What Traveller space combat game have you played since January 2014?
- Thread starter robject
- Start date
mike wightman
SOC-14 10K
It's definitely one of the best, and everything in it can be designed using FF&S (if you are into that sort of thing).
My only problem with BR is "What is standard for a Merchantman to be carrying in the way of sensors?"
If you look at BL, the Free Trader and Far Trader have very basic sensors. In BR terms, they'd effectively be A:0 P:1. Technically, the Active sensors aren't even that good. In truth, sitting on top of each other, a pair of Free Traders would have gross difficulty finding each other, since their active sensors only have a 300km range.
But, Traders are not combat vessels. Folks in the past have wondered since everyone can fly around armed to the teeth, what distinguishes a civilian vessel from a military vessel -- and the sensors can play a big part of that.
Slightly tangentially from the Merchants question, I should say that I always use Merrick's sensor rules to make passive sensors more useful in BR and to enhance the tactical feel I believe the game designer was aiming for but slightly missed in the rules-as-written.
In essence, a passive sensor detecting an active sensor-using ship adds together his passive base range and the active sensor base range to get a final base range. So a P:4 sensor detecting a ship with an A:8 sensor blasting out would do it as if the base range of the passive sensor was P:12.
This makes the 'command decision' of when to go active much more tricky and crucial.
In essence, a passive sensor detecting an active sensor-using ship adds together his passive base range and the active sensor base range to get a final base range. So a P:4 sensor detecting a ship with an A:8 sensor blasting out would do it as if the base range of the passive sensor was P:12.
This makes the 'command decision' of when to go active much more tricky and crucial.
I would think that the -1 Diff Mod for detecting an Active ship would compensate for that. A Passive sensors "range" is simply some base line measure of sensitivity (against some Ideal source to be tracked). The Active ship doesn't change that sensitivity, and the -1 Diff Mod acknowledges that an Active ship is, in theory, twice as "bright" as whatever ideal target the Passive sensor is designed to listen for in the first place.
Similarly, since the Diff Mod DM is static, rather than variable based on the Active sensor, you could argue that the range of an Active sensor is improved not necessarily because it's emitting more power, but rather because it's receiver is more sensitive and discerning, able to detect targets farther away with the same power. This seems intuitive simply because the power of the active sensors scales linearly with range, rather than geometrically (which it necessarily would need to since the power diminishes relative to the range squared, all else being equal).
I disagree that the -1DM works and so did Merrick. I use the fix instead of the -1DM for an active emitter.
When you play the game you soon realise that the DM fails to compensate for the fact that all active ratings are significantly greater than passives. There is simply no incentive to stay passive. Any competent captain simply drives around with his active sensors blasting away at full bore. You'll detect a passive enemy well before he'll get a chance to use the -1DM against you.
By adding the active sensor base range to the passive sensor base range you reintroduce that cat and mouse element the designer intended. Passive ships will regularly detect those active without giving themselves away.
When you play the game you soon realise that the DM fails to compensate for the fact that all active ratings are significantly greater than passives. There is simply no incentive to stay passive. Any competent captain simply drives around with his active sensors blasting away at full bore. You'll detect a passive enemy well before he'll get a chance to use the -1DM against you.
By adding the active sensor base range to the passive sensor base range you reintroduce that cat and mouse element the designer intended. Passive ships will regularly detect those active without giving themselves away.
You're right, i haven't played the game much. Your results don't necessarily surprise me, because the -1 DM effectively halves the range, but Passives as a rule appear to have half the range of Actives. Thus, they're essentially always on an equal footing.
I'm wondering how different if would be if you simply gave a -2 DM to Actives, rather than have to do the range math trick.
It makes no difference what you set the DiffMod at. That isn't the problem or the solution.
Let me try to illustrate. If I have a P:4 ship the maximum distance I can ever detect something is 32 hexes. It doesn't matter if I get a -3 DiffMod inside that range, I still can't detect anything at 33 hexes. Yet most ships with active sensors can detect me at 33 hexes (and a lot further).
I guess you could add another rules change and say that detection is possible past extreme range. And then give the -2DiffMod against active emitters. But remember that the -2 DiffMod is going to mean auto detection out to a considerable distance.
Let me try to illustrate. If I have a P:4 ship the maximum distance I can ever detect something is 32 hexes. It doesn't matter if I get a -3 DiffMod inside that range, I still can't detect anything at 33 hexes. Yet most ships with active sensors can detect me at 33 hexes (and a lot further).
I guess you could add another rules change and say that detection is possible past extreme range. And then give the -2DiffMod against active emitters. But remember that the -2 DiffMod is going to mean auto detection out to a considerable distance.
