>That's all you need to put rounds on target.
For dumb rounds and you could tell smart rounds to go to the predicted location but that wont take into account the target changing course >Also moronic
They did use missiles in a few instances but it is limited.
The Omega destroyer was supposed to feature them prominently, that is what the red circles along its sides are - missile silos. It was supposed to be done in a very dramatic "rolling out the guns" shot with the camera sweeping across as they opened up.
But this and other design features - the big guns in the front and the fighters launching from the rotating section - were never included in the show for some reason
>I don't think so, they did some amazing stuff in season 3 and 4. >I think somehow it wasn't conveyed that the model had those elements
the entirety of B5 was animated in Lightwave
Series 1 of B5 was animated entirely on a network of 20 amiga 2000 stations linked using the Newtek Video Toaster software/hardware interface. They upgraded to a network of 486DX PCs when Lightwave was ported from hardware to software. (yes, the original iteration of Lightwave was partially hardware based)
the 20 machines working in parallel were able to render about 1 frame every 45 minutes, In PAL Resolution: (720 x 576 pixel)
While the software did get a leap forward by Season 3, the single PC I'm typing this on has more graphics processing power than the multi-million dollar graphics rendering studio for B5.
toaster was the pilot, they upgraded for after it the regular series and again after season 2
1 year ago
Anonymous
Nope,. first season was done on video toaster boards. the software version wasn't released commercially till '94.
The pilot was on a network of 8 toasters, that was upgraded to 20 for the production of the first season CG by Foundation Imaging.
that was upgraded in turn to 486DX PCs for the start of season 2, but certainly wasn't in place for season 1.
>the single PC I'm typing this on has more graphics processing power than the multi-million dollar graphics rendering studio for B5.
The PC I'm using renders VR in 4k at 144FPS for videogames. Moore's law is a helluva drug.
>For dumb rounds and you could tell smart rounds to go to the predicted location but that wont take into account the target changing course
My homie, we've had weapons that could course correct for decades. No excuse to not have such ability centuries in the future
>They did use missiles in a few instances but it is limited.
Which is even more moronic. They can use missiles at standoff range and saturate a target area. None of the fricking ships in that universe have point defense systems either
course correct for what you cant track the ship, you can physically eyeball it and see it through an optical telescope but that is it >None of the fricking ships in that universe have point defense systems either
No we def see B5 had quad rail guns and RAMs for defense
>For dumb rounds and you could tell smart rounds to go to the predicted location but that wont take into account the target changing course
My homie, we've had weapons that could course correct for decades. No excuse to not have such ability centuries in the future
>They did use missiles in a few instances but it is limited.
Which is even more moronic. They can use missiles at standoff range and saturate a target area. None of the fricking ships in that universe have point defense systems either
course correct for what you cant track the ship, you can physically eyeball it and see it through an optical telescope but that is it >None of the fricking ships in that universe have point defense systems either
No we def see B5 had quad rail guns and RAMs for defense
>For dumb rounds and you could tell smart rounds to go to the predicted location but that wont take into account the target changing course
My homie, we've had weapons that could course correct for decades. No excuse to not have such ability centuries in the future
>They did use missiles in a few instances but it is limited.
Which is even more moronic. They can use missiles at standoff range and saturate a target area. None of the fricking ships in that universe have point defense systems either
No. No show, including the Expanse, has done Newtonian physics right for space combat. I suspect that's because the real deal would be not exciting for television screens.
Something like this
would get hit with a projectile fired at fractions of the speed of light and be obliterated instantly with no warning, killing everyone aboard. That might be interesting to see just once, but doesn't make for good television.
Regarding missiles, like everyone is talking about, those are generally moronic for space combat. They would be detected at range, meaning they have to be fast to avoid defenses. To be fast, they'd need a powerful engine, making them even more detectable, as well as a fuel source that'll probably be rapidly expended via constant acceleration, meaning the range will be short. Shorter than a railgun, which can fire faster, can't be intercepted, and gives no warning. The only reason to have them would be to bomb stuff through an atmosphere.
Well B5 still fell into the same trap they all do of depicting space battles as if they were ships of the line at sea, like some British age of sail adventure. There's not going to be broadsides in space, that's just fantasy. I will admit it's pretty to watch though.
What there would be in IRL space combat is nothing at all, followed by sudden extremely powerful violence.
B5 would sometimes go hard scifi with battles. There's one where the Narn engage the Shadows with beam weapons outside of visual range.
1 year ago
Anonymous
>B5 would sometimes go hard scifi with battles. There's one where the Narn engage the Shadows with beam weapons outside of visual range.
It's a great sequence.
A pity they dropped that approach afterwards. Need more BVR space combat.
>Regarding missiles, like everyone is talking about, those are generally moronic for space combat. They would be detected at range, meaning they have to be fast to avoid defenses. To be fast, they'd need a powerful engine, making them even more detectable, as well as a fuel source that'll probably be rapidly expended via constant acceleration, meaning the range will be short. Shorter than a railgun, which can fire faster, can't be intercepted, and gives no warning. The only reason to have them would be to bomb stuff through an atmosphere.
Projectile-based point defence will need a considerable amount of time to reach the missile and can be avoided if the missile has active sensors.
Beam-based point defence has a linear relationship between aperture diameter and effective range. Any point defence gun capable of intercepting a missile at a respectable distance would be the size of the main battery. Which is fine, we can have the main battery do double duty, but heat management is an issue, and it can be overwhelmed.
Any point defence gun small enough to fit in numbers would not be effective past doubledigit kilometres.
And you can't even fit them in numbers because heat management sets hard restrictions on the number of guns you have, anyway.
All of this also means that the missile can coast most of the way, only needing enough Delta V to do course correction and for the final approach, making them smaller and cheaper.
The best way to intercept missiles are, amusingly, smaller gunboats that can meet them at range. Which requires the missiles to be protected by their own gunboats, of course.
Oh, did I just set up fighters in space? Guess all the nerds b***hing about them need to take it up the ass.
>All of this also means that the missile can coast most of the way, only needing enough Delta V to do course correction and for the final approach, making them smaller and cheaper.
Really feels like it defeats the point of using a missile.
In the time it takes for your coasting missiles to reach the target said target has already ventilated the launcher with railguns/lasers, then utilised its superior delta v to manoeuvre beyond the course correction capabilities of the missiles.
Best point defence is being where the missile isn't, and this is the fundamental reason why missiles in space are of questionable utility. Spaceships are fast. Spaceships carry much more fuel than a missile. Any missile launched from far enough away to avoid projectile based retaliation will miss if the target manoeuvres at all. Any missile launched so close that the target can't evade needs to be transported through said projectile based weapons field of fire.
>Regarding missiles, like everyone is talking about, those are generally moronic for space combat. They would be detected at range, meaning they have to be fast to avoid defenses. To be fast, they'd need a powerful engine, making them even more detectable, as well as a fuel source that'll probably be rapidly expended via constant acceleration, meaning the range will be short. Shorter than a railgun, which can fire faster, can't be intercepted, and gives no warning. The only reason to have them would be to bomb stuff through an atmosphere.
You can fire a missile through a railgun, and that missile could iself be railgun.
Nebulous Fleet Command works with those issues with missiles by forcing players to use different tactics with different missile types. Having a missile that has a second "Sprint" stage allows you to fire it from far away or around objects to engage the ship with a missile that the enemy's PD cannot engage in time. Missiles can be fired in groups and with additional onboard munitions to overwhelm the PD with targets to track. There's a lot more to it, but it's honestly just a naval combat game in space.
In the time it takes for your coasting missiles to reach the target said target has already ventilated the launcher with railguns/lasers, then utilised its superior delta v to manoeuvre beyond the course correction capabilities of the missiles.
Best point defence is being where the missile isn't, and this is the fundamental reason why missiles in space are of questionable utility. Spaceships are fast. Spaceships carry much more fuel than a missile. Any missile launched from far enough away to avoid projectile based retaliation will miss if the target manoeuvres at all. Any missile launched so close that the target can't evade needs to be transported through said projectile based weapons field of fire.
>Regarding missiles, like everyone is talking about, those are generally moronic for space combat >and this is the fundamental reason why missiles in space are of questionable utility. Spaceships are fast. Spaceships carry much more fuel than a missile
This is some real hot take. Projectrho is dying inside tight now.
In the time it takes for your coasting missiles to reach the target said target has already ventilated the launcher with railguns/lasers, then utilised its superior delta v to manoeuvre beyond the course correction capabilities of the missiles.
Best point defence is being where the missile isn't, and this is the fundamental reason why missiles in space are of questionable utility. Spaceships are fast. Spaceships carry much more fuel than a missile. Any missile launched from far enough away to avoid projectile based retaliation will miss if the target manoeuvres at all. Any missile launched so close that the target can't evade needs to be transported through said projectile based weapons field of fire.
>missiles in space
Sorry anon(s) but you are very wrong, I hope you know The Expanse is built around basically engines, high-trust and nearly null consumption.
Maybe you believe missile = short range based on how they are used in our current atmosphere&gravity based warfare where missiles are constrained by size, cruising range, top speed or limited in methods to evade hard-kill intercept.
You saying "detectable" suggest you don't know stealth in space was never a possibility to begin with and it won't bother missiles.
Even the wording is wrong: >To be fast, they'd need a powerful engine >Spaceships are fast.
A missiles is literally a spaceship with only the mass needed to kill another, and yes it can be with 100% success.
Missile do not need to be as massive nor need as much propellant to achieve the same range.
A manned spaceship is going to be heavier and cannot have a high acceleration, any extra mass will reduce its range and it is mathematically impossible for a heavier spaceship with inferior acceleration to "evade" smaller missiles with higher acceleration and enough propellant to get in an intercept trajectory.
Even interplanetary missiles using a expendable nuclear-bus would be 100% worth the price to kill a costlier manned spaceship.
Yes you could make missile(s) launched by stupid people who can't do math waste their fuel.
Or maybe you'll face missile(s) launched by smart people who did not leave you any mathematical way out.
Do hope you'll have enough "railguns" to shot down the "lone missile" that split into hundred(s) of guided-projectiles.
With Bola-type design (possible in space) you'd have trouble even calculating where to shoot. Or shades that only need to be between your sensors and the missiles.
Hope you are quick because within orbits a missile could easily match the speed of a railgun.
Yes it will be costly for the equivalent of "a railgun shell" but space war are going to be one-hit kill.
>still face a swarm of guided subprojectile in a coordinated cloud that can never be shot down in time
It's game over, man, game over!
1 year ago
Anonymous
you'd either have to split them off close to intercept, giving the ship time to shoot it down from long range, or you're splitting them off into multiple missiles with deltav vastly smaller than the one big missile, meaning the ship can outburn them easier
however space missiles do add one interesting note to space combat, if we go the route of unmanned space warships (unlikely, someone has to do maintenance on them after all) a ramming manouver absolutely becomes an option
1 year ago
Anonymous
By the time a properly designed missile-bus get in intercept range (including projectile travel time), it will be too late for a manned spaceship to evade split missiles no matter how low their dV are.
A manned "warship" with reactor & stuff is not going to have high acceleration nor be able to vector into another direction like the dancing ships from "The Expanse".
http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/spacewardefense.php#id--Evasive_Maneuvers--Moment_of_Inertia
Therefore an enemy could see which way your ship is currently pointed, and insist in that direction.
A smart enemy who only need some of the projectiles to hit, will scatter them so even if you burn in a direction you'd put yourself in the trajectory of another.
Or the enemy can deduce by math what direction you are forced to take. It would be silly for you to do a burn in a direction that would deorbit your ship or on a trajectory you can not deviate from.
Orbital and Interplanetary space are going to have very different dynamic. Each would favor different missiles approach.
Trying to outrange a missiles will only work if the ship have vastly more dV or can force the missile into an impossibly costly maneuver.
A missile don't carry fuel to go back, don't carry life-support, equipment and quo, it can absolutely compete with a ship and have extra dV for a final sprint.
Depending of orbital mechanic the missiles can easily arrive at a speed comparable to a coilgun like the BAE project (~5 km/s)
And if the missile-bus have the right mix of deltaV/Thrust/Time it can arrive faster than any coilgun/railgun projectile ever could.
The above can be tested in ChoDE (pic) and that game don't even have complex AI-driven tactic with guided submunition swarm.
1 year ago
Anonymous
in the guaranteed intercept scenario, what's stopping the targeted ship from shooting down that lone missile from 2-3 thousand kilometers away? That's the one thing that I feel a lot of missile fans get wrong about space combat, the PDC range isn't 1-2 kilometers like in naval warfare, there's no atmosphere to make bullets ineffective, no horizon to hide behind.Of course accuracy at such ranges is abysmal, but with your proposed 5km/s it gives the ship a lot of time to defend itself.Of course such a defence could be countered with either a same time-on-target strike or a grouped missile salvo, the first one being delta-v expensive and the other opening the strike to a nuclear counter-missile.
Another thing, I don't see how acceleration changes anything when the COaDE style combat consists of minutes long burns alongside hours or even days of waiting, the delta v gain from having the bigger tank (thus from the square cubed law a more efficient one) does give the "slow big ship" a manouver advantage.
1 year ago
Anonymous
>in the guaranteed intercept scenario, what's stopping the targeted ship from shooting down that lone missile from 2-3 thousand kilometers away?
2000km? By space standard this is no distance at all, the missiles could have split much further away and have enough dV or speed to make evasive maneuver pointless.
I'm not saying you can't make scenario where the imperfect/obsolete missiles are shot down ...by a railgun projectile that might need guided-projectile itself because absolute precision is hard even with magnetic gun in space.
In such missile-centric setting, the obvious next step would obviously be defense drones or antimissile missile meant to force attacker into less efficient tactic.
And who know if efficient-laser tech don't make it the only interesting weapon.
>Another thing, I don't see how acceleration changes anything when the COaDE style combat consists of minutes long burns alongside hours or even days of waiting, the delta v gain from having the bigger tank (thus from the square cubed law a more efficient one) does give the "slow big ship" a manouver advantage.
As much as I respect COaDE autism, the game is limited by the difficulty to simulate military-grade AI made by genius, finding the ultimate fleet composition.
The author also wanted military spaceship, there's good reason to think they may not exist or be worth it economically.
In my book "manned ship" are what you keep behind 1000km of drones, counter-drones, counter-counter-drones who deploy/dock back to unmanned-tug.
It remind me a story about a wargame, some computer scientist kept winning by ignoring "conventional warfare" and minmaxed the math. His first win was a spam of smaller unit.
The Omega's will forever by my favorite sci-fi warship, they just feel right. Maybe some nostalgia thrown in ,
the Expanse
https://i.imgur.com/YOpz9Jc.jpg
>earth ships don't use missiles
[...] >None of the fricking ships in that universe have point defense systems either
You are either didn't watch the show, lying or moronic. Not sure which.
[...] >Animation budget, I think. The SFX department on B5 was on a shoestring. The first season was done with Amiga computers.
Not really hardware issue at all, it just happened to be first show doing CGI on major scale. Making animation takes time, from animator, more objects you add, more shit you need to animate. Laser beams and some sort light balls for particle projection cannons are just simpler to animate.
When it comes to Amiga, those were pretty common in audio-visual productions of all kinds until early 2000's, shit stuck around for almost decade after Commodore went belly up because Amiga in 90's had better software for that shit than pretty much any competitor at the time. Saying Amiga for kids might imply reasonably priced home computers, with comparable prices to modern reasonably priced gaming PC's is absolute bullshit. Amiga 2000, 3000 and 4000 line up was pretty different from Amiga 500 and 1200 home computers, especially with expansions, when it comes to both price and capability.
https://i.imgur.com/PBbAWt1.jpg
>No longer contracted to Babylon 5 meant that Foundation Imaging could then go to work for Star Trek
Fun fact. Pic related from Star Trek Voyager is literally unused Vorlon ship form B5. That is confirmed by guy who made the model, there might be more B5 originated work in progress stuff in later seasons of Voyager and DS9. Star Trek had similar issues when it came to effects as B5, there isn't lot of time to do models and animations for a weekly tv-show. Choke point for VFX was never computer hardware, that was the workforce. Kinda old scifi movies and tv-shows from early 2000's often better VFX than stuff coming out now. Why? Pretty much everyone working in the industry in late 90's and early 2000's were enthusiastic about stuff they did. No amount of rendering passes for dynamic light on some frame can replace good taste and commitment to the art.
Why is it that every sci-fi ship has their guns bolted to the front when turrets exist? You’d think being able to shoot in directions other than dead ahead would be useful in space
Why bother with turrets when your ship shoots at things at 500km+ away and your 5000m long warship turns at 30 degrees a second like in trek because of inertial dampeners kek.
