[Spaceships] Combat Examples?

[apoc527]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Point defense can't be modeled reasonably as just an effective skill level. Even in theory, probably, because you need more resolution than 3d6 provides to support some levels of defense you'd want! Also, determining the 'effective skill' is decidedly non-trivial, because it depends on the numbers of weapons and missiles involved in addition to the usual factors that modify attack rolls.

And since getting hit by 25 GURPS Spaceships missiles will typically reduce a ship to confetti, in any 'survivable' engagement for the as-written weapons you're likely to wind up in the pinch of needing to dice out whether an expected 0.1 hits actually means getting hit on this volley or not getting hit.

The Honorverse has a number of conceits set up such that one missile is far from lethal. First, all missiles are x-ray laser warheads, not kinetic energy weapons. Second, the impeller drives used by all ships produce invulnerable bands of stressed space wedges above and below the ship, so many missiles just bounce off harmlessly, leaving a relatively small window for effective attack.

I would suggest that any kind of GURPS Spaceships battle with missiles that must directly strike their target to be effective, you'd see very different tactics emerge. I would prefer most missiles to be proximity weapons or laserheads...assume that directly guiding the weapon into contact with your target is too hard over long ranges and/or is too easy to spoof with jammers or something. Unless of course you want one-hit kills on your space battleships!

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by apoc527

The Honorverse has a number of conceits set up such that one missile is far from lethal. First, all missiles are x-ray laser warheads, not kinetic energy weapons. Second, the impeller drives used by all ships produce invulnerable bands of stressed space wedges above and below the ship, so many missiles just bounce off harmlessly, leaving a relatively small window for effective attack.

And, critically, kinetic energy weapons (or impeller-damage weapons, as the missiles' drive wedges could destroy ships pretty well) wouldn't work in most cases, thanks to the 'sidewall' energy shields which would do quite catastrophic things to a projectile coming in contact with them. (So-called contact nukes are canonically semi-standoff shaped nuclear blasts, not actually placing the warhead in contact with the hull.)

Even so, it seems like somebody was probably missing a bet in never using no-warhead shots on the open bow and stern. A fading possibility, since the current ships can also generate a bow-wall.

Originally Posted by apoc527

I would suggest that any kind of GURPS Spaceships battle with missiles that must directly strike their target to be effective, you'd see very different tactics emerge. I would prefer most missiles to be proximity weapons or laserheads...assume that directly guiding the weapon into contact with your target is too hard over long ranges and/or is too easy to spoof with jammers or something. Unless of course you want one-hit kills on your space battleships!

For worthwhile standoff, laser heads only work if your missiles have a very good idea of where the target is. And warheads with enough 'blam' to make a really useful proximity blast are in the continent-demolishing range.

I'd suggest attributing the need for standoff warheads to close-in defense technologies that are so good they really do make the swarm of KK warheads option simply hopeless.

[apoc527]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

I'd suggest attributing the need for standoff warheads to close-in defense technologies that are so good they really do make the swarm of KK warheads option simply hopeless.

This isn't even an unrealistic or superscience-required idea, either IMO. If you can make lasers and AIs, you can make super accurate point defense lasers. If you can do that, you can probably make highly effective tracking radars. If you can do both, you can probably very accurately predict which pieces of weapon will impact you and which will not. Vaporize accordingly. Stand-off weapons bypass this level of effective close-in defense because (1) they don't need to impact and thus any of them can be dangerous, and (2) the point defense lasers lose power with range, probably fairly rapidly, if they are small and designed to engage only targets that will collide.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by apoc527

This isn't even an unrealistic or superscience-required idea, either IMO. If you can make lasers and AIs, you can make super accurate point defense lasers. If you can do that, you can probably make highly effective tracking radars. If you can do both, you can probably very accurately predict which pieces of weapon will impact you and which will not. Vaporize accordingly. Stand-off weapons bypass this level of effective close-in defense because (1) they don't need to impact and thus any of them can be dangerous, and (2) the point defense lasers lose power with range, probably fairly rapidly, if they are small and designed to engage only targets that will collide.

