and a Trepida-15 (or the Norris, as someone pointed out).

 

[mike wightman]

Computers, sensors and comms are better at TL15 than at TL14, power plants are half the size at TL15 to TL14... pretty major advantages on the battlefield.

 

[TheDS]

Well then, you're using a different ruleset than the one I use.

 

[Dragoner]

So, I have a tough question, and my scouring of google and the Traveller wiki has gotten me to this thread and a similar one here: https://www.travellerrpg.com/threads/traveller-military-orginization.1043/. There used to be an Imperial Marine regimental order of battle org chart on the wiki, but I can't find it now, though I found https://hemdian.com/traveller/book4/3277th-marine-regiment/ which is similar and has the same problem, which is, it contains tanks. Specifically, it references "Trepida MBT", which I had to dig around to find anything about it, and what I found (this thread) handed me a lot of stats that I don't have the books to tell me what it means, but it brought up the question:

"What role do armored vehicles have when soldiers with FGMPs for squad support can hurt anything lighter than spacecraft, and spacecraft rule the skies?" I caveat spacecraft ruling the skies with the caution that this means armoring up your fighters to ignore defensive fire. In Mg1, the only system I know, nothing on the ground (apart from the 20MCr Meson Accelerator) can hurt an armored fighter, whereas fighter-scale weapons are kind of overkill for ground vehicles. Are tanks tough enough to at least ignore FGMPs? Most of the examples in Mg1 Supplement 6 Military Vehicles are not.

Is there some middle ground where tanks have a role that they're cost-effective for? If so, what is it? In Mg1, Supp 6, if I design a tank that does much more than a TL5 WW2 relic, it's way past the cost that would be more efficiently spent on a fighter spacecraft.

I use them as support vehicles, though tanks are good as cheap alternatives to having gunships, which are better. Infantry has a tendency to get tied to it's transport as well, for better or worse, it is where they keep their food, and ammo. Nevertheless the paradigm isn't as good because reports are coming back from modern wars of 70% casualties from drones/loiter munitions.

 

[Condottiere]

I think we have to revise doctrine a tad, after recent developments.

Though I've always gone with Pournelle's vision in Falkenberg's Legion.

 

[RossWinn]

Well then, you're using a different ruleset than the one I use.

Since Trillion Credit Squadron, it has been pretty cut and dried that the difference of one tech level equals total loss.

 

[Dragoner]

I think we have to revise doctrine a tad, after recent developments.

Though I've always gone with Pournelle's vision in Falkenberg's Legion.

I liked those books. Per doctrine, I mean a few shipping containers with automated printers, that can produce drones by the millions? Brings Stargate Universe to mind.

 

[Badenov]

I use them as support vehicles, though tanks are good as cheap alternatives to having gunships, which are better. Infantry has a tendency to get tied to it's transport as well, for better or worse, it is where they keep their food, and ammo. Nevertheless the paradigm isn't as good because reports are coming back from modern wars of 70% casualties from drones/loiter munitions.

Are they cheaper than drop infantry, though? A guy with a FGMP and Battle Dress is, at the Mongoose Errata'd price, about 700,000 Cr. Throw in a Grav belt and it's still less than 1 MCr. No idea if Battle Dress even exists in CT. So for a 60-point hit, 25 Armor, and 300kph grav flight is your benchmark, can you make a vehicle that beats any of that? I've done vehicle designs with Book 6, but it always winds up being in the range of 3MCr, which buys you three troopers. I do have a 2.8MCr tank that has a 35mm railgun, which is a bit more effective than the FGMP against armored targets (which after all is what you want a tank for), but it's not much more effective, so the value is not great. I feel the value vs credit is going to be very hard to justify. The really hard hitting weapons get up into the area where a High Guard light fighter is so much more potent and costs less.

 

[kilemall]

Are they cheaper than drop infantry, though? A guy with a FGMP and Battle Dress is, at the Mongoose Errata'd price, about 700,000 Cr. Throw in a Grav belt and it's still less than 1 MCr. No idea if Battle Dress even exists in CT. So for a 60-point hit, 25 Armor, and 300kpg grav flight is your benchmark, can you make a vehicle that beats any of that? I've done vehicle designs with Book 6, but it always winds up being in the range of 3MCr, which buys you three troopers. I do have a 2.8MCr tank that has a 35mm railgun, which is a bit more effective than the FGMP against armored targets (which after all is what you want a tank for), but it's not much more effective, so the value is not great. I feel the value vs credit is going to be very hard to justify. The really hard hitting weapons get up into the area where a High Guard light fighter is so much more potent and costs less.

BD debuted in LBB4 Mercenary, so your choice whether that is CT enough. CA was in LBB1.

