Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Cobramax76

Specialist Void Fighters / Bombers

Recommended Posts

I saw something on hear a few years ago but no idea where it went to. My group is looking for some void fighter / bomber refits for more specialized roles ( IE ECM and TAG units ) as well as faster more maneuverable ones ( think dedicated void interceptors as opposed to multi-role fighters ) One of my players has already used a sizeable amount of earned PF over the years of play ( his dynasty now has been around about 150yrs ) into creating a dedicated anti-ship heavy fighter. This particular design uses a purpose-built heavy void bomber frame mounted around a weapon capable of actually damaging a cruiser ( specifically limited to targeting hardpoints such as engines, auger arrays, ANY weapons ( IE reducing the weapons strength per salvo etc ) ) It uses a modified version of the lost MKIII Synne pattern. Originally designed for use with void fighters the design failed abysmally by draining the fighters power core with each shot causing it to loose control and fall from the sky when attacking ground based super heavy targets in an air support role...just as dangerous in void combat where remaining immobile ( in this case flying in a straight line for a long period of time ) is as good as crashing into the ground as it will cause the enemy ships turrets ( and fighters ) to shred the fighter.  This variant  ( dubbed the Synne II pattern ) has been fit into a redesigned heavy void bomber frame. The increase in overall size of both the frame and upgraded powerplant coupled with extra capacitors mounted to either side of the  fuselage of the bomber means that the gunner can fire the volcano cannon each turn without causing the bombers power to fail. ( Also of note since a turn in RT represents a span of 30 minutes versus the ground version of a turn being more like 10-15 seconds ...means plenty of time to recharge the main gun ) The profile for this specialized bomber is thus.

Pirahnna

Spd: 5 ( i realize that the regular speed of a bomber is 4 and the fighters is 6..In this case though since the bomber isnt carrying 2 huge torpedoes as payload ( instead just one volcano cannon the frame is build around and with an upgraded engine )

Damage: The Volcano cannon deals the same 1d5 damage to the target as a torpedo

Payload: Instead of the usual 2 shots / torpedoes before having to return to the parentship for rearming this ship can fire continuously due to the weapon being energy based with the upgraded powerplant.

ROF: 1 per turn

Weapon Range: 1VU ( This means that the bomber MUST be in the same VU space as the target ship to fire ( if it wants a chance in the warp of hitting )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/16/2018 at 7:08 PM, Cobramax76 said:

a purpose-built heavy void bomber frame mounted around a weapon capable of actually damaging a cruiser

Damage: The Volcano cannon

If they could, they already would. ;) Also, a Volcano cannon? The smallest vehicle carrying it is Shadowsword, and as everything on Baneblade chassis it's in the size category higher by 2 than all this "small craft" (Monumental vs. Massive). Now, weapons from Massive land vehicles as main weapons on Massive spacecraft, maybe. And amusingly enough, Warhound Titan is still Massive, so perhaps its toys could do at least as fixed forward weapons.

For anti-ship purpose, the most promising non-heretical way to cause more harm is to start with murder-servitors (on assault boats) and try to improve -  even nastier experimental versions, or other enhanced living weapons (much like the stuff Beast House does for lulz).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, TBeholder said:

If they could, they already would. ;) Also, a Volcano cannon? The smallest vehicle carrying it is Shadowsword, and as everything on Baneblade chassis it's in the size category higher by 2 than all this "small craft" (Monumental vs. Massive). Now, weapons from Massive land vehicles as main weapons on Massive spacecraft, maybe. And amusingly enough, Warhound Titan is still Massive, so perhaps its toys could do at least as fixed forward weapons.

For anti-ship purpose, the most promising non-heretical way to cause more harm is to start with murder-servitors (on assault boats) and try to improve -  even nastier experimental versions, or other enhanced living weapons (much like the stuff Beast House does for lulz).

You might want to actually look up the size of a Fury ( the smaller of the two between the fighter and the bomber ) before you make an idiot of yourself.  " Like most Imperial vehicles and voidcraft there exist several different patterns, marks, and variants of the of the Fury Interceptor, with the largest of them reaching up to sixty or seventy metres in length and the smallest being close to forty metres. The Fury's size is such that a wing of twenty Furies takes up the same amount of space aboard a starship as a wing of forty of the Adeptus Astartes' Thunderhawk Gunships. "  ( Found on the website under Construction section ) The fighter is always smaller than the bomber and the size of a Shadowsword ( based off a Baneblade chassis ) is...

Length: 13.5m

Width: 8.4m

Height: 6.3m

Now then...Hmm...lets see...40-70 meters vs a tiny 13.5 meters to mount a weapon.  A Warhound Titan is only 14.4 Meters tall ( at rest ) x 11m wide x12.1m in length

 

Your argument like your comment is invalid. You FAILED to read the rest of the information put out in the comment.

On 3/16/2018 at 11:08 AM, Cobramax76 said:

( specifically limited to targeting hardpoints such as engines, auger arrays, ANY weapons ( IE reducing the weapons strength per salvo etc ) )

NOT...NOT damaging the actual ship itself. But ONLY its weapons and equipment

And to FINISH this...I CLEARLY stated it was using a purpose built heavy bomber frame...Not a fighter.  " Starhawk bombers are larger, slower craft, designed to carry a heavy payload of plasma bombs and armour-piercing missiles, for use against enemy capital ships. Crewed by a pilot, co-pilot, tech-priest (plus acolytes), various turret gunners and a logistics officer, a standard Starhawk features limited sleeping quarters, chemical toilets and even an automated medical unit inside its hull. Armed with a multitude of short-range turret-mounted defence weapons, used to fend off enemy starfighters, a lone Starhawk can wreak havoc among enemy fighter squadrons before swooping in to deliver a crippling missile strike on an enemy capital ship. " ( taken from the website again )

Edited by Cobramax76

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/19/2018 at 10:20 AM, Cobramax76 said:

You might want to actually look up the size of a Fury

Good point, size categories are kind of screwed up. Though in this case not quite that badly, since they don't consider shapes either, and Fury is mostly a thin cigar with little "wings". Also, all its weapons are attached on the outside and don't require anything on the inside except power/cooling for lascannons and controls.

On 3/19/2018 at 10:20 AM, Cobramax76 said:

 The Fury's size is such that a wing of twenty Furies takes up the same amount of space aboard a starship as a wing of forty of the Adeptus Astartes' Thunderhawk Gunships. " 

This one is hard  to swallow without a sauce. Especially since trivial comparison is impossible, since one is carried only by Navy and another only by Astartes. Also, in both BFG and RT basic unit of small craft directly corresponding to launch bay capacity is squadron (about that "paying attention" thing :P). Also, the available sauce (BFG FAQ 2007) says the opposite about squadrons themselves:

Quote

Any vessel that earns or pays for a refit to carry Thunderhawks may then ONLY carry Thunderhawks, and its launch bay capacity is reduced by half (rounding up when applicable). 

— i.e. even if so, it only means different organisation of the same number.

On 3/19/2018 at 10:20 AM, Cobramax76 said:

" Starhawk bombers are larger, slower craft, designed to carry a heavy payload of plasma bombs and armour-piercing missiles, for use against enemy capital ships. Crewed by a pilot, co-pilot, tech-priest (plus acolytes), various turret gunners and a logistics officer, a standard Starhawk features limited sleeping quarters, chemical toilets and even an automated medical unit inside its hull. Armed with a multitude of short-range turret-mounted defence weapons, used to fend off enemy starfighters, a lone Starhawk can wreak havoc among enemy fighter squadrons before swooping in to deliver a crippling missile strike on an enemy capital ship. " ( taken from the website again )

It's the size of a river steamboat or so, and carries payload inside, yeah. Lexicanum (using non-RT canon sources) agrees on the "automated medical unit" part, but to think of it, practically this means a bunk with IV rig and medical servitor strapped to the wall behind it.

On 3/19/2018 at 10:20 AM, Cobramax76 said:

 and the size of a Shadowsword ( based off a Baneblade chassis ) is...

Length: 13.5m

Width: 8.4m

Height: 6.3m

Indeed. Now let's compare Shadowsword with Stormlord? Replacing Volcano Cannon and its dressings (mostly generators and huge capacitor bank, though cooling this thing should be a problem even in atmosphere) with Vulcan Mega-Bolter and its dressings (mainly a box of ammunition) leaves enough of free space for 40 soldiers with equipment. That is the metal bawks is left half-empty.

Now, a bomb bay may well be large enough to mount a weapon from superheavy tank on a bomber, and Volcano will not need to fire continuously, just run on energy and heat capacity reserves… but this would probably amount to a much more expensive vehicle with performance close to the original.

