Phase World Fleets of the Three Galaxies

[Malakai]

Braden, I thinkk you missed the subject of his question - you referenced ONLY the the Cruise Missiles, whereas GT was asking specifically about the NON-Cruise missiles. here's an example

5. Long Range Missile Batteries (4): These weapons are used against fighters and missiles, especially cruise missiles
Primary Purpose: Anti-aircraft
Secondary Purpose: Defense
Mega-Damage: Varies with Missile Type
Rate of Fire: One at a time or volleys of 2, 4, 8, 16, or 32
Effective Range: Varies with missile type
Payload: 62* missiles per launcher. Loading from the cargo hold takes 1D6 minutes [was originally missiles ]

So, the question from GT is - is it one volley per action, up to the total amount of missiles available, or is it one volley per round, regardless of size?

I personally think it's the former.

On my own note, however, I would like to know when you think the opportunity for reloading occurs - i.e. If I only launch 4 of my 32 missiles, this round, can I "start the clock" to reload those 4 missiles, and still make use of the remaining 28 in the meantime, or does the entire launcher have to "sit" for the reload time, regardless of the number of missiles fired? Also, how long would it take if the missiles were right on hand - as the time for reloading is generally given as "from the cargo hold"




*what an odd number, I think this should probably have been either 32 or 64, but there's nothing inherently wrong in having this number, so I can;t say for certain if it was an error or not

[Braden Campbell]

In the quoted case, it is one attack = one volley of any size.

As for reloading, I have always assumed that you can only start once the enitre magazine is empty.

[GT]

Is there someplace where different speeds are listed for Phase World missiles? Because from wghat my group has seen, as written missiles are useless in space combat. A mach 3 missile won't connect with a mach 10 fighter.

I just add the speed of the launching unit to the speed of the missile for the total speed.

But yes it can still be very annoying how slow the missiles can be. Especially now that Cruise Missiles have a speed of Mach 9 in space now. A mach 10 fighter can't even hit a newer fighter that is flying away from it with a missile since any thing that can go Mach 14 or higher can out speed a Mach 10 fighter with a mach 3 missile. Even a huge ship like the Explorer can get away from a squadron of mach 10 fighters like the Flying Fang when running away form it and still not take a missile it, if its they don't have the mach 9 cruise missiles though.

But when engaging head attacks, then the missiles will hit usually.

Or simply X3 or X4 the missile speed in space and then add that to the speed of the launching unit.

[ZINO]

Guys;

You can make up whatever kind of vessels you want. These are just guidlelines to ensure game ballance across the power blocs, not hard and fast rules. If you want to build a capital ship that can volley off 140+ cruise missiles in seven seconds, then do it. Just be aware that it will violate treaties, or incite panic in others, or be the target of sabatoage of theft, or be a prototype, or an ancient relic perhaps best forgotten, or anything.

Like I wrote in the book, feel free to deviate from the established norms... but be ready to have a good story behind your creation to explain it.

1)nice statement ,but a player who got lucky is starting a space company to make a gunship but in shuttle size version i think is 200 or 3000 feet in length ( and starting to interst but not me )
2)adding stealth and cloaking he has test run about three types weight standard 15,000 tons

3)by the way WOW all of you post has surprised me love it with question and answer you guys and girls are great i humble by your post

[Scorpion Leader]

Is there someplace where different speeds are listed for Phase World missiles? Because from wghat my group has seen, as written missiles are useless in space combat. A mach 3 missile won't connect with a mach 10 fighter.

I just add the speed of the launching unit to the speed of the missile for the total speed.

But yes it can still be very annoying how slow the missiles can be. Especially now that Cruise Missiles have a speed of Mach 9 in space now. A mach 10 fighter can't even hit a newer fighter that is flying away from it with a missile since any thing that can go Mach 14 or higher can out speed a Mach 10 fighter with a mach 3 missile. Even a huge ship like the Explorer can get away from a squadron of mach 10 fighters like the Flying Fang when running away form it and still not take a missile it, if its they don't have the mach 9 cruise missiles though.

But when engaging head attacks, then the missiles will hit usually.

Or simply X3 or X4 the missile speed in space and then add that to the speed of the launching unit.

Gt, brings up valid points. Easiest thing is to increase the speed in space as he suggests,thus keeping inline how a Fighters speed is also Increased in Space. However to get a little scientific you must remember that the missile will actually be moving at the same speed as the luanching vessel when launched and then acclerate away.

ie. If you jump out of a car at 55 mph, your body is also moving at 55 + mph when you hit the ground, and thats also taking in account for acceleration due to the pull of gravity. This concept is also used to luanch things into space by riding piggyback or under a launch vechicle. Noted examples 1950's X-ship programs like the Bell X-1 & 2, the X-15 rockets, and The Current Virgin Atlantic Civilian spaceplane. If lets say a CAF Blackeagle fighter is duing Mach 16, then the missile it is carring is also already duing Mach 16 when Launched. Once Launched the missile then accelerates away thereby increasing its speed. (thus overcoming its normal speed limit, that it would have had if it where launched from a "relatively" at rest launcher so to speak. Namely ground based launchers from a base or armored vechicle. Yes the acceleration does apply to a fighter launching a missile in an atmosphere of a planet, or to one out in space, in case if you were wondering.)

Also note: yes speed level off/drop off does occur eventually especially at FTL speeds when an object is handed off in a warpfeild but cannot sustain it, unless it has a sustainer engine.

An object in motion tends to stay in motion unless acted upon by an outside force. It will also maintain its speed (especially in space) for a time until its speed eventually drops off (unless of course it accelerates), but it will still have momentum unless it can brake/reverse thrust itself, or is stoopped by an outside force.

