A side benefit of having lock-on things is that it would be relatively
easy to create reasons for having assigned squadrons and flagships in your
fleet.
As mentioned before just say that all ships in the same squadron may share
targeting data. Squadrons stay within a given distance from the "command
vessel" of that squadron. This would help out all those 1 FCS ships out there
some people seem to be concerned about getting hosed by the
Lock-On
rules. A command vessel must be a ship larger than all ships under it or a
specially equipped "command" version of the same size. You could give ships
"command ratings" which determine how many ships can be coordinated. Or some
other designation the naval types can spell out much better than I.
A ELINT ship may be assigned to a squadron to lend support in the form of
ECM/ECCM. This ship could be represented as having a special ECM system
and just lots of FCS. ECM could be given a rating which can be "loaned" to a
nearby vessel. Easy enough on first look.
Scout ships could lend FCS data over a greater distance than normal vessels.
Just a couple of ideas.
A side benefit of having lock-on things is that it would be relatively
easy to create reasons for having assigned squadrons and flagships in your
fleet.
As mentioned before just say that all ships in the same squadron may share
targeting data. Squadrons stay within a given distance from the "command
vessel" of that squadron. This would help out all those 1 FCS ships out there
some people seem to be concerned about getting hosed by the
Lock-On
rules. A command vessel must be a ship larger than all ships under it or a
specially equipped "command" version of the same size. You could give ships
"command ratings" which determine how many ships can be coordinated. Or some
other designation the naval types can spell out much better than I.
A ELINT ship may be assigned to a squadron to lend support in the form of
ECM/ECCM. This ship could be represented as having a special ECM system
and just lots of FCS. ECM could be given a rating which can be "loaned" to a
nearby vessel. Easy enough on first look.
Scout ships could lend FCS data over a greater distance than normal vessels.
----
Now this idea I like! Sort of the Command Datalink from Weber's stuff, or a
Sci-Fo version of integrated air-defense.
> Now this idea I like! Sort of the Command Datalink from Weber's
But more reason for the Fist o' Doom, too, so you can all be close
enough to share tracking data. :-(
> Now this idea I like! Sort of the Command Datalink from Weber's
But more reason for the Fist o' Doom, too, so you can all be close
enough to share tracking data. :-(
---
Only if you decide that's what is needed for the PSB. I can see the argument
that the opposite is desirable so as to create as many dissimilar paintings of
the target as possible.
Or create a dynamic tension between close together for ADFC benefits and
command ship protection and risk of said FoD and further apart to avoid that
but run the risk of having your command ship nailed - which then
could/would
screw up all the other ships FCS for a certain amount of time (More uses for
DC anyone?)
[quoted original message omitted]
A given ship can only coordinate for so many other ships. Depending on your
PSB and game balance needs you could limit the max size of squadrons available
accordingly.
It is also dangerous to put all your eggs in one basket. If the 6 MU limit is
given, your manuever would be very limited. And make your entire force very
juicy targets for area of effect weapons. And if your one command ship gets
nailed you just lost all your coordination.
As a PSB for the 6 MU limit the lag in communications over any distance
greater than that would degrade the targeting data so much as to be generally
useless. YMMV.
As yet another side you could link ADFC to the squadron you are a part of.
Makes those carrier escorts vitally important. Maybe you could even link
fighter CAP to the squadron as well!:)
Anyway the more I think about it the more I think this would make fleet games
and fleet make up a lot more structured and interesting.
---
And actually make the big ships important again- as well as a reason to
target them as opposed to making the "easy" kills against the escorts.
I don't know if 6MU is the right number, but I think this is good idea the
more and more I look at it.
Now I have to model this and start tinkering with Mass and rules effects. I
think it should have a clear benefit but an equally clear (and somewhat
nasty) penalty when it goes bye-bye...
Anyone have any thoughts?
> The Sutherlands wrote:
> there some people seem to be concerned about getting hosed by the
Or
> some other designation the naval types can spell out much better than
I like it!
I'd actually like to see specific FCS that would be used to share the
targetting data sort of like ADFCs are required to loan your PDS to
friendlies, call them Fleet FC (FFC) I guess. Each FFC allows the ship
to share it's lock-on roll with one other ship. A group of ships could
be a "task force" and you make all of their lock-on rolls and pick the
highest, reducing the effect of a bad lock-on roll. Limit FFC to a set
range between ships.
With this, ECM ships and/or capitol ships become more important
though... Not sure I like that.
--Tim