Spinal mounts. The idea is that the ship is designed to handle Gs primarily on a particular axis... so you put the giant railgun on that axis (albeit usually facing the opposite direction to the engines). That lets you mount a more powerful weapon than a turret could normally handle, because the ship's structure is already reinforced to handle loads on that axis.
>earth ships don't use missiles
[...] >None of the fricking ships in that universe have point defense systems either
You are either didn't watch the show, lying or moronic. Not sure which.
[...] >Animation budget, I think. The SFX department on B5 was on a shoestring. The first season was done with Amiga computers.
Not really hardware issue at all, it just happened to be first show doing CGI on major scale. Making animation takes time, from animator, more objects you add, more shit you need to animate. Laser beams and some sort light balls for particle projection cannons are just simpler to animate.
When it comes to Amiga, those were pretty common in audio-visual productions of all kinds until early 2000's, shit stuck around for almost decade after Commodore went belly up because Amiga in 90's had better software for that shit than pretty much any competitor at the time. Saying Amiga for kids might imply reasonably priced home computers, with comparable prices to modern reasonably priced gaming PC's is absolute bullshit. Amiga 2000, 3000 and 4000 line up was pretty different from Amiga 500 and 1200 home computers, especially with expansions, when it comes to both price and capability.
...my god, the logo for this faction is just terrible.
>For dumb rounds and you could tell smart rounds to go to the predicted location but that wont take into account the target changing course
My homie, we've had weapons that could course correct for decades. No excuse to not have such ability centuries in the future
>They did use missiles in a few instances but it is limited.
Which is even more moronic. They can use missiles at standoff range and saturate a target area. None of the fricking ships in that universe have point defense systems either
>None of the fricking ships in that universe have point defense systems either
You are either didn't watch the show, lying or moronic. Not sure which.
>never included in the show for some reason
Animation budget, I think. The SFX department on B5 was on a shoestring. The first season was done with Amiga computers.
>Animation budget, I think. The SFX department on B5 was on a shoestring. The first season was done with Amiga computers.
Not really hardware issue at all, it just happened to be first show doing CGI on major scale. Making animation takes time, from animator, more objects you add, more shit you need to animate. Laser beams and some sort light balls for particle projection cannons are just simpler to animate.
When it comes to Amiga, those were pretty common in audio-visual productions of all kinds until early 2000's, shit stuck around for almost decade after Commodore went belly up because Amiga in 90's had better software for that shit than pretty much any competitor at the time. Saying Amiga for kids might imply reasonably priced home computers, with comparable prices to modern reasonably priced gaming PC's is absolute bullshit. Amiga 2000, 3000 and 4000 line up was pretty different from Amiga 500 and 1200 home computers, especially with expansions, when it comes to both price and capability.
they upgraded the computers after season 2
you can see a very noticable bump in the quality of the digital from season 3 on
that is when they started using the nebula backgrounds, have a lot more ships doing a lot more things and doing it fast and with the camera moving around a lot
>they upgraded the computers after season 2
They got rid of effects company and hired animators themselves, bought bunch of hardware and started doing effects in house, cutting the middle man saves money. I picked up Amiga thing, because that for ignorants is implying hardware would be cheapo home computers. All computers of the era, including 100k+ SGI workstations are toasters by any semi-modern standards. Hardware was never bad by standards of the day. >that is when they started using the nebula backgrounds
Wonder what else changed. Hubble Space Telescope started working properly, after its optics were fixed. It produced copyright free high resolution images of nebulas.
>They got rid of effects company and hired animators themselves
After season 3 Douglas Netter wanted to buy out Foundation Imaging and make it an inhouse unit
They preferred to remain independent
So Netter let them go and hired a bunch of junior Foundation Imaging staff and put his son or grandson in charge of them :
No longer contracted to Babylon 5 meant that Foundation Imaging could then go to work for Star Trek and greatly improve their effects that were still mostly being done by ILM with models
>No longer contracted to Babylon 5 meant that Foundation Imaging could then go to work for Star Trek
Fun fact. Pic related from Star Trek Voyager is literally unused Vorlon ship form B5. That is confirmed by guy who made the model, there might be more B5 originated work in progress stuff in later seasons of Voyager and DS9. Star Trek had similar issues when it came to effects as B5, there isn't lot of time to do models and animations for a weekly tv-show. Choke point for VFX was never computer hardware, that was the workforce. Kinda old scifi movies and tv-shows from early 2000's often better VFX than stuff coming out now. Why? Pretty much everyone working in the industry in late 90's and early 2000's were enthusiastic about stuff they did. No amount of rendering passes for dynamic light on some frame can replace good taste and commitment to the art.
1 year ago
Anonymous
That thing is roughly as dense as planet Earth.
That's not a bioship, that thing's made of solid Titanium. With a lead core.
How are you getting the range, heading and speed of a target, if you can't see the target on radar?
Suppose the ship armor absorbs all radiowave/lightwave and doesn't bounce back any for receiving end. How are you ever "seeing" anything in the empty space? Might as well be shooting everywhere in every corner of the space at that point.
not to mention distances in space battles could be hundreds of kilometers
even if you could just look out a window (you wouldn't have one) the chances of seeing and estimating off visual alone is just lol, lmao
Minbari "Stealth" technology as portrayed in the prequal film "In the beginning" had a lot more to do with their sensors blinding the earth ship's targeting.
Think of it like getting a spotlight pointed directly in your eyes and everything goes white. You can't just "Aim at the light" because at that moment Everything looks the same. As for physical guided or unguided munitions the FX team and JMS originally started off trying to portray very long range engagements between capital ships but later with pressure from the network moved things closer together. The universe uses Interceptor cannons and sweeping beam weapons in the same way that The Expanse used PDC cannons that screen incoming shots both ballistic and energy weapons though they seemed to have little effect on beam type cannons. The Star Fury also carries missiles as well but are not seen in the show.
In the original design docs the Star Fury used mass driver style weapons that launched solid projectiles with a magnetic accelerator but this was again changed for visuals before the show's pilot aired. In fact before The expanse B5 showed more "realism" in a scifi property than any show we had seen to date. Some time ago the writer of The Expanse and JMS crossed paths in a twitter exchange where James Corey mentioned that B5 was part of his inspiration for the books.
the expanse where it's all moronic politics and sitting around hoping that your computer-guided munitions are slightly better than the other guys computer-guided munitions
>Need marines on mars who are trained in high grav to be effective on earth. >Which means you need high bone density and muscle mass >Most are WYMENS!!!!!!
homie what are you smoking? Most of the martian recon marines are men. Frankie was a physical freak.
https://i.imgur.com/IBvdU8v.jpg
aside from women being naturally weaker and thus shit material for high grav (for a martian) combat, people in general are very tired of Mary Sues mandated by the woke cultists plagueing entertainment
notice also in expanse the agenda creep in every aspect. >Like the best pres of earth being a pajeeta after men fail on multiple tries, >the belter rebel commander being constantly second guessed by his right hand who (of course) is always right, >Holden being holden to the obnoxious girl with the zoomer perm haircut, the only correct, >righteous and not cringe belter faction being led by Drummer who lives with a hamster colony commune "family" >the crack shot ace pajeet pilot Holden had effortlessly replaced by the martian mariner (after pajeet got cancelled irl) who turned out to be just as good as the natural born pilot. >the colonies on the alien planet led by strong, independent women who, of course, were in the right despite being illegal gypsy squatters and trying to kill the research crew sent out to prospect. While the only guy who had the correct answer for the belter question was, of course, the seasons big bad.
Bobbie in the books was established as being unusually large and strong due to her polynesian heritage.
I like the fact the director took the time to shoot closeups of her ass in tight space outfits coming down the ladders.
I had a sensible chuckle from one of Bobbie's internal monologs in the books. She said she usually had an advantage in social situations. Either the person was thrown off by being intimidated by her size or they were thrown off by her activating a chocolate muscle girl fetish.
>Muh books! >100lb woman is as strong as 250lb Arnold villain
The concept is overused and is moronic.
1 year ago
Anonymous
Have you considered not being an irredeemable homosexual?
1 year ago
Anonymous
>if you don't like current entertainment that puts diversity before story writing and character development, you're a gay
Sorry that I like good entertainment and don't consume current product.
1 year ago
Anonymous
>puts diversity before story writing and character development
How exactly did it do that? Be specific. What character development and story writing took a back seat?
1 year ago
Anonymous
This anon summed it up the best
https://i.imgur.com/IBvdU8v.jpg
aside from women being naturally weaker and thus shit material for high grav (for a martian) combat, people in general are very tired of Mary Sues mandated by the woke cultists plagueing entertainment
notice also in expanse the agenda creep in every aspect. >Like the best pres of earth being a pajeeta after men fail on multiple tries, >the belter rebel commander being constantly second guessed by his right hand who (of course) is always right, >Holden being holden to the obnoxious girl with the zoomer perm haircut, the only correct, >righteous and not cringe belter faction being led by Drummer who lives with a hamster colony commune "family" >the crack shot ace pajeet pilot Holden had effortlessly replaced by the martian mariner (after pajeet got cancelled irl) who turned out to be just as good as the natural born pilot. >the colonies on the alien planet led by strong, independent women who, of course, were in the right despite being illegal gypsy squatters and trying to kill the research crew sent out to prospect. While the only guy who had the correct answer for the belter question was, of course, the seasons big bad.
1 year ago
Anonymous
>has never met a Polynesia woman
Samoans are literally built different
1 year ago
Anonymous
>heavist deadlift by a woman, 621 lbs >heaviest deadlift by a man, 1,185 lbs
>Suit whose reaction time, speed and strength is dictated by the person inside makes up for women being slower and weaker.
At that point what's the point of having a person inside when you can make a robot for cheaper that will do everything better.
1 year ago
Anonymous
>At that point what's the point of having a person inside when you can make a robot for cheaper that will do everything better.
has it ever crossed your mind that an automated robot has significantly less narrative potential to become a character that readers (or the writer) can associate with, and therefore limits the ability of the author to drive the narrative through the character's perspectives, opinions - and prejudices - as well as their actions?
1 year ago
Anonymous
>Writes a story that is science fiction however based on the laws of physics and nature. >Completely ignores biology and states that women are just as strong as men.
aside from women being naturally weaker and thus shit material for high grav (for a martian) combat, people in general are very tired of Mary Sues mandated by the woke cultists plagueing entertainment
notice also in expanse the agenda creep in every aspect. >Like the best pres of earth being a pajeeta after men fail on multiple tries, >the belter rebel commander being constantly second guessed by his right hand who (of course) is always right, >Holden being holden to the obnoxious girl with the zoomer perm haircut, the only correct, >righteous and not cringe belter faction being led by Drummer who lives with a hamster colony commune "family" >the crack shot ace pajeet pilot Holden had effortlessly replaced by the martian mariner (after pajeet got cancelled irl) who turned out to be just as good as the natural born pilot. >the colonies on the alien planet led by strong, independent women who, of course, were in the right despite being illegal gypsy squatters and trying to kill the research crew sent out to prospect. While the only guy who had the correct answer for the belter question was, of course, the seasons big bad.
>didn’t read the books
Holden was a Pajeet because he was a Pajeet in the books and he was a talented Pajeet because he was literally a Pajeet PC in a tabletop campaign of Traveller you dumb culture warrior, and I say that as someone who doesn’t like the show and thinks the books are mid
Yeah nah c**t, as an aussie I can tell you right now that polynesian women (who bobbie is supposed to be) like that exist. The show and books had heaps of gay woke shit, bobby wasn't one of them
Eheh, at least Bobby was a TRAINED marine. Not like Avasaralla and the whole, smelly yaaasqueens behind her.
The physics checked out for the most part. But on the topic of military - to come back to the question OP had - it was more a political show and therefore
'insert latte-drinking millennial nasal tone
military `stuff` just `kinda happened` and some people died and got shredded.
I rate that show 6/10.
REALLY good visuals,
SOLID grasps on physics,
industrial sized cliffhanger insertions (basically ever ep ended with something hanging in the air),
and some sorry ass woke shit that just made my eyes roll.
Eheh, at least Bobby was a TRAINED marine. Not like Avasaralla and the whole, smelly yaaasqueens behind her.
The physics checked out for the most part. But on the topic of military - to come back to the question OP had - it was more a political show and therefore
'insert latte-drinking millennial nasal tone
military `stuff` just `kinda happened` and some people died and got shredded.
I rate that show 6/10.
REALLY good visuals,
SOLID grasps on physics,
industrial sized cliffhanger insertions (basically ever ep ended with something hanging in the air),
and some sorry ass woke shit that just made my eyes roll.
I like B5 better
Bosmang Camina was the only good female character, and truly a good female character for fricking once.
>In space no one can hear you scream - unless it is the battle cry of the United States Marine Corp!
As much as I liked Space Above and Beyond growing up it has to be the worst offender >recruits still in bootcamp sent to mars to check on radio telescope relay >marine fighter squadron pilots routinely tasked to fly transports, do ground pounding, intel, etc
>marine fighter squadron pilots routinely tasked to fly transports, do ground pounding, intel, etc
Yeah, this was the real limitation of the series. It would have been better to be two separate character sets that occasionally intersected. One set of aviators, one set of expeditionary ground forces.
>I, STAR COLONEL NICHOLAI MALTHUS, DO HEREBY CLAIM THIS THREAD IN THE NAME OF THE GREATEST MILITARY SF PRODUCTION - BATTLETECH >WHAT FORCES DARE DEFEND IT
No one gives enough credit to Battletech. They just see the mechs and go "WEEB SHIT" and move on, ignoring the entire franchise is centered around giga military autism. People would rather play Warhammer with its space magic, than shoot ERPPCs and LRM20s at approaching dropships laden with infantry and tanks, and cackling maniacally as they crash into a city and explode, taking out several buildings with them. Sad.
it has a lot of hand waving space magic in terms of ranges and abilities and sensors
but if you really stated weapons to have ranges of several km instead of ~600 meters you'd have to play on a gigantic field or adjust the scale and cause a new group of problems
I mean, they just explain that part away for the sake of gameplay by saying the technology loss from the Succession Wars was so huge that humanity practically reverted to medieval times, and that while they can build a lot of the military hardware they now use, they can't improve on it really or even understand how it totally functions. That's why they use short-range swarms of guided missiles, and lasers with a range of just a few km, etc.
In terms of actual table top gameplay though, full-spectrum Battletech is vastly more entertaining than Warhammer.
Ranges in the TT are deliberately shrunk down and abstracted so you don't have to rent a warehouse floor to play a big engagement.
Like, compare the RPG and Tabletop ranges: A shoulder-launched SRM in the TT has a max range of like 180 meters, while the same launcher in the RPG goes out to 750 meters for a long-range shot. RPG ranges for LRM enable straight up indirect fire over the horizon and the only direct-fire weapons longer-ranged than that (AC/2s, Light Guass etc.) are at least in part designed for AA duties.
Aren’t the succession wars basically what’s going on in Eastern Europe, but with all the inner sphere getting bombed back to the Stone Age?
That’s pretty realistic
Per the game lore, the Succession Wars were moronicly violent. Like, orbital-nukes-into-playgrounds violent. So yeah kinda. The rigid military hierarchy broke down, and individual regiments ended up becoming more like roving bands of boyars looting one place to go fight somewhere else. I'd actually say it was more like the 30 Year's War, in that any semblance of order just went right out the window.
Unfortunately, it's also the best backdrop for the series, apart from maybe the Clan invasions. All the latter lore is really boring, personally speaking.
in the star league era the standard deployment was a brigade of 3 mech regiments
by the time of the 3000s a regiment was the largest organization, and even then its forces only fought company-sized crossboarder raids
>in the star league era the standard deployment was a brigade of 3 mech regiments
Bigger formations, because they literally had more gear.
Regiments by the time of the tabletop game are about 3-5 battalions and 100-180 or so mechs, with the rest being tanks, infantry, VTOLs, logistical, C&C, etc. I don't think anyone plays with regiment-level units though, Battletech just isn't popular enough to pull that off. A shame really.
1 year ago
Anonymous
BattleForce is lance-sized units, that has been around a long time
Strategic BattleForce allows for regiment sized units, not sure how many actually play that
1 year ago
Anonymous
>tfw you will never experience a strategic game of Battletech like this
1 year ago
Anonymous
Go to Cincinatti
1 year ago
Anonymous
Just in general?
1 year ago
Anonymous
The local BT chapter is... infamous. They're a large part of the reason why the Blakists kept winning against all odds (scenarios were played out at cons and the results were used to write the overall story, and CGL drafted them to play as the Blakists. Oops). Several members are regulars on /btg/.
