Argument Thread OOC Future Tech Only

[Feazanthia]

Alright. After reading these last few pages (especially the triad stuff) I've decided that once the Hermes-IRON thing has either ended peacefully or we've beaten each other into submission, I need to do a massive overhaul of my entire naval doctrine in order to be true to my personal established canon, and be more efficient all around.

Frak frakkity frak.

[The Cosmic Balance]

<Grabs Feaz>

Oh, no you don't! You get back here and help define the Triads! We still don't agree on that.

I think it's a great nation design/RP device, really.

[-Raysia-]

Alright. After reading these last few pages (especially the triad stuff) I've decided that once the Hermes-IRON thing has either ended peacefully or we've beaten each other into submission, I need to do a massive overhaul of my entire naval doctrine in order to be true to my personal established canon, and be more efficient all around.

Frak frakkity frak.

aww, it'll be okay buddy... I undergo a reboot every few months lol

[Feazanthia]

Still working on my thoughts on how to implement the triad system, but I will state this.

You all know my "no stealth in space" mantra. Yes, there are ways to get around "no stealth in space", but they rely on environmental factors and generally require the ship to be "running cold" while hoping that the hostile sensor is aligned so that there is a radiation source behind the ship trying to be stealthy.

This extends to most types of electronic warfare. Unless we're not discounting handwavium, active scanners are jammable, passive sensors are not. Well, they are, but you have to actively block line-of-sight with something else, and make sure no low- or high-frequency radiation can filter through said block. Effectively, you have to be able to block both Radio and Gamma radiation, which is impossible if you actually want to be able to see the target yourself. So I would recommend dropping references to "confusion" in modifications to the triad system. The most effective I can think of would be anti-missile countermeasures which try to fool the missile's passive sensors. And even then, it would probably be more cost effective to mount interceptor missiles.

Edit: And logistics should absolutely be included in the triad, as navies with poor logistics bases can still be viable, they just have to use different tactics. They would, for lack of a better term, be reliant on a "rushing" strategy. Units striking very fast and very hard, attempting to break the enemy before it has the chance to regroup. Such a navy would have very high firepower and overall defense rating, but if it failed in its initial push its ability to continue the war would be hampered due to lack of adequate supply lines and resupply doctrine.


Edit2: Also, food for thought. Doesn't apply exactly to what we're trying to do (as it's for individual ships, while the triad is more on overall racial design philosophy), but I give you the Atomic Rocket Space Warfare Design Chart

[Arizona Nova]

Oh my goodness! My idea does seem to have captured some imaginations; this is good.

In terms of the triangles, my intent was for them to be something concrete and, in that sense, permanent; this is why I picked the Mobility - Offense - Defense for the major triangle, though I did struggle with the minor triangle. I think Morningstar's and Huerdae's commentary on that, as I quoted in the thread linked in my sig, does perfect the minor triangles. However, it is possible that one could "nest" triangles within triangles infinitely as they go from the general points to more specific points. I'll have to think about it.

As for the specializations, they are much more flexible, and can be added on to as need be. I don't support getting rid of gravitonics, because gravity is its own force. The addition of biotechnology, though, does address a grievous shortcoming in my initial draft; one which was, I believe, probably made from a blind spot arising from my own techbase, which as you'll notice does not emphasize the old minor triangle point of "suprabiology."

[The Cosmic Balance]

You all know my "no stealth in space" mantra. Yes, there are ways to get around "no stealth in space", but they rely on environmental factors and generally require the ship to be "running cold" while hoping that the hostile sensor is aligned so that there is a radiation source behind the ship trying to be stealthy.

At the higher tech levels, there is another way: Space-time engineering.

Consider a warp field, as described by Miguel Alucubierre. Some calculations have suggested that you can reduce the energy requirements to produce such a field by reducing the external surface of the warp bubble to microscopic size while keeping the internal volume large enough to hold a spaceship (yes, there are space-time manifolds that do just this, and if you're going to bend space-time to travel FTL, then this is hardly out of the question - there are in fact papers on it).

As I'm sure you know, for every wavelength of EM light, there is a minimum size for objects that can be discerned using that EM frequency; a warp bubble the size of a flyspeck is not only going to be hard to see - it is going to be impossible to see with all light below a certain wavelength. That's as close to a functional definition of "cloaking" as you're going to get. Essentially, you're in your own almost-pocket-universe - but try communicating in or out of it!

Other, less exotic uses of space-time engineering involve creating "lensing" effects by bending space around ones vessel. Nor do you necessarily need to know the direction from which you are being observed; there a complex topological solutions to the problem of "lensing" in all directions (IOW, there are mind-numbingly twisted space-time geometries that "lens" in all directions); OTOH - again - you won't be able to send messages in or out of such a "knot".

