I have been looking for rules for the deployment of def sats but I havn't been able to find any or any scenerio's involving this. So I thought it might be something neat to add to the game.

Maybe we all can come up with some good ideas for this. I was thinking a minesweeper could double as a minesweeper/def sat layer. Since a def sat is about the size of a drone it could easily be laid out of the mine racks. All we need are rules for it and some restrictions. If a minesweeper dosn't work then it may start a new series of varients that can do the job.

I'm not good at writing rules but I figured it would be something interesting we could all work on. (If it dosn't exist already).

By Hugo Vijftigschild (Galen) on Sunday, January 09, 2005 - 11:09 am: Edit

As far as I know a freighter is all you need.

By Martin Read (Amethyst_Cat) on Sunday, January 09, 2005 - 11:34 am: Edit

Hm. How odd (just looked up the DefSat SSDs). Something that accommodates a B-rack (or a disruptor or a photon or two additional ph-2 or a hellbore), two ph-2, and two ph-3, plus enough dedicated power systems to keep the phasers running, yet is SC7. OK...

By Barton Pyle (Bart) on Sunday, January 09, 2005 - 05:14 pm: Edit

I was thinking about rules for the deployment of DefSats in a scenerio.

By Alan Trevor (Thyrm) on Sunday, January 09, 2005 - 08:36 pm: Edit

M9.23 states that captor, sensor, control, chain, or deadman switch mines cannot be layed during the course of a scenario. Presumably setting these up is too complex and time consuming. Since DefSats would seem to be even more complex than standard captor mines, I would guess thay also cannot be deployed during a scenario.

By Barton Pyle (Bart) on Sunday, January 09, 2005 - 09:10 pm: Edit

Hey, it was just a thought

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Monday, February 09, 2009 - 10:43 pm: Edit

Thought we might discuss Def Sats...and maybe explore some new options.

Just for the Record, Def Sats are covered under rule (R1.15) (published in Captains Advanced Missions rule book, copyright 1991).

Defense satelites are deployed to protect colony planets. They are relatively inexpensive and can be operated by remote or automatic means. The have many of the characteristics of captor mines.

Counters are provided in Advanced Missions. SSDs for all DefSats are in Advanced Missions (except Hydrans, which are in module C1 and Andromedans, which are in Module C3.)

(R1.15A) Normally, a set of five satilites is deployed. Three are in a low (1 hex radius) orbit (R1.15G); two are in a high orbit (2- or 3- hex radius) orbit. This provides maximum coverage.

(R1.15B) Depending on the race using it, the DefSat will have a variety of weapons shown on the chart below.

RACES	WEAPONS	PH-3s
Lyr_Thl_WYN_KL:	2xPH-2 +2xDisrupter	+2xPh3
Federation	2xPh2 +2xPhoton	+2xPh3
Fed_Kzinti_KL;	2xPh2 +1 Drone B	+2xPh3
Gorn_Rom_ISC	2xPh2 +2xPlasmaF	+2xPh3
Gorn_Rom_ISC	2xPh2 +2xPlasma D Rack	+2xPh3
Hydran	2xPh2 +1xHellbore	1xPhG
Any	2xPh2 +2xPh2	2xPh3

Drone Racks (and plasma racks cant be reloaded during the scenario. All drones are type 1 (no special warheads) of the historically current speed (no limited or restricted speeds). Disrupters fire every turn, hellbore and photons every second turn, plasmas fire every third turn. Plasma D racks use offensive mode only.

All weapons have a 360 degree firing arc. The Phaser G will only fire at seeking weapons or fighters within two hexes. No weapons can be overloaded.

(R1.15C) Each DefSat is destroyed by 25 points of damage and is fully functional until thin. DefSats are considered drone sized (i.e. size 7) targets under (E1.7) and cannot be fired at unless they have fired. Each satilite can control the seeking weapons it launches; see (F3.226). Each DefSat has 2 points of ECM and 2 points of ECCM.

(R1.15D) If there is a player to control the DefSats, they are treated as command mines. If not... (rules talk about solitare ruules, not needed for this discussion).

Now, that is the record upon which (IMO) any discussion on DefSats must be judged on (namely, the published rules).

Now, it occurs to me, that this rules set is geared mostly for "colony planets".

What if we were to propose a more expensive (and possibly more complex type) than what exists in the current DefSat designs?

