Future Tech Advice and Assistance Thread [O.O.C.]

[Thrashia]

From what I've been able to deduce from the last ten years here...I've been one of a handful of steadily consistent players who maintains a logistics paradigm in regards to all military operations that my nation has ever undertaken. There are others, but most people tend to look down upon it as nothing more than book keeping. That couldn't be farther from the truth however.

[Oppressorion]

For me, logistics revolve around stars. They are huge energy sources, and as such form transport, power and manufacturing hubs (since the heat is used to process ore into products basically for free, energy-wise). Since ships are phased when in FTL and are coasting, there is no need for active supervision so the crew goes into hibernation and the AI switches to energy-saving mode. This means that ships have a fantastically long range from star to star, but get royally screwed if they need to go somewhere that doesn't have one nearby. Anyway, the point is that fleets aren't intended for long voyages so they rely on their own stores (and the larger ships have hydroponics, though the food doesn't taste great) between stops.

[The Fedral Union]

From what I've been able to deduce from the last ten years here...I've been one of a handful of steadily consistent players who maintains a logistics paradigm in regards to all military operations that my nation has ever undertaken. There are others, but most people tend to look down upon it as nothing more than book keeping. That couldn't be farther from the truth however.

Logistics are important, its fun working out details like that though. Its not hard to do though depending on whats required, though intergalactic distances and interstellar distances are orders of magnitude higher and provide much more complex requirements for supply and so forth. thankfully, our Talonian allies have that covered with their mobile stations and such, in combo with our mobile gates, it can be worked around.

(That said unlike you I have no first hand knowledge of situations on a line so I wont presume to be a smart ass about it.)

[Thrashia]

For an example, there's considering a world siege -- a common enough occurrence in FT and the ability of nations to otherwise defend their planets against absolute annihilation....but be warned, it's long.

Food supplies for the entire planet. Can they last relying solely on indigenous production? How long will any supplies last once nothing can be brought in from outside the planet? Where is the food stored? What is the durability of those depots, buildings, and granaries? What weapons can they withstand? How do they appear from the air? Ration projections, Sustainable food ration planning. Unsustainable food ratio planning, with appended lists of estimated sacrificial casualties. Are food riots likely? Where will food riots likely break out once starvation is a reality? Water supplies? Water filtration centers? How many such centers are required to be fully operational in order to supply the entire population? Which ones are likely to be destroyed first? Are there underground bunkers where water can be stored? Bedrock ground stores? Estimates of disease once any cities are have suffered civilian casualties too heavy to be dealt with efficiently? What types of disease? Enemy inspired or natural results of the casualties resolved from war. Severity of outbreaks? Risk of contagion? Number of medical facilities? Competency of staff? Stocks on necessary supplies for both military and civilian casualties? Does the populace have the ability to form militias of any kinds? Weapon stores? Conscripts or volunteers? Training regimes and training schedules? Ammunition supplies for the militia and regular forces? Projections for how long those will last? Ability to replace those stocks? Who are the leaders of individual sector/section forces across the planet? Are the military units stationed near significant industrial targets? What communication centers are there? Redundancies? Power sources? Redundancies? Landing platforms and necessary stations for air support? Fuel reserves and ability to replenish or produce said fuel (if necessary)? Heavy defense emplacements? What anti-air stations exist and can be kept operational? Supplies or power needed for said emplacements? Industrial capacity on planet capable of supporting all of the above? Estimates of what sectors will likely be destroyed first and priority sectors that are considered to be vital?

These are the kind of logistical matters that a real life commander might think to judge.

[Feazanthia]

With geothermal power stations and hydroponics technology, a system of underground farms could feed a planetary population easily without easily exposing itself to orbital fire.

[The Fedral Union]

With geothermal power stations and hydroponics technology, a system of underground farms could feed a planetary population easily without easily exposing itself to orbital fire.

