After reading Allan's scenario summary I have to say I agree with him the
sensor rules are really thin. So I have come up with some new sensor rules for
your approval.
Sensor Type To Hit Bonus
Basic +0
Enhanced +1
Superior +2
Add the bonus to the damage dice. for superior sensors 2 damage points would
be scored on a 4 or greater, and 1 DP on a 2 or 3.
ECM Type To Hit peanalty
ECM -3/-2
Area ECM -2/-1
The first number is if the ship uses no drive or weapons that turn, the second
number is for normal engine use and firing. For area ECM, 1 damage point would
be scored on a 5 or 6 for all the ships in the effected area.
Any holes or comments would be appreciated.
> At 08:51 PM 3/30/97 -0500, you wrote:
I like the idea of sensors enhancing combat. I'm not sure I'd want a whole
bunch of modifiers, though. Your system seems pretty straightforward, though.
I just don't want FT to get into the "modifier trap" because multiple
modifiers slow down the game.
Mind you, I'm currently at a loss as to what else can be done. Your system
seems simple enough. I'd like to give it a go before I commented further.
> Add the bonus to the damage dice. for superior sensors 2 damage points
This is what I meant about the "modifiers trap." We now have modifiers for the
firer to hit, and modifiers for the target to get hit. And the target's
modifier is based on speed. Again, this system seems pretty straightforward,
but I think it would still slow things down noticeably. Again, I'd have to try
it before I was sure. What are the results of your playtesting? Do they slow
the game, or am I worried over nothing.
I agree that I would prefer that there was SOMETHING else for the sensors to
do. Currently, the only reason I could think for using up their space is if
you are running with needle beams or if you require them for a scenario
(like the way sensors are used to identify cargo in the X-Wing/TIE
Fighter computer games).
> I'm also toying with the idea of having to roll for a weapons lock, but
I think that's starting to complicate things a tad. I look at FT as a fleet
game, and weapons lock seems more like what the weapons officer of a specific
ship worries about, not the commander of a fleet.
By the way, what is the ECM yo-you in SFB?
> On Mon, 31 Mar 1997, Allan Goodall wrote:
> I like the idea of sensors enhancing combat. I'm not sure I'd want a
IMHO, a simpler idea is to extend weapon ranges based on sensor power:
Basic +0"
Enhanced +1" per range band
Superior +2" per range band
ECM +4" to range
Thus a ship with Enhanced sensors would have beam ranges 13"/26"/39" and
a
one with Superior systems 14"/28"/42". While a ship with ECM protection
(area or personal) simply adds +4" to the range when someone is shooting
at it (or it tries to shoot) -- sometimes it makes a difference,
sometimes it doesn't.
The d6 range in FT is very limited. I'd stay away from modifiers to it,
since they can have a huge effect for a simple +-1.
You could say that To-Hit type weapons (Pulse torps, railguns) still
have their normal max range, they just hit better.
Realism check: Sensor power will probably be of utmost importance in space
battles. At the range of tens of thousands of kilometers or more, even a big
capital ship has relative visual size of about a pebble. BTRC's Slag! space
combat system is a diceless system based on sensor power. While I don't like
it much otherwise (it has hexes...), I find this aspect very nice.
> On Mon, 31 Mar 1997, Allan Goodall wrote:
> At 08:51 PM 3/30/97 -0500, you wrote:
We have been experimenting (Star Trek) with ecm/sensor rules. We are
using a system in which ecm protects a ship by increasing the range at which
it is shot at by enemy ships. Sensors can nullify this. It is a simply and
fast system that seems to be balanced so far, but then we have only used it a
couple of times.
> [quoted text omitted]
> At 01:51 AM 3/31/97 +0000, you wrote:
The ECM yo-yo only works because Star Fleet Battles works on
impulses. So the electronic warfare situation can change moment by moment.
However, Full Thrust works turn by turn, you only assess the electronic
warfare situation once a turn and hence there can be no ECM yo-yo.
James
> At 11:42 AM 3/31/97 -0500, Chad wrote:
Gee, simple and elegant. That might be the kind of effect we're looking for.
Are we in a minority, or do others think that sensors need "more bang for
their buck?"
> This is what I meant about the "modifiers trap." We now have modifiers
my experience with the my B5 modifiers is it slows the game some, but nobody
really seems to mind. I haven't playtested the sensors rules yet, they are
just off the top of my head. My explanation is more complicated
than it really has to be. (co-workers say my communication skills really
suck!).