1 year ago
Anonymous
>Battletech just isn't popular enough
Battletech is the only tabletop (sci-fi at least) that i've wanted to try out. Sadly however I have never met anyone else who wanted to play.
1 year ago
Anonymous
Try MegaMek. It's literally a free version of the tabletop game that can be played against local AI or online against other people.
1 year ago
Anonymous
This. Megamek has all the rules. ALLLLLL the rules. The actual tabletop rules, not that HBS gunk. Even most of the obscure optional ones (and you can turn them on or off). It has a single-player mercenary campaign mode that's actually pretty good, and you can play in any era you like across a thousand years.
Also, /btg/ and Sarna are helpful resources. /btg/ might even help you find some people to play Megamek online with.
1 year ago
Anonymous
>Sadly however I have never met anyone else who wanted to play.
The managing company is incompetent. They give it basically zero advertising or support, and their sole interest is to make money off legacy players. No one wants to play because no one really knows it exists. If they knew what it was, they WOULD want to play. That's the paradox.
It works for me, at any rate. It's futuristic space Chechnya 24/7.
1 year ago
Anonymous
They did license a really good and faithful version on the PC. And fricking Black folk on PrepHole and /btg/ and the CBT forums shat all over it because you could OPTIONALLY choose some pronoun bullshit (or you could choose not to) and because there were some VERY VERY minor differences in mechanics.
The CBT community doesn't deserve nice things. Although NEA seems like a nice guy. Apart from the weird porno fanfiction he wrote.
1 year ago
Anonymous
The only reason to get mad at the Battletech game is because there's not much variety in weapons or mechs. Some autismos modded it though and added in hundreds of mechs, as well as playable tanks, VTOLs, and basically every weapon ever dreamed up. The mod is 3x the size of the base game.
1 year ago
Anonymous
Which BT game and mod?
1 year ago
Anonymous
The only reason to get mad at the Battletech game is because there's not much variety in weapons or mechs. Some autismos modded it though and added in hundreds of mechs, as well as playable tanks, VTOLs, and basically every weapon ever dreamed up. The mod is 3x the size of the base game.
They expanded the Mechs and parts a bit in later DLCs, too.
Also, the mechanics differences if at all made things better overall IMO. The buff to ye olde autocannons alone was great, actually amde the smaller ones viable.
Which BT game and mod?
Harebrained Schemes' Battletech TBS game.
1 year ago
Anonymous
Battletech is one of those properties that I should enjoy and has occasionally piqued my curiosity but I never got into it, perhaps for this reason. It was interesting though... this new tabletop gaming bar opened up in my town (popular place too) and I wandered in and saw a couple probably in their late 30s / early 40s playing Battletech. I was, like, well that's cool in an unusual way.
1 year ago
Anonymous
You can come to /tg/ battle tech general and shitpost with us anon, and there is MegaMek than makes playing the game fun and not have to look for all the tables all the time.
1 year ago
Anonymous
>Sadly however I have never met anyone else who wanted to play.
The managing company is incompetent. They give it basically zero advertising or support, and their sole interest is to make money off legacy players. No one wants to play because no one really knows it exists. If they knew what it was, they WOULD want to play. That's the paradox.
It works for me, at any rate. It's futuristic space Chechnya 24/7.
That and the main BT system is kinda clunky and gets really time-intensive once you try to play larger than lance-on-lance engagements, let alone anything involving combined arms.
1 year ago
Anonymous
It's on the upswing, their new kickstarter just got 5.5 million
1 year ago
Anonymous
One cool aspect is that virtually all SLDF warships are actually armed transports, dedicating more tonnage towards cargo space than towards weapons and armor. Even the battleships.
And this actually makes sense in context, because of how BT's FTL works. And because the SLDF had more battleships and heavy cruisers than the rest of humanity had warships. Combined. So, they could afford to give most warships huge cargo bays, because space superiority was rarely in question until Amaris got control of the SDS.
Thankfully, the Clans never understood logistics like their ancestors did.
Per the game lore, the Succession Wars were moronicly violent. Like, orbital-nukes-into-playgrounds violent. So yeah kinda. The rigid military hierarchy broke down, and individual regiments ended up becoming more like roving bands of boyars looting one place to go fight somewhere else. I'd actually say it was more like the 30 Year's War, in that any semblance of order just went right out the window.
Unfortunately, it's also the best backdrop for the series, apart from maybe the Clan invasions. All the latter lore is really boring, personally speaking.
Russia and Syria before that are more akin to the Chaos March
military too weak to fully take over
various independent factions and militias sprout up to defend their newly independent fiefs
The Succession Wars are like WW2 if it went on for a few hundred years at like 10x intensity. Where you just can't produce things not only because the facilities producing the material are gone, but all the factories, labs and planets they were on.
Nukes and theater level chem weapons were the norm back then.
Eh, not quite. The First and Second Succession Wars (both lasted like 30 years each, with a ~10-year pause in between) were more akin to a full-blown Cold War goes hot scenario with all sides trying for full-on strategic destruction of their opponents warmaking and industrial potential. Everything that looked remotely important got nuked if at all practical. Military infrastructure, military-related industry, R&D, administrative hubs, hell even just civilian industry and whatever could theoretically be dual-use. Worlds died, and that was just collateral damage outside a few exceptions like Jinjiro Kurita going full psycho after his dad bit it.
They only stopped because they all by the end of the 2nd Succession War realised that interstellar civilization was literally at the brink of total collapse. WarShips - military FTL-capable ships - and the industries building them were literally extinct and civilian FTL JumpShip production had declined to the point where they could barely replace just the normal attrition from accidents and wear&tear.
The 3rd Succession War that followed and lasted ~160 years was essentially a mix between WWI and medieval-style raiding warfare. The lack of FTL transport meant that you couldn't really do massive invasions on an interstellar scale anymore. JumpShips were safe though, because basically everybody relevant agreed that destroying them now was a crime against humanity. So everyone just rolled out the militia, dug in on the border planets and put reserves one or two FTL jumps back and every real invasion would generally get stuck one jump in and then have to grind it out while both sides tried to bring in reinforcements. Campaigns slowed to a crawl and small-unit raids became the prevalent type of combat.
Battletech tries to be realistic but it's in the context of some really moronic foundational rules, so it's a give-some-take-some relationship to realism.
* """long-range""" missiles are about half a kilometre, and completely unguided without extra special equipment
* Literally ballistic weapons can't be fired *ballistically* at targets over the horizon, only missiles
* Armour is just protective hit points rather than a pierces/doesn't-pierce relationship like it mostly has in reality
* Let's build armoured fighting vehicles with giant windowed wienerpits, that's a great idea
* Walking tanks fighting at point-blank range, in fact even actually punching each other
* A computer allowing the giant robots to coordinate with each other takes up space & weight measured in fricking *tons* (this one at least is understandable since back in the 80s people thought powerful computers would always be big & heavy)
So yeah let's not pretend Battletech is the pinnacle of realism. It's decent at being internally consistent, though.
>* """long-range""" missiles are about half a kilometre
Even in the TT rules that seriously reduce weapons ranges for the sake of playability, this is incorrect. Also, the LRM is a tactical system and only considered long-range by that measure (and to differentiate from SRMs.) It's not an artillery weapon.
>and completely unguided without extra special equipment
As is this. The only actually unguided missile weapons in the game are cheapo one-shot rocket pods and specific "deadfire" missiles that sacrifice the basic seeker to pack more boom.
>*Literally ballistic weapons can't be fired *ballistically* at targets over the horizon, only missiles
Yes, because the "ballistic weapons" category are direct-fire weapons that make no accomodations to indirect use. Actual artillery weapons are treated as their own category.
>*Armour is just protective hit points rather than a pierces/doesn't-pierce relationship like it mostly has in reality
Which is an artifact of the in-setting technological progression. Armor has become increasingle ablative in exchange for being stupendously resistance to outright penetration. Older "primitive" or crappy commercial armoring types can be penetrated without ablating everything if you shoot it with a big enoug weapon, but those just aren't used on frontline units anymore exactly for that reason.
>* Let's build armoured fighting vehicles with giant windowed wienerpits, that's a great idea
Yet those "giant" windows are so small that trying to go for a cokcpit shot on a moving target is a waste of time.
>* Walking tanks fighting at point-blank range, in fact even actually punching each other
Which mostly happens in heavily broken or urban terrain, and as a consequence of armor being good enough to allow units to take hits and keep going as a matter of course.
NTA,
To be honest Battletech will obviously suffer from all the flaws related to mecha, AND being ported from arbitrary tabletop gameplay and funky sci-fi weapons that wouldn't exist by realistic physics.
Really, even Gundam is more coherent as pseudo-science and design go. Battledude mocking humanoid shape should remember Battletech still have anthropoid number of arms & legs (save a few exception).
pic 100% related
>Yet those "giant" windows are so small that trying to go for a cokcpit shot on a moving target is a waste of time.
Many battlemech do have GIANT windows right in the center of mass. Redesign or not.
At Battletech level they should have 360° VR with triple redundancy, even with a dedicated FoV for the real sensors
>* A computer allowing the giant robots to coordinate with each other takes up space & weight measured in fricking *tons* (this one at least is understandable since back in the 80s people thought powerful computers would always be big & heavy)
C3 networks do rather more than just "allow units to coordinate with each other". Like, holy shit, the actual level of data sharing and fire-control computation involved to make that work the way it does is pretty damn mind-boggling.
Also, remember that Mech construction rules are abstracted to a point. Like, weapons tonnage includes things like putting those guns into an articulated, armored mount and providing proper connections to power, cooling and autoloader systems. Targetting computers include actual upgrades to those remote mounts and all adjacent systems to work with the improved precision of the system etc.
>C3 Network
I give them inventing L16 before it was a thing IRL, but the computation required to have walking machine is actually far more impressive than just "sharing targeting data" which was IRL only a problem because constant emission make you into a target.
You're completely ignoring that there's degrees there. It's like someone saying modern fire control systems aren't impressive because technology doing the same existed a hudnred years ago already, all while completely ignoring the actual performance of the systems in question.
>heavist deadlift by a woman, 621 lbs >heaviest deadlift by a man, 1,185 lbs
yeah....
I'd like to see the guys who complain about how buff women are an impossible myth try and deadlift 621 pounds. Probably preceede it with the Jackass soundtrack.
1 year ago
Anonymous
again 621lbs of 1185lbs with similar years of training
Average male is stronger than the average female body builder,
Sorry that you don't like reality.
1 year ago
Anonymous
>ignoring the actual performance of the systems in question.
From my point of view you are the one who lack the technical understanding.
You treat it like it's all gradual.
But many tech work in a Yes/No fashion or follow a curve so steep it's also Yes/No.
Sensors and Data sharing are among those,
You either know where the target is down to the meter, or you don't.
You can either transmit targeting data or you don't.
Even jamming is all or nothing nowadays, it's not WWII anymore, you either jammed enemy comm, or you didn't and they got around it.
>* A computer allowing the giant robots to coordinate with each other takes up space & weight measured in fricking *tons* (this one at least is understandable since back in the 80s people thought powerful computers would always be big & heavy)
C3 networks do rather more than just "allow units to coordinate with each other". Like, holy shit, the actual level of data sharing and fire-control computation involved to make that work the way it does is pretty damn mind-boggling.
Also, remember that Mech construction rules are abstracted to a point. Like, weapons tonnage includes things like putting those guns into an articulated, armored mount and providing proper connections to power, cooling and autoloader systems. Targetting computers include actual upgrades to those remote mounts and all adjacent systems to work with the improved precision of the system etc.
All concessions to the board game so you could have a map or battlefield that would fit on a kitchen table with enough detail to have each mech in one hex.
Yeah the longest ranged ballistic weapon has less effective range than a modern HMG but just ignore that and say if they fired 20km I would need a map the size of my house to play on.
Both Battletech and WH40k games where the setting and associated fluff material is better than the game. Even the spin off and licensed vidya are mostly better than original games. Battletech has remained more or less same when it comes to gameplay between new editions, just added more stuff to it. WH40k on the other hand has gone thru plenty of simplification to make easier for kids, some of it good, some of it bad. Best GW games are easily the smaller scale games like Necromunda, Gorkamorka and Bloodbowl. Then again GW's main business has been selling miniatures and new books for new editions for sake of making more money.
Battletech tries to be realistic but it's in the context of some really moronic foundational rules, so it's a give-some-take-some relationship to realism.
* """long-range""" missiles are about half a kilometre, and completely unguided without extra special equipment
* Literally ballistic weapons can't be fired *ballistically* at targets over the horizon, only missiles
* Armour is just protective hit points rather than a pierces/doesn't-pierce relationship like it mostly has in reality
* Let's build armoured fighting vehicles with giant windowed wienerpits, that's a great idea
* Walking tanks fighting at point-blank range, in fact even actually punching each other
* A computer allowing the giant robots to coordinate with each other takes up space & weight measured in fricking *tons* (this one at least is understandable since back in the 80s people thought powerful computers would always be big & heavy)
So yeah let's not pretend Battletech is the pinnacle of realism. It's decent at being internally consistent, though.
All of that is derived from game play limitations, size of a table and trying to balance the game. If we ignore realism aspect entirely, look at the internal consistency. Like 70% canonical mechs have some borderline moronic armament choices. 25% are kinda okay with only mild moronation. 5% of designs actually make sense within game.
One thing is certain, people who made source books about inner sphere factions have no clue about math or human biology. People in BT breed like fricking insects. They also had very little idea of astronomy.
This is the part where I challenge you to a batchall right? ok, ahem > I, LORD OF THE STARS AND GUARIAN OF THE GALAXY DO CHALLENGE YOU TO A DANCE OFF, DARE YE REFUSE MY BATCHAL CLANNER SCUM!?
At least Andromeda's total failure destroyed that trend of "if you don't buy this, YOU'RE A RACIST/SEXIST!!!" whining. The game was so bad it collapsed an entire company and 300+ jobs. People got real silent with the strong-arming after that.
I've yet to make it more than a few hours in that game. Modded to shit, I still can't endure through. Blows my mind they spend years making that pile of shit, but only gave ME3 a fricking year.
>Blows my mind they spend years making that pile of shit, but only gave ME3 a fricking year.
I think someone said that the game was originally meant to make heavy use of procedural generation.
When they couldn't get that to work, or it wasn't cinematic enough, or something, they scrapped that. What was actually released as Andromeda was bashed together from the earlier version's assets and engine in like 1 year.
Yeah the writers are civvies basing it on a tabletop campaign. It’s why their captain can just do whatever he fricking wants without consequences and always saves the day and makes huge decisions for everyone else kek
The shot is a spinally mounted railgun, which is technically too big and powerful for the ship it's mounted to. The rotating ship is being pursued by the ships being shot at.
ya the battle in the refugee camp at the end is pretty kino. its post-apocalypse though, so there's not really any tech or futuristic military concepts on show, more societal collapse and rag-tag militarism.
Getting lucked into super advanced earth technology from the future. Stuck with billions of backward rituals and religious belief shit.
Having no problems of genocide Humanity because they got the wrong idea because activating your weapons is kinda aggressive looking for an outsider, despite their own claimed morally and spiritually superiority.
>activating your weapons is kinda aggressive looking for an outsider
I love how their "best of us all" guy saw how stupid the Minbari were and was endlessly frustrated with them.
>totalitarian regime in space >focus on superweapons over practicality >obsessed with being themed >makes sure the grunts are incompetent morons so they cannot rebel >brought down by its own spitefulness and desire to torture its already defeated foes
It's not a good military, but goddamn is it a realistic take on one specific type of military.
Oh shit I just remembered an old Newgrounds Flash cartoon... let me see if I can find it.
God damn this takes me back.
Did anyone check out my links? Opinions?
Interstellar Marines and Hellion showed a lot of promise, but both were cancelled due to frickery.
I have hopes that Kerbal Space Program or the older Orbiter community will give us the autismo space combat I crave.
Well, now that the Space Station 13 3D remake that was being made out of eight chan by that Russian autist is gone.
Outrim was a web comic with pretty hard physics, but it was based on someone's Traveller campaign. Too bad the author packed it in due to some family drama and never came back.
I heard the RPG Albedo, and the comic that it was based on, were pretty hard-SF settings. I mean, it's furry, but it's that charming sort of early 80's protofurry from before the Sonic OCs and Sparkledogs and the backlash.
No mention of the Battlestar Galactica reboot?
It kind of faded out of the public consciousness like Game of Thrones did, but it did introduce Newtonian physics to space dogfights.
And did anybody read the story at
It took some fricking hunting down, based on vague memories of having read it in an old issue of Omega my father owned. I actually tried sending a link to the Atomicrockets guy to see if he'd read it, but he's never replied or mentioned it.