Well the question is, how many people actually design their infrastructure that way in FT.. Alot of worlds and home planets aren't exactly virgin (insofar as having not been occupied for a while ). Now there are good compelling arguments why one might do so with existing planets but, is that a common design feature? (Though me living in NYC... I can see how an underground city of sorts could either be there in a rudimentary way, or in a more complete fashion)

[Feazanthia]

It is my belief that, sooner or later, we are going to have to shift to hydroponics to produce most of our food anyway. It's more cost-effective (when applied in large-scale), it produces a higher yield of better quality, and it is far more space-efficient. The one thing really holding it back right now is the problem of bacterial growth in the hydroponics tubes, a problem which can be solved with greater precision in manufacturing and advances in materials science - things which are essentially guarantees in any futuristic setting (also there's considerable political pressure to maintain the status quo in the farming industry but presumably that issue will be solved as well, technological advances have ALWAYS trumped luddite political ideology in the long run).

Additionally, I think we'll eventually shift to lab-grown meat in addition to hydroponic produce, for many of the same reasons.

[Imperial Nalydya]

With geothermal power stations and hydroponics technology, a system of underground farms could feed a planetary population easily without easily exposing itself to orbital fire.

Well the question is, how many people actually design their infrastructure that way in FT.. Alot of worlds and home planets aren't exactly virgin (insofar as having not been occupied for a while ). Now there are good compelling arguments why one might do so with existing planets but, is that a common design feature? (Though me living in NYC... I can see how an underground city of sorts could be managed)

Yea.... No. This sort of thing is actually brought up quite often when wars are discussed between myself and some of the other RPers I usually roll with. We get onto the subject of planetary assaults and so on and so forth, and the question "how many people design their planets for war" inevitably pops up, and usually the answer is interesting... Because in all actuality, specifically designing a planet... At least a civilian world, for war seems... Rather odd.

For myself, I've acknowledged on numerous occasions that our planets are not designed for war, and for the most part, against FT weaponry, the vast majority of the structures and infrastructure tends to be relatively flimsy, which I feel is much more of a realistic scenario. I mean, unless you've been in constant wars for god-knows-how-long, there shouldn't really be this pressing urge to add an extra layer of complexity for relatively little gain.

tl;dr - How often are your planets bombarded? How common are planned cities, infrastructure, etc, in your nation? And then move from there.

[The Fedral Union]

It is my belief that, sooner or later, we are going to have to shift to hydroponics to produce most of our food anyway. It's more cost-effective (when applied in large-scale), it produces a higher yield of better quality, and it is far more space-efficient. The one thing really holding it back right now is the problem of bacterial growth in the hydroponics tubes, a problem which can be solved with greater precision in manufacturing and advances in materials science - things which are essentially guarantees in any futuristic setting (also there's considerable political pressure to maintain the status quo in the farming industry but presumably that issue will be solved as well, technological advances have ALWAYS trumped luddite political ideology in the long run).

Additionally, I think we'll eventually shift to lab-grown meat in addition to hydroponic produce, for many of the same reasons.

You cant argue with practicality , fair point Feaz. Now the question is with all this in place. How would one eliminate the possible industrial capacity of a forfeited world without having to waste or slag the planet proper?

As well, underground infrastructure of a sufficient type will make it a hellish scenario to try to send in ground troops. That's just asking to be mauled; so I am left with two options, attempt to minimize civilian casualties with precision crust busters (ie fancy bunker busters) to hit industrial sites (again this may be hard with the lack of intelligence on the ground unless someone sneaks in) . Lay siege to the planet and park a few automated satellites in orbit to shoot down anyone trying to leave (Vipra talked about this one) , and thus move on.

Or for those who might not be so squeamish as my "Morally civilized" people sit at stand off range, and well quoting AVP . "Nuke the site from orbit , its the only way to be sure." Carpet nuke it until the crust is nice and malleable. (To be honest the cheapest option, but ehh my nation as it is..If we're driven to this, somethings gone tits up.)

