The Rancor Pit :: View topic - Ground Based Sensors

Welcome to The Rancor Pit forums!

FAQ :: Search :: Memberlist :: Usergroups :: Register :: Profile :: Log in to check your private messages :: Log in

Ground Based Sensors

The Rancor Pit Forum Index -> House Rules -> Ground Based Sensors

Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next

View previous topic :: View next topic

Author

Message

atgxtg
Rear Admiral

Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460

Posted: Thu Jun 23, 2011 1:01 pm Post subject:

I think scaling up the seansor ranges would be a good thing. I7ve got something in the works along these lines that might help with this, but for now, I could see something like doubling the SPACE ranges and reading as km. As far as the realtively shot range for missles in Star Wars. There is actually a good rationale for this, and it is one that applies to real world misles, too. At long ranges, a fast moving target can turn around and get beyond the missle's range. So even if an F-14 can shoot at a MIG at 100km, it probably won't. Plus in the real world, nobody wants to touch off a battle. Most engagements aren't "hot".

CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering

Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16178
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

Posted: Thu Jun 23, 2011 2:12 pm Post subject:

atgxtg wrote:

I think scaling up the seansor ranges would be a good thing. I7ve got something in the works along these lines that might help with this, but for now, I could see something like doubling the SPACE ranges and reading as km.

Personally, I'd like to drop ranges entirely and just go for range "brackets", making range to target an approximate number so that the GM can simply say "You've moved closer, so you are now at Medium range instead of Long," rather than calculating out the distances. Instead of range values, weapons would have modifiers for how well they function firing at targets within a given range bracket. Of course, this would necessitate a complete re-write of every ship and weapon stat ever written, so obviously something else is necessary.

Quote:

As far as the realtively shot range for missles in Star Wars. There is actually a good rationale for this, and it is one that applies to real world misles, too. At long ranges, a fast moving target can turn around and get beyond the missle's range. So even if an F-14 can shoot at a MIG at 100km, it probably won't.

I look at it more as the "official" torpedoes and missiles (as stated by WEG) are more like the heavy unguided rockets used for ground attack by fighters in WWII. They were never meant to be used against small moving targets like fighters; they were intended to give light airplanes the punch to take out something big that couldn't effectively dodge the shot.

Maybe a better fix would be to keep existing projectiles the way they are and develop other weapons with longer range and better guidance, but at the expense of damage.

Quote:

Plus in the real world, nobody wants to touch off a battle. Most engagements aren't "hot".

This would be one critical distinction between the real world and the SWU; in the films and in the EU, it's open and relatively unrestricted warfare, so most fights do go hot at the drop of a hat.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.

The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index

atgxtg
Rear Admiral

Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460

Posted: Thu Jun 23, 2011 3:19 pm Post subject:

crmcneill wrote:

That is what 1E was like, and D20 SW, too.
I don't think it would require a massive rewrite. The vast majoirty of ships use standard weapons with the same ranges. For instance, practically all laser cannons have ranges of 1-3/12/25, so we would just need to modify a dozen weapon stats or so to cover every ship.

Or, we could swipe and modify 1E. Treat the weapon ranges as the range band. Scaling could shift the range band, 1 step per scale. So Medium range for a fighter would be close range for a Star Destroyer.

We could use the same rules for sensor, too. Maybe even allow for scanning out past Long range as a Very Difficult action.

It really wouldn't be that hard.

Quote:

Well, yeah. Most of the missiles in Star Wars don7t seem much like missiles. I think that this really becuase WEG didn't differientate between missiles, torpedoes and bombs. Based on what we see in Episodes II and III there probably are "real" missiles in Star Wars. We just didn't see them in the first trilogy.

Quote:

This would be one critical distinction between the real world and the SWU; in the films and in the EU, it's open and relatively unrestricted warfare, so most fights do go hot at the drop of a hat.

Yup. Not to mention no one has to worry about identifying a target as friend or foe. In the real world, you don't really know what you got on your radar until you get close enough to do a visual ID. In Star Wars, they never seem to have problems distinguishing between an A-Wing and A TIE Interceptor.

garhkal
Sovereign Protector

Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14034
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.