Warhound is not a solid box, too. Let's consider its weapons (per Armory, source - Rites of Battle):

  • Turbo-Laser Destructor (twin): range 1000m, in power closer to a common lascannon than Volcano. Non-Titan uses: Thunderhawk.
  • Plasma Blastgun: range 600m(like long-barreled lascannon)/800m(Maximal), has good blast radius, but not as killy a lascannon. Non-Titan uses: Stormblade (Baneblade chassis, too), Macharius "Omega" (heavy chassis, not superheavy) carries smaller and prone to overheating variant.
  • Vulcan Mega-Bolter: range 400m. Non-Titan uses: Stormlord, Macharius Vulkan — and more importantly, voidship turrets, so both gun and ammunition are available.
  • Inferno gun: range 50m, just a huge flamer. Not even for close air support, as incendiary bombs and missiles have better range and versatility.

Thunderhawk has an option to carry Turbo-Laser Destructor, but not twin-linked, range 750m and 5 shots (per Armory, per Rites of Battle) rather than recharging as fast as fired.

 

On 3/19/2018 at 10:20 AM, Cobramax76 said:

NOT damaging the actual ship itself. But ONLY its weapons and equipment

That's great. I also had a thought about small craft or clusters of seekers (for anti-ordnance shots, present in BFG) attacking external components and turrets.

However, this opens two cans of worms: SPESHUL CASE and mechanics.

IMO the only way to prevent the former from getting ugly is to let the latter subsume it, i.e. to introduce generalized mechanics balanced at "normally it's possible, but not worthwhile", yet allowing adjustments for unusual circumstances to create curious fringe cases. I see but one general way to solve mechanics part like this without a special add-on comparable in size to the whole ship-to-ship rules (and to put it bluntly, in less time than Duke Nukem Forever): conversion into Alternity Warships system, since scaling of objects and damage is its strong side. This (or even making a d10-friendly hybrid based on Alternity+Alternity Warships) would be easier than making RT rules as such more detailed (and also allow other cool features).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, TBeholder said:

Good point, size categories are kind of screwed up. Though in this case not quite that badly, since they don't consider shapes either, and Fury is mostly a thin cigar with little "wings". Also, all its weapons are attached on the outside and don't require anything on the inside except power/cooling for lascannons and controls.

This one is hard  to swallow without a sauce. Especially since trivial comparison is impossible, since one is carried only by Navy and another only by Astartes. Also, in both BFG and RT basic unit of small craft directly corresponding to launch bay capacity is squadron (about that "paying attention" thing :P). Also, the available sauce (BFG FAQ 2007) says the opposite about squadrons themselves:

— i.e. even if so, it only means different organisation of the same number.

It's the size of a river steamboat or so, and carries payload inside, yeah. Lexicanum (using non-RT canon sources) agrees on the "automated medical unit" part, but to think of it, practically this means a bunk with IV rig and medical servitor strapped to the wall behind it.

Indeed. Now let's compare Shadowsword with Stormlord? Replacing Volcano Cannon and its dressings (mostly generators and huge capacitor bank, though cooling this thing should be a problem even in atmosphere) with Vulcan Mega-Bolter and its dressings (mainly a box of ammunition) leaves enough of free space for 40 soldiers with equipment. That is the metal bawks is left half-empty.

Now, a bomb bay may well be large enough to mount a weapon from superheavy tank on a bomber, and Volcano will not need to fire continuously, just run on energy and heat capacity reserves… but this would probably amount to a much more expensive vehicle with performance close to the original.

Warhound is not a solid box, too. Let's consider its weapons (per Armory, source - Rites of Battle):

  • Turbo-Laser Destructor (twin): range 1000m, in power closer to a common lascannon than Volcano. Non-Titan uses: Thunderhawk.
  • Plasma Blastgun: range 600m(like long-barreled lascannon)/800m(Maximal), has good blast radius, but not as killy a lascannon. Non-Titan uses: Stormblade (Baneblade chassis, too), Macharius "Omega" (heavy chassis, not superheavy) carries smaller and prone to overheating variant.
  • Vulcan Mega-Bolter: range 400m. Non-Titan uses: Stormlord, Macharius Vulkan — and more importantly, voidship turrets, so both gun and ammunition are available.
  • Inferno gun: range 50m, just a huge flamer. Not even for close air support, as incendiary bombs and missiles have better range and versatility.

Thunderhawk has an option to carry Turbo-Laser Destructor, but not twin-linked, range 750m and 5 shots (per Armory, per Rites of Battle) rather than recharging as fast as fired.

 

That's great. I also had a thought about small craft or clusters of seekers (for anti-ordnance shots, present in BFG) attacking external components and turrets.

However, this opens two cans of worms: SPESHUL CASE and mechanics.

IMO the only way to prevent the former from getting ugly is to let the latter subsume it, i.e. to introduce generalized mechanics balanced at "normally it's possible, but not worthwhile", yet allowing adjustments for unusual circumstances to create curious fringe cases. I see but one general way to solve mechanics part like this without a special add-on comparable in size to the whole ship-to-ship rules (and to put it bluntly, in less time than Duke Nukem Forever): conversion into Alternity Warships system, since scaling of objects and damage is its strong side. This (or even making a d10-friendly hybrid based on Alternity+Alternity Warships) would be easier than making RT rules as such more detailed (and also allow other cool features).

Ok..In order...lolz again....

1) Size categories have always been royally jacked up in 40k ( face it the creators have not a damned clue in holy **** wtf they are doing with the sizing of a damned thing besides a lone guardsman )  That i agree WHOLEHEARTEDLY.

2) I had never seen the BFG size comparison..so i took a few min and looked up the link ( Thank you by the way for them as i had not seen them before now ) and yep...says it clear...but honestly i think the conversion from BFG to RT leaves ALOT to be desired ( they are both jacked up in their own ways )

3) I read the entry on the site about the stormlord...whoever wrote THAT piece of total horsecrap needs banned from the site ( or GW case being ) for being a total and complete remedial *****. given the stated size of 13.5m long x 8.4m wide x 6.3m tall....add armour...engine..weapons...capacitors....and try fitting FOURTY units inside...Yeah..NO...sorry..thats seriously remedial and NEVER gonna happen ( 40 squats squashed in MAYBE...NOT including their gear )

4) As far as modifying the rules for the smaller attack craft dealing damage to the larger ships...i took that predominantly from RT rules converted mainly from BFG. I only allow the attack craft to attack ship components ( auger array, engine, weapons strength etc ) and not the ship itself ( hull integrity etc ) EXCEPTION being what is already stated in the rules that a bomber attacking with a anti-ship torpedo ( each bomber can carry 2 externally undermounted dealing 1d5dmg each ) THEY can actually damage the hull integrity. I dont get complicated with it all. I try to simplify it and if a rule screws things up ( like many in BFG ) i throw them in the trash where they belonged in the first place. ( Prime example is all the special orders rules for the ships...BS...ALL ships can accept ALL orders ( some will simply be able to handle them and execute them better than others )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/21/2018 at 4:23 PM, Cobramax76 said:

3) I read the entry on the site about the stormlord...whoever wrote THAT piece of total horsecrap needs banned from the site ( or GW case being ) for being a total and complete remedial *****. given the stated size of 13.5m long x 8.4m wide x 6.3m tall....add armour...engine..weapons...capacitors....and try fitting FOURTY units inside...Yeah..NO...sorry..thats seriously remedial and NEVER gonna happen ( 40 squats squashed in MAYBE...NOT including their gear )

Sure they are packed. It's an APC, not school bus. ;) And unlike in Chimera, they don't even get to shoot, unless they'll climb out to the fighting platform. But then, Gorgon is even more of a sardine can.

Exactly the point - this box is mostly empty. BTW, as to how much the caps take, see Thunderhawk inside. Laser capacitor (#31) is somewhat longer and wider than a suited Space Marine standing on a chair… and this turbo-laser is closer in power to common lascannon than Volcano. That one's got to be huge.

On 3/21/2018 at 4:23 PM, Cobramax76 said:

4) As far as modifying the rules for the smaller attack craft dealing damage to the larger ships...i took that predominantly from RT rules converted mainly from BFG. I only allow the attack craft to attack ship components ( auger array, engine, weapons strength etc ) and not the ship itself ( hull integrity etc ) […] I dont get complicated with it all.

The most obvious simple way is to use the common Test (Pilot+Craft Rating/Maneuverability). But this stuff is still mostly under armour (External vs. Exposed). Thus the test would be quite hard, to line up and hit a smaller target. Conversely, for point defences it's easier when attackers constrain their approach like this.

On 3/21/2018 at 4:23 PM, Cobramax76 said:

EXCEPTION being what is already stated in the rules that a bomber attacking with a anti-ship torpedo ( each bomber can carry 2 externally undermounted dealing 1d5dmg each )

Wasn't it one torpedo (almost the size of the bomber), with common warhead, but shorter range? :blink: Speaking of which, there are no rules for barrage bombs.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As for the size allowing 40 fully equipped unit to even stand shoulder to shoulder and chest to backpack would require more space than that tin can has after reducing the dimensions to account for the super heavy armour and systems..IF it was an empty can like the transports used on D Day back in WW2 then yeah...it would be plenty space...BUT...that vehicle still has ALOT of space needed for its chosen weapon systems...

