MJC is right.

John T: I was thinking about that last night. My first reasoning was that the generating ship would know the fequencies and energy levels so could see right through it but then it dawned on me that the Cloak works both ways why not this?
===========================================
THis is actually getting more interesting to me though I had first thought it too outlandish, but tossed it out anyway. However, lets look at the benefits vs. weakenesses. I don't think it's as outlandish as I first thought.

First a X-ESG is probably going to hold 7 power but lets, for now, only allow 5 to be used for the EES.

Benefits: You can esentually use and loan up to 20 ECM to your fleet for five power. (You fleet can float their own ECM but it is NOT cumulative with the EES.) It is a semi-natural source.

Weaknesses: Can be countered in verious ways including passing units through it, ECCM, and Hellbore fire (I need to creat a special interaction for those. It should not act exactly like a ESG in this way).

Only one can opperate at a time. Bases get only half the bennefit, round down, BUT can opperate two EES at different radius.

Limitations: Affects any unit viewing/firing through it. You can't see out and you can't see in. Lock-ons ARE maintained (this is a benifit over cloak).
Still blinds activated Scout Sensor Channels.

It doesn't cause damage. As a result, though the ECM benefit is great it is not too hard to counter.

Unlike cloak, it does not allow a ship(s) to approach undetected. It actually broadcasts your presence to the entire sector. Its energy cost is a lot less but it's maintainability is low (32 impulses max on and 32 off.)

The situation about Hellbore interaction is one I'm not sure of. I don't want to make it TOO easy for the Hydrans to counter this but want to stay in the realm of the way things are now with the ESG.
Options I've come up with are:

A)Hellbores interact the same and are degraded the same. Overkill hellbore energy auto hits the generating ship. (Note: This protects other shipps 100% from Hellbore fire.)

B)Hellbores pass through causing degadation at 50% to the EES but are not degraded them selves. Roll normally to hit with EW accounted for. (ESGs would interact separatly)

C)No interaction between the Hellbore and the EES. It just not the same sort of energy. (This is easiest. If the ship floats a normal ESG field as well the that type of interaction is worked out).

Is there any benifits or limitations I haven't thought of that should be there? Any other ideas for HB/EES interaction?

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Saturday, March 08, 2003 - 11:07 am: Edit

The EES does not detonate mines. If a mine was to explode and it radious crosses a EES field hex it would cause degradation.

EES has no affect on cloaks. It causes no damage and does not reviel a cloaked ships position.

EES is degraded by asteroids and anything else that damages ESGs.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Sunday, March 09, 2003 - 02:53 pm: Edit

Loren,

The ship should not be immune to the effects of a ECM-ESG any more than a ship should be immune to the effects of erratic maneuvers. It's too much of an advantage.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Sunday, March 09, 2003 - 04:54 pm: Edit

Ya, that's what I meant. Cloaks affect the owning ship as much as others ships. The same for the EES.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Sunday, March 09, 2003 - 05:18 pm: Edit

How do you handle an object that is in conatct with a EES more than one impule? Does it degrade each impulse?

Presumably an object in a EES hex is affected by the EES.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Sunday, March 09, 2003 - 07:34 pm: Edit

Ouch, good question. Normally a ESG field either is degraded to nothing or the object is destroyed. But what about a shuttle that just cruises in the field?

I don't know right now but there gonna have to be a change. I'll think about it. I want it to be degradable by the enemy but not that easy.

Second, I would say that it is a wall of obscurity. Viewing through it generates the ECM. Enemy or not. Objects in a EES field hex a viewing and being viewed through it from all directions.


OK, I thought about it. First try a degradation each impulse. I mean, if it's a shuttle the the owning ship should shoot it. It's also a good reason to keep the field size small. R2 would be good for covering your fleet and easy enough to kill local small units that would cause heavy degradation other wise.

So, John, that was a really good point, thanks. Degradation each impulse sounds bad to the Lyrans but probably is no that big of a deal in actual practice. So the rule is that. Each impulse objects are in the field the EES degrades by the amount of equivelant damage it could absorb.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Sunday, March 09, 2003 - 08:39 pm: Edit

Loren,

You could say that each object that contacts it degrades it by a flat 1, 2 or 3 points. That keeps big things like ships that have over 20 points of damage to them from popping the EES like a soap bubble.

