Page 24 of 50
Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread V
Posted: 2011-02-20 01:09pm
by Simon_Jester
Again, I'm not really trying to be a jerk about this. But if you go really fast, you do increase the risk of getting spotted
in general; it's not at all unfair that a relatively large ship moving very fast, even one coasting ballistically, will be relatively visible compared to a much smaller ship moving much more slowly.
So I don't think there's adequate grounds to complain when that happens once in a while. Also, I love the recon gunskimmer idea. Sneakiness has been declared un-Byzonic, and shot as a warning to the other abstract concepts!
One way to make the 'very fast mover' concept viable would be to have a ship that is low-signature in hyperspace, and fast in normal space instead of sneaky. Say, a gunskimmer modified using some of the same technology that goes into the
Light of Bragule subcruisers. So it sneaks up on the target through hyperspace... and avoids being detected and intercepted during its recon run in normal space more by outrunning the enemy than by avoiding being spotted. Then they flee back into hyper and everyone is all like "shit, where did they go?"
PS:
Speaking for myself, I tend to model 'detection contests' on submarine warfare, with some obvious modifications- but yes, my ships expect that they are at their greatest risk of being spotted, and often at their least ability to avoid being spotted, while moving.
If anyone remembers my earliest Zebes posts, I have my ELINT cutters (which, while not truly stealthy, do at least take some precautions to reduce their visibility) playing leapfrog in pairs for exactly this reason: the cutter that's moving uses the 'parked' cutter to spot for it.
Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread V
Posted: 2011-02-20 01:17pm
by Shroom Man 777
So it flies freakishly fast in sublight, but in hyperspace goes at a slow and ponderous 'low-signature' speed to make detection more difficult? Makes sense.
EDIT:
I would like to talk about this more tomorrow. Now I sleep.
Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread V
Posted: 2011-02-20 06:33pm
by Force Lord
Hey guys, before you go out and declare war on the MEH, I'm gonna try and finish up the post I was working on before its accidental deletion. It concerns a diplomatic meeting between my nation's leadership and that of the MEH.
EDIT: I would appreciate it if you notice any discrepancies or inconsistencies in my latest story post and tell me about it.
Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread V
Posted: 2011-02-20 09:54pm
by Karmic Knight
"Fuck-Off Pew Pew Laser Cannon" needs to be an official rating of laser in some state.
All around fantastic work Mayabird.
Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread V
Posted: 2011-02-20 10:47pm
by Mayabird
Karmic Knight wrote:"Fuck-Off Pew Pew Laser Cannon" needs to be an official rating of laser in some state.
All around fantastic work Mayabird.
Giant Fuck-Off Pew Pew Laser Cannon, you mean.