We might (if we wanted to maintain the same size class restriction (i.e. size class7) substitute other weapons types (possibly larger weapons) but if we do that we need to remain within the energy generation budget of the existing DefSats.

lets take the Federation version to examine.

it has 2xPh2s, 2xPhotons, and 2 phaser 3's, on board.

we "know" that it has 2 points of ECM and 2 points of ECCM available, and we know that it has some sort of "onboard" power generation system since the phasers and the photons can be recharged and fired.

For discussion purposes... what say we leave the Electronic warfare points out of the discussion and just examine the energy budget of the actual weapons systems.

Each phaser 2 costs 1 point of energy to recharge every turn. Each photon requires 2 points of power to recharge that photon every turn, and we know that the phaser 3's each require 0.5 points of power every turn.

that is 7 points of power used to recharge weapons every turn.

Now, I'm not an expert at drone construction... but it seems to me that if we assume that the primary threat for a significant portion of the Federation were drone using races (oh, I don't know, perhaps Klingon?!?, maybe the odd Kzinti or Orion Pirate with drones) then we might well dispense with the phaser 3's if we replace the phaser 3's with 2xDrone G racks that only held ADD rounds or (perhaps) type VI dogfight drones (with the same restrictions that the phaser 3's had...only launch against drones or fighters within 2 hexes.

Instead of using photons... what if we increased the phaser battery of the DefSat to hold 7xPh2s?

I imagine we could do something interesting with the other races... but a major planet protected by 5 such 7 phaser 2 Def Sats would have a total of 35 phaser 2's to assist in defense of the planet... and given that DefSats can't be targeted unless they have fired... would make attacking a planet far more dangerous.

comments?

By Richard Wells (Rwwells) on Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 01:12 pm: Edit

The phaser defsat only has 4xPh2 and 2xPh3. 7xPh2 can't be possible.

Plus there should be targeting issues. For whatever reason, the defensive phasers are limited. Replacing the phaser-3s with a phaser-2 should result in a phaser-2 that would fire in the same restrictive 2 hex mode; so what's the point?

In terms of non-standard drone launchers, ADDs tend to be useless. One surprise turn against one opposing player one time and then the opponent figures out how to use DF weaponry to destroy the DefSats and thus permit the drones to do their thing. Now, E-racks on DefSats tend to be awesome but large numbers of E-racks generally are. This is based on results of experimenting with alternate DefSat forms by groups I have played with.

But it is still specialised; runs rather contrary to the DefSat concept to design DefSats optimised to defeat specific attackers. If anything, the DefSat models guarding a given planet would likely be known since they are stationed for a long time; thus the attacker could optimize to defeat the known defenses. I think general purpose DefSats would be the better choice.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 05:17 pm: Edit

Richard Wells:

That was the point.

To open a debate on what is possible, in this case, DefSats.

The fact is, the Fed Photon DefSat does generate 7 points of power... and that is enough to power 7 phaser 2s. (2 of which are already standard on DefSat Designs...4 of which are standard on the phaser DefSat design).

In the interest in continuing the discussion, I would be willing to stipulate that the defensive phaser 3's are too valuable to replace... and since you have such a antipathy to Drone systems (in this case the Type VI or ADDs) I won't pursue a drone based option at this time.

That still leaves us with 6 points of power, and (given that) the published Phaser DefSat has a standard configuration of 2xPh2 + 2xPh2 (replaces the positions that the photon DefSat Mounted the photons in)... leaves us with a whole whopp'in 2 points of power to use for something else.

How about a new model Phaser DefSat that uses the extra power to increase the Electronic Warfare capability?

The standard design programs 2 points of ECM and 2 points ECCM... let the player decide if he wants the EW status to range from +4ECM/+2ECCM or +2ECM/+4ECCM.

Its a quality improvement that doesnt change the weapons of the DefSat... but does improve the quality of a DefSats ability to work in an Electronic Warfare environment.

By Jim Davies (Mudfoot) on Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 05:18 pm: Edit

What you really want is something with more and bigger guns than a defsat, but which keeps the defsat's stealth. I'd think that can be done at SC6.

Quite honestly, a defsat shouldn't be SC7 anyway. Quite how anything with 2 P2, 2 plasma-F, 2 P3 and the power to operate them can be the size of a drone is beyond me. Except for the 4 ECM against heavy weapons, it is SC6 for all practical purposes.

