Torpedo Musings

[Steve Walmsley (OP)]

I am considering changing the way torpedoes work so I thought I would post my still vague ideas here and let everyone comment. Unlike virtually every other beam weapon, torpedoes have no real defensive applications. They are purely offensive, which makes them less attractive than some of the alternatives. There is also no real incentive to use the better models of torpedo because you can research range separately and in terms of size vs damage the low model torps actually do similar damage to the larger ones with the same range. So I am considering making them a much longer ranged weapon, perhaps 25-30% the range of equivalent tech missiles. They would still be energy weapons and would require charging, although they would probably require more power than at the moment. However, they would be a seeking weapon and use some form of missile fire control. What I can't decide on is the exact mechanics.

What I am currently contemplating is to make them a photon torpedo type weapon that would do constant damage over its range. Improved tech would increase range, damage and speed, although they would still be generally slower than missiles. When designing a launcher you would design it in a similar way to designing a missile, where you allocate the available launcher size between speed, range and damage, although perhaps with a little less flexibility than missiles. Maybe a minimum amount allocated to each area to avoid the design of very long range torps or fast anti-missile torps. Those parameters would be fixed for all torpedoes fired from that launcher. Their primary disadvantages vs missiles of a similar tech level would be range and speed plus the fact you couldn't just design a better missile for the same launcher. Their main advantage would be that they didn't run out of ammo, didn't require magazine space and outranged all the beam weapons (although unlike beam weapons they could be intercepted). I think the easiest thing from a mechanics POV would be to make Torpedoes behave like missiles after launch with the possible exception that they would either be automatically detectable or that they would have a larger thermal signature. This would allow you to destroy them with AM fire. In short, they would be similar to an inexhaustible supply of short-ranged, easier-to-detect, easier-to-destroy missiles.

A second option is to make them more like an SFB Plasma Torpedo. Faster than the above idea (maybe even light speed) but with decreasing damage over range.

I am open to comments on the above or any suggestions with the same general idea of making torpedos a mid-range seeking weapon that sits between missiles and beam weapons

Steve

[Erik L]

I'm in favor of a weapon system that outreaches current beams (1.5m km), but not necessarily having the range of missiles.

Why not have customizable energy torpedoes? Research areas like damage output, capacitors, max range and speed. Put a limit on them, or make them similar to missiles in construction. For faster torps, you need smaller (less damage). Bigger, more damaging torps move slower. This would almost feel like the SFB plasma torps to me. Maybe have the launchers a separate item like missiles also. Give the launchers the capacitor and maybe a maximum torp size. Again, bigger torps require more energy and fire slower.

Since their range would be lower than missiles, I'd prefer to see an equivalent e-torp fire about 2x as fast as a missile. Size 1, Cap 1 e-torp is 15 ROF instead of the missile 30 ROF.

As for damage, make it a constant. But also have the torps be interceptable. Given they'd have a speed, current AM systems should be able to work on them. Call the torp's hits something like coherency, and make it research upgradable too (which in turn makes the torp slower, etc).

To offset the lack of magazine, I'd make the torp launchers ~ 50% larger than the equivalent missile launcher.

[Brian Neumann]

I will start out by saying that I actually like the way that torps work currently.  If you want to change them I would suggest something along the lines of their range being about double to tripple that of energy weapons.  I would not require a bigger launcher if they are also going to require a guidance system.  My first thought would be to have the weapon provide the targeting, and that there be no changing once fired.  The torpedo's should actually be faster than comparable missiles as well.  They are already shorter ranged than a missile will be and if you make them slower then they are also going to be shot down much faster as well.  If they are 50-100% faster than the missiles then they will be harder, but not impossible to intercept.  If possilbe I would have meson's not work as a point defense weapon, mostly just to make the choice of pd weapons more complicated.

Brian

[alanwebber]

How about reducing damage by any defensive fire e.g. A 1 point AM hit reduces damage by 1 pt.

[ShadoCat]

How about reducing damage by any defensive fire e.g. A 1 point AM hit reduces damage by 1 pt.

While I'm not fond if adding interception to their shorter range, this would be nice.  It might be harder to code though.

[schroeam]

Maybe allow AMM or railgun fire to completely eliminate the torpedo, but energy weapon fire will just degrade the destructive energy of the torpedo point for point.  This will allow both types of point defense work against the new torpedo.  I agree with the concept that torpedoes should be faster, yet shorter ranged than missiles, and longer ranged than beam weapons.  As far as fire control, maybe the torpedo should be targeted on the thermal signature of the contact.  To-hit percentages would be based on the thermal signature of the contact compared to that which the fire control is rated for.  The ability to fire would still require the active sensors, but use the thermal as the tracking means, since the torpedo will not have electronics to communicate with the fire control.  Also, maybe just modify the missile fire control design for optional torpedo, missile, or both.

