The problem, as I see it, is that the usefulness of such a weapon will vary based upon the difficulty the target will have in counteracting the "shift" effect. Thus, a consistent cost is difficult to determine (but I'm willing to listen to any suggestions).

The first step is to determine what exactly an ELINT/Scout ship would DO in game terms...

I think we discussed something similar to your Scout idea here, a long while ago.  I believe the notion of being able to buy extra Searchlights has also been proposed for scouts (but again, pricing was an issue there).

On the contrary, that's interesting. A bit too strong, but the ideas are good.

I'm still thinking about the gravitic shifter (and I should have made two different posts... :roll: ). As for the scout, it should be something not too strong enough in order to avoid ruining a game.

Marc

Ok, after having thought about it for a bit more (and having consumed a great
deal more coffee) I came up with this for scouts:

Special Equipment: Electronic Warfare:
Electronic Warfare equipment is employed by combat scout ships to improve the
combat capabilities or survivability of themselves or other vessels. During the
orders phase the controlling player selects one mode for the Electronic Warfare
Equipment; Offensive, Defensive, or Jamming. During the Combat Phase a scout vessel with
Electronic Warfare Equipment in Offensive mode may increase the reduce the ACC
numbers of a vessel's weapons by 1 (so a weapon which normally have a 4+ to hit
now hits on a 3+) against a single target. Alternately, a scout vessel employing its Electronic Warfare
Equipment in Defensive mode selects an enemy vessel which has all of its weapons
ACC numbers raised by 1 (so a weapon which normally has an ACC of 4+ now hits on
a 5+) due to the scout's electronic interference. In Jamming Mode the area surrounding the scout vessel is treated as a Dust Cloud (see terrain) to a distance of 10 hexes from the scout. This affects all ships within that area, friend or foe (though the ship initiating the Jamming is not affected).
Vessels with Electronic Warfare special equipment ignore the penalties of
Stealth equipped ships.
Additional Electronic Warfare special equipment on a vessel has no additional effect other than redundancy.

As you can see I was thinking along the same lines of making it a single piece of equipment, but with a different twist. I have no idea what the best way to point or SU this would be!
Cheers,
Erik
Edit: fixed a grey area

Yeah, I see this as one of those things someone might throw out to try and get away from an enemy or to use when you have a great range advantage to keep your foe from getting to shoot back.

See, I was thinking more of B5Wars ELINT Ships, most of which tend to be bigger. How about if in offensive mode (rather than inventing a new mode) an option would allow a friendly ship to ignore stealth instead of adding a bonus to ACC?

How can you survive without the elixer of life???? 
Erik

Either way, it is more about flavor: a tangible representation of powerful, specialized sensors, and should work the same, more or less.

My bad,  :oops: , I didn't mean to assume...

Erik

I have a couple of issues with the proposal for EW Equipment as it currently stands:

[*] Defensive: This should probably inflict a -1 penalty to to-hit rolls made by the affected ship.  There exists no other effect in the game (that I know of) that outright raises to-hit values.  Additionally, inflicting a penalty means it can be countered by Fire Control.

[*] Offensive: Debatably balanced against Fire Control...  the ability to gain a +1 to hit with any and all weapons is much more powerful than negating a penalty (you could, for example, load up ships with 6+ weapons and then use Offensive Scouts to spot for them, doubling their accuracy.  You'd basically need to make EWEQ large and expensive enough that you could fill a battleship hull with 6+ weapons and an EWEQ, and have it be roughly as expensive as a battleship hull full of 5+ weapons).  The targeting limitation may balance it, but it worries me from a balance perspective.  I'd probably go with "Can give a friendly ship Fire Control" from a balance and simplicity perspective.

[*] Jamming: This just has some unclear rules involved, since the basis (Dust Cloud) is a full-map effect rather than a limited area.  If you're inside the jamming and fire at a target outside the jamming, does it count double?  Do you just double the hexes that were jammed that the shot passes through?  What happens if you shoot in one side and out the other?  Basically, edge cases (in both possible senses of the phrase).
Also, I could see this being useful for getting fighters into position if your opponent favors long-range anti-fighter weapons, or potentially for neutralizing enemy AFBs (depending on the ruling of effects of dust clouds on AFBs; I think by RAW it wouldn't effect them, since they effect targets in 'an adjacent hex', not 'at range 1') if you can get your jammers close enough (I see cheap low-hull, no weapons, high-engines ships with just an EWEQ and maybe Stealth or CM for this purpose - accelerate them up to fighter speeds and have them move in with a fighter wave to provide cover.  Buy and field them in bulk to make sure your fighters stay covered).