I'd agree that being in an EES hex would be like having the EES between you and the rest of the mapboard.

because it pretty much is.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Monday, March 10, 2003 - 01:21 pm: Edit

Oh rats and double rats!

I wrote this long reply to that then for some reason it didn't get posted! Arrrggg!

Basically, I'm out of time for now but I just want to say that I have decided that it should be fragil and that units degrade it by their hit points per impulse they are in the EES field.

Later I will explain why. I have good reasons.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Monday, March 10, 2003 - 01:35 pm: Edit

I'll wait.

[leans back in chair, clasps hands behind head and starts whistling]

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Monday, March 10, 2003 - 10:53 pm: Edit

That first post that go lost was so good. I wish I hadn't lost it!

Anyway, I think it is better to have the EES take damage like a regular ESG field. Point for point. Besides, look at the ranges involved. Shortly after it is struck by a large unit the unit would be inside anyway. When a large unit pops it it will be time to engage anyway for both sides. It is of little cosiquence to have it pop easily. By the time it is popped by large unit the EES has done it's job and should be dropped. (Boy, pounded that point all the way down, didn't I?)

It has some great tactical uses. It will force enemies to close range instead or reaching R8, unloading and turning off. Like wise the Lyrans can close to R8, unload, raise an EES while turning off under great cover. The EES will make Lyran fleets nearly invulnerable to long range fire. Hydrans, fortunatly for them, will have hellbores but will have to use them up to knock the EES down.

The EES should pop like a bubble, it's very useful and should have a strong disability. If it doesn't pop easy it will be better than a cloak. You don't have to drop Fire Control (indeed you can't if you want to maintain it), and there is no fade it period. You only have to do an ESG announcement.

Every one will have ways of dealing with an EES. Hydrans have fighters and hellbores. Kzinti, Klingons, and Feds have fighters and drones. The other races never had anything to deal with ESGs so don't have much to deal with an EES other than regular EW or scouts. Of course, the plasma races would rather get close anyway and plasmas are not going to be much affected by high ECM levels (all they need is a lock-on and the EES does not break lock-on.)

The more I look at this the cooler (and less insain sounding) it gets. Sure, there should be some BPV cost to having this ability but it's pretty balanced. And totally new and totally Lyran. The only thing that I have found wrong with it is how to deal with non-EW games. Just leave it out or assign a shift like EM does?

Might should look for a new name too. Some thing that relates to the ESG by denotes what it does too. Currently it is EES (Expanding Ew Sphere).

EWG (Electronic Warfare Generator? No, that could be anything.
Hmmm, it's a function of the X2 ESG...it's a field. EWF is already taken (EW fighter).
It's ECM...fighters have the Jammer pod...JSF...no.
What might a Lyran call it after seeing one?...Fire wall? Obscurity Field? Counter Messure field? Counter Messure Sphere (CMS).

What's easy to say? "The XCC is raising two range three ESGs. One 21 pointer and the other is a...(?)"

Kinda like "Fire Wall".

Opinions?

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Thursday, March 13, 2003 - 01:34 pm: Edit

Question:

When a seeking weapon penetrates an EES and (for sake of argument) impacts a ship, the most common circumstance will be that the ship controlling the drone is outside the EES.

Is the drone affected by the EES because the controlling ship is outside or not because the drone itself is inside?

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Thursday, March 13, 2003 - 01:59 pm: Edit

Another good question and one I did not consider.

Hmmm, if the controling ship is outside of the EES (the field is between the controller and the drone) then the drone would be affected by the EES (though chances are that there would be little or no EES left. In X2 times the drones will be able to take at least 8 points or more.)

HOWEVER, X1 drones and by default X2 drones, have ATG so there will be no controler. The issue only pertains to GW vs. X2 games using non-ATG drones. Hmmm, or Seeking Shuttles.

Added rule: Scout Sensor functions are blocked by an EES. i.e. they cannot affect anything in or beyond a functioning EES field.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Thursday, March 13, 2003 - 07:02 pm: Edit

---

Quote:

Question:

When a seeking weapon penetrates an EES and (for sake of argument) impacts a ship, the most common circumstance will be that the ship controlling the drone is outside the EES.

