Board index » MDC Worlds » Rifts®: Dimension Books

 


Post new topic Reply to topic
Author Message
 Post subject: Planetary Defenses
Unread postPosted: Sat Nov 23, 2019 3:26 am
  

User avatar
Megaversal® Ambassador

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2011 1:23 am
Posts: 1798
Location: Houston, TX
Comment: "I will not be silenced. I will not submit. I will find the truth and shout it to the world. "
I have been listening to the Star Wars Book Thrawn Alliances and it got me thinking about a couple of things in Phase World:

1-Would Planets in the Three Galaxies use large heavy energy weapons that can fire on ships in orbit from the planet's surface? In DB2: Phase World the description for the Kreeghor home world it mentions large cannons that can melt a starship in orbit but that was before the retcon Fleets and Thundercloud so I'm not sure if such things still exist or would be wide spread.

2-Would planets in the Three Galaxies have something like planetary shields like we see in Star Wars on planets like Coruscant or even just shields for a base like we see in Empire on Hoth?

I have never really used this in Phase World as the nature of FTL travel and low speeds means a defense in depth approach that tries to stop a ship from reaching weapons range made more sense but I was wondering what others had done.

_________________
Northern Gun Chief of Robotics
Designer of NG-X40 Storm Hammer Power Armor & NG-HC1000 Dragonfly Hover Chopper
Big game hunter, explorer extra ordinaire and expert on the Aegis Buffalo
Ultimate Insider - WB 32: Lemuria
Ultimate Insider - WB 33: Northern Gun 1
Ultimate Insider - WB 34: Northern Gun 2
Showdown Backer - Robotech RPG Tactics
Benefactor Insider - Rifts Bestiary: Volume 1


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: Planetary Defenses
Unread postPosted: Sat Nov 23, 2019 8:57 am
  

User avatar
Supreme Being

Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2000 1:01 am
Posts: 8578
Location: Unreality
Comment: Being a moderator doesn't mean I speak for Palladium Books. It just makes me the lifeguard at their pool.
I think a lot of different strategies exist. We see UWW orbital defense platforms in Three Galaxies (I think).

Specifically on the Kreeghor, they seem to follow the One Big Gun philosophy for ship design, so it wouldn't surprise me that they build the biggest cannons they possibly can. Surface mounted weapons do have limited arcs of fire so you need to build a network of them.

Orbital defense platforms have wider arcs of fire and are more mobile allowing fewer systems to cover the same area.

_________________
Official Hero of the Megaverse

Dead Boy wrote:
All hail Jefffar... King of the Mods

Co-Holder with Ice Dragon of the "Lando Calrissian" award for Smooth. - Novastar

Palladium Forums of the Megaverse Rules

If you need to contact Palladium Books for any reason, click here.


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: Planetary Defenses
Unread postPosted: Sat Nov 23, 2019 5:54 pm
  

User avatar
Demon Lord Extraordinaire

Joined: Sun Apr 03, 2005 3:28 pm
Posts: 6343
Location: Apocrypha
Comment: You probably think this comment is about you, don't you?
I know that was a thing in the Robotech anime. There might be stats on such things in the 1st Ed books.


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: Planetary Defenses
Unread postPosted: Sat Nov 23, 2019 8:29 pm
  

User avatar
Megaversal® Ambassador

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2011 1:23 am
Posts: 1798
Location: Houston, TX
Comment: "I will not be silenced. I will not submit. I will find the truth and shout it to the world. "
Jefffar wrote:
I think a lot of different strategies exist. We see UWW orbital defense platforms in Three Galaxies (I think).

Specifically on the Kreeghor, they seem to follow the One Big Gun philosophy for ship design, so it wouldn't surprise me that they build the biggest cannons they possibly can. Surface mounted weapons do have limited arcs of fire so you need to build a network of them.

Orbital defense platforms have wider arcs of fire and are more mobile allowing fewer systems to cover the same area.

Like I said in my setting most of what I did in PW centered on ODPs but Star Wars has gotten me thinking. Placing heavy weapons on the surface allows for larger power plants (micronizing to fit in a platform is expensive) with increased energy draw so that means more damage and higher rate of fire.

Placing a cannon on the ground also makes it easier to defend as opposed to the same reactor weapon combo in orbit and I agree the Kreeghor would be more inclined to have them then say the Noro home world.

The Beast wrote:
I know that was a thing in the Robotech anime. There might be stats on such things in the 1st Ed books.


There are a few things in 1e Robotech but nothing on this scale and the weapons damages and especially the ranges are so beyond Phase World.

