Starships - Are We Bringing Enough Guns?

[Diveguy]

NOTE: I am NOT trying to challenge canon, re-write almost 40 years of our game, or otherwise start drama. Rather, I found this an interesting thing to consider and was curious as to what others thought. Nor am I interested in debating the "hard science" side of starship combat that Atomic Rockets does such a great job of break down real world vs. science fiction. Finally, I acknowledge beyond any shadow of a doubt that there are rules and canon I am *not* thinking of that probably address some of this.

In some of my non-gaming reading for the day, I was perusing an article by a retired Naval officer discussing the unfortunate state of our (U.S.) current fleet vis-a-vis the real world threat stream (a topic he has expounded on knowledgeably throughout the years). For the TL/DR crowd his argument, supported by history, is that when real-world conflicts happen Navies will bolt everything that can shoot onto their platforms in an attempt to counter threats. While he references battleships and other large combatants, for those without the background trust me, it extends down as small as "craft" can go - look up how much ended up mounted on WW II PT boats, or Vietnam-era PBRs as an example.

Which got me thinking about something I've always noticed about Traveller, even in my early exposures - that, by and large, ships had far fewer weapons than I would have expected... particularly if you work mostly in a small-ship universe. I'm aware some variants and such have played with this, but, by and large, Traveller ships have fewer but bigger weapons.

So, a few potential debate points come to mind:

- We're purely focused on "starship level threats" and things that can interact at near-AU distances; things like point defense and anti-personnel don't get reflected...
- While Traveller starships (and most sci-fi space combat) is based and somewhat modeled on real-world wet-navy operations, it's foolish to take the correlation too far...
- Come on, look at Star Wars, et al - throw some more turrets on those hulls!
- Eh, space combat is icky/difficult - can't we just focus on other stuff?

So - with all that said - I'd be curious to hear thoughts from others.

 

[whartung]

Traveller ships have fewer but bigger weapons.

The fewer, bigger weapons are what kill ships vs just make noise.

Small weapons for small ships, big weapons for big ships, and since fighters "don't work" (because they only mount small weapons which don't kill ships), there's little need for small weapons to fight off clouds of fighters.

Ergo, fewer, but bigger weapons.

 

[robject]

No you've got a valid point. I've seen this since shortly after I picked up Classic Traveller and started running games. My players would never care -- the setting is the setting. But I always wondered why in the world you'd buy a single laser when a triple doesn't really add that much to your monthly payment. And so on.

At the end of the day, I decided that the setting must be of a nature that makes it really unlikely for random combat to occur. I'm not sure I can articulate why that would be. Space is big? Interstellar traffic is low? Or perhaps the opposite -- patrols are common enough because there's lots of traffic.

Dunno, but... but I like the setting.

 

[Spinward Flow]

the setting must be of a nature that makes it really unlikely for random combat to occur. I'm not sure I can articulate why that would be. Space is big? Interstellar traffic is low? Or perhaps the opposite -- patrols are common enough because there's lots of traffic.

It kinda (sorta) depends on where you go.

Just as a matter of "chuck lots of dice" ... if you're running a route through a location which is mostly type C-E starports ... eventually you're going to run into someone who will try to make a move on you. It might be as rare as "once per year" that it happens, but the only way to absolutely prevent it from happening is to stick to type A-B starports where the system defense patrols ARE common enough to have run off the (wannabe) bandits.

Yes, space is big.
Yes, interstellar traffic can be low.

But you're there, aren't you?
Why can't someone else be there too ...
And not everyone else out there is going to be "nice and friendly" when paths cross ... so ...

When risks get high, being prepared isn't exactly an "option" (for anyone who wants to stay in business).

 

[Condottiere]

Optimal use of deck space, versus what's the actual threat.

Accurate fire control allowed the increased range of guns, plus the ability to be able to distinguish one set of splashes for correction, as opposed to another.

The Soviet solution for bolting down large missile systems top deck, is just an externalization of the vertical launch system, with what they understood was likely a kamikaze mission.

 

[Grav_Moped]

Optimal use of deck space, versus what's the actual threat.

Accurate fire control allowed the increased range of guns, plus the ability to be able to distinguish one set of splashes for correction, as opposed to another.

The Soviet solution for bolting down large missile systems top deck, is just an externalization of the vertical launch system, with what they understood was likely a kamikaze mission.

Lun-class surface-effect craft. Image credit: wikipedia.

 

[Condottiere]

As I recall, needs calm waters for smooth sailing.

Otherwise, depending on fuel efficiency, would likely have been earmarked for amphibious expeditionary units.