• Welcome to the new COTI server. We've moved the Citizens to a new server. Please let us know in the COTI Website issue forum if you find any problems.

Composition of armed forces in pocket empires

I will again ask the question. This version of Traveller is supposed to be occurring in Year Zero of the Imperium. The first Traveller News Service report, which appears in JTAS No. 2 puts the year at 1105 since the founding of the Imperium by Cleon. In 1105, Tech Level 15 is listed in The Traveller Book on page 86 as the maximum for the Imperium, with the average Tech Level being 11 to 12, and above average as Tech Levels 13 and 14.

If you have Tech Level 15 weaponry at Year Zero, what Level of weaponry should the Imperium have at Year 1105?

Since this is a discussion of Pocket Empires, if a Pocket Empire has worlds with a Tech Level of 15 at Year Zero, how does the Imperium take them over? At that level, they would have Jump-6 jump drives, which are viewed as not at all common in the Year 1105.

If you have Tech Level 15 at Year Zero, would someone explain why 1105 years later, the Imperium is still at Tech Level 15?
 
I will again ask the question. This version of Traveller is supposed to be occurring in Year Zero of the Imperium. The first Traveller News Service report, which appears in JTAS No. 2 puts the year at 1105 since the founding of the Imperium by Cleon. In 1105, Tech Level 15 is listed in The Traveller Book on page 86 as the maximum for the Imperium, with the average Tech Level being 11 to 12, and above average as Tech Levels 13 and 14.

If you have Tech Level 15 weaponry at Year Zero, what Level of weaponry should the Imperium have at Year 1105?

Since this is a discussion of Pocket Empires, if a Pocket Empire has worlds with a Tech Level of 15 at Year Zero, how does the Imperium take them over? At that level, they would have Jump-6 jump drives, which are viewed as not at all common in the Year 1105.

If you have Tech Level 15 at Year Zero, would someone explain why 1105 years later, the Imperium is still at Tech Level 15?

True, Millieu 0 is the "standard" setting for T4 (and so for Pocket Empires), and máximum TL by then was 12-13; but T4 also has provisions for designing ships up to TL15, so being usable for higher TL settings.

Could Pocket Empires be used in other settings (e.g. in a post Rebellion Hard Times, on an alternative timeline where virus does not so change the setting)?
 
I would like to see some rules on Deep sites, notably how they're attacked. FF&S I think actually has some noted in the design sequence on pricing a Deep Meson site. But I'm curious how they're attacked from orbit.

The only rules in a Traveller product that I ever saw for this specific thing said treat it as a HG2/MegaTrav spacecraft hit but ignore every result except a Weapon or Sensor hit.

I believe it might have been in COACC where this rule existed but I could be misremembering.

As far as I recall there is no other rule in any Traveller product published for how they are to be used in combat with spacecraft at a tactical level (of course there are the rules in I:E covering massed numbers of them grouped as PD divisions fighting spacecraft squadrons).
 
I would like to see some rules on Deep sites, notably how they're attacked. FF&S I think actually has some noted in the design sequence on pricing a Deep Meson site. But I'm curious how they're attacked from orbit.

There is some reference to it in MT:Arrival Vengeance, though not hard rules...
 
Meson guns are treated as indirect fire, but is more accurate than barrelled artillery. The entire indirect fire procedure is time-delayed and rather inaccurate, you can easily be off target by 500 m in the first round.


They have no stated maximum range, but a Striker battlefield is only a few km across so that does not say much.

They are always indirect fire weapons, with the implied inaccuracy that entails.

For something like a Striker play field, the range would certainly be "unlimited", simply because the nominal range of these things is in the 1000's of kilometers.

The reasons for inaccuracy in indirect fire is two fold. First, is simply bad spotting and range finding. The Forward Observer gets the range wrong. Second, is the inherent inaccuracy of an unguided ballistic projectile that's subject to the whims of the environment, plus the error rate of a mechanical device firing it (variances in powder charge, friction and how it affects velocity from the tube, etc.).

Neither of these would apply to a TL 15 battlefield.

Meson artillery nominally requires an FO, so in that sense the gun does not have LOS on the target. But, beyond that, it's a light speed weapon, and it's, literally, aimed at the target. It points through the mountain, through the trees, through the planetary crust and oceans if it has to aim at the target.

