Def Sats & Bases
Moderators: mjwest, Albiegamer
Def Sats & Bases
Can Def Sats be set up round other static points besides planets? i.e. bases. This would make up to some extent the lack of mine fields in F.C and give a cheap up grade option for bases in a campaign.
-
wedge_hammersteel
- Commander
- Posts: 578
- Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 12:42 am
- Location: Lafayette, LA
- Steve Cole
- Site Admin
- Posts: 3846
- Joined: Wed Oct 11, 2006 5:24 pm
I wasn’t looking at installing them during a scenario but rather as a quick and cheep up graded to a base in a campaign situation, so it would not interfere with using them as a kind of directly player controlled captor mine. Also I was wondering how far out they can be placed? I take it is 2 hexes as with normal deployment round a planet.
One reason for only allowing DefSats around planets or moons would be the gravity needed to keep them in orbit. Bases of any kind simply would not have enough mass to do that. A DefSat is more of a "put it and forget it" weapon as far as its position is concerned. It is a weapons platform with the necessary electronics and power generators to arm, launch/fire, and control whatever weapons it has.
Though, on second thought, some kind of positional stabilizers would seem to be required to fire phasers, photons, or disruptors. Perhaps those would be simply for aiming and not for stabilizing the position of the entire satellite in space.
Though, on second thought, some kind of positional stabilizers would seem to be required to fire phasers, photons, or disruptors. Perhaps those would be simply for aiming and not for stabilizing the position of the entire satellite in space.
Mike
=====
Sandpaper gets the job done, but makes for a lot of friction.
=====
Sandpaper gets the job done, but makes for a lot of friction.
-
wedge_hammersteel
- Commander
- Posts: 578
- Joined: Sat Sep 27, 2008 12:42 am
- Location: Lafayette, LA
Explosive mines in SFB go boom once; captor mines may have multiple shots, but not as many weapons as DefSats.
DefSats orbit around the planet, whereas mines cannot move (while I think the rules do allow minefields around planets, it doesn't make a lot of sense to me, because the planet is moving in its own orbit). Mines can be swept but DefSats cannot be tractored. And so on. So mines and DefSats are clearly different beasts.
I think DefSats should probably be limited to around planets in FC. Argument anti is that bases are pretty vulnerable in FC and this should beef them up. Also it may be creeping SFB-ism, which we want to avoid. Pro is that they're very cheap, and giving them effectively 360-degree arcs of fire without any blind spots makes them pretty darn good. And they're defense SATELLITES, not mines. They have to orbit something, and a base just doesn't have the mass.
DefSats orbit around the planet, whereas mines cannot move (while I think the rules do allow minefields around planets, it doesn't make a lot of sense to me, because the planet is moving in its own orbit). Mines can be swept but DefSats cannot be tractored. And so on. So mines and DefSats are clearly different beasts.
I think DefSats should probably be limited to around planets in FC. Argument anti is that bases are pretty vulnerable in FC and this should beef them up. Also it may be creeping SFB-ism, which we want to avoid. Pro is that they're very cheap, and giving them effectively 360-degree arcs of fire without any blind spots makes them pretty darn good. And they're defense SATELLITES, not mines. They have to orbit something, and a base just doesn't have the mass.
"Captain" Terry O'Carroll, fourteen papers published including six best of issue
"Man, Terry, you are like a loophole seeking missle!" - Mike West

"Man, Terry, you are like a loophole seeking missle!" - Mike West

I'm with Terry on this one.
Def Sats will comlicate FC, an undesirable goal. They weren't intended to protect anyting but a planet or other similarly large mass. Def Sats require detection rules (labs) as they use hidden placement.
Just provide escort class ships (or some type of attrition unit) for patrol and base protection. You don't need Def Sats.
Def Sats will comlicate FC, an undesirable goal. They weren't intended to protect anyting but a planet or other similarly large mass. Def Sats require detection rules (labs) as they use hidden placement.
Just provide escort class ships (or some type of attrition unit) for patrol and base protection. You don't need Def Sats.
"Damn the torpedoes, full spe........[squarrk]"
Actually DefSats (with simplified rules) are already in FC; it's MINES I don't want. Given that DefSats are already here, I think they should be planets only. Like monitors.
"Captain" Terry O'Carroll, fourteen papers published including six best of issue
"Man, Terry, you are like a loophole seeking missle!" - Mike West

"Man, Terry, you are like a loophole seeking missle!" - Mike West

- Dal Downing
- Commander
- Posts: 665
- Joined: Tue May 06, 2008 1:43 pm
- Location: Western Wisconsin
I tend to think since Defence Satalites are already here and it is becoming easier and easier to crack bases (with nothing keeping ships out of Range 1-2 Overload Volleys). We might as well let Defence Stalites stand in for minefields and just get on with it. Otherwise we will sooner or later see simplified Mine and Mine Sweeper Rules and I think most people would be aginst that.
Just my 2 coppers worth.
Just my 2 coppers worth.
Actually there is no hidden deployment rules in FC. You know right where the DefSats are (they are already placed on the board) you just can't fire on them until they fire on you.rulesjd wrote:Def Sats will comlicate FC, an undesirable goal. They weren't intended to protect anyting but a planet or other similarly large mass. Def Sats require detection rules (labs) as they use hidden placement.
-Dal
"Which one of you is the Biggest, Baddest, Bootlicker of the bunch?"
"I am."
"ARCHERS!!! THAT ONE!!!!"
"Which one of you is the Biggest, Baddest, Bootlicker of the bunch?"
"I am."
"ARCHERS!!! THAT ONE!!!!"

