"Best (Guided) Missile / Torpedo Rules - Help Wanted!" Topic
34 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
Please don't make fun of others' membernames.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Modern Naval Discussion (1946 to 2013) Message Board Back to the Game Design Message Board Back to the Spaceship Gaming Message Board
Areas of InterestGeneral Modern Science Fiction
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Link
Featured Ruleset
Featured Workbench ArticleHundvig is not a real big fan of pre-painted minis, and he positively despises randomly-packed "collectable" ones - so why is he writing this article?
Current Poll
Featured Book Review
Featured Movie Review
|
The Membership System will be closing for maintenance in 10 minutes. Please finish anything that will involve the membership system, including membership changes or posting of messages.
MacrossMartin | 12 Apr 2016 6:16 p.m. PST |
Hello All, Having an acute lack of fun trying to write up a set of near-future SF rules in which guided torpedoes / missiles play a significant role. Thus, I turn to my fellow TMP'ers for guidance. I'm determined to avoid written orders, and loathe to require players to record speeds or other data for each weapon launched. Each time I tackle the issue from that angle, it becomes a fun-drowning quagmire. But at the same time, I don't want to resort to merely fobbing off by saying torp/missiles are just a bigger / more accurate damage roll. At the moment, I'm working to the idea that when a weapon launches, it is placed tailing the target. (Nice psychological factor – "it's after me!!") measure distance from launcher to target – for every 'X' of distance, attacker gets a roll to lock on to the target, and strike. Mods for detection abilities, target stealth and aspect, etc. Fail to strike after 'X' attempts, we assume missile has self-destructed, gone off, lost power, etc. Not sure this is the way to go… would appreciate others' thoughts. What SF or modern naval rules have you used which gave you a satisfying but not cumbersome simulation of guided weapons? Ta! – Martin |
TheBeast | 12 Apr 2016 7:02 p.m. PST |
for every 'X' of distance The greater the distance, the better the chance? I'll cogitate a suggestion tomorrow. Maybe, by then, someone will better anything I could offer. ;->= Doug |
MacrossMartin | 12 Apr 2016 7:26 p.m. PST |
I didn't clarify that bit about 'X', but that's because I'm still muddling through the thought process… This should provide some clarification: Let's say 'X' = 3. That translates to 3 turns of chasing the target before boom. How many dice does the torp roll? Let's give the torp 4 dice to sniff out the target. At 1 turn range, the torp gets to roll all dice (4), -1 die for each turn further out. So – Range 1 4 dice Range 2 3 dice Range 3 2 dice Range 4 1 dice Range 5 0 dice – can't launch. = Torp rolls 2 dice at 3 turns out. Each success = -1 turn to impact. (It's becoming more certain of where the target is, so less to-ing and fro-ing as it searches.) Meanwhile, the target is using stealth, ecm, etc, to counter the torp, so there's an opposing roll from the defender – each success = +1 turn to impact. I'm making this up as I go, folks… |
Extra Crispy | 12 Apr 2016 8:07 p.m. PST |
So a turn is what – a minute? |
MacrossMartin | 12 Apr 2016 8:18 p.m. PST |
Have not specified exact period of a turn, EC, still bashing out the way the game feels. By 'turn' I mean one full rotation of the game: Initiative – Player Actions – Endphase. The purpose is to give the sense that the torp is hunting away, closing the distance, rather than just racing straight at its victim immediately. I've noticed that a lot of SF rules see torps and missiles this way, with perhaps the added mechanic of a lock-on or a re-roll for being guided. I want to avoid this approach. My design goal in regard to this aspect is to give the feel of a torpedo, stalking its target, getting faster and louder as its acquisition data improves. |
Oberlindes Sol LIC | 12 Apr 2016 9:07 p.m. PST |
In space or in the water? |
MacrossMartin | 12 Apr 2016 9:32 p.m. PST |
Glenn – underwater, but that, I should stress, is just the setting concept. My stress at the moment is getting the balance between playability and the 'feel' of the combat. Terrement – active and passive countermeasures are included in the game. Passive ones increase the time the torpedo must spend hunting, (meaning it may run out of time and go dead,) while active ones can destroy the weapon. |
