 April 15, 2012 - 4:49pm | Hey :) I was thinking about non-ship defensive platforms that could be used as a cheap and quickly-built substitute for starship weapons platforms. These things could be used to guard mining operations or to bolster a planet's defensive capabilities. So first thing to ask is: Are these things already in 'official' use in the SF universe? I don't recall seeing anything in any past SFMan articles and I don't recall ever having read about them in any of the cannon Knight Hawks material. Next: As a community opinion (assuming we don't already have such things), how do y'all feel about them and should we consider writing an article to govern them? We already have a precedent for them as far as Alpha Dawn is concerned (Sentry Guns; SFMan 05 p17 and Section 28 Rocket Launch Room; Sundown On Starmist Remastered Module p26). In my musings over the last few hours this is what I was imagining: Three different types of Independent Weapons Platforms (IWPs); small, medium and large. Small IWPs would be such things as laser batteries and assault rockets, etc. Medium IWPs would be such things as laser cannons and electron beam batteries, etc. Large IWPs would be such things as disruptor cannons and protron beam batteries, etc. These platforms would be automated, unmanned weapons that are placed in space (in orbit around a planet, a colony on an asteroid or whatever needs protection). They would have their own dedicated power source (atomic most likely), targeting computers, etc. I thought that each IWP could possibly have one defense (maybe reflective hull and armor would not count toward this restriction). This would allow for each platform to have one weapon system and one powered defensive system (though this could be changed to allow for the appropriate number of weapons/defensive systems that ships are allowed according to their hull size I suppose). Size: I figured that hull size should be used as the gauge for size so that it would be easy to reference the appropriate charts in Knight Hawks to see what weapons and defenses would be applicable for which size IWP. I figured hull size 1-4 for small, 5-9 for medium and 10+ for large. I was also thinking that the damage (in hull points) that these things would be capable of absorbing would be less than a similarly-sized ship as the ship has all sorts of extra 'hull' for all the living quarters and whatnot that these platforms would not have. So maybe reduce the amount of actual hull points for these platforms by 50% in comparison to a similarly-sized ship. Cost: So all you would need to calculate the cost would be the targeting computer, weapon system(s) defensive system(s), power generator, detection equipment and the basic hull. Con: Not mobile like a ship so there are some really limited tactical considerations concerning these. They start firing as soon as a target comes into weapon range and keep firing until the target leaves weapon range or is destroyed (or something else happens to affect the targeting system of the IWP; hiding behind a planet or entering a jamming window for example). Pro: Cheap (in comparison to a ship)! I don't have to outrun that nasty beast my friend...I just have to outrun you!  |
 April 15, 2012 - 5:17pm | No reason they couldn't exist. And no, as far as I know there is nothing written on this topic anywhere. The boardgame combat rules already cover part of this. The Combat table lists the base % chance of a weapon to hit if it is just controlled by it's computer and then give the chance to hit for "average" skill levels. These would be the base chances to hit for your platforms. If you wanted, you could work up a table of cost vs increase chance to hit (and personally, I think it should be expensive). As for size, I think it's probably a good idea to have the larger ones require large hull size platforms for play balance, maybe base it on the MHS for the weapons. However, in reality, none of the weapon systems are really that large and a hull of size 2 or 3 could easily hold the weapon, computer and power source for any single weapon so you might just consider going with that as the size hull needed for any of them. Ad Astra Per Ardua! My blog - Expanding Frontier Webmaster - The Star Frontiers Network & this site Founding Editor - The Frontier Explorer Magazine Managing Editor - The Star Frontiersman Magazine |
 April 15, 2012 - 5:43pm | Yeah, they're called seeker missiles in orbit. I tried to come up with something that would be cheap that my players could park in orbit around a moon they were using as a base but anything that we came up with only need about 20 to 30 percent more funding to place a ship in orbit. We even made a design of a deploy-able platform with weapons that could be parked in orbit by a mother-ship. The orbiting platform could not compete in the mock-up battles that we staged with the KnightHawk rules. We never did like how weak space-stations in the game were either. Our solution was seeker missiles in orbit, layed down and recovered by a minelayer. The problem with that is, you can never park ships in orbit or they will be targets also. When a platform was parked in orbit, a ship with a longer ranged weapon can just stand off at a distance, like with a Proton Battery, and blast it at their leisure. Useing the Knight Hawk's rule system would make this idea an exspensive one. With what you are suggesting, if the platform cannot take the damage like a ship, I will go with a ship that can also repair itself and can carry cannons. The spacestation rules suggest that spacestations cannot have cannons. We figure since there will be only limited use for the system, it could be half the hullsize. We made one design with Laser Cannons, one with EB, one with PB, and one with a disrupter. To just save the trouble, unless the rules get changed by the referee, a weapon platform will not be very feasable with current rules because a platform still can carry a high price and the repairs/replacement of them may and can be more costly than a ship that can pursue the attackers to let them know they were in the wrong place. I would suggest to make something and battle test it. You will probably understand it better. I also suggest going with a blockade having the attackers being able to call up reinforcements. I would have to weigh the firepower of the platforms to be able to see it. All this has the rules from Knight Hawks in mind too. I just could not see a spacestation being as weak as the rules make them so, I go with whatever weapons it has per hullpoint by replaeing the "or" with "and", this makes them way more dangerous to deal with in the game. Just my thoughts on the idea. |