Posted: Thu Jun 23, 2011 6:04 pm Post subject: Re: Ground Based Sensors

Bren wrote:

Fallon Kell wrote:

Maybe their weapons are not effective at the same ranges as their sensors? To extend the WWII analogy, even though the RAF could see the Germans coming from a lot further off, they still had to get within gun range to do anything but watch.

That is certainly a point. But SW isn't limited to .50 cal MGs and 20mm cannon. If you drastically increase the sensor ranges, you then really need to explain (especially in a vacuum) why the weapons can't hit what you can clearly see.

And of course jmanski is right that the reason combat is shown at close range in all Sci-Fi movies and TV shows is because you need to fit the attacking and defending ships in the same camera shot at a range where the audience can tell which ship is which which necessitates the ranges be artificially close. And of course if you can't see that - "It's not fun to watch." Very Happy

When running or playing space opera, I'm looking for the same kind of thrill the audience gets watching Star Wars and hence I want combat to simulate that.

Cause the further away you shoot at a target, the easier it is for them to dodge..

Quote:

Quote:
In that case the sensors will detect far outside the range where the weapons can target. See previous comment on the probe droid, also based on the radio play the Rebels on Hoth don't seem to detect the advancing Imperials for some time which doesn't seem consistent with better than earth-radar technology.

Radio silence? Curvature of Hoth's surface blocking the AT-AT's from sensor detection? Maybe the energy shield disrupted their sensors. After all, Hoth base did detect a fleet of Star Destroyers coming out of hyperspace in Sector Four.

Maybe the cold neutered the sensors for 'ground use'. Or cause of all the snow it lessened the range..
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!

CRMcNeill
Director of Engineering

Joined: 05 Apr 2010
Posts: 16178
Location: Redding System, California Sector, on the I-5 Hyperspace Route.

Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2011 12:23 am Post subject:

atgxtg wrote:

Good point. I like it.

Quote:

Or, we could swipe and modify 1E. Treat the weapon ranges as the range band. Scaling could shift the range band, 1 step per scale. So Medium range for a fighter would be close range for a Star Destroyer.

Another facet I'd like to introduce would be allowing a smaller scale vessel to get "inside" Point-Blank range. The way I figure it, a small fighter could get "under the guns" of a Star Destroyer or other cruiser, which would then be forced to resort to either point defenses or fighter/interceptors. Lacking those, a starfighter inside point blank range can hit a capital ship without getting hit back.

Quote:

We could use the same rules for sensor, too. Maybe even allow for scanning out past Long range as a Very Difficult action.

It really wouldn't be that hard.

I was thinking having it based on scale, so that Death Star Scale sensors can reach out further than Capital-Scale sensors, and so on.

Quote:

A piece of useful technology that actually exists today is called Non Cooperative Target Recognition. Advanced radars are actually capable of taking a snapshot of an unknown target and comparing its geometric features to a known database, giving the pilot an identification even if the target has its IFF turned off.
_________________
"No set of rules can cover every situation. It's expected that you will make up new rules to suit the needs of your game." - The Star Wars Roleplaying Game, 2R&E, pg. 69, WEG, 1996.

The CRMcNeill Stat/Rule Index

Bren
Vice Admiral

Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA

Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2011 9:52 am Post subject:

crmcneill wrote:

Interesting idea. It gives Starfighters a way to survive around capital ships (which I like), it is consistent with the Death Star run in ANH (the emplacements that shoot at the Rebels are PD lasers), and it also helps justify why Anakin and others fly their starfighters so close to the capital ships in RotS. If we combine it with the jmanski explanation the problem of the extremely close engagement ranges is nearly solved. Smile

atgxtg
Rear Admiral

Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460

Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2011 11:13 am Post subject:

crmcneill wrote:

Quote:

Interesting, but maybe a bit too much considering how hard it is for a Captial scale ship to hit a starfighter, now. Unless you want to reducing scaling a bit.

