Re: [GZG] The Great Premeasuring Monkey Dance

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lEli:
"When you consider that current radar systems can easily tracks hundreds
if
not thousands of objects simultaneously then I would imagine that
futuristic
sensors would have exceded this to the point of offering nearly complete
situational awareness in real time. Even the common infantry soldier
with a
pretty much normal tech level in FT should be able to benefit from
range-finders, battle comps and relays to sensor nets in orbit or from
aerial support and drones."

And yet, we manage to blow up the wrong targets, miss targets of
opportunity, etc. There are a lot of aspects of friction on the
battlefield
that the game (SG or DS) does not model explicitly. You could easily
construe that cases of failed measurement resulted from these sorts of
frictions that DO impede even the modern battlefield. In fact,
information
overload is one of the key dangers of the modern situation.

Also, in FT terms: No FTL Comms is there? (Not sure) If there aren't or
they
aren't small enough to be on sensor platforms etc, then combat at
fractional
light second distances will still be potentially problematic. Your
sensor,
even assuming the enemy has not jammed it up, whited it out, confused or
foxed it, or absorbed its emissions (we're talking about active fire
control
here), can still at best only tel you where it thought something was
some
time ago (that time being 1 outbound leg + 1 inbound leg for the
reflected
signal). It also needs multiple bounces (and the computer smarts to be
sure
these all came from the same bogey which are non-trivial esp in an EW
environment) to establish an approximate track.

 At fractional light second distances (assume a 10,000 km mu.... 30 mu =
300,000 km = 1 light second), that position uncertainty is sizable. Take
a
400m vessel moving at 20 mu (200,000 kph). In two seconds, it could move
just under 2 km (or 5 vessel lengths). And that's if it doesn't thrust.
And
that's if you assume ships move by vector movement. Cinematic is worse.

Sure, at 6 mu and speed 6, you need a pretty high thrust, good EW, a
super
stealthy hull, or a lot of prayer to not be locked up solid by fire
control.
But at moderate to longer ranges, and at higher speeds (and doubly so in
cinematic 'physics'), you aren't going to have as much position
certainty as
you think and the certainty of the enemy's track will be even lesser.
And
the time lag for combat at longer distances will mean that you will only
have a 'cloud of probability' about target location.

Now, a lot of this makes assumptions about:
- Needing to use active firecons vs. passive sensors for firing
solutions
(seems to be GZGverse standard)
- Effects of EW, stealth hulls, etc. (not really documented much in FT
as it
pertains to sensors, but if we accept no pre-measure, then we can
rationalize these effects as part of that)
- Size of an MU and thus speed of movement and ranges to target (the
arguments I make above do not work for a 100 km mu)
- Movement model in play/Physics model

But all in all, I think you'll only ever have a good approximation of
where
the enemy is. A 'cloud of probability'. That's enough to justify
measuring
uncertainty to me.

And let me toss this back at you 'know where everything is down to the
meter' folks:

If you can and do know where ships are to within very small
uncertainties
*WHY DO THE WEAPONS EVER MISS*? They should really never do so in those
cases - even damage should be somewhat predictable because the greater
your
certainty of enemy position and track and orientation, the greater your
ability to hit systems you want on his ship.

I think the mere fact we've got all the combat rolls implies positional
uncertainty. And thus, a no-measuring stance is perfectly defensible.

Tom B

PS - I concede groups should do what they want, but don't assault the
'realism' of not allowing pre-measuring when there are so many other
places
to batter at the hidden uncertainties beneath game granularity.....

-- 
http://ante-aurorum-tenebrae.blogspot.com/
http://www.stargrunt.ca

"He that would make his own liberty secure must guard even his enemy
from
oppression; for if he violates this duty he establishes a precedent that
will reach to himself." -- Thomas Paine

"When men yield up the privilege of thinking, the last shadow of liberty
quits the horizon." -- Thomas Paine