Mako11 | 12 Apr 2016 11:50 p.m. PST |
I get your desire, but you'll spend a lot of time moving little chits about, especially when multiple weapons are fired. See the old Air War rules from the 1970s/1980s. They used to track missile movements, in addition to those of aircraft as well. The problem was, you needed to have 3 chits for each missile, IIRC, e.g. one for the last position of the missile, one for the current one, and one for the projected next position as well Also, see the Full Thrust variants for how they handle torpedoes and missiles. Personally, I think doing away with them, and abstracting the detection/acquisition, countermeasures, and then rolling for To-Hit and Damage are the way to go, unless each vessel can only launch/control a very small number of torpedoes at one time. Also, to simplify things, once detection/acquisition occurs, don't reroll for that again, unless the contact is broken in some way, e.g. active or passive countermeasures, etc.. That should help streamline things a bit. |
MacrossMartin | 13 Apr 2016 1:52 a.m. PST |
Mako's thinking is pretty much my own. I was pulling my hair out over avoiding multiple chits for tracking movement, speed, altitude, etc, etc, etc! What I've go at the moment requires only ONE, double-sided counter for the weapon. This is placed on the tail of the target, and follows wherever it goes. The weapon isn't actually right there, stuck to the target, but it provides a visual reminder that trouble is coming for you. A single die tracks the number of turns that the weapon has, before it runs out of chances to launch its attack, runs out of power, and drifts away. One side of the counter shows the weapon is 'Active' – eagerly looking for its target, engine at max output. The other is 'Passive' – when it is being sneaky and quiet, stalking its prey. Active weapons get there quicker, with a better chance per roll of hitting, but have less time to do so, and risk being countermeasured. Passives take longer, have a lower chance of hitting, but countermeasures can't see them until the last moment. Thus, the speed and actual location of the weapon is abstracted, but everyone knows where it intends to go, and how its going about getting there. As for detection / acquisition – yep, once you see the target, you don't actually 'unsee' it, but a weapon might be forced to spend more time searching, and that means it might run out of power before it finds its target… All this is handled in a simple mechanic – weapon rolls a hand of die, each success (defined by the target's signature level) reduces the time to impact. (Weapon is getting more sure of itself, spending less time wandering around looking) If the time drops to zero – Boom! Countermeasures increase the time to impact ('Where'd he go? Hey, what's that over there? I'll just go look…") with the same mechanic – hand of dice, each success adds +1 turn of looking. Still scratching my head over some aspects of the endurance of the weapons, but I think its a working mechanic now. Mind you, I thought that before I started the hair-pulling! Oh, and thank you everyone for your input so far. :) |
Extra Crispy | 13 Apr 2016 5:58 a.m. PST |
I'm just imagining firing a spread of 4 guided torps/missiles and having a few other ships do the same. Suddenly we're spending all day rolling dice to see if anything lands. Does not sound fun. Now, if they are one at a time and only a few ships have them, I think this level of detail might actually add something. Especially if they are devastating if they hit. If we do all this tracking and dice rolling just to do 3 hull hits….meh. But if they take out 1/3 of your hull plus loads of crits, now you're on to something. I think one reason a lot of games abstract this out is, in the future won't everything be guided? Are you really going to put a billion dollar weapon in space that is aimed by Luke using the force? Or will you launch a platform of million dollar guided/seeking weapons? So I'd have a missile phase of the turn. For each missile roll the hunting dice and the avoidance dice. Then adjust the "closing distance" of the weapon with distance 0 = boom. I'd use a dice dock so you can load one die showing the endurance of the weapon and one showing the closing distance. The endurance counts down and either you get a boom or just a Pffft. In any case you have TWO stats for the missile. Endurance/fuel left and distance or time to target. |
