Odd Things in the MT Weapons

[McPerth]

Are those beam weapon ranges in the atmosphere or in vacuum? And if in the atmosphere, how are you targeting the ground vehicles.? Also, if in the atmosphere, there is this thing called planet curvature that needs to be taken into account, along with the high likelihood of blocking material.

I don't own Striker, nor have I read it, but being space rated weaponry, I'd guess they are used as ortillery, so negating both planet curvature and most blocking material (maybe lasers might be converted into rainbows by some clouds :file_21.

Of course, with those ranges they must be used from quite low orbit, if it can even be said as orbit the range for high energy (plasma/fusion) weapons. Maybe its main use if for fighters sunning close support and straffing runs.

See that in MT the range for those weapons is quite higher, allowing them (even energy weapons) to be used from high orbits.

 

[Vladika]

Are those beam weapon ranges in the atmosphere or in vacuum? And if in the atmosphere, how are you targeting the ground vehicles.? Also, if in the atmosphere, there is this thing called planet curvature that needs to be taken into account, along with the high likelihood of blocking material.

I'm with timerover on this one:

Ignoring the effect of atmospheric refraction, distance to the horizon from an observer close to the Earth's surface is about

d = approx 3.57 sqrt(h)

where d is in kilometres and h is height above ground level in metres.

Examples:

For an observer standing on the ground with h = 1.70 metres (5 ft 7 in) (average eye-level height), the horizon is at a distance of 4.7 kilometres (2.9 mi).
For an observer standing on the ground with h = 2 metres (6 ft 7 in), the horizon is at a distance of 5 kilometres (3.1 mi).
For an observer standing on a hill or tower of 100 metres (330 ft) in height, the horizon is at a distance of 39 kilometres (24 mi).

 

[Vladika]

"Referee: Roll this task when the air vehicle hits the ground. In the turn following the loss of locomotion, an air vehicle continues to move forward at one-half of its current movement rate and drops at a rate of 10 meters per second."

roughly = 10 meters per second per second It's an acceleration, not a velocity! (Also that's the approximate acceleration due to gravity on Earth. I'm an engineer, know my physics, and that is nothing you can successfully argue.

 

[Vladika]

v(t)=-gt+vo

y(t)=-1/2gt^2+vot+yo

where

vo is the initial velocity (m/s).
v(t)o is the vertical velocity with respect to time (m/s).
yo is the initial altitude (m).
y(t) is the altitude with respect to time (m).
t is time elapsed (s).
g is the acceleration due to gravity (9.81 m/s^2 near the surface of the earth).

It is a good approximation in air as long as the equivalently the object's velocity is always much less than the terminal velocity.

 

[McPerth]

I'm with timerover on this one:

Ignoring the effect of atmospheric refraction, distance to the horizon from an observer close to the Earth's surface is about

d = approx 3.57 sqrt(h)

where d is in kilometres and h is height above ground level in metres.

Examples:

For an observer standing on the ground with h = 1.70 metres (5 ft 7 in) (average eye-level height), the horizon is at a distance of 4.7 kilometres (2.9 mi).
For an observer standing on the ground with h = 2 metres (6 ft 7 in), the horizon is at a distance of 5 kilometres (3.1 mi).
For an observer standing on a hill or tower of 100 metres (330 ft) in height, the horizon is at a distance of 39 kilometres (24 mi).

And from orbit?

As I already said, the main use for those weapons (mostly in MT where range allows it) is as ortillery or, at most, straffing crafts.

IMHO the only use of those weapons from ground level (or near it) would be from space deffense batteries, be it against those same crafts giving troops ortillery or close support, or against ground troops if they are near enough (so, mainly in self defense).

 

[Vladika]

And from orbit?

You are going to pretty much see it, hit it and kill it.

 

[Carlobrand]

Are those beam weapon ranges in the atmosphere or in vacuum?

In atmosphere, and assumes a standard atmosphere. Double it in thin, halve it in dense, multiply by 10 in very thin, 100 in trace, 1000 in vacuum. 1/10 in exotic/corrosive/insidious.

And if in the atmosphere, how are you targeting the ground vehicles.?

I'm not.

Maximum direct fire range depends on the tech level of the direct fire control being used. In this case, the best available DFC, TL15, has an effective range of 10 kilometers, long of 20, extreme of 40. In the case of the lasers, it means you can fire out to the maximum range of your fire control and still be well inside the effective range - for penetration - of the weapon. Beyond maximum DFC range you'd handle it as indirect fire and you'd need someone to spot for you, which with a laser is quite a difficult arrangement.

In the case of the TL10 plasma gun, it can't even reach all the way out to 40 km. A target at 10 klicks, you roll to hit at effective range, but the target is at the weapon's long range for penetration.

Also, if in the atmosphere, there is this thing called planet curvature that needs to be taken into account, along with the high likelihood of blocking material.

