Topic: Anybody up for SM:P starship tactics discussion?

[markc]

 I was wondering what you would do in a SM:P universe with fleet battles that use the quantum drive. The big question is just how much extra volume does a quantum drive affect so as to get an idea on how many extra ships can piggyback on the big ship.

1) I would build a large ship [QD-3] that can such along other smaller ships with it.
2) Scan area and launch weapons at fixed assests.
3) Then the smaller ships use there own QD's [QD-2] to maneuver into tactical positions.
4) Launch fighters and tactical scouts to scan the area for mines and other items of intrest, etc.
5) Sit back and let the smack down begin.

 How would you defend against attack?
1) IMO I would have some intelagent QD mines that would project there fields around the outside of the system so trafic has to come in on a specific course or run the possibility of returning to space in another quantum field. Which is explosive to both ships/objects.
2) Or maybe have a star dock way outside the planets area that ships have to arrive at to get the current corse to go through the shifting quantum mine field.

Thoughts?
MDC

[RandalThor]

How about throwing in some intelligent QD torpedoes in there? Many of these torps don't actually have to have warheads either, they could have a single or double shot energy weapon that is triggered when it gets within a certain range. (Wouldn't that be a nasty surprise?!?)

[markc]

 Yes I have thought of that before as well as some type of assault craft with a QD drive to prevent another ship from escaping. Or even a torpedo with a QD drive that locks onto a ship to prevent it from using there QD drive, enabling others to board there ship.

 The torpedo idea is close to how torpedos are in traveller 2300, a one shot weapon with single or multiple weapon mounts depending on the power produced by the "torp".

 I have been doing a lot of fantasy stuff so it is nice to think about somesci-fi stuff for a change.

MDC

[Fidoric]

And what about gravity generators impeding the functioning of QD ? That way, ships could be 'bogged down' and unable to escape or at least to to it quickly.

[markc]

 I asked the author about this a long time ago and he said the QD works on steller atmosphere. That is if I remember correctly. So gravity does not have anything to do with it.
 The question I asked him is are there any devices like a star wars star destroyers that imhibit jump/QD effects. And he said no it is just steller atmosphere.

 Thanks though this is good to keep the old mind chuging along.

MDC 

[David Johansen]

Well, while QD acceleration is theoretically unlimited with access to zero point energy.  I tend to assume that the infinitely escalating energy requirements rule out accelerating to a truely devastating relativistic velocity in tactical terms.  Also the time frame shift tends to make you a sitting duck.  (yes it did come up...repeatedly)

Personally I think it's all about the big kinetic weapons on the capital ship scale, the spinal mass drivers from SM2 still hold the high ground.  Minimal target signature, incredible damage, and effectively unlimited range.

Large ships should probably serve as artillery and carriers and be shielded with escorts carrying disruptors for use on annoying ATX targets.  The main role of fighters seems to be keeping antimatter warheads as far from the captital ship as possible.   Though they and escorts can be set at great distances to increase scanning range.  Possibly even specialized gunboat sensor platforms would be nice, fighters are too fragile.  Of course, the Very Dangerous Array from Shlock Mercenary also comes to mind.  It's a synthesized array using the sensors on semi sentient apocalyptic torpedoes.

[markc]

DJ,
 I was thinking about synthetic sensor arrays using sensor drones. It is talked about a little in FF&S [Traveller] or at least they have a picture.

 I was also thikning about sensor ships like in BSG, the raptor I think it is called. That could go hide on the battlefield and listen passively or turn on active is something required them to. That way there are many platforms to detect anything strange or out of the ordinary. [Also remind me to work on sensor rules for the game, when it happens]

 I do not know yet what type of game I want to run in terms of fighters vs catital ships power wise. You know can fighters carry enough weapontry to damage a capitial ship?
 I was thinking of like you said fighters main job is to protect the capitial ship from AM Torps but I also thought about using anti-nuke screens from Traveller that I would apply to AM Torps as well as Nuke Torps.

 Volume Affected by QD:
 I was thinking of multiplying the volume of the ship that uses the QD by a factor of 1000 or more. Any votes or ideas on what multiple would work best? Or another way to go about it?

Thanks
MDC

[Fidoric]

As for the question of what damage can a fighter do to a capital ship, well, they can carry nuclear or AM warheads too.

[markc]

As for the question of what damage can a fighter do to a capital ship, well, they can carry nuclear or AM warheads too.

