Argument Thread OOC Future Tech Only

[Ruthless Slaughter]

The Raven Class is...*Dips into Your Navy's Primary Starship Thread*

Length: 60km
Width: 20km wing tip to wing tip
Height: 10km at the bow

Depending on the planet I would alter tides with that thing. Mind you it's our "primary" inasmuch as it's the vessel we're most known for. We don't have more than 15 or so.

[Senestrum]

This. Very much this. While my capital ships are too large to enter a planet's orbit let alone atmosphere, we don't go out of the way to put them in more danger than a very noticeable 60Km target should be. It may be powered by rule of cool but it is still used and handled like the warship that it is.

"capital ships are too large to enter a planet's orbit"
wait what?

Obviously his ships are so large that planets would orbit them.

[Arthropoda Ingens]

"capital ships are too large to enter a planet's orbit"
wait what?

Obviously his ships are so large that planets would orbit them.

The Yo Momma class of orbit-altering interstellar spaceboats.

[Balrogga]

*Restrains self from posting picture of my planet killer, The Bal Rogga...*

[YellowApple]

-snip-

On many levels this holds true. However, there are some situations where atmospheric entry is, if not necessary, then still desirable enough to be worth the diminished large-scale tactical and strategic capacity.

First, there's the issue of deployment. A large ship containing a landing force will want to be as close to the planet's surface as possible without getting blown up in the process, meaning that orbit is a bare minimum, if not actually entering the atmosphere to puke out dropships, drop pods, atmospheric bombers/gunships, etc., else said dropships, drop pods, and atmospheric bombers/gunships will have to travel further, which not only burns more fuel but also increases the duration of exposure to enemy fire (especially with drop pods, where the longer the thing's in the air, the longer the enemy has to predict its trajectory and shoot it down).

Second, there's an issue of range. Generally speaking, the closer you are to the target, the less guesswork you have to do to hit said target with a weapon that is not instantaneous. Even light/radio from Earth's surface to geostationary orbit has a delay of a few milliseconds, which - though it might not seem like much - could make the difference between hit and miss. Conventionally-launched kinetic projectiles will be - in most cases - even slower, resulting in even more delay between firing and impact.

In both cases Your Mileage May Vary, but they both are certainly worth noting.

[Ularn]

-snip-

On many levels this holds true. However, there are some situations where atmospheric entry is, if not necessary, then still desirable enough to be worth the diminished large-scale tactical and strategic capacity.

First, there's the issue of deployment. A large ship containing a landing force will want to be as close to the planet's surface as possible without getting blown up in the process, meaning that orbit is a bare minimum, if not actually entering the atmosphere to puke out dropships, drop pods, atmospheric bombers/gunships, etc., else said dropships, drop pods, and atmospheric bombers/gunships will have to travel further, which not only burns more fuel but also increases the duration of exposure to enemy fire (especially with drop pods, where the longer the thing's in the air, the longer the enemy has to predict its trajectory and shoot it down).

The ship is going to be burning fuel while it's in the atmosphere as well, much more fuel than the total amount being used by all the dropships together. Further, as I stated, putting the ship in atmosphere means that the enemy can now shoot at it as well as the dropships, and if your ship goes down then your entire invasion force goes with it since anything not killed in the explosion will be squashed by several megatons of burning metal landing on it. Considering that risk, I don't think it's possible to justify a starship entering atmosphere for the sake of a marginal (perhaps even non-existent) increase in the ease of deployment.

Second, there's an issue of range. Generally speaking, the closer you are to the target, the less guesswork you have to do to hit said target with a weapon that is not instantaneous. Even light/radio from Earth's surface to geostationary orbit has a delay of a few milliseconds, which - though it might not seem like much - could make the difference between hit and miss. Conventionally-launched kinetic projectiles will be - in most cases - even slower, resulting in even more delay between firing and impact.

In both cases Your Mileage May Vary, but they both are certainly worth noting.

We have the technology to hit a target accurately from orbit today. It's used in modern MIRV nuclear warheads. If your starships can't do the same then they shouldn't be in orbit; they should be on their way to the breakers yard because they're unworthy of being warships. True, the time lag between firing and hitting a target is a problem, but it's one that exists in modern artillery guns and no-ones saying it's a good idea to move them closer to the enemy so you can direct fire them instead. Any issues arising on that front can be overcome by sticking a manoeuvring thruster on your warhead for course changes to account for the target's movements.

[Sskiss]

The Raven Class is...*Dips into Your Navy's Primary Starship Thread*

Length: 60km
Width: 20km wing tip to wing tip
Height: 10km at the bow

Depending on the planet I would alter tides with that thing. Mind you it's our "primary" inasmuch as it's the vessel we're most known for. We don't have more than 15 or so.

Holy crap! Length wise that's larger than largest asteroid bases! Never mind our warships...

[Ularn]

The Raven Class is...*Dips into Your Navy's Primary Starship Thread*

Length: 60km
Width: 20km wing tip to wing tip
Height: 10km at the bow

Depending on the planet I would alter tides with that thing. Mind you it's our "primary" inasmuch as it's the vessel we're most known for. We don't have more than 15 or so.

Holy crap! Length wise that's larger than largest asteroid bases! Never mind our warships...

It's bigger than my capital city! 14km from the end of one docking pier to the opposite one and, IIRC, 1.5km high - unless you count the space elevator it's attached to.

