| Author |
Change how Electronic Warfare works... |
Lupino
Cadet
Joined: March 23, 2002
Posts: 359
|  Posted: 2004-11-18 16:20
Watching the recent scuffle over ecm/eccm functions (and that I average a post like this once every couple months  ) I think with the changes that .483 will bring we need to change how the EW part of this game works.
The following comes from the spacebattles forum but pretty much describes what I think would make DS so much better:
Quote:
| There are two basic types of ECM, both of which function just fine in space.
The first type is passive ECM. This means that you try to reduce your sensor profile as much as possible, try to blend in with the background, and try to make sure your enemy's sensor packets don't bounce off you and get back to him. In space, blending in and reducing sensor profile generally means reducing temperature as much as possible for the duration of the battle (and that includes the exhaust from your engines). Putting your vessel between the enemy and your exhaust should help, but there isn't a whole lot you can do about it. Getting between your enemy and a star is a good idea, though. Also, you'll want to paint yourself black and present a knife-like profile, so that visible-range EM sensors can't see you easily. Cold plasma shielding is a great way to scatter EM-based sensor packets, much like stealth systems work to scatter radar sensor packets in an atmosphere. Given realistic combat ranges, a 2 km starship is pretty hard to spot. Depending on sensor capabilities and passive ECM, ships are likely to be almost invisble to each other using passive sensors.
The second type is active ECM. If need to target the enemy, you'll almost certainly have to go active on your sensors. And if you do that, you'll need active ECM to protect yourself (or, if your passive sensors are sufficient to target the enemy, his are probably good enough to target you too, and you'll still need active ECM). With active ECM, your goal is to directly engage enemy sensor systems. A laser that is insufficient to actually damage an enemy vessel is probably more than sufficient to blind or even destroy EM sensors. That means a much less concentrated beam of energy can be used, giving you a much better chance to hit using much less of your resources. Your other option with active ECM is to simply flood the area around yourself with massive amounts of radiation. You just put out so much radiation into the surrounding environment that your sensor footprint is miniscule in comparison. This gives the enemy a general idea of your location, but they can't actually target you because they can't pick you out of the background. This tactic is especially great if you combine it with a spoofing technique.
Spoofing is another way to defeat enemy sensors, but it doesn't involve ECM (usually). All you have to do is build some drones that can mimick your sensor footprint. That can be difficult, unless your sensor footprint happens to be nothing but a big blob of radiation (as mentioned a moment ago). If you're going full active on ECM and using drones to spoof their sensors, and you're constantly moving, its not going to be easy for them to hit you. Meanwhile you and your drones are free to toss out as many sensor packets as your heart desires. If his ECM/ECCM isn't as good as yours, he's a sitting duck.
In short, sensors and countermeasures are not a waste of time. |
|
Basically in short, we completely alter DS's representation of electronic warfare. Instead of having ECM/ECCM, we have Active and Passive ECM and it would be a function of every ship; instead of being a device you can swap in/out, it would be an integral part of your ship, like using A/S/D to pilot your ship. Passive ECM would function much like our current ECM; activate it to turn your ship into "silent running" mode, except it works only to the point where your opponent can actually see you. Of course, Passive mode becomes moot if you crank your vessel to its maximum velocity, and your opponent can always use Scanners to get a better lock on you.
Active ECM would be like the article talked about, pumping out lots of radiation to hide your own vessel's signature. This ability would not stack; instead they provide a % chance that hostile fire will completely miss your vessel. If your opponent tried to fire his weapons at you, they would not be able to identify where you are within this "white noise". It would be like sitting in a pitch black room, hearing a loud noise in front of you and shooting a pistol it's general direction; chances are you are not going to hit it. There would however be different levels of jamming per vessel; a Dreadnaught would only put out a small amount that barely covers its hull, so that it's possible to spam weapons and eventually get a hit, while a Sensor Frigate could pump out enough to cover an area big enough to hide 2-3 Cruisers.
But how to combat Active ECM if there's no ECCM left? Pretty simple, actually. Scouts will still retain their sensor beacons, and a vessel marked by one will appear through the jamming and will give weapons a clear point to lock on to. Smart players will actually form mixed fleets to survive against each other: Scouts to go in and not only find your opponent, but mark him through the electronic jamming; Frigates/Destroyers to chase after Scouts and intercept their beacons; and the traditional Crusiers and Dreads to provide the punch.
_________________
\"Time is the best teacher; Unfortunately, it kills all its students!\"
|
Dreadlock Holiday
Admiral
Joined: March 18, 2004
Posts: 29
| Posted: 2004-11-19 14:28
Definately an improvement on the current situation, at least in theory. Unforetunately, because your idea is a more realistic version of how EW works, it would require giving weapons accuracy, that is, a percentage chance to hit or miss the enemy.
