Very simple (and untested) Electronic Warfare (EW) rules.
Assumption 1) Desired for EW to have an effect on
combat
Assumption 2) Want to be quick and easy Assumption 3) Want to stay with d6 (as
the rest of FT) Assumption 4) Want to keep within the GZG staging system for
EW (Basic, Enhanced, Superior) Assumption 5) All warships are considered to
have a minimum of Basic EW
EW Capability: # Dice Rolled: Basic 1 Enhanced 2 Superior 3
Procedure: Determine EW level for the attacker: Before firing, the attacking
ship will announce its target and the number of Fire Controls (FCS) that will
be committed to the target. 1 FCS is Basic, 2 FSC is Enhanced, 3 FCS provides
Superior EW. Enhanced Sensors will add one level to the EW level (Basic to
Enhanced, Enhanced to Superior) and Superior will add 2 levels to this (Basic
to Superior) for EVERY attack by the ship. The maximum level is Superior.
Determine the EW level for the target: The target ship starts with a Basic EW.
ECM adds 1 level to the EW rating (Basic to Enhanced). Area ECM adds 1 level
to the EW rating of all ships within 12", including itself. Thus if a ship has
ECM and is in an Area ECM field, it uses Superior EW. Maximum EW level is
Superior. Effect: Both ships roll a number of dice per the EW level. If any of
the attacker's dice are higher than the highest of the target's dice, the
attacker has locked on to the target. Perform combat as normal. If 2 or more
of the attacker's dice are higher than the highest of the
target's dice add +1 to all to hit rolls this turn from that ship to
that target. If the highest of the target's die is higher than the highest of
the attacker's die, the attacker may not fire at that ship. The attacking ship
may NOT retarget his weapons if he fails to achieve
target lock-on. FCS used to add EW levels to an attack may not be used
to target another ship or for any other purpose this turn.
-----
Brian Bell bkb@beol.net
-----
> -----Original Message-----
> On 7-Apr-00 at 08:16, Bell, Brian K (Brian_Bell@dscc.dla.mil) wrote:
I hate to be the nay-sayer, but I really don't like the idea of forcing
more FCS onto the ship. FCS are for firing weapons, not detecting. It's the
difference between a radar and a laser painting device.
I know this is beating a dead horse, but I would like to see something on the
information end. If you know it's there you can shoot at it.
IE
0-12 MU: see opponents SSD
12-36 MU: see miniatures on the board
36-60 MU: see "objects" representing mass classes, kind of like the
ping-pong balls.
60-80 MU: see non-mass differentiated objects.
Target in all cases. For the EW end I would like to see change of
range bands and/or provide disinformation in the 40-80 range. If
you want to play with passive/active sensors that would be fine
also.
The ranges need to be played with, the 80 MU distance feels correct to me for
those who don't have artificial speed limitations.
***
I hate to be the nay-sayer, but I really don't like the idea of forcing
more FCS onto the ship. FCS are for firing weapons, not detecting. It's the
difference between a radar and a laser painting device.
***
If you know it's there you can shoot at it.
***
I'm a bit of two minds here. However, it seems to me that you're talking about
two different things: ID'ing, which I'd say was based on long
distance sensors, and spacial pin-pointing, which is what FCS do.
I'd probably introduce levels/quality of rather than numbers of FCS, for
something like this, even though that's even MORE conplexxxity.
If you know it's there, you know it's something and can shoot at it. If you've
got good sensors, you can know what it is, and if you've got good FCS, you've
got a chance of hitting at it.
As with all my comments, off the top of head not fully thought out prolly
deserving of plasma-enhanced flaming.
The_Beast
> On 7-Apr-00 at 10:15, devans@uneb.edu (devans@uneb.edu) wrote:
It's
> the difference between a radar and a laser painting device.