 

[Dragoner]

Are they cheaper than drop infantry, though? A guy with a FGMP and Battle Dress is, at the Mongoose Errata'd price, about 700,000 Cr. Throw in a Grav belt and it's still less than 1 MCr. No idea if Battle Dress even exists in CT. So for a 60-point hit, 25 Armor, and 300kpg grav flight is your benchmark, can you make a vehicle that beats any of that? I've done vehicle designs with Book 6, but it always winds up being in the range of 3MCr, which buys you three troopers. I do have a 2.8MCr tank that has a 35mm railgun, which is a bit more effective than the FGMP against armored targets (which after all is what you want a tank for), but it's not much more effective, so the value is not great. I feel the value vs credit is going to be very hard to justify. The really hard hitting weapons get up into the area where a High Guard light fighter is so much more potent and costs less.

A lot depends on how one wants to look at it, fighters, platoons of Battle Dress, would possibly need more maintenance personnel than a regular platoon of tanks added to infantry company. Close Air Support is great, though also not always on the scene the way a tank would be. Looking at mgt2 books, BD starts at 0.2MCr and Grav Tank, the Paladin at 24MCr, G-Carrier is 11MCr; one could plug those numbers into various formations to look at costs. For them all I'd do rule of three: one BD/Tank/Carrier in the line, for one waiting in the armory as a replacement, and one getting maintenance in the shop.

 

[Badenov]

BD debuted in LBB4 Mercenary, so your choice whether that is CT enough. CA was in LBB1.

That's CT enough for me. LBB4 hasn't got much in the way of stats that I could find for Battle Dress, but it kind of doesn't matter because LBB4 seems to make Battle Dress part of the to-hit roll rather than armor.

A lot depends on how one wants to look at it, fighters, platoons of Battle Dress, would possibly need more maintenance personnel than a regular platoon of tanks added to infantry company. Close Air Support is great, though also not always on the scene the way a tank would be. Looking at mgt2 books, BD starts at 0.2MCr and Grav Tank, the Paladin at 24MCr, G-Carrier is 11MCr; one could plug those numbers into various formations to look at costs. For them all I'd do rule of three: one BD/Tank/Carrier in the line, for one waiting in the armory as a replacement, and one getting maintenance in the shop.

So, anything that costs more than 7-10MCr has to compete with a light fighter from High Guard that has a 1d weapon (which does 1d6x50, so 50-300 vs ground scale targets), 12 x 50, so 600 armor, and has Thrust 4. Calculating terminal velocity at 4G gives a top speed in atmosphere of something like 1000-2000 kph depending on how I mangle the math. So getting performance better than an armored infantry with an FGMP (at ~1MCr) for under 7-10MCr is where I get hung up.

Comparisons using MgT1, so YMMV.

 

[TamsinP]

Actually, Battle Dress is in LBB1 (81) - p42 at Cr 200,000 and TL13. For melee and missile combat it is treated as Combat Armour, but gives +2 DM for surprise and doubles encumbrance limits.

 

[Badenov]

Actually, Battle Dress is in LBB1 (81) - p42 at Cr 200,000 and TL13. For melee and missile combat it is treated as Combat Armour, but gives +2 DM for surprise and doubles encumbrance limits.

TY, I had been looking in LBB4. So, same cost as MgT.

 

[Dragoner]

So, anything that costs more than 7-10MCr has to compete with a light fighter from High Guard that has a 1d weapon (which does 1d6x50, so 50-300 vs ground scale targets), 12 x 50, so 600 armor, and has Thrust 4. Calculating terminal velocity at 4G gives a top speed in atmosphere of something like 1000-2000 kph depending on how I mangle the math. So getting performance better than an armored infantry with an FGMP (at ~1MCr) for under 7-10MCr is where I get hung up.

Mgt1 is fine. Fighters have anti-air capability so that is a plus, though also vulnerable to ground air defence. Another option is the Bombardment ship from Supplement 2: Traders and Gunboats; it is 416MCr, though only needs a crew of 12. Use these in support of a company or so. Supplement 6 gives a variety of grav tanks, in the 3, 9, and 20 MCr range. The determiner for this beyond price is also TL.

 

[Rupert]

I think we have to revise doctrine a tad, after recent developments.

Though I've always gone with Pournelle's vision in Falkenberg's Legion.

Or put decent point defence and EW on everything.

 

[Rupert]

I liked those books. Per doctrine, I mean a few shipping containers with automated printers, that can produce drones by the millions? Brings Stargate Universe to mind.

When a 3D printer can print silicon chips, maybe. Until then your cheap drones need a continual supply of electronic components made in a massive factory. In a Traveller (or Co-Dominium) setting, only the side(s) with either off-world backers/suppliers or good local industry will have them in that kind of number.