 April 15, 2012 - 10:24pm | Well I can suggest the following, first go with cheaper weapons, obviously a beam weapon would be a lot more expensive then a rocket battery, individual assault rockets, or a gauss cannon. Next, they are a lot smaller then a space station and most likely smaller then most starships. So I would give them the same evassive action bonus as a fighter becuase they are small moving fast in orbit and have a smaller signature due to no notice-able propulsion system. They also can be disguised, is that a civillian communications array or a battle platform...you don't know until it puts a target lock on you. Minimum crew, like an ICBM silo it would only have a small crew that kept everything running properly and assisted with weapons operation. Or you could make them robotic / automated. Advantage over the seeker missile in orbit is that the seeker, while very powerful, is a one shot weapon. If it is shot down by an ICM or defensive fire then you are S.O.L. Now you could place a lot of those seekers in orbit but eventually you start runing into the same type of cost it is to operate the platform. I don't think its as much a choice of cost as a choice of strategy. Of course Mega-Crops could lease the systems to less affluent planets to help alieviate that pesky pirate problem. Just as the pirate assault scout marauder arrives in orbit around alpha ceti 4 to pick up a quick haul off a launching freighter the pirates realize the planets govenor had a new supprise. A Acme Wartoi Pacifier 5000 orbital defense unit that quickly locked onto the pirates engine signature and fires two assault rockets and blast from its dual laser pods. The public cheered in celebration knowing its widgits and gizmoids would make it safely to Casadine to earn them some much needed revenue. Mean while the gunnery grew aboard the Pacifier 5000 reloads, cracks open a fresh case of yazarian ale, and await their next grand adventure as guardians of this peaceful planet. Knowing of course they are all getting a Smoke One Out bonus from their employer Acme Wartoi Inc. who leases the unit to the Alpha Ceti Government. |
 April 16, 2012 - 1:18pm | Hallowed out asteroids (where systems can be shielded form prying eyes) with turrets mounted on the surface make great "stealth" platforms. |
 April 16, 2012 - 5:06pm | The Knight Hawks (URS) rules include orbital weapon platforms in it's description of common space stations available throughout the core worlds. These small space stations are roughly 300' (90 or so meters in diameter) and have 20 hull points. They are generally are crewed by 1 commanding officer and have 9 gunnery officers that work 3/shift. The gun platform typically has an electron battery, and missile tubes, and can fire up to three seeker missiles. Oh and these platforms use reflective paint on their hulls. "Hey guys I wonder what this does"-Famous last words "Hey guys, I think it's friendly." -Famous last words "You go on ahead, I'll catch up." -Famous last words "Did you here that?" -Famous last words |
April 17, 2012 - 9:48pm | Cool. Thanks for the feedback! :) I don't have to outrun that nasty beast my friend...I just have to outrun you! |
 April 21, 2012 - 5:40am | If its latter in history ie post SW2 then no reason it cant be a stealthed/shielded system not radiating energy. Its cheap-ish and has the down side that its a sitting target without crew and limited or no repair ability. Its only detectable up close unless it activates its radar and begins firing. Limit it to things like RB, Seeker missiles or torps (as I doubt that solar collectors are enought to truly power LB, PB, or EB) though the rules on seeker missiles would be a bad idea in orbit where friendly ships are expected to congregate (though the seeker missile rules as written I would think are more appropriate for SW1 and a guided system for SW2 and latter- perhaps there is a range at which the firer looses control of the seeker and then it reverts to the old seeker rules but latter after SW2 they are fully guided). NOTE: mines are cheap and by definition are an early stage of weapons platform, all be it a single use one so the new generation of weapons platforms while multi use are perhaps only expected to survive full up combat for 10 to 30 minutes once they come under fire (1-3 KHs turns) Its not expected that an unmanned weapons platform is going to survive long just make the enemy in time and resources to take them out. I might not be a dralasite, vrusk or yazirian but I do play one in Star Frontiers! |
April 21, 2012 - 2:40pm | There is no reason it cannot have an atomic reactor to power LB, EB, or PB |
April 21, 2012 - 3:29pm | There is no reason it cannot have an atomic reactor to power LB, EB, or PB True but I was also thinking about the presence of energy sensors in game and hiding one with a reactor could be more problematic. I think the obvious design theory for these is pretty much a scaled up mine. Temporary defensive measure till a ship can intervene not really any hope of these holding off a competent fleet commander unless he fails to bring enough tonnage and these platforms were seeded thickly. So that said I would think that a passive energy collection array, stealth shielding and low energy needs weapons are called for at least in the early history of these weapons in the Frontier. I might not be a dralasite, vrusk or yazirian but I do play one in Star Frontiers! |