Yes i know what if the Fighter that is being attacked /targeted accelerates.
Well lets see.
For ease lets say fighters X and Y both have a top speed of Mach 10. both fighters are duing mach 5 fighter X launches a missile that can due Mach 3 normal max. at fighter Y. So given what i mentioned above the missile can actually reach a speed of Mach 8 but fighter Y can still out run it by accelrating to Mach 9 or 10. However Fighter X also accelerates and launches Agian if Fighter X's speed is Mach 9 the missile can go Mach 12 if at Mach 10 The Missile for a time can go Mach 13. Thus over taking Fighter Y. Heck even if fighter X was only duing Mach 7 and Y was tring to acclelerate to Mach 10, fighter X's missile could still match fighter Y's speed at Mach 10!! See how complicated this can all get. Sometimes we need to check ultra realism at the door just so we can keep the game moving and fun guys. some times to much detail is to much.that's why RPG's are General in terms. Best advise don't worry about the speeds so much and just enjoy the experience.
Brent

[Scorpion Leader]

Well it least I had part of it right.

But also keep in mind we have come a long way past Newtonian mechanics with Quantum mechcanics,Chaos therory,Therory of Relativity, etc. etc. which prove some of Newtonian physics not entirely accurret. (ie.Gravity does not need the Apple)This all makes my mind hurt. I'm just really a simple guy really.

But anyway A good Fantasy/Scfi Rpg is like a good Fantasy/Scifi movie it is based on some fact/reallity/science but not intirely. It requires Suspention of disbelief as they say, very good movie/rpg of this type of genere does. Otherwise where's the FUN in watching the movie or playing the game if it is Always Stuck with being what is real and possible. That's why it's called Fiction. But the Funny thing about Scifi is that often what was considered Impossible in the past, just pure fiction mind you, sometimes comes true and real in the future.

Anybody who watches Star Trek knows of various things that if have not already been made possible, there are Scientist out there working right now to make them possible.

(ie.Communicators=Flip Cell phones,voice recognition software,Scientest are working on making a transporter,universal Translator,Tricorder,Stephen Hawkins is working on warp threory. In the medical feild they have made devices like the hypo-spray,the monitors above a patients bed in a hospital are based off of the one in sick bay,they are now working on a portable maedical scanner like in star trek to quick get the patient vital signs. The military has based military command centers off of the Enterprise bridge.)

But enough about all of that.

My point is we should be less concerned about minute details and more about fun when playing.
What matters with the missile is its range,if the target can dodge, and has sheilds up. Just asume its got the speed it needs to get there.

I'm not here to preach but somtimes we forget about FUN for Details. I guess That's why in the RIFT's GM's GUIDE there is a section called The Seven Deadly Sin's of Gaming. Check out p.318 Lust: Loving Details to Death.

An object in motion tends to stay in motion unless acted upon by an outside force. It will also maintain its speed (especially in space) for a time until its speed eventually drops off (unless of course it accelerates), but it will still have momentum unless it can brake/reverse thrust itself, or is stoopped by an outside force.

Actually, according to Newtonian mechanics, an accelerating object in space will continue to accelerate until it hits something, or reaches the speed of light.

[Greyaxe]

An object in motion tends to stay in motion unless acted upon by an outside force. It will also maintain its speed (especially in space) for a time until its speed eventually drops off (unless of course it accelerates), but it will still have momentum unless it can brake/reverse thrust itself, or is stoopped by an outside force.

Actually, according to Newtonian mechanics, an accelerating object in space will continue to accelerate until it hits something, or reaches the speed of light.

Which effectivly gives railguns unlimited range.

[DhAkael]

oh gods... more physics-philes...
Just roll the dice, be quiet and have fun already.
you want physics?
You want to bog the game / combat mechanics even MORE!?
Play Star Fleet Battles already.
Yeah yeah yeah, I've heard it all before "Willing susspension of disbelief go only go so far..." etc etc etc ad-naseum ad-infinitum.

The System and stats as written don't work for you? Believe me, a lot doesn't work for me either (like weapon ranges in space), but carrying on...
CHANGE 'EM!
Just be sure your players and/or GM are willing to follow along with slide-rules and physics engine simulators on their lap-tops before you start going all HARD-Sci on their fiction.
Don't be suprised if you have a rebellion to rival the one George Lucas illustrated in his 3 movies.
(("What? There were another 3 prequels? Nope sorry, they never happened" ))

[azazel1024]

An object in motion tends to stay in motion unless acted upon by an outside force. It will also maintain its speed (especially in space) for a time until its speed eventually drops off (unless of course it accelerates), but it will still have momentum unless it can brake/reverse thrust itself, or is stoopped by an outside force.

Actually, according to Newtonian mechanics, an accelerating object in space will continue to accelerate until it hits something, or reaches the speed of light.

Which effectivly gives railguns unlimited range.

Unlimited range, but still a limited effective range. Railguns are only going to be pumping out ferous or semi-ferous (or ferous jacketed) death at a certain velocity. The high end is likely to be around 20-30km/sec for a really deadly round. This kind of velocity on a 1kg round is likely to do serious damage to a WWII battleship. As a comparison, a 1kg round at 30km/sec has the same kinetic energy as a 900kg round traveling 1km/sec...basically the kinetic energy of a 16 inch shell from said WWII battleship's main gun, but it transfers its energy much faster due to its low mass. So basically something like that would be pretty likely to shatter large sections of hull plates (and we are talking like 14-18 inch belt armor plates) and send fragments shotgunning through the interior of the ship.

At any rate, for a heavy rail gun in 3g, its likely spitting out something similar to a 500-1,000g round at those 20-30km/sec velocities. That might be 'unlimited range', but practical it isn't. If we consider the acceleration of something like a big battleship in 3g to be 1 gravity (and its probably higher) then you can move it 1,100m in 15 seconds. Figure another few seconds of reaction time to realize you just got shot at and you have maybe 20 seconds that you'd need from the time of being shot at to dodge/sufficiently change course to generate a miss. That gives even a really powerful rail gun something around a maximum effective range of 900km. More then that and the odds of generating a hit, at least with a large number of rounds would be very, very low (can always spray an area and make it almost impossible to dodge every single one). That doesn't take in to account needing to perdict the course of the ship and its velocity along with possible manuevers the ship is already under going in an attempt to make it difficult to hit it, without it actively dodging.

