ta_erog

That is the point, the attacker (blast I did not make this apparent in the post - sorry) is not necessarily attacking the defender. the attacker would if forced to but the goal would be what ever the defender is . .defending. If both sides "agree" on a "zero/zero intercept" (or more like a relative combat window) then yes it would be easy but if one does not want to engage or if they want to make it hard for or push an advantage that would be easily in the attackers ability and interest.

HMS Hood . . . ok then name another? or name when a fleet of BB's clashed? you do not make a entire class of ships for one main purpose and expect only to use them as designed only a handful of times or never. As soon as aircraft where used as a navel stand off weapon BB where on there way out. (also the Hood battle was more of a tactical error, with a possible destine flaw that ended a relatively short battle with a catastrophic sinking . . and the hood was a battlecruser) "As fa

I guess, my point is that the terminology we are using does not really fit. OR has to be redefined in detail. The BB refit did not include the Aegis system, and mostly added tomahawk, harpoon and defensive Phalanx systems. They where tasked as mainly bombardment ships . . 16 inch artillery and tomahawk. With harpoon to defend from ship threats and Phalanx from anti ship missiles. They had NO air defense of note. A single modern bomb could sink them. "But this all misses

Now take a ship traveling from the moon (which is rather close) to orbit and another leaving orbit and intercepting. Small scale distance and speed. Lets assume they can accelerate to 24,593 mph (slow Apollo flight speed) (a ~10 hour flight at max speed) This means a 49,186 mph closing speed. Now how would they engage? Assuming you could get on a exact reciprocal course (unlikely). they would be with in 1000miles of each other for only ~73secs . . Now this is going rather slow usin

First some facts Space is big, no . . really big . . ok Extremely big. Face it none of us can really understand how big. Normal human range (typical distance people go, short of making it a “trip”) 1-35 miles (56 km) Normal range of a car ~400 miles 644km 777 Air Liner 6906-9208 miles 11112-14816 km Circumference of the earth 24,859.82 miles 40,008 km. Low orbit 27,320miles 43,960km Geo Orbit 163,900miles 263,760km The Moon 247,900miles 399,

eetmorsqrls - here you go . . I made a new thread for these posts Science and sci-fi fun

Science and sci-fi fun First this thread is a location for Science and sci-fi speculation, fun facts, and discussion. This is in no way stating that The game has to be more realistic or less. . use common sci-fi conventions or not. It is meant to be a location so some science facts could be shown and discussed, how and where to add in fictional tech/physics to make interesting and believable sci-fi that could be use in this game or others. This is meant to be interesting and fun . . not a f

USS Ticonderoga "Aegis cruiser" was a "Aegis destroyer". They saw they had a "cruiser gap" they renamed it a cruiser . . . so much for nameing conventions?!? "The main reason why the navy decommissioned all her battleships in the 90’s was fuel." one reason possibly, but the battleships where decommissioned for other reasons also . . they were a liability (read single high value target), they would have to be entirely retrofitted, a big task for a old ship. BUT the main reason was t

Yes, Gauntlet03, the idea I put forward earlier had this range damage reduction (we are talking about extreme distances so good enough ) Instead of having long rage projectile canons. Time to target is just too long to make any sense. But a laser “canon” system defense would plausibly allow the damage gradient and allow tech ups that make allot of sense . . That may allow ships to hold on the ed

Ron Lugge - Yes That is where I was going on that point . . Armor would mostly turn from a primary defense to survival aid . . The ship would be still horribly damaged but it may make it possible for it to survive or not be entirely disabled by a “glancing blow” . . The idea that a massively armored ship could shrug off hit after hit of these terribly powerful weapons is a rather tall rather fantasy . . but then again that’s sci-fi <img src="http://images.stardock.com/gc2/T_DL/smiles/Smile.gif"

A kinetic Projectile will do the same damage regardless of range . . though travel time would make hitting a distant maundering object very hard. A guided projectile would help but then is it a projectile or a boost assisted missle? A Laser weapons beem will disperse over distance (in a vacuum this is more or less entirely the fault of a imperfect mechanism) So at some distance damage will decrea

Not with out it's Fleet it is not . . and simple bad weather could cripple it's offensive / defensive power. It needs it's fleet for protection, supply and support. Again it is the fleet that is the power not the single ship. (that ship IS the center of that fleet though because planes with anti-ship missiles are extremely powerful and long range) Planes are the real power projector there) .

wait do these ships have inertialess drives? or reactionless drives? or both? IF they do then they could do any maneuver is possible . . Normal Physics gets thrown right out. . If reaction less drives . .they why do these ships have thrusters? No need. If reaction drives . .you must throw matter out to move. The faster and more massive the matter the faster the ship can accelerate. If inertia less drives . .well then things go rather strange . . Since rendering the ship Mass-less b