Another thing I7d like to add would be my FlaK rules. What I did was eliminate all the shots from the Captail ship with a FlaK rating, based on skill, fire control, and number of guns. Starfighters must make a piloting roll to dodge the FlaK or thet get hit. Failing by 5+ means hit twice, 10+ - 3 times, and so on. The rule has really helped to keep starfighter-captial ship fights from bogging down.

Quote:

I was thinking having it based on scale, so that Death Star Scale sensors can reach out further than Capital-Scale sensors, and so on.

That is what I mean't by using the same method as for weapons. If a captial scale ship shifts the weapon ranges down one, then what would be long sensor range for a starfighter would be medium for a capital ship. A death star could do 2 range shifts.

Quote:

Yeah, but IRL not all non-cooperatives are enemy fighters. Remember that Korean airliner that got shot down by the Russians becuase it was mistaken for a spyplane?

Another thing we might do is look at CODA Star Trek. The game used range bands similar to what 1E Star Wars used, and it had maneuvers that ships could perform. Some of that stuff could be adapted to D6, and would probably be a boon for Captail Ships.

Gamer
Lieutenant Commander

Joined: 20 May 2010
Posts: 125

Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2011 11:32 am Post subject:

Quote:

Yeah, but IRL not all non-cooperatives are enemy fighters. Remember that Korean airliner that got shot down by the Russians becuase it was mistaken for a spyplane?

which is why NCTR is still in pipedreaming and not actually operational.
We have too many allies that utilize aircraft that are also utilized by 'threat' forces, so you best have your IFF properly set as a mig 29 looks and acts like every other mig 29.
This would still be a problem in starwars say rebels engages pirates and both sides had Y-wings, if you didn't have an active IFF your looking at frats on both sides.

Bren
Vice Admiral

Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA

Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2011 12:15 pm Post subject:

atgxtg wrote:

Another thing I7d like to add would be my FlaK rules. What I did was eliminate all the shots from the Captail ship with a FlaK rating, based on skill, fire control, and number of guns. Starfighters must make a piloting roll to dodge the FlaK or thet get hit. Failing by 5+ means hit twice, 10+ - 3 times, and so on. The rule has really helped to keep starfighter-captial ship fights from bogging down.

IIR the flak rules basically switched capital ship fire from a bunch of die rolls between the capital ship and the starfighter to effectively a hostile terrain for the starfigher with failures on the movement/evasion roll equal to hits by the flak. I recall liking that idea since it reduced the die rolling required, allowed good pilots in maneuverable ships to close more or less safely, and resulted in damage or destruction for some of the others. Did you do a final writeup of your flak rules?

atgxtg
Rear Admiral

Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460

Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2011 12:58 pm Post subject:

Bren wrote:

atgxtg wrote:

Yeah. At least "final" until I change it again! Wink

How it currently works is: Total up the attack dice for gunner skill and fire control. Subtract 6D for scaling (point-defense/starfighter scale weapons don't have that problem). This is the basic FlaK value.

Option: If you want some randomization. Keep the wild die or even two dice and roll a flak value each round.

-Apply any combined fire bonus (whichever method you prefer. i think I like the +1D per doubling rule best) to the Flak value for multiple guns firing at the same ship. Usially I just divide the attacks equally among the targets, but sometimes it mkes sense to concentrate of specific ships (like ignoring the A-Wings and concentrating of the ships with torps).

The ship can't normally attack more fighters than guns that threaten the fire arc. If you want to threaten more ships, you can attack twice as many ships by reducing the FlaK Value by 4.

-Pilot must beat the FlaK value or get hit, taking normal damage, applying the 6D scaling if applicable. Ships that fail by 5 or more get hit an addtional time for each 5 points they failed by.

-As guns get damaged/taken out, reduce the FlaK value for that fire arc. Note that is you got a extra gun or two, you can opt not to add them to the FlaK value, and instead apply them as extra hits.