[Feazanthia]

The question isn't "How often are your planets bombarded", it's "How afraid are your people of BEING bombarded?"

Consider this. Human beings are, by and large, logical creatures up until the point where they feel threatened. Then, biology takes over and flight-or-fight responses are triggered. In my country (the United States) for example, the odds of being killed by or even witnessing an attack by Islamic extremists is roughly on-par with the odds of being struck by lightning while being attacked by a shark while holding the winning Mega Millions ticket. Yet, we as a culture have dedicated an incredible amount of time, thought, and resources to the purposes of safeguarding ourselves against such attacks.

If we've proven one thing in the last RL decade, it's that the galaxy is a very dangerous place. We've had countless wars, several galaxy-threatening eldritch horrors, interstellar plagues, pirates, galaxy-spanning cold wars, and once or twice we've even had at least one empire be completely and instantly obliterated for no apparent reason whatsoever. Assuming there is some sort of interstellar, international information network available (which there almost undoubtedly would be), an educated and informed individual will know about these things. And, I believe, he'd be a little bit frightened by them, especially when 9 out of 10 empires in NSFT tend to be belligerent and expansionist.

[Senkaku]

With geothermal power stations and hydroponics technology, a system of underground farms could feed a planetary population easily without easily exposing itself to orbital fire.

I tend to see it the opposite way. Even a planet riddled with tunnels and reinforced bunkers and geothermal plants and hydroponic tunnels couldn't stand for long if the besieging ships remained in orbit uncontested. It wouldn't be a question of whether or not the food and power supplies were sufficient, but kinetic bombardment from orbit could easily crack open anything built in the crust and even, to some extent, in the upper mantle. You just drop dead ships or NEOs, causing shockwaves and earthquakes and magma movement, and the tunnels and such will collapse or get blown open.

[Feazanthia]

With geothermal power stations and hydroponics technology, a system of underground farms could feed a planetary population easily without easily exposing itself to orbital fire.

I tend to see it the opposite way. Even a planet riddled with tunnels and reinforced bunkers and geothermal plants and hydroponic tunnels couldn't stand for long if the besieging ships remained in orbit uncontested. It wouldn't be a question of whether or not the food and power supplies were sufficient, but kinetic bombardment from orbit could easily crack open anything built in the crust and even, to some extent, in the upper mantle. You just drop dead ships or NEOs, causing shockwaves and earthquakes and magma movement, and the tunnels and such will collapse or get blown open.

See, to me the question would be less "can I attack them" (the answer is unequivocally yes, once you cede orbital superiority the chances of successfully resisting a dedicated opponent drop dramatically), and more "can I see them?"

Now obviously that's a question of how powerful your ground-penetrating radar is vs how advanced the target's passive countermeasures are, but regardless an underground power station or hydroponics bay is going to be much less conspicuous than an above-ground one.

[The Fedral Union]

The question isn't "How often are your planets bombarded", it's "How afraid are your people of BEING bombarded?"

Consider this. Human beings are, by and large, logical creatures up until the point where they feel threatened. Then, biology takes over and flight-or-fight responses are triggered. In my country (the United States) for example, the odds of being killed by or even witnessing an attack by Islamic extremists is roughly on-par with the odds of being struck by lightning while being attacked by a shark while holding the winning Mega Millions ticket. Yet, we as a culture have dedicated an incredible amount of time, thought, and resources to the purposes of safeguarding ourselves against such attacks.

If we've proven one thing in the last RL decade, it's that the galaxy is a very dangerous place. We've had countless wars, several galaxy-threatening eldritch horrors, interstellar plagues, pirates, galaxy-spanning cold wars, and once or twice we've even had at least one empire be completely and instantly obliterated for no apparent reason whatsoever. Assuming there is some sort of interstellar, international information network available (which there almost undoubtedly would be), an educated and informed individual will know about these things. And, I believe, he'd be a little bit frightened by them, especially when 9 out of 10 empires in NSFT tend to be belligerent and expansionist.

