Argument Thread OOC Future Tech Only

[Galla-]

Point-to-point lasers, or radios.

Like a boss.

[Ularn]

Point-to-point lasers, or radios.

Like a boss.

This. And for FTL communications we blast the signal through wormholes. That only works between specific systems though. To communicate between ships within a system you have to put up with the usual lightspeed lag.

[Arkania 5]

My Zerg nation is actually being controlled by inter dimensional starcraft Korean players.

[Feazanthia]

My Zerg nation is actually being controlled by inter dimensional starcraft Korean players.

That's it, we're dead.

No one can beat a Korean Zerg player.

[Ruthless Slaughter]

We're not dead yet! I'm calling Jim Raynor! Through insanely suicidal missions that should but don't end in failure he'll stop all the Zergs!

[Dbrought]

Boxer will build more marines and win

[OMGeverynameistaken]

Time for carrier spam!

[Azhuru]

Void cheese is best cheese for brotoss.

[Sertian]

Warp in some dark templars into their supply lines!

Still can't believe I got into old school platinum with that strategy alone.

[Red Talons]

This is why gravatic drives are fun, they don't have "thrust" in a conventional sense.

True (I use the same thing) but I still don't know why you'd want to put your starships in atmosphere. There seems no advantage to it and plenty that can go wrong.

three words, Close Air Support.

Have a battleship park a few dozen kilometers over the the combat zone, and bam, instant aerial artillery.

[Ularn]

True (I use the same thing) but I still don't know why you'd want to put your starships in atmosphere. There seems no advantage to it and plenty that can go wrong.

three words, Close Air Support.

Have a battleship park a few dozen kilometers over the the combat zone, and bam, instant aerial artillery.

They could accomplish the same task from orbit while being less vulnerable and also able to cover a larger area (i.e. the whole planet instead of a few square kilometres) so I still don't know why you'd want them that close and vulnerable.

[Rethan]

three words, Close Air Support.

Have a battleship park a few dozen kilometers over the the combat zone, and bam, instant aerial artillery.

They could accomplish the same task from orbit while being less vulnerable and also able to cover a larger area (i.e. the whole planet instead of a few square kilometres) so I still don't know why you'd want them that close and vulnerable.

Not everybody is that accurate with their fire unfortunately. My old school Militocracy had to have ships in-atmo for precision strikes. Otherwise they could only deploy city destroying firepower.

[Ularn]

They could accomplish the same task from orbit while being less vulnerable and also able to cover a larger area (i.e. the whole planet instead of a few square kilometres) so I still don't know why you'd want them that close and vulnerable.

Not everybody is that accurate with their fire unfortunately. My old school Militocracy had to have ships in-atmo for precision strikes. Otherwise they could only deploy city destroying firepower.

I can't see why it would be difficult. All we're talking about is a MIRV warhead with guided submunitions.

[Risen Britannia]

They could accomplish the same task from orbit while being less vulnerable and also able to cover a larger area (i.e. the whole planet instead of a few square kilometres) so I still don't know why you'd want them that close and vulnerable.

Not everybody is that accurate with their fire unfortunately. My old school Militocracy had to have ships in-atmo for precision strikes. Otherwise they could only deploy city destroying firepower.

I'm assuming that the weapons in question are the same that are used to shoot at other ships whilst in space. If they are then they should have no issue with accuracy when aiming at ground targets

[Rethan]

Not everybody is that accurate with their fire unfortunately. My old school Militocracy had to have ships in-atmo for precision strikes. Otherwise they could only deploy city destroying firepower.

I'm assuming that the weapons in question are the same that are used to shoot at other ships whilst in space. If they are then they should have no issue with accuracy when aiming at ground targets

It's not accuracy so much as firepower. A weapon I fire to destroy a starship is not the same weapon I want to be firing as support for ground troops. Closer in, it might be possible for lesser, non-ship destroying weaponry to be used instead. Point defence turrets and so forth.

Personally, on the ground my War Diamonds engage at such range that if the enemy is close enough that the Diamond needs close air support, I'm doing something horribly, horribly wrong.

[Ularn]

Whenever my torpedo-wielding ships (Destroyers and above) are being sent on a mission involving capturing or defending a planet part of their missile loadout gets replaced with a missile designed for taking out planetside targets. it's essentially a MIRV with between three and a dozen guided missiles of varying size depending on the situation. It's still phenomenally powerful and you probably wouldn't want to rely on it at a tactical level but it basically fulfils the role quite well. Anything not requiring that level of firepower can be dealt with using traditional close air support like fighters and gunships, or drop pods, which can also be fired from missile tubes and carry a trio of ATGMs and heavy autogausses.

