More Dakka [Spaceships]

[AlexanderHowl]

Using Spaceships, it is possible to design vehicles that are capable of firing enormous amounts of shells. For example, you could have a SM+6 TL8 vehicle with the following: three metallic laminate armor, three defensive ECM, one control room, one enhanced sensors, two helicopter rotors, two fission reactors, and eight secondary weapon batteries. If each of the secondary weapon batteries possesses ten VRF 2cm guns, the vehicle will be capable of firing 8,000 rounds per turn (or 400 rounds per second).

While each round 'only' deals 3d d-damage on a proximity hit, that is enough damage to punch a hole in anything less than powered combat armor, meaning that standard infantry troops are quite vulnerable to attacks by such vehicles. With two controllers and eight gunners, it is actually a fairly cheap investment for its lethality, though it is limited by the fact that it only carries 80,000 rounds of ammo. With proximity hits though, each round is much, much more accurate and lethal than infantry rounds.

So, have you played around with designing vehicles with a more dakka? If so, how have you used them in your campaigns? How effective were they?

[Say, it isn't that bad!]

You could probably do something interesting with a SM+37 planetoid with a spinal energy cannon.

Maybe explode some uninhabited planets so you can mine them for resources?

[Ulzgoroth]

I don't think 'helicopter full of autocannon turrets' is all that innovative or useful. Yes, it will copiously kill exposed infantry. So will a conventional TL8 attack helicopter with a crew of two rather than 81. Or a TL6 armored car with a single turreted machine gun for that matter.


Back around when Spaceships was new, I wrote up basic 'as many small weapons as possible' missile boat designs, with the final word packing 17 missile launchers (and six extra rounds for 91 total missiles) and 18 VRF lasers on a SM+5 hull. Mostly fiddling with that helped put me off the Spaceships system altogether between the difficulty of resolving their attacks and the other system issues it brought into focus.

[AlexanderHowl]

You can link together the secondary weapon batteries into combined turrets (you do not have to have only one weapon per turret). You see plenty of examples of multi-weapon turrets in battleships, especially WWI and WW II battleships. Heck, a gatling gun uses multiple barrels, so it could be considered a multi-weapon turret.

[johndallman]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHowl

While each round 'only' deals 3d d-damage on a proximity hit, that is enough damage to punch a hole in anything less than powered combat armor, meaning that standard infantry troops are quite vulnerable to attacks by such vehicles.

It's a bit reminiscent of the Tu-2Sh, which mounted about 80 sub-machine guns in the bomb bay of a light bomber. The USSR built and tested one, but only one.

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by johndallman

It's a bit reminiscent of the Tu-2Sh, which mounted about 80 sub-machine guns in the bomb bay of a light bomber. The USSR built and tested one, but only one.

The various B-25s with many, many .50 BMGs were probably more practical but that's not saying much.

It's alright to say that a newly designed vehcile would excel at attacking lightly armored infantry but that's an area where more multi-purpose heavy weapons already do pretty well so there's little real demand.

[Rupert]

Originally Posted by AlexanderHowl

Using Spaceships, it is possible to design vehicles that are capable of firing enormous amounts of shells. For example, you could have a SM+6 TL8 vehicle with the following: three metallic laminate armor, three defensive ECM, one control room, one enhanced sensors, two helicopter rotors, two fission reactors, and eight secondary weapon batteries. If each of the secondary weapon batteries possesses ten VRF 2cm guns, the vehicle will be capable of firing 8,000 rounds per turn (or 400 rounds per second).

Bear in mind that 5.56mm assault rifles and SAWs firing APHC ammo can damage this thing (assuming it's streamlined, and if it's not it's not that useful) and GPMGs firing 7.62mm AP ammo will chop it up pretty well, let alone .50 cal HMGs and autocannons. It's got a lot of firepower, is fairly hard to hit with AA missiles, but it extremely vulnerable to direct fire weapons - I'd consider dropping one of the reactors and rotors in favour of more frontal and side armour. Also, infantry are annoyingly hard to stamp out, because they have a tendency to disappear into the ground and hide behind cover and in buildings. This helicopter will do great at killing light armour and soft-skinned vehicles in a situation where you have air supremacy, and will definitely force infantry to hide (but everything does that). The thing is, we already have aircraft and helicopters and drones that do that, and they don't need ten-person crews, and don't risk spreading radioactive junk all over the place if they get shot down.

Also, I'm not sure I'd call over $9M in 2000-2005 dollars 'cheap' for a COIN aeroplane.

EDIT: By the way, p.58 of SS allows 'improved' guns, so you could double the RoF of the weapons, seeing as they're TL8 and guns have a TL7 base.

[Michael Thayne]

Originally Posted by Rupert

The thing is, we already have aircraft and helicopters and drones that do that, and they don't need ten-person crews, and don't risk spreading radioactive junk all over the place if they get shot down.le the RoF of the weapons, seeing as they're TL8 and guns have a TL7 base.