More generally, though, information strategy tells us a lot about a culture. I just went through mentoring a new FT player a few minutes ago, and we compared InfoWar strategies. Hers - Control and Confuse - stood in contrast to the Kafers (the nation I will help break her in with) - Control and Conceal. This goes beyond ships: It tells me that strategically each culture will use different tactics. Both will strive for high command control, but the Kafers will emphasize ambushes, silent operation, and the like; their enemies will attempt to deceive or misdirect them at every turn, using feints, false signals, traps, ploys, general trickery, etc..

This applies to every aspect of their struggle, including ground combat, grand strategy, information strategy, everything. So even if you don't buy the "there's no stealth in space" theory, it still applies.

ADDENDUM: Just saw the rerolled Star Trek movie on Pay-Per-View last night; rising up out of the atmosphere of a moon behind the enemy is so very Kafer, as HT will attest.

SECOND ADDENDUM: I still think that Triads should all be built around the "choose two of three" problem, in order to avoid the obvious n00b response of, "Well, we do all of that better than anybody else."

[-Raysia-]

So, I can't seem to figure something out...

I'm considering ditching subspace communications and subspace sensors. I have alternatives for how to communicate, one more in line with my tech base. Basically it's like pneutmatic messaging, only using spacefold to send the message containers back and forth instead of any actual tuned infrastructure. I think it would be more fun to RP without subspace sensors and all that as well, and it would just make for interesting stories.

The only problem is figuring out what to do about all the people who rely heavily upon subspace communications.

So the thing I'm trying to figure out is, if I were to ditch subspace, how much would I be at a disadvantage?

Is there anyone else that doesn't use FTL sensors and FTL communications?

[The Kafers]

The Kafers don't. We have to send message probes to FTL between worlds in order to communicate.

I like your pneumatic tube idea!

[-Raysia-]

The Kafers don't. We have to send message probes to FTL between worlds in order to communicate.

I like your pneumatic tube idea!

Haha I said -like- a Pneumatic tube... I'm using the same tech for teleporters... Teleporters are still being refined and tested though IC'ly. So far the teleporters operate on the same theory as the transactory fold drive, and as such they tend to be rather complicated for human passengers haha....

[-Bretonia-]

So the thing I'm trying to figure out is, if I were to ditch subspace, how much would I be at a disadvantage?

Assuming conventional radios can't listen into subspace (as I haven't heard any alien shows while driving, I'm assuming it doesn't) you'd have trouble communicating with other nations. You'd be cut off from long-range diplomatic contact, you wouldn't hear foreign news for centuries or more... and by the time you heard about it and mobilised your fleet for action, the nations involved wouldn't even exist anymore. Sending people those capsules (cool idea, by the way!) might help with telling them things, but unless everybody started doing the same thing purely for your nation's benefit (and not all nations have space-folding, or similar, devices), you'd be left somewhat out-of-the-loop.

You could always RP some jazz about having subspace radio receivers, but not transmitters, then at least you could hear what was going on. Alien ships would just have to cotton on to the fact that you're sending them conventional radio signals, as I'm sure the vast majority of ships out there have radio transceivers, even if their crews don't monitor them.

So far as bog-standard EM sensors go, it could indeed be interesting. Trying to scan anything more than a few lighthours away could become a highly time-consuming process. I've seen people RPing the effects of such a disadvantage quite well in the past.

[Bryn Shander]

So what you're saying is that when I attack Keflek you won't get reinforcements for 30,000 years?

[-Raysia-]

Well, Bryn... I'm just assuming your FTLi blocks subspace communications as well...

Anyway, I guess Im going to have to use my work-around. I already have massive observatories, telescopes etc, all around my territory, tracking all sorts of objects and receiving transmissions. So far almost all my subspace communications have taken place via these observatories.

As my ships do not have warp drives or hyperdrives or anything like that, I'd really have no good reason to have transmitters mounted on the ships... But I suppose my massive observatories could act as the main subspace relays...

As for sensors... I think Ill limit subspace scanning to those observatories as well... No sense having communications there if I can't have sensors

[Feazanthia]

For communications - unless your formations have your ships more than a lightsecond apart, tightbeam laser works fine. For long range, I like Lorentzian wormhole theory.

Real men don't use FTL scanners. They use sensor buoys that MAYBE have FTL communications nodes.

[-Raysia-]

Maybe this would help... How does subspace radio work? I'm assuming you just constantly have antannae that are somehow tapped into the subspace dimension? Or does it involve establishing a link? Or is it so handwaved that no one ever cares?

[Bryn Shander]

Well, Bryn... I'm just assuming your FTLi blocks subspace communications as well...

It does. It wouldn't be a very good faster than light inhibitor if it let communications through.

[-Raysia-]

For communications - unless your formations have your ships more than a lightsecond apart, tightbeam laser works fine. For long range, I like Lorentzian wormhole theory.

Real men don't use FTL scanners. They use sensor buoys that MAYBE have FTL communications nodes.