EDIT: I just checked. It's a little over 15km from end to end, and 750m high. The four main habitat districts are approximately 2.5x2x0.75km in dimentions.

[Ruthless Slaughter]

Yeah, the only thing larger than those is the Gold Eagle, my second flagship. The next smallest is its sister the Saving Grace at 40km, then the Falcon Class Ship of the Line at 20km and then it's down to meters. I got carried away back in '04. Very carried away. I believe it was the height of the lolhuge superdread craze. There are 15 Ravens, 10 Falcons, and the two flagships and no others have been made since then. In NS time that's over 500 years. They're just too wasteful and the only reason they're still in service is their effectiveness and because they're already built. You try justifying spending that much on a ship just to decommission it

[Clamparapa]

Oh boy, no way will my gunner be able to miss those ships. Planet crackers should do well against planet-sized ships, no?

[Sskiss]

Yeah, the only thing larger than those is the Gold Eagle, my second flagship. The next smallest is its sister the Saving Grace at 40km, then the Falcon Class Ship of the Line at 20km and then it's down to meters. I got carried away back in '04. Very carried away. I believe it was the height of the lolhuge superdread craze. There are 15 Ravens, 10 Falcons, and the two flagships and no others have been made since then. In NS time that's over 500 years. They're just too wasteful and the only reason they're still in service is their effectiveness and because they're already built. You try justifying spending that much on a ship just to decommission it

Yes, I do recall the "superdread craze" (A good description of it, btw) that occurred several years back. Things got rather out of hand pretty quickly as I recall...

...and lately? population inflation... go figure!

[Feazanthia]

See: my sig

[Rethan]

Lawd. I have colony ships smaller than that. Who builds warships that big? o.O

[Huerdae]

Lawd. I have colony ships smaller than that. Who builds warships that big? o.O

...and compared to me, your ships are massive. Ships that size, I would probably just LAND on it and attack that way.

[Rethan]

Lawd. I have colony ships smaller than that. Who builds warships that big? o.O

...and compared to me, your ships are massive. Ships that size, I would probably just LAND on it and attack that way.

That could be awesome. Tanks and infantry formations moving across the hull of an enemy dreadnought....

[Zebian Syndicate]

That could be awesome. Tanks and infantry formations moving across the hull of an enemy dreadnought....

Screw ground wars, orbital drop pods, and bombardment. That's the way of the future.
I kind of want to do it now.

Of course, the problem is, how would you get the tanks and such to stick to the hull? Magnetic boots on infantry I can understand, (though a tad restrictive) but magnetic treads? Might as well go with space fighters then.

[Caragonia]

That could be awesome. Tanks and infantry formations moving across the hull of an enemy dreadnought....

Screw ground wars, orbital drop pods, and bombardment. That's the way of the future.
I kind of want to do it now.

Of course, the problem is, how would you get the tanks and such to stick to the hull? Magnetic boots on infantry I can understand, (though a tad restrictive) but magnetic treads? Might as well go with space fighters then.

There's no fighters in space silly.

It's actually an in-atmosphere ground attack fighter circling the dreadnought.

[Zebian Syndicate]

\

There's no fighters in space silly.

It's actually an in-atmosphere ground attack fighter circling the dreadnought.

This.

I want this guy in charge of my planetary defenses!

[Clamparapa]

Somewhere down the line, people will say "Screw assaulting these ships with ground forces; let's just slag them with ortillery." And then you have ship-to-ship combat again. THE CYCLE REPEATS EVERY 50000 YEARS.

[Vocenae]

I think you're forgetting the step where people start using mechs to fight the tanks, Clamps.

[Zebian Syndicate]

Actually, this is a pretty good subject,... and those are quite a good idea,...
I should right a book about it!
In fact, I might even make a couple of nations just to slug it out like this.

[YellowApple]

That could be awesome. Tanks and infantry formations moving across the hull of an enemy dreadnought....

Screw ground wars, orbital drop pods, and bombardment. That's the way of the future.
I kind of want to do it now.

Of course, the problem is, how would you get the tanks and such to stick to the hull? Magnetic boots on infantry I can understand, (though a tad restrictive) but magnetic treads? Might as well go with space fighters then.

If the ship is big enough, gravity should do the job just fine.

[Axis Nova]

Sorry, unless your ship is planetary scale then it's gravity is not going to be significant as far as someone standing on the hull is concerned.

Also, the cost of ship isn't just the initial costs, but also maintenance and crew-related costs.

[YellowApple]

Sorry, unless your ship is planetary scale then it's gravity is not going to be significant as far as someone standing on the hull is concerned.

Also, the cost of ship isn't just the initial costs, but also maintenance and crew-related costs.

Considering that players tend to make dreadnoughts larger than typical asteroids, I'd be surprised if there isn't at least a very slight gravitational pull.

[Vernii]

Sorry, unless your ship is planetary scale then it's gravity is not going to be significant as far as someone standing on the hull is concerned.

Also, the cost of ship isn't just the initial costs, but also maintenance and crew-related costs.

Considering that players tend to make dreadnoughts larger than typical asteroids, I'd be surprised if there isn't at least a very slight gravitational pull.

"Typical asteroid" can mean just about anything.

Also consider this: In a battle between a magnet on a refrigerator and the planet pulling on it, the magnet wins. The gravitational attraction of starships, even multi-megaton ones, is going to be something that gets measured by highly sensitive instruments, not on any level appreciable to human senses.