BTW, how much damage does an ADD do to a Defsat? I infer that it's 1d6, like to a shuttle, but I can't find it anywhere.

By Ed Crutchfield (Librarian101) on Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 06:51 pm: Edit

While it may produce the power to power th eadditional weapons, does it really have the internal space? by taking out the 2 Photons and 2 P3 do you have the space necessary. Size class is a fuzzy area. What are the particular limits in size class. S0 fed DD it appears is much larger than a fed FF, but both are size class 4. So you may have a range of size classes in a particular size class. Size class could also refer to the electronic signature the object leaves, because of ship or composition.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 07:58 pm: Edit

Jim,

DefSats (as represented by the rule extract above) have been in the game for more than 25 years... I think they were in the designers edition but can't recall off hand if they were in the Pocket game version... as such, I don't think there is any chance that they will be changed now... so any call to reclass the size class to somethin larger is probably doomed.

I'd guess that since there is no crew, there is no need for hull, life support or passage ways... what you have in the DefSat is minaturized weapons on a common frame that "bolts on" those systems needed.

The mystery for me, is how a size class 7 unit can generate 7 points of power... and still have enough left over for fire control, seeking weapons control and 4 points of electronic Warfare points.

If you could build a drone with that kind of "ummmmph" you could revolutionize drone combat.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 08:09 pm: Edit

Ed,

I doubt if there is any room inside the DefSat for weapons.

IMO the internal structure of the DefSat must be some kind of powerplant (probably without any kind of shielding since there is no need to protect the crew given that there isnt one)
.

How such a thing can do that without giving away its position is a mystery...

There must also be some kind of sensor/scanner assembly as the DefSat can control its own seeking weapons (those that have seeking weapons that is), a sophisticaated computer control system (far more capable than what is built in to drones, for example) and it can follow a series of nested command structures (look at the portion of the R1.15 rules I didnt extract!)

it musts have some sort of attitude control/thrusters to control pitch and yawl... and it must have some sort of shields (it takes 25 points of damage to kill a DefSat... so either it has shields or it has some sort of ablative shielding that also dampens the radiation/heat generated by the power plant.

Geeze... there is some amazing engineering in this thing... imagine if you could build a drone that has speed 32 and takes 25 points to kill it... the Kzintis would turn pure green with envy if any race could perfect a new generation of drones with this kind of technology!

By Michael Bennett (Mike) on Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 08:50 pm: Edit

I'd like to know exactly how long the DefSat has been in SFB. I remember submitting "Raid on a Mining Planet" that was published in CL3 and it was the first scenario I ever saw that used them.

Those DefSats had one ADD (12 rounds), 2 Ph-1, and 2 type-1M drones. The 1M drones could be fired one per turn. All weapons had a 360 degree firing arc. Each DefSat was fully functional until taking 25 points of damage when it was destroyed. Each could control up to 12 drones. Each had 2 ECM and 2 ECCM.

My memory of those days is bad, so I don't remember how the DefSats first came into being.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 09:00 pm: Edit

Michael Bennett:

I stand corrected, Captains log does indeed have the DefSats you speak of, and the introduction paragraph on page #1 (I assume that was written by SVC?) refers to the "New" defense Satilites in "Raid on a Mining Planet".

I have no idea when they changed... though Captains log #3 long predates Doomsday.

Means there hasn't been a serious review of DefSats since atleast 1991...

By Richard Wells (Rwwells) on Tuesday, February 10, 2009 - 11:48 pm: Edit

Jeff:

The rule back in 1985 (Volume III) closely matches the current rules. The addition of D-torp model and defining defensive rules for the phaser 3s and phaser Gs are the only changes I noticed.

In other matters:

The Fed focus you have presented troubles me. The paired disruptor models would require the same power plant and the Plasma-F variants would require more. If power plant was the primary requirement, other races would have DefSats with lots more phasers.

By Andrew Harding (Warlock) on Wednesday, February 11, 2009 - 12:52 am: Edit

The Plasma-F version actually needs less average power than the photon/disruptor versions albeit with a higher surge requirement. The drone version needs the least. I've never seen a player voluntarily choose the drone version.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Wednesday, February 11, 2009 - 09:05 am: Edit

Perhaps the Plasma DefSats use a battery pack of some sort (can plasmas be armed with battery power?!?... I know that it isnt restricted to Warp power only like photons.... so if batteries can be used... perhaps the DefSats computer control system also has an integrated "power management system" that stores power between plasma launches and "spikes" the third turn arming cycle when the plasma F requires a higher level of energy to arm the torpedo?

