Re: [Spaceships] TL10^ Arsenal Ship
 

I read "signature" as referring to "IR signature" modifier, since thats the main thing that makes stealth in space so hard. Still lets you have stealthed space stations, satellites, atmospheric jets, and powered down craft, but no craft with any sort of reactor or space drive beyond mass drivers or ion drives(maybe a magsail too).

Re: [Spaceships] TL10^ Arsenal Ship
 

SM is not a signature modifier; only the "IR signature" modifiers at the bottom of page SS44 are.

As for the Stealth Bomber, stealth is a lot easier in an atmosphere or on a planet. Its radar-absorbent structure is designed for use against active radar. Spaceship designers could do the same thing, but would be unlikely to bother when their creations could be detected anyway through passive IR.

Re: [Spaceships] TL10^ Arsenal Ship
 

Yup, you're correct, no argument. On re-reading, that's what it says. So my SM8 fusion-powered hot reactionless drive ship has a total detection modifier against a similiar SM8 ship using just normal sensors and a full 3 min turn to scan of 66. That's at least 1AU detection (Skill 10 +66-66 = 10, or automatic detection). An SM12 battlewagon will be detected at 10AU much of the time (Skill 10 +70-72 = 8).

Aw crap, that makes for boring space combat. Maybe realistic, but I don't like it. Is there any room in a game for pirates given such ranges? There's certainly no room for tactical manouvering. Either fight in a numbers-game combat or run away with a 10AU lead.

I still like my handwave on Stealth applying after all other modifiers including range are taken into account. It makes tactics interesting again. Sure, it's unrealistic but so are the concepts of no useful EW, dumb unvaried missiles and gunners in turrets that are RAW.

Regards, C

Has anyone worked out what the modifiers for an SM7 TL8 B-2 Stealth Bomber would be, just to test the modifiers against a real world example?

Re: [Spaceships] TL10^ Arsenal Ship
 

That's what the Cloaking device is for, I suppose.

My own personal bête noire is the way missiles tend to be one-hit-one kill, which is also a bit of realism that makes the game less enjoyable.
A stealth bomber is only stealthed against active radar, against which spaceships can defend as well as it can; it would likely have the same problems if you were to chuck it out into space, with no air to absorb the heat.

Re: [Spaceships] TL10^ Arsenal Ship
 

I designed a stealth warship...Also, there's room for tactical maneuvering, but not for stealthy tactical maneuvering with hot drives and reactors (if you have a signature for hot drives...I don't think there was one in the book). Cold drives and fuel cells, on the other hand, work fine.

You can potentially do some degree of stealth with rockets or fission rockets, due to the facing modifier to drive IR signature.

There is no reason in the world for your defense drone to have major battery VRF lasers. 100KJ is still completely useless against TL10 warships (1d damage against 7 defense for SM+5 nanocomposite), so you might as well have three times as many mounts.

Re: [Spaceships] TL10^ Arsenal Ship
 

I did some related stealth space interceptor missiles here http://forums.sjgames.com/showpost.p...5&postcount=13

Short term craft with fuel cells or MHDs for stealth are certainly doable and cheap - and there are a few designs around on the forums.

Or using combination power supplies and tactics: Get up to speed and on course using a reactor while out of detection range - then coast and switch to the fuel cell/MHD for final approach - then power up everything once combat begins.

Re: [Spaceships] TL10^ Arsenal Ship
 

Ulzgoroth, it does give a little bit of standoff range (C/S as opposed to C) for anti-missile fire though, which allows a layered defense. I like that, and I'm considering using the Pentad along with Diomedes' Protector PD Drone in a 1:2 ratio. That little extra damage helps clear up armored missiles too - such as thtraveller's SIM10/11 series or more heavily armored versions. With dDR of 0.7, a 30KJ laser isn't going to cut it (pardon the pun) enough times that a defender will be comfortable with relying just on them.

thtraveller, those missiles are sweet. If I use my houserule for ECM/ECCM systems, they get three Lvl2 suites and a C4 brain (for the base Op's skill) for a max Quick Contest of Skill 10 (or 3 of Skill6). They're not going to win too often against a battlewagon's suite but that's just fine by me. I want high attrition rates for missiles. But for an extra 60k they can have three Lvl 4 Hi-power suites, which changes the equation against many targets enough to make life interesting (QC16 max).

(Or, I could mix the salvo with unarmored ECM missiles, three extra slots for hi-power ECM suites and the max Quick Contest becomes 28, which will give an SM8 battlewagon with a solitary normal ECM suite (QC21) a headache. And the ECM missiles are still kinetic-kill too even if easier for PD to take down when it can see it. Oh, I love an arms race!)

Regards, C

PS On the B-2: I figure the total modifiers vs a fighter with combined radar/ir/telescopic sensors (e.g. a late-model Su or Mig fighter or a late-model Russian SAM system) against a dark sky to be 18. That seems an awful lot compared with the B-2s real-life performance expectations.

Re: [Spaceships] TL10^ Arsenal Ship
 

Oh chit, I forgot.

I wanted to thank all of you for your help. I know I come across as abrasively blunt in my writing style, but I really do appreciate all the aid and ideas, especially from those who have pointed out stuff I've missed in the rules.

Thanks, C