Unless i'm very much mistaken, all weapons in DS have a 100% chance to hit (not taking into account evasive action by the target and weapon range) and some weapons (e.g lasers/disruptors) cannot be avoided at all. Therefore I assume your idea would not only mean a re-working of the EW system but also of the weapon system, in order to take into account reduced weapon accuracy due to EW.
Your idea could be simplified a little by assuming that all ships always use passive ECM (as there would be no reason not to use it). Active ECM could be turned on and off.
ECCM could still play a roll in the game ( as a removeable device) by reducing the effectiveness of active ecm and as you stated there would still be a role for sensor scouts and beacons.
On the whole I like the idea and I can't see any drawback to it from a gamers perspective. It would certainly make EW more useful and rational.
Now Lupino, according to some people "There needs to be a key and dibilitating factor in each item...". As your proposal lacks such a factor, don't be surprised if you're accused of trying to unbalance the game. 
_________________
|
Lupino
Cadet
Joined: March 23, 2002
Posts: 359
| Posted: 2004-11-19 17:25
Quote:
|
On 2004-11-19 14:28, Dreadlock Holiday wrote:
Definately an improvement on the current situation, at least in theory. Unforetunately, because your idea is a more realistic version of how EW works, it would require giving weapons accuracy, that is, a percentage chance to hit or miss the enemy.
Unless i'm very much mistaken, all weapons in DS have a 100% chance to hit (not taking into account evasive action by the target and weapon range) and some weapons (e.g lasers/disruptors) cannot be avoided at all. Therefore I assume your idea would not only mean a re-working of the EW system but also of the weapon system, in order to take into account reduced weapon accuracy due to EW. |
|
I suppose you are correct, weapons accuracy would need a revamp, but (unless my very, very limited programing knowledge is wrong) it shouldn't be that hard, correct?
Quote:
| Your idea could be simplified a little by assuming that all ships always use passive ECM (as there would be no reason not to use it). Active ECM could be turned on and off. |
|
Agreed
Quote:
| ECCM could still play a roll in the game ( as a removeable device) by reducing the effectiveness of active ecm and as you stated there would still be a role for sensor scouts and beacons. |
|
I don't know, I find the idea of ECCM a little....odd. "Let's cancel their radiation by throwing up more radiation!" 0_o I mean, unless DS sensors worked on some strange property where throwing up a lot of particles would neutralize active jamming, but last time I checked this game was still based on real-world science (in a way  ).
Quote:
| On the whole I like the idea and I can't see any drawback to it from a gamers perspective. It would certainly make EW more useful and rational.
Now Lupino, according to some people "There needs to be a key and dibilitating factor in each item...". As your proposal lacks such a factor, don't be surprised if you're accused of trying to unbalance the game.
|
|
Ah, but there is. First, throwing up a lot of Active ECM is like putting a neon sign the size of the sun over your head saying "I'm Here! I'm Here!" Everyone's going to be able to see it, even from across the system, so you have to be careful about when you use it. Also, all the jamming in the world is not going to help you when a Scout slaps a few beacons on you, which might also be adjusted to increase a weapon's accuracy should that be programed in.
_________________
\"Time is the best teacher; Unfortunately, it kills all its students!\"
|
Dreadlock Holiday
Admiral
Joined: March 18, 2004
Posts: 29
| Posted: 2004-11-19 18:48
Quote:
| I don't know, I find the idea of ECCM a little....odd. |
|
I think the concept for ECCM is plausible. The problem is rationalising it. True the game has some basis in real world physics but at least an equal amount is science fiction/fantasy. Worm holes, faster than light drives, 2 dimensional movement in space (unless you are going to hit another ship O_o).
I don't think ECCM should be too hard to rationalise given the rest.
Quote:
| Ah, but there is. First, throwing up a lot of Active ECM is like putting a neon sign the size of the sun over your head... |
|
Agreed. However I was referring to items having innate debilitating factors (as demanded by others e.g. large energy consumption) as opposed to accidental ones. Granted my post did not make that clear.
My main gripe with the current system is that while using ECM for yourself and allies you also find yourself ECMing for the enemy, and this is an innate function of the ECM device! As long as you don't propose that i'm happy. 
[ This Message was edited by: Dreadlock Holiday on 2004-11-19 18:51 ]
_________________
|
-Pojo
Cadet
Joined: January 11, 2004
Posts: 68
From: GMT -5
| Posted: 2004-11-19 18:55
I for one really like these ideas. Rather than ECM just flat out reducing your signature and making yourself more difficult to locate, it rather confuses targeting systems when weapons are activated. The latter idea is what I always thought a device such as ECM would be used for.
