Re: NI/NAC AAR & Stealth

On Wed, 27 Jan 1999, John Leary wrote:

> Noam R. Izenberg SRP wrote:
> > 
> > On Mon, 25 Jan 1999, John Leary wrote:
> > > This assumes that sensor detection and targeting are identical.
I'm
> > assuming that individual weapons require target lock to fire and
hit.
> > Stealth frustrates the target lock.
> > 
> XXX
>      In the FT/MT/FB detection and targeting ARE identical.	All
> fuctions 
> that function to control, detect, and direct weapons function THRU the

I had always thought a ships' sensors were independednt of FCS, and FCS
was specifically the weapons control system. Can't you have a scout ship
with only ships sensor's a PDS or two, and no weapons or FCS? 

> One of the problems I have stated with the VERY generized 'stealth'
> concept
> that has been developed here is that it revises the building of ships.
  
> The concept even in the infant stages of development changes the
> shipbuilding
> rules and GIVES a LOCAL FCS to each and every weapon mount on the
ship.

Hardly. FCS targets the weapons. Stealth confuses the FCS. It doesn't
matter whether the FCS controls all the weapons or one. Again, I think
we're simply under different PSB assumptions. If mine are clearly
violating the game spirit, I'll try to revise them, but I'm not yet
convinced that's the case.

> A central FCS is no longer necessary to control, detect or direct the
> ships
> weapons.   Just throw the FCS away an mount more weapons.

That's fine if you want weapons that can't target anything. ;-) I am
_not_
advocating or claiming individual weapon FCSSeeing a target, and knowing
its general location is one thing - that's the role of ships sensors.
FCS'
role is to pinpoint the target so that weapons can hit it. One or all of
a
ships weapons use the targeting of the FCS. Again, if my understanding
is
fundamentally flawed, so be it. I'll have to revise my PSB.
  
>      Also note that if the target lock is an individual thing, then
one
> should
> check for each mount individually.   

That's abstracted by the single FCS controlling multiple weapons. 

>      Also note that a ship while in 'stealth' mode would not be using
> search 
> or target sensors, and therefore the 'stealth' ship cannot fire its
> weapons
> while in 'stealth' mode.  JTL

Except that stealth is not an active system. It's integral to the hull
structure of the ship. It's not, in this conception, and either-or
silent-running kind of system. It was originally modeled after the
Minbari
of B5, who could operate and fire with impunity while the enemy could
not
lock on. While on B5 stealth is a ships system, for FT, I though it
would
work better as a hull modification.

> > Same as for ships. It's not the sensors. It's the target lock. It's
realy
> > just PSB for the game effect, but it is consistent.
> > 
> XXX
>      The 'all things to all people' mode is back on!	 The individual
> weapons 
> mounts have a local fire control and ...non-sensor...target lock
> devices.
> If the PSB is an anti-lock device then the weapons should not have a
> hard
> breakthru point.  Individual rolls per weapon should be made to
> determine
> lockon.   JTL

That adds unnecessary complexity, which is abstracted by the simple
'treat as screen 2'. I wanted stealth to be as simple to apply as any
other system in FT. Forcing a lockon roll for each weapon and then
another
roll to hit is complexity few would want to add. reducing effective
range
bands for weapons has the same effect and is far more elegant, IMHO.