From: John Leary <john_t_leary@y...>
Date: Mon, 25 Jan 1999 12:44:24 -0800
Subject: Re: A Stealth Primer (long reply)
> Izenberg, Noam wrote:
XXX Well, I hope you will be able to read this prior to departure. Having you
ideas will make comments less general, and hopefully of more value. Some of
the content will no doubt be repeated from
prior posts. JTL
XXX
> Stealth Tech
XXX I cannot get around the fact that this system affects the weapons of
the enemy ship! Affects ALL enemy weapons the SAME, EXCEPT when the
stealth is acting as a SCREEN! Now to explain the last line:
'Affects ALL enemy weapons the SAME,' - All the beam weapons have
thier maximum range reduced. Problem: The only logical way that all types of
beam weapons can have the max range reduced by the SAME ammount is to have the
ship sensors blanked out, (PSB: your stealth ship can be generally tracked by
your exhaust.). This means that you have 'created' a 'local fire control' for
each weapon, and the weapon may fire when the stealth
ship is within the reduced range. (This concept means that the FCS has
no usefulness any more, and may be dispenced with on the SSD.) JTL Note: for
the second half of the line see the fighters, item 2. XXX
> 2) Stealth Fighter - Stealth fighters are +12pts/group and are
XXX Comments and thoughts, typed as they happen to come to me. 1) They do cost
a lot, no comment on that, they should. 2) Personal preferance: I do not like
to 'stack' the fighter abilites,
and do not look forward to the heavy, fast, long-range, attack,
torpedo, interceptor.
3) Stealth = screen: This is a fact, however inconsistant in
application.
4) I understand the problem with the PDS/ADFC/FTR, you do not want the
fighters the hang around just outside of ships range and fire away
without the ship having some chance to respond. I solved this
problem (and the ambush problem) by eliminating the ranged fire for
fighters. For Fighters to have combat here, they must be in base to
base
contact. I highly reccomend this change to all players to quicken
and simplify the game. (Sorry, I now terminate preach mode.) 5) I take it from
your comment that the type 1 beam ignores the stealth aspect
of the fighters when they come into range, Yes? This naturally
leads to the repacement of all PDS with type 1 beams as they have the same
performance.
JTL
XXX
> 3) Stealth System (not tested). ECM version of stealth with same
Mass
> similar to screen, cost ~ 2x screen or more. Ships with stealth system
XXX In the current campaign, we are treating the ECM as a level of stealth.
The effect of ECM is to reduce the enemys sensor range by 50 percent. The
result is very simple to use and in MOST cases the effect shows up
in the stratigic rather thsn the tactical game. Base sensor range is
60 inches for standard sensors and range doubles every additional level. You
mean the ship cannot use screens or sensors for fear of detection,
not that the ship cannot be equipped with them, Yes? JTL
XXX
> Oprationally, stealth 1 is harder to use, as the range reduction is
XXX Yes, I can see that the operational window is very small. JTL XXX
> NI AAR analysis:
XXX
The legend grows! :-)
Indy, send me your address, I'll send you some dice. JTL
XXX I think I rolled
> about average overall, and with better timing than Indy.Givent eh
XXX Agreed, and simple also. JTL XXX
> As for fighter-rerolls, I always thought of PDS fire as abstracting a
XXX While I agree with most of the above, heavy fighters are considered to
be at level one screen, not armored. Kra'vak fighters are armored not
screened.
The object of 'stealth' is to reduce/eliminate the ability of the
enemy
to detect the stealth ship. Once detected, the stealth ship is just
another
target! It is wildly unfair to change the premise of stealth to equal
that
of a screen simply because you are likely to be shot at. This also
invites the same change at ship level when the ship is likely to be shot at. I
personally dislike situational rules, they invite abuse and hard feelings. JTL
XXX
> 'zall for now.