RE: [DSII] [Tech] Battlefield Awareness (Was: [GZG] [HIST] Milit

Glover, spake thusly upon matters weighty: 

 then the tactic of the
> enemy turning his 'helmet' off and thus avoiding detection.

Or your guys doing it to the vexation of the officers to avoid 
detection by the enemy. 

 Also the use of
> transponders to place decoy helmets and equipment on the
'battlefield'.
> There are some interesting ambushes where teh enemies prescence is
made
> known both by fire and the electronics 'firing up'.
> 
> In DS this is well reperesented by no hidden movement.
> 
> In SG you could do similar, but if you wish for hidden movement then
perhaps
> no communications allowed including of course the squads on the ground
can't
> report enemy sightings back to HQ without revealing themselves!?

Of course, one could argue easily that the fact you'd have come up 
with fake sources, hard to detect signals, etc. means you may well be 
able to do comms without worrying about EVERY communication giving 
you away. Unless the enemy has a lot of time to investigate very 
signal, I'd sure as heck make a point to deploy 'fakers' against 
forces that I thought watched the EM bands extensively. Then they'd 
have too much info and your units would fade into invisibility in the 
background of intelligence noise.  

Although running silent would still be the preference. Comms would 
probably be short, clipped, and transmitted via burst transmissions 
with encryption. Probably frequency hopping, maybe even on impossible 
to detect transmission media like mesons or neutrinos. 

I think if you want a rationale to ban hidden movement, you can 
always envision one. 

Tom. 
/************************************************
Thomas Barclay		     
Voice: (613) 831-2018 x 4009
Fax: (613) 831-8255

 "C makes it easy to shoot yourself in the foot.  C++ makes
 it harder, but when you do, it blows away your whole leg."
 -Bjarne Stroustrup
**************************************************/