 Yes this is the balance I need to think about for my game. Do I allow any ship to carry nukes and AM weapons or do I use a device like in traveller a field that stops the nuke from reaching a run away reaction? Or do I want capitial ships sluging it out with smaller ships harring the smaller capitial ships and laying down EW screens, taking out some missile attacks, preventing or trying to prevent raming attacks etc.


 I think I have some tactics line up such as hiding in radiation fields, minor asteroid fields, nebuals [I think I need to lok it up but star treck allways goes into the nebula to even the odds] and other types of distortion fields. So military ships will have a radiation screen much much higher than a comericial star ship that is not designed for going into high radation zones. There will be some craft such as mining, exploration and transports that have to work in these zones that have a rad shield close to but not up to military specs. Maybe 1 or 2 generations behind the military.

Well enough ramboling for now thanks.
MDC

[RandalThor]

Some things to think about are: sensors and various weapon ranges.

How much range and "speed" do the sensors possess? By speed, I mean how fast is the information updated (can you see the "blip" move across the screen in real time?).

Weapon ranges vary by weapon type - which will definately make certain weapons (like slug throwers) obsolete. I feel that lasers would have, by a massive margin, much greater range than other weapons in space, but could be some of the easiest to defend against. In fact, laser ranges would only be limited by the sensors of the ship, and combined with a good targeting program would have as close to a 100% hit percentage as is possible. (That whole 299,792,458 meters per second is a little hard for a physical object to avoid.) But, as it is basically "hard" light, the defenses could be as simple as mirrored hulls or sandcasters. I would think that lasers are great finishers - when the ship is already damaged you blast the damaged sections with powerful lasers to do as much internal damage as possible. Nasty.

[markc]

RandalThor, 
 Yes and like you said the light you are seeing is "X" seconds old so what did the target do in the mean time? Are they still on the same course? etc.

MDC

[RandalThor]

RandalThor, 
 Yes and like you said the light you are seeing is "X" seconds old so what did the target do in the mean time?

MDC

Unless we are talking about millions of kilometers - not much. Certainly very little a moderately capable tracking program can't nail down. Really, with the tech-level we are talking about the vast majority of defenses won't be about making them miss (with energy weapons, at least), but about interception and keeping the weapon from damaging the target. We can, today, make programs capable of tracking scores of (maybe more, not current in all military weaponry anymore), fast moving targets at many kilometers. It is not a stretch to think that in the future (around 10,000 years or so, if I am remembering right) the automated tracking programs will be able to outgun any living being by a far margin.

But this is all dependent upon a fast, long-ranged sensor system. Without that, you might as well be looking out a porthole...... 

[markc]

 And also fast thinking defense systems that work with in the peramiters the captian or EW officer has set.

 I think SM2 has done a good job of this by just saying they cancel each other out. And in SM:P they have a chart that gives bonues depending on Tech level defensives. I think I am going to adjust the chart to give mods by .1 of tech levels and give higher bonuses. I have also had some thoughts about mixing the SM2 vehical and SM:P vehicle constuction rules.

MDC

[RandalThor]

I think it is much easier to quickly align a single gun sight than it is to alter the tragectory of an entire spaceship - particularly a large one. So the best defense (using fast thinking defense programs and EW systems) will be active defenses such as point defense systems and the like and thick armor (maybe reactive armor), not dodging the shot like in all the movies. As cool as a space dog-fight looks it is not realistic, think of how modern aircombat has evolved: we are in the age of the missile, the age of dog-fighting is mostly over.

I just think that for space combat you will be looking at very long ranges with numerous missiles fired and then the ships/fleets prepare to deal with the incoming missiles. The winners will be those who are able to put out and shoot down the greatest numbers of missiles. Not glamorous or extremely fun in a day-to-day game basis, but more realistic.

[markc]

I think it is much easier to quickly align a single gun sight than it is to alter the tragectory of an entire spaceship - particularly a large one. So the best defense (using fast thinking defense programs and EW systems) will be active defenses such as point defense systems and the like and thick armor (maybe reactive armor), not dodging the shot like in all the movies. As cool as a space dog-fight looks it is not realistic, think of how modern aircombat has evolved: we are in the age of the missile, the age of dog-fighting is mostly over.

I just think that for space combat you will be looking at very long ranges with numerous missiles fired and then the ships/fleets prepare to deal with the incoming missiles. The winners will be those who are able to put out and shoot down the greatest numbers of missiles. Not glamorous or extremely fun in a day-to-day game basis, but more realistic.

