| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Hellcat
Grand Moff
Joined: 29 Jul 2004
Posts: 11921
Location: New England
|
 Posted: Wed Jun 09, 2010 11:52 pm Post subject: |
 |
|
| atgxtg wrote: | | I think the point defense guns are simply because the Clone War ships got statted out for D20. In D20 the ISD's have Point defense guns, too. Those turbolaser batteries (even the quad lasers on the Falcon) are very similar in appearance to 20-40mm ainti-aircraft guns. |
That may be, but there were cap-ships that were given anti-starfighter defenses by WEG. The Nebulon-B escort frigate for instance has 12 laser cannons for anti-starfighter defense. The Trenchant-class light cruiser has 8 quad lasers. The Cal-class battleship has 30 lasers (pretty much useless at 2D). The Invincible-class dreadnaught heavy cruiser also has 30. The Discril-class cruiserhas 4 tri-laser cannons. The Tapani-class frigate has 20 lasers. The Neutron Star-class bulk cruiser has 30 quad lasers.
You can do the same thing as me and just go through WEG stats and find any weapons that are starfighter scale on a cap ship. The point is that anti-starfighter weapons is not something unheard of in SW and it's been there for a long time now.
_________________
FLUFFY for President!!!!
Wanted Poster |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
atgxtg
Rear Admiral
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 10, 2010 12:12 am Post subject: |
|
|
Let me clarify. It's not that I believe the point defense guns don't belong on the Venator or other ships, just that the ISD probably should have PD guns,too. Hence why I pointed out how the tubolaser and qaud lasers look like air defense guns. I think the reason why the ISD doesn't have them is because it's stats were written up very early, before the scaling rules, and the stats weren't quite worked out.
All those early (in terms on the RPG) capital ships with low powered turbolasers were probably meant to have been PD guns.
The ships with mixed scaled weapons took awhile to come out.
IMO one of the things that D20 did right was make some of the ISD weapons point defense and had the tubolasers fire in batteries, combining fire. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Leon The Lion
Commander
Joined: 29 Oct 2009
Posts: 309
Location: Somewhere in Poland
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 10, 2010 3:32 am Post subject: |
|
|
| hisham wrote: | | Don't nukes cause considerably less damage in space because lack of atmosphere makes for really terrible shockwave damage? I think the BSG effects are good because nukes in space are just fireball pops. However, nukes detonated inside ships... |
Quoting directly from another forum where the same doubts were brought up:
| Quote: | Nuclear detonations produce most of their energy in the forms of gamma rays, x-rays, and neutrons. When a nuke is detonated in air, that air absorbs the gamma rays and X-rays produced. It heats up, producing the [first] fireball. Intensely-heated air expands, the expansion producing the shockwave. And the shockwave does most of the damage, though the fireball does glow hot enough that its thermal radiation inflicts burns and sets fires.
In space there is nothing to absorb the x-rays and gamma-rays except for the debris from the bomb case, and there really isn't enough of it to produce much of a shockwave. So there is no fireball, and no shockwave to speak of.
On the other hand, the gamma rays and x-rays proceed directly to the target, unimpeded by air. And where they are absorbed, they heat the surface of the target. If they heat it rapidly, the explosive evaporation of the target surface will set up shockwaves in the surface material of the target, shattering it.
Back-of-envelope calculations [of gamma-rays and x-rays released and the reaction of materials to intense heating] suggest that a 1-megaton warhead will be destroying spacecraft at a distance of ~600 metres. That's only about the size of the fireball itself for such a weapon detonated in air. It makes a 1 megaton warhead in vacuum "only" about as effective as a 10-kiloton warhead in Earth's atmosphere. But "ten or twenty feet" it ain't. 600 metres is quite a wide setting on a proximity fuze. |
I think this successfuly busts the myth that "Nukes are useless in space" 
_________________
Plagiarize! Let no one else's work evade your eyes,
Remember why the good Lord made your eyes! So don't shade your eyes,
But plagiarize, plagiarize, plagiarize... Only be sure to call it, please, "research".
