[MC+SS] Alternate TS Calculation

[vierasmarius]

I figured I'd repost this here, since the thread I originally posted it in is the e23 forum, and this post is specific to GURPS. I'd love to hear people's feedback on this idea!

Originally Posted by vierasmarius

Just got this pdf, thoroughly enjoying it. I did have an observation though, in regards to the Mass Combat rules. Because of how price scales in Spaceships (proportional to Mass) compared to how DR and HP scale (proportional to linear dimension), larger ships have a much higher cost per TS than small craft and fighters (assuming equivalent systems devoted to armor and weapons). I had a thought on how to address this, by replacing the DR+HP portion with a formula based on Mass. Something like: Mass ÷ 10 x (1 + dDR ÷ dST)

This would have the effect of making a SM X ship the equivalent of 3 SM X-1 ships, 10 SM X-2 ships, etc. Compare to the rules as they stand, where 1 SM X = 2 SM X-2. It would make it much easier to represent the "Super Battleship", a single ship capable of fighting an entire enemy fleet, while also keeping in check the power of carriers with massive fighter complements.

I hope this isn't taken as a criticism of the article. On the contrary, I love the mechanic he's presented, and am currently in the process of applying it to all of the published spaceships. So take this more as a musing than a complaint, as a slightly different way to represent spaceships in MC.

EDIT: Another way to think of it that comes to mind. You have a SM+5 fighter with a Spinal weapon mount, and a SM+6 fighter with the same weapon in a Major mount, and the smaller ship has double the TS of the larger one (3 x 20 vs 1 x 30). If this is based on Mass instead, they'd be roughly equal TS (3 x 30 vs 1 x 100).

A specific example of the change this would have: The Meteor Aerospace Fighter and the Shrike Fighter-Bomber are of comparable TL (9^ and 10) and have similar loadouts. The Meteor is SM+5, with one Major battery (a VRF 25mm cannon) and 2 Medium batteries (6x16cm launchers). Its TS is 5000. The Shrike is SM+6, with a Major battery Laser and a Secondary battery of missile launchers, 10x16cm. Its TS is only 3900, despite having nearly double to firepower, better HP and DR, and comparable maneuverability. Using my alternate option, they'd be TS 750 and 1300 respectively, which (IMO) better matches their differing power and utility. Of course, you can tweak the equation's constant (I divided Mass by 10, but you could use a higher or lower value), but the important thing is relative strength between spaceships.

[Langy]

I had this same exact concern. I'm curious if David Pulver had a reason to make TS not scale with cost.

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by Langy

I had this same exact concern. I'm curious if David Pulver had a reason to make TS not scale with cost.

An attempt to make fighters useful? ;)

[vierasmarius]

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

An attempt to make fighters useful? ;)

Hehe, that could be. They still seem to have some use as it is, since they benefit from better Handling and can devote a higher percentage of their systems to combat. But granting an SM+11 Carrier with Heavy Fighters four times the TS of an SM+11 Battleship of the same TL... that seems a bit too useful. There are some settings where this might be appropriate of course; Star Wars and BSG seem obvious examples. In such a campaign I'd probably give a discount to large vessels, to give some justification for why people bother with them.

[David Johnston2]

Originally Posted by vierasmarius

Hehe, that could be. They still seem to have some use as it is, since they benefit from better Handling and can devote a higher percentage of their systems to combat. But granting an SM+11 Carrier with Heavy Fighters four times the TS of an SM+11 Battleship of the same TL... that seems a bit too useful. There are some settings where this might be appropriate of course; Star Wars and BSG seem obvious examples. In such a campaign I'd probably give a discount to large vessels, to give some justification for why people bother with them.

In the real world, people bother with battleships for their ship to shore bombardment capability.

[Peter Knutsen]

I haven't bought the #30 Pyramid, but it seems to me there are three classes of ship:

1. Short occupancy ships wth no FTL. These are able to devote many module slots to weapons and defence, and sensors and ECM and so forth, so they should have a high TS for their size.

2. Long occupancy ships with no FTL. Medium TS for their size.

3. Long occupancy ships with FTL. Low TS for their size.