[Mobius]

Hehe...I love myself! 

"First, an intrasystem jump can occur between two points in a star system. Most small, space-faring vessels are equipped with motivators capable of these short jumps. The presence of an intense gravitational field is required, prohibiting travel beyond the boundaries of a star system."

That's what the Species.tbl says about intrasystem jumps.

In intrasystem jumps the presence of an intense gravitational field is required. But we know that some star systems have planets, while others not. We know that stars are different(giant, supergiants, Sun-like stars), thus changing the gravitational field.

As consequence, there's a certain gravitational field in each system. Though there's no canon evidence, we know that jumping to Pluto, Sedna or Quaoar would be difficult for many warships, so the areas under control have certain limits and are somewhat easy to patrol and control.

But what if we take in consideration systems like Antares or Betelgeuse? Those are supergiants, many hundred times as big as Sol. Their gravitational field is different, so the regions that can be virtually reached with subspace jumps change. I know that systems like Antares aren't supposed to have planets(though there are some in the FreeSpace Universe)but their gravitational field should remain intense, no matter of the presence of planets.

I wonder if in systems like Antares hiding a fleet is easier. We know that long range sensors need time to detect ships(star systems are immense), so reconnaissance craft are needed. But, in an immense system, succeeding becomes harder. What do you think?

[Sarafan]

The presence of an intense gravitational field is required, prohibiting travel beyond the boundaries of a star system."

The presence of an intense gravitational field is required and that is not provided only by the system's star, some types of planets also possess considerable gravity, like Jupiter, so a giant gas planet at the edge of a system might "expand" the range ships can jump on that system.

As consequence, there's a certain gravitational field in each system. Though there's no canon evidence, we know that jumping to Pluto, Sedna or Quaoar would be difficult for many warships, so the areas under control have certain limits and are somewhat easy to patrol and control.

If there's no canon evidence then why do you say that we know that jumping to Pluto, Sedna or Quaoar would be difficult? From were do you base your claim on that? Besides from where Sedna or Quaoar are from? I've never heard of them.

But what if we take in consideration systems like Antares or Betelgeuse? Those are supergiants, many hundred times as big as Sol. Their gravitational field is different, so the regions that can be virtually reached with subspace jumps change. I know that systems like Antares aren't supposed to have planets(though there are some in the FreeSpace Universe)but their gravitational field should remain intense, no matter of the presence of planets.

I wonder if in systems like Antares hiding a fleet is easier. We know that long range sensors need time to detect ships(star systems are immense), so reconnaissance craft are needed. But, in an immense system, succeeding becomes harder. What do you think?

That depends, I agree that different stars must have a impact in the subspace capability or "range" in their given system, supergiants or double star systems may have a greater sphere of where you can jump to. But the impact of planets is also to be considered, they may either contribute to that by extending it or just get in the way.

IMO hiding a fleet in a system doesnt have much to do with the size of the system, but more with were on the system you would hide your fleet in so the geographical aspect (ex: asteroid fields, etc) would have a greater importance. I'm not saying they dont matter but that you have to consider more than just the system's size.

[TrashMan]

WEll, dut to complex gravitational forces some parts of the system might be hard to reach with jump drives (or impossible), so hiding a fleet there might be a good idea...or maby that's the first place someone would look?
but wihout jumping ability, that area of space would be hard to patrol, no?

[Dark Hunter]

Besides from where Sedna or Quaoar are from? I've never heard of them.

The Kuiper Belt, if I'm not mistaken. Out past Pluto, and not quite as large, but not as far away as Eris.

[Mobius]

The presence of an intense gravitational field is required and that is not provided only by the system's star, some types of planets also possess considerable gravity, like Jupiter, so a giant gas planet at the edge of a system might "expand" the range ships can jump on that system.

That's the point. But I don't know if the dimensions of supergiants can somewhat "compensate" the lack of planets. There are HUGE stars like The Garnet Star, VV Cephei and VY Canis Majoris. The last one is believed to have an enormous radius(same as the distance between the Sun and Saturn), so the boundaries of those star systems should be expanded.

