Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > Traveller

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 04-25-2018, 06:01 PM   #1
SteveS
 
Join Date: Nov 2013
Location: near Seattle WA USA
Default hardpoints, turrets, etc.

I recall that in classic Traveller, each turret required a hardpoint, each bay reduced the number of possible hardpoints by ten, and a spinal mount also reduced the number of possible hardpoints. A hardpoint didn't need to have a turret installed, but turrets required hardpoints. Ships were limited to one hardpoint per 100 dtons. [Correction in bold.]

Is that the case in GURPS Traveller? I've been puzzling over my copy of Starships for a while, and it looks like hardpoints are surface features unrelated to turrets there. However, the limit of one turret per 100 dtons still applies, and is still reduced by ten per bay, and by one per 100 dtons of spinal mount.

Am I reading things correctly?

Last edited by SteveS; 04-27-2018 at 09:38 AM. Reason: Left out a word.
SteveS is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2018, 12:13 PM   #2
Pomphis
 
Join Date: Oct 2004
Default Re: hardpoints, turrets, etc.

Yes. Page 19.
Pomphis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-26-2018, 08:41 PM   #3
ak_aramis
 
ak_aramis's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2010
Location: Alsea, OR
Default Re: hardpoints, turrets, etc.

Quote:
Originally Posted by SteveS View Post
I recall that in classic Traveller, each turret required a hardpoint, each bay reduced the number of possible hardpoints by ten, and a spinal mount also reduced the number of possible hardpoints. A hardpoint didn't need to have a turret installed, but turrets required hardpoints. Ships were limited to hardpoint per 100 dtons.
Not quite, at least not for HG2. The wording for bays works out to 10 HP, but if you pull the bay in a refit, the HP don't exist, so you can't replace the bay with turrets. GT is different, as are MT and MGT.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Bk 5-1980
One hardpoint is allowed per 100 tons of hull not otherwise allocated to weapons. For example, a 50,000-ton ship carrying a 5,000-ton type A meson gun and twenty 100-ton bays may designate 250 hardpoints for turrets.
Follow the math:
50,000 - 5,000 = 45,000
45,000 - (20x1000)=45,000 - 20,000 = 25,000
25,000/100= 250
ak_aramis is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2018, 01:13 AM   #4
tanksoldier
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Default Re: hardpoints, turrets, etc.

Note that not all Traveller systems use the same rules. Mongoose Traveller's Aslan "HALAHEIKE-CLASS POCKET WARSHIP" is 1200 tons, with 2 small (50 ton) PA bays and 10 turrets.

I understand the reason for the 1/100 rule, and it makes a certain sense below 1000 tons...

....but a 1000 ton ship has to decide if it's going to carry a single bay, or 10 turrets. That makes no sense to me.

a 1200 tons ship with one 50 ton bay and 2 turrets or 12 turrets? What do you do with the rest of the displacement?

Ships in this range, say 1000 to 10,000 dtons, almost have to become carriers.

IMTU despite using GURPS I use the Mongoose rule.
tanksoldier is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2018, 06:19 AM   #5
Anaraxes
 
Join Date: Sep 2007
Default Re: hardpoints, turrets, etc.

Quote:
Originally Posted by tanksoldier View Post
What do you do with the rest of the displacement?
Ignore it.

You're fretting over a 4% difference when the numbers you're starting with aren't even specified to be closer than 10% accurate to begin with. It's false precision.

If you want handwavery, you can remember the space for all those little access tunnels and hatches to get to the extra turrets, machinery to rotate them, their fire control computers, and so on. The design rules don't nickel-and-dime you death on every liter of volume, so all that's normally just swept under that rug covering 10% of your ship. There's also the fact that things like bays on small ships or spinal mounts, both equipment and associated target acquisition and fields of fire, are significant design decisions for the hull. Ships aren't Lego blocks with dton cubes that can be added or subtracted wherever and whenever the owner has a whim to rearrange the armament. Perhaps committing to a bay means the architect had to make some choices that meant they didn't have free space easily adapted for other purposes. For any given design, feel free to invent some reasons and embody those choices into the deck plans.
Anaraxes is online now   Reply With Quote
Old 04-27-2018, 10:13 AM   #6
tanksoldier
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Default Re: hardpoints, turrets, etc.

Quote:
.You're fretting over a 4% difference when the numbers you're starting with aren't even specified to be closer than 10% accurate to begin with. It's false precision
I think you’re missing my point. I’m not trying to be precise.

That ship has 2 bays and 10 turrets instead of the two bays and ONE turret it’s allowed under most other Traveller rule sets. That’s a bit more of a difference than a10% displacement discrepancy.

A system defense monitor is even worse. I used to use a 1200 dton hull just so I could put two self defense turrets on it... and had so much left over space because I didn’t need drives or fuel. An 800 dton hull with two bays and 6 turrets just works better.

The ability to put bays on ships less that 1000 dton and not have to choose between one bay OR ten turrets makes sense to me.

All m saying is I like the idea of being able to fit a bay or tow AND turrets into a 1000 dton cruiser.

Last edited by tanksoldier; 04-27-2018 at 10:45 AM.
tanksoldier is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 09:41 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.