I think my biggest issues with it as a whole, though, are balance and Dan's "One Trait, One Effect" rule of thumb.  I would definitely split it into three components with separate functions and separate pricing, because as one monolithic component, it's 1) fantastically powerful (in part because it's really versatile, and in part because its functions are all strong) and 2) it's really complicated for just one thing.  Plus, the versatility would make it really, really hard to price (though anything that grants an ability to another ship is going to be impossible to price perfectly, unless you have its price be a function of the composition of the fleet that is fielding it, which is just a nightmare from a paperwork perspective).

I do like JR's notion of limited range on the scout abilities, though "Target Lock" is totally foreign (I don't have the KA/RA books, so if it's something in there, that would explain it).  Bonuses to finding Cloaked vessels make sense as well; that's probably one of the more elegant implementations of anti-cloak technology possible.

While we're at it, I'm going to throw out the notion of hyperdrive interdiction - when active, subtracts 2 (or some other constant, or (1d6 mod 3) plus 1, or ???) from the hyperdrive build-up pools of all ships within some number of hexes.  Probably a 5% SU, x1.15 or x1.2 (or so) ORAT ability.  Alternatively, you could buy hyperdrive interdiction nodes kind of like mine factors (at a flat cost per node).  Then, each node can be used during the shooting phase to make an 'attack' against a target with difficulty varying by range like Teleporters (maybe 1d6+2 or 2d6 vs. range to target).  A success reduces the target's hyperdrive pool by 1.  Or make them work just like mines that inflict hyperdrive pool damage to any target in the field during the end phase.  Kind of special purpose, and I don't see myself ever using it, but it does fit in some universes (I believe SW has hyperspace interdictors, for example).

After thinking about it more, it seems that if you look at converting source material, they all treat "combat scouts" a bit differently. Maybe in the end it is easiest to create a setting specific set of scout abilities and require some special equipment to operate them. I was also thinking of what was mentioned earlier that 1 special equipment equals 1 game effect (something like that) and I thought maybe the answer is to make several pieces Special Equipment that can do different things that can be built in to simulate Scout abilites. In other words, an "Offensive" scout equipment for increasing fire control, a "defensive" for loaning protection, a "Jamming" for increasing range, an "Advanced Sensors" for increasing detection abilities (anti-cloak, etc). This more "modular" approach would also leave room for some "scouts" that are more or less capable in absolute terms of electronic warfare. Anyway, just thinking out loud as it were.
Erik

Quite right. I was never happy with the "Scout" designation for the tactical side of space combat; I always liked the old B5Wars "ELINT" a bit more. It seemed more descriptive and decidedly more sci-fi sounding. There are strategic scout-like functions that are outside of Starmada's theater, but I think "Electronic Intelligence" or "Electronic Warfare" vessels could certainly have a place in a fleet as long as the game doesn't become mired in ECM/ECCM/EW nightmare calculations.

     In modern navies just about every blue water vessel is large and sophisticated enough to be its own EW platform to some degree (and this is much as games like Starfire seem to present their EW, with "Scouts" being a strategic asset). While "navies in space" is certainly the most approach to space combat, there are settings that have specialized combat scouts. These settings tend to have more specialized warships in general, like B5Wars and SFU, with more "niche-y" design types (witness the myriad of Earthforce Hyperions!).
Wait, did I have any point at all here?

     Oh yeah, I think that it all comes down to the setting you want to represent or possibly convert as to whether such a ship/function makes any sense. If you are doing a straight up conversion of an established source which features Scout-ELINT-EW whatever you want to call, it would seem to be appropriate. If you are creating your own universe (my isn't that a bit pretentious!) than there is absolutely nothing to say that it must be included, just like any other rule or mechanic.

I personally would prefer to differentiate the "Scout/ELINT" capabilities from the standard FC and CM as this would make them different and "special" compared to the equipment on a "regular" ship. Then again, I guess maybe the ability to loan them to another ship would automatically make them special, especially in a setting where the regular warship has neither.
Erik