[Prophet]

Has anyone suggested this before?

My idea is to give capships "ECM value" that would effect turret weapons by reducing their accuarcy when shooting the target ECM is on. I think is just stupid that FS capships have no other means of defence exept armour (well, weapons too). So when a turret fires at target, the targets ECM scrambles the enemys targetting systems so that their turrets are less accurate. What do you think?

Another thing. Obviously the weapon systems would be able to overcome the ECM eventually. Easily, when shooting at slowmoving FS capships in open space (imagine throwing rocks at your neighbours window, if the first one misses the second hits much closer). So a way should be figured to reduce the effect of the ECM over time. Perhaps when the ship enters combat the "ECM value" would begin dropping as enemy targetting systems are working trought the scramble. So at first the turrets would have a hard time hitting the target, but would zero in eventually.

Any comments?

[Fury]

Perhaps optional base ECM and ECCM values in ships.tbl and also possibility to set-up through sexps. Instead of accuracy increasing automatically, fredders have full control over it via sexps. The higher the difference between ECM and ECCM values, the easier or harder it will be to get a computer assisted weapons lock. For AI controlled ships and turrets, this can be probably be a static decrease or increase in accuracy.

[Wanderer]

If it would be build in that way then entries might look like this:

$ECM:
+Start: Would define the beginning strenght of the ECCM
+End: Would define the maximum strenght of the ECCM (if required)
+Increment: Would define the change in ECCM strenght per second or shot
+ECM: Would define the defending ECM strenght

Though IMO we do have option for that for something like that for standard weapons with $fof:. I'm just afraid that this might turn into quite horrendous mess very easily. Also what is the use of the ecm on clearly visual range. The effect of weapons (for example multi-part turrets) deliberately firing off their target even at point blank range because of ECM/ECCM values would be quite sight also. For longer range it might be nice but then again we already have the $fof available.

[Prophet]

Also what is the use of the ecm on clearly visual range. The effect of weapons (for example multi-part turrets) deliberately firing off their target even at point blank range because of ECM/ECCM values would be quite sight also. For longer range it might be nice but then again we already have the $fof available.

You do have the lead indicator? Not that I am suggesting that ECM should have any effect on fighters (other than perhaps secondary lock difficulties), nor should it even be on fighters (we have stealth allready). But the lead indicator is the most obvious thing in game indicating that there is a mess of electronics constantly "observing" your target, and likely assiting in target aquisation and tracking. Automated turrets should be voulnerable to any kind of ECM. Should the turrets in FS be controlled by real person, the gunner is still much depended on the information that electronic targetting systems supply him. Hence ECM would work in both cases.

But! Because of what Wanderer said the ECM would not be effective forever. Even the simpliest computer (in FS universe) or gunner should be able to realize that the shots are missing to the left and adust targetting to the right in order to hit. Thus negating the ECM effect.
Also. ECM in a ship as big as Colossus, for example, wouldn't really do much good. It's a big ship you could hit no matter what.
And. ECM in small craft like fighter is dead weight. It's small and agile and nothing ever really hits it anyway.
The biggest use would be for cruisers and corvettes. Does it make much differenve when SRed misses the Fenris? I think so.

[FireCrack]

Well.. ecm on fighters could help against missiles and AAA beams...

[CaptJosh]

In theory. However, a fighter's primary defense against those is speed and maneuverability. Some of today's atmosphere fighters have some very impressive jamming systems, though, and they're much smaller than the fighters in FS or FS2. Hard to say what's better, really.

[Prophet]

Well if the coders want to make fighters ECM capable then ok. But I think it's not really worth for even two lines in tbls, not to mention code. Id' say that beam-protect and invisibility are enought to keep fighters safe from beams...

[FireCrack]

Unless you actualy want beams shooting at fighters...

[Pnakotus]

It's fallacious to compare modern sensors and ECM to FS sensors and ECM, since we know nothing about FS sensors or how ECM might interfere with them.

Electronic warfare in broader strokes would be interesting, but I think it's the sort of thing best left to SEXPs.

[Trivial Psychic]

Cap-Ship ECM could be useful for TBP, as another method of simulating Telepath jamming of Shadow Cap-ships.

[Prophet]

My sub-consciousness has been screaming to me something about this for a few days. I think JMS said that when them Q'Guan and Primus were shooting each other (my sub-consciousness isn't that good with episode numbers) and the missed each others at first. It was because of ECM.

I think I remember that, somewhere in the second season. I think I look it up later today, unless someon remembers the episode number...

[Prophet]

Well at least in season 2 episode 15 "And now for a word" where the Narns and Centauri are fighting around B5 the warships are sitting next to each other and are hitting ****. Beams seem to hit allright, but first wolleys by pulse weapons are missing quite nicely...

Furthermore, since the lack of interceptors leaves a gaping hole in to TBP defences ECM would be a useful defence for them.