First, let me tell you all what a pleasure it is to be part of this list!!
I have seen too many situations where people jump down each others throats
right away or respond with such carelessness that actual discussion and
creative thought is non-existant.
Looking back at my original ECM comments, these were my thoughts while looking
at FT with a certain frame of mind. No one blasted me, told me how stoooopid,
etc. I was being... Thank you one and all!!
Okay, at the time I was seeing FT through the eyes of a level of technology
akin to something in Star Trek: Next Generation. You know, where one quick
swipe of a medical tricorder and they can figure-out what your
great-great-great cousin ate for breakfast on her 3497th day of life.
However, it was in the responses to my post that I was brought "back to
earth". Three of my favorite videos are Predator, Classic Star Trek episode
with the Romulans, and Hunt For Red October. [do you see a pattern here?]
So, in regards to ECM in Full Thrust, would it be safe to say that we are
talking about the ability to detect the presence of another ship, ID that ship
as an enemy and to be able to fire weapons that will hit it...
versus the ability to prevent detection, identification and/or weapons'
lock?
Questions:
1] Will activity [like combat] on the part of a ship increase its
vulnerability to being targeted?
2] Can fighters act as "forward observers" and "paint" targets or at least
perform recon that will aid the fleet?
3] How about weapons packages that contain transponders, scramblers, and other
thingies that will act a "bell around the cat's neck"?
4] [My 11 year old daughter came up with this] How about "whiskers"? Unmanned
probes that are released once a ship enters normal space. They would range far
and wide gathering and transmitting data that warns ships of dangers, hazards,
etc. These could also be used in military roles ranging from recon to decoys.
Thanks for the space.
In response to John Huber's post:
I think each of your insights has validity in a futuristic space combat. To
recap John's post:
Questions:
1] Will activity [like combat] on the part of a ship increase its
vulnerability to being targeted?
2] Can fighters act as "forward observers" and "paint" targets or at least
perform recon that will aid the fleet?
3] How about weapons packages that contain transponders, scramblers, and other
thingies that will act a "bell around the cat's neck"?
4] [My 11 year old daughter came up with this] How about "whiskers"? Unmanned
probes that are released once a ship enters normal space. They would range far
and wide gathering and transmitting data that warns ships of dangers, hazards,
etc. These could also be used in military roles ranging from recon to decoys.
Thanks for the space.
> At 12:01 02/06/97 -0500, you wrote:
shows something about the standard of gamers who use these systems
> I have seen too many situations where people jump down each others
lock?
> Questions:
No, (well yes and no) yes its now flashing and communicating with other ships
firing thrusters etc rather than coasting on 'silent running';but is now
altering course employing decoys ecm filling space with debris etc. I would
say net difference zero. However if you can supprise a ship on s.r then thats
different (use the rules in mt senario {the one with the non combat ready
ship.}
> 2] Can fighters act as "forward observers" and "paint" targets or
This I like, say increased range or roll an extra 1d6 per
weapon/fire-con
**********
> 3] How about weapons packages that contain transponders,
senario dependant
> 4] [My 11 year old daughter came up with this] How about
senario dependant or bonus for defending fleets id of ships.
> Thanks for the space.
Jon (top cat) is back Sprayforming Developments Ltd.
[production tools]
@
[prototype times]
I haven't been on this long myself and I'm not really familiar with what
happens elsewhere on the net but it has been interesting and given me a few
ideas which I might just shamelessly steal. Anyway to your questions....
1. Yes, definately. By firing a ship is announcing that it is there. Missle
and torpedo fire should be fairly straight forward to back track (this might
vary with ECM and Senors) to point of origin. Beams should be harder useless
you believe that the beam would be visible along it's entire length (ala Star
Trek phasors) it which case firing one will be a dead give away. For more
ideas you might watch the battle sequence at the end of "Star Trek?, The
Undiscovered Country", (look for the torpedo launches by the Klingons).
2. Interesting idea. Problem is how do you get this to work on the table? To
my way of thinking recon operations are more siuted to campaign games at the
"Operational level" which is between the Strategic and Tactical levels.
"Starfire" rules have two levels for this which they call the System and
Interception levels, this (if you can get the rules) might give you some ideas
for this "Operational" level.