I might not use the observatories for FTL scans... It's still up for debate... (arguing with myself haha)

As for short range communications... Have you forgottn who you're talking to? Haha my formations are often close enough for hand signals

Seriously though, I don't have any reason not to just use radio... It's not like radio necessitates omnidirectionality... You can direct it pretty easily... Haven't you ever watched satellite TV? you don't have to resort to lasers...

Edit: also... If you were even 100,000 km apart, it would be pretty hard to track a laser on a moving object...

[Huerdae]

What are you talking about? Real men use actual light to communicate with Morse code. And as a backup plan, some poor idiot with flags doing semaphore on the outside of the conning tower!

[The Cosmic Balance]

"Doing Seminole"? What do Indians from Florida have to do with anything?!?

(It's semaphore.)

[Bryn Shander]

What are you talking about? Real men use actual light to communicate with Morse code. And as a backup plan, some poor idiot with flags doing Seminole on the outside of the conning tower!

Who the hell let you into my command briefings?

[Huerdae]

"Doing semaphor"? What do Indians from Florida have to do with anything?!?

(It's semaphore.)

Shit. Fail on my part. Serves me right for writing a joke when I wasn't fully aware.

Bryn: I brought the coffee.

[Feazanthia]

TCB, if I had the technology to bend space-time and enough mastery over it to use it as a cloak generator? I could do a lot more nasty things than hide myself with said technology.

As in make the vital organs of an enemy crew jump six meters to the left.

[The Cosmic Balance]

Not necessarily. Technologies that can be used on friendly assets can't always be projected to enemy assets.

The point is that the "No stealth in space" dictum is dependent on the assumption of a hard SF environment. When we move into soft ST, all sorts of "cloaking" technologies become possible, and to claim that they don't exist isn't consistent with our RP traditions.

Which, of course, brings me back to my "InfoWar" Triad. Most "cloaking" technologies force silence or isolation on the "cloaked" object. If that's the case, the Control-Confuse-Conceal choice fits quite well: I can use my information/communications assets to manage my own forces, interfere with the enemy's, or not use them at all in order to try and hide on the battlefield (whatever actual or logical battlefield we're discussing, in whatever context). I think the idea fits well.

And I still haven't heard a good explanation of why other proposed Triads (aside from the original "Major" [or, as I call it, "Energy"] Triad) aren't menus from which the overly ambitious player can't just say, "Well, all of them, of course!"

The original "Energy" Triad, which appears at both the Atomic Rockets site and was fundamental to the design of several early SF board games (I'm thinking Triplanetary in particular, although I could be wrong) was designed because someone sat down and said: "Well, with a power plant of X capacity, I need to divide my energy budget between weapons, shields, and drives. Thus tactical warfare can be abstracted into a trade-off between Offense (Weapons), Defense (Shields), and Mobility (Drives)."

It is this idea that I'm trying to build upon: Trade-offs. With other Triads, where are the trade-offs that force us into making real choices?

[-Raysia-]

I contend that you could cloak by slipping into another dimension... or doing the normal "phase cloak" thing....

However, the harsh realities of phase cloaking would be:

Yes, you would fall right through the floors.
No, your weapons wouldn't be able to work
No, you wouldn't be able to see anything... at least, not anything from your original dimension.

Perhaps one could use an alternate-reality drive (from Atlantis: Daedalus Variations) to move into a parallel dimension, then re-emerge into your own at the correct time.

[TRIAD Enterprises]

I contend that you could cloak by slipping into another dimension...

The Sertians and the Balroggans both do this! They even have Space Submarines!
Assuming I remember descriptions of their tech right... Their drives "submerge" the vessel into another dimension/reality/Otherspace. While in this Otherspace, there is no direct interaction with energy or mass in Realspace. They are blind to events in Realspace.
However they have devices which are basically "periscopes" which emerge into Realspace through a very small opening. Yes, it's possible to detect the "Periscope", just as with a RL submarine, however it's a lot harder than if the whole ship were on the "surface".

However, the harsh realities of phase cloaking would be:

Yes, you would fall right through the floors.
No, your weapons wouldn't be able to work
No, you wouldn't be able to see anything... at least, not anything from your original dimension.

You'd only fall through the floors of matter in "normal" phases. If the whole ship and all contents phase, then everyone inside is on the same phase as the floors, so no falling through.
However, phasing just a person does bring up the falling through the floor/ground/planet issue.

Yep, weapons would be just as phased as the ship. *Unless* the weapon incorporates some kind of phase aperature to bring the weapons-fire back into "normal" phase after firing. However, this would be close to (or even beyond) the acceptable limit for tech-wank.

Again, the sensors would have to somehow allow Sensor emissions to pass back and forth between phased and unphased states. Any opening in a phased state would make the vessel detectable however, thus defeating the purpose of a phase cloak right?

[Polish Worlds]

http://www.abovetopsecret.com/pages/philadelphia.html

The cloaking system I use is based on the most far-fetched conspiracy theories above.

Also, I had a somewhat WTF idea for FTL involving naturally occurring derivatives of x, y, z and time across reality, or artificially formed through some sort of non-described exotic matter.