The ONLY targets the fighters/bombers go after that are even close to their own size would be the defensive turrets...Literally EVERYTHING else they would target are far Larger ( have you seen the bore of a macrocannon???? it can launch a Thunderhawk! ) And the macros are the SMALL ones...Targeting the auger arrays ( HUGE long spines / vanes ) , the Engines ( self explanatory for target size ) , and various other weapon and systems all of comparably large size against the fighter/bombers...NO...they dont get penalties for hitting any of them ( if anything they get a bonus ) All the ships have weapon MIU interfaces and specialized targeting equipment ( augers ) that can provide pinpoint ( comparatively ) accuracy with the weapons ( except for the torpedoes of course )

And nope..it was 2 Torps...then back to base ship for reload ( clearly stated in rules but your size comparison vs the bomber is correct ) And yes they were shorter ranged as well ( i believe it was only 6VU total ) I dont let my bomber groups fire until they are effectively in the same VU ( at point blank range relatively speaking )

Barrage bombs????  Do you mean MIRV warheads or massed torpedo strikes?

If you mean MIRV....ive allowed it under stipulation....It gains a +20 to hit but lesser overall damage ( 1d5-1 min 1 ) to simulate that not all the smaller warheads strike the target..some WILL miss BUT gives a better chance of Crit ( x2 chance ) to simulate that the warheads hit multiple areas thereby increasing potential of hitting and damaging something vital.

NOTE: An enterprising player managed to acquire ( did the surveying of multiple planets and asteroid belts etc and finally managed to find the suitable material and paid the PF to set up mining and refining of the requisite radioactive materials then paid Ad Mech handsomely to weaponize it ) Atomics...then pulled this little stunt with the MIRV...according to the damage level of an Atomic ( 100pts ) i made him divide it up into 5 ( 20pts each ) then said each "hit" ( the same 1d5-1 ) would hit for 2d10 damage and crit as normal. What this did was create a seriously evil torpedo ( i already saw he was gonna use them on the bombers ) so i used this method to reduce ( by a minimum of 1/5 max of 4/5 less damage ) and disperse the damage ( into 1-4 different locations ) and mitigate any higher crit chances in the process.

If you mean massed Torpedo strikes...i thought it did...simply handle it in groupings of 5 or 10 or whatever is convenient to the GM....subtract the turret rating from the incoming salvo size then roll to check to see how many of the remaining torpedoes actually hit the target then roll damage as normal for each....Unless im missing / forgetting something ( wouldnt be the first time...lol )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 3/26/2018 at 10:21 PM, Cobramax76 said:

As for the size allowing 40 fully equipped unit to even stand shoulder to shoulder and chest to backpack would require more space than that tin can has after reducing the dimensions to account for the super heavy armour and systems..IF it was an empty can like the transports used on D Day back in WW2 then yeah...it would be plenty space...BUT...that vehicle still has ALOT of space needed for its chosen weapon systems...

Stormlord's weapons are all outside the main hull, in turret and sponsons. And seeing how tall it is, troops are probably not on the same level with crew, larger mechanisms or anything else.

On 3/26/2018 at 10:21 PM, Cobramax76 said:

The ONLY targets the fighters/bombers go after that are even close to their own size would be the defensive turrets...[…] Targeting the auger arrays ( HUGE long spines / vanes ) , the Engines ( self explanatory for target size ) , and various other weapon and systems all of comparably large size against the fighter/bombers...NO...they dont get penalties for hitting any of them ( if anything they get a bonus ) All the ships have weapon MIU interfaces and specialized targeting equipment ( augers ) that can provide pinpoint ( comparatively ) accuracy with the weapons ( except for the torpedoes of course )

IMO the only simple way to handle this would be handling of inflicted damage as penalty to the target's actions (per arc, in many cases). E.g. turrets are too numerous to exterminate completely, but fighters may break a few, this would inflict penalty on turret rolls in one arc, perhaps -1% (1/5 of Turret Rating point's worth) per DoS. Emergency Repairs in case of turrets is probably possible without EVO, so it simply fixes DoS [maximum CR bonus] % of capability with each action (these things are small and hopefully unified, but they are scattered all over the place).

Macrocannons are off limit not as much due to size (heavy munitions could cause enough of damage that the gun would be dangerous to use) as due to gun ports - the weapon itself is hard to get, short of flying almost into the muzzle right before it fires.

On 3/26/2018 at 10:21 PM, Cobramax76 said:

And nope..it was 2 Torps...then back to base ship for reload ( clearly stated in rules but your size comparison vs the bomber is correct ) And yes they were shorter ranged as well ( i believe it was only 6VU total ) I dont let my bomber groups fire until they are effectively in the same VU ( at point blank range relatively speaking )

Source? :blink: What with torpedo being almost the size of that bomber.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

on small stuff:

On 3/26/2018 at 10:21 PM, Cobramax76 said:

Barrage bombs????  Do you mean MIRV warheads or massed torpedo strikes?

"Special Torpedoes" for orbit-to-surface action with saturation cluster warheads, so a bit of both.

BARRAGE BOMBS
Barrage bombs are configured specifically for penetrating the atmosphere of a world and bombarding planetary targets. In comparison to ordinary anti-ship torpedoes, barrage bombs have a relatively diffuse blast radius, being designed to achieve maximum saturation of the target area.
Special rules
Barrage bombs can be launched while a ship is in low orbit […]
Barrage bombs may also be launched in space, like ordinary torpedoes. Each salvo of barrage bombs which strikes a planet during a planetary assault scenario earns [variable] Assault Points […]
Barrage bombs which attack ships do not ignore shields like other ordnance; instead they knock down shields and place blast markers for hits just like a direct fire attack (which can be pretty useful in its own right).
-- BFG Armada Appendix I


Curiously, bombardment cannons are not given Assault Points bonus.

In Deathwatch torpedo strike has its niche, as it takes but a few rounds to arrive (rather than a hour like bombers) and has lesser blast area than either bombers or lance, thus can be more useful as "emergency air support", and if one missed, just shoot another after it. Torpedo is (close 4d10+6 X Pen 10 Blast ~500)/(far 2d10 X Blast ~500-1500), Marauders carpet bombing with plasma bombs is (6d10 E Pen 0 Blast ~2500), lance strike is (close D Blast ~500)/(far 5d10+10 E Pen 10 Blast ~1000).

On 3/26/2018 at 10:21 PM, Cobramax76 said:

 a +20 to hit but lesser overall damage ( 1d5-1 min 1 ) to simulate that not all the smaller warheads strike the target..some WILL miss BUT gives a better chance of Crit ( x2 chance ) to simulate that the warheads hit multiple areas thereby increasing potential of hitting and damaging something vital.


Bomber attack is also not a pinpoint thing, they aren't close air support, just unload the whole bay and bug out. But they at least can see what they do and presumably the rest of squadron will try to hit the damaged places. So bomber attacks as a salvo, squadron as a ripple. While a barrage bomb normally just tries to cover a wide area with a salvo, and when used vs. ships perhaps set to minimum dispersal, or maybe submunitions just don't have time to scatter much.

But since torpedoes with submunitions already exist, the idea to stuff a torpedo with tons of hunter-killers for use as a flyswatter is quite obvious. And then, to use such "less-than-macro" munitions for point defense suppression. Conversely, swap submunitions to boatload of heavy flak shells shells and let them scatter wide.

Speaking of which. Anti-ordnance use of macroweapons is supported in BFG, but not RT. Also, bombardment cannons have a bonus on this, presumably due to huge bombs capable of making larger clouds of massive fragments.

Which is a trade-off, in that some penalties affecting the ship don't apply to seekers, but their BS in 40k is paltry compared to that of a good gunner, thus such penalties will only make them comparable; also they can be duped. Conversely, flak benefits from aim and just shreds whatever was unlucky enough to be in the way of shrapnel without giving jack about holofields and other countermeasures. Thus, it's best to throw wasp nests at the Orky bommas and suchlike, but macro-flak at the Eldar.

Somewhere in between would be missile macroweapons with anti-ordnance seeker submunitions.
 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I dont have the BFG Armada Appendix so that was the first time i had heard of the "barrage bombs"  After reading the info you provided for it ( ty btw ) i like them.  I agree with you about the bombardment cannons not getting Assault Points Bonus ( despite fact that they were obviously designed to seriously do just that action ( ie heavily assaulting things ) )  I also dont have the Deathwatch info so no current access to that info as listed...but it is interesting...( possible next aquisitions )

As for the question about bombers making 2 runs....The bombers payload is what was discussed and the manual that mentioned specifically bombers getting 2 runs before having to rearm is Ships of the Imperial Navy 1.2.0

As for the torps with submunitions...im NOT giving that idea to my powergamer....just No....lol The same as anti-ordnance macros and bombardment cannons....Negative on letting said gamer hear about them....lol Hes bad enough as is.