Adam.

[welchbloke]

I think you may have opened another can of worms here Steve  
Personally, I'd like to see an increase in range to 30% of comaprable missile range.  Keep the launchers roughly the same size but require some kind of fire control.  Definately up the power requirements by up to 50%. I would keep the rate of fire about the same as a comparable missile launcher.  If it's possible I really like the idea of reducing the warhead strength due to intercepts.  As mentioned above by Erik call it something like conatainment or cohernece and as the warhead takes hits its coherence decreases down to 0.  Keep the speed down to maybe 70% of a comparable AMM (making them slightly faster than a comparable ASM if I've done my sums correctly).  I see my suggestion as a mix of SFB photon topedo and plasma torpedo.  Something that can make a mess of an opponent but can be handled using the correct tactics.  Improvements available for research would be rate of fire, warhead strength and speed.

[Steve Walmsley (OP)]

Maybe allow AMM or railgun fire to completely eliminate the torpedo, but energy weapon fire will just degrade the destructive energy of the torpedo point for point.  This will allow both types of point defense work against the new torpedo.  I agree with the concept that torpedoes should be faster, yet shorter ranged than missiles, and longer ranged than beam weapons.  As far as fire control, maybe the torpedo should be targeted on the thermal signature of the contact.  To-hit percentages would be based on the thermal signature of the contact compared to that which the fire control is rated for.  The ability to fire would still require the active sensors, but use the thermal as the tracking means, since the torpedo will not have electronics to communicate with the fire control.  Also, maybe just modify the missile fire control design for optional torpedo, missile, or both.

With regard to the idea that torpedoes could be shorter and faster versions of missiles, don't forget that torpedoes would have no ammunition requirement and therefore no requirement for magazine space and no logistical chain. That is a huge advantage. They would probably become a better option than missiles if they were also faster (which means they would have a better chance to hit) as well as not requiring ammo. That was why I suggested shorter-ranged and slower. Although they would be less effective on a per-shot basis, you would likely carry more torpedo launchers than missile launchers and you can keep firing them for ever. Perhaps one option is to make torpedoes faster and shorter ranged but have an ammunition component, such as in the Star Trek movies as opposed to SFB. Although in that case, they wouldn't be much different than simply having a short-ranged but fast missile.

I think having a torpedo-specific fire control but based on the missile fire control is a good idea. The problem with targeting them on a thermal contact is that ships could avoid torpedoes by stopping. Perhaps simply locking the target at launch with no ability to retarget would be the way to go (i.e. no onboard sensors).

Steve

[welchbloke]

Perhaps simply locking the target at launch with no ability to retarget would be the way to go (i.e. no onboard sensors).

Steve

I think 'lock before launch' would be good.

[Steve Walmsley (OP)]

I think you may have opened another can of worms here Steve  
Personally, I'd like to see an increase in range to 30% of comaprable missile range.  

Yes, I think that is a good ball-park figure

Keep the launchers roughly the same size but require some kind of fire control.  Definately up the power requirements by up to 50%. I would keep the rate of fire about the same as a comparable missile launcher.

All that sounds reasonable

If it's possible I really like the idea of reducing the warhead strength due to intercepts.  As mentioned above by Erik call it something like conatainment or cohernece and as the warhead takes hits its coherence decreases down to 0.  

It is possible. The main issue would be tracking salvos of torpedoes where one has suffered damage but not the others. I can see a few ways around that though. One is to split off damaged torpedoes into separate salvos, although that would complicate things for point defence. A second is to always damage the same torpedo so I would keep track of only one damaged torpedo per salvo, but that would break the simultaneous nature of combat as weapons would have to fire in sequence to achieve the effect. A third, which might be fun, is to make torpedoes much bigger and scarier, along the lines of a Type-R from SFB, and track them individually rather than as salvos. With missiles, having very large ones is less effective as they can be taken out more easily but if anti-torpedo damage reduces the warhead instead then if doesn't matter if it is several small torps or one huge scary torpedo.

Keep the speed down to maybe 70% of a comparable AMM (making them slightly faster than a comparable ASM if I've done my sums correctly).  I see my suggestion as a mix of SFB photon topedo and plasma torpedo.  Something that can make a mess of an opponent but can be handled using the correct tactics.  Improvements available for research would be rate of fire, warhead strength and speed.

Yes, the trick is going to be creating something that is good in the right situation but can be handled by a suitable defence, while not making it substantially better or worse than any other system - missiles in particular.

Steve

[welchbloke]

A third, which might be fun, is to make torpedoes much bigger and scarier, along the lines of a Type-R from SFB, and track them individually rather than as salvos. With missiles, having very large ones is less effective as they can be taken out more easily but if anti-torpedo damage reduces the warhead instead then if doesn't matter if it is several small torps or one huge scary torpedo.
Steve

You have a rather interesting definition of 'fun' but I agree a Type R torpedo salvo coming at you is very scary   I've had my SFB ships mashed by these more than once.  In this case I guess it would much larger launchers with massive power requirements?