And
Oh shit I just remembered an old Newgrounds Flash cartoon... let me see if I can find it.
God damn this takes me back.
OK, the guy can barely draw faces and some of the 3D is a bit wonky but he was pushing Flash to its limits back then. But IMO that's a Newtonian space battle done right, even if a lot of it is at knife fight range.
Aside from the time travel BS, really enjoyed the plot, story, and combat. You can tell that they were aiming for the gritty feel that old school Halo gamers were seeking for years: wouldn't this game be a lot tougher if we were ODSTs?
>It really felt like a crossover between Portal and Halo.
Perfect way to describe it. I absolitey enjoyed pilot shenanigans with wall-runs and the like. It's a pity the original game is near impossible to play these days; support ended a while ago.
>Kamovs are supposedly complete shitbuckets >can cloak >can immediately fire out of jump >will fire several salvos despite Energy Shield Genrators are online and win trough sheer saturation >meanwhile Gamma shoves their thumbs up their buttholes and you have to protect from enemy turrets,fighters and destroy shield gens, till their slug like movement allows them to lock and fire
It depends on travel technology, therefore how meaningful/meaningless distances get, and how much resources are available and required. Both defines the scale of conflicts and what is needed: at a short enough distance, you wouldn't even risk human lives on spaceships, if there's enough resources you wouldn't have much conflicts at all.
Still the ideal spaceship design would look kind of like an airship, that is a very small spaceship, surrounded by a huge structure that catches projectiles. At least, in the few vidya that kinda properly depict space combat issues, it's what works the best, there needs to be as much filler as possible around you.
>THIS ENTIRE THREAD >no one mention Kessler effect
Disappointed.
Space debris are really, really, really bad for any orbit you care about and the infrastructure building your mighty manned spaceship.
Once you have the infrastructure to build "warship" you have the ability to build Laser turrets capable of effectively disabling any fleet or missile swarms not big enough to get through.
On the other side, this is a way to legitimize space boarding.
Frick off moron. Kessler syndrome is functionally impossible and cleans itself rapidly. Solar wind, magnetism, and thin exosphere all rapidly degrade the orbit of small objects. But also collisions result in most off the mass staying in a single large chunk in the original orbit and very few small pieces and a token amount if sand and powder that basically deorbit instantly.
Frick off with your "nuclear winter but in space" lies. BTW nuclear winter is also a fricking lie.
>denial
Smarter people than you say otherwise. I guess you like looking like a moron on the internet.
You don't even understand basic orbital mechanics, "original orbit" still mean all orbits going through it will be lost and must be cleaned of anything that cannot dodge, constantly, for several decades.
Else ANY impact will create another "original orbit" you cannot go through.
The only orbits that clean themselves are the very low orbits and it still take decades plural and depend of debris size. Surprise surprise most of what we are small expendable satellites of a few tons at most who can dodge on their own.
The danger literally scale with how much stuffs you have up there, it would already cause problem right now despite our very low launch capability so we literally cannot have a glorious space future with large space station, space dock, orbital rings, space elevators...etc unless we take this deadly seriously.
Good luck telling everyone on Earth they should just wait "decades" then rebuild all their 1000+tons stations and only build rocket capable of dodging the shredder orbits.
>Frick off with your "nuclear winter but in space" lies. BTW nuclear winter is also a fricking lie.
I suspect you are the kind of idiot who think Climate change is a lie because "it didn't kill us already" or because as long as a few people survive it doesn't count.
You weren't worth answering but many other will care to get the full scope.
Not him, and most of your post is relatively okay, but "climate change" literally is a propagandistic lie. It's a nuspeak term that means whatever people want it to mean, which is why it's never clearly defined. I doubt you know what it really means either, but you're very sure it's real, because a lot of people have repeated the buzzword on tiktok and you heard about it in public school. Yet you don't really think in practical terms of what "climate change" allegedly is. Which is why if there's more hurricanes, that's climate change. If there's no hurricanes, that's climate change. If it's the same amount of hurricanes, well that's climate change as well. Etc. It's just a rebrand of "global warming" because global warming didn't actually happen, and despite what the false prophets of 30 years ago said, Florida wasn't put 20 feet under water, which is what they originally predicted would have happened by now. Whatever doomsday scenario you've been taught in school is going to happen in the next ten years, I guarantee you it isn't going to happen. And if Hollywood movie-tier doomsday "climate change" were about to happen in the next few years, the governments of the world would be sterilizing and killing people off, and shutting down Chinese factories with nukes if they had to. Instead, mass-immigration continues unabated, and cheap Chinese crap continues pouring into every Western nation.
>Frick off moron. Kessler syndrome is functionally impossible and cleans itself rapidly. Solar wind, magnetism, and thin exosphere all rapidly degrade the orbit of small objects.
It is possible and how fast low earth orbits will clean itself is extremely relative. Shit might stay up there for long enough to prevent or at least limit space flight for generations.
[...] >That's not a bioship, that thing's made of solid Titanium. With a lead core.
kek. I have rarely bothered to check numbers in any of supposed technical specs in scifi fluff materials. I guess we have lead based lifeforms here. Now the relevant thing is how you can kill 'em, lead poisoning wouldn't be a viable method.
[...] >"climate change" literally is a propagandistic lie
Most of opposition for climate change are propagandistic lies. Literally coming from same scientists that previously opposed the fact that smoking causes cancer. People with previous experience in selling their opinions to business interests. Rest are mostly willful ignorance.
"Climate change" isn't real, which is why you cannot define what it is. Reddit is elsewhere.
It's been memory holed, but Pepperidge Farm and the Wayback Archive still remember.
https://web.archive.org/web/20091230061832/http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/snowfalls-are-now-just-a-thing-of-the-past-724017.html
[...]
Frick off you smelly dumb culture warrior scum. I just want to enjoy a nice thread on /k/ for a change you verminous Black person.
Then stop bringing it up like
https://i.imgur.com/7P8OwMU.jpg
>denial
Smarter people than you say otherwise. I guess you like looking like a moron on the internet.
You don't even understand basic orbital mechanics, "original orbit" still mean all orbits going through it will be lost and must be cleaned of anything that cannot dodge, constantly, for several decades.
Else ANY impact will create another "original orbit" you cannot go through.
The only orbits that clean themselves are the very low orbits and it still take decades plural and depend of debris size. Surprise surprise most of what we are small expendable satellites of a few tons at most who can dodge on their own.
The danger literally scale with how much stuffs you have up there, it would already cause problem right now despite our very low launch capability so we literally cannot have a glorious space future with large space station, space dock, orbital rings, space elevators...etc unless we take this deadly seriously.
Good luck telling everyone on Earth they should just wait "decades" then rebuild all their 1000+tons stations and only build rocket capable of dodging the shredder orbits.
>Frick off with your "nuclear winter but in space" lies. BTW nuclear winter is also a fricking lie.
I suspect you are the kind of idiot who think Climate change is a lie because "it didn't kill us already" or because as long as a few people survive it doesn't count.
You weren't worth answering but many other will care to get the full scope.
did.
1 year ago
Anonymous
IT'S BEEN MEMORY-HOLED, shrieks the stupid homosexual who remembered it wrong
1 year ago
Anonymous
It's been memory-holed in the sense that the Independent has nuked the original story off their own web page... hence, the need for Wayback Archive as an unbiased source.
Can we go back to BattleTech now?
1 year ago
Anonymous
Not him, and most of your post is relatively okay, but "climate change" literally is a propagandistic lie. It's a nuspeak term that means whatever people want it to mean, which is why it's never clearly defined. I doubt you know what it really means either, but you're very sure it's real, because a lot of people have repeated the buzzword on tiktok and you heard about it in public school. Yet you don't really think in practical terms of what "climate change" allegedly is. Which is why if there's more hurricanes, that's climate change. If there's no hurricanes, that's climate change. If it's the same amount of hurricanes, well that's climate change as well. Etc. It's just a rebrand of "global warming" because global warming didn't actually happen, and despite what the false prophets of 30 years ago said, Florida wasn't put 20 feet under water, which is what they originally predicted would have happened by now. Whatever doomsday scenario you've been taught in school is going to happen in the next ten years, I guarantee you it isn't going to happen. And if Hollywood movie-tier doomsday "climate change" were about to happen in the next few years, the governments of the world would be sterilizing and killing people off, and shutting down Chinese factories with nukes if they had to. Instead, mass-immigration continues unabated, and cheap Chinese crap continues pouring into every Western nation.
Frick off you smelly dumb culture warrior scum. I just want to enjoy a nice thread on /k/ for a change you verminous Black person.
Original anon you answered,
Only way to keep this on topic would be to point out that propaganda and false information are legitimate weapon of war. An alien civilization who would like to wipe us out (without being irrefutably evil to other civilization) might discretely encourage self-destructing stupidity in our race.
Shame it may make you think you are right because you branded what other said as "propaganda" first, regardless if making you believe something is "fakenews" might be the (real) propaganda of another group who make extra millions per seconds of you acting on wrong information.
Changing the name of something isn't done solely for misinformation, sometime it's because the problem you only saw a fraction of needed a more scientifically accurate name.
In military context it's like rewording "Enemy provocation, they won't really do it" into "Enemy first strike, they mean war".
Actually it's pretty clearly defined, they just changed the term from g"lobal warming" to climate change because the former gave inept morons like yourself an aneurysm when it wasn't 86 degrees in the winter
Most Starlink orbits are designed to be self-cleaning within a matter of months/years if the satellite fails to respond to de-orbit commands. It's MEO/HEO/GEO where you have to worry about long-term Kessler risks.
Needing to design the satellites so they deorbit themselves is precisely because leaving it to nature will take several years as soon as you are above VLEO.
Also I don't trust such companies to coordinate properly with others or use "self-cleaning" for more than the most minimal technically correct effort.
>most
Most CURRENT satellites and a full constellation will be nothing compared to a future infrastructure capable of building spaceship in orbit.
By the time we get there, we'll definitely require ridiculously tight regulation that some call police-state.
>rapidly degrade the orbit of small objects
Actually, no. People tend to exaggerate how hard it is to hit a perfect orbit. It's very easy, and the margin of error is absolutely huge.
Our only frame of reference is the ISS and the early MIR, but that's only because they're low enough that it's still in the upper layer of the atmosphere, and gets slowed down. That aside, anything else higher up is likely to remain long enough to be a huge pain in the ass for several generations.
This is in my top 5 anime of all time.
I like the little detail accuracies. Like how before going on a spacewalk, they zero a artificial horizon on their HUD to give them a frame of reference. It's not explained in the show/manga, they just do it.
>Frick off moron. Kessler syndrome is functionally impossible and cleans itself rapidly. Solar wind, magnetism, and thin exosphere all rapidly degrade the orbit of small objects.
It is possible and how fast low earth orbits will clean itself is extremely relative. Shit might stay up there for long enough to prevent or at least limit space flight for generations.
That thing is roughly as dense as planet Earth.
That's not a bioship, that thing's made of solid Titanium. With a lead core.
>That's not a bioship, that thing's made of solid Titanium. With a lead core.
kek. I have rarely bothered to check numbers in any of supposed technical specs in scifi fluff materials. I guess we have lead based lifeforms here. Now the relevant thing is how you can kill 'em, lead poisoning wouldn't be a viable method.
Not him, and most of your post is relatively okay, but "climate change" literally is a propagandistic lie. It's a nuspeak term that means whatever people want it to mean, which is why it's never clearly defined. I doubt you know what it really means either, but you're very sure it's real, because a lot of people have repeated the buzzword on tiktok and you heard about it in public school. Yet you don't really think in practical terms of what "climate change" allegedly is. Which is why if there's more hurricanes, that's climate change. If there's no hurricanes, that's climate change. If it's the same amount of hurricanes, well that's climate change as well. Etc. It's just a rebrand of "global warming" because global warming didn't actually happen, and despite what the false prophets of 30 years ago said, Florida wasn't put 20 feet under water, which is what they originally predicted would have happened by now. Whatever doomsday scenario you've been taught in school is going to happen in the next ten years, I guarantee you it isn't going to happen. And if Hollywood movie-tier doomsday "climate change" were about to happen in the next few years, the governments of the world would be sterilizing and killing people off, and shutting down Chinese factories with nukes if they had to. Instead, mass-immigration continues unabated, and cheap Chinese crap continues pouring into every Western nation.
>"climate change" literally is a propagandistic lie
Most of opposition for climate change are propagandistic lies. Literally coming from same scientists that previously opposed the fact that smoking causes cancer. People with previous experience in selling their opinions to business interests. Rest are mostly willful ignorance.
There was no reason to mention it. This thread isn't about that.
Secondly, the debris wouldn't be permanent.
Thirdly, all the space debris problems could be mitigated by just not having ships in that orbit.
Practical actual combat ships in space are going to be small, have small crews, and be highly fast and maneuverable while delivering probably one single powerful punch before running away. Basically gunships. Something that zooms into orbit as fast as possible, drops a payload of warheads onto the surface, and hits the burners to break orbit just as quickly. There's not going to be any big hulking cruisers with 10,000 crew members, precisely because that is impractical and stupid, and also presents a gigantic target. Newtonian physics dictates that big slow targets will be very dead targets, and in the arms race between defenses and offenses, offenses will ultimately win. A rod of tungsten about the size of a telephone poll fired at 60% C at a planet would blow the planet up. There's no armor or PDWs that will ever be enough. The only way to not die will be to not get hit. So there won't be big debris fields that choke off a planet, because no one will be dumb enough to build massive structures or ships to create such a thing. Or, well... I should rephrase that, because humanity is stupid. Someone WILL build a big thing, and it will inevitably be destroyed, and then the lesson learned after will be "Oh, we shouldn't build big targets anymore", since a lot of people will have to die before lessons are learned. And that's always been the case.
I don't especially like Mass Effect's space ship designs, but they had the right idea in a double-hulled 20-30 man ship that can RCS out of the path of danger, and juke, roll, etc.
Something that can kill or deny a military force orbits is very much in topic.
If you wanted a genocidal war you'd definitely count on a Kessler effect.
actual combat ships in space
You'll need to be a bit more specific with the context because you may not need to have crew, or a spaceship at all.
Given you used "Mass effect" as reference you'll understand I'm skeptical of your understanding of space navigation and reactive mass.
You do not need to move in a planet orbit to then strike the surface, and being able to do so while starting outside this planet orbit (or even from its moon) imply your ship have huge power source and dV range, making it BIG by other standard.
ex: >small
gunship varied a lot in size
>small crews
A mostly automated deathstar would count
>highly fast
Can either mean you can change orbit quickly
or can reach another planet with SLOW but constant acceleration
>maneuverable
Could just be a space pod capable of moving around space station
Could be a very big ship capable of changing orbit, basically pic.
>before running away
All trajectories in space are ballistic, this imply you cancel the speed you've painfully gained to go back. It's going to require a LOT of fuel.
What you describe is more like
- changing your trajectory so it pass by the target
- use a non-autonomous weapon on target you couldn't hit another way
- keep on your trajectory then change it later
>because no one will be dumb enough to build massive structures or ships to create such a thing.
So building a civilization is stupid but war is natural and should be actively made easier to do without repercussion?
I see you don't have an high opinion of mankind.
If your real argument is that we should not encourage single point of failure, obviously but risk prevention will mean acting to make war unprofitable (and yes by that I mean making space-Putin not even be able to order to capture space-Ukraine).
you doomer idiots need to go into the corner with the warm weather hysterics and women will stop giving birth prophets. I swear to god there is a certain gene in certain human monkey types that just deeply yearns for a grand happening. Practically you types are no different then the "THE END IS NEAR" morons with the signs on the street corner
What does everyone think about the idea of still using conventional weapons on Mars?
Rifles, etc should all still work.
I guess you need to adjust for a higher barrel pressure differential with the thin atmosphere
The only argument that can be made about handing to use lasers or rail guns instead, is that it takes fuel to get the chemical propellant and projectiles to Mars, and those materials could be better used in other applications
Why? Basically all the resources needed are on Mars. The problem is extracting them. There's nitrogen and carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, water ice in the ground.
Water flow has artificially concentrated a lot of the elements on earth. Think California gold rush. You mine the minerals where they are, not everywhere.
I suppose everything is technically possible though.
>What does everyone think about the idea of still using conventional weapons on Mars?
