T4 Space Combat Questions

[Jeffr0]

The four numbers defining a laser battery's damage-- what ranges do they correspond to?

Does "Very Short" range have its own range band, or is it a special case of "short" used only for fighters and so forth?

Is any weapons fire permitted at extreme range?

When missiles are in flight and the target "has initiative" it seems he can just elect to flee the missiles indefinitely. Is that correct?

Using the standard Patrol Cruiser and firing missiles... can it launch 5 missiles per barbette per turn... or does it have to wait until a set of missiles impact before launching another volley? If not, under what circumstances can it dump a massive amount of missiles at once to overwhelm a targets defenses?

The sandcaster table is utterly confusing. What is the target number and dice to roll for each range? The effect of the "DM" is ambiguous. (And what are the sandcasters going to be blocking from long range?)

 

[Jeffr0]

The four numbers defining a laser battery's damage-- what ranges do they correspond to?

Does "Very Short" range have its own range band, or is it a special case of "short" used only for fighters and so forth?

Is any weapons fire permitted at extreme range?

When missiles are in flight and the target "has initiative" it seems he can just elect to flee the missiles indefinitely. Is that correct?

Using the standard Patrol Cruiser and firing missiles... can it launch 5 missiles per barbette per turn... or does it have to wait until a set of missiles impact before launching another volley? If not, under what circumstances can it dump a massive amount of missiles at once to overwhelm a targets defenses?

The sandcaster table is utterly confusing. What is the target number and dice to roll for each range? The effect of the "DM" is ambiguous. (And what are the sandcasters going to be blocking from long range?)

 

[robject]

I believe the ranges are

close/point-defense range
short range
medium range
long range

I don't know which weapons may reach extreme range.

The Patrol Cruiser may fire a salvo of missiles each turn. (I believe the preferred record-keeping method is to track them as one big blob).

I have no idea about initiative and sandcasters.

 

[robject]

I believe the ranges are

close/point-defense range
short range
medium range
long range

I don't know which weapons may reach extreme range.

The Patrol Cruiser may fire a salvo of missiles each turn. (I believe the preferred record-keeping method is to track them as one big blob).

I have no idea about initiative and sandcasters.

 

[Jeffr0]

Thanks robject. I'm closer to some semblance of space combat.

Your ranges make sense... but there are odd references to "Very Long" and "Extreme" range that come out of nowhere and are confusing.

I'm playing missiles as being launched at the same range as the ships are seperated. The ship that wins initiative can double up his missile swarm by closing range with the missiles-- but then the other ship can double up, too!

Example:

Two patrol cruisers engage at medium range launching 10 missiles each. The next turn, the Intruder closes to Short... and the missiles also are "Short" away from the targets. They both launch 10 missiles each. The ships are too big to close to Close/Point-defense range so they can't increase the swarm size again no matter where they move. If they stay at Short until someone dies, then on the next turn (turn 3) they will each face a swarm of 20 missiles... and then a swarm of 10 on each following turn.

Sand can fire at missiles at short, medium, and long range. (And also at extreme?!) The dice to roll are 2.5, 3, and 3.5 respectively. The targets (modified by gunner skill?) are 7, 6, and 5 respectively. "Sanding" missiles at long range is nearly impossible.

Lasers are your only hope if the missiles make it to Close/Point-defense range. The die roll is 2d6 and the target it [4 + Ships Fire COntrol] or less with gunnery skill helping. A Gunner-3 on a Partol Cruiser with FC 2 hits the missiles on 9 or less... but only removes 3 points of damage on a success. (This is a good place to reward critical success... but it isn't.) I think nuclear missiles do double damage... so the lasers will be much less effecive if thats what's being fired.

A patrol cruiser is unlikely to survive a swarm of 20 nuclear missiles. Under my interpretation of the rules, they will not close unless they win initiative-- and get really lucky and take out the enemy's first salvo with a lucky sandcaster hit.

Does this seem reasonable?


I still have a few odd questions yet, but the sensor rules are my main irritant now. Does anybody undersand sensor-lock, "masking", jamming, and active/passive rules?

 

[Jeffr0]

Thanks robject. I'm closer to some semblance of space combat.

Your ranges make sense... but there are odd references to "Very Long" and "Extreme" range that come out of nowhere and are confusing.

I'm playing missiles as being launched at the same range as the ships are seperated. The ship that wins initiative can double up his missile swarm by closing range with the missiles-- but then the other ship can double up, too!

Example:

Two patrol cruisers engage at medium range launching 10 missiles each. The next turn, the Intruder closes to Short... and the missiles also are "Short" away from the targets. They both launch 10 missiles each. The ships are too big to close to Close/Point-defense range so they can't increase the swarm size again no matter where they move. If they stay at Short until someone dies, then on the next turn (turn 3) they will each face a swarm of 20 missiles... and then a swarm of 10 on each following turn.

