SpineMaker thoughts

[robject]

The foundation of BCS is the set of weapons/spinal mounts.
Every ship as built around a central weapon(s), or central payload, and clarified by mission.

Spine Requirements

Let's assume a Spine at a minimum requires

Weapon Type
Its own independent power source
Some sort of an effect generator with or without an enhancer (the "tube")
Some sort of control mechanism and operational crew.
If required, a fuel source
If required, a Magazine with reloads.

Let's also assume that we can define the output of the Spine in some terms of Damage or Effect at Space Range= 7.

Define the Standard Effect of the Weapon associated with a Size and its other minimums.

That is the Standard Weapon. Make sure it all works with Range Changes and with TL Stage Effects. Ideally, a sophisticated Spine (higher TL effects) at a lower Space Range = 5 or 3 or so produces the Smallest of Spines. If you set that at 2,000 tons, you make it not installable in an ACS ship.

...and you have standards to work from for the other size ranges.

Modifiers

Size. "VSmall" small, medium, large, extra large, etc. Pick a range of sizes. Perhaps a series of modifiers for the sizes, giving us a strange series of Large-Vsmall, and medium medium.
Other Identifier. Double Barrel, Fore and Aft (Janus, I like that). etc.

e.g.

/4 Tiny
/3 Vlight
/2 Light
x1 Standard
x10 Heavy
x100 Vheavy
x1,000 Gigantic
x10,000 Colossal

Stage Effects.
Range Effects.
Mount.


Primary Weapon Standard Sizes

There is a lot to think about. We need to think this through in detail. We have to be able to build a viable spine that fits onto a 2,500 ton minimum BCS ship, or a weapon for the Death Star (or even bigger: if we allow really-high-tech 900-mile-diameter sphere structures, then we're talking about 100 quadrillion tons in which to seat a truly gargantian weapon... and then there's jump-capable worlds, ringworlds, dyson spheres... aieeee).

We need a set of standard sizes for Primary Weapons from A to Z, actually from 0 or 1 to Z.
We need to then assign capabilities to these primary weapons (and power requirements, if any).
I believe that Dreadnought all-big-gun style ships are probably superior, but we need to allow other building strategies.

A single ship with multiple spinal mounts, either in parallel, or pointing in many directions.
A single ship with multiple sizes of weapons, perhaps a Main Spinal and many smaller "spinals."
A million-ton planetoid hull could easily manage many 10,000 ton spinals pointing in many directions.
A single ship may need multiple spinals just to be able to bring to bear Stasis/Jump Inducer/ etc other effects as it needs them.

An efficient ortillery ship is more efficient if it has multiple guns to fire.
An efficient seigecraft benefits from having several railguns firing in tandem.
Or is it better to have each tube an individual ship?


Benchmark

The "Smallest Of Spines" -- the "0" spine that gains the miniaturization benefits of a short range and high TL -- is probably 2,000 tons.

Assume that's "Fighter Range" and "Tiny". "Standard" is therefore 2,000 x 3 (Range) x 4 (Size) = 24,000 tons... perhaps the sort of weapon you'd install on a heavy cruiser or battleship?

Assuming each spine increment is 24,000 tons, and range goes up to DS (tons x 3) and size goes up to Colossal (x10,000), then the maximum volume would be 24,000 x 34 (Spine Z) x 3 (DS) x 10,000 (Colossal) = 24 billion tons.

Not enough for a Death Star, perhaps, but maybe we can rely on "ganged" spines at that point.

 

[daltoncalford]

How about a simple formula ie
TL*Rating*BaseSize*QREBS=Tonnage
Tonnage*QREBS*BaseCost=Mcr

Or something like that where you would have a straight forward table like this (example only)

Weapon	Base Size	Base Cost	Base Dmg
cpaw	500	1000	100
npaw	500	1000	100
Meson Gun	500	1000	100
Disinagrator	500	1000	100
bfsw	500	1000	100

So, you know how much tonnage you want to use and what weapon type you will use. Easy Calc. Multiple sizes/configurations due to qrebs.

