> John Leary wrote:
> If someone is closing to within 9 inches/cm of me, you can
Except the needle beams <g> And when speeds climb to 40 and above, you
don't have much time to scan (or, indeed, see what weapons they fire -
since they don't).
> Suggestion: Area ECM is -1 to scans and ship ECM is -2.
Since the ECM currently gives a -1D6 rather than -1 or -2, I'm not
entirely sure your suggestion is an improvement...?
> Allan wrote:
[huge snip]
> Basic Sensors and Passive Sensors: successful active scan gets you the
Um... if you can identify the ship and class names, you probably know
pretty well what armament the ship has :-/
[snip]
> Needle beams become seriously over priced based on the above argument.
I don'¨t use needle missiles. I refuse to believe that a missile can mount
powerful enough scanners for such precision targetting...
> Does anyone have any suggestions for handling this anomaly?
[snip]
> 2) Don't let a needle weapon fire at any system -- including the
Weird? Not IMO. You know it's there _somewhere_, but do you know exactly
enough to hit it (instead of the crew quarters two meters to the left)?
> 3) Allow a needle weapon to fire at the engines of a ship without
This is what I do currently.
> 4) Allow ships firing needle weapons (beams and missiles) to see a
and
> 5) Make all system information available to all ships within 9",
Not if you're using the advanced sensor rules, no.
> 6) Allow a needle weapon to fire at a ship that hasn't been scanned.
Sounds fun. Havent' used it, but it ought to work; it's a bit like the
Starfire Needle beam (although, to make it identical, a needle without any
precision target would work as a C battery in FT. I prefer to treat the
Starfire N as a one-point E instead of a one-point F weapon <g>)
> 7) Same as 6, but group systems into three main chunks: weapons
Hm... how can you aim for fire cons etc that are basically internal
electronics? Hitting them accidentally, yes, but aiming for them specifically?
> Note that in most cases if a successful scan has been done, allow the
Well - if you pinpoint a destroyed system with your needle beam, tough
luck
:-)
> And finally, do you use the advanced sensor rules? Do you use the
Yes (sometimes), yes and 3 above.
> John Leary wrote:
> If operating in the defensive mode certain assumptions can be
The last you can't assume. Even the basic FT rules allow you to buy extra
fire cons... The other two are fine (especially 1, for most races - but
where are the engines on a Minbari ship? <g>)
> ... One can suspect that at a range of 9 the ship can be observed on
This depends on your gaming scale. A long time ago, someone (sorry, don't
remember the name) derived a scale from the orbital mechanics in MT, where
one turn is roughly 15-20 minutes and one measuring unit is about 1000
km; this is what I prefer to use. I'm not entirely sure that visual sensors
would work very well at such ranges - but OTOH needle beams wouldn't
either
<g>
> Oerjan Ohlson wrote:
Taken out of the context of the passage I cannot help but agree.
The formula is: 1D6 plus sensor modifier minus ECM modifier = result on the
sensor table.
I hope this will clarify my intent.
Bye for now,
> John Leary wrote:
machine and the arrow that said "Shoot here for FCS" on all FCS installed on
the ship.
I try to give a useful answer to a question. If stating
a 'house rule' of my own I try to provide a solution to a prior
question by someone. The things I dream up may prove a help
to some people. If the suggestion works, use it. If it
doesn't, try something else or some other persons idea. I am not
likely to know the result either way, unless I get return mail.
The answer to the Minbari question is a simple one for me. I suspect that the
Minbari use a less advanced form of the
Marcal Le'mer inertialess drive. This form of sub-light drive
is built into the hull and is automatically damaged at every threshold check.
The question of scale is also a simple one. FT has no defined time or distance
scale.
Well the visual thing works for me, and provides a reasonable answer to the
question 'why doesn't this weapon, so powerful that it cannot be stopped by
screens, not do damage to the target ship on a 4 or 5?
Its getting late, and my mind is shutting down.
Bye for now.
On Mon, 24 Nov 1997 00:49:14 +0100, "Oerjan Ohlson"
> <oerjan.ohlson@nacka.mail.telia.com> wrote:
> Um... if you can identify the ship and class names, you probably know
Only if you are using a a class of ship that you've used in previous games or
one from the upcoming Fleet Book. I mean, most people have no idea what my
Tsarist Borodino class ships have. In a campaign game this would be a major
asset just knowing the ship's name, assuming
that the ship and/or class had been encountered before. I think that's
the point, though.
> I don'¨t use needle missiles. I refuse to believe that a missile can
> Hm... how can you aim for fire cons etc that are basically internal
I assume that fire cons, since they have a targetting component, has some sort
of sensor array that is vulnerable.
"Unlike serial killer profiling, writing is a lonely and
depressing profession." - Jose Chung, Millenium