Now if you get in to really extreme ranges where sensors are going to detect a rail gun firing on the ship you have an issue of accuracy, the most accurate weapon in the universe (well, projectile weapon) is likely to have a spread of at least several meters, if not several hundred at ranges of tens of thousands of km, making a hit difficult at best. Also when you are talking such long ranges gravity begins to come in to it deflecting the rounds unless you are in pretty deep interstellar space.

So relatively unlimited range, but if you want to be realistic about it, the maximum effective range is getting up on maybe 1,000km for a really powerful rail gun.

Of course I just go by what the books tell me.
-Matt

[Greyaxe]

An object in motion tends to stay in motion unless acted upon by an outside force. It will also maintain its speed (especially in space) for a time until its speed eventually drops off (unless of course it accelerates), but it will still have momentum unless it can brake/reverse thrust itself, or is stoopped by an outside force.

Actually, according to Newtonian mechanics, an accelerating object in space will continue to accelerate until it hits something, or reaches the speed of light.

Which effectivly gives railguns unlimited range.

Unlimited range, but still a limited effective range. Railguns are only going to be pumping out ferous or semi-ferous (or ferous jacketed) death at a certain velocity. The high end is likely to be around 20-30km/sec for a really deadly round. This kind of velocity on a 1kg round is likely to do serious damage to a WWII battleship. As a comparison, a 1kg round at 30km/sec has the same kinetic energy as a 900kg round traveling 1km/sec...basically the kinetic energy of a 16 inch shell from said WWII battleship's main gun, but it transfers its energy much faster due to its low mass. So basically something like that would be pretty likely to shatter large sections of hull plates (and we are talking like 14-18 inch belt armor plates) and send fragments shotgunning through the interior of the ship.

At any rate, for a heavy rail gun in 3g, its likely spitting out something similar to a 500-1,000g round at those 20-30km/sec velocities. That might be 'unlimited range', but practical it isn't. If we consider the acceleration of something like a big battleship in 3g to be 1 gravity (and its probably higher) then you can move it 1,100m in 15 seconds. Figure another few seconds of reaction time to realize you just got shot at and you have maybe 20 seconds that you'd need from the time of being shot at to dodge/sufficiently change course to generate a miss. That gives even a really powerful rail gun something around a maximum effective range of 900km. More then that and the odds of generating a hit, at least with a large number of rounds would be very, very low (can always spray an area and make it almost impossible to dodge every single one). That doesn't take in to account needing to perdict the course of the ship and its velocity along with possible manuevers the ship is already under going in an attempt to make it difficult to hit it, without it actively dodging.

Now if you get in to really extreme ranges where sensors are going to detect a rail gun firing on the ship you have an issue of accuracy, the most accurate weapon in the universe (well, projectile weapon) is likely to have a spread of at least several meters, if not several hundred at ranges of tens of thousands of km, making a hit difficult at best. Also when you are talking such long ranges gravity begins to come in to it deflecting the rounds unless you are in pretty deep interstellar space.

So relatively unlimited range, but if you want to be realistic about it, the maximum effective range is getting up on maybe 1,000km for a really powerful rail gun.

Of course I just go by what the books tell me.
-Matt

I think it would be a fun random encounter. Traveling in deep space and tattatatataatata sprayed with rail gun fire, from unknown source. Not unlike a meteor shower just more dense and faster (AKA more damage)

[azazel1024]

I'd think that it would be a risk in any system where a battle has occured. I'd posit that missiles have a self destruct mechanism, so that as soon as they run out of propulsive power they self detonate to reduce the risk of colateral damage (think modern day abandoned mine field or UEO) later on. Course a system is a big place, but if you pump out say several million rail gun rounds in the course of a giant battle odds aren't really quite so infintesimal that one or more might not find their way in to an innocent habitat, space station or ship.

Could be a great GM plot line to make the characters do something.

"Just as you begin to outrun the customs vessel your radar system picks something up coming inbound fast. Before your character can react a loud ringing crash can be heard repeated several times in rapid sequence. Before the sound even has a chance to subside the damage alarms start hooting and you can see that the primary coolant exchange system for the main drive has been damaged. You've only got 10 minutes of drive power left before you'll have to shut the drive down. Your only real chance is to try to get your ship back planet side and hide in the steamy jungle to repair the damage unless you relish spending 10-15 in a CCW jail for smuggling. As you land you tear through the atmosphere you see a clearing on your radar with a wierd structure at the center of it, do you head for the clearing???

....

As you inspect the damage to the hull and coolant system it looks suspciously like heavy rail gun damage, but the customs ship was never firing on you and it came in from an oblique angle to the customs ship?"
-Matt

[Malakai]

I'd think that it would be a risk in any system where a battle has occured. I'd posit that missiles have a self destruct mechanism, so that as soon as they run out of propulsive power they self detonate to reduce the risk of colateral damage (think modern day abandoned mine field or UEO) later on. Course a system is a big place, but if you pump out say several million rail gun rounds in the course of a giant battle odds aren't really quite so infintesimal that one or more might not find their way in to an innocent habitat, space station or ship.

Could be a great GM plot line to make the characters do something.

"Just as you begin to outrun the customs vessel your radar system picks something up coming inbound fast. Before your character can react a loud ringing crash can be heard repeated several times in rapid sequence. Before the sound even has a chance to subside the damage alarms start hooting and you can see that the primary coolant exchange system for the main drive has been damaged. You've only got 10 minutes of drive power left before you'll have to shut the drive down. Your only real chance is to try to get your ship back planet side and hide in the steamy jungle to repair the damage unless you relish spending 10-15 in a CCW jail for smuggling. As you land you tear through the atmosphere you see a clearing on your radar with a wierd structure at the center of it, do you head for the clearing???

....

As you inspect the damage to the hull and coolant system it looks suspciously like heavy rail gun damage, but the customs ship was never firing on you and it came in from an oblique angle to the customs ship?"
-Matt

Three Galaxies mentions something about micro-meteor showers - I think Rail-gun bursts would be similar in terms of detection. However, I do feel that the battle would either have to be extremely recent or a long, long time ago, given the distances involved, inter-planetary and inter-system distances are quite large, even for the speed of rail gun rounds.