Hes got a point *glances at thrash* (its all good).. But seriously after having two worlds nuked.. My home world toasted a while ago, ehh.. I cant say Feaz is wrong.. No one is invulnerable, and having a planet busted stays in the national memory for generations upon generations. This is why the UTA turned so fervently against such methods unless its an absolute last resort. And why for a peaceful power, we heavily invest in ships and other defense infrastructure. This is indeed true for most FT nations.. I like subverting the morally gray trope myself but that's out of taste.

We've got, contingencies for events, including second strike doctrines. "Revel in your temporary victory, for your empire will one day grow feeble and frail, and the echos of a people long passed and crushed under your tyrannical and devastating heel , will be the harbinger of your destruction." Type deal...

.. Yeah, however I am personally glad people don't run around randomly busting planets or using nova bombs.. (>.>) Because at that point people like say mine (not that it'd happen today because oh lord someone would get slapped silly. ) if we're the victim of another glassing or busting.. We'll reply if possible with massive retaliation..

But again galaxy is big, the verse is big. But yeah, however while Feaz has a point. I think a Fleet is still one of your best defenses against this sort of scenario. I suspect most nations might have fall out shelters or arcologies under various urban centers to deal with a crisis.. Feaz mentioned another point, either by intent or not.. Information tends to shape the opinion of ones citizenry, so in a nation like mine with our fancy democracy and republicanism you can sure bet our government would be under due pressure to keep people safe. I mean if our leaders want to get elected again.. But you know people at times, they want to keep their cake and want to eat it too. The unfortunate fact is, bad news, and foreboding information sell; people are alarmists. But eh that's another topic for another thread..

Though galactic cold wars are sort of . ehh a memory :/.. I mean sense of scale wise, silly but...Most of the major alliances are busy not fucking with one another and doing their own thing.

Moral of the story I suppose.. "The universe is one of those places where in the next star system you don't know if you'll meet the demise of your entire race."

[Imperial Nalydya]

If we've proven one thing in the last RL decade, it's that the galaxy is a very dangerous place. We've had countless wars, several galaxy-threatening eldritch horrors, interstellar plagues, pirates, galaxy-spanning cold wars, and once or twice we've even had at least one empire be completely and instantly obliterated for no apparent reason whatsoever. Assuming there is some sort of interstellar, international information network available (which there almost undoubtedly would be), an educated and informed individual will know about these things. And, I believe, he'd be a little bit frightened by them, especially when 9 out of 10 empires in NSFT tend to be belligerent and expansionist.

Well, I guess that depends just on how your nation would react to such threats... Species, experiences, etc, as revamping one's planetary infrastructure is but one part of what can be done. To use Nalydya as an example - as Senkaku pointed out, it isn't terribly difficult to destroy underground complexes from orbit. Not too much moreso than surface installations, depending on what the attacker is using and what defenses there are. Because of this, most of the Nalydian reaction to such fears, if you call them that, is to invest more in their offensive arm and active defenses - fleets, stations, etc.

[Vocenae]

I'm very busy today and cannot make a larger post on this subject, but I thought I might leave this quote here, at least in response to the 'feeding your planetary population' discussion.

As the new century begins...we may be ready to settle down before we wreck the planet. It is time to sort out Earth and calculate what it will take to provide a satisfying and sustainable life for everyone into the indefinite future...For every person in the world to reach present U.S. levels of consumption would require [The resources of] four more planet Earths.

-Edward O. Wilson.

