I can see that. Sounds like a good idea, to me...balanced and new at the same time. You could even tailor some of the functions by race if you wanted; like the drone ones for the Kzinti, or some such. Just a thought.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Tuesday, February 25, 2003 - 04:44 pm: Edit

I would cease to relate it to special sensors and call it "enhanced bridge functions". Rather than say "It's a built-in brain-damaged special sensor" say "it's a bridge that does a few special sensor things."

You'll get less people clamoring for a full-function special sensor if you never use the words.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Tuesday, February 25, 2003 - 06:41 pm: Edit

But in reality it does have the full functions but the EW part is harder to kill. You have to destroy ALL control boxes to do that. So they can clamor but they already got it (in a way).

I still like "Special Bridge".

BTW, in my proposal ships WITH Special SENSORS do not have Special Bridge. These ships will have at least four sensors and the S-Bridge is too much and (technobabble) would conflict with the frequencies and machanics of the Spec. Sens. (or whatever).

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Tuesday, February 25, 2003 - 07:50 pm: Edit

What's wrong with putting a full special sensor on the ship?

One of the lessons learned from the Andromedan War is that a special sensor is a piece of equipment no heavy ship can do without.

If the sensor is hit on the second "bridge" hit, then it just about does the same thing.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Tuesday, February 25, 2003 - 07:58 pm: Edit

Jeff,

A special sensor is equipment every combat ship can do without because anything over a P-3 blinds it. Much better to have a dedicated scout that can focus on helping out.

I will not repoen the debate on unblindable scout channels. It is a simply a bad idea.

Besides, putting a special sensor on a line combat ship breaks the EW game against RW and X1 tech.

And it's an Old X2 idea and I'm prejudiced agaisnt Old X2 (and rightly so)

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Tuesday, February 25, 2003 - 08:56 pm: Edit

I never said it should be unblindable.

But as a leftover from ship design lessons in the last 7-8 years of the Andromedan War.

Strategically useful. Tactically useless.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Tuesday, February 25, 2003 - 08:56 pm: Edit

I would submit that Loren's idea is by far the best put forward so far. I'll be using for my Fed proposals, and will figure out a way to mark the bridge as "special". I like it from both a function standpoint, and an aesthetic one as well. I think it's a winner.

I've put togther this SSD showcasing the bridge, and some of the other stuff we've bandied around...all we need now is a concensus on the photon, and we'll be getting somewhere.

Federation XCA, Y-205

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Tuesday, February 25, 2003 - 09:04 pm: Edit

---

Quote:

BTW, in my proposal ships WITH Special SENSORS do not have Special Bridge. These ships will have at least four sensors and the S-Bridge is too much and (technobabble) would conflict with the frequencies and machanics of the Spec. Sens. (or whatever).

---

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Tuesday, February 25, 2003 - 09:36 pm: Edit

Jeff,

"Strategically useful" how?

I guess it does make every ship a potential base-buster, but hey, very few ships go out alone on this mission. Only one ship needs the sensors and it doesn't need to engage.

MJC,

Presumably the Special Bridge functions as a single scout channel, More than that woudl be excessive.

I would phrase a rule something like, "While the Special Bridge is capable of some scout-channel functions it does not count as a scout channel for most purposes, including channel blinding. Firing weapons that would blind a sensor channel cannot blind the Special Bridge. Under consitions where a scout channel will be blinded, the special bridge may not be blinded in the place of a scout channel."

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Tuesday, February 25, 2003 - 09:44 pm: Edit

JT,

As I said, it was a leftover from Late Andromedan War days.

Are we certain Operation Unity eliminated ALL the Andromedans?

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Tuesday, February 25, 2003 - 10:07 pm: Edit

Mike R. Bravo, works for me!

John T. Regarding comment to MJC: 1) My point exactly and 2) Works for me.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Tuesday, February 25, 2003 - 10:26 pm: Edit

Jeff,

I'm not concerned where it is a leftover/potential leftover from. It's a potentially unbalancing and/or munchkin precedent to set. Like scout/carriers

The ADB chose not to give every race a SSCS in R7, (And R7 would have been the place) I think that decision was wise.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Tuesday, February 25, 2003 - 11:36 pm: Edit

If we make the Special Bridge sound even remotely like a non blinded special sensor then we'll get a set of munchkins who will insist A) Special Sensors on X2 vessel shouldn't be blindable and B) the Special Bridge should be allowed to generate EW...or maybe they'll meet you half way, should be able to generate Self Protection Jamming (28).