By the way I'm sure you /k/ junkies will love this page or have plenty of opinion about it
http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/sidearmintro.php
(talking about pure oxygen atmosphere in space station, which give plenty of advantage) >In such an atmosphere, the danger of muzzle flash, the unburned gunpowder residues, will force the installation of silencer mount to any gun. Hot brass pose anther ignition source and brass catcher have to be attach to any autoloader or use of revolvers instead. The lower air pressure will reduce the natural convection heat transfer, the guns will heat up very fast and will takes longer time to cool down. Any expose metal part should be cover in the equivalent of full body barrel shroud that prevents any contact between the hot metal to any flammable material if the gun dropped or fall down. Two unexpected perks of the lower pressure; firstly sound transfer reduced by the lower air density and with combine with the obligatory silencers eliminate the need of hearing protection. Second; the lower air density, a fifth of Earth sea level, meant that the air drag is also approximately fifth of what the bullet face in normal Earth air. Most if not all of the special purpose cartridges designed for reduced hull penetration and reduce over-penetration have terrible aerodynamic properties. A lower pressure cabin will allows such types of ammo lower velocity drop and larger ranges beyond their Earth bound specification.
And more here with official report
http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/sidearmslug.php#id--Slugthrowers--Vacuum_Firearms
>guns heat up fast and cool down slowly >hot brass an active fire hazard
Are we actually going to return to revolvers and boltguns in space? Can Mosins on Mars still happen?
Not likely. Brass may pose a hazard but plastic won't. We'll probably see polymer body cases with brass, steel, or nickel rims if using conventional actions. Push through actions using prism ammo like the rotating chamber action seen on the G11 and Stoner's cannon may also make a comeback, or Dardick trounds if a very high ROF is needed.
Earth Force had Russian tier tactics in Mimbarii war. All they did was just letting themselves to be blown up by space elves. Sheridan was only one who did something else, utilizing concept of trap on his own.
Even first contact was like they intentionally choose most hotheaded and not fitting officer to do diplomatic mission.
Also security on Babylon 5 sucks, far to many times ambassadors had no protection and were in danger few easy to avoid assassination and murder attempts (some even successful).
So yeah, technically it did it right, realistically depending what irl military you compare with
I'm not reading this whole fricking thread just to post 'Space: Above and Beyond' was the best military scifi show and be eternally and indisputably right.
War is hard to show accurately because the truth of war is boring and cruel. The action is brief and brutal where men either act according to their training or panic and do stupid things. There's no anime style deep thoughts and inner monologue and cool thought provoking exposition between people amidst a fight. Fighting is surprisingly simple and dumb, whereat who ever hits first when the other least expects it will win. They dont show the long trek across difficult terrain and weather, the illnesses and hard work and boredom of camping, having higher ups be ass pains the whole time, the back pain of sitting on uncomfortable seats in vehicles (or saddles), foot pain from walking, sleepless nights, constipation and diarrhea, headache, no place to jack off, no shower, bedbugs and hairlice, unwashed unwiped ass, and extreme cold or heat
>actually pulls her weight in combat and duty >isn't really speciest/racist like everyone claims, just accurately predicts aliens will throw humanity to the intergalactic wolves >tennyson enjoyer >family girl
based?
Has anyone here read the Frontlines series my Marko Kloos or the Palladium wars?
1/3 of his writing is just tungsten-tipped munitions and dropship turret calibers (1/3 self-insert)
I feel like these threads just end up being bigheads arguing over the plausibility of certain things being feasible while discrediting everything that doesn't make said situation plausible or feasible.
Unfortunately no space force national guard is leaking the shadow government's star cruiser plans. >Dunning Krueger morons really really want to repeat projectrho musings for the hundredth time
I tried reading forever war but it was way too much of a vietnam allegory. Any books that get the military right but get a little creative with the setting?
>can't lock onto Minbari ships so earth gets rolled in the war
That always irked me. You have range, heading, and speed. That's all you need to put rounds on target.
>earth ships don't use missiles
Also moronic
This. If a Tesla can drive around on cameras then at some point you can build military tech that can basically say if I can see it, I can shoot it.
>That's all you need to put rounds on target.
For dumb rounds and you could tell smart rounds to go to the predicted location but that wont take into account the target changing course
>Also moronic
They did use missiles in a few instances but it is limited.
The Omega destroyer was supposed to feature them prominently, that is what the red circles along its sides are - missile silos. It was supposed to be done in a very dramatic "rolling out the guns" shot with the camera sweeping across as they opened up.
But this and other design features - the big guns in the front and the fighters launching from the rotating section - were never included in the show for some reason
>never included in the show for some reason
Animation budget, I think. The SFX department on B5 was on a shoestring. The first season was done with Amiga computers.
I don't think so, they did some amazing stuff in season 3 and 4.
I think somehow it wasn't conveyed that the model had those elements
>I don't think so, they did some amazing stuff in season 3 and 4.
>I think somehow it wasn't conveyed that the model had those elements
the entirety of B5 was animated in Lightwave
Series 1 of B5 was animated entirely on a network of 20 amiga 2000 stations linked using the Newtek Video Toaster software/hardware interface. They upgraded to a network of 486DX PCs when Lightwave was ported from hardware to software. (yes, the original iteration of Lightwave was partially hardware based)
the 20 machines working in parallel were able to render about 1 frame every 45 minutes, In PAL Resolution: (720 x 576 pixel)
While the software did get a leap forward by Season 3, the single PC I'm typing this on has more graphics processing power than the multi-million dollar graphics rendering studio for B5.
toaster was the pilot, they upgraded for after it the regular series and again after season 2
Nope,. first season was done on video toaster boards. the software version wasn't released commercially till '94.
The pilot was on a network of 8 toasters, that was upgraded to 20 for the production of the first season CG by Foundation Imaging.
that was upgraded in turn to 486DX PCs for the start of season 2, but certainly wasn't in place for season 1.
>the single PC I'm typing this on has more graphics processing power than the multi-million dollar graphics rendering studio for B5.
The PC I'm using renders VR in 4k at 144FPS for videogames. Moore's law is a helluva drug.
>For dumb rounds and you could tell smart rounds to go to the predicted location but that wont take into account the target changing course
My homie, we've had weapons that could course correct for decades. No excuse to not have such ability centuries in the future
>They did use missiles in a few instances but it is limited.
Which is even more moronic. They can use missiles at standoff range and saturate a target area. None of the fricking ships in that universe have point defense systems either
course correct for what you cant track the ship, you can physically eyeball it and see it through an optical telescope but that is it
>None of the fricking ships in that universe have point defense systems either
No we def see B5 had quad rail guns and RAMs for defense
You forgot the BGG, which scored most of the capitol ship kills.
The Omega's will forever by my favorite sci-fi warship, they just feel right. Maybe some nostalgia thrown in ,
No. No show, including the Expanse, has done Newtonian physics right for space combat. I suspect that's because the real deal would be not exciting for television screens.
Something like this
would get hit with a projectile fired at fractions of the speed of light and be obliterated instantly with no warning, killing everyone aboard. That might be interesting to see just once, but doesn't make for good television.
Regarding missiles, like everyone is talking about, those are generally moronic for space combat. They would be detected at range, meaning they have to be fast to avoid defenses. To be fast, they'd need a powerful engine, making them even more detectable, as well as a fuel source that'll probably be rapidly expended via constant acceleration, meaning the range will be short. Shorter than a railgun, which can fire faster, can't be intercepted, and gives no warning. The only reason to have them would be to bomb stuff through an atmosphere.
B5 did 3D physics right
whether it correctly applied the technology at hand is another question
Well B5 still fell into the same trap they all do of depicting space battles as if they were ships of the line at sea, like some British age of sail adventure. There's not going to be broadsides in space, that's just fantasy. I will admit it's pretty to watch though.
What there would be in IRL space combat is nothing at all, followed by sudden extremely powerful violence.
B5 would sometimes go hard scifi with battles. There's one where the Narn engage the Shadows with beam weapons outside of visual range.
>B5 would sometimes go hard scifi with battles. There's one where the Narn engage the Shadows with beam weapons outside of visual range.
It's a great sequence.
A pity they dropped that approach afterwards. Need more BVR space combat.
I mean it's all fantasy in space to some degree, so better just to pick a historic metaphor as baseline for your space battles.
Star Trek II's submarine like space battle was more interesting than whatever the show did space battlewise
>Regarding missiles, like everyone is talking about, those are generally moronic for space combat. They would be detected at range, meaning they have to be fast to avoid defenses. To be fast, they'd need a powerful engine, making them even more detectable, as well as a fuel source that'll probably be rapidly expended via constant acceleration, meaning the range will be short. Shorter than a railgun, which can fire faster, can't be intercepted, and gives no warning. The only reason to have them would be to bomb stuff through an atmosphere.
Projectile-based point defence will need a considerable amount of time to reach the missile and can be avoided if the missile has active sensors.
Beam-based point defence has a linear relationship between aperture diameter and effective range. Any point defence gun capable of intercepting a missile at a respectable distance would be the size of the main battery. Which is fine, we can have the main battery do double duty, but heat management is an issue, and it can be overwhelmed.
Any point defence gun small enough to fit in numbers would not be effective past doubledigit kilometres.
And you can't even fit them in numbers because heat management sets hard restrictions on the number of guns you have, anyway.
All of this also means that the missile can coast most of the way, only needing enough Delta V to do course correction and for the final approach, making them smaller and cheaper.
The best way to intercept missiles are, amusingly, smaller gunboats that can meet them at range. Which requires the missiles to be protected by their own gunboats, of course.
Oh, did I just set up fighters in space? Guess all the nerds b***hing about them need to take it up the ass.
macross fans know better
>All of this also means that the missile can coast most of the way, only needing enough Delta V to do course correction and for the final approach, making them smaller and cheaper.
Really feels like it defeats the point of using a missile.
In the time it takes for your coasting missiles to reach the target said target has already ventilated the launcher with railguns/lasers, then utilised its superior delta v to manoeuvre beyond the course correction capabilities of the missiles.
Best point defence is being where the missile isn't, and this is the fundamental reason why missiles in space are of questionable utility. Spaceships are fast. Spaceships carry much more fuel than a missile. Any missile launched from far enough away to avoid projectile based retaliation will miss if the target manoeuvres at all. Any missile launched so close that the target can't evade needs to be transported through said projectile based weapons field of fire.
>Regarding missiles, like everyone is talking about, those are generally moronic for space combat. They would be detected at range, meaning they have to be fast to avoid defenses. To be fast, they'd need a powerful engine, making them even more detectable, as well as a fuel source that'll probably be rapidly expended via constant acceleration, meaning the range will be short. Shorter than a railgun, which can fire faster, can't be intercepted, and gives no warning. The only reason to have them would be to bomb stuff through an atmosphere.
You can fire a missile through a railgun, and that missile could iself be railgun.
Yo dawg, we heard you like near C projectiles, so we put a railgun in yo railgun projectile, so you can fire a railgun while firing railguns.
Nebulous Fleet Command works with those issues with missiles by forcing players to use different tactics with different missile types. Having a missile that has a second "Sprint" stage allows you to fire it from far away or around objects to engage the ship with a missile that the enemy's PD cannot engage in time. Missiles can be fired in groups and with additional onboard munitions to overwhelm the PD with targets to track. There's a lot more to it, but it's honestly just a naval combat game in space.
the only good example i can think of is the hyperion novels
>No. No show, including the Expanse, has done Newtonian physics right for space combat.
What's wrong with Expanse's Newtonian physics?
>Regarding missiles, like everyone is talking about, those are generally moronic for space combat
>and this is the fundamental reason why missiles in space are of questionable utility. Spaceships are fast. Spaceships carry much more fuel than a missile
This is some real hot take. Projectrho is dying inside tight now.
>missiles in space
Sorry anon(s) but you are very wrong, I hope you know The Expanse is built around basically engines, high-trust and nearly null consumption.
Maybe you believe missile = short range based on how they are used in our current atmosphere&gravity based warfare where missiles are constrained by size, cruising range, top speed or limited in methods to evade hard-kill intercept.
You saying "detectable" suggest you don't know stealth in space was never a possibility to begin with and it won't bother missiles.
Even the wording is wrong:
>To be fast, they'd need a powerful engine
>Spaceships are fast.
A missiles is literally a spaceship with only the mass needed to kill another, and yes it can be with 100% success.
Missile do not need to be as massive nor need as much propellant to achieve the same range.
A manned spaceship is going to be heavier and cannot have a high acceleration, any extra mass will reduce its range and it is mathematically impossible for a heavier spaceship with inferior acceleration to "evade" smaller missiles with higher acceleration and enough propellant to get in an intercept trajectory.
Even interplanetary missiles using a expendable nuclear-bus would be 100% worth the price to kill a costlier manned spaceship.
Yes you could make missile(s) launched by stupid people who can't do math waste their fuel.
Or maybe you'll face missile(s) launched by smart people who did not leave you any mathematical way out.
Do hope you'll have enough "railguns" to shot down the "lone missile" that split into hundred(s) of guided-projectiles.
With Bola-type design (possible in space) you'd have trouble even calculating where to shoot. Or shades that only need to be between your sensors and the missiles.
Hope you are quick because within orbits a missile could easily match the speed of a railgun.
Yes it will be costly for the equivalent of "a railgun shell" but space war are going to be one-hit kill.
>shoots down missile
what now, chud?
>still face a swarm of guided subprojectile in a coordinated cloud that can never be shot down in time
It's game over, man, game over!
you'd either have to split them off close to intercept, giving the ship time to shoot it down from long range, or you're splitting them off into multiple missiles with deltav vastly smaller than the one big missile, meaning the ship can outburn them easier
however space missiles do add one interesting note to space combat, if we go the route of unmanned space warships (unlikely, someone has to do maintenance on them after all) a ramming manouver absolutely becomes an option
By the time a properly designed missile-bus get in intercept range (including projectile travel time), it will be too late for a manned spaceship to evade split missiles no matter how low their dV are.
A manned "warship" with reactor & stuff is not going to have high acceleration nor be able to vector into another direction like the dancing ships from "The Expanse".
http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/spacewardefense.php#id--Evasive_Maneuvers--Moment_of_Inertia
Therefore an enemy could see which way your ship is currently pointed, and insist in that direction.
A smart enemy who only need some of the projectiles to hit, will scatter them so even if you burn in a direction you'd put yourself in the trajectory of another.
Or the enemy can deduce by math what direction you are forced to take. It would be silly for you to do a burn in a direction that would deorbit your ship or on a trajectory you can not deviate from.
Orbital and Interplanetary space are going to have very different dynamic. Each would favor different missiles approach.
Trying to outrange a missiles will only work if the ship have vastly more dV or can force the missile into an impossibly costly maneuver.
A missile don't carry fuel to go back, don't carry life-support, equipment and quo, it can absolutely compete with a ship and have extra dV for a final sprint.
Depending of orbital mechanic the missiles can easily arrive at a speed comparable to a coilgun like the BAE project (~5 km/s)
And if the missile-bus have the right mix of deltaV/Thrust/Time it can arrive faster than any coilgun/railgun projectile ever could.
The above can be tested in ChoDE (pic) and that game don't even have complex AI-driven tactic with guided submunition swarm.
in the guaranteed intercept scenario, what's stopping the targeted ship from shooting down that lone missile from 2-3 thousand kilometers away? That's the one thing that I feel a lot of missile fans get wrong about space combat, the PDC range isn't 1-2 kilometers like in naval warfare, there's no atmosphere to make bullets ineffective, no horizon to hide behind.Of course accuracy at such ranges is abysmal, but with your proposed 5km/s it gives the ship a lot of time to defend itself.Of course such a defence could be countered with either a same time-on-target strike or a grouped missile salvo, the first one being delta-v expensive and the other opening the strike to a nuclear counter-missile.
Another thing, I don't see how acceleration changes anything when the COaDE style combat consists of minutes long burns alongside hours or even days of waiting, the delta v gain from having the bigger tank (thus from the square cubed law a more efficient one) does give the "slow big ship" a manouver advantage.
>in the guaranteed intercept scenario, what's stopping the targeted ship from shooting down that lone missile from 2-3 thousand kilometers away?
2000km? By space standard this is no distance at all, the missiles could have split much further away and have enough dV or speed to make evasive maneuver pointless.
I'm not saying you can't make scenario where the imperfect/obsolete missiles are shot down ...by a railgun projectile that might need guided-projectile itself because absolute precision is hard even with magnetic gun in space.
In such missile-centric setting, the obvious next step would obviously be defense drones or antimissile missile meant to force attacker into less efficient tactic.
And who know if efficient-laser tech don't make it the only interesting weapon.
>Another thing, I don't see how acceleration changes anything when the COaDE style combat consists of minutes long burns alongside hours or even days of waiting, the delta v gain from having the bigger tank (thus from the square cubed law a more efficient one) does give the "slow big ship" a manouver advantage.
As much as I respect COaDE autism, the game is limited by the difficulty to simulate military-grade AI made by genius, finding the ultimate fleet composition.