I suppose what he said about settling down isn't all that true, given the conflicts currently taking place on the planet, but what he says about consumption is definitely something to take into account. Planet Earth is simply overtaxed by a civilization that cannot realize that it is killing the planet by it's own greed and relentless population expansion. We're overtaxing our planet's ability to produce food on such a massive level, and this is largely just for a handful of nations on it. This is why Agriculture Worlds are a thing in Science Fiction, because so many people want to play with these massive populations and have transformed their homeworld into a ecumenopolis that have no way of supporting themselves outside of entire worlds dedicated to producing foodstuffs (not to mention the fact that you'd need incredible amounts of technology just to keep such a planet from overheating by it's own excess heat output).

Even in FT, with all of our fantastic technologies, one would be hard pressed to simply handwave away the needs of such massive populations (most of which are always centered on planets that are exactly the same size of Earth because most people don't go into massive detail designing their planets). That is why, as I mentioned a few pages ago concerning planetary populations, that I try to stick with my Gameplay population numbers now. It just allows me the ability to portray a planet that isn't groaning and straining to stay alive under the crush of civilization.

As for 'designing a planet for war', I have to side with the arguement that unless you are locked in such an apocalyptic conflict that building war-proof cities is all your culture can do then otherwise it's a bit of Meta-Gaming. Especially given how wars in FT rarely ever reach the 'apocalypse' level of conflict, since most FT players realize there's no real purpose in putting forth the massive effort required to take a world if you're just going to reduce it to ashes.

[The Fedral Union]

I'm very busy today and cannot make a larger post on this subject, but I thought I might leave this quote here, at least in response to the 'feeding your planetary population' discussion.

As the new century begins...we may be ready to settle down before we wreck the planet. It is time to sort out Earth and calculate what it will take to provide a satisfying and sustainable life for everyone into the indefinite future...For every person in the world to reach present U.S. levels of consumption would require [The resources of] four more planet Earths.

-Edward O. Wilson.

I suppose what he said about settling down isn't all that true, given the conflicts currently taking place on the planet, but what he says about consumption is definitely something to take into account. Planet Earth is simply overtaxed by a civilization that cannot realize that it is killing the planet by it's own greed and relentless population expansion. We're overtaxing our planet's ability to produce food on such a massive level, and this is largely just for a handful of nations on it. This is why Agriculture Worlds are a thing in Science Fiction, because so many people want to play with these massive populations and have transformed their homeworld into a ecumenopolis that have no way of supporting themselves outside of entire worlds dedicated to producing foodstuffs (not to mention the fact that you'd need incredible amounts of technology just to keep such a planet from overheating by it's own excess heat output).

Even in FT, with all of our fantastic technologies, one would be hard pressed to simply handwave away the needs of such massive populations (most of which are always centered on planets that are exactly the same size of Earth because most people don't go into massive detail designing their planets). That is why, as I mentioned a few pages ago concerning planetary populations, that I try to stick with my Gameplay population numbers now. It just allows me the ability to portray a planet that isn't groaning and straining to stay alive under the crush of civilization.

As for 'designing a planet for war', I have to side with the arguement that unless you are locked in such an apocalyptic conflict that building war-proof cities is all your culture can do then otherwise it's a bit of Meta-Gaming. Especially given how wars in FT rarely ever reach the 'apocalypse' level of conflict, since most FT players realize there's no real purpose in putting forth the massive effort required to take a world if you're just going to reduce it to ashes.

Ahh just like Trantor, in the Foundation series. Yeah I've never been one for hive worlds.. Never fit me, that said Voc, alot of us have long histories where we did indeed get our worlds turned in to slag.. But now a days you have a point that for the most part no one does that any more. I never found the need to mention specific populations, that said if I ever make a fact book I need to choose weather to scale up or stay with game pop.. Aside from that, by the time you get to hive cities? Why the hell aren't you living in space on large ships, or mobile stations you can move? The most secure populaces in NSFT are nomadic races, honestly.