The only way to minimise this is to either not have the special bridge, which I would rather call highly advanced ship's sensors ( to minimise the munchkin realisation ) or to stick in the Z sections that the introduction of Special Sensor based Loaning from the Special Bridge would be greatly unbalancing to the ships and thus are automatically places on the auto-reject list...but you'll still get the odd Yutz trying to convince the Steves to allow it.

I wonder if we could use some of the tractor of Fighter boxes for our bridge in order to generate the flexibility in what we are putting forward.
Say if we have a triangle reach to the middle of the square and having a base along on side of the square, then when the bridge box is destroyed, the entire quare is filled in, or has a check mark put in it or is crossed out or some such.
When the bridge and sensor is repaired then an erasor is used to clean out that box. If the bridge box is repaired but the sensor attactxched to it isn't then the marks in the box are earsed and the player fills in or makes a check mark in, or crosses out the triangle inside.


Or we could just repair the Bridge and in repairing the bridge pay the full cost of the repair of the bridge box and the special sensor that goes with it.
I mean if the last bridge box is destroyed, the Player is bound to have an Aux Control or Emergency Control box destroyed and so if he wants a cheap repair he can go for one of those.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Tuesday, February 25, 2003 - 11:54 pm: Edit

Agreed that the repair cost of a special bridge goes up.

There's no real way to keep munchkins from connecting Special bridge to Special sensor. it can be mitigated by keeping the name as ar away from "special sensor" as possible.

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Wednesday, February 26, 2003 - 08:21 pm: Edit

Maybe the "Special Bridge" should be an XP-era gizmo, not X2. See the XP thread, to prevent cross posting.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Friday, March 07, 2003 - 08:03 pm: Edit

Here is an insain idea for the Lyrans.
A Phase Modulator for the ESG that uses the energy to generate ECM(EES=Expanding ECM Sphere) . Anything inside the field benefits from the ECM to outsiders. The owning ship knows the modulation spectrum and is not affected by it when viewing/firing out. Other units are. Only one field at a time possible. Use the damage chart and convert the numbers directly to ECM. Cannot be combined with self generated or lent ECM (they conflict and actually pin point the ships position).

Can be countered with ECCM. Units passing through the EES degrade it as though it were a ESG but do not take actual damage. Units IN a sphere hex are still affected. Bases, due to their positional stabilizers are more dificult to cover in this case and gain only a half benifit BUT can raise two EES fields at different radi.

ESG fields and one EES field can co-exist. Degradation is divided evenly among the fields.

Almost better than a cloak!

Sick ain't I?

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Friday, March 07, 2003 - 08:27 pm: Edit

The first ship to hit the "ECMSG" would pop it like a soap bubble

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Friday, March 07, 2003 - 08:48 pm: Edit

Unfortunately hitting that 20 points of ECM bult up by an R0 ECMSG is going to be hard to pop like a soap bubble, but once you do occupy the same hex, you'll probably be in good enough shape to fire without the ECM protection.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Friday, March 07, 2003 - 08:50 pm: Edit

Yes. But if it also has a ESG field up there would be some damage.

But the appraoch is covered, really well. Also, there is nothing to stop you from using it at R0. That's 20 ECM at R0 for five power. 15 ECM at R3 for five power.

Oh, I forgot, HellBore interaction reamains the same.

By Mike Raper (Raperm) on Friday, March 07, 2003 - 08:51 pm: Edit

Actually, it sounds alot like the Vudar IPG. Read about it...it's very similar.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Friday, March 07, 2003 - 08:56 pm: Edit

It kinda sounds too powerful. Too much potential ECM.

Unless it's 2-way and anyone firing through the ECMSG takes the ECM.

By Kenneth Jones (Kludge) on Friday, March 07, 2003 - 10:04 pm: Edit

Yeah until it pops the ECM effect should apply to ships firing through the bubble. from either direction.

Closest similar bit is a Lyran CV firing off drones from it's fighters.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Friday, March 07, 2003 - 11:53 pm: Edit

Everyone is affected but the ship armed with it.

By Jeff Tonglet (Blackbeard) on Saturday, March 08, 2003 - 12:54 am: Edit

If it allows 20 ECM, plus the 6 self generated, that's a FIVE-shift.

At a minimum, it would have to work both ways to be balancable.

But I like it.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Saturday, March 08, 2003 - 07:18 am: Edit

---

Quote:

If it allows 20 ECM, plus the 6 self generated, that's a FIVE-shift.

---