Welcome to the HeavyMetalPro Forums

Notes:
While rules I've proposed for SHOAGs are lengthy and sort of complex, I don't currently desire them to be in Total Warfare; they could be published in a future version of Tactical Operations, and remember that the rules for mobile structures are way more complex than below rules for SHOAGs.

Yes, I do believe that TAG & Light TAG attack(s) must each have LOS range to-hit modifier from Tactical Operations in place of each of their Short or Medium or Long or Extreme range(s) because TAG beam(s) or Light TAG beam(s) each create 0 heat, and repeated doubling of TAG or Light TAG range results with 0 heat generated, and so each of their ranges would be like limitless sunlight range.

No, I don't currently support chip's rule for having TAG(s) or Light TAG(s) be energy laser weapon(s) because of strafing rules, but strafing rules must be removed because infantry can use their lasers for TAG like effects; so after strafing rules are omitted, then I'll support having TAG(s) & Light TAG(s) be energy lasers that can be targeting computer compatible (BV formulas of TAG or Light TAG guided munitionscan be adjusted to proportionately accommodate that).

Overview:
Clan Warriors, that were wanting a way to reduce getting hit by TAG and Light TAG guided attacks, told their Scientists to design a counter to those attacks. Those Scientists, knowing that TAG and Light TAG beams are made of light, could be shrinked by counter lights known as destructive interference and that would be constructive for units operated by Clan Warriors; and those Scientists, also knowing that TAG and Light TAG beams of light, could be expanded by counter lights known as constructive interference and that would be destructive for units operated by Clan Warriors. And so Clan Scientists designed SHOAG equipment.

Rules:
A. When a TAG or Light TAG beam attempts to hit a unit or structure with functioning SHOAG equipment(s), player controlling unit or structure, that is making that TAG or Light TAG attack, must roll 2D6 and use table below to determine which modifier is applied to every attack homing in on that TAG or Light TAG beam. Multiple SHOAG to-hit modifiers are cummulative.
Dice__To-hit
Roll__Modifier
2____+5
3____+4
4____+3
5____+2
6____+1
7____+0
8____-1
9____-2
10___-3
11___-4
12___-5

B. If unit or structure has fully functioning SHOAG(s) at nighttime, then that unit or structure is illuminated and therefore nighttime to-hit modifier doesn't apply to all attacks made against that unit or structure.

C. Each SHOAG light has a radius of 1 meter.

D. Each critical hit to a slot containing SHOAG destroys that part of that SHRAG.

E. Functioning SHOAG lights have no effect when they're armored using armored components rules.

F rule is now clarified as: "A unit or structure may use its own probe(s) or probe(s) of one or multiple friendly unit(s) or structure(s) to examine incoming TAG or Light TAG beam(s) that penetrate effect radius (radii) of probe(s) to get SHOAG to automatically attempt to omit said beam(s) and omitted TAG or Light TAG beam(s) have absolutely no effect provided that said probe's(') effect radius or radii is effective to examine said incoming TAG or Light TAG beam(s), but only one frequency of any SHOAG can be used to omit only one frequency of TAG or Light TAG beam(s) at a time, and omitted TAG or Light TAG beams are absolutely unaffected by A Time of Warfare TAG or Light TAG autohit(s) of 12.

G. Each SHOAG, that is mounted in a unit or structure (conventional infantry can't have SHOAG mounted), has 4.2% of that unit's or structure's total tonnage for SHOAG, and that doesn't include carried items like external cargo, handheld weapon(s), etc.; that SHOAG consumes a number of item slots as follows: 2 per location except head (SHOAG occupies just 1 critical slot). A conventional vehicle has SHOAG consume 1 item slot per each location. An Inner Sphere tonnage of SHOAG and Inner Sphere slots for a SHOAG are same for Clan versions of SHOAG.

H. BV for a fully functioning SHOAG equals unit's defensive movement modifier plus 0.02.

I. Cost for a fully functioning SHOAG equals SHOAG's tonnage multiplied by 2,500 Kerensky Bills.

SHOAG word replaced SHRAG word on Sept 15, 2017.

_________________
Any rules ideas that I post for BT aren't official unless an up to date BT rulesbook declares otherwise. You might have to wait at least a fortnight for me to reply because I'm usually very active. I won't discuss real life politics or religion on any of these forum(s), but my favorite color is yellow like my skin color (hint).

Well Chip... can I call you Chip? Feels like I've known you for decades now...

"toppling" as it were, particularly on the light spectrum had a very short lifespan due to being quickly defeated and inherently flawed. The problems are twofold:

1) Light just doesn't work that way.

When you add other frequencies to light, even those opposing your signal, it's still additive and the original is still there / visible. It's why if you shine a cyan light at a red one you get white -- NOT black. You're only widening the presence of frequencies, not defeating them. Any sensor worth a damn would have a filter over it to block other frequencies -- and probably also a 'topline' filter to recognize such jamming attempts and try to use your little 'sensors' like they were NARC pods.