The author also wanted military spaceship, there's good reason to think they may not exist or be worth it economically.
In my book "manned ship" are what you keep behind 1000km of drones, counter-drones, counter-counter-drones who deploy/dock back to unmanned-tug.
It remind me a story about a wargame, some computer scientist kept winning by ignoring "conventional warfare" and minmaxed the math. His first win was a spam of smaller unit.
Your shipfu was copied from 2010.
Yes, I think everybody knows that.
Why is it that every sci-fi ship has their guns bolted to the front when turrets exist? You’d think being able to shoot in directions other than dead ahead would be useful in space
You literally just saw the only part of the expanse where they aren't furiously dakkaing with turrets, kek
Why bother with turrets when your ship shoots at things at 500km+ away and your 5000m long warship turns at 30 degrees a second like in trek because of inertial dampeners kek.
Spinal mounts. The idea is that the ship is designed to handle Gs primarily on a particular axis... so you put the giant railgun on that axis (albeit usually facing the opposite direction to the engines). That lets you mount a more powerful weapon than a turret could normally handle, because the ship's structure is already reinforced to handle loads on that axis.
The big red circles are clearly broadside particle cannon.
...my god, the logo for this faction is just terrible.
>earth ships don't use missiles
>None of the fricking ships in that universe have point defense systems either
You are either didn't watch the show, lying or moronic. Not sure which.
>Animation budget, I think. The SFX department on B5 was on a shoestring. The first season was done with Amiga computers.
Not really hardware issue at all, it just happened to be first show doing CGI on major scale. Making animation takes time, from animator, more objects you add, more shit you need to animate. Laser beams and some sort light balls for particle projection cannons are just simpler to animate.
When it comes to Amiga, those were pretty common in audio-visual productions of all kinds until early 2000's, shit stuck around for almost decade after Commodore went belly up because Amiga in 90's had better software for that shit than pretty much any competitor at the time. Saying Amiga for kids might imply reasonably priced home computers, with comparable prices to modern reasonably priced gaming PC's is absolute bullshit. Amiga 2000, 3000 and 4000 line up was pretty different from Amiga 500 and 1200 home computers, especially with expansions, when it comes to both price and capability.
they upgraded the computers after season 2
you can see a very noticable bump in the quality of the digital from season 3 on
that is when they started using the nebula backgrounds, have a lot more ships doing a lot more things and doing it fast and with the camera moving around a lot
>they upgraded the computers after season 2
They got rid of effects company and hired animators themselves, bought bunch of hardware and started doing effects in house, cutting the middle man saves money. I picked up Amiga thing, because that for ignorants is implying hardware would be cheapo home computers. All computers of the era, including 100k+ SGI workstations are toasters by any semi-modern standards. Hardware was never bad by standards of the day.
>that is when they started using the nebula backgrounds
Wonder what else changed. Hubble Space Telescope started working properly, after its optics were fixed. It produced copyright free high resolution images of nebulas.
>They got rid of effects company and hired animators themselves
After season 3 Douglas Netter wanted to buy out Foundation Imaging and make it an inhouse unit
They preferred to remain independent
So Netter let them go and hired a bunch of junior Foundation Imaging staff and put his son or grandson in charge of them :
No longer contracted to Babylon 5 meant that Foundation Imaging could then go to work for Star Trek and greatly improve their effects that were still mostly being done by ILM with models
>No longer contracted to Babylon 5 meant that Foundation Imaging could then go to work for Star Trek
Fun fact. Pic related from Star Trek Voyager is literally unused Vorlon ship form B5. That is confirmed by guy who made the model, there might be more B5 originated work in progress stuff in later seasons of Voyager and DS9. Star Trek had similar issues when it came to effects as B5, there isn't lot of time to do models and animations for a weekly tv-show. Choke point for VFX was never computer hardware, that was the workforce. Kinda old scifi movies and tv-shows from early 2000's often better VFX than stuff coming out now. Why? Pretty much everyone working in the industry in late 90's and early 2000's were enthusiastic about stuff they did. No amount of rendering passes for dynamic light on some frame can replace good taste and commitment to the art.
That thing is roughly as dense as planet Earth.
That's not a bioship, that thing's made of solid Titanium. With a lead core.
How are you getting the range, heading and speed of a target, if you can't see the target on radar?
Suppose the ship armor absorbs all radiowave/lightwave and doesn't bounce back any for receiving end. How are you ever "seeing" anything in the empty space? Might as well be shooting everywhere in every corner of the space at that point.
not to mention distances in space battles could be hundreds of kilometers
even if you could just look out a window (you wouldn't have one) the chances of seeing and estimating off visual alone is just lol, lmao
1. star occlusion
2. don't have to because the crew's fricking pork roast lol do you think spaceships radiate heat for fun
how the frick you gonna get range, heading, and speed if you cant get a radar signature?
Fire wildly into the air
Pic related.
Minbari "Stealth" technology as portrayed in the prequal film "In the beginning" had a lot more to do with their sensors blinding the earth ship's targeting.
Think of it like getting a spotlight pointed directly in your eyes and everything goes white. You can't just "Aim at the light" because at that moment Everything looks the same. As for physical guided or unguided munitions the FX team and JMS originally started off trying to portray very long range engagements between capital ships but later with pressure from the network moved things closer together. The universe uses Interceptor cannons and sweeping beam weapons in the same way that The Expanse used PDC cannons that screen incoming shots both ballistic and energy weapons though they seemed to have little effect on beam type cannons. The Star Fury also carries missiles as well but are not seen in the show.
In the original design docs the Star Fury used mass driver style weapons that launched solid projectiles with a magnetic accelerator but this was again changed for visuals before the show's pilot aired. In fact before The expanse B5 showed more "realism" in a scifi property than any show we had seen to date. Some time ago the writer of The Expanse and JMS crossed paths in a twitter exchange where James Corey mentioned that B5 was part of his inspiration for the books.
the expanse where it's all moronic politics and sitting around hoping that your computer-guided munitions are slightly better than the other guys computer-guided munitions
>the Expanse
No, show is moronic as are the factions and how they work
>Muh Martian marines 80% are STRONG WYMENS!!!!!
tfw no cute martian GF
You know she'd slap a ball gag on you, strap on a massive dildo and reorganize your guts in zero g.
I know. That's the appeal.
>doesn't have any coherent commentary on the space combat in teh show, just gets mad at the female marine
oof
>mad at the female marines
>Need marines on mars who are trained in high grav to be effective on earth.
>Which means you need high bone density and muscle mass
>Most are WYMENS!!!!!!
Military aspect of the show is moronic.
homie what are you smoking? Most of the martian recon marines are men. Frankie was a physical freak.
Bobbie in the books was established as being unusually large and strong due to her polynesian heritage.
NTA but it is nice they cast an actual Polynesian chick to play the part. That actress is a tank .
I like the fact the director took the time to shoot closeups of her ass in tight space outfits coming down the ladders.
Also this
Can we get some webm's please? Thank you.
I had a sensible chuckle from one of Bobbie's internal monologs in the books. She said she usually had an advantage in social situations. Either the person was thrown off by being intimidated by her size or they were thrown off by her activating a chocolate muscle girl fetish.
>Muh books!
>100lb woman is as strong as 250lb Arnold villain
The concept is overused and is moronic.
Have you considered not being an irredeemable homosexual?
>if you don't like current entertainment that puts diversity before story writing and character development, you're a gay
Sorry that I like good entertainment and don't consume current product.
>puts diversity before story writing and character development
How exactly did it do that? Be specific. What character development and story writing took a back seat?
This anon summed it up the best
>has never met a Polynesia woman
Samoans are literally built different
>heavist deadlift by a woman, 621 lbs
>heaviest deadlift by a man, 1,185 lbs
yeah....
>>Most are WYMENS!!!!!!
Less than half of them were, and they were in power armor which more than makes up for their sex.
>Suit whose reaction time, speed and strength is dictated by the person inside makes up for women being slower and weaker.
At that point what's the point of having a person inside when you can make a robot for cheaper that will do everything better.
>At that point what's the point of having a person inside when you can make a robot for cheaper that will do everything better.
has it ever crossed your mind that an automated robot has significantly less narrative potential to become a character that readers (or the writer) can associate with, and therefore limits the ability of the author to drive the narrative through the character's perspectives, opinions - and prejudices - as well as their actions?
>Writes a story that is science fiction however based on the laws of physics and nature.
>Completely ignores biology and states that women are just as strong as men.
aside from women being naturally weaker and thus shit material for high grav (for a martian) combat, people in general are very tired of Mary Sues mandated by the woke cultists plagueing entertainment
notice also in expanse the agenda creep in every aspect.
>Like the best pres of earth being a pajeeta after men fail on multiple tries,
>the belter rebel commander being constantly second guessed by his right hand who (of course) is always right,
>Holden being holden to the obnoxious girl with the zoomer perm haircut, the only correct,
>righteous and not cringe belter faction being led by Drummer who lives with a hamster colony commune "family"
>the crack shot ace pajeet pilot Holden had effortlessly replaced by the martian mariner (after pajeet got cancelled irl) who turned out to be just as good as the natural born pilot.
>the colonies on the alien planet led by strong, independent women who, of course, were in the right despite being illegal gypsy squatters and trying to kill the research crew sent out to prospect. While the only guy who had the correct answer for the belter question was, of course, the seasons big bad.
I bet you also get angry that the Sky Marshal in Starship Troopers got replaced by a black woman.
Facism breeds wokeness!
Oh no
I would rather being eaten by a bug then follow orders from a black woman!
>Facism breeds wokeness!
To fight the woke, we must understand the woke. We can ill-afford another Bud Light.
At least she had a better idea than the brickhead before her. But, yeah, that was also the EXACT thing that happened.
Watch, Starship Troopers Traitor of Mars if you want to see fascist Emma Watson.
>didn’t read the books
Holden was a Pajeet because he was a Pajeet in the books and he was a talented Pajeet because he was literally a Pajeet PC in a tabletop campaign of Traveller you dumb culture warrior, and I say that as someone who doesn’t like the show and thinks the books are mid
The girl boss theme really got on my nerves in this show.
It had some great space combat scenes though.
Yeah nah c**t, as an aussie I can tell you right now that polynesian women (who bobbie is supposed to be) like that exist. The show and books had heaps of gay woke shit, bobby wasn't one of them
There are only two types of women that scare me, white women because they are psychotic and polynesian women because they will eat me
Get good at eating them and you'll not only
1) Not get eaten
2) Make a new, close friend
3) Have a loyal bodyguard.
Seems sound, I’ll brb. I have to go find a Polynesian to eat.
Eheh, at least Bobby was a TRAINED marine. Not like Avasaralla and the whole, smelly yaaasqueens behind her.
The physics checked out for the most part. But on the topic of military - to come back to the question OP had - it was more a political show and therefore
'insert latte-drinking millennial nasal tone
military `stuff` just `kinda happened` and some people died and got shredded.
I rate that show 6/10.
REALLY good visuals,
SOLID grasps on physics,
industrial sized cliffhanger insertions (basically ever ep ended with something hanging in the air),
and some sorry ass woke shit that just made my eyes roll.
I like B5 better
Bosmang Camina was the only good female character, and truly a good female character for fricking once.
I would drag my dick through a mile of broken glass just to hear her fart through a walkie-talkie
>In space no one can hear you scream - unless it is the battle cry of the United States Marine Corp!
As much as I liked Space Above and Beyond growing up it has to be the worst offender
>recruits still in bootcamp sent to mars to check on radio telescope relay
>marine fighter squadron pilots routinely tasked to fly transports, do ground pounding, intel, etc
>marine fighter squadron pilots routinely tasked to fly transports, do ground pounding, intel, etc
Yeah, this was the real limitation of the series. It would have been better to be two separate character sets that occasionally intersected. One set of aviators, one set of expeditionary ground forces.
several characters spread around
pilot, jarhead, crew, some folks back home, etc
what the Battlestar Galactica remake figured out
Edge of Tomorrow is pretty good
>I, STAR COLONEL NICHOLAI MALTHUS, DO HEREBY CLAIM THIS THREAD IN THE NAME OF THE GREATEST MILITARY SF PRODUCTION - BATTLETECH
>WHAT FORCES DARE DEFEND IT
No one gives enough credit to Battletech. They just see the mechs and go "WEEB SHIT" and move on, ignoring the entire franchise is centered around giga military autism. People would rather play Warhammer with its space magic, than shoot ERPPCs and LRM20s at approaching dropships laden with infantry and tanks, and cackling maniacally as they crash into a city and explode, taking out several buildings with them. Sad.
it has a lot of hand waving space magic in terms of ranges and abilities and sensors
but if you really stated weapons to have ranges of several km instead of ~600 meters you'd have to play on a gigantic field or adjust the scale and cause a new group of problems
I mean, they just explain that part away for the sake of gameplay by saying the technology loss from the Succession Wars was so huge that humanity practically reverted to medieval times, and that while they can build a lot of the military hardware they now use, they can't improve on it really or even understand how it totally functions. That's why they use short-range swarms of guided missiles, and lasers with a range of just a few km, etc.
In terms of actual table top gameplay though, full-spectrum Battletech is vastly more entertaining than Warhammer.
Ranges in the TT are deliberately shrunk down and abstracted so you don't have to rent a warehouse floor to play a big engagement.
Like, compare the RPG and Tabletop ranges: A shoulder-launched SRM in the TT has a max range of like 180 meters, while the same launcher in the RPG goes out to 750 meters for a long-range shot. RPG ranges for LRM enable straight up indirect fire over the horizon and the only direct-fire weapons longer-ranged than that (AC/2s, Light Guass etc.) are at least in part designed for AA duties.
Aren’t the succession wars basically what’s going on in Eastern Europe, but with all the inner sphere getting bombed back to the Stone Age?
That’s pretty realistic
Per the game lore, the Succession Wars were moronicly violent. Like, orbital-nukes-into-playgrounds violent. So yeah kinda. The rigid military hierarchy broke down, and individual regiments ended up becoming more like roving bands of boyars looting one place to go fight somewhere else. I'd actually say it was more like the 30 Year's War, in that any semblance of order just went right out the window.
Unfortunately, it's also the best backdrop for the series, apart from maybe the Clan invasions. All the latter lore is really boring, personally speaking.
in the star league era the standard deployment was a brigade of 3 mech regiments
by the time of the 3000s a regiment was the largest organization, and even then its forces only fought company-sized crossboarder raids
>in the star league era the standard deployment was a brigade of 3 mech regiments
Bigger formations, because they literally had more gear.
Regiments by the time of the tabletop game are about 3-5 battalions and 100-180 or so mechs, with the rest being tanks, infantry, VTOLs, logistical, C&C, etc. I don't think anyone plays with regiment-level units though, Battletech just isn't popular enough to pull that off. A shame really.
BattleForce is lance-sized units, that has been around a long time
Strategic BattleForce allows for regiment sized units, not sure how many actually play that
>tfw you will never experience a strategic game of Battletech like this
Go to Cincinatti
Just in general?
The local BT chapter is... infamous. They're a large part of the reason why the Blakists kept winning against all odds (scenarios were played out at cons and the results were used to write the overall story, and CGL drafted them to play as the Blakists. Oops). Several members are regulars on /btg/.
>Battletech just isn't popular enough
Battletech is the only tabletop (sci-fi at least) that i've wanted to try out. Sadly however I have never met anyone else who wanted to play.
Try MegaMek. It's literally a free version of the tabletop game that can be played against local AI or online against other people.
This. Megamek has all the rules. ALLLLLL the rules. The actual tabletop rules, not that HBS gunk. Even most of the obscure optional ones (and you can turn them on or off). It has a single-player mercenary campaign mode that's actually pretty good, and you can play in any era you like across a thousand years.
Also, /btg/ and Sarna are helpful resources. /btg/ might even help you find some people to play Megamek online with.
>Sadly however I have never met anyone else who wanted to play.
The managing company is incompetent. They give it basically zero advertising or support, and their sole interest is to make money off legacy players. No one wants to play because no one really knows it exists. If they knew what it was, they WOULD want to play. That's the paradox.
It works for me, at any rate. It's futuristic space Chechnya 24/7.
They did license a really good and faithful version on the PC. And fricking Black folk on PrepHole and /btg/ and the CBT forums shat all over it because you could OPTIONALLY choose some pronoun bullshit (or you could choose not to) and because there were some VERY VERY minor differences in mechanics.
The CBT community doesn't deserve nice things. Although NEA seems like a nice guy. Apart from the weird porno fanfiction he wrote.
The only reason to get mad at the Battletech game is because there's not much variety in weapons or mechs. Some autismos modded it though and added in hundreds of mechs, as well as playable tanks, VTOLs, and basically every weapon ever dreamed up. The mod is 3x the size of the base game.