On a side note, but still about Electronic Warfare, I was stumbling through the back news and uncovered this:
- Jammer device – which prevents all communications within 500gu of device when active.
I think this would be a very usefull device in EW. I imagine it is still being though up for a future version (the news article said version 1.5), and I for one would enjoy disrupting enemy communications and limiting the effectivness of their tactics more than I would meeting the enemy head on and slugging torpedoes at the other.
Just my $.02, though...possibly just the ramblings of a madman...
_________________
It doesn't take a 17 year-old to know you can just say you are 18 or older.
|
Axalon
Vice Admiral
Joined: June 15, 2003
Posts: 442
From: East Windsor, NJ, USA
| Posted: 2004-11-20 08:34
I suggest making the ECM/ECCM rings only visible to the player. The rings kill the "stealth" because players can see you easier. If you can see a ghosted version of yourself while cloaked, I think the ECM/ECCM should be ghosted and only able to be seen to the player.
I mean, a jammer doesn't exactly emit light. Energy, save for light, is invisible, so the ECM/ECCm should also be.
#include
Int main()
{
cout<<"Offtopic: "
cout<<"Super minor bug: On the taskbar it still says "DarkSpace v 1.481" when we are clearly in v. 1.482."
cout<<"End offopic."
Return 0
}
-Axalon
[ This Message was edited by: Axalon{Absolut-DSA} on 2004-11-20 08:35 ]
_________________
|
Tridgit
1st Rear Admiral
Joined: November 20, 2004
Posts: 24
From: Canada
| Posted: 2004-11-20 08:44
%Disband
Ext sub)(
}
coupe>>"l33tRe-ply: "
coupe>>"Ultra small bug; likely to be ignored for: ##% Two Weeks™ at minimum// ^ playerbase remind: we all remember the spelling mistake in options]]|."
coupe>>"l33tRe-ply."
Floss 3
{
_________________
|
Lark of Serenity
Grand Admiral
Raven Warriors
Joined: June 02, 2002
Posts: 2516
| Posted: 2004-11-20 18:28
just to point out, in the realworld game of stealth fighters, there isnt actually anything truly invisible to radar, its just that radar has a very difficult time detecting it because a stealth object is good at dispercing radar waves away from it. stealth fighters slip in and out of radar detection. perhaps this could be applied to kluth cloak and ecm ships? they arent actually completely undetectable with eccm running, they blip for a short period of time every once and awhile on a players hud. the amount of time a ship blips would be dependant on its signature, so the lower the signature the shorter and farther inbetween blips would be. employing a cloak would automatically bring the blips down a very significant amount, enough for a ship to sneak the distance of a dictor field without being detected for example. obviously, a short period of time would mean enemy vessels would be able to get the odd shot off, but not necessarily destroy you. youd only be destroyable if they used enough eccm to raise your sig above 0, or beaconed u during one of the periods you were out of stealth
_________________
Admiral Larky, The Wolf
Don't play with fire, play with Larky.
Raven Division Command - 1st Division
|
Fatal Rocko Willis
Fleet Admiral
Fatal Squadron
Joined: March 01, 2003
Posts: 1336
From: Kentucky
| Posted: 2004-12-01 10:24
Ok folks here is my .99 cents worth on the ECM/ECCM idea.. but a little background info...
I have 19 years in the US Navy, of which 14 years of it was as an Electronics Tech specializing on Anti Submarine Warfare and Electronic Warfare Systems... so this based on real world knowledge. I am not a programmer BUT I can tell you exactly how things work or don't work so that the people who do program can figure out how to do what needs to be done.
First there are Three types of "Active" ECM, or Electronic Countermeasures, currently in use. Currently the only aircraft in the US military that is used as an Active ECM or "Jammer" role is the Navy's EA-6B "Prowler". The three Active ECM/Jamming modes are:
#1 - Selective Jamming - This is the most commen used form. It selectivly jams Search, Fire Control, Guidance and Height Finding Radars as well as communications, (LF, HF, UHF, VHF and the like). This jamming can also be InfraRed Jamming.
#2 - Broadband Jamming - This is what is commanly known as "White Noise" or "Brute Force" jamming. It is where you put out thousands upon thousands of watts of raw power across a wide frequancy spectrum hence the name "White Noise".
#3 - Deceptive Jamming - This the least used but most effective. I cannot go into details how this works but basically the jamming aircraft sends false signals back down the radar beam to the originating radar station and spoofs them to think that the aircraft is at postion B when it is actually at position A.
Passive ECM is not actually the correct term. Passive Countermeasures would be a more correct term but for ease of usage I can agee it is Passive...
