Traveller Is 45 Years Old Today!

Traveller was first created by Marc Miller in 1977, published as a box containing three black, digest-sized books by Game Designer's Workshop. The game was the first to use a lifepath system for character creation (one in which, famously, characters could die before play even began!) These days, the game is published by Mongoose Publishing.

View attachment 254767

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

It's cool for cats. Looking at data sheets from NASA, the likelihood of space battle would be enhanced radiation weapons, neutron bombs, exploding hundreds of kilometers away, and doing crew or electronics kills on the vehicles. Fairly grim or unsatisfying imo. Sort of like when stuff gets put in the van allen belt, except no, that is a raging river of radiation. I'll give on the technical side to let the players have agency in how it all works out vs you did your math wrong and now the enemy weapons drone has the drop on you.

Yes, but take a look at modern warfare. Its all about sensors and C3I, etc. Kill chains have become very elaborate and multi-step. The idea that you just know where everyone is and direct-fire missiles at them which magically and inevitably guide themselves to the target is hilariously unlikely to even faintly resemble some sort of realistic future space combat. Even in the '70s and '80s when Marc was writing this stuff he could easily have done a bit of homework on naval warfare and gotten an idea of where things were. I think the analogy is going to be pretty good there, though of course some of the technical details will vary.

I'd expect things like the quality and tech of your radars and such to be extremely important, for instance, and most tactics would likely revolve around how, when, and where to carry out active detection. It would be highly likely such platforms would often be remotely deployed. EW would be a supremely important factor, as would stealth, but there are likely subtle details of all this. For instance modern 'stealth jets' like F22 are actually quite easy to detect on radar! What you can't easily do is figure out what they are and exactly where with enough accuracy to target an attack on them. Similar kinds of situations would likely exist. S-band radars can detect almost anything, but have low accuracy, X-band radars are highly accurate and used for fire-control, but are much easier to block.

Compute is also incredibly important, and not really in terms of "oh I can aim my laser +1 more accurately" but more in terms of how many targets you can engage at a time, are there restrictions on that, like 'all in one area', etc. IFF is a critical capability, etc. etc. etc. The ability to simply communicate with and command all the likely remote sensing and weapons platforms, etc.

HG tries to kind of paper over some of this by positing a kind of 'dreadnought age' scenario where smaller weapons are harmless to larger vessels that have masses of armor and 'shields' of some sort. I guess the theory is everyone will just build big spinal mount bruisers and not really care who can see them. It seems rather far-fetched overall. It also misses the point that none of that will exist at the RPG-relevant scales of <1000 ton ships.

 

[dragoner]

Yes, but take a look at modern warfare. Its all about sensors and C3I, etc. Kill chains have become very elaborate and multi-step. The idea that you just know where everyone is and direct-fire missiles at them which magically and inevitably guide themselves to the target is hilariously unlikely to even faintly resemble some sort of realistic future space combat. Even in the '70s and '80s when Marc was writing this stuff he could easily have done a bit of homework on naval warfare and gotten an idea of where things were. I think the analogy is going to be pretty good there, though of course some of the technical details will vary.

I'd expect things like the quality and tech of your radars and such to be extremely important, for instance, and most tactics would likely revolve around how, when, and where to carry out active detection. It would be highly likely such platforms would often be remotely deployed. EW would be a supremely important factor, as would stealth, but there are likely subtle details of all this. For instance modern 'stealth jets' like F22 are actually quite easy to detect on radar! What you can't easily do is figure out what they are and exactly where with enough accuracy to target an attack on them. Similar kinds of situations would likely exist. S-band radars can detect almost anything, but have low accuracy, X-band radars are highly accurate and used for fire-control, but are much easier to block.

Compute is also incredibly important, and not really in terms of "oh I can aim my laser +1 more accurately" but more in terms of how many targets you can engage at a time, are there restrictions on that, like 'all in one area', etc. IFF is a critical capability, etc. etc. etc. The ability to simply communicate with and command all the likely remote sensing and weapons platforms, etc.

HG tries to kind of paper over some of this by positing a kind of 'dreadnought age' scenario where smaller weapons are harmless to larger vessels that have masses of armor and 'shields' of some sort. I guess the theory is everyone will just build big spinal mount bruisers and not really care who can see them. It seems rather far-fetched overall. It also misses the point that none of that will exist at the RPG-relevant scales of <1000 ton ships.

As per sensors, space is sort of an extremely "severe clear" sort of environment, which is why ERW, radiation is such a big deal. Even with radar defeating tech, both visual, and IR, and ships would light up vs black-body radiation. Though definitely putting another body in front of you, coming in out of the sun, there are environmental tactical options. I think that most battles would be around a body as well, for trav, probably the gas giant.

Indeed HG does a sci-fi dreadnought battle scenario. Though maybe book two's lack of armor might be a little more realistic, I mean, a rocket has a opening for thrust, no doubt. However, yes, looking at ranges esp, and think lasers, or missiles as represented are a bit too powerful. It is what it is though, and it is easily modified to taste if one wishes.