Sand can fire at missiles at short, medium, and long range. (And also at extreme?!) The dice to roll are 2.5, 3, and 3.5 respectively. The targets (modified by gunner skill?) are 7, 6, and 5 respectively. "Sanding" missiles at long range is nearly impossible.

Lasers are your only hope if the missiles make it to Close/Point-defense range. The die roll is 2d6 and the target it [4 + Ships Fire COntrol] or less with gunnery skill helping. A Gunner-3 on a Partol Cruiser with FC 2 hits the missiles on 9 or less... but only removes 3 points of damage on a success. (This is a good place to reward critical success... but it isn't.) I think nuclear missiles do double damage... so the lasers will be much less effecive if thats what's being fired.

A patrol cruiser is unlikely to survive a swarm of 20 nuclear missiles. Under my interpretation of the rules, they will not close unless they win initiative-- and get really lucky and take out the enemy's first salvo with a lucky sandcaster hit.

Does this seem reasonable?


I still have a few odd questions yet, but the sensor rules are my main irritant now. Does anybody undersand sensor-lock, "masking", jamming, and active/passive rules?

 

[robject]

It's bizarre... and the range bands have still got me wondering (perhaps it's short-med-long-vlong, with PD being a degenerate case?).

And sand... why would sand ever be ranged? Don't make no sense to me.

But I agree, 20 missile hits against a patrol cruiser seems to be a mission-kill at least.

The sensor rules are nonintuitive to me. And tend to seem finicky.

 

[robject]

It's bizarre... and the range bands have still got me wondering (perhaps it's short-med-long-vlong, with PD being a degenerate case?).

And sand... why would sand ever be ranged? Don't make no sense to me.

But I agree, 20 missile hits against a patrol cruiser seems to be a mission-kill at least.

The sensor rules are nonintuitive to me. And tend to seem finicky.

 

[Jeffr0]

Actually, the Extreme range sandcasters was fixed in the errata:

"Page 120, Sandcasters table


Range should read "Very Short, Short, Medium, Long."

http://traveller.mu.org/errata/official.errata.html

Sandcasters can fire at point defense range. That makes a big difference!

(You also find that the small craft and the Patrol Cruiser stats are wrong wrong wrong....)

("Masking" is from a hull feature, not jamming. There are some comments on jamming in the errata, but I'm not sure if its enough to settle the question.)

 

[Jeffr0]

Actually, the Extreme range sandcasters was fixed in the errata:

"Page 120, Sandcasters table


Range should read "Very Short, Short, Medium, Long."

http://traveller.mu.org/errata/official.errata.html

Sandcasters can fire at point defense range. That makes a big difference!

(You also find that the small craft and the Patrol Cruiser stats are wrong wrong wrong....)

("Masking" is from a hull feature, not jamming. There are some comments on jamming in the errata, but I'm not sure if its enough to settle the question.)

 

[Jeffr0]

But this suggested redesign of the Patrol Cruiser (that can't be made with te QSDS)...

Patrol Cruiser
Tons: 400 Volume: 5600 Cost: 237.219
Crew: 17 Troops: 8 Passengers (L): 0
Cargo: 13 Controls: Bridge/Fib Tech Level: 12
8 Size Rating 3 Jump Rating
4 Fire Control Rating 4 G Rating / Thruster
2 Battery Mil Lsr 3-2-0-0 4 Power Plant Rating (850 MW)
2 Battery Missile Barb 5 (4) 124.5 Fuel / Scoop / Purify
0 Meson Screen Rating
0 Sand Caster Rating
0 Damper Rating
A10 P4 J10 Sensors (TL12 Small Mil)
10 Armor
16 Structure
Crew Detail: 2 Engineers, 2 Electronics, 1 Astrogator, 1 Pilot, 4 Gunnery, 3 Command, 1 Medic, 1 Steward, 8 troops, 2 Supernumary.

Notes: Based on a 400-ton Airframe Needle hull, he Patrol Cruiser has TL12 Advanced Commo, and a TL12 10-ton capcaity fuel purifier. The ship carries a 30-ton Ship's Boat in an AirFrame Grapple, as well as an ATV. There are 2 TL12 MFDs each capable of controlling 4 missiles. The Marines are quartered in bunks, the Command staff in Large staterooms and the rest in small staterooms.
A comment on the notation: the line "2 Battery Mil Lsr" means that there are two independent batteries of Military Lasers; similarly "2 Battery Missile Barb 5 (4)" means 2 independent batteries of missile barbettes; each barbette has 5 ready missiles, and can control 4 of them in flight at once.
This ship does require a custom hull (available from the "Big Table of Hulls), though a similar ship limited to 3G could be built from the QSDS rules in T4.