MacrossMartin | 13 Apr 2016 6:29 a.m. PST |
You're very close to where I am now, EC. I've gotten the torps stat down to a single number, called Threat Level, which gives the amount of dice rolled to attack, the endurance, and maximum range. As range is abstracted into the time to the target, rather than the distance, all that is needed is a single die to record the number of turns the weapon is zipping along. And yes, the impact from most of these weapons is "we're all gonna die!" in proportion. These are the primary ship-killing weapons of the game. Everything else is for self-defence, shooting up fixed objectives, or dealing with small fry. But, few vessels carry more than 6-8 of them, and can only launch one or two per turn, due to a currency mechanic (Spend actions from a limited pool to get stuff done). Won't everything be guided? Yes, but some things, to paraphrase Orwell, are more guided than others. I want these weapons to play a big part in the feel of the game, as they are an important example of the backstory's tech style. And while I agree with you that a guided weapon platform makes more sense than a farmboy with a snubfighter and some hokey religion – who are we to argue with George Lucas and his bank balance? ;) Thanks for your thoughts! |
Lion in the Stars | 13 Apr 2016 6:39 a.m. PST |
Well, I'm using a hacked version of Full Thrust for my submarine game, and I'm just treating conventional torpedoes as SMLs with endurance. Significant endurance, usually. Supercavitating torpedoes like the VA111 Shkvall are pulse torps (direct fire weapons) with a different damage rule. PDS systems reduce the number of dice rolled for damage, it's an abstracted version of making the torps explode farther away from the hull. |
Zephyr1 | 13 Apr 2016 2:42 p.m. PST |
Even/Odd it toward the target: Even roll = +1 closer / Odd roll = +0 closer ; Also -1 each turn from it's 'Turns In Play' (so that it runs out of 'juice' eventually, especially if there are lots of Odd rolls… ;-) For counter-measures, either force a re-roll, or add additional rolls/turns it takes to reach the target. That should at least add some tense moments to the game… ;-) |
Covert Walrus | 13 Apr 2016 5:38 p.m. PST |
I tend to think the Salvo Missile rules for Full Thrust at present are damn good for representing a "Torpedo spread" attack. |
MacrossMartin | 13 Apr 2016 8:11 p.m. PST |
In what I have ATM, countermeasures 'kill' torpedoes if they push the number of hunting turns beyond the weapon's endurance. There's also the ability to load anti-torp missiles (missiles are smaller, short-ranged and not as smart as torps in the game setting) that can pick off the torps, but I'll need to playtest to see if they are too good at neutralising the primary fighting weapon. Launching a torp 'loud' increases the chance of somebody noticing you, and returning the favour with interest. But it is also possible to 'swim out' a torp, and let it quietly sneak off before it does its thing. Lion mentioned supercavitating torps, so its probably a good opportunity to describe the background tech for the torpedoes in my game… * From 1st Draft rulebook * "Long before anyone had heard of drone weapons, there were guided torpedoes. First fielded as far back as the Second World War, these ‘tinfish' have gotten progressively smarter and deadlier, to the point where a modern Torpedo is capable of stalking and killing its prey with speed, cunning and violence that a Great White shark would admire. "The guidance system on a torpedo is a perfect example of the dilemma faced by computer designers during the second half of the 21st Century; they are smart enough to be considered to possess intelligence equal to many higher mammals, such as dolphins or primates. That they are aware of themselves has been proven, through variations of the Turing test; the dilemma arises from the fact that they seem to want to explode and kill subfighters – and no-one, it seems, can figure out exactly why. "The moral dimension of such a machine's urges is, however, somewhat lost on the Leaders and Admirals of the world's navies. It is, however, discomforting for many aquanauts to know that their primary weapons might – just might – be digitally obsessed with killing subfighters, and of course, those aquanauts are strapped into just such a subfighter… "Just to make them even more frightening, the torpedoes aren't happy with killing things at normal velocities – they do their thing supersonic. As well as more mundane turbine propulsors, torpedoes carry rocket boosters capable of pushing them past Mach 1 — over 5000 kph beneath the waves. A torpedo only activates its supercavitation rockets once it has a firm ‘lock' on its target, usually in the last 1000 metres of so of its approach, but often much closer. Although this means the torpedo can be heard for hundreds of kilometres around, such warning almost certainly comes to late for its victim…" |