Which BT game and mod?
They expanded the Mechs and parts a bit in later DLCs, too.
Also, the mechanics differences if at all made things better overall IMO. The buff to ye olde autocannons alone was great, actually amde the smaller ones viable.
Harebrained Schemes' Battletech TBS game.
Battletech is one of those properties that I should enjoy and has occasionally piqued my curiosity but I never got into it, perhaps for this reason. It was interesting though... this new tabletop gaming bar opened up in my town (popular place too) and I wandered in and saw a couple probably in their late 30s / early 40s playing Battletech. I was, like, well that's cool in an unusual way.
You can come to /tg/ battle tech general and shitpost with us anon, and there is MegaMek than makes playing the game fun and not have to look for all the tables all the time.
That and the main BT system is kinda clunky and gets really time-intensive once you try to play larger than lance-on-lance engagements, let alone anything involving combined arms.
It's on the upswing, their new kickstarter just got 5.5 million
One cool aspect is that virtually all SLDF warships are actually armed transports, dedicating more tonnage towards cargo space than towards weapons and armor. Even the battleships.
And this actually makes sense in context, because of how BT's FTL works. And because the SLDF had more battleships and heavy cruisers than the rest of humanity had warships. Combined. So, they could afford to give most warships huge cargo bays, because space superiority was rarely in question until Amaris got control of the SDS.
Thankfully, the Clans never understood logistics like their ancestors did.
Russia and Syria before that are more akin to the Chaos March
military too weak to fully take over
various independent factions and militias sprout up to defend their newly independent fiefs
The Succession Wars are like WW2 if it went on for a few hundred years at like 10x intensity. Where you just can't produce things not only because the facilities producing the material are gone, but all the factories, labs and planets they were on.
Nukes and theater level chem weapons were the norm back then.
Eh, not quite. The First and Second Succession Wars (both lasted like 30 years each, with a ~10-year pause in between) were more akin to a full-blown Cold War goes hot scenario with all sides trying for full-on strategic destruction of their opponents warmaking and industrial potential. Everything that looked remotely important got nuked if at all practical. Military infrastructure, military-related industry, R&D, administrative hubs, hell even just civilian industry and whatever could theoretically be dual-use. Worlds died, and that was just collateral damage outside a few exceptions like Jinjiro Kurita going full psycho after his dad bit it.
They only stopped because they all by the end of the 2nd Succession War realised that interstellar civilization was literally at the brink of total collapse. WarShips - military FTL-capable ships - and the industries building them were literally extinct and civilian FTL JumpShip production had declined to the point where they could barely replace just the normal attrition from accidents and wear&tear.
The 3rd Succession War that followed and lasted ~160 years was essentially a mix between WWI and medieval-style raiding warfare. The lack of FTL transport meant that you couldn't really do massive invasions on an interstellar scale anymore. JumpShips were safe though, because basically everybody relevant agreed that destroying them now was a crime against humanity. So everyone just rolled out the militia, dug in on the border planets and put reserves one or two FTL jumps back and every real invasion would generally get stuck one jump in and then have to grind it out while both sides tried to bring in reinforcements. Campaigns slowed to a crawl and small-unit raids became the prevalent type of combat.
Have you considered that space magic is okay?
Have you considered not being an irredeemable homosexual?
Battletech tries to be realistic but it's in the context of some really moronic foundational rules, so it's a give-some-take-some relationship to realism.
* """long-range""" missiles are about half a kilometre, and completely unguided without extra special equipment
* Literally ballistic weapons can't be fired *ballistically* at targets over the horizon, only missiles
* Armour is just protective hit points rather than a pierces/doesn't-pierce relationship like it mostly has in reality
* Let's build armoured fighting vehicles with giant windowed wienerpits, that's a great idea
* Walking tanks fighting at point-blank range, in fact even actually punching each other
* A computer allowing the giant robots to coordinate with each other takes up space & weight measured in fricking *tons* (this one at least is understandable since back in the 80s people thought powerful computers would always be big & heavy)
So yeah let's not pretend Battletech is the pinnacle of realism. It's decent at being internally consistent, though.
>* """long-range""" missiles are about half a kilometre
Even in the TT rules that seriously reduce weapons ranges for the sake of playability, this is incorrect. Also, the LRM is a tactical system and only considered long-range by that measure (and to differentiate from SRMs.) It's not an artillery weapon.
>and completely unguided without extra special equipment
As is this. The only actually unguided missile weapons in the game are cheapo one-shot rocket pods and specific "deadfire" missiles that sacrifice the basic seeker to pack more boom.
>*Literally ballistic weapons can't be fired *ballistically* at targets over the horizon, only missiles
Yes, because the "ballistic weapons" category are direct-fire weapons that make no accomodations to indirect use. Actual artillery weapons are treated as their own category.
>*Armour is just protective hit points rather than a pierces/doesn't-pierce relationship like it mostly has in reality
Which is an artifact of the in-setting technological progression. Armor has become increasingle ablative in exchange for being stupendously resistance to outright penetration. Older "primitive" or crappy commercial armoring types can be penetrated without ablating everything if you shoot it with a big enoug weapon, but those just aren't used on frontline units anymore exactly for that reason.
>* Let's build armoured fighting vehicles with giant windowed wienerpits, that's a great idea
Yet those "giant" windows are so small that trying to go for a cokcpit shot on a moving target is a waste of time.
>* Walking tanks fighting at point-blank range, in fact even actually punching each other
Which mostly happens in heavily broken or urban terrain, and as a consequence of armor being good enough to allow units to take hits and keep going as a matter of course.
NTA,
To be honest Battletech will obviously suffer from all the flaws related to mecha, AND being ported from arbitrary tabletop gameplay and funky sci-fi weapons that wouldn't exist by realistic physics.
Really, even Gundam is more coherent as pseudo-science and design go. Battledude mocking humanoid shape should remember Battletech still have anthropoid number of arms & legs (save a few exception).
pic 100% related
>Yet those "giant" windows are so small that trying to go for a cokcpit shot on a moving target is a waste of time.
Many battlemech do have GIANT windows right in the center of mass. Redesign or not.
At Battletech level they should have 360° VR with triple redundancy, even with a dedicated FoV for the real sensors
>C3 Network
I give them inventing L16 before it was a thing IRL, but the computation required to have walking machine is actually far more impressive than just "sharing targeting data" which was IRL only a problem because constant emission make you into a target.
>"sharing targeting data"
You're completely ignoring that there's degrees there. It's like someone saying modern fire control systems aren't impressive because technology doing the same existed a hudnred years ago already, all while completely ignoring the actual performance of the systems in question.
I'd like to see the guys who complain about how buff women are an impossible myth try and deadlift 621 pounds. Probably preceede it with the Jackass soundtrack.
again 621lbs of 1185lbs with similar years of training
Average male is stronger than the average female body builder,
Sorry that you don't like reality.
>ignoring the actual performance of the systems in question.
From my point of view you are the one who lack the technical understanding.
You treat it like it's all gradual.
But many tech work in a Yes/No fashion or follow a curve so steep it's also Yes/No.
Sensors and Data sharing are among those,
You either know where the target is down to the meter, or you don't.
You can either transmit targeting data or you don't.
Even jamming is all or nothing nowadays, it's not WWII anymore, you either jammed enemy comm, or you didn't and they got around it.
>* A computer allowing the giant robots to coordinate with each other takes up space & weight measured in fricking *tons* (this one at least is understandable since back in the 80s people thought powerful computers would always be big & heavy)
C3 networks do rather more than just "allow units to coordinate with each other". Like, holy shit, the actual level of data sharing and fire-control computation involved to make that work the way it does is pretty damn mind-boggling.
Also, remember that Mech construction rules are abstracted to a point. Like, weapons tonnage includes things like putting those guns into an articulated, armored mount and providing proper connections to power, cooling and autoloader systems. Targetting computers include actual upgrades to those remote mounts and all adjacent systems to work with the improved precision of the system etc.
Literally everything you're complaining about is explained by the canon.
All concessions to the board game so you could have a map or battlefield that would fit on a kitchen table with enough detail to have each mech in one hex.
Yeah the longest ranged ballistic weapon has less effective range than a modern HMG but just ignore that and say if they fired 20km I would need a map the size of my house to play on.
Both Battletech and WH40k games where the setting and associated fluff material is better than the game. Even the spin off and licensed vidya are mostly better than original games. Battletech has remained more or less same when it comes to gameplay between new editions, just added more stuff to it. WH40k on the other hand has gone thru plenty of simplification to make easier for kids, some of it good, some of it bad. Best GW games are easily the smaller scale games like Necromunda, Gorkamorka and Bloodbowl. Then again GW's main business has been selling miniatures and new books for new editions for sake of making more money.
All of that is derived from game play limitations, size of a table and trying to balance the game. If we ignore realism aspect entirely, look at the internal consistency. Like 70% canonical mechs have some borderline moronic armament choices. 25% are kinda okay with only mild moronation. 5% of designs actually make sense within game.
One thing is certain, people who made source books about inner sphere factions have no clue about math or human biology. People in BT breed like fricking insects. They also had very little idea of astronomy.
This is the part where I challenge you to a batchall right? ok, ahem
> I, LORD OF THE STARS AND GUARIAN OF THE GALAXY DO CHALLENGE YOU TO A DANCE OFF, DARE YE REFUSE MY BATCHAL CLANNER SCUM!?
>You think your freeborn moves can possibly compare to how a trueborn of Clan Jade Falcon gets down?
>Well bargained and done then surat.
Clan Jade Falcon reference.... lol , my sides, literally, my sides.... XD
For me it's CoD AW
Mass Effect has the right amount of military and science autism. Damn shame about Andromeda though.
Pretty sure they're de-canonizing Andromeda, because Mass Effect 4 is in the works.
>"I must go now, the Milky Way needs me."
>Note: Ryder died on the way back to their home galaxy
At least Andromeda's total failure destroyed that trend of "if you don't buy this, YOU'RE A RACIST/SEXIST!!!" whining. The game was so bad it collapsed an entire company and 300+ jobs. People got real silent with the strong-arming after that.
I've yet to make it more than a few hours in that game. Modded to shit, I still can't endure through. Blows my mind they spend years making that pile of shit, but only gave ME3 a fricking year.
>Blows my mind they spend years making that pile of shit, but only gave ME3 a fricking year.
I think someone said that the game was originally meant to make heavy use of procedural generation.
When they couldn't get that to work, or it wasn't cinematic enough, or something, they scrapped that. What was actually released as Andromeda was bashed together from the earlier version's assets and engine in like 1 year.
Expanse.
Pretty sad there is no game like Elite Dangerous/SC but Expanse
based fellow expanse poster beating me by 15 seconds
the Expanse
the Expanse gets ships right but militaries very very wrong because the writer is a homosexual civilian
Yeah the writers are civvies basing it on a tabletop campaign. It’s why their captain can just do whatever he fricking wants without consequences and always saves the day and makes huge decisions for everyone else kek
Why does he rotate for no reason?
360noscope
The shot is a spinally mounted railgun, which is technically too big and powerful for the ship it's mounted to. The rotating ship is being pursued by the ships being shot at.
Awesome shot, solid grasp on physics
Just. Those four ships could pepper the roci`s ass just as likely.
agreed, fantastic shot, cool change of direction, a pity about what it would have done to the crew inside that coffin
I'm probably the only person on /k/ old enough to have watched this. From what I remember it was really, really good.
I remember that shit
homie I was born in 1986 of course I remember it
Why are you still on PrepHole? For that matter, why am I? I was born in '83.
its saturday
You're not the only one. I remember. Had the toys too. Good times
I was too poor to have the toys so I drew them while I watched the show and clipped out pages from toy catalogs.
I used to have the toy on the right side of this picture.
80s and 90s toys were GOAT
Never seen that, as that was the year I moved overseas. My childhood exo cartoon was The Centurions, but that wasn't set in space.
13 Year old me was hooked on this show. Frick this was based children's programming.
i have season 2 .do you?
>WWII IN SPAAAAAAAACE
They even had an entire episode that was an expy of the Battle Off Samar.
I SHALL INSCRIBE YOUR NAMES IN STONE
Apart from the cops all carrying airsoft H&K XM8s, Children of Men was pretty good, but probably not exactly what OP is after
fug. forgot pic.
Children of Men is a great movie.
ya the battle in the refugee camp at the end is pretty kino. its post-apocalypse though, so there's not really any tech or futuristic military concepts on show, more societal collapse and rag-tag militarism.
that one dudes got a cool HUD eyepiece like the og halo dudes.
>Have any science fiction films or tv shows gotten the military right?
For all the autism of Kubrick a few things slipped by.
Mickey mouse march is immediately in my head, don't know why that part of the film is the first part I think of
Still did a pretty good job considering that entire set was located a few miles outside of London.
You are now noticing the bent rifle barrel
I hate the Minbari so much!
Getting lucked into super advanced earth technology from the future. Stuck with billions of backward rituals and religious belief shit.
Having no problems of genocide Humanity because they got the wrong idea because activating your weapons is kinda aggressive looking for an outsider, despite their own claimed morally and spiritually superiority.
And that interspecies shit. Stop that!
>activating your weapons is kinda aggressive looking for an outsider
I love how their "best of us all" guy saw how stupid the Minbari were and was endlessly frustrated with them.
BSG
ships don't use missiles
no but earth defense ring was all missiles
Stargate is really close to how Planet Dirt really operates
t. overheard something I wasn't supposed to
>Planet Dirt
What?
I wouldn't worry about it.
>Have planet
>Name it dirt
No wonder the Gou'ld abandoned it.
Where did you hear about Planet Dirt, anon? Outside of ATS of course. Apparently there is a other potentially better place to go now.
>totalitarian regime in space
>focus on superweapons over practicality
>obsessed with being themed
>makes sure the grunts are incompetent morons so they cannot rebel
>brought down by its own spitefulness and desire to torture its already defeated foes
It's not a good military, but goddamn is it a realistic take on one specific type of military.
Sir that is a dick and balls
Gunbuster
I remembered this story, written in a snit after seeing the WW2 aeroplane space battles in Star Wars.
http://library.lol/fiction/4b0c638011a5231bc781f3f4446b5863
Did anyone check out my links? Opinions?
Interstellar Marines and Hellion showed a lot of promise, but both were cancelled due to frickery.
I have hopes that Kerbal Space Program or the older Orbiter community will give us the autismo space combat I crave.
Well, now that the Space Station 13 3D remake that was being made out of eight chan by that Russian autist is gone.
Outrim was a web comic with pretty hard physics, but it was based on someone's Traveller campaign. Too bad the author packed it in due to some family drama and never came back.
I heard the RPG Albedo, and the comic that it was based on, were pretty hard-SF settings. I mean, it's furry, but it's that charming sort of early 80's protofurry from before the Sonic OCs and Sparkledogs and the backlash.
No mention of the Battlestar Galactica reboot?
It kind of faded out of the public consciousness like Game of Thrones did, but it did introduce Newtonian physics to space dogfights.
And did anybody read the story at
It took some fricking hunting down, based on vague memories of having read it in an old issue of Omega my father owned. I actually tried sending a link to the Atomicrockets guy to see if he'd read it, but he's never replied or mentioned it.
And
OK, the guy can barely draw faces and some of the 3D is a bit wonky but he was pushing Flash to its limits back then. But IMO that's a Newtonian space battle done right, even if a lot of it is at knife fight range.
Oh shit I just remembered an old Newgrounds Flash cartoon... let me see if I can find it.
God damn this takes me back.
Did anyone else really enjoy Titanfall?
Aside from the time travel BS, really enjoyed the plot, story, and combat. You can tell that they were aiming for the gritty feel that old school Halo gamers were seeking for years: wouldn't this game be a lot tougher if we were ODSTs?
Titanfall 2 was a fricking blast in singleplayer. Even the time travel shenanigans were awesome to use.
It really felt like a crossover between Portal and Halo.
>It really felt like a crossover between Portal and Halo.
Perfect way to describe it. I absolitey enjoyed pilot shenanigans with wall-runs and the like. It's a pity the original game is near impossible to play these days; support ended a while ago.
Man I really hate to do this, but
AT LAST, WE NOW GET THE CHANCE TO FACE EACH OTHER IN COMBAT
>Kamovs are supposedly complete shitbuckets
>can cloak
>can immediately fire out of jump
>will fire several salvos despite Energy Shield Genrators are online and win trough sheer saturation
>meanwhile Gamma shoves their thumbs up their buttholes and you have to protect from enemy turrets,fighters and destroy shield gens, till their slug like movement allows them to lock and fire
>torpedoes
My PTSD just kicked in.