That's it. One thing I was thinking of is maybe making an eact hit become a "graze" that does reduced damage. Maybe half,or dropping the scale. But I haven't implemented it yet.

atgxtg
Rear Admiral

Joined: 22 Mar 2009
Posts: 2460

Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2011 1:06 pm Post subject:

Gamer wrote:

Yup. It is also why most air forces go for a visual ID before they start shooting. And even differernt models of aircraft can have similar "sensor" signatures and radars.

Bren
Vice Admiral

Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA

Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2011 4:07 pm Post subject:

atgxtg wrote:

Yeah. At least "final" until I change it again! Wink

Obviously. Wink

And thanks! Very Happy

When I think of flak, I think of shell bursts that sometimes damage (via shrapnel or concussion I suppose) rather than outright destroy planes.

I think I misremembered or misunderstood what you had previously posted. I may still be misunderstanding, but what you posted seems not much different that just targeting the incoming starfighter. It just seems that you are cutting down on the number of rolls for the defending ship by using one roll (or most of one roll) for all incoming ships. I was thinking the flak number would set what was in effect a terrain difficulty that the pilot than had to maneuver through (rather than rolling a dodge vs. the attack). Then how well the pilot succeeded in traversing the terrain would determine if he avoided damage or took damage, but the damage would vary based on the amount the roll was missed by. With a bad miss = full damage, but less severe misses = lesser amounts of damage.

For capital vs. starfighter weapons the 6D scaling factor makes a hit unlikely, but makes virtually any hit instantly fatal. Which is not what I want for PCs. I would prefer that flak - blasting in the general area of incoming ships as opposed to specifically targeting incoming ships - does the following four things: (i) creates a bumpy ride for the incoming fighter (no real game effect, just color really), (ii) provides an increase in the space terrain difficulty so that incoming fighters need to move at a lower speed than all out or risk running into flak, (iii) provides a better likelihood of some damage being inflicted than if the guns were directly targeting the fighter, but (iv) provides a lower likelihood of outright and instant destruction compared to directly targeting the fighter.

Confused

I'm not trying to be snarky, I'm just curious, but are you spelling flak with an upper case K accidently or on purpose. I know keyboards sometimes have a mind of thier own. Wink

garhkal
Sovereign Protector

Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14034
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.

Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2011 4:53 pm Post subject:

atgxtg wrote:

Bren wrote:

atgxtg wrote:

Yeah. At least "final" until I change it again! Wink

Perhaps cap ship guns have a potential power setting where they can 'rapid fire' at a lesser power level, creating that flak barrage.. Each D of damage they take off gives them say +2 to hit bonus...

Quote:

For capital vs. starfighter weapons the 6D scaling factor makes a hit unlikely, but makes virtually any hit instantly fatal. Which is not what I want for PCs

Hence my above reduction in power for better chance to hit.
_________________
Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!

Bren
Vice Admiral

Joined: 19 Aug 2010
Posts: 3868
Location: Maryland, USA

Posted: Fri Jun 24, 2011 5:07 pm Post subject:

Or just flip scales, so the guns do the same D of damage, but it is starfighter scale, but because they are firing rapid fire in a flak pattern (maybe a globular area), they get starfighter scale accuracy. Make switching between fire modes take one round at a moderate difficulty. "Main gun batteries, switch to flak suppression fire mode! Point defense lasers target the incoming B-wings!" Though I am still thinking of a way to make it a terrain difficulty to cut down on all the dice rolling by the capital ships - since usually the starfighters are the players.

garhkal
Sovereign Protector

Joined: 17 Jul 2005
Posts: 14034
Location: Reynoldsburg, Columbus, Ohio.

Posted: Sat Jun 25, 2011 12:18 am Post subject:

Hows about using it as 'supression fire'.. To even get in the zone, you have to pilot better than the to hit, but anything that enters that area has to do it or gets whakked. _________________ Confucious sayeth, don't wash cat while drunk!

Display posts from previous:

	The Rancor Pit Forum Index -> House Rules	All times are GMT - 4 Hours Goto page Previous 1, 2, 3 Next
Page 2 of 3

Jump to:

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum