[email removed] ( PBJuzyk) wrote
>
> Also my theoretical tender/carrier would have an extensive suite of all
> the best electronic/communication gear that would enable it to monitor
> the precise location of all craft invloved in the action, especially its
> rpvs, so if a comm lock was momentarily lost with a particular unit its
> position could be scanned, adjusted for its vector, and tight-beam comm
> reestablished.
>
I believe (today I left my copy of FF&S at home, oh well) that fighters are
controlled through an MFC with capabilities comparable to a beam pointer. In
rules terms, you should be amble to regain control of any fighter you can get a
lock on. Having the fighter "go EMS active" when it is out of control would aid
in that. You should get some bonus for knowing where the damn thing is,
however.
> Unless I missed an important section of the official rules nothing is
> mentioned in either TNE or FFS about communication lags (which I agree
> would definitely exist) or major difficulties with maintaining laser (or
> maser, meson) communications.
No, but I think the control range limit is something like the MFC's short range,
I presume is to account for lag and comm difficulties..
Unfortunately, FF&S does not provide much in the way of rules for automation. I
hope that supplements will improve that without blowing game balance. The
remote I would like to build (and which does not seem to be covered by the
rules) is a spy probe. Something small, with lots of passive EMS and a limitted
interplanetary travel capability, as well as a powerful communicator. With
such a beast, I could jump into the outer system and send a couple to sniff out
the Gas Giants and main world to evaluate enemy forces.
Les Howie
Prograph International