This would include the simple things like Flares, Chaff and Decoys. I know you might think.. "A ship at sea has those?" Yes we do... Flare decoys are shot out or set adrift from the stern of a ship, Chaff most commonly known as RBOC or SuperRBOC (Rapid Blooming Onboard Chaff) uses an unguided rocket to shoot a "Chaff Bomb" into the air thus creating a chaff cloud larger than the ship. As far as decoys are concerned... Every ship in the US Navy, including Aircraft Carriers, Has what's called Nixie's.... They are a decoy that is streamed out behind a ship and basically causes so much noise it attracts torpedoes to it instead of the ship itself.
Now another thing about "Passive ECM" concerns the signature of a ship. It is actually called EMCON or EMmisions CONtrol. In total EMCON you shut down all forms of Radar and communications outside of the ship.
Now to the theories of the game....
ECM in game is just that.... IMO it is broadband "white noise"... pure and simple... it jams the sensors of the person trying to see the jammer and thats why you cannot "see" a jammer ship until it gets close enough to be seen visualy.
Now you are saying.... "Then how does ECCM work in game" Well folks here comes your physics/science lesson of the day. I understand it this way... Every ship, regardless of size, has a standard sensor suite.... it has a set detection value... as you add "ECCM Modules" you are basically upgrading not only the sensitivity but the power of the sensor..... this leads to what is commanly called "Burn Through" in the modern day world. Lets look at the idea in real world terms.
If Jammer Aircraft A has lets say, 10 power units, and starts to jam Radar Site B, who starts off with 5 Power Units, the Radar Site is now Jammed out. But if the Radar Site increases its power to say 20 poser units it will eventually "Burn Through" or sort out the Jamming to figure out what is real and what is false.
So if that Sensor Scout has 5 ECCM and the Bomber Scout has 1 ECM then guess what... the sensor suite on the Sensor Scout is better than the Jamming Suite on the Bomber so gues what... the Bomber is seen...
SO if you don't want to be seen then Jam the heck out of the enemy and if you want to see them then get more or better sensor suites... the system in place makes the most out of the above jargon and makes into a simple thing...
In conclusion, IMHO, the system in place makes the best of a complex system. I like the idea of graduating the jamming over distance which is just lke in real life as well as the ECCM. Now if you want to include a "Stealth Mode" in the game... you should do this... If you engage Stealth Mode you loose all Active ECM, Active Sensors (which btw was telling you where everyone else was and now you cannot tell where they are unless they still have their Active Sensors on) and you loose all outside comms ( you can receive messeges in game but cannot broadcast to others).
*thinks about Assault Cruisers in Stealth Mode sneaking up on Enemy Ships*
I hope this information and insight helps you, the programmers, to make the game a better place regarding ECM and ECCM.
Rocko Willis
_________________
|
Linna Yamazaka {Vice Admiral}
Vice Admiral
Raven Warriors
Joined: May 03, 2003
Posts: 415
From: killer
| Posted: 2004-12-01 19:23
very nice idea and explanations there Rocko Willis
, I think it NEEDS to be looked into and considererd for trying this into the game. I think the ideal of Flars and Chaff need to be used JUST FOR A TRIAL PERIOD. And see how they will work within the game. Yes i know it will incress the objects within the game as with cause headaches with the programing. BUT LETS AT LEAST GIVE IT A TRY BEFORE WE FLAME IT.
_________________
Two weeks™ Later and a new sig.
|
Fatal Rocko Willis
Fleet Admiral
Fatal Squadron
Joined: March 01, 2003
Posts: 1336
From: Kentucky
| Posted: 2004-12-05 05:48
Thanks for the vote of confidence... I am not sure how flares would be realistically used in DS since there are no "Heat Seaking" weapons...
I beleive ECM/ECCM should be kept the way they currently are... Including the idea of reduced effectiveness over distance... very realistic IMO...
Yes.. I think that making the ECM/ECCM rings veiwable to only the faction using them is a smart move... would you really see visible rings around a ship while it was using its ECM? It is basically a "Please Shoot Me" sign in contrary to the idea of ECM... along with the fact it may even ease the "items rendered"... you could make it a client side thing... like make it as a simple reminder type of visible thing... "if the rings are visible ECM is on"
Passive ECM is not ECM.. it is Emissions Control.... Passive ECM (Electronic Countermeasures) .. is by name, Active... since it counters something...
Now I could see Decoy's being employed... maybe a ship has like 5 if a Dreadnought class, 4 if a Cruiser, 3 if a Destroyer, 2 if a Frigate and 1 if a Scout.... not really sure if a Station could utilize a Decoy System since it is so huge to begin with... but maybe it could.....
Chaff could be used like the above.. or maybe just the decoy.... you guys chose.... 
Fatal Rocko Willis
_________________
|
|
English
Deutsch
Nederlands
)