Gets better than that. Planetary curvature varies with the size of the planet, and of course the effective horizon varies with the altitude of the firing vehicle and the target. Striker offers a few quick numbers for range to horizon varying with planet size, along with an equation to use when your grav tank at altitude X wants to fire at the other guy's grav tank at range R and altitude Y on a size Z planet.

roughly = 10 meters per second per second It's an acceleration, not a velocity! (Also that's the approximate acceleration due to gravity on Earth. I'm an engineer, know my physics, and that is nothing you can successfully argue.

I'm not an engineer, I ain't about to argue with someone who spent years studying and then actually doing things I only dabble in and only vaguely understand. However, I do know my physics well enough to know that the quoted rule represents a gross simplification, probably for ease of play and to encourage survival of players (who tend to go all squishy-looking when you drop them from a high altitude).

It could be errata, it could be assuming that your vehicle has some ability to glide in rather than plummeting like a rock. Seems rather generic - very generic, really - to treat an air/raft the same way you'd treat an airplane, but I didn't write 'em, I just report 'em. Any engineer out there wants to give us rules that tell us what a Trepida would do in thin atmosphere on a 0.7G world, versus a speeder in a dense atmosphere on a 1G world, I would be very grateful.

 

[Hyphen]

Are those beam weapon ranges in the atmosphere or in vacuum? And if in the atmosphere, how are you targeting the ground vehicles.? Also, if in the atmosphere, there is this thing called planet curvature that needs to be taken into account, along with the high likelihood of blocking material.

From memory, Striker assumes "in-atmosphere" for ranges. I think there's a rule that multiplies range by 10 (or something) when you're in vacuum.

BTW, that's just for penetration effects; just because your rifle will damage something 10km away if it accidentally hits it, donesn't mean you can actually AIM at a target that far away...

EDIT: Thanks, Carlobrand, for giving us the correct figures. I was only off by two orders of magnitude...

 

[Hyphen]

Seems to say you crash when power goes, you might crash (or manage a hard but safe landing) when propulsion goes, but no crash noted when structure goes - you just sort of stop being able to do anything. I can see a plane crashing anyway, but maybe the grav vehicle just sort of hangs there. :devil:

Another example of where more explanation was required. I would suggest that speed would have to be reduced immediately to some "safe" level, or else incur more structural damage per round. (<clang>"What was that?" says some unnamed browncoat shipowner). You probably have to land asap. In atmosphere only, that is; if the craft is in vacuum, I suggest there would be no extra effect.

For my money, if you reach "destroyed" (and are still flying), it means the craft comes apart around you, and you are left sitting in mid-air holding the control stick...

As I recall, a 10 dT fighter's about the size of a large tank; the Striker APC would come in around 12-13 dTons.

TL14 500 Mw fusion gun: hit +0, penetration 103 at effective range, which is 21 kilometers. (It'll do 91 out to its 42 Km long range)

So, the vehicles need to pretty wickedly armored to resist a ship weapon in Striker.

The standard heavy tank is 20 tons, but RVG says they realised this was too big, so developed the Norris 10-ton tank.

On the other hand, Tavonni's defence forces field the Belion TL 15 Superheavy MBT (Striker); at 75 tons and its minimum armour as 71, it's "more like a pocket SDB". At MCr 50, they are rather pricey...

Of course, it does carry the above 500 MW ship's fusion gun as its main weapon...

 

[aramis]

One thing to keep in mind, and IMO, this was an error in transition from Striker to MT: Striker uses subtraction, while MT uses a division, to determine the level of penetration (which striker almost exactly equates to damage, and MT doesn't...).

In Striker,

Ranged: if AV ≥ Pen+10, the weapon cannot wound. If AV+1≤ Pen, the weapon cannot fail to wound. If AV+10≤ Pen, it cannot fail to kill.

Melee: if AV ≥ Pen+5, the weapon cannot wound. If AV+6≤ Pen, the weapon cannot fail to wound (Thrashers, broadswords, polearms). If AV+14≤Pen, it cannot fail to kill (but no melee weapon comes close to that.).​

 

[GypsyComet]

The standard heavy tank is 20 tons, but RVG says they realised this was too big, so developed the Norris 10-ton tank.

Even a 10-dton tank is huge by current standards, being about the same volume as a 70-foot cargo container. 20 dtons is up there with a two-truck modular house.

 

[aramis]

Even a 10-dton tank is huge by current standards, being about the same volume as a 70-foot cargo container. 20 dtons is up there with a two-truck modular house.

To give a better idea of a Td: a 20'x8'x8.5' container is 2.75 Td; adding a foot of height (20'x8'x9.5') to make the standard high-cube 20' container, one gets 3.07Td.

A 40' van trailer is typically 5.5Td of container, and 1 Td for running gear... plus about 2 td under the trailer of empty space