Mako11 | 13 Apr 2016 9:54 p.m. PST |
Don't forget the decoys. There must be decoys…… |
MacrossMartin | 13 Apr 2016 11:32 p.m. PST |
|
(Phil Dutre) | 14 Apr 2016 2:47 a.m. PST |
In my underwater rules for scuba divers ( link ) I used some time ago, we used a very simple scheme: - torpedo is launched, goes fixed distance straight ahead. - every turn, torpedo changes course to nearest target in visibility arc. Width of vis arc can be larger than max allowed course change - after fixed number of turns, torpedo fizzles out. The intent was to provide games in which you could outrun or outmanoeuvre torpedoes that were chasing behind you. I am not claiming this is 'realistic' or modeled on real weapon systems. But it was fun. |
Mako11 | 14 Apr 2016 2:51 a.m. PST |
I doubt those will fool anyone, Martin. |
MacrossMartin | 14 Apr 2016 5:02 a.m. PST |
I remember stumbling upon your blog, Phil, when I started researching ideas for my game! Looks like it was a great game, good fun and foaming glasses of Ramée… *yum!* Fear not, Mako, I just haven't converted those into subs yet! :D There are active micro-torpedo 'noisemaker' decoys in the game, and less advanced denizens of the deep can resort to chucking out 'Noisebombs' which blow up in the face of a torp, pounding its sonar with sonic waves. I'm still working on other ideas for measure / countermeasure, with the objective of trying to tailor them to fit the operational doctrine and technological 'feel' of each faction. Doing so can result in a somewhat cartoonish, simplistic result; the subtle differences of real-life naval antagonists are, unfortunately, difficult to highlight in a wargame. Fleets of subs, one blue, the other red, with differences that are only small variations on the same theme would get dull rather fast from the fleet collecting perspective… Thus, for example, the almost 'racial' different characteristics of otherwise identical human beings in Flames of War. The exaggeration helps to add personality to a player's chosen army, and, inspires the desire to collect another army, to experience its notably different playing style. Hmm, being an Australian, I fear I'll be charged with high treason for publicly declaring my enthusiasm for the brews of the Low Countries… |
TheBeast | 14 Apr 2016 8:04 a.m. PST |
MM, I found one thread from MANY years ago, for subs-via-Full-Thrust. TMP link I gave a link to the Schild en Vriend group's Aquazone. Don't think you'll approve the missile/torps. Doug |
MacrossMartin | 14 Apr 2016 8:59 a.m. PST |
Thanks Doug! Regardless of my approval, I certainly appreciate your help. I notice from that thread that I wasn't alone in contemplating basing my mechanics on the Full Thrust engine. Nor was I such an original deviant for thinking 'Deep Thrust' would be a giggle. - Martin |
Parzival | 14 Apr 2016 2:13 p.m. PST |
In GOBS (Generic Outlandishly Big Spacefleets) torpedoes move independently, controlled by the player (they're guided, after all). Torpedoes have a set movement rate which they must use in its entirety, but if this movement intersects an enemy vessel, the torpedo explodes. The catch is that the movement must be in a straight line, and any heading change occurs at the start of the movement, in 45° increments. This makes it possible for a vessel which is the likely target to maneuver out of range or arc. The targets don't have to be declared; a torpedo simply hits whatever enemy the player can make it hit on a turn he can do so. (Again, torpedoes are assumed to be both intelligent and guided, able to alter tactical choices either by direct command or internally— whatever fluff sinks your boat; the rules don't specify, and it's not important.) The restriction is that torpedoes have limited fuel, so only maneuver for 3 turns, after which they drift in a straight line based on their last move. As for defense, torpedoes can be shot during the target phase, same as ships or other targets (but they're very hard