Thanks for the info on a few things i didnt have though...gives me some things to purchase in due time as well as info i can utilize in future.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎3‎/‎30‎/‎2018 at 3:48 PM, Cobramax76 said:

I dont have the BFG Armada Appendix so that was the first time i had heard of the "barrage bombs"  After reading the info you provided for it ( ty btw ) i like them.  I agree with you about the bombardment cannons not getting Assault Points Bonus ( despite fact that they were obviously designed to seriously do just that action ( ie heavily assaulting things ) )  I also dont have the Deathwatch info so no current access to that info as listed...but it is interesting...( possible next aquisitions )

I believe they have stats in Deathwatch as well - that's capital ship launched, not bomber launched - but the damage is a 0.5km blast with Krak missile effect, and 0.5-1km with Frag missile effect.

On ‎3‎/‎26‎/‎2018 at 8:21 PM, Cobramax76 said:

As for the size allowing 40 fully equipped unit to even stand shoulder to shoulder and chest to backpack would require more space than that tin can has after reducing the dimensions to account for the super heavy armour and systems..IF it was an empty can like the transports used on D Day back in WW2 then yeah...it would be plenty space...BUT...that vehicle still has ALOT of space needed for its chosen weapon systems...

That's pretty much what the Gorgon is. FW used to sell 4 strips of dudes to fill it, and yes, they were shoulder-to-shoulder. That thing's resemblance to a WWII landing boat is not accidental. Fitting the same number of troops in a Stormlord by comparison is something comparable to the idea of a guy with a backpack mounted banner being able to charge out of the front ramp of a land raider.

On ‎3‎/‎30‎/‎2018 at 4:27 AM, TBeholder said:

IMO the only simple way to handle this would be handling of inflicted damage as penalty to the target's actions (per arc, in many cases). E.g. turrets are too numerous to exterminate completely, but fighters may break a few, this would inflict penalty on turret rolls in one arc, perhaps -1% (1/5 of Turret Rating point's worth) per DoS. Emergency Repairs in case of turrets is probably possible without EVO, so it simply fixes DoS [maximum CR bonus] % of capability with each action (these things are small and hopefully unified, but they are scattered all over the place).

Suppressing Turrets is a standard thing in Battlefleet Gothic, I believe.

Bear in mind that 'turret rating of 2' doesn't mean '2 turrets' but 'at least 2 turrets can bear on you whichever way you're coming in from'.

Theoretically, there should be a case of 'fire at maximum range' with suppressing turrets allowing you to launch from closer in, but then there's a second problem that assault boats have to go all the way in by default to achieve anything.

I'd agree with the Turbolaser. Astartes tech can fit a turbolaser on a craft ~ starhawk sized (the image of the starhawk shows a lot of thunderhawk heritage) so it clearly can be done. A turbolaser rather than a volcano cannon makes more sense. Regardless, I'm not sure why it has to be a different in-game mechanic to a bomber - a centreline turbolaser on a bomber chassis certainly isn't a dogfighting weapon...

If you wanted a separate mechanic because of critical hits, (target component XYZ), then maybe reduce the gross damage to increase the chances of a critical?

 

Given that a fighter also has to fall back to its mothership to reload and replenish combat endurance after an intercept, then a piranha wouldn't be able to maintain indefinite endurance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/18/2018 at 4:11 AM, Magnus Grendel said:

 

Suppressing Turrets is a standard thing in Battlefleet Gothic, I believe.

Bear in mind that 'turret rating of 2' doesn't mean '2 turrets' but 'at least 2 turrets can bear on you whichever way you're coming in from'.

Theoretically, there should be a case of 'fire at maximum range' with suppressing turrets allowing you to launch from closer in, but then there's a second problem that assault boats have to go all the way in by default to achieve anything.

I'd agree with the Turbolaser. Astartes tech can fit a turbolaser on a craft ~ starhawk sized (the image of the starhawk shows a lot of thunderhawk heritage) so it clearly can be done. A turbolaser rather than a volcano cannon makes more sense. Regardless, I'm not sure why it has to be a different in-game mechanic to a bomber - a centreline turbolaser on a bomber chassis certainly isn't a dogfighting weapon...

If you wanted a separate mechanic because of critical hits, (target component XYZ), then maybe reduce the gross damage to increase the chances of a critical?

 

Given that a fighter also has to fall back to its mothership to reload and replenish combat endurance after an intercept, then a piranha wouldn't be able to maintain indefinite endurance.

Ahh but the turbolaser doesnt have nearly the same penetration value a Volcano cannon has...hence why it was used instead....the turbolaser would be more for enemy craft intercept models....as it would work better for it. But for penetrating a starship hull...no regular laser ( turbo or otherwise ) would stand a chance in the warp of doing it. The Volcano cannon was chosen specifically because of its penetration value vs size and ammo requirements....hence why i said the craft had an upgraded engine...It can stay out to harass and damage enemy ships far longer before needed to come back to replenish its fuel ( the only weapon systems on the ship are energy based ) It was designed around Extended patrol/intercept and combat roles. No "ammo" to replenish....or run out of...Upgraded powerplant with higher output and increased engine fuel stores as well as more efficient thruster engines. It is a purpose designed variant to eliminate the need for the older limited Starhawk bombers.

Also different variants will be included in wings / waves of them ( eg...ECM variant capable of hiding it and all in its immediate vicinity from auger sweeps...( read as hefty penalty to detect ) ) with moderate firepower ( light interceptor level ) A dedicated interceptor model ( likely with the above mentioned turbolaser ( thanks for the idea btw...im liking that idea quite a bit ) And a Scout model ( best quality high end auger arrays and both passive and active scan ability...ie large bonuses to detect and extended detection area ) that would include a bonus to speed.

Spd       Type

5             Primary / Bomber role

6            Interceptor

6            ECM

7            Scout

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
20 hours ago, Cobramax76 said:

Ahh but the turbolaser doesnt have nearly the same penetration value a Volcano cannon has...hence why it was used instead....the turbolaser would be more for enemy craft intercept models....as it would work better for it.

I fear it really wouldn't. The aeronautica Thunderhawk's turbolaser is a ground attack only weapon - even an astartes-tech, astartes-piloted gunship hasn't got the manoeuvrability to employ it against fast-moving targets because the rate of fire is so goddam awful (you got both ammo limits due to the sheer amount of charge you drew from the engines messing with your endurance, a single attack die compared to the hail of dice from the heavy bolters, and a lousy reload time. But it's worth it against ground targets because one hit makes them emphatically go away far better than any other imperial air-to-ground weapon short of a Marauder Colossus' single massive-ordnance bomb, and from further out - which is critical if said ground target is shooting back).

The Thunderhawk Annihilator was included in some later versions of the Space Marine Battlefleet Gothic list, and is the technical definition of Turbolaser rather than cannon-armed thawks. They counted as fighters & bombers (rather than fighters and assault boats as per standard thawks) but still just used the standard bomber rules; they didn't get any standoff range like torpedo-bombers would.

20 hours ago, Cobramax76 said:

The Volcano cannon was chosen specifically because of its penetration value vs size and ammo requirements....hence why i said the craft had an upgraded engine...It can stay out to harass and damage enemy ships far longer before needed to come back to replenish its fuel ( the only weapon systems on the ship are energy based )

I think fitting a volcano cannon to a small craft is definitely doable - as noted, if a Thawk can carry a single turbolaser, an equivalent - maybe ever so slightly larger chassis (because as noted a lot of the 'width' dimention of a thunderhawk is in its wings, not its core hull) - can pack a volcano cannon if it's giving up its troop capacity and maybe a couple of its secondary weapon mounts (make sure it has fighter cover!).

Note that the shadowsword volcano cannon - the MkII Synne pattern is an older version of shadowsword armament (the MkIV Phaeton is the current one) - is essentially a 'heavy turbolaser'. It is not a Bellicosa-pattern (the kind found on a warlord titan) as that thing explicitly needs a warlord- or ordinatus-grade reactor to power it and isn't far short of a single gun from a laser macrobattery.

More importantly, if you're building with anything short of really, really high-end archeotech (Inquisition, Assassinorium and Mechanicus' private toys-equivalent stuff) - more than just an old pattern that nevertheless used to be imperial army issue - you're still going to burn through your endurance really quickly. Note that fighters armed with a bunch of what are (compared to an all-up Volcano Cannon) pretty much popguns still exhaust their combat endurance in a single round dogfight. One combat turn represents not much short of a half-hour engagement; more than enough to fire several shots that would drain combat reserves and frankly start to burn out components (compare the novel Shadowsword and how much maintenance even a couple of volcano cannon shots imposes on the crew).

An upgraded power plant over a starhawk is good, but you're going to need it to use the volcano cannon in the first place. Better straight-line speed is fine, but (especially since said increased speed would also burn fuel faster) I don't think that you can claim unlimited endurance on anything that's going to be small enough to use smallcraft rules.