 

[Licheking]

Just a quick question, why aren't you using the old High Guard tables?

 

[McPerth]

Just a quick question, why aren't you using the old High Guard tables?

I don't own T5, so I only spaculate, but perhaps he wants to allow them for anyone not knowing CT:HG, making T5 more an independent game...

 

[robject]

Reusing High Guard

There is some interest in modifying High Guard to be BCS, not just for spines.

What is needed is a mapping of HG/MT weapons, including spines, to combat effectiveness in Traveller5.

Probably the tables (spines for example) will be tweaked a bit, following earlier efforts by the CT-Starships group, to reform High Guard. I've seen these efforts. Among other things, the spines change. For example, they're decoupled from tech level, presenting a list of spines classified by letter, and showing how tech level affects their volume and price. Values are formula-based.

Then, a way to expand spine sizes -- but that's a solved problem, I think.

T5 damage might be reasonably calculated based on the spine's letter code (I've done it), and the spine letter in HG indirectly maps to the Target Number, just like ACS does. Although, spine TLs in HG do not map well to letter codes. More, HG differs in that it maps its spine ratings to critical hits, whereas T5 has crits already built into the combat system.

Spines. For each of the two types of weapons (PA and Meson), High Guard has eight spines, two from each TL -- the lowest effective and the biggest -- which are by far the most common meson spines used when players design ships with High Guard, and the biggest possible particle accelerator spines are the most common PA spines. Even though the table of spines was intended to provide options, it in reality does not; instead, weapon choice comes only based on combat effectiveness at a given TL.

4-7 Meson spines: C, F, H, N, [K, R, T].
5-8 PA spines: E, L, N, Q, R, [C, J, M].

 

[robject]

I've designed a prototype Azhanti High Lightning over here (http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showthread.php?t=31107), and so I have one data point.

The most used spines in HG are:

Used PA Spines
Code Tonnage TL  EP
  C   4500    8  500
  E   3500   12  600
  L   4000   12  800
  M   3500   13  900
  N   3000   14  900
  Q   4500   12 1000
  R   4000   13 1000

Used Meson Spines
Code Tonnage TL  EP
  C   2000   12  600
  F   2000   13  800
  H   2000   14  900
  K   8000   12 1000
  N   2000   15 1000
  R   5000   15 1100
  T   7000   15 1200

 

[robject]

Mapping HG energy to T5 energy is straightforward: 1 EP in HG equates to 50 EP in T5.

Similarly, calculating EPs generated by a ship's powerplant in T5 is nearly the same as the formula in High Guard: 1% Hull Volume x Power Plant Rating / 2.

In Traveller5, a Power Plant-6 in an Azhanti High Lightning generates 150,000 EP (1% x 60,000 x PP-5 / 2 = 150,000).

Using High Guard's PA spine table as a template, we get these numbers for spines:

PA Spines / Power (Standard = TL12)
'Rating'  T5 EPs  HG EPs  Volume
   1      30,000    600    3500
   2      40,000    800    4000
   3      50,000   1000    4500

In High Guard, EP roughly maps to volume, and volume roughly maps to cost, and both are strongly affected by TL. Traveller5 allows stage effects at these levels; since they haven't been defined yet for spines, they can model HG closely. In fact, PA is easily expressed in functions. Meson guns are more challenging.

30,000 EP in Traveller5 requires an 1800 ton power plant. In the AHL, that would be Power Plant-2. That means, for Traveller5, that if we want to fire the spine, the jump drive goes offline for that turn. And vice versa.

 

[robject]

Build riders and tenders at TL14 and they have to be much larger, so much so that the difference between them and battleships is not so pronounced, and maxing out armour is more difficult so the rider takes a lot more damage from secondary weapons.

- Mike Wightman commenting on High Guard


When looking at the spines table, I look at three things: sizes, damage ratings, and stage effects. But, it strikes me that the spine is only dependent on the weapon type for its base TL. For example, the PA is Standard at TL11, and the Meson gun at TL13. Other weapons have other standard TLs.