No, though a few got close.
It depends on travel technology, therefore how meaningful/meaningless distances get, and how much resources are available and required. Both defines the scale of conflicts and what is needed: at a short enough distance, you wouldn't even risk human lives on spaceships, if there's enough resources you wouldn't have much conflicts at all.
Still the ideal spaceship design would look kind of like an airship, that is a very small spaceship, surrounded by a huge structure that catches projectiles. At least, in the few vidya that kinda properly depict space combat issues, it's what works the best, there needs to be as much filler as possible around you.
>THIS ENTIRE THREAD
>no one mention Kessler effect
Disappointed.
Space debris are really, really, really bad for any orbit you care about and the infrastructure building your mighty manned spaceship.
Once you have the infrastructure to build "warship" you have the ability to build Laser turrets capable of effectively disabling any fleet or missile swarms not big enough to get through.
On the other side, this is a way to legitimize space boarding.
Frick off moron. Kessler syndrome is functionally impossible and cleans itself rapidly. Solar wind, magnetism, and thin exosphere all rapidly degrade the orbit of small objects. But also collisions result in most off the mass staying in a single large chunk in the original orbit and very few small pieces and a token amount if sand and powder that basically deorbit instantly.
Frick off with your "nuclear winter but in space" lies. BTW nuclear winter is also a fricking lie.
>denial
Smarter people than you say otherwise. I guess you like looking like a moron on the internet.
You don't even understand basic orbital mechanics, "original orbit" still mean all orbits going through it will be lost and must be cleaned of anything that cannot dodge, constantly, for several decades.
Else ANY impact will create another "original orbit" you cannot go through.
The only orbits that clean themselves are the very low orbits and it still take decades plural and depend of debris size. Surprise surprise most of what we are small expendable satellites of a few tons at most who can dodge on their own.
The danger literally scale with how much stuffs you have up there, it would already cause problem right now despite our very low launch capability so we literally cannot have a glorious space future with large space station, space dock, orbital rings, space elevators...etc unless we take this deadly seriously.
Good luck telling everyone on Earth they should just wait "decades" then rebuild all their 1000+tons stations and only build rocket capable of dodging the shredder orbits.
>Frick off with your "nuclear winter but in space" lies. BTW nuclear winter is also a fricking lie.
I suspect you are the kind of idiot who think Climate change is a lie because "it didn't kill us already" or because as long as a few people survive it doesn't count.
You weren't worth answering but many other will care to get the full scope.
Not him, and most of your post is relatively okay, but "climate change" literally is a propagandistic lie. It's a nuspeak term that means whatever people want it to mean, which is why it's never clearly defined. I doubt you know what it really means either, but you're very sure it's real, because a lot of people have repeated the buzzword on tiktok and you heard about it in public school. Yet you don't really think in practical terms of what "climate change" allegedly is. Which is why if there's more hurricanes, that's climate change. If there's no hurricanes, that's climate change. If it's the same amount of hurricanes, well that's climate change as well. Etc. It's just a rebrand of "global warming" because global warming didn't actually happen, and despite what the false prophets of 30 years ago said, Florida wasn't put 20 feet under water, which is what they originally predicted would have happened by now. Whatever doomsday scenario you've been taught in school is going to happen in the next ten years, I guarantee you it isn't going to happen. And if Hollywood movie-tier doomsday "climate change" were about to happen in the next few years, the governments of the world would be sterilizing and killing people off, and shutting down Chinese factories with nukes if they had to. Instead, mass-immigration continues unabated, and cheap Chinese crap continues pouring into every Western nation.
meds
"Climate change" isn't real, which is why you cannot define what it is. Reddit is elsewhere.
"Snowfalls in the UK are a thing of the past".
what about it
It's been memory holed, but Pepperidge Farm and the Wayback Archive still remember.
https://web.archive.org/web/20091230061832/http://www.independent.co.uk/environment/snowfalls-are-now-just-a-thing-of-the-past-724017.html
Then stop bringing it up like
did.
IT'S BEEN MEMORY-HOLED, shrieks the stupid homosexual who remembered it wrong
It's been memory-holed in the sense that the Independent has nuked the original story off their own web page... hence, the need for Wayback Archive as an unbiased source.
Can we go back to BattleTech now?
Frick off you smelly dumb culture warrior scum. I just want to enjoy a nice thread on /k/ for a change you verminous Black person.
Original anon you answered,
Only way to keep this on topic would be to point out that propaganda and false information are legitimate weapon of war. An alien civilization who would like to wipe us out (without being irrefutably evil to other civilization) might discretely encourage self-destructing stupidity in our race.
Shame it may make you think you are right because you branded what other said as "propaganda" first, regardless if making you believe something is "fakenews" might be the (real) propaganda of another group who make extra millions per seconds of you acting on wrong information.
Changing the name of something isn't done solely for misinformation, sometime it's because the problem you only saw a fraction of needed a more scientifically accurate name.
In military context it's like rewording "Enemy provocation, they won't really do it" into "Enemy first strike, they mean war".
?t=70
Actually it's pretty clearly defined, they just changed the term from g"lobal warming" to climate change because the former gave inept morons like yourself an aneurysm when it wasn't 86 degrees in the winter
Most Starlink orbits are designed to be self-cleaning within a matter of months/years if the satellite fails to respond to de-orbit commands. It's MEO/HEO/GEO where you have to worry about long-term Kessler risks.
Needing to design the satellites so they deorbit themselves is precisely because leaving it to nature will take several years as soon as you are above VLEO.
Also I don't trust such companies to coordinate properly with others or use "self-cleaning" for more than the most minimal technically correct effort.
>most
Most CURRENT satellites and a full constellation will be nothing compared to a future infrastructure capable of building spaceship in orbit.
By the time we get there, we'll definitely require ridiculously tight regulation that some call police-state.
>rapidly degrade the orbit of small objects
Actually, no. People tend to exaggerate how hard it is to hit a perfect orbit. It's very easy, and the margin of error is absolutely huge.
Our only frame of reference is the ISS and the early MIR, but that's only because they're low enough that it's still in the upper layer of the atmosphere, and gets slowed down. That aside, anything else higher up is likely to remain long enough to be a huge pain in the ass for several generations.
Space diapers!
This is in my top 5 anime of all time.
I like the little detail accuracies. Like how before going on a spacewalk, they zero a artificial horizon on their HUD to give them a frame of reference. It's not explained in the show/manga, they just do it.
>Frick off moron. Kessler syndrome is functionally impossible and cleans itself rapidly. Solar wind, magnetism, and thin exosphere all rapidly degrade the orbit of small objects.
It is possible and how fast low earth orbits will clean itself is extremely relative. Shit might stay up there for long enough to prevent or at least limit space flight for generations.
>That's not a bioship, that thing's made of solid Titanium. With a lead core.
kek. I have rarely bothered to check numbers in any of supposed technical specs in scifi fluff materials. I guess we have lead based lifeforms here. Now the relevant thing is how you can kill 'em, lead poisoning wouldn't be a viable method.
>"climate change" literally is a propagandistic lie
Most of opposition for climate change are propagandistic lies. Literally coming from same scientists that previously opposed the fact that smoking causes cancer. People with previous experience in selling their opinions to business interests. Rest are mostly willful ignorance.
There was no reason to mention it. This thread isn't about that.
Secondly, the debris wouldn't be permanent.
Thirdly, all the space debris problems could be mitigated by just not having ships in that orbit.
Practical actual combat ships in space are going to be small, have small crews, and be highly fast and maneuverable while delivering probably one single powerful punch before running away. Basically gunships. Something that zooms into orbit as fast as possible, drops a payload of warheads onto the surface, and hits the burners to break orbit just as quickly. There's not going to be any big hulking cruisers with 10,000 crew members, precisely because that is impractical and stupid, and also presents a gigantic target. Newtonian physics dictates that big slow targets will be very dead targets, and in the arms race between defenses and offenses, offenses will ultimately win. A rod of tungsten about the size of a telephone poll fired at 60% C at a planet would blow the planet up. There's no armor or PDWs that will ever be enough. The only way to not die will be to not get hit. So there won't be big debris fields that choke off a planet, because no one will be dumb enough to build massive structures or ships to create such a thing. Or, well... I should rephrase that, because humanity is stupid. Someone WILL build a big thing, and it will inevitably be destroyed, and then the lesson learned after will be "Oh, we shouldn't build big targets anymore", since a lot of people will have to die before lessons are learned. And that's always been the case.
I don't especially like Mass Effect's space ship designs, but they had the right idea in a double-hulled 20-30 man ship that can RCS out of the path of danger, and juke, roll, etc.
Something that can kill or deny a military force orbits is very much in topic.
If you wanted a genocidal war you'd definitely count on a Kessler effect.
actual combat ships in space
You'll need to be a bit more specific with the context because you may not need to have crew, or a spaceship at all.
Given you used "Mass effect" as reference you'll understand I'm skeptical of your understanding of space navigation and reactive mass.
You do not need to move in a planet orbit to then strike the surface, and being able to do so while starting outside this planet orbit (or even from its moon) imply your ship have huge power source and dV range, making it BIG by other standard.
ex:
>small
gunship varied a lot in size
>small crews
A mostly automated deathstar would count
>highly fast
Can either mean you can change orbit quickly
or can reach another planet with SLOW but constant acceleration
>maneuverable
Could just be a space pod capable of moving around space station
Could be a very big ship capable of changing orbit, basically pic.
>before running away
All trajectories in space are ballistic, this imply you cancel the speed you've painfully gained to go back. It's going to require a LOT of fuel.
What you describe is more like
- changing your trajectory so it pass by the target
- use a non-autonomous weapon on target you couldn't hit another way
- keep on your trajectory then change it later
>because no one will be dumb enough to build massive structures or ships to create such a thing.
So building a civilization is stupid but war is natural and should be actively made easier to do without repercussion?
I see you don't have an high opinion of mankind.
If your real argument is that we should not encourage single point of failure, obviously but risk prevention will mean acting to make war unprofitable (and yes by that I mean making space-Putin not even be able to order to capture space-Ukraine).
What game?
Children of a Death Earth
you doomer idiots need to go into the corner with the warm weather hysterics and women will stop giving birth prophets. I swear to god there is a certain gene in certain human monkey types that just deeply yearns for a grand happening. Practically you types are no different then the "THE END IS NEAR" morons with the signs on the street corner
The Outer Limits
Space: Above and Beyond
starship troopers.
the movie not the book.
What does everyone think about the idea of still using conventional weapons on Mars?
Rifles, etc should all still work.
I guess you need to adjust for a higher barrel pressure differential with the thin atmosphere
The only argument that can be made about handing to use lasers or rail guns instead, is that it takes fuel to get the chemical propellant and projectiles to Mars, and those materials could be better used in other applications
By the time wars are being fought on Mars, there will be local production of muntions.
They may need to come up with new recipes then.
Why? Basically all the resources needed are on Mars. The problem is extracting them. There's nitrogen and carbon dioxide in the atmosphere, water ice in the ground.
Water flow has artificially concentrated a lot of the elements on earth. Think California gold rush. You mine the minerals where they are, not everywhere.
I suppose everything is technically possible though.
This has likely occured on Mars as well because it too had water and rivers.
Mars had liquid water in the past. It has had a lot of resource concentration.
>What does everyone think about the idea of still using conventional weapons on Mars?
By the way I'm sure you /k/ junkies will love this page or have plenty of opinion about it
http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/sidearmintro.php
(talking about pure oxygen atmosphere in space station, which give plenty of advantage)
>In such an atmosphere, the danger of muzzle flash, the unburned gunpowder residues, will force the installation of silencer mount to any gun. Hot brass pose anther ignition source and brass catcher have to be attach to any autoloader or use of revolvers instead. The lower air pressure will reduce the natural convection heat transfer, the guns will heat up very fast and will takes longer time to cool down. Any expose metal part should be cover in the equivalent of full body barrel shroud that prevents any contact between the hot metal to any flammable material if the gun dropped or fall down. Two unexpected perks of the lower pressure; firstly sound transfer reduced by the lower air density and with combine with the obligatory silencers eliminate the need of hearing protection. Second; the lower air density, a fifth of Earth sea level, meant that the air drag is also approximately fifth of what the bullet face in normal Earth air. Most if not all of the special purpose cartridges designed for reduced hull penetration and reduce over-penetration have terrible aerodynamic properties. A lower pressure cabin will allows such types of ammo lower velocity drop and larger ranges beyond their Earth bound specification.
And more here with official report
http://www.projectrho.com/public_html/rocket/sidearmslug.php#id--Slugthrowers--Vacuum_Firearms
>guns heat up fast and cool down slowly
>hot brass an active fire hazard
Are we actually going to return to revolvers and boltguns in space? Can Mosins on Mars still happen?
Not likely. Brass may pose a hazard but plastic won't. We'll probably see polymer body cases with brass, steel, or nickel rims if using conventional actions. Push through actions using prism ammo like the rotating chamber action seen on the G11 and Stoner's cannon may also make a comeback, or Dardick trounds if a very high ROF is needed.
>iykyk
>that commercial got so many dudes
what?
https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x6tottr
i love this scene of space yamato with everthing and how moron its is.
Earth Force had Russian tier tactics in Mimbarii war. All they did was just letting themselves to be blown up by space elves. Sheridan was only one who did something else, utilizing concept of trap on his own.
Even first contact was like they intentionally choose most hotheaded and not fitting officer to do diplomatic mission.
Also security on Babylon 5 sucks, far to many times ambassadors had no protection and were in danger few easy to avoid assassination and murder attempts (some even successful).
So yeah, technically it did it right, realistically depending what irl military you compare with
I love it when I have a chance to post this image.
>letting this tgread archive on a saterday night
As if you shut-ins have dates or something.
>As if you shut-ins have dates or something.
Game nights, anon.
I'm not reading this whole fricking thread just to post 'Space: Above and Beyond' was the best military scifi show and be eternally and indisputably right.
Patlabor 2 has maybe the best depiction of electronic warfare in any film, should I put together a QRD?
I'm interested, hit me up sempai.
Soon. Once they get all those closeted gay boomers out of the Pentagon.
Still waiting on the anon to elaborate to where he heard about Planet Dirt.
War is hard to show accurately because the truth of war is boring and cruel. The action is brief and brutal where men either act according to their training or panic and do stupid things. There's no anime style deep thoughts and inner monologue and cool thought provoking exposition between people amidst a fight. Fighting is surprisingly simple and dumb, whereat who ever hits first when the other least expects it will win. They dont show the long trek across difficult terrain and weather, the illnesses and hard work and boredom of camping, having higher ups be ass pains the whole time, the back pain of sitting on uncomfortable seats in vehicles (or saddles), foot pain from walking, sleepless nights, constipation and diarrhea, headache, no place to jack off, no shower, bedbugs and hairlice, unwashed unwiped ass, and extreme cold or heat
Ashley Williams is an accurate depiction of Military womens.
>actually pulls her weight in combat and duty
>isn't really speciest/racist like everyone claims, just accurately predicts aliens will throw humanity to the intergalactic wolves
>tennyson enjoyer
>family girl
based?
Has anyone here read the Frontlines series my Marko Kloos or the Palladium wars?
1/3 of his writing is just tungsten-tipped munitions and dropship turret calibers (1/3 self-insert)
BABYLON 5 WAS OUR LAST, BEST HOPE FOR PEACE
IT FAILED
>Have any science fiction films or tv shows gotten the military right?
None correctly depict orbital mechanics.
I wonder how many takes that required to get the 'Jam' lid showing at just the right angle.
Only two, apparently. It flew by the camera just right.
Kind of disappointing with everything referenced ITT, nobody has brought up the two greatest spaceship combat games, Freespace and...
farscape
I feel like these threads just end up being bigheads arguing over the plausibility of certain things being feasible while discrediting everything that doesn't make said situation plausible or feasible.
Unfortunately no space force national guard is leaking the shadow government's star cruiser plans.
>Dunning Krueger morons really really want to repeat projectrho musings for the hundredth time
I tried reading forever war but it was way too much of a vietnam allegory. Any books that get the military right but get a little creative with the setting?
Honor Harrington
Lieutenant Leary/the RCN series
Hammer's Slammers
Starship Troopers
John Ringo's Gust Front series
I thought Call of Duty: Infinite Warfare was kind of slept on.
In Blakes 7, there was an interesting speech in Travis' court martial, here at about 37:56.
https://www.dailymotion.com/video/x20yspu
Footfall
The Mote in God's Eye
>Have any science fiction films or tv shows gotten the military right?
Larry Niven.
On Point as a Motherfricker.
Tasp.
Look it up, Boy.
classical conditioning.