CT Only: Black Globe and defensive fire

[McPerth]

One question I’ve never seen discussed, not even know if it has appeared on any game…

Black Globes affect both, enemy and friendly fire in a similar way. So, if you have a Black Globe flickering at 60%, you have your armor increased by 12 (even against Mesons), but so has your enemy if you hit it. Right to this point?

If so, how does the BG affect your defensive fire?

I mean, if you try to use a laser (or repulsor, or whatever) battery to stop enemy missiles, it’s assumed to also be affected by it, but is there any rules as how is it?

 

[mike wightman]

Your defensive fire isn't affected, your agility is reduced though.

 

[McPerth]

Ok, that's what rules seem to point, but whay so?

I mean, your beams are affected while firing other enemies, why not missiles? As per narrative description, they should, as they (and probably the sensors) are affected by the BG. Even sand would be ineffective, as it will be probably absobed by it...

See that if you fire my beams agains incoming fighters while having my BG at 60% flickering, those fighters would have its armor increades by 12. If I fire them against missiles they are not affected?

Or it's just a matter of rules "simplicity"?

 

[mike wightman]

It's the level of abstraction they accepted.

There are a lot of things very unplayable in the black globe rules.

The EP bookkeeping is a nightmare if you try and use it in a fleet vs fleet battle and requires a lot of prep work.

EP capacity for each BG ship needs to be calculated and recorded.

EP absorbed need a look up table written, until you memorise the EP for every weapon type and battery factor.

 

[Badenov]

This is one of the things that's always bothered me. How hard can it be to time your ownship's weapons fire to when your Black Globe is in an OFF part of its cycle? This sort of thing is done all the time in radar electronics at TL 6/7 when you don't want your sensors to get triggered by your own emissions. In 1915, the first synchronization gears were put in service allowing a machine gun to be fired through an airplane's propeller arc, mostly without incident. By 1917, it was reliable. (source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Synchronization_gear) This is very early TL5.

I realize this would be an actual change to RAW, but it's one I'd stand up for. Black Globes affecting ownship fire was not a fully-thought-through rule. As to how it would affect game balance, BGs are already pretty unbalancing, so that would be a GM call for their game.

Now timing engines is another thing entirely, and I'm willing to accept that even at TL15 you can't cut a thruster on and off in synch with a BG to achieve some percent of your full thrust, though I wouldn't argue against it if someone asserted you could. TL15 is way too far into the future to make speculation technically meaningful. TL15 is whatever we imagine it is. This is a cavemen speculating about nuclear weapons-level of future tech.

 

[McPerth]

This is a cavemen speculating about nuclear weapons-level of future tech.

In fact, among cavemen and nukes there were only 6 TLs. From us to TL 15 there are 7-8 TLs ...

 

[whartung]

Ok, that's what rules seem to point, but whay so?

The logic (I think) is that your weapons are can be synchronized with the flicker of the globe, so they're able to shoot "through" it more effectively.

 

[McPerth]

The logic (I think) is that your weapons are can be synchronized with the flicker of the globe, so they're able to shoot "through" it more effectively.

But that could also apply to pire against fighters, or other targets...

Sinchornizing lowered the fire rate, and so the effectivity, and the sensors should also be affected, as lock on is adquired/broken with each flicking

And for beam lasers, thos would not work, as they are continuous beams (or so are described)

 

[Badenov]

But that could also apply to pire against fighters, or other targets...

Sinchornizing lowered the fire rate, and so the effectivity, and the sensors should also be affected, as lock on is adquired/broken with each flicking

Re: sensor locks breaking - That's not true even at TL7. Sensors miss targets in a coverage area more or less frequently depending on a host of environmental variables. Sensors continue to estimate where the target ought to be and pick the target up again when the variables are in their favor. Sensors can scan hundreds of times per second, and even at thrust 6, half a second is not a lot of time to significantly alter your vector and certainly not enough time to drop a track.

And for beam lasers, thos would not work, as they are continuous beams (or so are described)

At the very least, pulse lasers should be synchronizable through a BG with zero shenanigans. There's no statement anywhere I can find saying how long other weapons take to fire, so I guess it's a GM call to say weapons fire takes too long to fire through the off phase of a BG. Note that if the On/Off of a BG was in units of time other than seconds (which seems awfully specific for alien tech), that could allow longer firing openings, with a correspondingly longer active time to absorb incoming fire in order to maintain the overall percent of uptime.

 

[whulorigan]

I realize this would be an actual change to RAW, but it's one I'd stand up for. Black Globes affecting ownship fire was not a fully-thought-through rule. As to how it would affect game balance, BGs are already pretty unbalancing, so that would be a GM call for their game.

It isn't a RAW change, actually. I remember synchronization of the black globe flicker to the timing of weapons fire and sensor ops like interruptor gears going all the way back to CT in the early '80s. But I am not in a position at the moment to go look up any actual references.

 

[Rupert]

It's fairly obvious that fire from the owning ship is synchronised with the globe flicker - if it wasn't fire would be pouring energy into the globe every time the ship fired. As for defences, fire by lasers, etc. not being affected is presumably an abstraction to make play more manageable.

 

[mike wightman]

The trouble with that interpretation is that the EP is a power point, it is energy every second. Weapons fire continuously so long as they are switched on.

If you reduce your rate of fire to match flicker rate then you should be reducing the EP input to weapons fire by the same amount. EPs reduced to match flicker rate should result in that percentage reduction of EPs to weapons and therefore reduced weapon factor.

Example - a ten triple turret laser battery requires 30 EPs.

Synchronised to fire through a #4 BG is a 40% reduction in EPs, since they have to switched off while the field is active.

So 0.6 x 30 = 18 which is a #7 laser battery.

This is likely why it is ignored, yet more tedious EP accounting.

 

[Condottiere]

As I recall, flicker rate is basically when the Black Globe is active, and because it's cycle rate is so rapid, it affects both incoming and outgoing energy, equally.

I would think that outgoing ordnance would be somewhat excepted, since the only energy that can be absorbed would be propulsion and electronics.

 

[mike wightman]

Outgoing fire should be timed to not hit your own globe, but at a reduced EP since instead of 100% of EPs committed to weapons you can only commit a fraction based on flicker rate.

Rather than cope with this EP mini-game the designers opted to add the increased armour factor to attacker and defender.

If you can be bothered you should calculate batteries bearing and weapon factor for the flicker rate and add another line or four to the USP...

you also need to calculate how many EP the black globe/jump drive capacitors can store and write this down, tracking it every turn or combat...

it gets complicated and messy rather quickly