20 hours ago, Cobramax76 said:

ECM variant capable of hiding it and all in its immediate vicinity from auger sweeps...( read as hefty penalty to detect )

Note that no check is required to detect small craft.

  • Unlike a torpedo which can be fired 'deadfall' like a ballistic mine, have to have life support running continuously because they're manned
  • Unlike an all-up starship, they can't carry the 'cold mass' to avoid radiating heat or the volume of endurance to tolerate silent running
  • They're too small - even as a dedicated payload - to carry an ECM package which will inconvenience a starship, whose augur arrays are likely bigger than the combined volume of the entire squadron.

Jamming is not unreasonable in a small craft vs small craft situation - which would give you a bonus to dogfighting - but that's as easily modelled as a bonus to the interceptor version's craft rating rather than creating variant rules for the sake of rules, especially if that's also the interceptor variant. Give it a 'jamming system' rule to.....I dunno? Reduce/Increase the degrees of failure/success if in a dogfight?...where the Fury has 'Durable'. and you're good to go.

20 hours ago, Cobramax76 said:

A dedicated interceptor model ( likely with the above mentioned turbolaser ( thanks for the idea btw...im liking that idea quite a bit )

The turbolaser is not a practical small-craft-to-small-craft dogfighting weapon - see comments about Aeronautica above.

You'd do far better wrapping it in multiple lascannon turrets (assuming it's the same chassis as the 'strike' piranha, which is more a bomber than a fighter, it's not going to be able to turn well enough to want fixed mounts if it has a choice, so a turret-armed dogfighter like the Defiant is a better plan).

a05132.1.jpg

The Fury packs ten (fixed) lascannons and dogfighting missiles. Assuming you're confident you don't need the extended reach of missiles (that's one of the big narrative rather than rules effects of the jammer loadout), then you can probably pack a reduced total lascannon load in return for a number of lascannon turrets (say, three fixed front and three twin turrets, one on each wingtip and one dorsal), which makes up for your reduced agility with increased coverage and probably functions better in a confused many-on-many dogfight where everyone's comms and auspexes are buggered by jamming.

 

20 hours ago, Cobramax76 said:

And a Scout model ( best quality high end auger arrays and both passive and active scan ability...ie large bonuses to detect and extended detection area ) that would include a bonus to speed.

Don't anticipate a massive speed increase. Proper Imperial long-range recon command & control auspex systems (on a battlespace-wide scale or even a void combat scale) are at least as big and power-hungry as major weapons systems. The Marauder Vigilant (the Imperial Navy's aeronautica AWACS equivalent) is has the same performance specs as a standard Marauder bomber (and a touch less than the low-level gunship Destroyer variant), rather than more so.

MarauderVigilant01.jpg

This goes double for a void-recon fighter, which is going to need significantly more endurance tankage to be able to operate far enough out to meaningfully extend a starship's auspex range - you need to be something like a light-second out from your base ship to even increase the active augury range.

 

 

Essentially

  • More or less a starhawk-sized hull, meaning less agility than a 'fury, meaning squadrons of 8 or so craft
  • Slightly higher speed than a starhawk, slightly lower speed than a fury, due to oversized/overcharged engines.
  • Armour better than a fury, lower than a starhawk.
  • Piranha (standard)
    • Jamming System (bonuses to dogfighting)
    • Forward Pilot-Operated Triple Lascannons
    • Dorsal Gunner-Operated Twin Lascannon Turret
    • Wingtip Gunner-Operated Twin Lascannon Turrets
  • Piranha (strike variant)
    • Removes Jamming System, Forward Lascannons, Dorsal Lascannon to pack in main armament and a lot of capacitors.
    • Centreline Gunner-Operated Volcano Cannon
    • Wingtip Gunner-Operated Twin Lascannon Turrets
  • Piranha (vigilant variant)
    • Removes Jamming System, Forward Lascannons, Wingtip Lascannons to pack in auspex array and a huge set of additional fuel tanks.
    • Augur system (you could probably mount something not a million miles from a battle titan's auspex array)
    • Dorsal Gunner-Operated Twin Lascannon Turret

 

Edited by Magnus Grendel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 hours ago, Magnus Grendel said:

I fear it really wouldn't. The aeronautica Thunderhawk's turbolaser is a ground attack only weapon - even an astartes-tech, astartes-piloted gunship hasn't got the manoeuvrability to employ it against fast-moving targets because the rate of fire is so goddam awful (you got both ammo limits due to the sheer amount of charge you drew from the engines messing with your endurance, a single attack die compared to the hail of dice from the heavy bolters, and a lousy reload time. But it's worth it against ground targets because one hit makes them emphatically go away far better than any other imperial air-to-ground weapon short of a Marauder Colossus' single massive-ordnance bomb, and from further out - which is critical if said ground target is shooting back).

The Thunderhawk Annihilator was included in some later versions of the Space Marine Battlefleet Gothic list, and is the technical definition of Turbolaser rather than cannon-armed thawks. They counted as fighters & bombers (rather than fighters and assault boats as per standard thawks) but still just used the standard bomber rules; they didn't get any standoff range like torpedo-bombers would.

I think fitting a volcano cannon to a small craft is definitely doable - as noted, if a Thawk can carry a single turbolaser, an equivalent - maybe ever so slightly larger chassis (because as noted a lot of the 'width' dimention of a thunderhawk is in its wings, not its core hull) - can pack a volcano cannon if it's giving up its troop capacity and maybe a couple of its secondary weapon mounts (make sure it has fighter cover!).

Note that the shadowsword volcano cannon - the MkII Synne pattern is an older version of shadowsword armament (the MkIV Phaeton is the current one) - is essentially a 'heavy turbolaser'. It is not a Bellicosa-pattern (the kind found on a warlord titan) as that thing explicitly needs a warlord- or ordinatus-grade reactor to power it and isn't far short of a single gun from a laser macrobattery.

More importantly, if you're building with anything short of really, really high-end archeotech (Inquisition, Assassinorium and Mechanicus' private toys-equivalent stuff) - more than just an old pattern that nevertheless used to be imperial army issue - you're still going to burn through your endurance really quickly. Note that fighters armed with a bunch of what are (compared to an all-up Volcano Cannon) pretty much popguns still exhaust their combat endurance in a single round dogfight. One combat turn represents not much short of a half-hour engagement; more than enough to fire several shots that would drain combat reserves and frankly start to burn out components (compare the novel Shadowsword and how much maintenance even a couple of volcano cannon shots imposes on the crew).

An upgraded power plant over a starhawk is good, but you're going to need it to use the volcano cannon in the first place. Better straight-line speed is fine, but (especially since said increased speed would also burn fuel faster) I don't think that you can claim unlimited endurance on anything that's going to be small enough to use smallcraft rules.

Note that no check is required to detect small craft.

  • Unlike a torpedo which can be fired 'deadfall' like a ballistic mine, have to have life support running continuously because they're manned
  • Unlike an all-up starship, they can't carry the 'cold mass' to avoid radiating heat or the volume of endurance to tolerate silent running
  • They're too small - even as a dedicated payload - to carry an ECM package which will inconvenience a starship, whose augur arrays are likely bigger than the combined volume of the entire squadron.

Jamming is not unreasonable in a small craft vs small craft situation - which would give you a bonus to dogfighting - but that's as easily modelled as a bonus to the interceptor version's craft rating rather than creating variant rules for the sake of rules, especially if that's also the interceptor variant. Give it a 'jamming system' rule to.....I dunno? Reduce/Increase the degrees of failure/success if in a dogfight?...where the Fury has 'Durable'. and you're good to go.

The turbolaser is not a practical small-craft-to-small-craft dogfighting weapon - see comments about Aeronautica above.

You'd do far better wrapping it in multiple lascannon turrets (assuming it's the same chassis as the 'strike' piranha, which is more a bomber than a fighter, it's not going to be able to turn well enough to want fixed mounts if it has a choice, so a turret-armed dogfighter like the Defiant is a better plan).

a05132.1.jpg

The Fury packs ten (fixed) lascannons and dogfighting missiles. Assuming you're confident you don't need the extended reach of missiles (that's one of the big narrative rather than rules effects of the jammer loadout), then you can probably pack a reduced total lascannon load in return for a number of lascannon turrets (say, three fixed front and three twin turrets, one on each wingtip and one dorsal), which makes up for your reduced agility with increased coverage and probably functions better in a confused many-on-many dogfight where everyone's comms and auspexes are buggered by jamming.

 

Don't anticipate a massive speed increase. Proper Imperial long-range recon command & control auspex systems (on a battlespace-wide scale or even a void combat scale) are at least as big and power-hungry as major weapons systems. The Marauder Vigilant (the Imperial Navy's aeronautica AWACS equivalent) is has the same performance specs as a standard Marauder bomber (and a touch less than the low-level gunship Destroyer variant), rather than more so.