[SquareDisc City]

The V O I D

As it stands, your idea is interesting but your scale is a bit wonky. You've mentioned some of the void's superpowers, if you want to RP any of them in regular NSFT you'll have to downsize. Alternatively, have the superpowers as backstory and primarily RP as one of the void's smaller powers, maybe one with an unusual interest in the "normal" world.

I advise not using the portal variant that moves whole stars around. You're probably best sticking to a few "fixed" portals to start with; a gateway that's always open to all in both directions will assuage fears of you abusing the void and its portals. Of course if a portal popping up or closing down makes a good plot element then go for it.

[The Fedral Union]

The V O I D

As it stands, your idea is interesting but your scale is a bit wonky. You've mentioned some of the void's superpowers, if you want to RP any of them in regular NSFT you'll have to downsize. Alternatively, have the superpowers as backstory and primarily RP as one of the void's smaller powers, maybe one with an unusual interest in the "normal" world.

I advise not using the portal variant that moves whole stars around. You're probably best sticking to a few "fixed" portals to start with; a gateway that's always open to all in both directions will assuage fears of you abusing the void and its portals. Of course if a portal popping up or closing down makes a good plot element then go for it.

Yes well, I don''t see why he cant keep the mechanic for moving stars if its a plot device for an rp now eh? As for the factions he rps, well again it depends on how he does it. You can pull a-lot off if its tasteful. FT is wide and varied so I'm sure he'll find people conductive to his ideas. But alas we need to wait until things are better defined.

[Senkaku]

I tend to see it the opposite way. Even a planet riddled with tunnels and reinforced bunkers and geothermal plants and hydroponic tunnels couldn't stand for long if the besieging ships remained in orbit uncontested. It wouldn't be a question of whether or not the food and power supplies were sufficient, but kinetic bombardment from orbit could easily crack open anything built in the crust and even, to some extent, in the upper mantle. You just drop dead ships or NEOs, causing shockwaves and earthquakes and magma movement, and the tunnels and such will collapse or get blown open.

See, to me the question would be less "can I attack them" (the answer is unequivocally yes, once you cede orbital superiority the chances of successfully resisting a dedicated opponent drop dramatically), and more "can I see them?"

Now obviously that's a question of how powerful your ground-penetrating radar is vs how advanced the target's passive countermeasures are, but regardless an underground power station or hydroponics bay is going to be much less conspicuous than an above-ground one.

Don't have to see them, depending on how large the object you're dropping is. If the shockwave is powerful enough, it'll cause an earthquake that'll crush everything around it, or most things, anyways. Or if you only have limited data, it might just liquefy the target box and destroy a little extra to make sure you hit what you were aiming for.

If we've proven one thing in the last RL decade, it's that the galaxy is a very dangerous place. We've had countless wars, several galaxy-threatening eldritch horrors, interstellar plagues, pirates, galaxy-spanning cold wars, and once or twice we've even had at least one empire be completely and instantly obliterated for no apparent reason whatsoever. Assuming there is some sort of interstellar, international information network available (which there almost undoubtedly would be), an educated and informed individual will know about these things. And, I believe, he'd be a little bit frightened by them, especially when 9 out of 10 empires in NSFT tend to be belligerent and expansionist.

Well, I guess that depends just on how your nation would react to such threats... Species, experiences, etc, as revamping one's planetary infrastructure is but one part of what can be done. To use Nalydya as an example - as Senkaku pointed out, it isn't terribly difficult to destroy underground complexes from orbit. Not too much moreso than surface installations, depending on what the attacker is using and what defenses there are. Because of this, most of the Nalydian reaction to such fears, if you call them that, is to invest more in their offensive arm and active defenses - fleets, stations, etc.

That's probably the wiser strategic move. Even if you build something at the planet's very core, someone could, if they had sufficient motivation (as they might, if the planet was important enough to warrant such fortifications), deorbit a small moon or fire an RKV at it and destroy everything regardless of its fortification.