- Tom Lehrer |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hisham
Commander
Joined: 06 Oct 2004
Posts: 432
Location: Malaysia
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 10, 2010 4:06 am Post subject: |
|
|
| Leon The Lion wrote: | Quoting directly from another forum where the same doubts were brought up:
| Quote: | Nuclear detonations produce most of their energy in the forms of gamma rays, x-rays, and neutrons. When a nuke is detonated in air, that air absorbs the gamma rays and X-rays produced. It heats up, producing the [first] fireball. Intensely-heated air expands, the expansion producing the shockwave. And the shockwave does most of the damage, though the fireball does glow hot enough that its thermal radiation inflicts burns and sets fires.
In space there is nothing to absorb the x-rays and gamma-rays except for the debris from the bomb case, and there really isn't enough of it to produce much of a shockwave. So there is no fireball, and no shockwave to speak of.
On the other hand, the gamma rays and x-rays proceed directly to the target, unimpeded by air. And where they are absorbed, they heat the surface of the target. If they heat it rapidly, the explosive evaporation of the target surface will set up shockwaves in the surface material of the target, shattering it.
Back-of-envelope calculations [of gamma-rays and x-rays released and the reaction of materials to intense heating] suggest that a 1-megaton warhead will be destroying spacecraft at a distance of ~600 metres. That's only about the size of the fireball itself for such a weapon detonated in air. It makes a 1 megaton warhead in vacuum "only" about as effective as a 10-kiloton warhead in Earth's atmosphere. But "ten or twenty feet" it ain't. 600 metres is quite a wide setting on a proximity fuze. |
I think this successfuly busts the myth that "Nukes are useless in space" |
Interestingly awesome.
_________________
The Enteague Sector | Cracken's Collection of Crackpots
In D6, of course. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
hazardchris
Commander
Joined: 01 Nov 2005
Posts: 358
Location: Lexington, KY
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 10, 2010 8:16 am Post subject: |
|
|
If you want some inspiration for what Star Wars as a military sci-fi might be like, take a gander at the Republic Commando novels.
_________________
"Don't you have to have mini-clorinies in your blood or something to be a jedi?"
"Oh no, that's just something we used to tell people."
Let me make you a picture! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ZzaphodD
Rear Admiral
Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 2426
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 10, 2010 3:53 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| atgxtg wrote: | Let me clarify. It's not that I believe the point defense guns don't belong on the Venator or other ships, just that the ISD probably should have PD guns,too. Hence why I pointed out how the tubolaser and qaud lasers look like air defense guns. I think the reason why the ISD doesn't have them is because it's stats were written up very early, before the scaling rules, and the stats weren't quite worked out.
All those early (in terms on the RPG) capital ships with low powered turbolasers were probably meant to have been PD guns.
The ships with mixed scaled weapons took awhile to come out.
IMO one of the things that D20 did right was make some of the ISD weapons point defense and had the tubolasers fire in batteries, combining fire. |
That can be said about the game in general. If you compare early scenarios and rules to later ones youll see that a lot more thought has been put into the later variants. This of course includes thinking that large ships need anti starfighter protection too.
Also, I think that very large capital ships should logically be protected by picket ships, much like a modern aircraft carrier. Of course this is not the case if we look at the movies though... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kemper Boyd
Sub-Lieutenant
Joined: 28 Jun 2008
Posts: 68
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 10, 2010 5:10 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ZzaphodD wrote: | | Also, I think that very large capital ships should logically be protected by picket ships, much like a modern aircraft carrier. Of course this is not the case if we look at the movies though... |
Of course, the in-universe explanation we can use is that either we don't see them (like at Endor or Hoth), or the Star Destroyers are on very specific missions which fall outside normal fleet ops, like the capture of Leia's Corvette at the beginning of ANH.