MarauderVigilant01.jpg

This goes double for a void-recon fighter, which is going to need significantly more endurance tankage to be able to operate far enough out to meaningfully extend a starship's auspex range - you need to be something like a light-second out from your base ship to even increase the active augury range.

 

 

Essentially

  • More or less a starhawk-sized hull, meaning less agility than a 'fury, meaning squadrons of 8 or so craft
  • Slightly higher speed than a starhawk, slightly lower speed than a fury, due to oversized/overcharged engines.
  • Armour better than a fury, lower than a starhawk.
  • Piranha (standard)
    • Jamming System (bonuses to dogfighting)
    • Forward Pilot-Operated Triple Lascannons
    • Dorsal Gunner-Operated Twin Lascannon Turret
    • Wingtip Gunner-Operated Twin Lascannon Turrets
  • Piranha (strike variant)
    • Removes Jamming System, Forward Lascannons, Dorsal Lascannon to pack in main armament and a lot of capacitors.
    • Centreline Gunner-Operated Volcano Cannon
    • Wingtip Gunner-Operated Twin Lascannon Turrets
  • Piranha (vigilant variant)
    • Removes Jamming System, Forward Lascannons, Wingtip Lascannons to pack in auspex array and a huge set of additional fuel tanks.
    • Augur system (you could probably mount something not a million miles from a battle titan's auspex array)
    • Dorsal Gunner-Operated Twin Lascannon Turret

 

The biggest flaw in all of it is simply this. Agility in atmosphere counts for damned near everything.Agility in space...is nothing more than keeping away from or using the gravity wells from celestial bodies/phenomena to assist in said agility. In space NOTHING MATTERS towards agility. EXCEPT how many maneuvering thrusters you put on the body! ZERO-G for a reason and also equates to ZERO WEIGHT. To continue moving in a given direction in a ship you literally have to do NADDA! Just kill the engines and coast in at the EXACT SAME speed you were going when you shut off the engines INDEFINITELY ( until you get into a gravity well of some sort ) If you keep adding thrust then in actuality your speed would continue to increase by that amount each turn. So...They burn out full throttle get into their vector and once verified kill throttle and let it coast to designated target area...saving reaction mass and power and reducing EM signature considerably. Furthermore by removing redundant totally unnecessary crew by using high end servitors leaving the pilot which can be linked into a separate O2 supply directly to the helmet. ( All the bull about high G turns and maneuvers in space is just that...bull..Unless your in a celestial bodies gravity well there is NO "G-Force" for turns or anything else....The one that wins the battle is the one that can remember to think 3D and has the better thrusters for vector changes...NO more NO less. Also..Bolters in space...gimme a break..Frakkin useless. At the speeds these fighters and bombers come in at...you couldnt figure the angle of deflection in order to put your nose or worse yet...turret...in order to hit these things...Even at 1VU per turn...thats 20,000km/hr...and these ships are doing 4-6VU per turn ( IE 8-10VU/hr )

As for the Volcano Cannon vs Turbolaser deal...the raw damage potential is a one hit kill regardless ( which is what is wanted ) All the lascannons and extra crap is worthless as NONE of it can do a one hit kill shot ( unless you get the god emperors grace and hit the cockpit ) You can have 5 million rounds of ammo but if you cant make it hit the target...you got nothing. One shot One kill vs spray and pray...And as for the quality level of the kit on the ships ( as well as their design ) yes it is high end Ad mech.

As for the jamming..yes that was what i had in mind...shielding the other ships coming in on the attack wave and they wouldnt have much in way of defensives ( chaff and flare against missiles etc ) but likely minimal lascannons etc for deterrent.....just the wingmates in the other variants to cover. I was thinking of a basic scout class ( lighter frame/armour with further upgraded engines for better power to weight thrust ratio ) As for the auger range...it doesnt need to be that much more....No one is gonna be able to see 1 VU away in space and identify anything short of a large asteroid or small moon anyway...) Running in passive modes reduces chances of detection by enemy ships ( but wont mitigate it totally ) Big ships can detect lone aquila landers at range ( it IS in the fluff on many occasions ) I dont use BFG rules for RT anyway ( only the size,range,damage,crit,power )

As for overall detection of any of them...HA...thats simple. Its all in the paint coating the entire hull of the ships....Similar style they use in personal armors works the same for bigger machines as well ( just the amount to kit a squadron is an Acquisition test ( at variable penalty or bonus depending on where you are and who you are dealing with etc )

I like BFG for the ship design setup thats in direct line with RT but i use almost NONE of their BS rules for ships and stellar behavior. OH the perks of having an old HS buddy that has always been an avid gamer AND worked for NASA as an aerospace engineer...you learn alot sometimes.

In the end its always nice to have these nice little long lost devices called perpetual plasma reactors....no more refueling....no more power problems...Archeotech has its uses.  The plasma is used as both power and to a point siphoned into containment for use as thrust via shunted ports. It takes next to no reaction mass to alter trajectories of things in space ( again unless your in a gravity well of something )

 

I do like those Piranha variant ideas though...modified to a point yes but they are quite appealing even as is. Thank you for those.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
50 minutes ago, Cobramax76 said:

In space NOTHING MATTERS towards agility. EXCEPT how many maneuvering thrusters you put on the body! ZERO-G for a reason and also equates to ZERO WEIGHT.

Zero G does mean no weight but mass and inertia still matters for changing velocity. A less massive fury will still turn tighter with the same engine power.

50 minutes ago, Cobramax76 said:

To continue moving in a given direction in a ship you literally have to do NADDA! Just kill the engines and coast in at the EXACT SAME speed you were going when you shut off the engines INDEFINITELY ( until you get into a gravity well of some sort )

Correct. It does make you a bit predictable should someone chose to lob a shot in your direction, but I'm assuming you wouldn't do that inside 'combat radius'.

50 minutes ago, Cobramax76 said:

So...They burn out full throttle get into their vector and once verified kill throttle and let it coast to designated target area...saving reaction mass and power and reducing EM signature considerably.

Not quite correct - at least not a great idea.

A 5 VU displacement over 1 turn is somewhere between 5,000 and 50,000 km in 30 minutes depending on the environment (1VU is defined as between 1,000km and 10,000km). Taking the lower value of 5,000km, that requires a continuous acceleration of about 3G, which is perfectly survivable but will do your long-term coronary health no good whatsoever. Trying to do that with near-instantaneous acceleration over, say a couple of minutes or so - especially in 'open space' where a VU represents more like ten times that distance - would require the kind of acceleration which will reduce your pilot to a smear on the back of the compartment.

You do experience g-force in space. The engines accelerate the ship, and the ship accelerates you by pushing you in the back with the chair. Zero G is 'everyone falling at the same speed', which precludes manoeuvring.

50 minutes ago, Cobramax76 said:

All the bull about high G turns and maneuvers in space is just that...bull..Unless your in a celestial bodies gravity well there is NO "G-Force" for turns or anything else....The one that wins the battle is the one that can remember to think 3D and has the better thrusters for vector changes...NO more NO less

And the ability to tolerate the effects of said vector changes. Which is one of the biggest advantages astartes have, and one of the reasons Thunderhawks have a 4+ save in Battlefleet Gothic compared to the arguably just as tough and well-armed Fury.

50 minutes ago, Cobramax76 said:

Also..Bolters in space...gimme a break..Frakkin useless. At the speeds these fighters and bombers come in at...you couldnt figure the angle of deflection in order to put your nose or worse yet...turret...in order to hit these things...Even at 1VU per turn...thats 20,000km/hr...and these ships are doing 4-6VU per turn ( IE 8-10VU/hr )

Hence the main space-to-space dogfighting weapons are the tail-mount lascannons on a thunderhawk. The heavy bolters mentioned are point defence when doing close-in assault-boat work when more-or-less stationary relative to a capital ship or when landing troops or fighting inside an atmosphere.

That's not to say firing bolt shells like they're going out of fashion is useless - Dogfights - at least as described in the novels (don't poke the science; if you're wanting complete accuracy then 40k is the wrong setting) do often happen within a few kilometres and with broadly matched velocities. equally, when the thing you're firing at is a torpedo spread which doesn't evade and is on a predictable path, or you're just trying to put rounds into the path of someone or something trying to head straight at you, more shots never hurt.

50 minutes ago, Cobramax76 said:

As for the Volcano Cannon vs Turbolaser deal...the raw damage potential is a one hit kill regardless ( which is what is wanted ) All the lascannons and extra crap is worthless as NONE of it can do a one hit kill shot ( unless you get the god emperors grace and hit the cockpit ) You can have 5 million rounds of ammo but if you cant make it hit the target...you got nothing. One shot One kill vs spray and pray...And as for the quality level of the kit on the ships ( as well as their design ) yes it is high end Ad mech.