to hit, and only certain weapons have the versatility to hit them). Also, a target gets to jam the torpedo when it arrives at the target; if the jamming attempt is successful, the torpedo doesn't explode; if it has movement left it continues to move. If it doesn't, it simply moves as usual on the next turn. It is possible for a torpedo to be jammed by one target, but hit another on the same turn when it continues any remaining movement. My goal with GOBS was to make the rules have the feel of the old Star Wars fighter simulators, where it was possible to outmaneuver torpedoes locked on you (not likely, but possible). I also wanted them to be distinctly different from "roll dice to hit" weapons as phasers, lasers, etc.. I think the simple movement rule gives them the uniqeness desired, and makes player input significant to their use, while not bogging things down. In the end, they're kind of like little ships that want to suicidally ram other ships… which is basically what a torpedo is, isn't it? |
Lion in the Stars | 16 Apr 2016 1:11 p.m. PST |
In the end, they're kind of like little ships that want to suicidally ram other ships… which is basically what a torpedo is, isn't it? Exactly. |
MacrossMartin | 16 Apr 2016 11:11 p.m. PST |
Parzival is quite right in some respects; a torpedo does behave in a manner similar to a ship, within a space setting. The means of propulsion are likely to be the same, albeit on a different scale. But that can be something of an over-simplification, one which poses the risk of forgetting that ships and torpedoes are in fact, completely different in the important roles they perform. In essential game terms, ships are non-expendable assets, compared to torpedoes. Unless you have a game that records ammo as a finite resource that cannot be refreshed between games (a campaign situation) then torpedoes, by their very nature, are wholly expendable. That statement does assume a limited number of ships, and of course, the tactical expendability of each one will increase proportionally to the strategic goal. I point this out only because what I'm trying to do here is create a model in which it 'feels' like the torpedoes are moving with the same dynamics as the subs, but are clearly not actually small subs. They are weapons, and far more expendable than the subs. I did try the approach of treating them exactly like small subs, and things snowballed when I did; far too long, too much record-keeping, too many rules. With some editing done, I have the rules for torpedoes down to a few paragraphs and example illustrations, for about 1-2 pages or so in the final layout of the rulebook. In summary, they go something like this: Torpedo Summary Each torpedo takes 1 Action to launch Torpedoes are regarded as having a 360° firing arc Each Torpedo must be designated as Active or Passive Active Subtract -1 from the number of hunting turns available +1 die each Lock-on attempt Passive No countermeasures unless torpedo locks-on Range Target's Current Noise Level at launch: Base size x CNL = Range inches Threat level (1 to 4) Number of dice rolled to attack maximum launch range maximum number of hunting turns Hunting turns (record with D6) 1 span of Target Noise Range = 1 hunting turn At the end of the torpedo's phase, reduce hunting turns -1 Lock-on Target number = Current Noise Level minus number of hunting turns remaining Each success (roll equal or above) = -1 hunting turn If turns = 0: Lock-On, immediate attack
Countermeasures! Active, or Pinged Passive torpedo can be countermeasured 1 countermeasure takes 1 Action, used immediately Target number = above torpedo's Threat Level Each success = +1 hunting turn. If number of turns increased beyond Threat level, the torpedo is lost Boom If countermeasures fail, apply usual damage rules Thanks again, all, for participating. Much appreciated!! |
TheBeast | 17 Apr 2016 5:19 a.m. PST |
Unless you have a game that records ammo as a finite resource that cannot be refreshed between games… A bit of a simplification, as I've held fire on torpedoes/missiles if I can run out in a single battle. However, damn seldom. The torp you hold until you're killed/mission-killed isn't worth much if you can't shoot it later. Sorry, I've seen too many movies where the captain is spending torpedoes like precious coins. Of course, usually on commerce interdiction, not a fight for his life. Doug |
MacrossMartin | 17 Apr 2016 6:13 a.m. PST |
