Ships and Fighters with Stealth

[tschuma]

If a ship is firing at a fighter stand that has stealth and is in base contact, does the ship ignore the stealth, like a fighter in base contact ignores stealth?

Thanks

Tom

 

[G Quan]

We do in this manner. Base contact is base contact.

 

[Burger]

No; the rule for overriding stealth (page 29) only applies to flights. Not capital ships.

 

[locarno24]

Note that this only applies if firing the ship's main guns - shots from the Anti-Fighter and Advanced Anti-Fighter traits ignore Stealth, just like they ignore Dodge.

 

[tschuma]

So if the Anti Fighter attackes ignore stealth, then why do the main guns not ignore it?

Doesn't that seem odd?

Also if the Fighters ignore stealth when in base contact, then why does the ship not ignore it and have to roll to see the fighters that are shooting at it?

Why not make it the anything under 2" ignores stealth.

Tom

 

[Burger]

Well the ship's main guns are not calibrated to shooting small craft that are close, skimming around the ship in all directions (as they frequently do to B5 in the show). So they would use the same targetting computers when the fighters are in base contact, as they would do when they are not. Therefore have to roll stealth.

The AF weapons are designed for shooting small, fast craft at close range. So they are calibrated with different targetting computers, that can see through stealth of small fighters.

 

[Taran]

That would be a good answer if it was canon...

The real answer is:
"Anti-fighter is Magic!"

 

[l33tpenguin]

Well the ship's main guns are not calibrated to shooting small craft that are close, skimming around the ship in all directions (as they frequently do to B5 in the show). So they would use the same targetting computers when the fighters are in base contact, as they would do when they are not. Therefore have to roll stealth.

The AF weapons are designed for shooting small, fast craft at close range. So they are calibrated with different targetting computers, that can see through stealth of small fighters.

Something I do so love about the translation of movies and tv shows or game rules to any sort of 'real life' or equivalent. There is always that break down of 'Why...?' I'm not attacking anyone, not even Burger here, I just find it funny.

That response begs the question of 'If the anti fighter guns are capable of defeating stealth, why aren't the same stealth defeating targeting computers used on the big guns?'

It’s the breakdown of 'cool on screen' vs 'real world practicality' Like when they used manual firing on the white star to knock out the shadow fighters and the bomb for B4. Remember that? You are telling me that, somehow, a human being is more capable at hitting a target than a computer?

Last time I checked, not even today, is human control preferred over computer in regards to any sort of precision, from giving driving directions to manufacturing. Sorry, my GPS is FAR more accurate than your hand drawn map. But somehow, at a range of several kilometers, a human was more capable of directing the firepower of a star ship than the computer just because, its WAY cooler for a character to say 'Give me manual control' than have them press the button again.

The Anti-Fighter rules work the way they do because thats how they are written. Same reason you collect $200 for passing go.

 

[basaint]

Listen to you go L33T.

Me, I don't think its so much canon as reality. I mean come, on; if you have a beam weapon mounted on a huge system or even one thats mounted along the hull, how the heck are you gonna hit a small fighter? The weapon could be advanced enough to track it but its like using a tank round to shoot at a single troop.

Somebody, somewhere put some thought into it and probably came to a similar conclusion-hence the rule.

 

[l33tpenguin]

The biggest difference that it would come down to, in my honest opinion, is it takes a lot more energy and resources to operate those ship killing weapons than a fighter killing weapon requires. You don't use a cruise missile to take out a tank. While a cruise missile CAN do the job, its overkill. You would actually be very surprised to see what goes into determining the size and type of munitions that are dropped on targets. The same as you don’t want to use 7 terajoules of energy to knock out something that requires a few megajoules.

I'm not in the Army, I know some around here are, but, how easy is it for an M1 to hit a single man sized target with its main gun?

Its interesting to note that modern ship close in defense weaponry (i.e. the phalanx CIWS and similar systems) is radar guided and computer controlled, using a weapon that delivers a high rate of fire in order to knock its target out of the sky. If that were to hold over to B5, stealth would work AMAZINGLY well against it, unless it used some sort of advanced visual tracking method.

 

[basaint]

Exactly...I thought about using a missile as an example but you get it.
You could hit a person with a tank round, but if the person twitched alittle you'd probably miss

 

[AdrianH]

Space is big. Even when capital ships are in base contact, they're far enough apart that they're effectively very small dots and you need to get a weapons lock to hit one.

Fighters zipping around a capital ship at near zero range have an easier job. When the target is big enough to fill your entire forward view, weapons lock is not necessary and no amount of stealth will help.

The fighters themselves aren't such easy targets so the ship's big guns, even the ones in turrets, need weapons lock to hit them.

Alternatively you get a large number of very small weapons, too small to do much to anything bigger than a fighter, and put up a barrage which is pretty well guaranteed to hit something. Stealth won't help the fighters here.

 

[McKickaha]

Space is big. Even when capital ships are in base contact, they're far enough apart that they're effectively very small dots and you need to get a weapons lock to hit one.

Fighters zipping around a capital ship at near zero range have an easier job. When the target is big enough to fill your entire forward view, weapons lock is not necessary and no amount of stealth will help.

The fighters themselves aren't such easy targets so the ship's big guns, even the ones in turrets, need weapons lock to hit them.

Alternatively you get a large number of very small weapons, too small to do much to anything bigger than a fighter, and put up a barrage which is pretty well guaranteed to hit something. Stealth won't help the fighters here.

Impeccable logic AdrianH

 

[Democratus]

Space is big. Even when capital ships are in base contact, they're far enough apart that they're effectively very small dots and you need to get a weapons lock to hit one.

But that's not how it works in the B5 universe, as we've all seen. Ships get close enough to each other that they are huge even to the naked eye. Then they fire upon each other at ranges that would be considered ludicrously close even in naval warfare of the 20th century.

Fighters zipping around a capital ship at near zero range have an easier job. When the target is big enough to fill your entire forward view, weapons lock is not necessary and no amount of stealth will help.

Again, this isn't true. We actually see the battle of the line where fighters are unable to effectively fire on the Sharlin cruisers that completely fill their screen.

It's an odd universe that B5 put together for us. No wonder making a rules set to reflect both the show and some kind of "realistic" battle system is so difficult.

 

[Burger]

We actually see the battle of the line where fighters are unable to effectively fire on the Sharlin cruisers that completely fill their screen.

We see that Sinclair is unable to get a weapons lock on the Sharlin. But that doesn't mean he can't fire manually. He goes for the ram because his weapons are down, and it is all he can do.