Requesting evaluation/elaboration on old tech

[Toshiro]

In my recent thread, "Kirie and Keiko Update + Weapon Update", I learned that the Ke-M2-W2907-SDMM Subspace Detonating Mini-Missile and the Type 1 AS-7-1-SDM Torpedo were considered to still be canon in spite of the fact that they made holes in barriers, collapsed wormholes, and disabled FTL use. Specifically, when discussing the similarly equipped El-Z8-1a Adrast-Type Heavy Torpedo submission (currently on hold for unrelated reasons) @Wes confirmed this here.

I'm not complaining about the fact this technology exists, as it seems that @Fred has previously used it without issue and @FrostJaeger has defined what seem to be reasonable limitations (including a time limit) on its use in his submission. My issue is that there seems to be no standard, particularly on the older articles, and that these missiles are not among what I thought was the commonly held idea that "Anti-FTL only exists with the use of a gravitation beam projector or naturally within a star system or celestial body's hill sphere". As such, the older articles need to be re-evaluated with this in mind, but a discussion may be required first.

Specifically, I don't know if the barrier disabling properties of the missile travel with the ship or stick to the point in space time in which they were detonated. I also don't know the time limits of the old missiles. I ask Fred to elaborate how he actually uses these missiles in RP to help codify this standard.

Full disclosure, I also have a secondary minor concern in that an updated version of the old Link Siphon that I'm working on uses wormholes for things like power, weapons, and propulsion on the premise that the concept of wormhole disabling was dead, but since one part of the wormhole is always anchored and sustained inside a physical ring mounted on or (usually) inside the ship anyway...I'm fairly sure I can reasonably manage a way not to leave the vessel disabled with one of these missiles using that idea. Just putting that out there so no one calls me out on it later, thinking I had some ulterior motive. This part can also be discussed here if I'm in error though.

 

[Fred]

Like I said in the other thread:

I think I'm one of the heaviest user of Subspace Detonator-type technology in our community. Here's how I think it can be adapted.

Subspace Detonator are an electronic-type of warhead. They can be shot down, and usually harmlessly so. When activation conditions are satisfied (often collision or proximity to a target), a spherical fizzle will occur around the triggerpoint, and the projectile itself is rendered useless.

The area of effect is usually tied to the tier of the guided projectile. The most common is the SDMM, which stands for Subspace Detonating Mini-Missile, and it results in nullifying the barrier of a power armor. An SDMM being used on a larger mecha would create a power armor-sized gap in its barrier defense. Then, there's me an SD device meant to disable mecha barriers, and would only have partial effect on a larger target. Then the starship version, and the capital vessel version.

As far as the question of barrier facing goes, my answer is simple: is it hit, or is it not hit? If it is, you lose that facing.

I've inspired a sense that subspace detonators of a signicantly smaller payload than their target won't be as effective. Can power armor SDMM make holes in a ship's barrier? Sure. But they won't be very big/a power armor will usually barely squeeze through. It's a case where I want to promote using the appropriate tool, or using a multiple SDMM volley to achieve a satisfactory result.

Another point of interest is that Subspace Detonators disable barriers and engines if they are functioning. One precaution against such an attack is to disable the propulsion unit/deactivate the barrier.

The duration is kind of flexible: as a GM, I make it last about a posting turn. Meaning, after I made an action resolution post, I let everyone post, and then in my next resolution post, the SD effect will have waned away. Roughly, 10 seconds? That metric is mostly inspired off DRv2's "Damage-per-10sec" approach.

That said, a Subspace Detonator does not cause damage that depletes a barrier; it prevents it from functioning. Once the barrier comes back online, it's as potent as it was before it was knocked out.

I have no experience with the anti-wormhole properties of the Subspace Detonators. I've never paid attention to it, and never found much use for it.

 

[Zack]

These seem to be really old articles.


What I think this really boils down to is that we need to set FTL rules and then stick with those rules instead of changing them every time someone has a question about them.


Pretty much everything in the setting is tied into how FTL works, and small changes that have big effects on how the setting is portrayed. We won't have a consistent setting without consistent FTL rules. I would say 'stick with what wes has said about FTL rules' but we've got two statement that seem to contradict each other with Subspace detonators being able to be used as Anti-FTL and there no longer being anti-ftl in the setting.


The trend seems to be going back towards having wormholes and such. And I don't think subspace detonators are going to go away unless there is a serious push to get rid of them. If you're going to make a new article for them, I'd suggest you give them a DRv3 value allowing them to negate X amount of shields so they at least fall in line with other weapons.

 

[FrostJaeger]

[...]

What I think this really boils down to is that we need to set FTL rules and then stick with those rules instead of changing them every time someone has a question about them.

We've used the same set of FTL rules for the past six years, @Zack - and I'm fairly certain numerous questions were asked about them during those six years.

[...] I would say 'stick with what wes has said about FTL rules' but we've got two statement that seem to contradict each other with Subspace detonators being able to be used as Anti-FTL and there no longer being anti-ftl in the setting.

According to this section of the Starship Combat Guide, there is anti-FTL weaponry in the setting in the form of graviton beams - and I've already submitted an update that, among other things, adds subspace detonators to the list of allowed anti-FTL weaponry.

The trend seems to be going back towards having wormholes and such.

Do you have any evidence that supports this claim, @Zack?

[...] If you're going to make a new article for them, I'd suggest you give them a DRv3 value allowing them to negate X amount of shields so they at least fall in line with other weapons.

Didn't @Fred literally just say otherwise in his post, @Zack?