From the High Guard spines table I have two observations:

OBSERVATION 1. A spine's Code more or less directly implies required Energy Points.
OBSERVATION 2. Volume varies with the ratio of a spine's Code to its TL.

And, for a proof-of-concept for Traveller5 spines, I will extrapolate from the High Guard spines, with the following assumptions:

ASSUMPTION 1. All weapons will use unified tables for spines.
ASSUMPTION 2. Spines are identified by letter, in ascending order of devastation.
ASSUMPTION 3. Spine Volume = Gun Volume + Overhead Volume (determined by TL).
ASSUMPTION 4. Spine Damage = related to Spine TL and/or Volume.
ASSUMPTION 5. A spine's "tube" is optional.
ASSUMPTION 6. A spine requires controls and crew.
ASSUMPTION 7. A spine requires its own independent power source.
ASSUMPTION 8. Energy Points, Volume, and Price are formula-driven.
ASSUMPTION 9. Spines have, by default, a range of S=7 (Attack Range).
ASSUMPTION A. Stage Effects and Range Effects change the spine in consistent ways.

 

[robject]

Building High Guard Spines

High Guard spines can be mapped according to two features:

Size. At the main tech levels, there are four size classes of spine, which I call Very Light, Light, Medium, and Heavy. The larger the size, the larger and more effective the spine.

(DISCLAIMER: Proof of concept only)
Size Vol Damage
---- --- ------ 
VL    /3   -4
L     /2   -2
M     x1   +0
H     x2   +2
VH    x3   +4

[b]NOTE[/b]: Damage scales poorly with volume.  This will be adjusted.

Stage. Spines span five tech levels. Tech level affects volume as well as effectiveness.

(DISCLAIMER: Proof of concept only)
Stage TL  Vol    Damage
----- --  ------ ------
Exp   -3  x2       -6
Prot  -2  x1.5     -4
Early -1  x1.25    -2
Std   +0  x1       +0
Imp   +1  x0.9     +2
Mod   +2  x0.85    +4
Adv   +3  x0.8     +6
Ult   +4  x0.75    +8

STANDARD SPINES

A subset of spines allows High Guard spines to be approximated.

CAVEAT: The minimum allowable spine assumed here is 2,000 tons. This means the two 1,000 ton meson spines in High Guard will not be mapped here.

Standard Spines by Code and Volume for High Guard Mapping:

(DISCLAIMER: Proof of concept only)
A 5,000 - 10 hits
B 6,000 - 11 hits
C 7,000 - 12 hits
D 8,000 - 13 hits

Mapping to High Guard

(DISCLAIMER: Proof of concept only)
Meson Spine C: Early Vlight Meson Spine-A (TL12, 2083 tons, 4 hits)
Meson Spine F: Std Vlight Meson Spine-B (TL13, 2000 tons, 7 hits)
Meson Spine H: Imp Light Meson Spine-A (TL14, 2250 tons, 9 hits)
Meson Spine K: Ear Med Meson Spine-B (TL12, 7500 tons, 8 hits)
Meson Spine N: Mod Light Meson Spine-A (TL15, 2125 tons, 11 hits)
Meson Spine R: Mod Med Meson Spine-B (TL15, 5100 tons, 15 hits)
Meson Spine T: Mod Med Meson Spine-D (TL15, 6800 tons, 17 hits)

PA Spine C: Exp Light PA Spine-A (TL8, 5000 tons, 2 hits)
PA Spine E: Can't do it currently.
PA Spine L: Can't do it currently.
PA Spine M: Can't do it currently.
PA Spine N: Adv Light PA Spine-C (TL14, 2800 tons, 15 hits)
PA Spine Q: Imp Med PA Spine-A (TL12, 4500 tons, 12 hits)
PA Spine R: Mod Med PA Spine-A (TL13, 4250 tons, 14 hits)


Problems with the PA Spine Mapping. The mapping attempt shows a weakness in my proof-of-concept "Size" table: the multipliers are too large, and the resulting continuum is too coarse-grained for the PA entries. Alternately, the damage modifiers are not wide enough to match the scale factors.