The instant you lose orbital superiority, it doesn't really matter how well-fortified the planet is, when the enemy can just drop things on you at their leisure. But if you have defenses that can make it hard for them to drop things safely even once they've killed all your ships, then you can at least make life difficult for them.

Or maybe even make it so they don't kill all your ships.

[The Fedral Union]

See, to me the question would be less "can I attack them" (the answer is unequivocally yes, once you cede orbital superiority the chances of successfully resisting a dedicated opponent drop dramatically), and more "can I see them?"

Now obviously that's a question of how powerful your ground-penetrating radar is vs how advanced the target's passive countermeasures are, but regardless an underground power station or hydroponics bay is going to be much less conspicuous than an above-ground one.

Don't have to see them, depending on how large the object you're dropping is. If the shockwave is powerful enough, it'll cause an earthquake that'll crush everything around it, or most things, anyways. Or if you only have limited data, it might just liquefy the target box and destroy a little extra to make sure you hit what you were aiming for.

Well, I guess that depends just on how your nation would react to such threats... Species, experiences, etc, as revamping one's planetary infrastructure is but one part of what can be done. To use Nalydya as an example - as Senkaku pointed out, it isn't terribly difficult to destroy underground complexes from orbit. Not too much moreso than surface installations, depending on what the attacker is using and what defenses there are. Because of this, most of the Nalydian reaction to such fears, if you call them that, is to invest more in their offensive arm and active defenses - fleets, stations, etc.

That's probably the wiser strategic move. Even if you build something at the planet's very core, someone could, if they had sufficient motivation (as they might, if the planet was important enough to warrant such fortifications), deorbit a small moon or fire an RKV at it and destroy everything regardless of its fortification.

The instant you lose orbital superiority, it doesn't really matter how well-fortified the planet is, when the enemy can just drop things on you at their leisure. But if you have defenses that can make it hard for them to drop things safely even once they've killed all your ships, then you can at least make life difficult for them.

Or maybe even make it so they don't kill all your ships.

Congratulations your flagrant act of wonton genocide just made your nation the subject of international outrage and possibly massive retaliatory strikes upon your worlds.. Civilized nations don't do this, you do realize how much energy it takes to MOVE A MOON? I hope?

[Vocenae]

I would have to respond with a resounding: What nations out there actually care?

We've seen entire stars eaten by the Pathogen, worlds carpet nuked, worlds subjected to such high energy bombardments that their atmosphere and ecosystems have been fried almost beyond repair. Damaged but still inhabited military craft being flung into the atmospheres of planets as crude orbital bombardment vectors...I myself leveled half of a populated city that hadn't even begun to evacuate just to slow down an enemy ground force.

In FT, life is cheap. It is cheap because it i so widespread within the galaxy, that the distances between all of our nations is so vast (even on a local scale) that some person dropping a moon on someone else isn't going to cause much of a reaction outside of a resounding 'woah'. There is no Space UN. There is no governing galactic body that says 'these guys must be punished for [X] action'. There are no FT Geneva Accords. The closest you will ever get to international action between FT nations would be the outdated and dead alliance system.

)Unless you're playing a white hat 'morally outraged for a millenia' nation that acts the same way that anti-slaver nations do in MT, of course. Then by all means, feel free to go wild about it, but realize that it isn't exactly the best choice OOCly due to so many bad examples of anti-slaver nations in the past.)

And there never will beand sort of binding document. There will never be a unifying political document in FT that lays out intergalactic law, not just because the existing FT states will never sign such a thing (it was hard enough just to get them to even agree consider taking some sort of joint action against the Rethast) ICly, but because OOCly, such a document would be a confining force upon everyone's creativity. You'd never get the players to agree upon it, or acknowledge it to the point where it actually makes a difference.

Now, concerning dropping a moon...Dropping a Luna sized moon would be wank of excessive proportions. Without sufficient plot reasons and the unanimous consent from all the players in the thread, it would be a godmod. However, dropping asteroids would be far simpler and easier to accomplish the same general goal. Plus, you can do it more than once and pick your targets.