... can only control 8 missiles at a time altogether.... Massive swarms of missile like I postulated are not possible under this design. I don't see why the ship would be built with the ability to shoot two extra missiles that it can't control. What's up with that? Shouldn't they go with a "light" version of the barbette?

This version still doesn't list the ship's standard load of ammo.

We have the sensor ratings listed in the design here-- evidently switching to passive yields a lower sensor rating, making it harder to detect the enemy. I don't see anything about a penalty for the enemy to detect you if you're using passive, though.

There is a Jam rating, though... so we at least know where that # comes from.

Doh! This guy took out the sandcasters! How can this thing survive? The armor's gone, too! And the lasers are much lighter.

With four gunners, two fire the lasers and two guide the missiles. That makes sense. If it did have sandcasters, could the two laser gunners fire those at no penalty?


Ai yai yai. The ship I pick for the experiment had to be the one with the most ridiculous stats....

 

[Jeffr0]

But this suggested redesign of the Patrol Cruiser (that can't be made with te QSDS)...

Patrol Cruiser
Tons: 400 Volume: 5600 Cost: 237.219
Crew: 17 Troops: 8 Passengers (L): 0
Cargo: 13 Controls: Bridge/Fib Tech Level: 12
8 Size Rating 3 Jump Rating
4 Fire Control Rating 4 G Rating / Thruster
2 Battery Mil Lsr 3-2-0-0 4 Power Plant Rating (850 MW)
2 Battery Missile Barb 5 (4) 124.5 Fuel / Scoop / Purify
0 Meson Screen Rating
0 Sand Caster Rating
0 Damper Rating
A10 P4 J10 Sensors (TL12 Small Mil)
10 Armor
16 Structure
Crew Detail: 2 Engineers, 2 Electronics, 1 Astrogator, 1 Pilot, 4 Gunnery, 3 Command, 1 Medic, 1 Steward, 8 troops, 2 Supernumary.

Notes: Based on a 400-ton Airframe Needle hull, he Patrol Cruiser has TL12 Advanced Commo, and a TL12 10-ton capcaity fuel purifier. The ship carries a 30-ton Ship's Boat in an AirFrame Grapple, as well as an ATV. There are 2 TL12 MFDs each capable of controlling 4 missiles. The Marines are quartered in bunks, the Command staff in Large staterooms and the rest in small staterooms.
A comment on the notation: the line "2 Battery Mil Lsr" means that there are two independent batteries of Military Lasers; similarly "2 Battery Missile Barb 5 (4)" means 2 independent batteries of missile barbettes; each barbette has 5 ready missiles, and can control 4 of them in flight at once.
This ship does require a custom hull (available from the "Big Table of Hulls), though a similar ship limited to 3G could be built from the QSDS rules in T4.

... can only control 8 missiles at a time altogether.... Massive swarms of missile like I postulated are not possible under this design. I don't see why the ship would be built with the ability to shoot two extra missiles that it can't control. What's up with that? Shouldn't they go with a "light" version of the barbette?

This version still doesn't list the ship's standard load of ammo.

We have the sensor ratings listed in the design here-- evidently switching to passive yields a lower sensor rating, making it harder to detect the enemy. I don't see anything about a penalty for the enemy to detect you if you're using passive, though.

There is a Jam rating, though... so we at least know where that # comes from.

Doh! This guy took out the sandcasters! How can this thing survive? The armor's gone, too! And the lasers are much lighter.

With four gunners, two fire the lasers and two guide the missiles. That makes sense. If it did have sandcasters, could the two laser gunners fire those at no penalty?


Ai yai yai. The ship I pick for the experiment had to be the one with the most ridiculous stats....

 

[robject]

So tell me. What's the sudden impulse toward T4? Are you experimenting? I'm very interested in seeing what your impressions are: T4 seemed to improve some rules, while also dis-improving other rules at the same time.

 

[robject]

So tell me. What's the sudden impulse toward T4? Are you experimenting? I'm very interested in seeing what your impressions are: T4 seemed to improve some rules, while also dis-improving other rules at the same time.

 

[robject]

A10 P4 J10 Sensors (TL12 Small Mil)

I'd forgotten about those. I really like the sensor terminology for T4, though the rules for their use seemed so-so at best.

Perhaps there are missiles which have enough brains to do their own sensing and F&F recognition. The rules only have to mention how many dumb missiles can be controlled...

 

[robject]

A10 P4 J10 Sensors (TL12 Small Mil)

I'd forgotten about those. I really like the sensor terminology for T4, though the rules for their use seemed so-so at best.

