Re: [GZG] Re: Mines

[Oerjan Ariander <oerjan.ariander@xxxxxxxxx>]

John Tailby wrote:

> > I would tend to think that a mine could do a passive sensor shot, and if 
> > it detects something that doesn't match IFF it simply blows up with a 
> > bomb pumped laser directed towards the target or perhaps fires off as an 
> > autonomous missile in a wait mode.
>
> This is still a very limited engagement range with no persistence to the 
> defences.
> The maximum range of passive sensors is 24", unless you go to the 
> additional expense of enhancing the sensors.  So you need to have the 
> mines pretty close together to get any kind of coverage.

What house rules do you use that restrict the maximum range of passive 
sensors to 24"?

According to the published Full Thrust rules, the maximum *identification* 
range of Full Thrust passive sensors is 36" (FT2 p. 21). Passive 
*detection* range is longer still - any unit on the table will have its 
presence detected unless it is Cloaked (even though it might not be 
positively identified).

'Course, the mines' *sensor* range isn't particularly imortant as long as 
it exceeds the mines' *weapons* range (or combined single-turn movement and 
weapons range, if you treat the mines as dormant missile salvoes or somesuch).

> An effective defence platform could be to have swarms of automated ships 
> similar to the Islamic frigates. 2 MT missiles and drives to reposition to 
> continue the attack and the ability to withdraw when ordnance is expended 
> makes for a nasty defensive barrier.

What would be the game difference between these "automated ships" and 
normal ships crewed by living people?

Regards,

Oerjan
oerjan.ariander@xxxxxxxxx

"Life is like a sewer.
 What you get out of it, depends on what you put into it."
-Hen3ry

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l