> >I'm also toying with the idea of having to roll for a weapons lock,
the ECM yo-yo is where you put a lot of power into ECM, forcing a target
lock roll, let it drop, force a target lock roll and repeat until the other
guy fails or you run out of power, whichever comes first. It's one of my pet
peeves with Star Fleet Battles.
I would not want to go agianst a SDN with level 3 screens and ECM =~{
Brian Bell pdga6560@csi.com
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/pdga6560/fthome.html
Includes the Full Thrust Ship Registry Is your ship design here?
----------
> From: Marshall Grover <mgrover@mint.net>
[snip]
> Any holes or comments would be appreciated.
> At 12:22 AM 4/1/97 -0500, you wrote:
AHA! a Hole, I didn't even think of shields when I wrote it up, how about
making the two mutually exclusive, If you want to use ECM you have to turn
your fire control off.
I still like the system I posted a couple weeks ago, in essense:
ECM acts like another level of screens against beam-damage-type
weapons, or as a -1 to hit against "roll-to-hit" weapons.
Enhanced/Superior sensors can negate those effects.
Area ECM can be loaned to someone nearby. Superior sensors can be loaned to
someone nearby.
I'll spare the bandwidth of posting the details again. Seems simple and about
the right power level, IMHO.
> On Mon, 31 Mar 1997, Allan Goodall wrote:
> Are we in a minority, or do others think that sensors need "more bang
Dunno if we're a minority, but you're not alone:)
I just got the Fleet book (finally) and I noticed that there was no listing
for ECM or Sensor equipment. What I am wondering is if people still play with
the sensors and ECM? If so do you pay mass and cost based on the old values or
did you modify them?
> What I am wondering is if people
AFAIK Basic sensors are probably still part of the hull. The FB designs don't
have enhanced or superior sensors as the new rules for these systems are still
in the pipeline / playtest.
There are no new stats for Superior | Enhanced Sensors, [Area] ECM etc.
so it makes sense to use the old MASS and points values, there being no
conversion formula etc. and other MT systems such as Missile are the same MASS
and points cost they were in MT. Systems that effect the whole ship such as
fields and screens use the 10% of Mass if greater than the fixed MASS cost
rule. I don't think I would apply this to Sensors of ECM as they are fixed
size (typically) installations, YMMV.
Sensor Rules I have been thinking about sensor use and though I am impressed
with what SBS and Philip have written I had to try it myself. Philip is
especially hard to ignore as he does this for a living! The result has been
influenced heavily by: * Larry Bond's Harpoon modern naval rules. * Star
Cruiser. * Various Salamander books on modern warfare.
Sensors You cannot fire on a ship until you have a firm sensor contact on it
and
the sensors can hand this over to the fire control system. Missile systems may
be launced at a proble target (ie. a bogie) but I am less certain about beams.
The missiles can find their own targets if you put them in the right area but
beams need to be aimed precisely.
Roll 1d and apply modifiers. The roll should be made by the referee of
opposing player, the scanning player should have no idea how well ne has
rolled. Each player must write orders for their ships before the comencement
of the action. Only when conditions specified in the orders are met or a bogie
is detected can a player start writing his orders on a normal basis. Orders
will be something like "head toward the planet at velocity 12, use pasive
sensors only. New orders when a bogy is detected or you reach
20 MU from the planet".
Sensor Range (MU)
0-12 12-24 24-36 36-48 48-60 60-72 72-84 84-96 96-108
108-120
Modifier +3 +2 +1 0 -1 -2 -3 -4 -5
-6
Active sensors If the modifiers result is 6 or more the target has been
firmly located and a firing solution has been achieved. The amount by which
the die roll exceeds 6 improves the quality of information obtained.
Passive Sensors Though a roll of 6+ provides some information a roll of
12+ is required for a firing solution.
Modifiers (Apply to both active and passive sensors)
Situation Modifier Reasoning or comments
Target Mass Target Mass/50 Use apparent mass
for weasel and stealthed* ships.
Target is damaged +1/Damage row lost
Target is stealthed* -Stealth level
Cluttered environment (belt, nebula...) -2 or more
Basic Sensors -
Enhanced Sensors +1
Superior Sensors +2
Crack crew +1
Passive sensor modifiers
Target is running quiet -2 Reduces targets
signature
Target is using Active Sensors +3 Increases targets
signature
Target is using ECM +2 Ditto
Target is using Area ECM +4 Ditto
Target is firing energy weapons +1 Ditto
Target is screened + Level of screens Ditto
Target is firing Nova Cannon or Wave Gun +2 Ditto in spades!
Active Sensor Modifiers
Target is using ECM -4 Active
countermeasures
Target is using Area ECM -4 Ditto
Target is semi-streamlined -1 Less angular hull
reduces apparent area.