2) Active emissions are the enemy, even jamming ones.

This is why Sparkvark is mostly relegated to the past. One of the problems with even radio frequency jamming is you have to actively emit a signal to defeat another one. This plays RIGHT into the hands of PASSIVE receiver equipment. You go active jamming what you are jamming -- at least in most forms of LADAR/RADAR/SONAR -- will know something is out there jamming, and switch over to passive systems that once they subtract their active frequency from the data, will go "AHA! THERE YOU ARE!" -- next thing you know a passive seeker like HARM is coming to say hello.

AAMRAM for example in its active track final stage can alternate between off-board active, on-board active, and passive tracking, meaning that for all intents and purposes you crank up a waveform jammer, you might have jammed the active sensing but you just set off a flare to everyone else "HERE I AM, FREE LUNCH!"

Now, with most ground radar -- like ATC -- they sweep a wide area (360 degrees) of sky very slowly, so jamming them is easy and usually they won't switch over. ANYTHING used to active target tracking and acquisition however can quickly and easily defeat active jamming... just like how the RWR in a airplane turns active radar into the biggest way to get yourself shot down!

With light it's only WORSE since light is always additive, you're just adding more signal to track you by.

It's not like noise cancelling headphones. (which despite the claims, can actually still burn out your ears which is why modern shooting cans deaden ALL noise first, and then selectively feed you safe frequencies and levels with speakers and a mic)

In modern combat any ACTIVE system puts you at risk of detection, which is why active systems are often left turned off -- see radar in the nose of interceptors which is left off as GCI or AWACS walks you onto the enemy's six. See how when pilots fly around in active search an enemy with a proper RWR can use that to figure out where they are LONG before that nose radar picks up a damned thing, figure out where they are, where they are headed, and with a bit of stealth, guile, and guesswork sneak right up behind them to shove a dagger in the back.

Hence why the F-14's retirement was only a decade overdue, and honestly it NEVER lived up to any of the reputation it got from the aviation fanboys. Who typically know Jack about **** when it comes to air combat! ...and Jack left town

Pretty much ALL combat is the art of the backstab... the 'noble duel' of trading shots that makes up Battletech being strictly the world of fantasy... and that's a third ground at which I'd reject your device. This is a fantasy GAME

Your rules are too complex and convoluted for simple and easy gameplay. It would get in the way and drag an already slow game to an even slower crawl. Sadly that describes a LOT of the pointless garbage added to the game ever since the whole "multiple rulebook" relaunch pissed on things.

Even so, again IMHO this is the technological equivalent of strapping the enemy's NARC pods all over yourself on purpose. PARTICULARLY the nonsense about mounting more than one of them.

It would also be impractical from a detection standpoint since with a proper targeting laser, you'd need a full detection grid over the whole skin of the unit; laser light particularly at non-visible frequencies just doesn't refract that much. That's why laser comms are considered a fairly secure communication technique and VERY hard to intercept.

Remember, in the game fiction even damage lasers are only visible due to refracted radiation causing eye damage and not visible light... and that's at power levels strong enough to slag away tons of armor.

A PROPERLY tuned targeting laser shouldn't refract enough to even be visible regardless of the gear -- the only reason modern IR gear sees a lot of laser designators right now is how much 'inventory rot' is being fielded. We've got insurgent asshats with 1980's designators operating against forces wearing bleeding edge spec night vision.

_________________
[size=80][color=#114488][i]
It seems very queer that we invariably entrust the writing of our regulations for the next war to men totally devoid of anything but theoretical knowledge.[/i][/color][/size]

interesting Post
i totally agree with the "its a game it must not be overcomplicated" point

one question: is it feasible to find out what frequency opforce Designators use? if one unit marks a target for another unit they should have a limited number of frequencys in use(or Colors of laserlight, wich is physically the same)

i would think that a number of decoys littered around would make it impossible for the weapon that uses the Designation to determine wich is the true target.
rulewise an extra to-hit roll would be made for the nearest decoy and if the success is greater for the decoy the decoy is hit.
much simpler rulewise amd probably much more realistic.
even simpler: when a certain effort is made by one side the other Player would be simply informed: "sorry, but your oponent littered the field with decoys, you cannot use tag in this battle" or "there are so many decoys that only on a roll of 5+ on a D6 you hit your target"

_________________
typos and spelling-mistakes are property of the finder. english is not my mother-tongue.

Well, even if you know the frequency (what is it Kenneth?) it might not be all that useful... Sure early first generation designators were just "ooh let's shine a really bright light at it"

But you know how laser communication is a thing? For most guidance systems 16 updates a second is sufficient, most systems going for pretty much the NTSC monochrome rate of 30 for good measure.

Using amplitude modulation, frequency modulation, and just plain old fashioned pulsing, it is possible to encode data into what's being reflected. If a pre-selected set of keys is used, with difficult a algorythm using hashes instead of keys...

