Follow-up to myself: Oops. I made a mistake in my last calculation. The -10 cutoff point means it goes from "detection impossible" to "detection unless there is a critical failure" in one range band.
> Travis replied to Hal: > > > > Does GURPS have a model(outside of a bonus to skill) to account for the > > ability of an automatic system to do real-time processing of the sensor > > data to provide either an enhancement over-lay(like how many computer games > > will highlight items and enemies), or other augmented-reality type > > processing that could allow a user(biological or electronic) to spot or > > identify things that they may not have been able to see regardless of skill? > > > > > As a suggestion? Why not list the costs involved? > > > > > > More often than not, the military tries to get by with the "good enough" > > > train of thought instead of "optimal". On the other hand, you might > > > consider that the military might have different suit types for different > > > purposes - much like Starship Troopers suggests. Just a thought. :) > > The problem is how the various parts of the model interact: > > * Size, range, speed are not TL-dependent, of course. > * Radical stealth or emission cloaking gives a (TL-4)*2 penalty to > detection. Same for stealth force screens, but I'm assuming that > isn't cumulative. Note that stealth force screens work against > all sensors, a true cloaking device ... > * From TL10 up, deceptive jammers work against thermal/PESA and > ladar, again (TL-4)*2 with a maximum of 20 which is reached at > TL14 and up. > > If a vehicle can afford a maximum-size jammer, the total stealth > penalty is > > TL radar ladar PESA > 8 -16 -8 -8 > 9 -20 -10 -10 > 10 -24 -24 -24 > 11 -28 -28 -28 > 12 -32 -32 -32 > 13 -36 -36 -36 > 14 -40 -40 -40 > 15 -42 -42 -42 > 16 -44 -44 -44 > > For sensors and sensor analysis, things look different. > > * For the same weight, the nominal range of a PESA doubles from > TL8 to TL11, then it is flat. > * There are other sensor types. FTL radar appears at TL?, but > the performance is based on the radar of that TL, so there > is a TL progression. (Note that this is an actice sensor.) > It is not defined if deceptive jammers help against FTL > radars. > * Gravscanners are affected by deceptive jammers and emission > cloaking. No joy. > * Ultrascanners have no detailed rules, but they are active, > like a 'shoot me' sign. > * Neural nets for with Electronics Operation (Sensors) helps, > too, but it substitutes the computer's skill for the human > one, which is significant because no roll is possible if > the 'technical' penalties are -10 or worse -- the signal is > lost in the noise. So skills over 27 are pointless. > Also keep in mind that the human skill is no longer added. > > Assuming a 1,000-lb. sensor and a microframe neural-net with > the biggest skill program it can run, we get > > TL PESA scan FTL radar scan skill > 8 25 57 15 > 9 27 59 24 > 10 29 61 27 > 11 31 63 27 > 12 31 63 27 > 13 31 63 27 > 14 31 63 27 > 15 31 63 27 > 16 31 63 27 With a SM+5 target, the cutoff point is reached at this speed/range: TL Possible Impossible 10 -19 -20 11 -17 -18 12 -13 -14 13 -9 -10 14 -5 -6 15 -3 -4 16 -1 -2 Remember, this is for a half-ton sensor trying to detect a 3,000-cf vehicle. The detection range is less than the vehicle length :-( Regards, Onno _______________________________________________ GurpsNet-L mailing list <[email protected]> http://mail.sjgames.com/mailman/listinfo/gurpsnet-l