[waresky]

In StarsWars are some idea for Torpedo tech,effort,etcetc?

Anywhere,am intriguing in some change,i love torpedoes primary for JP def use,but are interesting for "high Tech" level Races (use of them).
Give a High Tech level,i think some races are more like use Torp than "old iron head" missiles:)

[IanD]

Something like a plasma torpedo from SFB looks like a weapon sufficiently different to be interesting and useful. However, currently the only forgiving thing about an early encounter with precursors is that they eventually run out of missiles. The thought of them having an inexhaustible torpedo is truly frightening  and if it had ECM, bearing in mind that I have so far failed to intercept any precursor missiles..........

Regards

[Paul M]

Well I'm rather fond of them as they are now and so none of the above options really appeals to me.

Why not just look at making the concept of improving the torpedoe itself more useful.  That would involve changing the existing non-thermal torpedoes to do more damage basically.  Also you could add in that they increase the basic range of the torpedoe itself as a bonus above the technology that modifies that.  Essentially make each new generation of torpedoe more effective.

Making the range increases so they outrange a standard beam weapon by about 50% would seem like a reasonable start, so that they are clearly superior then lasers which I don't think is the case at the moment.  I don't think you want to have them even begin to approach missiles in range because frankly they are unguided which means your real chance to hit is nil.  Also there is nothing stopping someone from making short range "close assault missiles" that do exactly what you are trying to do to the torpedoe so if you go that route I'd just remove them from the game.  I have to admit that the thought of high speed, short range (same as counter missiles), high damage missiles has crossed my mind on a few occasions.  Ideal for fighters and FACs or last ditch planetary defence.

There is nothing stopping you from using torpedoes to shoot down inbound missiles either that I can see.  It's not particularily effective but it is possible, so they are not solely offensive weapons or at least no more so then plasma carronades.  Also they require reactors and that is a substantial mass penalty already to the ship, plus a seperate (generally speaking longer ranged) guidance system from any other beam weapon you might have on board.

The SFB plasma weapon is the plasma caronade with its fairly steep decrease over range.  I treat the torpedoe as the klingon disrupter more than anything else.  Low damage, even over all ranges but long range (for an energy weapon).

A further suggestion would be to make the designs increasingly energy efficient as you increase the tech level.

You cold also give them a square or triangluar (for odd damage) armour penetration pattern. 2 pts does x-x, 3 points does x/x-x, 4 points does x-x/x-x, 5 points does x/x-x/x-x, 6 does x-x/x-x/x-x and so forth.   You could also limit the penetration to say 3 levels of armour and then make it spread so 7 would then be x-x/x-x/x-x-x and 10 would be x-x-x/x-x-x/x-x-x-x or x-x/x-x-x/x-x-x-x-x depending on how you imagine these things work.  It is worth pointing out that a weapon that does the same damage but with a completely different penetration patern is very much a different weapon.

Fundamentally if you are going to have different weapons they should each be unique and there is no real need to balance them at all points.  Both of these things killed 4E where the weapons became totally generic and so balanced they were dull and boring.  Not to mention the goof of the capital energy beam doing less damage then a non-capital flavour and a few other things which don't stick in my head enough to remember the details over.  Giving the weapons break points where you get changes in the slope of the improvement with generation is a good way to add interesting effects to the game system.

[Brian Neumann]

I like the Idea tha Paul had of each generation of torps getting a better range multiplier.  The problem with this is that they would need a seperate fire control system to target with.  Currently the range for a torpedo is slightly less than the equivilent max range of the fire control.  If they are going to have a significantly longer range then there needs to be a different fire control mechanism for them.  If the idea is to give them a range that is greater than the other beam weapons, then it can't be used by any other beam weapon.  The reason I say that is the larger lasers, railguns and even mesons can actually have a max range greater than their fire control.  As far as the damage output goes the current progression will probably work.  As long as the rate of fire remains the same the torpedo's damage to mass ratio does improve steadily.  If shooting down a torp becomes harder as you have to match it's damage output then having the torp be slower doesn't bother me.  At high tech levels it generally only takes one or two counter-missiles to shoot down an incomming attack missile.  If you instead had to match the damage it does, then it would take many more counter missiles to shoot down one incomming torpedo.  This gives a balance between the small launchers doing a small amount of damage, but easily stopped by counter missiles vs the larger, probably slower firing torpedo's that will require a bunch of hits to take out.  Whatever speed is decided upon should be just as fast as the comparable missiles, but less than a maxed out speed missile can get.  This way the torpedo's can be hit, but mostly with dedicated weapons and not the heavier anti-ship weapons.  It will be interesting to see what comes of this.

Brian