Sensor Options

[Sigtrygg]

Here is the first change, the addition of range columns for active (A) and passive (P)

Sensor	TL	suite	range A	range P	DM	power	tons	cost
basic	8	Lidar, Radar	adjacent	close	-4	0	-	-
civilian	9	Lidar, Radar	short	medium	-2	1	1	MCr3
basic nav*	9	Radar/Lidar, Passive EM, Visual	short	medium	-2	5	1
minimal*	10	Radar, Lidar, Visual	adjacent	close	-4	1	-
military	10	Jammers, Lidar, Radar	short	medium	0	2	2	MCr4.1
basic mil*	11	Radar/Lidar, Passive EM, Visual, Jammers	medium	long	0	10	2
adv mil*	12	Radar/Lidar, Passive EM, Visual, Jammers	long	v long	+1	20	3
v adv mil*	12	Radar/Lidar, Passive EM, Visual, Jammers	v long	distant	+1	30	5
improved	12	Densitometer, Jammers, Lidar, Radar	medium	long	+1	4	3	MCr4.3
advanced	15	Densitometer, Jammers, Lidar, Neural Activity Sensor, Radar	v long	distant	+2	6	5	MCr5.3

* T2300 AEH sensor systems

increased range - increase range by one band, this requires increasing power by x5 for one range band, x7.5 for two range bands.

For each TL above base pick any combination of the following, some may be taken multiple times
reduced tonnage - reduce sensor tonnage by 1 (maximum reduction 3t)
efficient - reduce power by 1 (maximum power reduction 3)
high resolution - increase DM by 1 (maximum DM addition of 3 up to a maximum DM of 0)

Note - a power rating of (0) means the sensors may be used passively.

If you want a better sensor that is a higher TL than your base then you have to take a disadvantage, up to a maximum of 3. Each disadvantage increases the cost by 50%

increased tonnage - increase sensor tonnage by 1 (maximum increase 3t)
inefficient - increase power by 1 (maximum power increase 3)
low resolution resolution - increase DM by 1 (maximum DM reduction of 3)

 

[phavoc]

For the most part, radar-based sensors will be sufficient for civilian applications. Lidar is better for targeting, but civilian just need to see that something is in front or nearby. They don't need the accuracy of Lidar. The one exception would be docking, but radar is sufficient to give you that sort of data as well.

You'd also have jammers at all TL's starting at TL8. Their ability and range would increase as TL increases (as would costs). It's probably too much to try and differentiated ECM/ECCM and other forms of electronic warfare for Traveller. So I'd just state that all ECM systems have an inherent ECCM capability and leave it at that.

One other thing (and don't let anyone tell you otherwise) - size and power matter. The more powerful your signal and emitters are the more likely they can overpower a weaker jammer system and burn through the jamming. Airborne jammers work at a distance from an emitter due to signal strength, but in a battle between air and ground, ground stations always win because they are bigger and have more power and will overcome the jamming being performed by the airborne target. In game terms it means a battleship's ECM suite isn't going to be the same size as a scout ship. And that battleship is gonna burn through any ECM defenses the scout ship has without batting an eye.

To reflect this in the game you'd have to have the defensive system scaled based upon the size of the ship its installed on. So while you may set aside 1Dton for the scout for it's ECM/ECCM suite, you might set aside 100 tons for a 100,000 Dton battleship. And power might be 1 point vs 100 points. To justify this you'd simply have more redundancy and emitters on the battleship since it's a more sizeable target and needs more equipment spread out. Your larger ships would also (or should) have more crew and space dedicated to ECM/ECCM operations as they will take on more targets simultaneously and have to spend more tonnage for the same essential function.

Some of this may be too much for the game though, as some just want a check-box for a system and to be done with it.

 

[phavoc]

I would like to see a simple system for sensors. All ships get "basic sensors" these are enough to navigate, do some docking, etc. Anything more than that should be simple add-ons that use Power, Space (dtons or whatever), and Bandwidth. Keep the bonus TL vs TL, but make it only applicable to Sensor checks, not for a bonus to hit. That should cover basically everything you are describing.

Edit: For Mil-spec sensors, allow the bonus to apply to targeting as well. That should keep the balance where it should be for warship vs merchant ship without adding more complexity.

Edit of My Edit: Basically no sensors are strictly military. Make Mil-Spec a modifier to the individual sensor add-ons. That way you have one sensor listing but it can be used two ways depending if you bought the commercial version or the Mil-Spec version. For Mil-Spec sensors and sensor components, I would say at minimum, double the Space, double the Power, double the Bandwidth, and x10 on the price. That is just off the top of My head though.

It would be better, from a DM point of view, to make mil-spec the norm with no DM, and make civilian with a negative DM to reflect their poorer capabilities (or basically lacking them altogether).

