MT Ship Combat

[aramis]

OK, Mert, I'll see if I can make it workable for the average shlub with just MTPH, MTRef's, and MTIE.

Batteries:
a battery uses the average gunnery skill of the gunners, Pen is the average of the weapons in the battery. Damage is the total of the weapons in the battery.

Batteries gaina couple of options...
1) Dispersed sheaf: -1 DifMod, 1/4th damage
2) Concentrated Sheaf: +1 DifMod, double damage (intentionally NOT ballanced)

Bays and Batteries: There is no reason bays can't be in batteries.

Mixed Batteries: Bad Idea. Only reason would be for mixed turret munitions... So organize the turrets into the batteries, not the weapons therein, but list each mounted weapon type as a single Battery, but the turret battery gets the damage track.

Say, would yall prefer I do a PDF for say, download, or post dribs and drabs here?

 

[aramis]

OK, Mert, I'll see if I can make it workable for the average shlub with just MTPH, MTRef's, and MTIE.

Batteries:
a battery uses the average gunnery skill of the gunners, Pen is the average of the weapons in the battery. Damage is the total of the weapons in the battery.

Batteries gaina couple of options...
1) Dispersed sheaf: -1 DifMod, 1/4th damage
2) Concentrated Sheaf: +1 DifMod, double damage (intentionally NOT ballanced)

Bays and Batteries: There is no reason bays can't be in batteries.

Mixed Batteries: Bad Idea. Only reason would be for mixed turret munitions... So organize the turrets into the batteries, not the weapons therein, but list each mounted weapon type as a single Battery, but the turret battery gets the damage track.

Say, would yall prefer I do a PDF for say, download, or post dribs and drabs here?

 

[TheEngineer]

Hi Aramis !

I will be happy with any form of information You can provide.
So You may provide it in a way you prefer

Respectfully,

Mert

 

[TheEngineer]

Hi Aramis !

I will be happy with any form of information You can provide.
So You may provide it in a way you prefer

Respectfully,

Mert

 

[TheEngineer]

Hi Aramis !

I will be happy with any form of information You can provide.
So You may provide it in a way you prefer

Respectfully,

Mert

 

[Spud]

OK, Mert, I'll see if I can make it workable for the average shlub with just MTPH, MTRef's, and MTIE.

<snip>

Say, would yall prefer I do a PDF for say, download, or post dribs and drabs here?

--------------------
-aramis

Well, golly, I think a PDF would be extremely generous of you, sir.

 

[Spud]

OK, Mert, I'll see if I can make it workable for the average shlub with just MTPH, MTRef's, and MTIE.

<snip>

Say, would yall prefer I do a PDF for say, download, or post dribs and drabs here?

--------------------
-aramis

Well, golly, I think a PDF would be extremely generous of you, sir.

 

[Spud]

OK, Mert, I'll see if I can make it workable for the average shlub with just MTPH, MTRef's, and MTIE.

<snip>

Say, would yall prefer I do a PDF for say, download, or post dribs and drabs here?

--------------------
-aramis

Well, golly, I think a PDF would be extremely generous of you, sir.

 

[mike wightman]

You got my vote for a pdf as well

 

[mike wightman]

You got my vote for a pdf as well

 

[mike wightman]

You got my vote for a pdf as well

 

[aramis]

Hey, I've got a mac. I can print almost anything (Except Acrobat Reader) to PDF.

I'll need to take some time to do the striker and HG figurings for the variant damages for the big guns...

and find the missile stats. I think the tac missile warheads are in 101 Vehicles... but I'll need to check.

 

[aramis]

Hey, I've got a mac. I can print almost anything (Except Acrobat Reader) to PDF.

I'll need to take some time to do the striker and HG figurings for the variant damages for the big guns...

and find the missile stats. I think the tac missile warheads are in 101 Vehicles... but I'll need to check.

 

[aramis]

Hey, I've got a mac. I can print almost anything (Except Acrobat Reader) to PDF.

I'll need to take some time to do the striker and HG figurings for the variant damages for the big guns...

and find the missile stats. I think the tac missile warheads are in 101 Vehicles... but I'll need to check.

 

[TheDS]

Originally posted by TheEngineer:

IMHO MT combat tumbles between three extremes:
- You succeed without any problem
- nobody hurts another
- you die nearly instantly

Is that the way technology based combat works ?
Dont know.

Why yes, that IS how it should work. Naval combat is not only completely dependent on technology, but even a slight edge can give a major advantage. During the last two centuries, around 1900 especially, ships faced many revolutions in technology. Indeed, many ships were obsoleted before they were commissioned.

Probably the greatest example was in 1862, when the British were said to have been reduced to 2 ships in their entire navy. They had been experimenting with ironclads, and only had two such vessels, but neither was of the toughness of the two American vessels that fought each other to a standstill that year.