I think I'm going to give Impstars and other capital ships in my campaign some extra point defense guns though, but another thing could be that this is a failure of Imperial doctrine, since starfighters are not seen as a serious threat to capital ships before Yavin. Maybe we could postulate that in the post-Yavin period most Impstars were equipped with a PD package. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
ZzaphodD
Rear Admiral
Joined: 28 Nov 2009
Posts: 2426
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 10, 2010 5:18 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Leon The Lion wrote: | | hisham wrote: | | Don't nukes cause considerably less damage in space because lack of atmosphere makes for really terrible shockwave damage? I think the BSG effects are good because nukes in space are just fireball pops. However, nukes detonated inside ships... |
Quoting directly from another forum where the same doubts were brought up:
| Quote: | Nuclear detonations produce most of their energy in the forms of gamma rays, x-rays, and neutrons. When a nuke is detonated in air, that air absorbs the gamma rays and X-rays produced. It heats up, producing the [first] fireball. Intensely-heated air expands, the expansion producing the shockwave. And the shockwave does most of the damage, though the fireball does glow hot enough that its thermal radiation inflicts burns and sets fires.
In space there is nothing to absorb the x-rays and gamma-rays except for the debris from the bomb case, and there really isn't enough of it to produce much of a shockwave. So there is no fireball, and no shockwave to speak of.
On the other hand, the gamma rays and x-rays proceed directly to the target, unimpeded by air. And where they are absorbed, they heat the surface of the target. If they heat it rapidly, the explosive evaporation of the target surface will set up shockwaves in the surface material of the target, shattering it.
Back-of-envelope calculations [of gamma-rays and x-rays released and the reaction of materials to intense heating] suggest that a 1-megaton warhead will be destroying spacecraft at a distance of ~600 metres. That's only about the size of the fireball itself for such a weapon detonated in air. It makes a 1 megaton warhead in vacuum "only" about as effective as a 10-kiloton warhead in Earth's atmosphere. But "ten or twenty feet" it ain't. 600 metres is quite a wide setting on a proximity fuze. |
I think this successfuly busts the myth that "Nukes are useless in space" |
600m, or even 1km aint several space units..so in the space units scale nukes are still 'overpowered' in D6 Space. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atgxtg
Rear Admiral
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 10, 2010 6:02 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Kemper Boyd wrote: | | ZzaphodD wrote: | | Also, I think that very large capital ships should logically be protected by picket ships, much like a modern aircraft carrier. Of course this is not the case if we look at the movies though... |
Of course, the in-universe explanation we can use is that either we don't see them (like at Endor or Hoth), or the Star Destroyers are on very specific missions which fall outside normal fleet ops, like the capture of Leia's Corvette at the beginning of ANH.
I think I'm going to give Impstars and other capital ships in my campaign some extra point defense guns though, but another thing could be that this is a failure of Imperial doctrine, since starfighters are not seen as a serious threat to capital ships before Yavin. Maybe we could postulate that in the post-Yavin period most Impstars were equipped with a PD package. |
I think that another in-universe explanation is that the Captial ships aren't as vulnerable to fighters as modern ships are. In the real world, one F111 can fire a missile than can potentially sink any ship afloat. A Y-Wing just isn't the same threat to a ISD as the F111 is to a Carrier or Battleship.
Also, since the fighters and the ships are both operating in the same enviormnent, space, as opposed to modern fighters (air) and ships (sea), it could be that the big ships in the SW Universe actually carry thier picket ships within. Those gunboat shuttlecraft that were such a pain in the X-Wing computer games comes to mind. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
atgxtg
Rear Admiral
Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460
|
| Posted: Thu Jun 10, 2010 6:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| ZzaphodD wrote: |
600m, or even 1km aint several space units..so in the space units scale nukes are still 'overpowered' in D6 Space. |
As the size of a SU varies, 1km could be several SUs. At least sometimes. Based on the Star Warriors game, I am getting the imression that 1SU=400-500m The 30 minute average travel time from a planet to one of it's moon works out to around 13,000kph, and that is probably assuming a double move rate and increasing SU size as the ship gets farther rom the planet.
If we use 1km SUs, and assume an average ship has a Space 4 engine, that is 4km/turn, 48km/min, or 2880km/hr.
At that scale the nukes would work out okay. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Kira Firestorm
Sub-Lieutenant
Joined: 17 May 2010
Posts: 72
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 22, 2010 1:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
Well what we can learn from Battlestar Galactic is that the droids are nasty, spiteful and take no crap.
Tehy may not speak 6 miliion languages, dont serve drinks, dont care if your alien or human when they try to kill you, and seriously would be a formidable opponenent to destroy.