3. Another interesting idea. Battletech had something similar (NARC I think it
was called?) which was a missle that did no damage but once attached increased
the chances of another missile hit. I believe that the further missiles had to
come from the original firer or one that was fitted with the same system. You
might then come up with two new missle types, a "leech" which attaches and
transmits a homing becon and the "bloodhound" type which would attack only
targets with leeches attached but with increased chances of a hit.
4. Your daughter watches too much "Sea Quest: DSV". This would really fit into
recon area to which see above. On the actual table it might be useful as a
limited scarifical mine clearing system. On second thoughts it might be useful
in asteroids allowing you to target ship that you otherwise can't. The only
time that you can't draw line of sight is in an asteroid field. Firing beams
and torpedos would be dodgy (as they need direct line of sight) but it should
allow you to fire missiles. Give the system say the same mass and cost as a
screen and allow a number of drones
depending on class ie Capitals - 3. Perhaps 1 mass for every 3 drones.
Hmmmm..........
Don't worry about making the system too complicated. It's clear from the mail
here that people make the game simpler or more complex according to their own
tastes. If you and the people you play with (a VERY important consideration)
are happy it doesn't matter. As you seem to be into submarines can I suggest
"War beneath the
sea: submarine conflict 1939-1945" by Peter Padfield. My copy is by
Pimlico press. Cheers.
Tony. twilko@ozemail.com.au "Everything has been thought of before, the
problem is to think of it again." Johann W. von Goethe.
> At 12:01 PM 02-06-97 -0500, you wrote:
lock?
> Questions:
> At 02:37 PM 6/2/97 -0400, you wrote:
Yes. If a ship is firing weapons it's emitting energy. OK, so the beam weapons
are highly focused pulses, but you are still going to get some
'bleed'.
> 2] Can fighters act as "forward observers" and "paint" targets or
Um, I suppose so. This presumes though that weapon range is greater than the
range at which you can determine friend or foe. In FT, that isn't necessarily
the case.
> 3] How about weapons packages that contain transponders,
I would save said they were in the rules in MT under spoof ships, yes?
> 4] [My 11 year old daughter came up with this] How about
And would be the first thing to get taken out in any given conflict:).
Whiskers are all very well in principle (and on TV) but they are far too
brittle for a wartime system.
TTFN
Jon
John Huber you have a lot to answer for. I have a comp in two days, half my
fleet additions are still unpainted, I still have to sratch build a base and
yet this wiskers idea keeps coming back to me. AHHHHHHHH!!!:) Anyway here's
what I'm thinking....
Wiskers system 4 mass 20 points. (basic-15, superior 25)
3 Extra Wiskers 3 mass 10 points.
Wiskers are pilotless drones that are used to scout for larger ships. They are
represented by a single fighter model. They move 12" in all respects as a
fighter. They are attacked in the same way as missiles except that fighter
groups may dogfight them needing 6's to hit. The controling
ship may use upto two wiskers at a time (basic-1, superior-3). The
control ship only may draw line of sight from the drone but still draws line
of fire and hence range from the ship itself. If both the target and the drone
are
in debris clouds or nebula a lock-on roll must be still made but at +1
for the ship controlling the wisker drone. Wiskers have no weapons. They may
ram mines, destroying both, or ships. If they attack ships they roll two dice
and do a single point of damage if a double 6 is rolled.
I don't agree with Jon (of Abosolutely Barking Stars) that they would be taken
out quickly. It would be nice to do so but I envisage very small stealthy
drones that would be really hard to spot. The Isrealis used drones at the
start of the "Peace for Galilee" operation back in the 80's (I suddenly feel
old) for recon work and pinpointing hostile SAM batteries (most of which
belonged to the Syrians) without being noticed. As there isn't that much
"terrain" in FT I still thing these things will be most usefull in a long
range recon role. A good parallel would be the Japanese Navy of WWII where the
aircraft aboard the crusiers did all the search and recon work leaveing ALL
the aircraft aboard the carriers free for strike duty. You might think that
this is all just recycled cow fodder but I'd still like to hear what you think
especially if you use something like this in a game. Cheers.