"if you put engines on both ends then you never have to turn around. " random but a good point . . if these ships have a reaction drive then the thrust really needs to be vectored regardless of ship orientation IF orientation makes a difference . . remember there is NO reason space ships need to resemble navel ships in ANY way. The Starfurry from B5 and Gunstar from The Last Starfighter, and The firefly from the show Firefly where the best representation of a space going maneuverable ship using

This is interesting . . A variant on the non-jump and jump capable ships in other games (systems ships and starships) Systems ships are cheaper and can be made in great numbers, Jump capable ships must dedicate part of the ship to the jump engines. . more expensive and possibly uses up vital ship resources. Your idea expands this to linked cheap drives and non linked expensive drives . . . that opens up allot of possibilities and tactics . .and that is always good.

eetmorsqrls yes, I do agree, but then again it is just us mostly speculating which has only minor effect on the game . . ("more... educated" possibly . . though TV shows, magazines, and the random URL do not count . . There is a rather unintuitive level in allot of fields that laymen have a real hard time with . . Hence all of the Flying boxes, perpetual motion engines, and cold fusion clames by savvy but still ignorant Laymen.) SIN's is not required to give a deep story with a fully explain

Nice, A alternate variation on that good idea. A massive laser orbiting the planet . . and it can hit anything in the system . . Tech advances may increase damage and possibly refire speed. (also a good way to balance it) as a rule the closer you get the more damage it does . . But a some level of tech . . later in the tree when real siegeing is happening a new tech advance (possibly linked with another tech) that allows a frigate, or special fighter squadron to generate a

Do not believe periodicals with short blurbs on tech advances . . Most of that drivel is over done and misleading. for example “Teleportation possible, Star trek here we come, tests going on now!!!” Read into the article or research the origonal paper and you find that a long theorized test has been devised to attempt to transport a single particle. When asked, the scientist said this test has yet to be done, it could only happen with in very narrow conditions IF possible and could not be

lol, but anything that isn't primetime needs an explanation, so then they have to use time to make up that explanation... although if we had someone smart out there that could make up some really good technobabble the devs would prolly consider it... Yes, that is exactly correct . . Before I moved to software QA, I studied film . . (ya what a jump ) and with scree

Sorry, That was directed at the other post (my bad for not highlighting that) . . Herm movement? not off the top of my head but then again There are all sorts of strange enomilies a fresh sci-fi writer could think up. Here are a bunch less used. A micro black hole. A planetary system in a rosette (5 planets or 5 mini suns all orbiting each other . . no need for a central orbiting mass) A neutron star system with planets. A rouge planet A supper massive planet A roset

Cool, down . . you may want to read my post again . . "Do not confuse sci-fi, Theories and known reality. There is no observational evidence for wormholes. Wormholes are not excluded within the framework of general relativity, but the physical plausibility of the needed solutions is uncertain. They exist currently as a interesting possibility and in now very popular in sci-fi terms and plot devices. . but that does not mean in any way that they are a probability or even exist.

Since when don't they exist in real life? Maybe not star-ship sized ones (and definitely not stable ones), but IIRC the basic phenomena does exist. Do not confuse sci-fi, Theories and known reality. There is no observational evidence for wormholes. Wormholes are not excluded within the framework of general relativity, but the physical plausibility of the needed solutions is uncertain. They exist currently as a interesting possibility and in

I would like to see the defense get more dense/effective the closer you get to the planet. (The planet is the main focus of defense) . Attacking ships MAY be able to sit on the edges of the system and use stand off weapons to pick away at outer defenses or possibly fire stand off siege weapons (minor damage to planet and attacking fleet) as fleet moves in both possible planet damage and Fleet damage increases. This allows a real siege that could isolate a planet (in well) and annoy it . . if

The capital ships need to be researched prior to being able to construct them. Why have research for frigates and cruisers then? It would be lame to force research on the much less complicated frigates and cruisers, but just give everybody access to capital ships. This is assuming that the frigates and cruisers researched are not more technically advanced the the other ships. Size does not = more advanced. Take the Kodiak Cruiser it is a specia

Now there is a real difference between researching a ship and researching systems ON a ship. The time frame of this game is way too short for a research tech up from small craft to large (normally 4x games go from just reaching space to empire) this game does not! Now all of the SHIPS should be there, but the systems may not be . . that is where the researching should be done. You can make the battleship . . but to make it more effective you need defensive and offensive tech. This allow