Re: Mass for Points Tradeoff

>> I was thinking about Negative Stealth: you make yourself easier to
detect
>> and get, say, 3% cost reduction for the ship.  This stems from my
assumption
>> that military ships all have Basic Stealth to start with; if you're
not
>> bothering with radar-absorbing hull coating and diffusing your drive
plume
>> and so forth, you can spend the mass to pack in more systems.
>
>L.
>     Not a viable concept, you are trying to trade a (Quasi) stratigic
>non point/mass value non-item for a mass/point tacitical advantage.

Stealth would be be tactical/operational.

>(I realize my 'point of view' is much different than yours.
>Put simply, the trade of 10% greated detection range for
>10% more weapons is not even worth consideration if I was the GM)

If there is no downside to it under the rules in force, then no, of
course
not.  However, even if you're not using Sensor/ECM rules, you might
allow it
by giving other disadvantages.	SLM's get +1 on their "to hit" die, for
instance, or SLM's home if within 3.5" instead of 3".