This. The TL10 version probably looks like the Vulture from Reign of Steel with its weapons replaced with one of the big guns from Tech and Toys II upgraded to ETC.

[Anaraxes]

Originally Posted by Rupert

Also, I'm not sure I'd call over $9M in 2000-2005 dollars 'cheap' for a COIN aeroplane.

Insurgents are also not noted for gathering in large numbers in open fields. One problem with building a "max dakka in one place" design is that there's usually a limited number of targets available, so you can't really put all those guns to use at the same time. Two vehicles with half the firepower can spread out and engage more targets -- or move together when (or if) you do find a giant concentration. The designer has to have some assumptions about the targets and intended role for a vehicle, not just get the most RPM in a given volume by throwing on as many HMGs as possible.

(Sounds like a Car Wars strategy for 18-wheelers... let's see, 40 kg per Browning M2, 35 tons in a truck means 875 HMGs. Bring on the biker gang, Lord Humungus.)

[Phantasm]

One spacecraft I came up with, with a grand total of 45 16cm missiles firing 9 at a time. I don't see anything to sub in Secondary or Tertiary batteries in SM +5 craft, though, which would greatly increase the payload at a minor decrease in per-shot damage.

SF-17 Dragonfly
30-ton (SM+5) Fleet Defense Interceptor

The SF-17 Dragonfly was designed as a fast interceptor. It is a single-person craft, designed to be fast and agile. It is currently the fastest craft in the fleet, with an acceleration of 10G. Its armaments are designed for fast interception: it uses its large payload of missiles at range to eliminate incoming attack fighters and bombers, and switches to its particle beam and Gauss cannon when combat closes to close range.

Front:
[1] Armor, Diamondoid; dDR 7, $300K
[2!] Weapon, Major Battery; $150K
[3!] Weapon, Major Battery; $150K
[4] Weapon, Medium Battery; $150K
[5] Weapon, Medium Battery; $150K
[6] Weapon, Medium Battery; $150K

Middle:
[1] Armor, Diamondoid; dDR 7, $300K
[2] Control Room; C7 Computer, Comm/Sensor 5, 1 Control Station, $60K
[3] Tactical Comm/Sensor Array; Level 7, $300K
[4-5!!] Heavy Force Screen; dDR 80, $3M
[6, core] Power Plant, Antimatter; 8 PP, 20 year endurance, $1.2M

Rear:
[1] Armor, Diamondoid; dDR 7, $300K
[2-6!] Hot Reactionless Engine; 10G accel, $500K
[core] Power Plant, Antimatter; 4 PP, 20 year endurance, $600K

Design Features:
Emergency Ejection; $500K
Gravitic Compensation; $30K
Hardened Armor; $900K

Design Switches:
Adjustable Force Screen; $3M
Hardened Force Screen; $1.5M
Multiscanner Array
Pseudovelocity
Waste Heat Signature

Forward Major Battery 1 Breakdown:
Fixed-Mount 10MJ Particle Beam Cannon
- Option: Improved
- dDmg: 4d (5) burn rad sur
- Range: Close/Short
- sAcc: -3
- Rcl: 1

Forward Major Battery 2 Breakdown:
- Fixed-Mount 25mm Electromag Gun
- Option: Very Rapid Fire
- dDmg: 3d+2 (2) pi++
- Range: Short
- sAcc: -8
- Rcl: 2
- Gun Shots: 1,400

Forward Medium Battery 1 Breakdown:
Three Fixed-Mount 16cm Missile Launchers
- dDmg: 6d×4 (2) cr ex
- Range: Long
- sAcc: 3
- Rcl: 1
- Missile Shots: 5 per launcher (15 total)

Forward Medium Battery 2 Breakdown:
Three Fixed-Mount 16cm Missile Launchers
- dDmg: 6d×4 (2) cr ex
- Range: Long
- sAcc: 3
- Rcl: 1
- Missile Shots: 5 per launcher (15 total)

Forward Medium Battery 3 Breakdown:
Three Fixed-Mount 16cm Missile Launchers
- dDmg: 6d×4 (2) cr ex
- Range: Long
- sAcc: 3
- Rcl: 1
- Missile Shots: 5 per launcher (15 total)

Crew:
Control Room: 1

TL: 11^
Vehicle: SF-17 Dragonfly
dST/HP: 20
Hnd/SR: +1/4
HT: 12
Move: 10 G/100 mps
LWt: 30
Load: 0.1
SM: +5
Occ: 1SV
dDR: 7
FF dDR: 80
Cost: $13.24M
Notes: [1, 3, 4]

Notes:
[1] Streamlined.
[3] dDR is Hardened.
[4] FF dDR is Hardened.


Part of me wishes I could get those 10 Secondary or 30 tertiary launchers per battery, if only to pull a Macross Missile Massacre!