 Your last thought there is one I have seen in many sic-fi books I have been reading and as you said can be a big pain in group RPGing. I think when I have the time I will run a few SM2 AA and SS combats and see what I like and do not like. My last group did not get real heavy into space combat and I used the star ships from Traveller 3rd and 4th since they had deckplans and other good stuff.

Thanks
MDC

[Oldgrue]

The problem with fleet actions are that the harder SF we go, the closer to submarine battles and picket lines we get.

A starship is awfully hard to find in general.  We have a celestially miniscule object that observers need to perform no small amount of searching for.

Thermographic searches are still line of sight based, and relatively short ranged.
Energy emissions are subject to a farraday cage type effect, and high-frequency lasers need to be interrupted to be detected.

I disagree that space combat will be long-ranged for any significant length of time.  With the difficulty of detecting a ship, conflicts will be swift and brutal, based on speed and the amount of firepower delivered downrange more than defensive capabilities.

An attacking flotilla should be unconscionably numerous.  With the advent of Inertial dampners, A fighter could be little more than a powerplant, thrust, control module, and a few weapon systems.  Combat could be designed to take advantage of developments in dirtside hulls.  Even if they're immune to projectiles, the energy has to go somewhere, throwing ships off attack vectors harmlessly. think of the invaders in ID4 and how severe impact just threw them off course, and thus all their weapons.  Additionally, an attacking flotilla would need to rely on stealth for their approach - oblique orbital angles and high relativistic velocities.

Range in 0g vacuums becomes almost irrelevant.  How much atmospheric bloom does a particle stream really suffer in in space? An object in motion is subject to very predictable forces.  Range becomes dictated by the maneuverability of the target.

Plan a Planetary bombardment months in advance: slip into a system, calculate the rotation of a planet along its orbit, and deploy a cluster of individual projectiles at the same velocity in the opposite direction of planetary orbit - they'll smash into each other

Defense then becomes layers of early warning rather than direct interdiction.  Large composite arrays become desirable in larger numbers and significant distances while under active surveilance.  Planetary approaches need to be seeded with high velocity clouds of intervention....like counter-orbit debris fields.

[yammahoper]

I have one question;

Would you all be so nice as to bunch up your fleets so i can take you out with one shot from my Wave Motion Gun?  Thanks!

Captain of the Yamamoto

[Oldgrue]

carrying on with my earlier position:

Short brutal fighting is what I expect it to be all about. Massive power output tearing at ablative armor and fields.  More of a high-energy knife fight than throwing rocks at relativistic velocities.


Atomic weapons might not be used - their force is applied in a sphere. They have to be delivered at a significant range to be safe.  Radiological weapons, like a neutron bomb might be more likely.  Fired from an oblique angle to detonate on the far side of a ship, or in to the midst of a cluster of ships.


Expanding on defense:
All defense is going to have to be based on detection and interdiction in a sphere.  With that being an issue, defense then becomes either obscurity or limiting the angle of approach.

A deep field of debris moving opposite of planetary rotation could act as a rudimentary armor.  Slivers of material could cause damage enough to deny a planetary approach.  Networks of mobile automated weapons arrays still can become prohibititavely expensive due to the ships they are designed to interdict.

The best defense, I think, is to make a resource defended exactly well enough that capturing it would risk destroying it.

How prevalent and powerful do you consider ship sized shields, so I can work closer to the realm you're focusing on?

[markc]

Oldgrue,

 I think you have hit all the major points that I have read about in many SF novles. Except the sub comment, which I fully agree with and I do not think I want to get too deep into the 3-D nature of space combat unless my PC's want to go that way.

 Shield size? I do not quite remember what SM:P and SM2 say about ahield size. In fact I think they really do not talk about it. I think I prefer charged particles maipulated by equipment to intersect attacks and very short ranged energy shields.

 Now that you brought it up I think SM:P Quantum Drive which is a large radius effect could be a very effective weapon if you get a large rock with some engines on it to keep up with the other ship. So you essentally get 1 asteriod attack for every ship that shows up. It might also really confuse the defenders until they can get some good information on the incoming targets. Just becuse one of them moves does not mean it is the one with the people on board.

MDC

[Oldgrue]

From SM:P (p26) I get the impression that a QD doesn't work anything like the impeller drives from Honor Harrington. (if I missed something, directions would rule!)  Additionally, since its useless within 100 planetary circumferences (appx 4 million KM for earth) the QD is only useful for deeper space bombardments.  Since per the Vehicle manual, a quantum drive covers "a very large area" a single jump ship could be used - presuming all the other ships kept accelerating at the same g.  This could let ships piggyback on a retreat too.

This puts weapons back in the hands of reactionless drives.