True, but you don't have to have 'one hit kill' to kill a target. Rotary cannons and multiple machine guns are the order of the day in the real world when agile targets (like fighters) engage precisely because getting a hit is the hard part; most shots will miss in this environment and rate-of-fire is the best way to compensate.

If you can put a certain amount of energy downrange, it's better to do it as three hundred lascannon shots rather than a couple of volcano cannon shots because if even ten of those lascannon bolts connect it's probably enough to kill (or at least cripple) an attack craft.

50 minutes ago, Cobramax76 said:

As for the jamming..yes that was what i had in mind...shielding the other ships coming in on the attack wave and they wouldnt have much in way of defensives ( chaff and flare against missiles etc ) but likely minimal lascannons etc for deterrent.....just the wingmates in the other variants to cover. I was thinking of a basic scout class ( lighter frame/armour with further upgraded engines for better power to weight thrust ratio )

Pretty much. As noted, though, whilst blinding the auspex systems of defensive fighters is quite realistic, don't anticipate it doing much to an M-100 or M-201.b starship augur array, just given the differential of size and power.

50 minutes ago, Cobramax76 said:

for the auger range...it doesnt need to be that much more....No one is gonna be able to see 1 VU away in space and identify anything short of a large asteroid or small moon anyway...) Running in passive modes reduces chances of detection by enemy ships ( but wont mitigate it totally ) Big ships can detect lone aquila landers at range ( it IS in the fluff on many occasions )

Depends on circumstances.

A ship - even a small craft - under power has a plasma flare that you're going to be able to see easily at least a light second away (30VU), even if it's not pinging auspex. If it's not burning engines it's going to be harder to see but it's still going to show up on IR because running without manoeuvring still needs the engines burning because the plasma turbine is your power plant, you can't travel 'cold' for long without killing the crew and more importantly it makes the auspex work, and starting a power plant from cold is always shown as a big job for a tech-priest and not something that can really be done 'in the field' 

50 minutes ago, Cobramax76 said:

As for overall detection of any of them...HA...thats simple. Its all in the paint coating the entire hull of the ships....Similar style they use in personal armors works the same for bigger machines as well ( just the amount to kit a squadron is an Acquisition test ( at variable penalty or bonus depending on where you are and who you are dealing with etc )

It's not about dispersing active pings so much as their own 'leaking' heat. You can't avoid leaking heat because if you bottle it up, somehow, you're going to broil the crew. Thermal emissions can be picked up from interplanetary ranges, with the right (modern) tech.

A starship is big enough to soak a lot of heat energy into the keel and structure before increased temperature starts to be an issue.

50 minutes ago, Cobramax76 said:

In the end its always nice to have these nice little long lost devices called perpetual plasma reactors....no more refueling....no more power problems...Archeotech has its uses

Archeotech does whatever the GM says it does, but at the same time I'm not touching that one with a bargepole other than to point out that we're talking about a fighter smallcraft.

Assuming a carrier along the lines of a dictator with two capital-class launch bays, that's about ten ships per squadron (if it's the same size as a starhawk), times three squadrons per point of launch capacity (appropriately enough for the rules probably one each of strike, recon, interceptor), times two points of launch capacity per bay, times two bays per ship.

That means we're talking about over a hundred of these things manufactured to order, plus loss replacements. That's well beyond 'I found non-replicable old archeotech artefact' territory.

50 minutes ago, Cobramax76 said:

It takes next to no reaction mass to alter trajectories of things in space

Depends how quickly you throw said reaction mass out the back. But, the faster you do, the higher energy plasma you're probably talking about, the bigger an energy spike you'll produce.

Edited by Magnus Grendel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 6/21/2018 at 9:39 AM, Magnus Grendel said:

Zero G does mean no weight but mass and inertia still matters for changing velocity. A less massive fury will still turn tighter with the same engine power.

Correct. It does make you a bit predictable should someone chose to lob a shot in your direction, but I'm assuming you wouldn't do that inside 'combat radius'.

Not quite correct - at least not a great idea.

A 5 VU displacement over 1 turn is somewhere between 5,000 and 50,000 km in 30 minutes depending on the environment (1VU is defined as between 1,000km and 10,000km). Taking the lower value of 5,000km, that requires a continuous acceleration of about 3G, which is perfectly survivable but will do your long-term coronary health no good whatsoever. Trying to do that with near-instantaneous acceleration over, say a couple of minutes or so - especially in 'open space' where a VU represents more like ten times that distance - would require the kind of acceleration which will reduce your pilot to a smear on the back of the compartment.

You do experience g-force in space. The engines accelerate the ship, and the ship accelerates you by pushing you in the back with the chair. Zero G is 'everyone falling at the same speed', which precludes manoeuvring.

And the ability to tolerate the effects of said vector changes. Which is one of the biggest advantages astartes have, and one of the reasons Thunderhawks have a 4+ save in Battlefleet Gothic compared to the arguably just as tough and well-armed Fury.

Hence the main space-to-space dogfighting weapons are the tail-mount lascannons on a thunderhawk. The heavy bolters mentioned are point defence when doing close-in assault-boat work when more-or-less stationary relative to a capital ship or when landing troops or fighting inside an atmosphere.

That's not to say firing bolt shells like they're going out of fashion is useless - Dogfights - at least as described in the novels (don't poke the science; if you're wanting complete accuracy then 40k is the wrong setting) do often happen within a few kilometres and with broadly matched velocities. equally, when the thing you're firing at is a torpedo spread which doesn't evade and is on a predictable path, or you're just trying to put rounds into the path of someone or something trying to head straight at you, more shots never hurt.

True, but you don't have to have 'one hit kill' to kill a target. Rotary cannons and multiple machine guns are the order of the day in the real world when agile targets (like fighters) engage precisely because getting a hit is the hard part; most shots will miss in this environment and rate-of-fire is the best way to compensate.

If you can put a certain amount of energy downrange, it's better to do it as three hundred lascannon shots rather than a couple of volcano cannon shots because if even ten of those lascannon bolts connect it's probably enough to kill (or at least cripple) an attack craft.

Pretty much. As noted, though, whilst blinding the auspex systems of defensive fighters is quite realistic, don't anticipate it doing much to an M-100 or M-201.b starship augur array, just given the differential of size and power.

Depends on circumstances.

A ship - even a small craft - under power has a plasma flare that you're going to be able to see easily at least a light second away (30VU), even if it's not pinging auspex. If it's not burning engines it's going to be harder to see but it's still going to show up on IR because running without manoeuvring still needs the engines burning because the plasma turbine is your power plant, you can't travel 'cold' for long without killing the crew and more importantly it makes the auspex work, and starting a power plant from cold is always shown as a big job for a tech-priest and not something that can really be done 'in the field' 

It's not about dispersing active pings so much as their own 'leaking' heat. You can't avoid leaking heat because if you bottle it up, somehow, you're going to broil the crew. Thermal emissions can be picked up from interplanetary ranges, with the right (modern) tech.

A starship is big enough to soak a lot of heat energy into the keel and structure before increased temperature starts to be an issue.

Archeotech does whatever the GM says it does, but at the same time I'm not touching that one with a bargepole other than to point out that we're talking about a fighter smallcraft.

Assuming a carrier along the lines of a dictator with two capital-class launch bays, that's about ten ships per squadron (if it's the same size as a starhawk), times three squadrons per point of launch capacity (appropriately enough for the rules probably one each of strike, recon, interceptor), times two points of launch capacity per bay, times two bays per ship.

That means we're talking about over a hundred of these things manufactured to order, plus loss replacements. That's well beyond 'I found non-replicable old archeotech artefact' territory.

Depends how quickly you throw said reaction mass out the back. But, the faster you do, the higher energy plasma you're probably talking about, the bigger an energy spike you'll produce.

OK..In order...lol

1) The mass/inertia vs turn ability. That specific was mentioned in a previous comment about simply adding more vector thrust nozzles to increase your crafts Maneuver rating. ( To which there is actually a component in the game for doing just that )

2) As for moving in a straight line.  Yes agreed it would not be done in a combat arena..but getting to one to help out your team/side however.....definite possibility ( which is what i was thinking anyway )

3) You ONLY feel the inertia of acceleration IF...IF you are still within a planetary bodies ( or stellar phenomena ) field of gravity OR....are using the gravity plating common to all Imperial ships ( something that CAN be turned off....and would be for combat vessels that are controlled NOT by hand ( too sloppy and ineffectual ) but by full MIU interface with the ship by the pilot ( and servitor crew )

4) In planetary landing or orbital missions yes that would have to be taken into account unless you wanted an epic crash and burn scenario but there are ways to make the pilot able to take more than an Astartes could. Its called bionics and even full cybernetic replacement/enhancements and better equipment than the astartes bother with or have access to. ( The Thunderhawks were always far inferior to their older predecessors. ) In fact the files on the Lathe Forges specifically flesh out that exact pilot type as they have a class of pilot that is said to be THE best of them all.