But what if we take in consideration systems like Antares or Betelgeuse? Those are supergiants, many hundred times as big as Sol. Their gravitational field is different, so the regions that can be virtually reached with subspace jumps change. I know that systems like Antares aren't supposed to have planets(though there are some in the FreeSpace Universe)but their gravitational field should remain intense, no matter of the presence of planets.

I wonder if in systems like Antares hiding a fleet is easier. We know that long range sensors need time to detect ships(star systems are immense), so reconnaissance craft are needed. But, in an immense system, succeeding becomes harder. What do you think?

That depends, I agree that different stars must have a impact in the subspace capability or "range" in their given system, supergiants or double star systems may have a greater sphere of where you can jump to. But the impact of planets is also to be considered, they may either contribute to that by extending it or just get in the way.

IMO hiding a fleet in a system doesnt have much to do with the size of the system, but more with were on the system you would hide your fleet in so the geographical aspect (ex: asteroid fields, etc) would have a greater importance. I'm not saying they dont matter but that you have to consider more than just the system's size.

Not really. Communications and radar echoes need time to reach the sensors of whoever is pursuiting a fleet. The only way to attack the Repulse, in fact, was to lure it to attack. Asteroid fields are useful, but it doesn't mean that you can avoid enemy attacks by jumping to different locations every 4-6 hours. NTF rally positions were located thanks to reconnaissance flights, not long range sensors. They would have never catched the fleet in time.

[Snail]

Long range sensors can detect ships, you know.

[Mobius]

But they need time! A battle group that jumps to different locations every 5-6 hours should remain hard to assault, right?

[Sarafan]

Not really. Communications and radar echoes need time to reach the sensors of whoever is pursuiting a fleet. The only way to attack the Repulse, in fact, was to lure it to attack. Asteroid fields are useful, but it doesn't mean that you can avoid enemy attacks by jumping to different locations every 4-6 hours. NTF rally positions were located thanks to reconnaissance flights, not long range sensors. They would have never catched the fleet in time.

Oh, sure, I said that the system's geographical aspects will be a bigger factor in determining where a fleet can hide than its size but it will also determine where the enemy will have to look to find you.

Long range sensors can detect ships, you know.

Except the ones that are hiding.

[Mobius]

Question: what if a sun is between the sensors that are attempting to detect a fleet and the fleet itself? Is it going to compromise the search? In which way, exactly?

[Sarafan]

Question: what if a sun is between the sensors that are attempting to detect a fleet and the fleet itself? Is it going to compromise the search? In which way, exactly?

Of course it will, it would probably be impossible for a fleet to use their long range sensors to try to detect a fleet near a sun because it will scramble their sensors, masking their presence. And I doubt a signal can go trough a sun so you cant scan the whole system from just one position, you would have to send ships to its other side.

[Mobius]

Got it. I need those info for a *cough* *cough* WIP. Thanks

[Sarafan]

Got it. I need those info for a *cough* *cough* WIP. Thanks

Bad move, man, you shouldnt have mentioned that. Now you gonna have to tell us what that WIP is. You better start speaking or it aint just bones that are gonna break.

[Mobius]

Steadfast...a faction is never detected.

[Sarafan]

Steadfast...a faction is never detected.

 

Care to explain more?

[Mobius]

In Steadfast there's a rebellion bla bla bla...but onlike any other rebellion, the enemy is capable of avoiding any kind of contact(thought it launches massive assaults with spacecraft and warships). Thanks to the system I mentioned before(the fleet is always on the move)and the presence of many AWACS, the rebels start a war of attrition. That's not what happens in normal campaigns, where destroyers and other warships are easily encountered and took down. I wanted something terrible for the GTVA. Though strong, in that theatre of operation the GTVA doesn't have a lot of AWACS, so it has an obvious disadvantage.

[Sarafan]

It looks to be a really cool campaign.

[Mobius]

Of course...mostly thanks to cutscenes and other *CLASSIFIED* stuff(that I find great). I don't like the way most rebellions are put to an end. They have strategies, they should put up one hell of a fight. And starting a war of attrition while hitting the GTVA's resupply fleets...it's fine.