Also, little cheap drones are very vulnerable to EW. It's just that the drone-tech was more widely available immediately than the EW tech and gear, so it's taking a little while for that to catch up. People are already talking about cable links to drones to avoid the issues with radio (jammable, detectable), which makes the drone heavier and severely limits range and utility in forests.

How small drones (large ones are really just slow missiles) play out overall remains to be seen. It's still very much in flux, and calling it one way or the other is like the declarations post 1973 that ATGMs had made tanks obsolete - premature.

 

[Dragoner]

When a 3D printer can print silicon chips, maybe. Until then your cheap drones need a continual supply of electronic components made in a massive factory. In a Traveller (or Co-Dominium) setting, only the side(s) with either off-world backers/suppliers or good local industry will have them in that kind of number.

Also, little cheap drones are very vulnerable to EW. It's just that the drone-tech was more widely available immediately than the EW tech and gear, so it's taking a little while for that to catch up. People are already talking about cable links to drones to avoid the issues with radio (jammable, detectable), which makes the drone heavier and severely limits range and utility in forests.

How small drones (large ones are really just slow missiles) play out overall remains to be seen. It's still very much in flux, and calling it one way or the other is like the declarations post 1973 that ATGMs had made tanks obsolete - premature.

Tanks have seen refinements since the 70's though are of that era's designs fwiw. If future printers can print chips, or analogs to, is unknown. I agree that it is all unknown how it will play out, the ew right now affects the controller; though one could envision more advance AI controls, and wire guided by network. Future vehicles will likely all need trophy type systems for basic survivability.

 

[Rupert]

BD debuted in LBB4 Mercenary, so your choice whether that is CT enough. CA was in LBB1.

Book 1, LBB, 1977:

Battle Dress— The ultimate in battle armor, military battle dress consists of a complete vacuum-suit-like array of metal, synthetic and electronic armor. The values given for protection using battle dress are for the basic suit, without electronic or other enhancements. Battle dress is strictly military, and not available to civilians in most circumstances. When available, base price is around CR 200,000 per suit. Vacc suit skill is required before an individual can even think of using battle dress. In the powered mode, battle dress doubles personal strength, and eliminates any endurance requirements or restrictions.

But, until Striker battledress wasn't all that when it came to protection. Autorifles are medium range still had a pretty good chance of hitting and penetrating, as did a submachinegun at short or medium range.

By the way, a gravbelt cost Cr 1,000,000 in '77. The '81 edition dropped that to Cr 100,000.

Edit: LBB1, '77 doesn't mention Combat Armour - it's an addition in '81.

 

[Condottiere]

In the end it does come down, to how much each side is willing to pay.

If you have humans on the battlefield, the cost to train, equip, and resupply them, has to be cheaper than sending in the drones.

Likewise with tanks, though more in the sense of the cost of achieving objectives.

 

[Badenov]

Mgt1 is fine. Fighters have anti-air capability so that is a plus, though also vulnerable to ground air defence. Another option is the Bombardment ship from Supplement 2: Traders and Gunboats; it is 416MCr, though only needs a crew of 12. Use these in support of a company or so. Supplement 6 gives a variety of grav tanks, in the 3, 9, and 20 MCr range. The determiner for this beyond price is also TL.

Well, the 1.7 MCr tracked tank has avg 28 armor, though better in front and embarassing in thr rear, plus a gun that is almost as good as an FGMP, so roughly equivalent to a trooper in Battle Dress with an FGMP for 2x the cost.

The 3MCr Grav Tank has decent armor, enough to stop small arms and typical support weapons, though an FGMP will still hurt it, as will tank guns 125mm and up, which are available to TL6. It'll take more than one shot, but it's not that tough. The damage it does is pretty anemic, though, noticably less capable than the FGMP, about the equivalent of a 105mm tank gun from TL5-6.

The 9 MCr Grav Tank has really good armor, shrugging off FGMPs except for a couple small hits in vulnerable facings, The weapon is one of the mid-range dangerous guns, about 25% more max penetration than the FGMP, though I'd expect a lot more for the price tag. At that price point, High Guard fighters with missiles are your competitor and win in every category except ammo capacity, though the tank has a fixed capacity also.

The 20MCr Grav Tank is armored a tiny bit better than the 9 MCr Grav Tank, with no FGMP vulnerabilities (thouugh something like a 22mm Gauss Heavy Gauss Cannon will hurt it badly and the 35mm railgun can hurt it a bit), and with an actually dangerous gun. At 20 MCr, though, it's competing against high-end particle beam fighters that do not have limited ammo and do 3d6 space damage, so 150-900 ground damage, making the 98-point Fusion Z gun look sad.

So this is the issue I have: the cheap tanks are about as effective as a soldier in battle dress for more cost, and the expensive ones are less capable than their High Guard peers.

Note, everywhere I point to the FGMP, a TL10 Anti-Materiel Rifle will do nearly the same thing, albeit with limited ammo.