Perhaps there are missiles which have enough brains to do their own sensing and F&F recognition. The rules only have to mention how many dumb missiles can be controlled...

 

[Jeffr0]

T4, in spite of 10 pages of errata just on the ships and ship combat, seems to strike a good compromise between depth and playability-- and very good for a first draft. It's "Book 2"+ in a lot of ways. There's room for improvement, though. (I looked at fighter combat here and noted a few things. If only I had the power of Kenneth Bearden!)


I think I've almost got sensors down...

The detecting ship chooses between active and passive sensors and cross references it's rating on the chart on p 120 to get the DM.

The target ship may jam. It's Jam rating becomes a penalty to the detecting ship's sensor roll.

The detecting ship's sensor skill is a positive DM. (The target ship's sensor skill seems to be irrelevant.)

If the target ship elects to jam on a subsequent turn, the detecting ship must reroll for lock. Any turn that the detecting ship fails, it may not fire weapons at the ship... and missiles do not close with their target.


That leaves just a few things to pin down:

Fleet interactions become complex: each ship gets a roll to detect each opposing ship it intends to fire upon... and each ship can jam at most a single enemy. (?)

If the target ship jams, then the target ships sensor skill level should matter.

If a ship is only using passive sensors, then it should be harder to detect. Maybe a DM on -3 is about right... that would be comparble to having a masked hull. What do you think?

 

[Jeffr0]

T4, in spite of 10 pages of errata just on the ships and ship combat, seems to strike a good compromise between depth and playability-- and very good for a first draft. It's "Book 2"+ in a lot of ways. There's room for improvement, though. (I looked at fighter combat here and noted a few things. If only I had the power of Kenneth Bearden!)


I think I've almost got sensors down...

The detecting ship chooses between active and passive sensors and cross references it's rating on the chart on p 120 to get the DM.

The target ship may jam. It's Jam rating becomes a penalty to the detecting ship's sensor roll.

The detecting ship's sensor skill is a positive DM. (The target ship's sensor skill seems to be irrelevant.)

If the target ship elects to jam on a subsequent turn, the detecting ship must reroll for lock. Any turn that the detecting ship fails, it may not fire weapons at the ship... and missiles do not close with their target.


That leaves just a few things to pin down:

Fleet interactions become complex: each ship gets a roll to detect each opposing ship it intends to fire upon... and each ship can jam at most a single enemy. (?)

If the target ship jams, then the target ships sensor skill level should matter.

If a ship is only using passive sensors, then it should be harder to detect. Maybe a DM on -3 is about right... that would be comparble to having a masked hull. What do you think?

 

[robject]

If you're coding fleet interactions into a computer program, then your fleet interactions work well.

Otherwise, I'd be tempted to use the abstract system in T4's Pocket Empires.

Passive sensors already don't detect well; I believe that's why they have a relatively low rating. In other words, isn't the "hard to detect" bit built-in to passives?


Other thoughts.

1. Thanks for posting the info to your blog. I'm learning lessons.

2. Should fleeing ships get a bonus if they're not using their weapons? I suppose not; the attacker has to decide how badly it wants the target stopped, and time is an important consideration. Although a pursuit table might help here, with a standard deviation in hours, for ships equally capable.

3. Good points about critical success and failure.

4. Interesting that DEX and END don't play a part in starship combat... again, I had forgotten.

5. Active vs Passive sensors... to me this amounts to whether or not you're trying a sneak-attack. Passives mean the target won't know you're there until you fire. Or so I thought.

6. In the end, I look at T4 ship combat and ask "is this really any better than CT combat?". Despite its added features (sensors, armor), I can't really tell.

 

[robject]

If you're coding fleet interactions into a computer program, then your fleet interactions work well.

Otherwise, I'd be tempted to use the abstract system in T4's Pocket Empires.

Passive sensors already don't detect well; I believe that's why they have a relatively low rating. In other words, isn't the "hard to detect" bit built-in to passives?


Other thoughts.

1. Thanks for posting the info to your blog. I'm learning lessons.

2. Should fleeing ships get a bonus if they're not using their weapons? I suppose not; the attacker has to decide how badly it wants the target stopped, and time is an important consideration. Although a pursuit table might help here, with a standard deviation in hours, for ships equally capable.

3. Good points about critical success and failure.

4. Interesting that DEX and END don't play a part in starship combat... again, I had forgotten.

5. Active vs Passive sensors... to me this amounts to whether or not you're trying a sneak-attack. Passives mean the target won't know you're there until you fire. Or so I thought.

6. In the end, I look at T4 ship combat and ask "is this really any better than CT combat?". Despite its added features (sensors, armor), I can't really tell.