DefSat control

Mike · Post by **Mike** » Thu Jun 11, 2009 12:06 am

The rules about DefSats suggest that unless they are deployed in a situation in which some type of facility on a planet could control them, they must be controlled by a ship. There is no range specification for how far away the ship can be to control them and I'm not looking for an addition to the rules.

Still, I'm wondering if we should take this to mean the control ship has to be somewhere on the same (normal size) map? I would assume this, but just thought I'd put this question out there just in case.

mjwest · Post by **mjwest** » Thu Jun 11, 2009 2:58 am

Yes, a controlling ship would need to be on the same map. To give a number, let's go with the normal 25 hex limit that is seen with drones.

Steve Robinson · Post by **Steve Robinson** » Thu Jun 11, 2009 6:25 pm

So if the controlling ship were destroyed, the sattelites would (esentially) go inert?

Just to confirm, a planet (since there are no ground bases if FC yet) could not provide control?

mjwest · Post by **mjwest** » Thu Jun 11, 2009 6:45 pm

Let's back up a moment.

If the DefSats are deployed around a friendly planet (i.e. the DefSats and planet are on the same side), then the planet controls the DefSats irrespective of any other facilities or whatnot. The planet does not need an explicit base (either in space or on the surface) to control the DefSats. Just by virtue of being present, they can control the DefSats.

If, however, the DefSats are deployed around an enemy planet (i.e. the DefSats are hostile to the planet and its occupants), then you need a ship present to control them. Or a space-based base or something. An example of this situation is where Klingons might deploy DefSats around a subjugated Hydran planet to keep it in line. In this case, a Klingon ship (or perhaps a base as simple as a ComPlat) must be present to control the DefSats.

So, the situation where a planet is not controlling the DefSats around it is highly unusual and very unlikely to ever occur in a scenario.

Now, to the question. If a set of DefSats is deployed around a hostile planet and being controlled by a ship (or base) and that ship (or base) is destroyed (or moves more than 25 hexes from the closest DefSat), the DefSats will go inert. They won't go away or self-destruct or anything (like a drone to which control was lost), they will just sit there and do nothing.

Mike · Post by **Mike** » Fri Jun 12, 2009 2:34 am

Ahhhh.... (he says while drumming his fingers together)

I have a scenario that I will submit after Origins that will feature DefSats around a planet and the planet will not be controlling them.

Of course, it may not ever see ink on any paper but my own...

Mike · Post by **Mike** » Fri Jun 12, 2009 2:43 am

MJWest, a couple more questions...

You say that if DefSats are deployed around an unfriendly planet and are being controlled by a nearby ship, and if the ship in question were to leave or be destroyed, the satellites would go inert.

What if another ship friendly to the DefSats that had gone inert were to come into range? Could it control them so that they would be able to resume normal operations, or would they be considered inert for the rest of the scenario?

This might also imply that a particular ship is fitted with special control equipment or codes for the DefSats. Could this sort of thing simply depend on the individual scenario?

mjwest · Post by **mjwest** » Fri Jun 12, 2009 5:22 pm

I would say that is the domain of the scenario's special rules. For a default, I would take the conservative choice and say the ship's control could not be established in the time frame of a scenario, unless it had been specially equipped or forearmed with access codes and such. (I.e. DefSats stay inert unless specified in the scenario.)

Note that these are just "out there" rulings. They are probably right, but I don't think these circumstances were thought through in this level of detail before. So, as things progress, there could be changes.