Tactical Intelligence
This is being posted in a new suggestions topic instead of under a version thread do to the scope of changes involved.
In older versions we would get internal data on ships scanned by active sensors fairly freely. (Engines, launchers, reactors, etc etc etc) We were getting way too much data for very little effort. This first lead to active scans being a hostile act and ultimately a significant cut back on the tactical intelligence data collected. With the cut back, if my memory is correct, tactical intelligence was limited to data that has an existing “signature” (engine thermal, sensor em, shield em, hull cross section, etc) and any additional data that can be calculated from those signatures (speed being the main one).
My proposal is to expand the concept of signatures. Beam fire, missile launches, small craft launches, etc should have some form of a signature that can be applied to the tactical intelligence database, provided that you have a ship with an appropriate sensor within range to record said signature. Not all beams should have the same signature base. Lasers could have both thermal and em while microwaves might only have em.
An additional item could be the seperation of activating fire control from active sensor activation. Search and fire control should be able to be identified by signature type.
These signatures could then be associated with a specific hull type to differentiate classes. When first detected hulls that have the same base signatures would be lumped into the same class until such time as they display different characteristics. (i.e. 2 hulls that are 10k ton with the same engine thermal would list as the same class until they show different shield em, weapons signature, sensor signature, etc) Perhaps a race level screen to set rules for defining when the tactical intel screen should reassign ships detected to different classes.
Pro:
• Realistic tactical intelligence gathering
• Provides data for refining the AI’s target assignments
• Still provides a functional level of “fog of war”
Con:
• Significant database and programming change
• Huge potential for heavy CPU usage
I suspect the last con I've listed to be a killer for this proposal.