The easiest way to illustrate the combat results you noticed is by noting battleships. They have big guns and lots of armor. The guns are intended to be able to cripple or sink any lesser ship with a single hit. Likewise, their armor is designed to shrug off hits from any lesser ship.

This means that when something goes against a battleship, it's probably going to lose, and the battleship won't even notice. When you have two battleships pounding away at each other, they either get a lucky critical hit, or it takes all day to do anything to each other. When lesser ships combat each other, especially in the modern age of missiles, there is an excellent chance that both sides will be destroyed.

Warships are designed well enough to withstand a few hits and keep fighting, even if they are sinking.

In the age of sail, ships couldn't do much damage to each other, and most engagements, if they were won at all, had to be won by boarding actions. Cannonfire was simply not good enough, unless you had a little ship getting smashed by a big one.

Anyway, hopefully I didn't make my examples too hard to follow, and the point was made.

 

[TheDS]

Originally posted by TheEngineer:

IMHO MT combat tumbles between three extremes:
- You succeed without any problem
- nobody hurts another
- you die nearly instantly

Is that the way technology based combat works ?
Dont know.

Why yes, that IS how it should work. Naval combat is not only completely dependent on technology, but even a slight edge can give a major advantage. During the last two centuries, around 1900 especially, ships faced many revolutions in technology. Indeed, many ships were obsoleted before they were commissioned.

Probably the greatest example was in 1862, when the British were said to have been reduced to 2 ships in their entire navy. They had been experimenting with ironclads, and only had two such vessels, but neither was of the toughness of the two American vessels that fought each other to a standstill that year.

The easiest way to illustrate the combat results you noticed is by noting battleships. They have big guns and lots of armor. The guns are intended to be able to cripple or sink any lesser ship with a single hit. Likewise, their armor is designed to shrug off hits from any lesser ship.

This means that when something goes against a battleship, it's probably going to lose, and the battleship won't even notice. When you have two battleships pounding away at each other, they either get a lucky critical hit, or it takes all day to do anything to each other. When lesser ships combat each other, especially in the modern age of missiles, there is an excellent chance that both sides will be destroyed.

Warships are designed well enough to withstand a few hits and keep fighting, even if they are sinking.

In the age of sail, ships couldn't do much damage to each other, and most engagements, if they were won at all, had to be won by boarding actions. Cannonfire was simply not good enough, unless you had a little ship getting smashed by a big one.

Anyway, hopefully I didn't make my examples too hard to follow, and the point was made.

 

[TheDS]

Originally posted by TheEngineer:

IMHO MT combat tumbles between three extremes:
- You succeed without any problem
- nobody hurts another
- you die nearly instantly

Is that the way technology based combat works ?
Dont know.

Why yes, that IS how it should work. Naval combat is not only completely dependent on technology, but even a slight edge can give a major advantage. During the last two centuries, around 1900 especially, ships faced many revolutions in technology. Indeed, many ships were obsoleted before they were commissioned.

Probably the greatest example was in 1862, when the British were said to have been reduced to 2 ships in their entire navy. They had been experimenting with ironclads, and only had two such vessels, but neither was of the toughness of the two American vessels that fought each other to a standstill that year.

The easiest way to illustrate the combat results you noticed is by noting battleships. They have big guns and lots of armor. The guns are intended to be able to cripple or sink any lesser ship with a single hit. Likewise, their armor is designed to shrug off hits from any lesser ship.

This means that when something goes against a battleship, it's probably going to lose, and the battleship won't even notice. When you have two battleships pounding away at each other, they either get a lucky critical hit, or it takes all day to do anything to each other. When lesser ships combat each other, especially in the modern age of missiles, there is an excellent chance that both sides will be destroyed.

Warships are designed well enough to withstand a few hits and keep fighting, even if they are sinking.

In the age of sail, ships couldn't do much damage to each other, and most engagements, if they were won at all, had to be won by boarding actions. Cannonfire was simply not good enough, unless you had a little ship getting smashed by a big one.

Anyway, hopefully I didn't make my examples too hard to follow, and the point was made.

 

[TheEngineer]

Hi TheDS !

Thanks for clarificazion.
I just was a bit unsure, because simulation results were SO sensible even to slight differences in starship stats...
But if thats ok its ok

Regards,

Mert

 

[TheEngineer]

Hi TheDS !

Thanks for clarificazion.
I just was a bit unsure, because simulation results were SO sensible even to slight differences in starship stats...
But if thats ok its ok

Regards,

Mert

 

[TheEngineer]

Hi TheDS !

Thanks for clarificazion.
I just was a bit unsure, because simulation results were SO sensible even to slight differences in starship stats...
But if thats ok its ok

Regards,

Mert