Taking the Bridge
Jim Vassilakos
(19 Aug 2015 18:31 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Taking the Bridge
W. Hopper
(19 Aug 2015 19:10 UTC)
|
RE: [TML] Taking the Bridge
Anthony Jackson
(19 Aug 2015 21:00 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Taking the Bridge
Grimmund
(19 Aug 2015 21:05 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Taking the Bridge
Dan Corrin
(19 Aug 2015 21:28 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Taking the Bridge
rupert.boleyn@xxxxxx
(19 Aug 2015 23:53 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Taking the Bridge Tim (20 Aug 2015 03:26 UTC)
|
RE: [TML] Taking the Bridge
Jeff Rowse
(20 Aug 2015 06:34 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Taking the Bridge
Tim
(20 Aug 2015 09:38 UTC)
|
RE: [TML] Taking the Bridge
Ewan Quibell
(20 Aug 2015 11:04 UTC)
|
RE: [TML] Taking the Bridge
Phil Pugliese
(20 Aug 2015 12:26 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Taking the Bridge
Kelly St. Clair
(20 Aug 2015 16:09 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Taking the Bridge
Phil Pugliese
(20 Aug 2015 19:01 UTC)
|
RE: [TML] Taking the Bridge
Jeff Rowse
(21 Aug 2015 12:34 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Taking the Bridge
Richard Aiken
(20 Aug 2015 20:46 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Taking the Bridge
shadow@xxxxxx
(20 Aug 2015 16:40 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Taking the Bridge
Jeffrey Schwartz
(21 Aug 2015 15:24 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Taking the Bridge
Grimmund
(21 Aug 2015 16:11 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Taking the Bridge
Jeffrey Schwartz
(21 Aug 2015 16:23 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Taking the Bridge
Bruce Johnson
(21 Aug 2015 17:02 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Taking the Bridge
Grimmund
(21 Aug 2015 17:59 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Taking the Bridge
Bruce Johnson
(21 Aug 2015 20:29 UTC)
|
Re: [TML] Taking the Bridge
Richard Aiken
(25 Aug 2015 02:55 UTC)
|
On Wed, Aug 19, 2015 at 11:31:19AM -0700, Jim Vassilakos wrote: > Yet another dumb question from yours truly... > > Imagine that you're in the middle of a shipboard combat aboard a small > merchant or scout vessel. IYTU, how important is it to take the bridge? Not very important in the short term, in most cases. There are primary control systems physically located near the bridge, but there are nearly always backups elsewhere, typically in an engineering room. Those will usually be less comprehensive and convenient, but still usable. Eventually, access to the systems will yield control over those systems to someone who knows exactly what they're doing and are willing to make physical changes to do it, but it nearly always won't be just a matter of using the controls to do whatever they like. Control over the ship's systems is far more important than the bridge itself, and can be established from elsewhere -- though perhaps with greater difficulty. There are great variations in what systems there are or how they can be used or abused between different ships. Even purely passive things like internal sensors can give a large tactical advantage to the side that can read them. Typically the degree of control will be roughly correlated with tech level, and the most advanced ships may even have the onboard facilities to create new capabilities to some extent. The usual advantages will involve actions like removing most of the air from chosen rooms, introducing airborne drugs, corrosives, visibility or other sensor blockers, remotely locking or opening hatches, altering the gravity or inertial compensation, sonic attacks or propaganda through internal speakers, allowing their own bots through ducts and denying the reverse, jamming communications, calling for external help, and having the capability of putting the ship as a whole into a situation more unfavourable to the other side. They can also destroy the ship more easily, though it's likely that either side can do that to a smallish ship given the will to do so. A well prepared enemy should be able to negate most of the effects of these actions, but they will make everything significantly more difficult. - Tim