On Thu, Jun 25, 2015 at 12:37 AM, Greg Chalik <mrg3105@gmail.com> wrote:

> I see a vastly more 'populated' system.

As you will.  Again, disparate assumptions.  But ships are going to be
more expensive than ground cars or grav vehicles.  Even if you have
several thousand ships in a system, keeping track of the vast majority
of them is relatively trivial.

Can you break surveilance using terrain?  Probably, if there is an
ansteroid belt or other clutter.

Is there a point to doing so?  Probably not.  File your flight plan,
stay on your flight plan, ammend your flight plan if you want to
change it.  As long as you stick close to your flight plan, nobody
particularly *cares* were you go or how long you stay.

Every ship is a kinetic weapon.  System controls tracks them.

> But, what if "if a squadron of warships appears, you should be able to ID
> and track them when their EM wave front crosses your sensor
> pickets.", but its not a squadron of warships?
> What if the ships are not even a squadron?
> What if they don't even look like warships?
> What if they appear at different times and for different reasons?

If you jump into a big, controlled system, your ship will be tracked
from emergence, until it makes port somewhere, or jumps out again.
System Traffic Control will ping you when you get in comm range, for
ID and flight plan, and possibly assign you a flight plan.

STC is not a monoblock sittting on the mainworld or in orbit above it.
  It  can't work that way; it has to be a disperesed structure.  The
closest node reacts first, but the other nodes get the same
information.

Communications are slow but continuous.  It may take hours to get an
*answer* but the data is still flowing back and forth regardless.

> By the way, where would you suggest looking for affordability calculations?

 Trillion Credit Squadron had budget calculations.

Dan

--

"Any sufficiently advanced parody is indistinguishable from a genuine
kook." -Alan Morgan