Of course, if you take the 'close defense guns are just that good' angle, it has implications that propagate to other parts of the setting. Mixing this with riflemen who look like they stepped out of 2015 except maybe their rifles shoot something special isn't a bit dubious for plausibility.

Light lag can also help standoff warheads. Decoys might. (ECM seems dubious since simple telescopic spotting is more likely than radar and probably can't be dazzled effectively.)

Laser fall-off, well, bigger lasers with more range are always possible...and may be present as part of the ships' offensive battery.

[apoc527]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Of course, if you take the 'close defense guns are just that good' angle, it has implications that propagate to other parts of the setting. Mixing this with riflemen who look like they stepped out of 2015 except maybe their rifles shoot something special isn't a bit dubious for plausibility.

Maybe the targeting software requires really powerful computers that need to be powered by fusion or something. Or maybe all of it just can't fit in anything much smaller than a super-tank. Either way, there's always room for infantrymen!

Light lag can also help standoff warheads. Decoys might. (ECM seems dubious since simple telescopic spotting is more likely than radar and probably can't be dazzled effectively.)

Laser fall-off, well, bigger lasers with more range are always possible...and may be present as part of the ships' offensive battery.

The intelligence of the missiles can make a big difference too and the spoofability of them. It's a given that a missile will not have the power or computational prowess to compete with shipborne computer and jamming systems.

As for laser fall-off, I'd assume that larger lasers are part of hte offensive battery--the point defense ones would be highly specialized to maximize focus at relatively point-blank ranges.

Ironically, much like in the Honorverse...

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by apoc527

Maybe the targeting software requires really powerful computers that need to be powered by fusion or something. Or maybe all of it just can't fit in anything much smaller than a super-tank. Either way, there's always room for infantrymen!

But that's taking it way out of the domain of the realistic. We know computation is not that hard.

Originally Posted by apoc527

The intelligence of the missiles can make a big difference too and the spoofability of them. It's a given that a missile will not have the power or computational prowess to compete with shipborne computer and jamming systems.

But again, seeing ships in space is easy. Even seeing missiles in space is easy. Honorverse jamming is...hard to explain.

Originally Posted by apoc527

As for laser fall-off, I'd assume that larger lasers are part of hte offensive battery--the point defense ones would be highly specialized to maximize focus at relatively point-blank ranges.

Ironically, much like in the Honorverse...

But there's no reason those lasers (or intermediate-sized weapons) can't be used to engage distant missiles.

[Fred Brackin]

I hope the OP will note that all this utterly off-topic i.e. not based in combat experience "problems" with missiles and PD come from people who can't get their House Rules to work the way they want.

Or even _decide_ how they want those rules to work. All very theoretical.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by Fred Brackin

I hope the OP will note that all this utterly off-topic i.e. not based in combat experience "problems" with missiles and PD come from people who can't get their House Rules to work the way they want.

Or even _decide_ how they want those rules to work. All very theoretical.

Besides the part where I designed ships, which you can find on the forum, and then concluded that actually I wasn't crazy enough to game out anything with them. (And am not convinced that the rules are actually well-enough defined to allow me to if I were willing.)

The Honor Harrington sidetrack is a sidetrack.

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Besides the part where I designed ships, which you can find on the forum, and then concluded that actually I wasn't crazy enough to game out anything with them. (And am not convinced that the rules are actually well-enough defined to allow me to if I were willing.)

The Honor Harrington sidetrack is a sidetrack.

The OP wants _experiences_ and not opinions well-informed or not. It's all a sidetrack.

[sir_pudding]

Originally Posted by apoc527

This is always the issue...if anyone figures out how to game out the Honorverse, let me know.

Convert Saganami Island Tactical Simulator to use GURPS skills...