Re: Full Thrust : Electronic Warfare

On Tue, 3 Nov 1998, Jeff Lyon wrote:

> At 07:53 AM 11/3/98 -0800, Phillip E. Pournelle wrote:
> >At 09:13 AM 11/3/98 -0600, Jeff Lyon wrote:
> >>
> >><snip FMA-style EW rules>
> >>
> >>Uh, how about we stick to D6 for Full Thrust and leave FMA to other
games?
> >
> >	How Boring....
> 
> And making an opposed roll every turn for each firecon on the table
ISN'T?
> 
> :)
> 
> >>
> >>Suggested quickie EW rules:
> >>
> >
> >	Use 1d6 as your base and add one or subtract one for each die
shift
> >listed.
> 
> Something like this?
> 
> -------
> 
> Basic Stealth/ECM Firecon Jammer:
> 
> Roll 1D6 for each firecon attempting to lock-on.  Negates lock on a
roll of:
> 6  vs. Superior Targeting sensors
> 5+ vs. Enhanced Targeting sensors
> 4+ vs. Military Targeting sensors
> 3+ vs. Civilian Targeting sensors
> 
> -------
> 
> >I think you get a better result using the shifted dice.
> 
> Maybe yes, maybe no.	But then it's not Full Thrust anymore.
> 
> Jeff

	I seem to recall another discussion of ECM and Counter ECM here
on
the group some time back.. either it was here or at my local store, one
or
the other =)  Anyway, the basic concept was this: Have the range bands
increased for each level of sensor or fire control (whichever you think
more approprate) by x number of inches.  This will effectivly enagle
better targeting/damage, which can be countered by having different
levels
of ECM systems that serve to counter act this range increase in the same
fashion, and nobody has to roll any dice =).  Working out mass/cost
values
for the systems shouldn't be too terribly hard.

Just my $.02

--Theron Hatfield