You'd need to reverse engineer ALL of that... in realtime. You'd also have to compensate for the doppler shift of radar ranging, which the DESIGNATOR would use to shift frequency, keys, hashes, and all sorts of other information on suspicion of either being spoofed, or other friendly units designating other targets.

At laser frequencies, you can pack a LOT of data into 1/30th of a second.

It's called signal discrimination, and it gets more and more intricate every year. MOSTLY it was originally done so multiple units on the battlefield could paint different targets at once, either for their own or other units fire. This signal discrimination would make trying to fake multiple targets significantly harder...

Though at the same time Battletech targeting barely lives up to mid 20th century standards so... who knows. There is that tale in the fiction of Falcons waltzing into a AFFC training course and not entirely realizing they were looking at sensor ghosts...

But given conventional battlemech targeting is likely heat source and visual profile based, those are a LOT easier to fake.

If anything, we need rules for dummy units to make enemies waste ammo on. Rather than trying to fake tag, fake a target for the guy WITH tag to paint. Lower tech and easier solution, even if they are nothing more than shadowboards and inflatable dummies.

USAF testing actually found that given a choice between a flat target painted on the ground and an actual airplane parked next to it -- operating on visual recognition only -- most pilots at over 1000 feet altitude pickled the dummy first....

-- edit --

though you DO bring up an interesting point, the odds of the unit being painted knowing it is targeted is complex and difficult... for some other nearby unit to see it? Boom, there you are. One of the things that makes laser designation so fascinating is the dot on the target is really tiny and hard for the target to be aware of -- while anyone tuned to the right light spectrum in the immediate area is gonna go "hey, what's that dot?"

One unit masking for another is more likely than a unit doing it for themselves.

ASSUMING that TAG is actually a targeting laser and not a complex relational space system that just uses a laser and other sensing for rangefinding, heading, and relative geodesic coordinates. There's a REASON LGB's gave way to GPS Guided as the weapon of choice. Figure in a thousand years of inertial guidance tech, and there's no reason to assume TAG even relies on anything more complex on that laser than rangefinding. The Bombs and missiles being far more likely to be along the lines of JDAM style GPS an/or inertial guidance.

Though really with continued micronization I'd not be surprised if a future weapon system of off-board designation didn't cram every damned source of information possible just to make it harder to screw with. Laser pointer + GPS + inertial + active RADAR + passive IR + passive EM + electro-optical + passive radiometric (radiation guided)

Again as I think I mentioned in another thread, you'd think given the fiction of what a BattleMech IS that's one HELL of a lot of information you could latch onto for a viable targeting solution -- just another reason a half ton machine gun bottoming out at 90 meters is "hah, RIGHT...."

_________________
[size=80][color=#114488][i]
It seems very queer that we invariably entrust the writing of our regulations for the next war to men totally devoid of anything but theoretical knowledge.[/i][/color][/size]

so the WWII inflatble tanks + a heat source + metallic(foil)Surface would still be state of the art in the 31st century.

_________________
typos and spelling-mistakes are property of the finder. english is not my mother-tongue.

It's like I remember some commentary about the Apache longbow they were officially setup so a unit of up to say 16 of them could fly up to a ridge and just peek over it with their masters mount sensors and designators showing then they would designate 1 target each and 1 unit would popup and fire (up to 16) missiles and immediately duck back behind the ridge for cover.

Yes.

_________________
Karagin-

Darkness is a friend of mine. Sometimes I have to beat it back, or it would overwhelm me. Shirley Meier

[url]http://karagin12.livejournal.com/[/url]

The Wookiee, he's not wearing any pants!

[img]http://www.heavymetalpro.com/countries/mil-army.gif[/img]

So, would any of you that read above rules for SHOAG use it? Why or why not?

_________________
Any rules ideas that I post for BT aren't official unless an up to date BT rulesbook declares otherwise. You might have to wait at least a fortnight for me to reply because I'm usually very active. I won't discuss real life politics or religion on any of these forum(s), but my favorite color is yellow like my skin color (hint).

Hi Tom,
I have typed above SHOAG rules to make them as comprehendable as I most possibly can. The SHOAG basically uses light to shrink or omit from existence light beam(s) from TAG(s) or Light TAG(s) via destructive interference. That is constructive (pun intended) for Clan forces when they encounter TAG guided attacks, but potentially destructive (again pun included) for Inner Sphere forces. I'm sure you'll be able to comprehend them; they just take time to read. You might find these two following links beneficial.

https://www.google.com/search?q=constru ... Dmv-rmqlrI

https://www.google.com/search?source=hp ... 7DlFNzlIUQ

_________________
Any rules ideas that I post for BT aren't official unless an up to date BT rulesbook declares otherwise. You might have to wait at least a fortnight for me to reply because I'm usually very active. I won't discuss real life politics or religion on any of these forum(s), but my favorite color is yellow like my skin color (hint).