FT: EW suggestion/response

1 posts ยท Apr 9 2000

From: GBailey@a...

Date: Sun, 9 Apr 2000 15:02:31 EDT

Subject: FT: EW suggestion/response

> Electronics Systems

I'd rather see the following to go along with the current MT sensors so we
don't have to modify our own designs.

SYSTEM.................Mass.....Cost
Class 0 (Basic).............0.........0
Class 1 (Enhanced).......1........15
Class 2 (Superior).........2........30
Class 3 (Elite)...............3........45
Class 4 (Supreme)........4........60

That's enough.

> The Class 0 system will be inherent to all ships, so

I like the randomness of die rolls that we use now for scanning. Knowing that
one ship has no screens and the
others have screens is detrimental to the non-screened ship
against beam heavy opponents.  Also, a needle beam-armed
ship may try to sneak in for a shot before being pounded on by the enemy. I
could go with various maximum ranges for the different classes although I'd
keep it to 6" differences.

> Ships using Active detect AND are detected at the

I like this better than the current number of scans based on the size of the
ship. Larger ships already have an advantage.

> These dice are scored just like beam weapons, including re-rolls on a

I'm not sure I like the effects. Screen level changes do not effect many
systems (i.e., pulse torpedoes) or may have no effect if the ship already as 2
levels and gains another. Also, how can you falsify information from your own
scans? That's the effect of jammers. Speaking of which, you don't have any or
their effects.

Now you got me to thinking (ouch, stop that).
**  Warning  **    :)
A post may soon follow with my own EW rules that mesh with MT.

Glen