Target is fully streamlined -2 Less angular hull
reduces apparent area.
Target has been located by passive sensors +2 You know where to
look
Maintaining fix +3 Ditto
Passive Sensor Results Die Roll Results
<=0 False Contact. Place a bogie marker on the table.
6+ Recognise existence of bogies. May react to them.
8+ Number of targets.
10+
12+ Firing Solution. Target may be fired upon.
Active Sensor Results Table Die Roll Results
<=0 False Contact. Place a bogie marker on the table.
6+ Firing Solution. Target may be fired upon.
7+ Apparent mass of target.
8+ Apparent mass and thrust of target.
9+ Reveal true mass of target.
10+ Data on actual MASS, Propulsion and Screening systems (original,
undamaged, values).
11+ Data on all onboard systems (original, undamaged, values).
13+ As above plus current damage status and systems functional. - all
data about the ship.
Notes Stealth. I am assuming that some sort of stealth or masking is
available. It may function in one of two ways:
1. Reduce apparent mass of ship, like an inverted weasel system.
2. A straight modifier to enemy sensor rolls.
Though the modifier list includes both only one is possible and the other
should be deleted from the list.
I am assuming that better sensors are 'smarter' rather than more powerful. If
they are more powerful they should be easier to detect, conversely they may
become harder to detect as the sensor improves.
Running Quiet. Target ship is not manoeuvring, using active sensors, launching
fighters or firing. The target is unscreened.
I am doing a conversion between GURPS Traveller and FT, and thought my take on
sesnors and FC might be of interest.
Fire Control & Sensors
There is no FC in GURPS Traveller Full Thrust (GTT), instead each ship has a
sensor pool, based on the complexity of the ships computer (Complexity is a
computer term in GURPS Vehicles wich dictate computer power and compacity).
In order to "Detect" a vessle, points is allocated from the pool, dependant on
the range and Tech level of the sensors (basicly subsumed into the bridge
componant in GT). You allocate 1 point minimum, and Must allways use 1 dice
from the pool per detection.
Modifiers To detection attempt.
Range : +1 point per range band
Basic Stealth : +1 point per TL difference higher (minimum +1)
Radical Stealth : +2 points per TL Difference higher (minimum +2)
Active Black Globe (Cloak) : +3 points
Target has active sensors : - 3points
Sensing ship is active : -2 points
Tracked last turn : -1 dice per turn
Total upp the points. This is the cost from the pool of 1 dice worth of
detection. More dice may be added to the attempt at a cost of 1 point per
dice.
After totalling up the points. Roll the dice as per normal beam combat.
Results:
1 HIT : Bogey detected. +2 range bands to fire on.
2 HIT : Soft Lock. +1 range bands to fire on
3 HIT: Hard lock. Fire as normal
4 HIT+ : Hard Lock and movement compensated. Fire as -1 range bands
(minimum 1)
Example:
A Beowolf is attempting to detect a missile comming in. Range is 1 band
(1
point), it is a GTL12 basic stealth (Since the Beowolf is GTL10, point cost is
2
points). The Beowolf, being paranoid about being hit, goes active (-2
points), so its points cost for 1 dice is 1 point. He desides to add another 2
dice into the pool, at a cost of 2 points, so all up the cost is 3 points from
the sensor pool.
A Zhodani cruiser is attempting to detect a Tigress (A GTL12 BD). The range is
3 bands (3 points), the Tigress has radical stealth (GTL difference of
+1, so 2
points). It tracked the Tigress last turn (-1 point). So the cost of 1
dice of detection is 4 points.
Datalinks
Sensor pools can be combined and allocated at the discretion of the Flagship.
1/2 of the sensor pool is sacrifised to the Flag sensor pool (allowing
point defence and independant fire for the ships part of the Flag sensor
pool). It then allows the flag to detect enemy vessles from the closest ship
that is part of the pool. It also allows all ships as part of the Flag sensor
pool to use the detection level of the detected ships (Ie, if the flag detects
a cruiser with a Hard lock, all ships in the pool treat the cruiser as a hard
lock).
If the flag is distroyed, the alternate flag takes up the pool, but since
looses half of the available points (they do not go back to the ships
allocating, this represents the confusion of rebuilding the sensor net during
battle). If the alternate is distroyed, the flag pool is no longer usable, and
all sesor points go back to their ships.
Feedback please.
Darryl
######################################################################
This e-mail message has been scanned and cleared by MailMarshal
http://www.marshalsoftware.com
######################################################################
D Adams wrote -
> I am doing a conversion between GURPS Traveller and FT, and thought my
I like your ideas, here are my thoughts on what you're putting together.