And thank you!
I need to stop getting distracted by these shiny little side things and get back to actual plot. Force Lord, I hope you don't mind my birdie's possibly sinister schemings.
Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread V
Posted: 2011-02-21 07:15am
by Force Lord
On the contrary Maya. I want to see what's our blackbird plotting.
And Karmic sends out his Centralists. I imagine the CENINTERN conference will get pretty interesting...
Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread V
Posted: 2011-02-21 08:55am
by Thanas
I am still not happy about the hooker bot, really. Siege, Pezook and Shroom are all operating under the assumption (for now) that she is not an AI and the dominion would have no way of knowing that she was, seeing as how the Germans won't talk and they are the only ones who do.
So I'd appreciate it if it were simply changed to retainer or aide or whatever.
EDIT: Not trying to be a jerk about this, but it kinda screws with in-universe perception if the Dominion, on the other end of the galaxy, has better information than the three nations bordering the Sassanids, the one with the best spy networks into Sassanid territory.
Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread V
Posted: 2011-02-21 08:57am
by Lonestar
Fine.
Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread V
Posted: 2011-02-21 08:59am
by Thanas
Thank you.
Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread V
Posted: 2011-02-21 09:16am
by Simon_Jester
Thanas wrote:I am still not happy about the hooker bot, really. Siege, Pezook and Shroom are all operating under the assumption (for now) that she is not an AI and the dominion would have no way of knowing that she was, seeing as how the Germans won't talk and they are the only ones who do.
Hmph. There
is another way to manage this.
Given that the entire chain of information is probably being passed through multiple sets of contacts and then being (re)interpreted by multiple sets of intelligence officers, it may well be that the "hooker bot" hypothesis is favored in the Dominion precisely
because they don't know the details. No one who "knows" the details seriously believes that there's a humanoid robot running around the Xenos faction. All the evidence indicates that she's human. Only a complete loon with virtually no concrete information on the situation whatsoever would believe that this Sänger person is running around with a hookerbot.
Well. OK.
Two complete loons.
The fact that this wild conspiracy theory happens to be (arguably) closer to the truth than what the evidence suggests is mostly a matter of blind luck, with a healthy dose of 'truth is stranger than fiction.'
Of course, to follow that idea up properly, you'd need to inject a lot of information into the Dominion picture of the situation that is not true, or anywhere near true: "These 'Xenos' are all cyborgs who can fly and shoot lasers out of their eyes, they have dozens of operational superfighters..." Something like that.
Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread V
Posted: 2011-02-21 02:31pm
by Steve
Unless Beowulf signed off or agrees to that post, dark, I consider it null and void. This is getting fricking ridiculous.
Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread V
Posted: 2011-02-21 02:39pm
by Darkevilme
He said I could pounce one. I may have not done it in the most elegant fashion though i admit.
Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread V
Posted: 2011-02-21 03:13pm
by Simon_Jester
Darkevilme wrote:He said I could pounce one. I may have not done it in the most elegant fashion though i admit.
Actually, to my way of thinking this evokes a US Navy submarine pinging a Soviet one in the Atlantic or something. Sort of
Red October-ey.
I don't think this is unreasonable. There are dozens of stealth ships flying around the MEH, from several different nations. It's hardly a wonder if once in a while one of them spots another. Think about Cold War submarine contacts: the subs would listen for each other, follow each other around, engage in a bit of dickery*, and this kept going on for decades.
I like these stealth-ship interactions; they offer a good way for players to interact with each other short of war.
*Crazy Ivan!
Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread V
Posted: 2011-02-21 03:17pm
by PeZook
Also, it's just plain no fun if stealth ships don't detect each other.
Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread V
Posted: 2011-02-21 03:24pm
by Simon_Jester
On a side note, I would just like to confirm, for the record, no doublespeak, that there are NO Umerian stealth ships in or around the MEH on or before December 31, 3400.
I may be the only active player who doesn't have any stealthers there, but there it is.
Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread V
Posted: 2011-02-21 03:37pm
by Lonestar
Thanas wrote:
EDIT: Not trying to be a jerk about this, but it kinda screws with in-universe perception if the Dominion, on the other end of the galaxy, has better information than the three nations bordering the Sassanids, the one with the best spy networks into Sassanid territory.
Whatever dude. You got Byers bangin' a website.
No cookies for you.
Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread V
Posted: 2011-02-21 03:54pm
by Tanasinn
Simon_Jester wrote:On a side note, I would just like to confirm, for the record, no doublespeak, that there are NO Umerian stealth ships in or around the MEH on or before December 31, 3400.
I may be the only active player who doesn't have any stealthers there, but there it is.
I don't, either. The Union doesn't really give a toss about the MEH, it being too far away to pose a threat or hold under occupational control in the long term. Of course, the Union does publicly condemn the MEH's anti-human acts of slavery and experimentation.
Besides, dedicated stealth boats are new for the Federal Navy, and while they've been on plenty of training exercises here at home, the Navy doesn't particularly want to give a trial-by-fire for one of its new toys so very far from home.
Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread V
Posted: 2011-02-21 04:31pm
by fgalkin
http://worldsofsdn.wikia.com/wiki/Abaddonae
Wiki article on the Lost navy is now up. I will add more to it, including deployments, etc later, but it should be good for now.
Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin
Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread V
Posted: 2011-02-21 04:33pm
by Steve
If Beo signed off on it, I have no problem. I just want it established that the appropriate way to do this stealth-on-stealth stuff, or detecting others, is by going to the guy you want to do it with first.
So, Dark, do continue.

Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread V
Posted: 2011-02-21 04:37pm
by Simon_Jester
Of course, if stealth ships engage in active dickery in someone else's territory, that someone else is entitled to some reasonable degree of 'defending themselves.' You aren't expected to sit there and do nothing about a stealth cruiser that is actively crapping out mines in your home system or raiding your commerce just because the person running the cruiser didn't give you permission to spot it.
EDIT: I do not say that Steve disagrees with this; I just wanted to get it out there.
Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread V
Posted: 2011-02-21 04:58pm
by Steve
Yes, that is an important caveat, and I'm thankful Jester reminded us of it. That's why he has that shiny Mod badge.

Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread V
Posted: 2011-02-21 05:19pm
by fgalkin
...what just happened?
Have a very nice day.
-fgalkin
Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread V
Posted: 2011-02-21 05:23pm
by Simon_Jester
Tianguonese are being paranoid as hell and placing extremely low value on their own lives for the simple and obvious reason that they remembered to save their game.
What bugs me is that they're placing such low value on their equipment: the mere fact that one of their probeships has been spotted is enough for them to scuttle the thing.
Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread V
Posted: 2011-02-21 07:13pm
by Mayabird
Simon_Jester wrote:On a side note, I would just like to confirm, for the record, no doublespeak, that there are NO Umerian stealth ships in or around the MEH on or before December 31, 3400.
I may be the only active player who doesn't have any stealthers there, but there it is.
Actually, I most likely don't have any stealth ships there either, even though the Refuge would really, really prefer to get its own intel instead of having to rely on like eight other nations for it. Just plain logistics here.
Re: SDN Worlds 4 Commentary Thread V
Posted: 2011-02-21 08:53pm
by Master_Baerne
Simon_Jester wrote:On a side note, I would just like to confirm, for the record, no doublespeak, that there are NO Umerian stealth ships in or around the MEH on or before December 31, 3400.
I may be the only active player who doesn't have any stealthers there, but there it is.
Ah, not so, sir! I too have taken the road of reasonable disinterest. (Of course, I don't have any stealth ships to send, but there you go...)