suggestion : Cloaking devices

Czert · Tue Mar 28, 2006 6:58 pm

like klingons.
Yours thought ?

Revolver · Tue Mar 28, 2006 7:47 pm

just radar cloaking or full visual...would there be any way to detect them, or would their cloak turn off upon firing of weapons?

Yugi · Tue Mar 28, 2006 9:38 pm

Czert wrote:like klingons.
Yours thought ?

Well, you already get something similar (stealth shields), but a fully cloaking version would be highly useful. There should, of course, be a race with a device that can de-cloak you, or tell where you are.
Two more drawbacks there should be are:
- No shields
- No weapons
This would help prevent you from being too powerful.
Maybe the cloaking device could be a shield, acting as a normal shield when not in use, but when in use it might only be half or quarter of it's normal strength.
There should also be another race that uses cloaking devices, and a weapon available that can track on to cloaked ships. Maybe a missile...

EDIT: BTW, the concept has been talked about endlessly at the UTF.

the_holy_thom · Tue Mar 28, 2006 10:17 pm

An enemy using a cloak would make a nice change, if they werent too regular. The more variety, the better. Up to a point, anyway.

palmiche · Tue Mar 28, 2006 11:05 pm

I like it!!!

F50 · Wed Mar 29, 2006 4:07 am

what if that enemy could teleport short distances as well

OddBob · Wed Mar 29, 2006 5:30 am

what if that enemy could teleport short distances as well

Yeah, and shoot flaming gobs of space cheese, and if it had a briefcase.

Jumpdrives are rare, it's unlikely that an entire force would be equipped with them, and in-game, humans don't control that technology. I would prefer a cloak that is radar only and doesn't either give an Enemies approaching warning or show the shots on radar, when used by enemies, and simply reduced detection range of enemies to slightly slightly less than visual range. It doesn't matter if you can fire or not, because when you shoot enemites, they'll come to investigate, thus getting into visual range and being able to see you just fine.

The concept has been discussed rarely if ever at UTF, and I frankly find it absurd. I've learned to stop trying to prevent it though.

palmiche · Wed Mar 29, 2006 6:07 am

If I'm a fighter pilot, I use a cloacking device, among other things, to avoid been caught by the enemy's radar and most important: by the targeting system. Besides, if the enemy cannot fully "perceive" me, the amount of damage recieived must not be the same, unless the enemy has one of the exhaust-tracking topedoes from one of the StarTrek movies. I'dont care if the enemy has a "visual" on me as long as he wont be able to aim his omnidirectional cannon with the precision required to open a big hole in the center of my cockpit or to blast away one of my engines.

OddBob · Thu Mar 30, 2006 3:23 am

If I'm a fighter pilot, I use a cloacking device, among other things, to avoid been caught by the enemy's radar and most important: by the targeting system. Besides, if the enemy cannot fully "perceive" me, the amount of damage recieived must not be the same, unless the enemy has one of the exhaust-tracking topedoes from one of the StarTrek movies. I'dont care if the enemy has a "visual" on me as long as he wont be able to aim his omnidirectional cannon with the precision required to open a big hole in the center of my cockpit or to blast away one of my engines.

'visual' = detected.
Anything you can detect, you can shoot at. If your targeting system can't detect a target, you probably can't. Your ship doesn't even have windows. There is no real 'visual' contact. "Visual range" ingame is on-screen.

Anything detected is targetable. What you're talking about is electronic countermeasures. Jamming and the like. Why invent a magic cloakng device when you can have an ECM pod?

Thu Mar 30, 2006 3:42 am

this reminds me of my offset shield generator sudgestion. Basicly it would show the ship at an offset of where the ship really was. I think that would be a fun thing to fight against.

Frits · Thu Mar 30, 2006 5:45 am

I think you'd be used to it after fighting it twice.
What's this thread about anyway? i never watch star trek.

palmiche · Thu Mar 30, 2006 5:45 am

'visual' = detected.

In the AirForce argot "having a visual" means exaclty that, having spotted the target with the eyes or having the target within eye sight, not the radar or whatever mean the use to "locate" and destroy it.

Anything detected is targetable.

In the 2-D of Transcendence you can spot a ship behind a planet and sure you can open fire, but the only result you'll get is the waste of valuable ammo.

If your targeting system can't detect a target, you probably can't.

Radars were introduced in late WWII, the previuos inexistence of this useful invention didn't stop airforces from both sides to shoot down the other side's planes. Both sides had similar tech levels. In Transcendence you can acquire (most of the time) the tech to match your opponent's tech level.

our ship doesn't even have windows. There is no real 'visual' contact.

I cant't agree with that, because you can always have cameras, even long range ones. Have you seen the "windows" of the USAF SR-71 BackBird?

What you're talking about is electronic countermeasures.

Kind of. But ask yourself what a Cloacking Devise actually is.

Why invent a magic cloakng device when you can have an ECM pod?

Good point!!! You have just generated a brand new idea!!!

Finally I must say: when I posted I was using my IMAGINATION. I'm no pilot and we all are Starship Captains in our IMAGINATION only!!!.

the_holy_thom · Thu Mar 30, 2006 7:47 am

you can always have cameras, even long range ones.

*whisper* space is fairly dark you know... there will definately be times when cameras become completely useless

Thu Mar 30, 2006 8:58 am

well in space where we are (near inner planets) it is quite brite. At earth distance it would be just like daytime (just no scattering). So I would have to disagree with you on that thom at least for the places we are talking about. (the sun is about 500 light seconds from earth to give you a referance)

palmiche · Thu Mar 30, 2006 9:29 am

Betelgeuse wrote:it is quite brite

Very good point!!! Betelgeuse, with your post there is no need for mine, but is just a matter of honor

...

the_holy_thom wrote:there will definately be times when cameras become completely useless

Think of cameras not in the way youre used to when whatching TV but in the way of pictures of distant stars, and even black holes, all taken from earth stations. There is a little (!?!?!?) difference in size but in the game we all are captains of not-yet-invented spaceships and so we may have not-yet-invented cameras also, cameras fitting a hand but with powerful enought lens to see crearly from side to side of an star system. That's why you are able to see a spaceship behind a planet, behind a huge space station, of even behind the star of the system, because science-fiction games have a lot of rules and devices not-yet-invented about which nobody asks any questions, but all comfortably installed in your ship, so if your are not a ship's systems engineer or an inventor, you have no reason to know about such devices, how they work, or why they make your life easier. And we all are just Ship Captains!!!