I'd definitely have a difference between civilian and military. A merchie needs to know there is a rock or a ship out there, a military vessel would want to know class, power output/EM readings, etc in both active and passive modes. While civilian may do the same, passive allows you to know about your enemies without revealing your location. That's important for military, not so much for civilian ships that need to hide. Which circles back to mil-spec being default and civilian being their much poorer (and cheaper) capability cousins.

 

[MasterGwydion]

It would be better, from a DM point of view, to make mil-spec the norm with no DM, and make civilian with a negative DM to reflect their poorer capabilities (or basically lacking them altogether).

I'd definitely have a difference between civilian and military. A merchie needs to know there is a rock or a ship out there, a military vessel would want to know class, power output/EM readings, etc in both active and passive modes. While civilian may do the same, passive allows you to know about your enemies without revealing your location. That's important for military, not so much for civilian ships that need to hide. Which circles back to mil-spec being default and civilian being their much poorer (and cheaper) capability cousins.

If by default, you mean, that which is most common, I think you have it backwards. Civilian would be the default, and Mil-Spec the one the is rarer.

 

[phavoc]

If by default, you mean, that which is most common, I think you have it backwards. Civilian would be the default, and Mil-Spec the one the is rarer.

Eh, that could be true as well. Lots of players start off with scout ships, or a free trader. But yeah, there'd be a lot more merchies out there than military ships.

I was thinking more from a weapons engagement issue. Merchies would rather run than fight, and military fight rather than run. And the idea being that for combat mil-spec is the standard (as opposed to just overall count). Arguably having civilian-grade sensors and purely defensive weapons like sandcasters would greatly reduce the need for military-grade sensors. Sand doesn't get any bonuses and you don't need to have an accurate picture of the enemy since you aren't targeting them (unless you are using pebbles). Ideally you wouldn't run into DM inflation with too many positives to the rolls.

 

[MasterGwydion]

Eh, that could be true as well. Lots of players start off with scout ships, or a free trader. But yeah, there'd be a lot more merchies out there than military ships.

I was thinking more from a weapons engagement issue. Merchies would rather run than fight, and military fight rather than run. And the idea being that for combat mil-spec is the standard (as opposed to just overall count). Arguably having civilian-grade sensors and purely defensive weapons like sandcasters would greatly reduce the need for military-grade sensors. Sand doesn't get any bonuses and you don't need to have an accurate picture of the enemy since you aren't targeting them (unless you are using pebbles). Ideally you wouldn't run into DM inflation with too many positives to the rolls.

All ships default to the Basic Sensor Suite. If you want more, you pay for it. For that reason, I figured that Basic Sensors were the default.

 

[Sigtrygg]

Next update will look at using sensors, how sensor tasks can extend range, how active emissions can be detected over longer ranges, radio boradcasts, transponders etc.

 

[swordtart]

Can you also give consideration to the passive detection from systems and what you need for more than a dot on the screen. A 360 degree scan is very different to a nose forward "try not to bump into things" radar.

There is also a the detailed analysis phase to consider. Once I have all my tracks, I need to correlate them, hand them off to other sensor and analysis platforms etc. Task up more detailed scans on targets of interest. Maintaining even a small LOS (a few hundred nautical miles) air picture requires back end crews of up to a dozen operators. If you are doing ELINT as well you need specialist crew and systems and whilst Traveller is often monolingual interception of comms is a specialism. Usually missions focus on collect since analysis of all that data takes a large team of experts some time. You can probably real-time analyse a few tracks of interest, but you can't get the detail on everything unless they are in a cooperative network (like a tactical datalink).

Expert systems could auto collect and analyse (since we are already going that way).

Most of this stuff is not in the public domain, but AIS is used for surface vessel tracking and COSPAS SARSAT is emergency beacon tracking. There is plenty of information there which would be about the level of normal spaceship tracking and control with cooperative vessels (and some pitfalls when people are less cooperative or equipment ends up in the wrong hands).

The other stuff will be limited to military (real and in game) and probably an itch best left unscratched in public forums.

 

[Terry Mixon]

And figure out sensor packages on probes/missiles, please.

 

[Ol'Weedy]

I think 2300 put a lot more thought into sensors and AEH was less concerned with simplicity than HG. Without putting nearly as much thought into it as you have, I generally think the 2300 sensor regime is overall better. But I don't think there is any Traveller ship that doesn't use Virtual Aperture Array and has actual telescopes and EMS dishes.

T:NE puts a lot more effort into sensors in FF&S as well. But the baseline mechanics are pretty different, of course.

Only ever saw the original 2300AD, but detailed sensor rules were a part of it's core "Hide and seek with bazookas" vision of space combat, I try to stick to that feel in regular Traveller. Always made more sense to me than the Star Wars "Has to be in visual range so you can see the spacial effects" vision.