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

As per sensors, space is sort of an extremely "severe clear" sort of environment, which is why ERW, radiation is such a big deal. Even with radar defeating tech, both visual, and IR, and ships would light up vs black-body radiation. Though definitely putting another body in front of you, coming in out of the sun, there are environmental tactical options. I think that most battles would be around a body as well, for trav, probably the gas giant.

Indeed HG does a sci-fi dreadnought battle scenario. Though maybe book two's lack of armor might be a little more realistic, I mean, a rocket has a opening for thrust, no doubt. However, yes, looking at ranges esp, and think lasers, or missiles as represented are a bit too powerful. It is what it is though, and it is easily modified to taste if one wishes.

I'm not sure they are too powerful. I mean, sure we cannot make a laser anything like as powerful as the ones that are depicted, today, but we cannot make even a non-starship anything like what is in Traveller either, so I wasn't really bothered by that. Things like 'meson guns' and such are rather fanciful, but I guess if you can do anti-grav then its hardly a leap to stuff like that!

I just think that ACTUAL space warfare will be MUCH more of a cat-and-mouse type of game, ala The Expanse (though the particulars don't have to match that especially). Turning on a radar will be a real serious decision, and most of them will probably be remote platforms. Maybe 'quantum radar' will turn them more from bright spotlights into extremely faint ones and it be a bit like old school sub battles where everyone sits and quietly waits, and maybe sends out a ping now and then to get a firing solution. I'd think missiles would be unlikely to be simply launched either. You'd chuck them out a hatch, carefully move away, and then fire them up, or they might simply be used like mines, lurking and waiting to activate. I just think it would be a slow, slinky, sneaky kind of thing. Actually getting HIT would be stupid bad, usually lethal. Even bigger ships would have trouble taking hits, as equipment is delicate and even a small bit of damage could easily cripple critical subsystems. Even if your 'ablative armor' largely stopped that damned laser, the thing still fried 3 antennas and melted a reactor exhaust port.

 

[dragoner]

I'm not sure they are too powerful. I mean, sure we cannot make a laser anything like as powerful as the ones that are depicted, today, but we cannot make even a non-starship anything like what is in Traveller either, so I wasn't really bothered by that. Things like 'meson guns' and such are rather fanciful, but I guess if you can do anti-grav then its hardly a leap to stuff like that!

I just think that ACTUAL space warfare will be MUCH more of a cat-and-mouse type of game, ala The Expanse (though the particulars don't have to match that especially). Turning on a radar will be a real serious decision, and most of them will probably be remote platforms. Maybe 'quantum radar' will turn them more from bright spotlights into extremely faint ones and it be a bit like old school sub battles where everyone sits and quietly waits, and maybe sends out a ping now and then to get a firing solution. I'd think missiles would be unlikely to be simply launched either. You'd chuck them out a hatch, carefully move away, and then fire them up, or they might simply be used like mines, lurking and waiting to activate. I just think it would be a slow, slinky, sneaky kind of thing. Actually getting HIT would be stupid bad, usually lethal. Even bigger ships would have trouble taking hits, as equipment is delicate and even a small bit of damage could easily cripple critical subsystems. Even if your 'ablative armor' largely stopped that damned laser, the thing still fried 3 antennas and melted a reactor exhaust port.

The faster a ship moves, the faster the missile moves, as it imparts its momentum. I would guess that space warfare is similar to air, and sea warfare where one is firing a guided missile at a blip on a screen, whatever the sensors are. Maybe 10% of the time, it might engage with a laser or rail gun; otherwise it is high velocity, long distance passes. The distance makes it probably hours of boredom interspersed with seconds of terror. Any armor on a spacecraft would have to be pretty fancy stuff, not massive enough to slow the vessel down, and have some sort of blow out panels so that if there were an explosion inside, it would not concentrate it in the interior of the vehicle.

 

[payn]

The faster a ship moves, the faster the missile moves, as it imparts its momentum. I would guess that space warfare is similar to air, and sea warfare where one is firing a guided missile at a blip on a screen, whatever the sensors are. Maybe 10% of the time, it might engage with a laser or rail gun; otherwise it is high velocity, long distance passes. The distance makes it probably hours of boredom interspersed with seconds of terror. Any armor on a spacecraft would have to be pretty fancy stuff, not massive enough to slow the vessel down, and have some sort of blow out panels so that if there were an explosion inside, it would not concentrate it in the interior of the vehicle.

Curious what folks think of the combat from The Expanse?

 

[AbdulAlhazred]

Curious what folks think of the combat from The Expanse?

I've not seen a lot of it, so I'm not sure. What I did see seemed somewhat realistic, if dramatically Hollywoodized.

