What's the problem with the current mechanics (and changes/features added in C#) that we're trying to fix here?
It is already possible to get stealthy ships through a defended JP. Jump distance is a thing and you can get to decent amounts relatively quickly if you then use small sized self-jumping ships with thermal dampened engines and cloaking device. They might avoid notice altogether or they can be far enough that they vanish out of sensor range quickly. In contract, you can also do it the brute force way, jumping in a dozen really fast ships via bunch of squadron jumps and then have them disperse, hoping that the defenders can't catch them all until they can vanish from sensors. If they have some PD with them, it is possible to stop small missile salvos. Depending on comparative tech levels between the opponents, either (or both) approaches can range for easy to impossible.
I wouldn't want to introduce a feature that makes either approach an automatic success. Plenty of German submarines were sunk when they tried to sneak past Gibraltar into the Mediterranean, to use the most famous example.
Now, I've personally never tried either approach seriously because, honestly, there is nothing for such raiders to do aside from reconnaissance. Outside of multi-faction Sol starts, convoys almost don't exist and even when they do, they are seldom crucial - because mass drivers are a thing. As for scouting purposes, it is very much possible and both approaches work. I guess with C# allowing orbital bombardments without missiles, we could use beam armed ships to bombard unguarded colonies into dust and hope our raiders have enough MSP to cover the 1% malfunction rate but that's pretty grim and certainly not something that would go with every game play style.
I never said it would be automatic (at least not in its current iteration). The idea here was to come up with a sustainable idea of an asymmetric warfare model that is better than what we currently have. One of the biggest problem with the current model is that you can reasonably get in but not out, more or less so it basically become a suicide mission.
Now.. against the AI it might not be a huge issue as it is not the best at defending JP all that much, but not everyone play only against the AI all the time.
I know that Steve have said he might like some sort of submarine or cloaking mechanic, I also know he has toyed with the first idea that I suggested as well. So this thread is about discussing that.
I don't think it is useful to just dismiss either idea just becasue one like the status quoe of JP defense is king and always will be, there are nothing that say that things could not change and new mechanics added for an even greater experience.
I get that some people are entrenched in the idea that it is boring with raiding enemies the likes if U-Boats or that ships potentially could bypass jump points. I know that Steve had som pretty interesting ideas in his Aurora II project of ships able to travel without jump gates. I actually think you could have both systems in a game and make it work if you are creative enough. But currently I'm more interesting in the U-Boat idea as it it quite interesting from a story perspective.
There is nothing particular wrong with how Aurora work right now and I never said so, but the current version don't have U-Boat like warfare or a very good system for something like it.
I do agree that such a system should not make JP defence obsolete, I don't want that. But I don't agree with some of the comment it can't be done as the cost of drawbacks from what has been suggested is huge, both from a logistical, industrial and research perspective. The benefit of Stealth scouting should be powerful when you consider the costs involved. Building a substantial fleet of cloaked ship would be very costly if compared with a conventional fleet, I don't think it would be viable if you had two powers of equal opportunity opposing each other, even if one side could cause some mayhem at the beginning of a war the other would likely win through conventional means in the end.
The feeling I get from some of the answers are mostly one of emotion and not rational. I respect if some people don't want to deal with raiders in their backwater or that they don't want to deal with a defence in depth system.
The cloaking system that I suggested so far could be defeated with a good enough cover of DSTS and patrol ships in important systems. You might need to put some research into anti-cloak technology but I don't think that would pose a huge issue.
I'm pretty sure there are those that would like to deal with a U-Boat like strategic warfare in addition to what Aurora offer today.
If you are just categorically against asymmetric warfare I respect that but I don't agree with that notion.
I think the discussion is better to keep in the direction of what to do to get that feeling IF Steve would find anything remotely like that to be interesting in the future.