I guess I have a problem with theDrone varsion DefSat... I mean... here you have a size class 7 unit (the DefSat) armed with drone B rack with 6 spaces (each size class 7) of drones and the normal phaser 2 mounts, and the normal phaser 3s and the power generation capacity undeminished, the EW systems as described and seeking weapon control... all on a size class 7 unit that is undetectable until it fires.

Awesome engineering!

By Jeff Laikind (J_Laikind) on Wednesday, February 11, 2009 - 02:16 pm: Edit

How do I bolt one of the photon versions onto my F-15?

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Wednesday, February 11, 2009 - 05:58 pm: Edit

Jeff...Why stop at just one!!!



IIRC, the F-15 could hold 4xtypeIs and 4xtype VIs...Imagine Four DefSat style drones, each one with 2 photons and 2xPh2's and 2 Ph3's... and it adds +2 Ecm and +2ECCM, and each DefSat Drone thingee ads +1 seeking Weapon Control channel... talk about a scary Ship!

Dang thing would have 8xPhotons, 8xPhaser 2's 8xPh3s AND Gatlings on top.

I want to meet the engineer that could make one of those sets work!

By Jim Davies (Mudfoot) on Wednesday, February 11, 2009 - 06:58 pm: Edit

Like I said, the SC7 is clearly (ahem) a misprint. It's actually the size of a heavy shuttle, and simply behaves as though SC7 because of stealth technology. The Annex 7K statement about its taking 10 cargo units is clearly another misprint. Should be 100.

I have similar objections to captor mines, but they're a bit harder to resolve.

By Stewart W Frazier (Frazikar1) on Wednesday, February 11, 2009 - 07:31 pm: Edit

OK, enough tomfoolery, the rule says 'considered' not 'is' and that's for E1.7 (small target mods). So it is NOT drone sized...it's basically not defined, at least in the usual terms...

It's not as good as a captor mine and with their weapons load-out should be about the same size (with less stealth tech built in?)...

Another question is how many can one could stuff in orbit, as five is considered a colony... (I usually stop at 13, 6 in high, 3 in low and 4 in the middle.)

By Andrew Harding (Warlock) on Wednesday, February 11, 2009 - 07:39 pm: Edit

I'd stop at however many the campaign rules require or encourage. They're not bad but phaser-IV bases, minefields or standalone captor mines are better value.

By Jeff Wile (Jswile) on Wednesday, February 11, 2009 - 11:27 pm: Edit

All of this "tom foolery" is fun and entertaining (in a scarry munchkin sort of way! ... but the subject is DefSats, and there are several open quetions...

The forum is open, and if any of you "lurkers" have some thoughts to share with us, please feel free to "drop the cloak" and join in!

Items to discuss include:

1) Deployment limits for "non colony worlds" (since the rules don't seem to define how many developed planets may have... as as Andrew Harding points out, Ground bases are a better value... but there are time the attributes of the DefSats are very nice additions to the planetary defense system (atleast as defined in SFBs!)

2) Suggestions (or comments on already posted improved DefSats) on how to improve DefSats. (note that Power does not seem to be a problem for DefSats... even if gthey are not SC 7 (as in considered to be!) they still are relatively small units that generate awesome power for the size... conservatively estimated at some 12 points of power (take the Fed Photon DefSat example( it has the ability to recharge 7 points available for weapons (phaser 2, phaser 3 and photons) pluse active fire control, seeking weapons control channels, and 4 points of EW.

Imagine what a "Mauler" style DefSat could do with 12 points of power!

Another option to consider is a "EW DefSat" platform... what if instead of using the weapons energy and EW points for its own attacks...consider a DefSat kitted out with special sensors... and 12+ points of power to "lend" to the other DefSats?

Yet another idea would be DefSat that is designed to use its heavy weapons on "Overload" only... so instead of 2 photons... it has 1 16 point overloaded Photon Torpedo... it takes points of feed back damage everytime it its a target at range 0 or 1... but it alwasys hits at range 0.

By Antti Hyvärinen (Dencat) on Thursday, February 12, 2009 - 05:46 am: Edit

You forgot the T-Bomb carrying model Andros use.