[KLM]

Just a side note:

Railguns are only going to be pumping out ferous or semi-ferous (or ferous jacketed) death at a certain velocity. The high end is likely to be around 20-30km/sec for a really deadly round.
-Matt

Electromagnetic railgun rounds do not need to be ferrous. Conductor, preferably superconductor material yes,
ferrous (ferromagnetic) not needed.

Besides, in the 3Galaxies, people punch holes into each other with GR guns - ie. gravity propelled slugs.

And since the Scorpion's main gun cannot be dodged more easily from its max. range of 24 kms, than from
point blank, I guess the flight time is around half a sec - which gives us a velocity of around 40 km/sec.

And the gun (presumably a GR-1000 ->2 tons, plus a ton of ammo) is neatly packed into a 10,m long, 6 ton
fighter... Battleship guns anyone?
------------

That said, slugthrowers do have a limited effective range, even throught slug will fly thru the galaxy
with time.

Adios
KLM

[azazel1024]

Yeah probably. Afterall most battles occur near a planet, or at least that is the most likely spot. Interstellar space is vast and not much to contest out there. At 30km/sec a railgun round will travel out of Cislunar space in something less then 2 hours, Earth to Mars in 20 days and Earth to Pluto in 4 1/2 years (at Pluto's closest approach).

So yeah, right on, either pretty recently, or probably a long time ago.
-Matt

[azazel1024]

Well the issue here is that Palladium's combat system doesn't work from dodging at range. Look at a bow weapon, sure dodging an arrow at 50ft isn't really easier then at 15ft as the flight time is so low, but dodging at 200ft is easier then at say 40-50ft, yet that isn't taken in to account anywhere in a bonus to dodge (or a penalty to strike). Just like a weapon has no penalties to strike at any range up to its maximum effective range, yet trust me it is much harder to hit something with a .30-30 at 300yds with a quick shot then it is to strike a target at 50yds with a quick shot. Reall Palladium should have a ranged system of point blank, short, medium and long range with say a bonus to strike at point blank, no modifier at short, a slight penalty at medium and a bigger penalty at long range and it varying depending on the weapon (with say a gun maybe +2/0/-1/-3, with a bow weapon maybe +2/0/-2/-5).

At any rate, even a full second doesn't allow much dodge time, that is one full second in which you have to realize that you've been shot at, react to dodge and then move far enough to generate a miss. In hand to hand combat that is plenty of time because assumedly you are paying pretty close attention to what the other bloke is doing, in dog fighting your attention is probably not 100% on your enemy and if he is shooting at you, its probably 50% on him and 50% on your controls and what you are doing.

Your correct in that a railgun just needs a conductor, but I tend to think of railguns in rifts as actually being coil guns and not rail guns. There is no mention of rail wear or anything similar in rifts, even using megadamage materials there'd be some sort of rail wear along with pretty extreme heat generated by a rail gun. Also a rail gun at this powers and velocities is likely to vaporize a good portion of the projectile (well, a few percent at least and leave the remaining part extremely hot) meaning that the projectiles, even at incredible speeds are going to leave a trail that would put a tracer round to shame. A coil gun, even a powerful one produces less heat and less projectile heating and also has no effective barrel wear. So in this case I tend to think of rail guns in rifts as coil guns (a coil gun is going to be much more capable of rapid fire then a rail gun with the extreme heating that a rail gun undergoes).

So in this case, well at least if it was a coil gun, it would need some sort of magnetic or ferromagnetic projectile. Its easy enough to wrap a tungsten or osmium penetrator in iron or use an iron driving band. Heck it could be a subcaliber round with a sabot that is iron impregnated plastic, though I doubt that model would work well at these velocities as the sabot itself could pose quite a bit of danger to anyone remotely near the gun.
-Matt

[Scorpion Leader]

oh gods... more physics-philes...
Just roll the dice, be quiet and have fun already.
you want physics?
You want to bog the game / combat mechanics even MORE!?
Play Star Fleet Battles already.
Yeah yeah yeah, I've heard it all before "Willing susspension of disbelief go only go so far..." etc etc etc ad-naseum ad-infinitum.

The System and stats as written don't work for you? Believe me, a lot doesn't work for me either (like weapon ranges in space), but carrying on...
CHANGE 'EM!
Just be sure your players and/or GM are willing to follow along with slide-rules and physics engine simulators on their lap-tops before you start going all HARD-Sci on their fiction.
Don't be suprised if you have a rebellion to rival the one George Lucas illustrated in his 3 movies.
(("What? There were another 3 prequels? Nope sorry, they never happened" ))

I'm really not that into physics myself really, and my point was like yours, if you read my post in its entirety, is that we should be having Fun and not worring about such mundane details as missile speed and infinite range etc,etc.

The Palladium Megaverse System is not the only Game system plagued with these problems. Even the Star Wars,Traveler,Star Trek, the Old TSR Star Frontiers, Gamma World, Battletech, Firefly, Battlestar Galctica RPG's to name a few have ranges and speeds. RPG's aren't design for Reality and Physics, they are designed for playabilty and Fun. They stick to General Terms and Like Capt. Barbosa said the Rules are more like a set of Guidelines. This is also reflected in the Rifts Ulimate Edition and Rift's GM's Guide.

Your right, and it was my point also, that it just bogs down the game by getting into too much detail.

Also as I pointed out Palladium Books Covered This Subject and Many others in the SEVEN DEADLY SIN's OF GAMING in the RIFT'S GM's GUIDE.

Also my point on suspention of disbelief is that to ENJOY a GOOD RPG or SCIFI MOVIE , one can't concern one's self overly in the details of what really happens in reality, you have to suspend your disbelief or the Game or Movie will not be enjoyable (no fun Factor).

Can sound be transmitted in space? Can you see Laser Beams or due they make sounds other than from the machinery used to generate them? Would you see explosions from space Combat? Due fighters need to make wide swooping turns in space like jets flying in an atmophere? THE ANWSER IS NO!!

But do WE LOVE this STUFF when we see it on the big screen or act it out during a RPG secession, YOU SURE BET WE DO! It's part of what gives these things their character.

If you take that Cool stuff (we come to expect and see) Away and stuck to Reality, There's no longer any WOW to it all! It now becomes just plain Dull and unenspiring.

So after this long winded explation agian I hope you see I'm with you, not agianst you.
So let's just have Fun and forget about the Slide Rules!!!

Braden if your still with us what do you think?

[DhAkael]

So after this long winded explation agian I hope you see I'm with you, not agianst you.
So let's just have Fun and forget about the Slide Rules!!!

Oh, I wasn't making that post to YOU sir, but to a few of the others who posted on this thread (the usual suspects, who will remain nameless to protect the guilty). Sorry if it came across as such. It was more a general ranting.

[azazel1024]

Guilty as charged.

Really I try to examine the reality of things. I use the palladium system as is, or close to it. I think I mentioned I fiddle with ranges/speeds a bit, but that is it. I don't want hard science when I do my role playing, though sometimes suspension of disbelief can only go so far when something really ridiculous steps in (I honestly can't think of an example off hand). Sometimes people mention "well, really it should be like this if it was realistic!" Okay, you want to play that game, well really this is they way it would be if it were realistic. But its not, its an RPG and I am okay with that (except on alternate tuesdays).

I'd still dearly love to see a few tweaks here and there, like I mentioned with a weapon range system with point blank, short, medium and long range bonuses/penalties.
-Matt

[KLM]

Hi there!

I'd still dearly love to see a few tweaks here and there, like I mentioned with a weapon range system with point blank, short, medium and long range bonuses/penalties.
-Matt

That would be a bit difficult, since we have to differentiate projectile, directed energy and (guided) missile weapons.

Just my two cents.

Adios
KLM

[azazel1024]

Certainly, but my thought is that each and every weapon has it listed under it.

So for example you'd see something like (making up the stats since I don't have the book in front of me).

NG-L5
Weight: 12lbs
Damage: 3d6md per shot
Range: 50/400/1,200/2,000ft
Hit modifier: +2/0/-1/-3
Rate of Fire: Single shot, burst or spray
Payload: 20 shots per short e-clip, 30 shots per long e-clip
Cost: 25,000cr.

So instead of simply having a range, or rules for types of weapons, each and every weapon has included ranges for point blank, short, medium and long as well as the bonuses/penalties to strike at each range. A couple of other RPGs have this and it works well.
-Matt

[KLM]

I guess hitting with a directed energy weapon isn't harder at longer ranges (ie. within "human" distances),
but damage is reduced as the beam loses coherency.

With projectile weapons, damage gets reduced in a lesser degree (especially in space) but achieving a hit
is much harder, due the flight time of bullets.

Missiles... Are a big can of worms, like flight time, guidance mode (ie. FoF or paint? - just to keep simple...)

And so on...

Adios
KLM

[azazel1024]

At extreme ranges hitting with a directed energy weapon is harder. First off all your trying to aim at a really tiny target. At 100km a 20m starfighter appears as big as a 2cm target would at 10m (IE really, really tiny) just a hair of beam divurgence is going to throw it off, even with computer aided targetting, etc. Also at those distances, even with relativistic speeds for a directed energy weapon, or the speed of light for a laser a target can move. Very little, but in that tiny fraction of a second a starfighter moving at around Mach 10 will move about 1m in the time it takes to fire the laser and the time it would arrive. If glancing hit would have been achieved or you didn't properly lead the target your likely to miss.

At any rate, I'd say that most energy weapons would likely see at most a -1 at long range (if nothing else a really tiny target to try to hit, even if there is no actual gravity/air resistance to compete with). Reduced damage should occur at more extreme ranges as well, but for the sake of things I think that can be ignored.

To me I never pictured plasma weapons moving at relativistic speeds. I pictures them like a rail gun that basically fire a projectile that was superheated to high enough temperatures to turn it in to a plasma. Basically say using a laser to vaporize a projectile (copper, lead, cadmium-telluride, maybe even just air) and then accelerate it using either rails like a rail gun or coils like a coil gun at extremely high speeds. The damage was done by a combination of kinetic and thermal energy. Particle beam weapons would of course fire a stream of neutrally charged particles (dueterium) at near relativistic speeds. Ion beams would do the same as a particle beam, but would fire lighter charged particles (ionized hydrogen).

Of course the canon issue there is that Particle beam, plasma (except the Naruni plasma cartridge weapons) and ion beam weapons only use e-clips for power, no physical ammo.

Anyway, I digress a little. I agree that energy weapons would in general, to make it easier, see only a very slight penalty to strike at longer ranges due to firing at a small target (bonus to strike a big old ship/target are already in the rules so you don't have to worry about monkeying around with that).

Projectile weapons you'd have to contend with air resistance and gravity close to a planet. Though even further from a planet unless you are way out in interplanetary space you'll have to contend with gravity. Geosynchronous orbit you still have to deal with gravity that is something around abouts as strong as the surface gravity of the moon or somewhat less, that will deflect projectiles.

With missile weapons I'd think at their longer ranges you'd still see a penalty probably, or at least missile weapons would have a different range table, maybe short/long or short/medium/long. Depending on the missile it is either relying on the launching vessels loaded telemetry and maybe some basic sensors of its own, which means the longer/further the flight time the more likely it is to have a shoodier time to hit the target. For some missiles they can take mid course and terminal updates from the launching ship as well as have better sensors, penetration aids and manuevering jets. Those types (probably cruise missiles and maybe long range missiles) would probably see less penalty then you'd think. A minimissile probably isn't going to see any penalty to strike over its short range. A short range missile might see a small penalty at its extreme range (maybe anything over 8/16 miles (atm/space)), a medium range missile would probably also see a small penalty at longer ranges (maybe 30/60 miles (atm/space)) same with a long range and cruise missiles. Probably only small, like -1 or -2 to strike.

Just some thougths on the matter.
-Matt

[glitterboy2098]

originally i had though myself to just multiply all ranges by a set value..since it was simpler. but recently i've been thinking about how to take my Cinematic realism rules and my phase world technical manual (which was written with braden's input regarding aspects of Fleet's), and get them published as an official palladium suppliment.

to do so, i'd need to solve the rather low ranges in a manner that doesn't alter the stats. what i've come up with is that thel isted ranges in space are actually range brackets, so to speak. firing beyond them carries increasingly high to-strike penalties, based on multiples of thel isted range.

so for example, the 1000 mile range of the CCW's big lasers would just be the distance they can fire without penalty. but they could fire farther. but out ot 2000 miles you have a -1 to strike, to 3000 miles a -2, to 4000 miles a -3, etc. thus you could fire those lasers out to say, 20,000 miles...but you'd have a -19 to strike, before any other penalties or bonuses. this brings the ranges more into line with reality, but also encourages ships to get in close form ore accurate shots...preserving the star-warsy type feel of the battles, where ships are practically touching while they exchange fire. (in a sense, this is similar to star trek's dynamic. trek's weapon could reach hundreds of thousands of KM, but we usually saw them fighting much closer. in one episode of TNG, Riker actually points out to a klingon captain that by closing range, you reduce reaction times and thus accuracy..)

[Esckey]

so for example, the 1000 mile range of the CCW's big lasers would just be the distance they can fire without penalty. but they could fire farther. but out ot 2000 miles you have a -1 to strike, to 3000 miles a -2, to 4000 miles a -3, etc. thus you could fire those lasers out to say, 20,000 miles...but you'd have a -19 to strike

This is how I've always played it. Most of the weapons have a "effective" range. I also dumb down the damage die energy weapons, depending on type (ex:plasma gets cut down to 0 MDC quicker the a Laser weapon)



While the topic of ship building is still around, somewhat...

I've used converted cargo ships in my campaigns a couple of times, but mostly as Q ships or pirate ships. For a warship, even one that hangs back they are just too lightly armed and armored along with too low of a speed to keep up with a fleet. Also since they aren't designed for launching and recovering fighters it slows their operational deployment and recovery

In a world of VTOL spacecraft just what sort of equipment and specialty items separates a real carrier from a makeshift one?

[KLM]

In a world of VTOL spacecraft just what sort of equipment and specialty items separates a real carrier from a makeshift one?

Well, a stealth/TW/phase fighter popping up and sending a pair of cruise missiles into the ship, from point blank range...

That is usually a good separator.

The point is, that true combat ships are designed to withstand enemy fire - in this regard the 3G carriers
are more like early carriers, which sometimes had to face guns.

And of course, ordenance misfiring in the hangars of a makeshift carrier is probably the last thing in the ship's
life.

Adios
KLM

[Esckey]

Well I was thinking of structurally built into the ship from the get go. But you make some good points. You would probably need two bays one for launch and one for recovery and the munitions storage would have to built into the ship. Other things would be ATC, some kind of actual recovery system for ships unable to make it back and for the bigger ships possibly a full scale factory. A Packmaster a year out in war probably took some fighter losses

[azazel1024]

Most points have been hit.

Others are, munition storage. Fighter weapons tend not to all be stored right where the fighters are. This makes for bad damage management if hit. The weapons on a well designed carrier are going to be stored in armored bunkers deep in the ship and delivered through armored tubes/delivery systems to prevent battle damage from touching off hundreds or thousands of missiles. This is going to require serious surgery and reeingineering a freighter to accomodate. The battle damage issue has been hit on (military carrier being designed structurally and hull armoring to take battle damage, plus redundant control systems, etc).

I got the idea that dedicated carriers are likely to have some kind of GR launch 'catapults' to enable the ships to punch out fighters at a fairly high speed instead of having to accelerate out of a launch bay.

A number of systems could be retrofitted on to a civillian ship, but I would imagine it is going to increase cost more then having the systems built in originally and it is likely to have design compromises (IE a squadron's launch bays might be broken up instead of all being together because the primary coolant runs pass right between some of them, making it more difficult for the entire squadron to scramble to their fighters in the event of an emergency launch).
-Matt

[Scorpion Leader]

So after this long winded explation agian I hope you see I'm with you, not agianst you.
So let's just have Fun and forget about the Slide Rules!!!

Oh, I wasn't making that post to YOU sir, but to a few of the others who posted on this thread (the usual suspects, who will remain nameless to protect the guilty). Sorry if it came across as such. It was more a general ranting.

Hey that's okay. No harm no foul. At least we didn't get locked and i hope we don't!
I went though enough of that over on the Robotech Forum where there are alot of fellow gamers
who like to kill joy the Game System with all it's flaws and getting too technical about what is realistic and what's not.
Like you said, i've said, and Palladium has said the rules are but guidelines, don't like something change it with a house rule.
I frankly find the Palladium system fun and easy to play and works fine 90%+ of the time. There are more than enough thechnical games out there, and they really aren't that fun. Heck i've stopped playing D&D because it started to get to complicated infavor of the Palladium Fantasy RPG. Palladium Fantasy is on 2nd edition rules D&D is now on what 4th edition now, soon it will probably be 4.5 then 5.0, kinda say's something don't it? The D&D/AD&D i remember back in the 80's is a faded memory now. Long Live The Megaverse!!!

[Scorpion Leader]

Well not to beat the dead horse on the question of ranges and realism, but everyone should read the Phase World Source Book,Rifts Ultimate Ed.,and Rift's Game Masters Guide where the Author and Game Designer explain the reasons why a more technical system was not used. In fact the Game Designer even explains in the GM's Guide that the Game system (and I remember it well,when it was) was more technical/realistic and why he changed it to a simpler down and dirty system.

(The only area that is still complicated in Rifts is magic,especially Techno-wizardry. But the Game Designer commented on that as well in Rift's Ultimate Ed. saying he'd would of liked to seen a simpler system)

But However I have done some thinking on this subject and have come up with a system that might just work:

Point blank Range: Automatic Strike/Hit.
Short Range: Roll a 5 or better to Strike/Hit.
Medium Range: Roll a 8 or better to Strike/Hit.
Longe Range: Roll a 10 or better to Strike/Hit.
(sometimes 12 in some cases, GM's discreation applies)
All strike,dodge,size,etc. bonuses and pentalies still apply.

The only thing left is to figure out is how the various ranges are divided out.

So what do you think?

[Scorpion Leader]

Hey guy's you know one thing I never got with Phase World is why it was deemed necessary to have a Seperate Fighter Model/Design shall we say, just becuase you stick a Couple of Missiles (granted big ones/cruise missles) on a Figther and reduce its speed? When the Missiles are Luanched performance would go back to Normal, and when in space there is no Air Drag to Reduce performance due to having the Big Heavy missiles attached to the fighter. Also except for the speed issue there is no difference between the standard model and attack versions of the fighter in performance,weapons,or equipment/avionics,etc..Noted examples being the Scorpion and Black Eagle Fighters. This is not a game mechanics realism problem, but a pure no brainer common sence one. So why Bother with a seperate models? These fighters are advanced technology where such a dividtion does not hardly seem necessary.

[azazel1024]

I agree on both accounts. It wouldn't be to hard to come up with basic rules like point blank is 1/10th maximum range, 1/4 for short, 1/2 for medium, and up to the full range for long. Maybe you tinker with it for different weapon types or maybe you just keep it the same across the board.

For different models, no reason why it should be different. That said, there should be differences if you really want FB versions. The FB version of the Scorpion and Black Eagle should really be 2 seaters with a seperate weapon/sensor operate to take the load off the pilot as well as maybe more advanced sensors and targetting computers to go along with that cruise missile package.

Also, the Scorpion at least should have a 2 seater training version, that or the CCW and TGE need a trainer fighter. That is one thing I don't like about the TGE, one and only one type of fighter. I'd like to see at least one or two additional types (with one having a training option), the TGE is likely to have at least a dedicated heavy fighter/bomber and the CCW is as well.
-Matt

[KLM]

Hi there!

Actually, very heavy guns might have a difficult time hitting targets at point blank...

---
As for missile armament I always felt that outer weapon hardpoints are to vulnerable.
Not versus enemy fire - but in the sense, that ordenance will sufer from cosmic radiation,
micrometeorites, atmospheric reentry, direct sunlight... and other hazards of space.

---

And yes, tons of fighter types are needed, for independent system, local powers
(within the CCW and even the TGE), you name it....

Adios
KLM

[rat_bastard]

Just got my copy today...

quick issue:
the Pilot's survival kit: it costs 15,000 credits and comes with a pse scanner with a bio upgrade-

which costs over a million credits

typo, or did the cost of scanners lose 3 zeros?

[Braden Campbell]

Heh. Ask Mr Marker on that one...

[rat_bastard]

Heh. Ask Mr Marker on that one...

I'm gonna avoid asking Mr Marker about anything Palladium related for a little while.

[Scorpion Leader]

I agree on both accounts. It wouldn't be to hard to come up with basic rules like point blank is 1/10th maximum range, 1/4 for short, 1/2 for medium, and up to the full range for long. Maybe you tinker with it for different weapon types or maybe you just keep it the same across the board.

For different models, no reason why it should be different. That said, there should be differences if you really want FB versions. The FB version of the Scorpion and Black Eagle should really be 2 seaters with a seperate weapon/sensor operate to take the load off the pilot as well as maybe more advanced sensors and targetting computers to go along with that cruise missile package.

Also, the Scorpion at least should have a 2 seater training version, that or the CCW and TGE need a trainer fighter. That is one thing I don't like about the TGE, one and only one type of fighter. I'd like to see at least one or two additional types (with one having a training option), the TGE is likely to have at least a dedicated heavy fighter/bomber and the CCW is as well.
-Matt

My thoughts exactly!! I think an FB version of the Black Eagle with a weapons officer and tail gunner would be really cool !! It already seats three anyway. Change the loadout to include more cruise missles (at least four total) and dump ethier one of the guns (probablly the lasers) or the mini missiles,then add a tail gun and some more sophisticated sensors, Wa-la a true Fighter Bomber/Attack Fighter!! (even better if its got FTL) What do you think?

Then agian a Katana can already be equipped like this. All the other fighters should have been made more like it.
-Brent

[azazel1024]

Sounds good to me.

Also a reconisance fighter. Either built in or carrying a sensor pack have much more powerful/extended range sensors. Something that is good at burning through stealth.
-Matt

[ZINO]

Guys;

You can make up whatever kind of vessels you want. These are just guidlelines to ensure game ballance across the power blocs, not hard and fast rules. If you want to build a capital ship that can volley off 140+ cruise missiles in seven seconds, then do it. Just be aware that it will violate treaties, or incite panic in others, or be the target of sabatoage of theft, or be a prototype, or an ancient relic perhaps best forgotten, or anything.

Like I wrote in the book, feel free to deviate from the established norms... but be ready to have a good story behind your creation to explain it.

1)nice statement ,but a player who got lucky is starting a space company to make a gunship but in shuttle size version i think is 200 or 3000 feet in length ( and starting to interst but not me )
2)adding stealth and cloaking he has test run about three types weight standard 15,000 tons

3)by the way WOW all of you post has surprised me love it with question and answer you guys and girls are great i humble by your post

hey what about gunship like fighter size or shuttle size?????????

[Scorpion Leader]

Sounds good to me.

Also a reconisance fighter. Either built in or carrying a sensor pack have much more powerful/extended range sensors. Something that is good at burning through stealth.
-Matt

Yah,
That would be awesomely cool too!!(would have FTL for Long Range Recon of course??)
-Brent

[Scorpion Leader]

-Azazel 1024-
Matt I for got to say I agree on your assessment on how to divide out the Ranges.
Now lets hope that the folks at palladium make the change using the Ideas you and I gave.
-Brent

[azazel1024]

We can certainly hope they do that in some revised version. Its a relatively simple change to the combat system and doesn't require a massive rewrite of every book, but it makes it a bit more realistic and beyond that simply a better system IMHO.

I mean, really why would shooting someone with a scoped rifle at 100ft be just as easy as hitting them at 2,000ft at the very edge of the maximum range of the rifle? Or heck, even at 500ft.

Now if they do that, I'll start lobbying for movement penalties to strike. I mean, heck even with a speed of light laser its harder to hit something on the move then standing still (have to keep fairly steady tracking, etc even if you don't really need to learn to lead something).

My proposal 4 'speed' penalties. Standing still, no penalty. People speeds, -1 to strike, ground vehicle speeds -2 to strike, air vehicle speeds -3 to strike. Or hell, just use an actual speed band, like say 1-44spd -1 to strike, 45-220spd -2 to strike and 221 and above -3 to strike. Halve the penalty rounded down for energy weapons (IE no penalty until 45spd and then only -1 from there on up).

Finally, penalties to strike on the run (ranged combat only). No penalty standing still, -1 walking, -3 running and -5 sprinting. From a moving vehicle -2 to strike unless using a stabalized mount.
-Matt

[glitterboy2098]

actually penalties for movement and target movement can be found in RUE. it's generally a bad idea to apply them to space travel though, since even at the absurdly slow listings for phase world ships, the penalties owuld make them quite unhittable. i usually assuem that in space, you don't have penalties for velocity, just accelleration or decelleration, and reletive bearing. though i'm still working out the specific penalties though. generally though, the best shots occur after matching the same course and accelelration as the target. which when combined with the range modification i listed before, creates a combat visual not too far from what you see in movies (ships pulling up alongside at fairly 'close' ranges and exchanging fire. close for space anyway.)

[azazel1024]

DANGIT!

I need to get RUE, I still just have the original core book.

I'd agree on space, it isn't speed that really matters (though it matters a bit), its mostly acceleration, jinking, etc.

I think somebody needs to come up with an actual dog fighting guide for PW. Throw together say 20 or 30 combat manuevers that you can attempt (base them off real ones, like an Immelmann turn, etc). Then give piloting bonuses or penalties to attempt and then what bonus or penalty it'll give you/your opponent in combat.

Also set it up so that you HAVE to manuever to get on a person's tail while dog fighting to hit them, unless doing a high speed chicken pass while attacking, both ships cannot attack each other at the sametime unless one has tail guns. In real life and frankly in a game where most fighter weapons are forward firing weapons when you dogfight, other then head on closing there is an agressor and an agressee (I just wanted to say agressee). Only the agressor can fire on the other fighter as the other one can't point their forward weapons at the other fighter (of course except for tail guns/PD weapons).

Example, maybe a Kulbit manuever (you basic do a quick loop attempting to get your opponent to overshoot you). Your oponent can make an oposing dog fighting skill roll to stay with you or prevent being overshot, negating the manuever bonuses. If you do succeed you are in the agressor position meaning you can fire your forward facing weapons at your opponent and you gain +2 to strike due to suprise/advantageous position. Just an example of one manuever. Makes dog fighting not only more worth while, but also fun (oh and realistic).

If you put together a decent 10-15 page guide with manuevers and rules it really would not be that hard to both role play and do the rolls for. It would make it a lot more exciting, fun, realistic and important to work on dogfighting skills, have fighters with dogfighting bonuses, etc. Oh and almost as importantly it would make the quality of the pilot more important then the fighter they are in (within reason).

I'd also set it up for other rules, such as the faster fighter always provides a +10% bonus when rolling dogfighting rolls in combat against an opponent or something similar (again the make it somewhat more realistic)
-Matt

[glitterboy2098]

alot of atmospheric dogfighting movies don't work in space though. they rely on a two dimensional bound version of 3D thinking. IE: that there is a "ground" somewhere all planes stay oriented reletive too.

space "dogfighting" manuvers would be things like the skewturn (twisting your ship onto a new course without cutting the drive first), which basically "slides" you to a bearing the reverse of your original one, and cutting speed at the same time.
or cutting your accelleration and pivoting everywhich way to bring your guns to bear at tangents to your course.
or the use of retro thrusters or similar means to suddenly decellerate without doing a tun-over. which drops your velocity reletive to others, possibly screwing up an enemy long range shot or causing a following enemy to get close so you can flip and shoot them.

basically fighting more like the star furies in babylon 5, or the vipers in battlestar galactica.

[azazel1024]

I certainly agree, but that still leaves a lot of dogfighting manuevers possible and it still has an agressor role. You can certainly slip and shot at someone behind you after cutting the drive keeping your current velocity and vector, though that also leaves you at least temporarily vulnerable to a shot as you are no longer a dodging target...though simply ceasing to maneuver might throw off a shot as well (probably not to likely).

A lot of atmospheric dogfighting manuevers would still work with a reactionless drive (especially high G reactionless drives) such as CG drives. Now with reaction drives things would be radically different.
-Matt

[ZINO]

wow nice statements/post everyone i am humble to read your post and i will keep trying and posting new ideas even if they are corny

[GT]

One thing I never could understand at 8 million a copy, the new Golgan fighter is said to be expensive? When its next closest non shielded counter parts cost 30 million for a Scorpion and 47 million for a Draygon Star Hawk.

[sHaka]

One thing I never could understand at 8 million a copy, the new Golgan fighter is said to be expensive? When its next closest non shielded counter parts cost 30 million for a Scorpion and 47 million for a Draygon Star Hawk.

Perhaps the 8 million price tag is expensive for Golgans?

[azazel1024]

One thing I never could understand at 8 million a copy, the new Golgan fighter is said to be expensive? When its next closest non shielded counter parts cost 30 million for a Scorpion and 47 million for a Draygon Star Hawk.

We are talking about a galactic polity that is about as backwards politically as is possible and still remain a cohessive empire.

My guess is their tax collection system and GDP are a bit subpar compared to the galactic norm. The Golgan Republik is also much smaller than most of the big gov'ts. So much less buying power. 8 million credits is, per capita, probably a much bigger expenditure than 50-60 million credits is for the CCW, TGE or UWW.
-Matt

[Braden Campbell]

We are talking about a galactic polity that is about as backwards politically as is possible and still remain a cohessive empire.
-Matt

I just wanted to say how much I love the Golgan for just that reason - they are a breath of fresh air in a setting packed with every concievable sci-fi trope. As a culture, they are unique, often laughable, and under the right circumstances, deadly. They're like Austro-Hungary... in space... with lasers and aliens.

BTW, if all goes well, their first attempt at extra-galactic colonization should appear in Thundercloud Galaxy.