I'd think of it like this, the total impulse available to ships is large, but they are also massive. Missiles can carry only limited fuel, but they are much less massive and can afford to accelerate at much higher rates. I think the upshot being, missiles are likely to come at you with fairly high delta-V, whatever the source (launcher or the missile itself) but if you manage to dodge or blind/confuse the thing, then its unlikely to be able to reengage in most cases. It actually might be most deadly to have a missile coming at you at LOW delta-V as it can keep making passes!

Again, the whole sensor game is THE THING. You want to detect and track the enemy and yet hide from him. If you can do that, and even better attack without him localizing you, then you're likely to win. If it comes to a slugfest, then whomever can overwhelm or blind the other guys attacks and defenses will logically come out ahead, though mutual destruction seems like a likely outcome. I'd expect ships would basically be a combination of a very large computer and a lot of remote deployable weapons and sensors (at least emitters). Revealing YOUR actual location would probably be a desperation move, though warships would likely have some large powerful emitters on the ship due to power requirements. A ship of that sort would 'light up' once the fight was ongoing but try to remain shielded from attack by its deployed assets. Of course 'range' isn't really much of a concept when it comes to missiles in space, so attacks on any fixed location would probably just amount to building up a really big pile of ordnance and launching it all from a very remote location.

 

[payn]

I've not seen a lot of it, so I'm not sure. What I did see seemed somewhat realistic, if dramatically Hollywoodized.

I'd think of it like this, the total impulse available to ships is large, but they are also massive. Missiles can carry only limited fuel, but they are much less massive and can afford to accelerate at much higher rates. I think the upshot being, missiles are likely to come at you with fairly high delta-V, whatever the source (launcher or the missile itself) but if you manage to dodge or blind/confuse the thing, then its unlikely to be able to reengage in most cases. It actually might be most deadly to have a missile coming at you at LOW delta-V as it can keep making passes!

Again, the whole sensor game is THE THING. You want to detect and track the enemy and yet hide from him. If you can do that, and even better attack without him localizing you, then you're likely to win. If it comes to a slugfest, then whomever can overwhelm or blind the other guys attacks and defenses will logically come out ahead, though mutual destruction seems like a likely outcome. I'd expect ships would basically be a combination of a very large computer and a lot of remote deployable weapons and sensors (at least emitters). Revealing YOUR actual location would probably be a desperation move, though warships would likely have some large powerful emitters on the ship due to power requirements. A ship of that sort would 'light up' once the fight was ongoing but try to remain shielded from attack by its deployed assets. Of course 'range' isn't really much of a concept when it comes to missiles in space, so attacks on any fixed location would probably just amount to building up a really big pile of ordnance and launching it all from a very remote location.

From what I know of Expanse:
It's seems without advanced tech, it's very difficult to hide a ship from sensors. Part of this is ships all over communicating, stations in the belt and on moons, etc... You need to be in deep space or hiding behind a large object like a moon or planet to avoid detection. So, typically there is no "surprise you didnt me coming!"

The missiles they fling at one another do seem to have their own propulsion system. Those in ships that can do 5,10+ G in thrust can potentially out run them and their fuel, problem is humans being able to withstand that force on their bodies for a prolonged period (missiles have unlimited thrust G, as no worry about killing anybody from the force). Usually doesn't work out for the runners.

Some ships (mostly war ships) have point defense cannons. These weapons fire slugs rapidly to try and take out the incoming missiles before they can hit their target and detonate. Most warship battles seem to be one of attrition. Keep firing at each other until one side gets through or runs out of ammo.

Few ships are equipped with rail guns. Also, some bases, moons, and other stationary places will have them for defense. As you figure they toss large chunks at super high velocities. Very nasty to get hit by them, especially if they hit the drive section.

 

[dragoner]

Curious what folks think of the combat from The Expanse?

I like the Expanse a lot, it was a great show, combat is a mix with an eye towards realism.

 

[payn]

I like the Expanse a lot, it was a great show, combat is a mix with an eye towards realism. Though things do have a tendency to move at speed of plot, I mean one is not having a rail gun shooting from Earth to Mars in a reasonable amount of time that a guided missile wouldn't be better. Some of the maneuvers the missiles did were cool though.

Right now on the Traveller forum there is an ongoing, pretty forever convo about space combat. With my own setting, I am using Cepheus Engine, which is 90% Mongoose 1e, I try to streamline it where possible, I have used it since it came out over ten years ago, not being real big on house rules.

I'd love to add an Expanse like combat system to Mongoose Traveller 2E. Right now its pretty much pew pew each other until somebody surrenders or comes apart. Missiles have their part too, but are very expensive (for non-military campaigns). I dont mind the missiles rareness in the setting, but my players want to fire them constantly and complain about the cost.

 

[dragoner]

I'd love to add an Expanse like combat system to Mongoose Traveller 2E. Right now its pretty much pew pew each other until somebody surrenders or comes apart. Missiles have their part too, but are very expensive (for non-military campaigns). I dont mind the missiles rareness in the setting, but my players want to fire them constantly and complain about the cost.

I liked the Book 2 rules because it was fast.