5) I have yet to read one that actually details a dogfight in space. Only attack runs and boarding ops into enemy ships. The only dogfights ive read about are ALL within the planetary atmospheric envelope ( or coming into it at high speed)

6) The one point you missed with this particular variant is simple. They are not meant to be dogfighters...The smallest thing they are meant to intercept would be a scout sloop ( still almost 1000m long ) but usually to attack destroyers - cruisers and try to knock out auger arrays, turret rating, engines, bridge, weapons,etc....no real Hull Integrity damage in game dynamics but enough to temporarily cripple certain hardpoints ( except for the bridge...that is a bit much to come back from im afraid ) IE..the target ship given enough time could repair all damage done by this specialty fighters attacks. In this regard i have seriously limited this specialty class for balance purposes. It comes in and allows the true bombers ( and waves of torpedoes launched from the main ship ) to hit their mark with more success rating ( due to lower defensive rating of target ship vs a more permanent damaging strike of a true bomber )

7) As for the auspex arrays versus stealthing out the ship...Our current methods prove your hypothesis incorrect. The B2 Spirit for instance..or the newer generation fighters...they appear as much much smaller than they really are. Given the right angles of design and outer materials and coatings the power of the auspex means nadda.

8) HAHAHA...you forgot one important thing there...Yes it the engine flare could be seen IF...you were seeing it from behind or a rear angle.....AND...you had a sufficiently powered telescope and were looking right at it when it was on. I was talking about with the naked eye. a full 360* sphere is ALOT of area to cover by eye.

9) The 40k verse can and has done exactly that...The Ravenguard did exactly that. They had a type of shield ( reflex ) that altered and brought the emissions to practically zero from the ship to include visual stealthing. They used it during the Heresy and before as that is where i found it from. It is alterable with a regular shield but takes 1 turn to switch from one type to the other ( the ONLY example where a ship can have two types...as it is truly only one simply with 2 "modes" of function )

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Cobramax76 said:

The mass/inertia vs turn ability. That specific was mentioned in a previous comment about simply adding more vector thrust nozzles to increase your crafts Maneuver rating. ( To which there is actually a component in the game for doing just that )

Which expends your delta V reserves faster and reduces your effective endurance. But the point is, reducing your mass is just as effective as increasing your engine power, and - more importantly - a larger, more massive ship will manouvre worse with the same engine power.

Zero G does equal Zero Weight, but as long as you have mass Zero Weight is not Zero Momentum.

2 hours ago, Cobramax76 said:

2) As for moving in a straight line.  Yes agreed it would not be done in a combat arena..but getting to one to help out your team/side however.....definite possibility ( which is what i was thinking anyway )

The problem is not that it's not a fast way to make transit, it's that it's not really survivable due to the acceleration.

2 hours ago, Cobramax76 said:

3) You ONLY feel the inertia of acceleration IF...IF you are still within a planetary bodies ( or stellar phenomena ) field of gravity OR....are using the gravity plating common to all Imperial ships ( something that CAN be turned off....and would be for combat vessels that are controlled NOT by hand ( too sloppy and ineffectual ) but by full MIU interface with the ship by the pilot ( and servitor crew )

Not true. If you are in a ship which is accelerating at 9.81m/s^2 forwards, the ship accelerates you at the same rate (otherwise you'd fall backwards through the ship). That acceleration is what pushes you back into your seat at a perceived 1.0 G.

Gravity plating is actually something which can stop that - the primary function of grav plating on imperial starship is inertial protection - which is why imperial capital ships can pull 5-6 G. Strike craft, however, do not have artificial gravity because it's too 'big' a technology for small craft - see continuous references to even astartes-tech and assassinorium-tech small-craft (multiple horus heresy books, beast arises, Execution Force) experiencing G-force when manouvring and using mag-lock boots.

3 hours ago, Cobramax76 said:

6) The one point you missed with this particular variant is simple. They are not meant to be dogfighters...The smallest thing they are meant to intercept would be a scout sloop ( still almost 1000m long ) but usually to attack destroyers - cruisers and try to knock out auger arrays, turret rating, engines, bridge, weapons,etc....no real Hull Integrity damage in game dynamics but enough to temporarily cripple certain hardpoints ( except for the bridge...that is a bit much to come back from im afraid ) IE..the target ship given enough time could repair all damage done by this specialty fighters attacks. In this regard i have seriously limited this specialty class for balance purposes. It comes in and allows the true bombers ( and waves of torpedoes launched from the main ship ) to hit their mark with more success rating ( due to lower defensive rating of target ship vs a more permanent damaging strike of a true bomber )

Being able to take out a macrobattery but not able to inflict hull damage seems a little odd. Hit and Run attacks can do this but do so by applying small chunks of damage inside the hull armour. Minimal damage to turrets and auspex to support the bombers is a thing in BFG - turret suppression - I can't recall if it's in the Battlefleet Koronus rules or not.

3 hours ago, Cobramax76 said:

7) As for the auspex arrays versus stealthing out the ship...Our current methods prove your hypothesis incorrect. The B2 Spirit for instance..or the newer generation fighters...they appear as much much smaller than they really are. Given the right angles of design and outer materials and coatings the power of the auspex means nadda. 

This is a difference between (a) stealth and (b) jamming. Jamming is a blanket transmission of 'garbage' signals - theoretically the best way to blind sensors, but it does kind of announce 'hey, stupid! we're over here!" when you use it.

Stealth by hull design is a different issue - theoretically it works, reducing reflective cross-section. However, the power of the auspex does matter, because if you (say) reduce the reflected strength by 75%, you still get 25% 'pinged' back, so the sensor return from an M-100 will be less than an M-201.b.

However, I'm not talking about active sensors, so much as passives, since (given 'active augury' being a non-automatic extended action) it's implied passives are the more important sensors.

3 hours ago, Cobramax76 said:

? HAHAHA...you forgot one important thing there...Yes it the engine flare could be seen IF...you were seeing it from behind or a rear angle.....AND...you had a sufficiently powered telescope and were looking right at it when it was on. I was talking about with the naked eye. a full 360* sphere is ALOT of area to cover by eye.

Not necessarily. You're producing thrust by kicking hot particles backward - you produce a continuous thermal trail pointed at your hull.

Even the F-22 and similar stealth aircraft have issues in atmosphere with potential passive thermal detection - but they have the advantage that they're not against a background of not-quite-absolute-zero.

360' is hard to watch, but the problem is much like submarines on passive - the more you want to accelerate, the more of a 'spike' you produce.

3 hours ago, Cobramax76 said:

9) The 40k verse can and has done exactly that...The Ravenguard did exactly that. They had a type of shield ( reflex ) that altered and brought the emissions to practically zero from the ship to include visual stealthing. They used it during the Heresy and before as that is where i found it from. It is alterable with a regular shield but takes 1 turn to switch from one type to the other ( the ONLY example where a ship can have two types...as it is truly only one simply with 2 "modes" of function )

The raven guard reflex field is also not a jammer - it's a third type, called 'active cloaking' (in this case dumping the energy buildup into the warp - the reverse of normal void shields, which do that to incoming fire). There are three issues with that:

1) It's not perfect - a minor issue, no form of stealth truly is - but you're going to have to have it 'on' as long as you want stealth - fine for a starship with an all-up reactor. Less so with a strike craft with defined endurance of a few hours.

2) It is based off heavy-duty void shields - the smallest craft we've seen with void shields is a full-on sokar-pattern stormbird, not even a thunderhawk. The smallest thing we've seen reflex fields on is a warlord-class titan, and even that was a 'holy Beep!' moment.

3) There's not, that I've seen, even been any indication the raven guard have these anymore. One ship having irreplacable archeotech is one thing; squadrons of dozens or hundreds of craft?

I've seen the Reflex field in heresy books, but I've never seen rules for them for rogue trader.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/8/2018 at 12:31 PM, Magnus Grendel said:

3) There's not, that I've seen, even been any indication the raven guard have these anymore. One ship having irreplacable archeotech is one thing; squadrons of dozens or hundreds of craft?

I've seen the Reflex field in heresy books, but I've never seen rules for them for rogue trader.

Ive found a set of rules for them specifically for the rogue trader line but they are fan based but do seem to work quite well. They have a heavy limitation on timeframe to switch from stealth to active void shield modes ( in stealth they provide ZERO actual protection from damage ) and do cost a bit different as far as power and space goes. If youd like a copy of the file ( i have edited several other items into it for a larger more comprehensive listing but the section on the Reflex Shielding is as i found it ) then just let me know in PM and i can email you a copy if youd like. I have an extensive listing of various items and components etc that ive found and in some rare cases created ( basing them off fluff entries by various authors etc )

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
12 minutes ago, Cobramax76 said:

in stealth they provide ZERO actual protection from damage

Correct. When in reflex mode they are inverted, and only stop outgoing energy, not incoming.

I'll have a natter to my player group and see if people are interested.

Thanks. :)

 

Edited by Magnus Grendel

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...