 

[robject]

Power Plant and Fuel. The power plant has to be big enough to fire the spine. I think there is more than one way to do this. In this case, I will give the spine its own power plant.

The spine's energy requirement is completely dependent on its effectiveness. In HG2, this was its letter code exactly. In T5, it is probably the number of hits it inflicts.

So, the power plant. The formula is EP = (T-1) x 100/3. So for example, if the power plant had to generate 50,000 EP, the power plant would be 1501 tons.

Next, fuel. If we use the spine's hits as its rating, fuel for the spine = 0.01 x Spine Volume x Spine Rating. So for example, if the spine displaced 2,000 tons, and its rating were 22, fuel required equals 440 tons.


Centralized Power. The other way to do it is to oversize the ship's power plant. Calculations will probably be similar, though, since what you'll probably do is take the EP needed for the ship (which I suppose should be known), add the EP of the spine, then calculate a single drive from both.


Eurisko. Viewing HG2 and BCS as "spines with a transport mechanism", one can see why Eurisko succeeded. The solution is not to complicate shipbuilding, but rather to enrich the setting -- battles are never fought in isolation.

 

[rancke]

Eurisko. Viewing HG2 and BCS as "spines with a transport mechanism", one can see why Eurisko succeeded. The solution is not to complicate shipbuilding, but rather to enrich the setting -- battles are never fought in isolation.

The setting is already enriched. We have a statement to the effect that cruisers are too fragile to stand in the line of battle and that battleships are tough enough to stand in the line of battle. That they are, figurativly speaking, eggshells armed with hammers and coconuts armed with hammers. A ship design system that produces bigger eggshells rather than coconuts is simply not compatible with such a statement. There's only two ways to deal with it: ignore the discrepancy or eliminate the discrepancy.

It probably won't surprise anyone to learn that my vote goes to fixing the problem (And I don't think a solution need complicate ship design unduely). YMMV.


Hans

 

[robject]

Second Try

REQUIREMENT: No spine can be installed in an ACS. (At least, none in the OTU).

Assume: TL15.
Assume: Stage Effects are the same as those used for other weapons.
Assume: Range Effects are the same as those used for other weapons.
Assume: The smallest spine is an "Ultimate"-stage spine.
Assume: The smallest spine is an "Attack"-ranged spine.
Assume: The smallest spine is around 1,000 tons.
Assume: The smallest spine plus its power system is 2,000 tons.

Then:

The default "A"-class spine, standard and attack-ranged, displaces 4,000 tons.

POWER

ASSUME: The Ult AR Spine-15 requires roughly around 600 EP in HG2. That equates to 30,000 EP in T5 terms, and that implies a 901 ton Power Plant. ASSUME further that the spine's power plant will need at least 100 tons of fuel. Therefore, the total tonnage of spine + power plant + fuel is a bit over 2,000 tons.


TABLE OF SPINES

ASSUME ships up to 500,000 tons are reasonably supported by spines up to 8,000t.
ASSUME therefore, ships up to 15 million tons are reasonably supported by spines up to 240,000t.
ASSUME a list of 24 spine mounts, from A to Z, from 4,000 to perhaps 240,000 tons.

 

[robject]

Damage

And now some wild guesstimating.

ASSUME: the ACS "main" gun doesn't use more than a couple thousand EP: in one configuration its power comes from the power plant, and likely 'banks up' energy taken from the plant over time. Whatever.

Now we know the "main" gun has a DM+10 to hit, and inflicts 100D.

ASSUME: Spine DM and damage are linearly based on energy:
DM=+15.
Hits=1,000D per 10,000 EP.

THEN

A 30,000 EP spine has DM+15 and 3,000D hits.

Big assumptions, and likely wrong.

 

[Hemdian]

CT, MT, etc, used to have a rule that there could be up to 1 bay per 1000 dtons of ship not already allocated to weapons (ie. the spine). And that there was one hardpoint per hundred dtons of ship not already allocated to weapons (ie. spine + bays). Unless I missed it, ACS just says 1 hardpoint per hundred dtons of ship. Period.