But that's a tactical choice, isn't it? An experienced commander would know that there's a balance between survival and over-expenditure of combat resources, and such experience would tell when the tipping point has been reached. I'm eager to see what happens when players make that choice. Will they treat their torps like precious coin, spray them like bullets, or come up with other solutions? The rules will get their first real playtest next weekend, so it should be very interesting to see what the players come up with; I hope they think it works but for all I know, I may be taking the knife to my darlings… ;) |
Lion in the Stars | 17 Apr 2016 5:25 p.m. PST |
At least for subs, the limitation on torpedoes is how long it takes to reload the tubes. It's a 10-20 minute process for a competent crew (varies based on how competent), and can take 30+ minutes for the less competent/technologically equipped. Much faster to use hydraulic rammers than muscle-powered block-and-tackle, for example. So unless you have really long game turns, no sub is going to be launching lots and lots of torps constantly. Not to mention the limited number of torps onboard, limited number of launchers, and the desire to always keep one tube ready for snapshots. So modern subs will likely only fire one or two torps at a time, keeping the other two tubes ready for unpleasant surprises. Older subs with unguided torps would have to fire larger spreads to bracket the target. A proper bracket would have one torp pass ahead of the target and one torp pass astern, with all the others hitting the target, 2-4 hits per spread. As far as limited capacity goes, only the Seawolf class really carries a huge magazine of 40 (with 8 launchers). The Los Angeles class carries 24 torpedoes (with 4 launchers) and a dozen Tomahawks in a separate launcher, and the Virginia class carries ~38 (I think 26 torps and 12 Tomahawks). Start counting the spaces in a torpedo room and you rapidly get down to a dozen heavyweight torpedoes, maybe 8 supercavitating torpedoes for antisub snapshots, and a few odds and ends like mines, Harpoons, and/or that new IDAS-T missile system. That doesn't give you any 21" decoys, either. |
TheBeast | 18 Apr 2016 6:52 a.m. PST |
But that's a tactical choice, isn't it? Right, but the crux is whether you can fire next turn or not. If the limit is number of total weapons, number of launchers, or time to reload, the pressure to decide only comes if you have a decision to make, now OR later. Can you do that with the 'action' format? I don't know. Doug |
Lion in the Stars | 19 Apr 2016 12:00 a.m. PST |
So, from you description of the torpedo attack process, it doesn't sound like torpedoes in your setting are supposed to be catastrophic kills. This is notably different from real-world submarine warfare, at least as long as we're talking heavyweight torpedoes used by the subs and not the pathetic things used by surface ships or aircraft. 21"/533mm "heavyweight" torpedoes usually have ~600lbs of explosive (though it's closer to 1000lbs of TNT-equivalent, everyone uses about the same explosives underwater). So my basic torpedo does 6d6 damage, -1d6 for each effective defense system (Full Thrust rules). The (21"/533mm diameter) VA111 Shkvall supercavitating torpedo has a 460lb explosive warhead, so it does about 4d6 damage. The big 650mm torpedoes carry a full 450kg/1000lbs of explosive or more, so could roll 10d6 for an antisubmarine version or ~12d6 for the wake-homing monsters with their 560kg warheads. But the 12.75"/324mm torpedoes that are air-dropped or launched from surface ships only have about a 100lb warhead. It's basically only enough to mangle a screw, maybe pop the shaft seals if it explodes close enough. It will force a mission-kill on a sub, but isn't anywhere near as terrifying as a heavyweight. I am being simplistic with my damage rules, I know that explosive damage doesn't really scale linearly with charge weight. |
Rudysnelson | 20 Apr 2016 6:33 a.m. PST |
For a WW2 style un-guided torpedo, we used a torpedo run system. The length that the torpedo could run per turn was measured on a chyneil / pipe cleaner stem. If a ship ran over the stem during that turn then the torpedo had a chance to hit and explode. The next turn, the stem was replaced with the next stem for the next turn. In regards to guided missles, the wire guided or lazer guided would have a chance for a distraction miss. A fire and forget system would always land on target. |
|