If
> you've got good sensors, you can know what it is, and if you've got
I guess what I am mostly getting at is I do not, in any way shape or
form, want to re-create SFB EW. It is fine for a 2 ship duel, I
want to avoid all the die rolling it requires for a fleet action. If I want to
manage power and play EW fire control defeating games I'll play SFB. If I want
a fleet game I want FT, whose primary design rules seems to have been KISS.
***
I guess what I am mostly getting at is I do not, in any way shape or
form, want to re-create SFB EW. It is fine for a 2 ship duel, I
want to avoid all the die rolling it requires for a fleet action. If I want to
manage power and play EW fire control defeating games I'll play SFB. If I want
a fleet game I want FT, whose primary design rules seems to have been KISS.
***
Ok, you talked me out of it.;->=
I know I had your reaction to the EW duel described. I would mind
less a much simpler shot modifier than the pre-shot procedure. Still,
complex enough to be very optional.
The_Beast
From: <devans@uneb.edu>
> I hate to be the nay-sayer, but I really don't like the idea of
> I'm a bit of two minds here. However, it seems to me that you're
If
> you've got good sensors, you can know what it is, and if you've got
There is one big disadvantage of NOT using FCs for detection: you either have
an "inherent" set of sensors, with all attendent problems: or you must make up
a new system, and then you have the problem of what about all existing designs
in FB1 and FB2 that don't have them.
For "inherent" systems, how do you knock them out? Maybe this could be
amalgamated with the existing inherent systems, ie Bridge, Life Support, and
Reactor. So you could have the standard sensor suite being part of the Bridge.
*shrug*
IMHO the best and easiest way to deal with this is to define the FC
systems as having 2 actual parts: a long-range sensor, capable of
detecting things but not accurately enough to provide a firing solution,
From: "Roger Books" <books@mail.state.fl.us>
> I guess what I am mostly getting at is I do not, in any way shape or
Good Points. Perhaps something that's about as simple as the EW rules for
Federation and Empire? The "best ship" of a fleet determines the detection
range of the fleet, but this may be modified by unusual circumstances.
Standard Detection Distance 6 at which time you get FC quality
data. This is the Fire Control Distance - FCD.
+1 if you have a Scout System on one of your ships
-1 if enemy has a Jammer on one of his ships
Then individually
-1 if enemy ship has a jammer on it
-1 on enemy that didn't use thrust
-1 on enemy that didn't fire
Multiply FCD by 12" to get the actual distance.
This way a "silent running" jammer will get FC data on it at 36" if you have a
scout, 24" if not.
New Systems required: Improved ("Scout") sensors Mass?? Cost?? Jammer Mass??
Cost??
OPTIONAL: You get data:
Actual Status (ie which boxes crossed off) at FCD-1
SSD at FCD+1
Mass at FCD+2
Something There but dunno what at FCD+3
Normal Circumstances (no jammers etc) then are:
Ships start not firing weapons so FCD is 5. You get a "blip" at 8 (96") You
get mass at 7 (84") You get SSD at 6 (72")
> Brian Bell wrote:
> Assumption 4) Want to keep within the GZG staging system
I agree with all the assumptions I snipped except for this one.
I personally prefer modifying the MT staging system to a Class based system,
similar to beams. This is less restrictive and allows for (as in the case of
beams) infinite scalability. In other words I can make my
sensors as powerful as I want - so long as I've got MASS and POINTS to
spend.
> EW Capability: # Dice Rolled:
Change this to Class 1, 2, and 3, and I'm all for it. It would then allow for
Class 4 with 4 dice, etc.
> Procedure:
Why not just base this on the type of sensors ONLY. I see no real reason to
add FCS into the equation. I egree with previous comments made concerning the
artificial addition of FCSs to Fleet scouts just to get benefits.
> Determine the EW level for the target:
I prefer having the "sensor pool" be the same for both. Your EW capability
determines level for attacker and target.
This eliminates this entire step. ANY ship's EW level is simply the type of
system it has.
It also requires alot of dice rolling if each ship needs to pair off with
every other ship for EW. It would be simpler to have the EW dice somhow slaved
to range.