But that goes back to my earlier statement. The effort needed to conquer a planet with the intent on using it in FT requires a enormous amount of logistics to set up, everything from food to fuel to organizing starship crew and directing entire platoons. If you want the planet because it holds some kind of cultural or otherwise non-resource centric importance to you, then why are you dropping things from orbit in the first place? You don't piss into the pool you're about to be swimming in, after all.

Want to damage the planet's infrastructure and population without doing such cataclysmic damage to the planet itself? Aside from precision orbital bombardment with smaller kinetic strikes (much like the laser guided missiles and most cruise missiles of our current time) hitting military facilities with high accuracy, you could always freeze them out by blocked sunlight from reaching the agricultural parts of the planet via massive solar shields.

But at that point you may as well just invade the damn planet. It'll be more fun for all involved.

[The Fedral Union]

I don't think its inherently the issue of getting nations to work together.. I mean GESO does a good job of that. But its more sense of scale, and ooc desires/plot. Since the verse is big... well yeah we're not omnipotent; and just because a nation has seen it in past doesn't mean the subscribe to allowing it to happen.

But you're right, there is no intergalactic police; however I'm not sure what you mean by out dated alliance system?

While its unlikely we'd ever start butting in to things just to butt in with sense of scale and all, GESO certainly has the will, the means and the ability to (if the other players agree) stare folks down about it. icly its not hard at all to get people working together if you play politics the right way. And besides, people may enjoy the specter of political maneuvering and gaming oocly with an international body such as GESO... it adds more depth.

[Feazanthia]

I don't think its inherently the issue of getting nations to work together.. I mean GESO does a good job of that. But its more sense of scale, and ooc desires/plot. Since the verse is big... well yeah we're not omnipotent; and just because a nation has seen it in past doesn't mean the subscribe to allowing it to happen.

But you're right, there is no intergalactic police; however I'm not sure what you mean by out dated alliance system?

While its unlikely we'd ever start butting in to things just to butt in with sense of scale and all, GESO certainly has the will, the means and the ability to (if the other players agree) stare folks down about it. icly its not hard at all to get people working together if you play politics the right way. And besides, people may enjoy the specter of political maneuvering and gaming oocly with an international body such as GESO... it adds more depth.

By the by, continually namedropping your alliance every few posts as a way of "oh by the way JOIN MY GUILD" is off-topic, irritating others, and should probably stop. Just my two cents.

[The Fedral Union]

I don't think its inherently the issue of getting nations to work together.. I mean GESO does a good job of that. But its more sense of scale, and ooc desires/plot. Since the verse is big... well yeah we're not omnipotent; and just because a nation has seen it in past doesn't mean the subscribe to allowing it to happen.

But you're right, there is no intergalactic police; however I'm not sure what you mean by out dated alliance system?

While its unlikely we'd ever start butting in to things just to butt in with sense of scale and all, GESO certainly has the will, the means and the ability to (if the other players agree) stare folks down about it. icly its not hard at all to get people working together if you play politics the right way. And besides, people may enjoy the specter of political maneuvering and gaming oocly with an international body such as GESO... it adds more depth.

By the by, continually namedropping your alliance every few posts as a way of "oh by the way JOIN MY GUILD" is off-topic, irritating others, and should probably stop. Just my two cents.

Hmm I didn't intend for that tbh; its just I cant think of any other examples to prove my point atm.. Since you know FT is a little uhh barren with alliances I guess aside from two?. If it came off like that, just know it wasn't deliberate. Suppose I'll use different pronouns and wording then. But more or less I just wanted to illustrate a point that getting nations to agree with some things doesn't have to be that hard..

Also the GA has been mentioned before as a space UN lite..Those threads were fun to read.

[Imperial Nalydya]

- stuffs and things -

Well said... Basically sums up my views on the subject.