The targeting is going to be based solely on the precision of the delta between the designated target, as recorded by the FO, and the placement of the mount. We'd picture that as being done through some global reference point. The mount position needs to be precisely located. Then the FO needs to be, finally the FO needs a reliable way to measure from it's position to that of the target.

I don't think anyone foresees problem with the FO having some kind of binoculars with inbuilt GPS, inertial navigation/internal compass, and a laser range finder. With a useful range of 10-20km. (You know, like this: http://www.celestron.com/browse-sho...0-binocular-with-gps,-digital-compass-reticle)

We have B-1 bombers flying loitering missions waiting for calls of close air support. With JDAM munitions, the FO of the ground force GPS pings the target, forwards that through combat operations, and the bomb is configured on the fly for this specific sortie. The B-1 the executes the attack, plopping a precision 1000lb bomb on top of a particularly stubborn target. It then goes back to patrolling.

This is not the old days of artillery firing smoke and the FO walking the fire in to the target. There's no need to do that with precision munitions, especially with something like a Meson gun (ESPECIALLY something with a 100m burst radius, you know the old saying "horseshoes, hand grenades, atom bombs, and 100m burst meson blasts").

So, yes, Mesons are "indirect fire", but even a trained spotter with a Mk 1 Eyeball should be able to take a simple bearing and guesstimate to within 100-200m, much less a pair of $200 TL 8 binoculars ordered from Amazon.

The only rules in a Traveller product that I ever saw for this specific thing said treat it as a HG2/MegaTrav spacecraft hit but ignore every result except a Weapon or Sensor hit.

Do you get the bonus DM for the planet being a REALLY BIG target size?

There is some reference to it in MT:Arrival Vengeance, though not hard rules...

Any more details than that?
 
Neither of these would apply to a TL 15 battlefield.

...

This is not the old days of artillery firing smoke and the FO walking the fire in to the target. There's no need to do that with precision munitions, especially with something like a Meson gun (ESPECIALLY something with a 100m burst radius, you know the old saying "horseshoes, hand grenades, atom bombs, and 100m burst meson blasts").
Striker 2 has "Precision Indirect Fire" for this that basically is resolved like direct fire.
 
Striker 2 has "Precision Indirect Fire" for this that basically is resolved like direct fire.

But ironically, not for indirect meson fire which according to rule 13.6 is area fire.

Although, in TNE/Striker-II you could direct fire your meson gun (and you could even direct fire it from orbit according to rule 13.7).
 
Do you get the bonus DM for the planet being a REALLY BIG target size?



Any more details than that?

The COACC rules are on page 73. The Arrival Vengeance rules are on page 20. Despite both being MT products, the rules aren't consistent.
 
MgT1E CSC has the battlefield meson accelerator range as 150 km, nothing else in CT Striker, good enough for working purposes.
 
But ironically, not for indirect meson fire which according to rule 13.6 is area fire.

Although, in TNE/Striker-II you could direct fire your meson gun (and you could even direct fire it from orbit according to rule 13.7).
Thanks, I only read Rule 8 where it is indicated that mesons and guided munitions should be Precision Indirect Fire.
 
Pocket Empires

....

As far as I recall there is no other rule in any Traveller product published for how they are to be used in combat with spacecraft at a tactical level (of course there are the rules in I:E covering massed numbers of them grouped as PD divisions fighting spacecraft squadrons).

There is a part in the "T4 Pocket Empires" book too. It is about the large scale war.

(Can I write a question about the Pocket Empires economics in this topic? As I see, this is the only topic about the Pocket Empires. The Pocket Empires book wrote that the robots are infrastructure, not part of the labor-score. In my opinion, the autonomous robots (eg robots with int 6 or more) are more worker than only infrastructure. Do you have any opinion about that?)
 
Last edited:
There is a part in the "T4 Pocket Empires" book too. It is about the large scale war.

(Can I write a question about the Pocket Empires economics in this topic? As I see, this is the only topic about the Pocket Empires)

Just start a new thread about the economics of Pocket Empires. No one is going to get upset about that. A lot of guys do use the Pocket Empires book for other editions as well. I suspect that the discussion of economics would be quite interesting.
 
Back
Top