Frankly, sending an entire ship into a planet's atmosphere just so it can point its point defence at the enemy seems like a massive waste of its potential.

[Red Talons]

Well, lets take my heavy cruiser as an example. Its got three spinals and 12 turrets that are the scale to be ship to ship. These would excel at rapid fire tactical strikes against enemy positions. Now, the smaller missile turrets would excel at providing air superiority. Then, the fifty odd point defence guns would be used to provide close air support strikes against enemy infantry or vehicles. I've just filled three combat roles with a single ship parked in the atmosphere. Now, if I were to park five or six across an area, they could provide covering fire for each other, as well as for troops and armour on the ground. I now don't need to use a small air-force or deploy artillery on the ground, and my ground forces have the added benefit of eyes in the sky to give them a heads up for things like enemy ambushes or even things like land-mines or the like.

[Feazanthia]

I prefer to keep things specialized. My yewonrozt capital ships are purely for space combat. A commanding officer may requisition a few kinetic smart MIRVs for their forward magazines, but primarily a yewonrozt is going to carry a handful of thermonuclear warning shot warheads and a boatload of missile buses for primarily Kuun-Lamaat laserhead kamikaze attack drones. A yewonrozt would almost never be used to directly attack a planet unless no other option was available, and it would certainly never do it with ship-to-ship weaponry unless there were dire circumstances (the Kiith are very loathe to drop nuclear or thermonuclear weapons on inhabited worlds they intend to take)

Now an armed transport or even a mothership will have dedicated orbit-to-surface batteries primarily armed with kinetic smart MIRVs. However, these vessels are generally also carrying the invasion force, and primarily close air support comes from dedicated atmospheric chassis which are much more versatile than a vacuum-hardened ones and better able to avoid enemy fire.

[Risen Britannia]

If shields stop all incoming matter (KE) and EM (lasers).... How the funk are your sensors and targeting devices going work?

[Arthropoda Ingens]

If shields stop all incoming matter (KE) and EM (lasers).... How the funk are your sensors and targeting devices going work?

The shield produces a signal mirroring low levels of incoming radiation to feed to the ship's sensors, or serves as a sensory field in the first place?

[Otagia]

If shields stop all incoming matter (KE) and EM (lasers).... How the funk are your sensors and targeting devices going work?

QE'd sensor drones? Extruding sensor masts through the shield? There's plenty of methods, even for perfect shields.

[Risen Britannia]

If shields stop all incoming matter (KE) and EM (lasers).... How the funk are your sensors and targeting devices going work?

The shield produces a signal mirroring low levels of incoming radiation to feed to the ship's sensors, or serves as a sensory field in the first place?

If your shields let a % of everything through that's going lower the effectiveness of your shields . It will also mean that as 90% (random %) is being blocked out, communication signals will have to be allot stronger.

and I don't really get how a shield could act as a sensor

If shields stop all incoming matter (KE) and EM (lasers).... How the funk are your sensors and targeting devices going work?

QE'd sensor drones? Extruding sensor masts through the shield? There's plenty of methods, even for perfect shields.

Sensor drones would have that same problem that they have to broadcast through the shields. Having extruding sensor masts outside your shields means that parts of your ship can be blasted off by incoming weapons fire, and unlike other bits of the ship sensor masts cant really be armoured.

[Rethan]

Sensor drones would have that same problem that they have to broadcast through the shields.

QE doesn't work that way. A QE'd sensor drone cannot (as far as I am, aware) be jammed or intercepted. It'll transmit through shields just fine, just make sure it's outside the shields.

[Risen Britannia]

Sensor drones would have that same problem that they have to broadcast through the shields.

QE doesn't work that way. A QE'd sensor drone cannot (as far as I am, aware) be jammed or intercepted. It'll transmit through shields just fine, just make sure it's outside the shields.

so what QE then...?

[Rethan]

QE doesn't work that way. A QE'd sensor drone cannot (as far as I am, aware) be jammed or intercepted. It'll transmit through shields just fine, just make sure it's outside the shields.

so what QE then...?

Quantum Entanglement. Particle A is entangled with Particle B. Alterations to Particle B will effect Particle A and vice versa, essentially transmitting data without...transmitting anything.

That's a reeeeeeally basic way of describing it. Someone else may correct me.

Edit: Courtesy of Feazanthia on the IRC, "quantum entanglement does not transmit faster-than-light. And that an entanglement comm would be incapable of "broadcasting" anything. It requires a specific transmitter that can only broadcast to a specific receiver, and at the speed of light"

So basically, it's not useful as a mass transmitter for all purposes. Every pair of particles is only capable of transmitting within the pair, and is limited to the speed of light. So if you have a hundred sensor drones, you need a hundred pairs of particles.