As for ships, well vipers are good, manauverable, and would be fast. That said a x-wing would mop the floor with them.
Cylone fighters are hard to kill as they are, let alone make them in star wars too.
An it seems the human race after all these years according to BSG still has not learnt anything with respect to nukes. They use them willingly, get nuked into the stone ag by them and dont care so much who they kill.
_________________
"To find our future, we must look to our past" |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Lostboy
Commander
Joined: 22 Aug 2008
Posts: 384
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 22, 2010 3:29 am Post subject: |
|
|
The ISD uses turbolaser saturation for area denial, this helps protect against fighters. The true anti fighter screen is the endless waves of tie fighters.
Fighters can't cause enough damage to Capital ships unless a very large number are used. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
garhkal
Sovereign Protector
Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14034
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 22, 2010 5:44 am Post subject: |
|
|
I would love to see how a battle between say 3 ISDs and their attendent escorts, faired say against an equal number of cylon base ships..
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16178
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 22, 2010 1:48 pm Post subject: |
|
|
| garhkal wrote: | | I would love to see how a battle between say 3 ISDs and their attendent escorts, faired say against an equal number of cylon base ships.. |
I think a major factor would be the Cylon's ability to infiltrate the computer systems of the Imperial ships. You also have to factor in the absence of shields and weight the pros and cons of beam weaponry versus the Cylon's missile based armament. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering
Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16178
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.
|
| Posted: Tue Jun 22, 2010 2:19 pm Post subject: Re: What can we learn from Battlestar Galactica? |
|
|
| Kemper Boyd wrote: | I've been rewatching the new Battlestar Galactica series and decided to use some ideas from it in future campaigns.
First of all: general-purpose military craft don't appear much in Star Wars. Something like one of the Colonial Raptors would be a fun thing to have in a campaign. Decent range, able to do fire support, recon and land ground troops and even help board ships. |
I would think the Raptor would be classified more as a Scout vessel than anything else. It's decidedly weak in the troop transport department, but does have a pretty versatile ordnance delivery capability. The closest example I can think of in the SWU would be something like the Moldy Crow.
| Kemper Boyd wrote: | Second: the way the Battlestars in the series use their weapons against other ships seems like it could easily be adapted into the game. Instead of having Star Destroyers aim at enemy fighters, it would make more sense if they would use the kind of flak barrage as seen in the series, that is to say that their guns are used for area denial. The main batteries of the ships remain silent against fighters but are used for attacking other capital ships.
Gunfire would be sort of a navigational hazard instead of actively targeting single ships. |
I've been considering something similar. I always thought the navigational hazard rule would be a good way to game a minefield (i.e., set a terrain difficulty for the density of the minefield, and any movement failure equals an encounter with a mine).
I know in Battlefleet Gothic, the rules allow for anti-capital ship weaponry to be used against starfighter-scale targets at greatly reduced effectiveness (20 to 25% of normal). The best modern example would be the DP cannon aboard modern warships. With radar fire control, these cannon can fire contact fused shells against surface targets, or proximity fused shells against aerial targets. While most warships today mount gatling or cyclic based weaponry to deal with threats in close, the DP cannon provides an effective anti-aircraft capacity much further out.
I've considered several options, but I do think the terrain difficulty is the best of the bunch. Simply designate that all the weapons in a certain fire arc are engaged in suppression barrage, and then any starfighter that fails its piloting roll takes a hit (and, at CS-Scale damage, is probably destroyed).
This ties into another rule I've been considering, specifically, making weapons less effective or completely unusable within point blank range, especially against smaller scale targets. In this example, starfighters would be threatened by the capital ship's barrage fire, but once they got into Point Blank range, the heavy guns would no longer be able to slew and traverse to target. This, then would be the province of the point defense weapon systems; smaller, lighter cannon engaging smaller, more maneuverable targets that have managed to penetrate the outer defenses.
On a related note, has anyone ever considered how to gameplay starfighter squadrons as a group in fleet combat? After all, a squadron of X-Wings firing a barrage of proton torpedoes at a capital ship packs a punch, but how would you gameplay it? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