Is the drone affected by the EES because the controlling ship is outside or not because the drone itself is inside?

---

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Thursday, March 13, 2003 - 07:49 pm: Edit

Loren,

Just because a drone has ATG doesn't mean a ship can't control it. If a ship has a high amount of ECCM, the ship SHOULD control it. What ATG means is that is the ship's control is lost, the drone doesn't go dead.

Okay with drones you're right A EES isn't going to stay up long against any kind of determined drone attack. Plasmas are another matter.

You realize that if a EES blocks scount channel functioning, a Lyran ship can not only create a 7-hex wide dead zone around itself where the Lyran scout is inside the EES lending support to combat ships who cannot be hit with OEW.

By michael john campbell (Michaelcampbell) on Thursday, March 13, 2003 - 08:27 pm: Edit

---

Quote:

Just because a drone has ATG doesn't mean a ship can't control it. If a ship has a high amount of ECCM, the ship SHOULD control it. What ATG means is that is the ship's control is lost, the drone doesn't go dead.

---

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Thursday, March 13, 2003 - 08:51 pm: Edit

MJC: I don't have time to verify that but where is that rule. Type VI drones are the ones with R8 (IIRC).

Jonh, an lent OEW would be of little consequence anyway. The ships inside can't see out. In that situation it's a bennefit to the enemy in that they can save their OEW until the EES comes down.

In many ways the tactical use will be similar to cloak but not a desisivly though more flexable.

Only in an environement where lock-on could be lost should a ship bother to maintain control of an ATG drone. (To get the second lock-on roll). Otherwise, once inside the EES the drone has clear view to the target. Now, ships inside may have their own ECM up and that get treated as normal. But to units outside an active EES field would ignore self generated or lent EW as the EES cancels it out. Therefore if your EES ECM level is less than your current self generated or lent EW levels then it is best to just drop your EES.

ECCM can be used to peer through an EES, from either side. It would be possible for a ship and scout to reduce the shift generated by an EES to zero.

By Kenneth Jones (Kludge) on Thursday, March 13, 2003 - 10:39 pm: Edit

Loren FD5.21 Says R8 for ATG drones

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Friday, March 14, 2003 - 12:54 am: Edit

Thanks. Ooops. I never use ATG and haven't reviewed those rules for some time. Can't catch 'em all.

By Chad Carew (Spetsnaz) on Sunday, March 16, 2003 - 01:58 am: Edit

I didn't see Lorens post until today, but I put up a similar system in the new rules section if anyone cares to look, though it is far less powerful, so not X2 material, thus I didn't repost it here. I'm not looking to step on Lorens toes, but I would like any feedback I can get.

By Loren Knight (Loren) on Sunday, March 16, 2003 - 02:26 am: Edit

My toes are fine. Just wanted to let you know. Great minds...

By Chad Carew (Spetsnaz) on Monday, March 17, 2003 - 05:37 am: Edit

Cool Loren. Thanks. I like your idea, too. I was thinking that if the Lyrans developed the system I have in mind, yours would be a "logical" next step as X2 developed?

By Kenneth Jones (Kludge) on Monday, March 17, 2003 - 06:26 am: Edit

Maybe you two should collabarate(sp?)

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Monday, March 17, 2003 - 02:30 pm: Edit

A comment from the shield thread:
"Plus being able to generate 6ECM+6ECCM at the same time was VERY nice"

Perhaps X2 ships could generate a max of 8 ECM and a max of 8 ECCM.

Alternatively perhaps they can generate 12 points with a max of 8 either direction.

By John Trauger (Vorlonagent) on Monday, March 17, 2003 - 05:48 pm: Edit

12 is a hades lot of EW even if you get a max of 8 any one place.

By Tos Crawford (Tos) on Monday, May 12, 2003 - 11:15 pm: Edit

I think we may may have discussed some of this before but how about X2 ships ignore all lent EW from SC5 units and smaller? This eliminates ECM drones, MRS, PF-Scouts, SWACS.