I
understand your concept of X points available to the sensor pool, where X is
based on the class of system. What I think you need is a fixed value EW or
Sensor system. Might as well class everything as Basic, Enhanced, and
Superior. That keeps it in line with current FT doctrine.
Does this sensor pool relate to Fire Controls, and if so how? I'm thinking of
Fire Controls as the number of separte targets you can engage, or devote to
dedicated weapons. Most of your examples seemed to deal with detection.
How do
you use these points in relation to Fire Controls?
Must you attempt to detect your target every turn, or may you pay X points to
maintain your lock?
While I understand your intial design is for a FT / Traveller crossover
I would recomend first defining the FT modifiers then work on the Traveller
ones. Good
luck - Aron
dadams@parracity.nsw.gov.au on 04/06/2000 02:24:14 PM
Please respond to gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
To: gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
cc: (bcc: Aron Clark/AM/Avid)
Subject: Sensor Rules
I am doing a conversion between GURPS Traveller and FT, and thought my take on
sesnors and FC might be of interest.
Fire Control & Sensors
There is no FC in GURPS Traveller Full Thrust (GTT), instead each ship has a
sensor pool, based on the complexity of the ships computer (Complexity is a
computer term in GURPS Vehicles wich dictate computer power and compacity).
In order to "Detect" a vessle, points is allocated from the pool, dependant on
the range and Tech level of the sensors (basicly subsumed into the bridge
componant in GT). You allocate 1 point minimum, and Must allways use 1 dice
from the pool per detection.
Modifiers To detection attempt.
Range : +1 point per range band
Basic Stealth : +1 point per TL difference higher (minimum +1)
Radical Stealth : +2 points per TL Difference higher (minimum +2)
Active Black Globe (Cloak) : +3 points
Target has active sensors : - 3points
Sensing ship is active : -2 points
Tracked last turn : -1 dice per turn
Total upp the points. This is the cost from the pool of 1 dice worth of
detection. More dice may be added to the attempt at a cost of 1 point per
dice.
After totalling up the points. Roll the dice as per normal beam combat.
Results:
1 HIT : Bogey detected. +2 range bands to fire on.
2 HIT : Soft Lock. +1 range bands to fire on
3 HIT: Hard lock. Fire as normal
4 HIT+ : Hard Lock and movement compensated. Fire as -1 range bands
(minimum 1)
Example:
A Beowolf is attempting to detect a missile comming in. Range is 1 band
(1
point), it is a GTL12 basic stealth (Since the Beowolf is GTL10, point cost is
2
points). The Beowolf, being paranoid about being hit, goes active (-2
points), so its points cost for 1 dice is 1 point. He desides to add another 2
dice into the pool, at a cost of 2 points, so all up the cost is 3 points from
the sensor pool.
A Zhodani cruiser is attempting to detect a Tigress (A GTL12 BD). The range is
3 bands (3 points), the Tigress has radical stealth (GTL difference of
+1, so 2
points). It tracked the Tigress last turn (-1 point). So the cost of 1
dice of detection is 4 points.
Datalinks
Sensor pools can be combined and allocated at the discretion of the Flagship.
1/2 of the sensor pool is sacrifised to the Flag sensor pool (allowing
point defence and independant fire for the ships part of the Flag sensor
pool). It then allows the flag to detect enemy vessles from the closest ship
that is part of the pool. It also allows all ships as part of the Flag sensor
pool to use the detection level of the detected ships (Ie, if the flag detects
a cruiser with a Hard lock, all ships in the pool treat the cruiser as a hard
lock).
If the flag is distroyed, the alternate flag takes up the pool, but since
looses half of the available points (they do not go back to the ships
allocating, this represents the confusion of rebuilding the sensor net during
battle). If the alternate is distroyed, the flag pool is no longer usable, and
all sesor points go back to their ships.
Feedback please.
Darryl
######################################################################
This e-mail message has been scanned and cleared by MailMarshal
http://www.marshalsoftware.com
######################################################################
> Results:
I think that the possible results are a bit extreme. A destroyer with standard
sensors might not get even bogey info until the enemy is quite close.
Likewise, adjusting an entire rangeband is potentially a bit much. There are,
after all essentially only three bands to begin with. I think that "half
bands" might work better and allow for more varied results.
> Datalinks
Hmmm, Starfire. I've also looked a mimicking this system. There needs to be a
limitation on the distance between datalinked ships, otherwise the system
becomes too powerful.
As a Traveller simulation, those sensor rules are fine, but I'd hesitate to
adopt them as a general set for FT; a little too involved.