Shouldn't BCS have a set of weapon mount restrictions?

 

[Vladika]

The most used spines in HG are:

Used PA Spines
Code Tonnage TL  EP
  C   4500    8  500
  E   3500   12  600
  L   4000   12  800
  M   3500   13  900
  N   3000   14  900
  Q   4500   12 1000
  R   4000   13 1000

Used Meson Spines
Code Tonnage TL  EP
  C   2000   12  600
  F   2000   13  800
  H   2000   14  900
  K   8000   12 1000
  N   2000   15 1000
  R   5000   15 1100
  T   7000   15 1200

I think the absence of the Meson "J" is a very serious over site...

 

[Hemdian]

Too many bays, too many hardpoints

CT, MT, etc, used to have a rule that there could be up to 1 bay per 1000 dtons of ship not already allocated to weapons (ie. the spine). And that there was one hardpoint per hundred dtons of ship not already allocated to weapons (ie. spine + bays). Unless I missed it, ACS just says 1 hardpoint per hundred dtons of ship. Period.

Shouldn't BCS have a set of weapon mount restrictions?

*BUMP* Anyone have any thoughts?

 

[robject]

Well... ACS doesn't have that restriction. I mean, I can design a Mercenary Cruiser in ACS that has two bays. And it seems to me like ACS should be *more* restrictive than BCS... but other than that, I don't know.

 

[GrayPennell]

Damage

And now some wild guesstimating.

ASSUME: the ACS "main" gun doesn't use more than a couple thousand EP: in one configuration its power comes from the power plant, and likely 'banks up' energy taken from the plant over time. Whatever.

Now we know the "main" gun has a DM+10 to hit, and inflicts 100D.

ASSUME: Spine DM and damage are linearly based on energy:
DM=+15.
Hits=1,000D per 10,000 EP.

THEN

A 30,000 EP spine has DM+15 and 3,000D hits.

Big assumptions, and likely wrong.

I think 3000D hits if way way to much because armor scales with hull size. I could not make an effective 5000-150000 ton ship with a main gun and armor more than 2, 1, 1, 1 or 5 points of armor for about 1500 points. So if you max out the damage at 1000D than you reduce ep usage to 10,000 or less.

 

[flykiller]

Shouldn't BCS have a set of weapon mount restrictions?

*BUMP* Anyone have any thoughts?

there seems to be no objective reason for any abstract restrictions at all. a 3d mock-up of a small ship's layout might impose objective field-of-fire restrictions or objective spacing/placement restrictions - and perhaps the 100 dton per turret rule simulates this - but for large ships there is no rational restriction.

in my experience crew and energy point requirements and therefore dtonnage are limiting factors before the "100 dtons per turret" rule comes into play. this alone seems sufficient to restrict weapons. for very large ships there will be a surface area restriction - a sphere should be able to mount far fewer turrets or bays than a cylinder of equal dtonnage.

 

[robject]

I think 3000D hits if way way to much because armor scales with hull size. I could not make an effective 5000-150000 ton ship with a main gun and armor more than 2, 1, 1, 1 or 5 points of armor for about 1500 points. So if you max out the damage at 1000D than you reduce ep usage to 10,000 or less.

You're brought up a really good point that we need to think about. And I think this is an even more important distinction than spines.


Say I've got a 400 ton TL10 frigate, and 12% of it is armor (4 layers). Its basic AV is therefore TL 10 x 4 layers = AV 40.

Now say I've got a 400,000 ton TL10 dreadnought, and 12% of it is armor (4 layers). Its basic AV is therefore TL 10 x 4 layers = AV 40.

This seems to tell me that an ACS ship has a good chance of penetrating the hull of a BCS, unless said BCS has overwhelming active defenses.

Therefore, it seems to me that the defining difference between ACS and BCS is not [just] the spine, but rather the sheer defensive capability of BCS.

If not, then BCS are in trouble!