What do you two think of the whole planet based or planet wide shields?

_________________
Northern Gun Chief of Robotics
Designer of NG-X40 Storm Hammer Power Armor & NG-HC1000 Dragonfly Hover Chopper
Big game hunter, explorer extra ordinaire and expert on the Aegis Buffalo
Ultimate Insider - WB 32: Lemuria
Ultimate Insider - WB 33: Northern Gun 1
Ultimate Insider - WB 34: Northern Gun 2
Showdown Backer - Robotech RPG Tactics
Benefactor Insider - Rifts Bestiary: Volume 1


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: Planetary Defenses
Unread postPosted: Sun Nov 24, 2019 2:45 pm
  

User avatar
Monk

Joined: Sat Sep 30, 2000 1:01 am
Posts: 15173
Location: Eastvale, calif
Due to orbital mechanices, ground based anti-ship weapons are of limted value in the defince of a planet. The other thing that limits the value of ground based anti-ship weapons is that they are stationary. That can be attacked via balistic attacks that can be made from outside the weapons' fire range and firing arcs.

Orbital weapons platforms also share the deficets to value that being stationary targets. Vulerable to c-fractional attacks by KEWs and other long range balistic attacks.

Even semi-moble weapons platforms have troubles with fighting a moble force.
----
planitary defence shields.....not practable unless the economic costs are not factored into the equation...(see SW Rouge One-Scarif as example)
area defence shields.... are more practable but still only useful only after the base it protects from orbital bombardment is detected. (see SW Empire Strikes Back-Hoth as example)

_________________
Q's on this board need canon answers first for the question that was asked. Then you can post your own opinions or house rules, they need to be listed/declareds as your own opinions or house rules.


My Artwork


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: Planetary Defenses
Unread postPosted: Sun Nov 24, 2019 8:36 pm
  

User avatar
Priest

Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2003 8:19 pm
Posts: 43322
Location: Somewhere between Heaven, Hell, and New England
Area forcefields are also problematic because if you make them too small(and economical), a clever opponent might start slicing in fractional-cee KEWs at shallow angles to create earthquakes under the edge of your shield, or land them offshore to inundate your city/protected target with tidal waves. :twisted:
That's f they don't particularly care about tearing up the real estate.

_________________
-------------
"Trouble rather the Tiger in his Lair,
Than the Sage among his Books,
For all the Empires and Kingdoms,
The Armies and Works that you hold Dear,
Are to him but the Playthings of the Moment,
To be turned over with the Flick of a Finger,
And the Turning of a Page"

--------Rudyard Kipling
------------


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: Planetary Defenses
Unread postPosted: Mon Nov 25, 2019 3:05 am
  

User avatar
Megaversal® Ambassador

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2011 1:23 am
Posts: 1798
Location: Houston, TX
Comment: "I will not be silenced. I will not submit. I will find the truth and shout it to the world. "
Thanks, it's really interesting ideas but I was hoping to limit it to in universe. KEWs would drastically change the battlespace for Phase World pretty radically, unless like in systems such Honor Harington they can be countered by energy based point defense systems.

I tend to agree that planet wide energy shields would be way too expensive. Even on densely populated worlds like Tera Prime where the population and infrastructure might justify it so much is in orbit that would be left out that it wouldn't be worth it.

I still think that the Hoth style local shield would be more of a thing, especial for large power plants or strategic command centers, as the expense would be about that for a comparably sized spacecraft.

I've always had an issue with fixed orbital defenses. Yes they are vulnerable but if you have orbital infrastructure they are also unavoidable and because of the lack of weapons much cheaper than a ship.

I always thought that planets with large populations and expensive orbital facilities would probably have system defense ships. I envisioned them as being Destroyer to Cruiser sized, with no FTL, no figthers and no range. They would carry Heavy weapons, shields and would have a sublight speed that would be average and above, and probably not have much point defense as they could depend on locally deployed fighter squadrons and large numbers of pre-deployed missile pods.

_________________
Northern Gun Chief of Robotics
Designer of NG-X40 Storm Hammer Power Armor & NG-HC1000 Dragonfly Hover Chopper
Big game hunter, explorer extra ordinaire and expert on the Aegis Buffalo
Ultimate Insider - WB 32: Lemuria
Ultimate Insider - WB 33: Northern Gun 1
Ultimate Insider - WB 34: Northern Gun 2
Showdown Backer - Robotech RPG Tactics
Benefactor Insider - Rifts Bestiary: Volume 1


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: Planetary Defenses
Unread postPosted: Mon Nov 25, 2019 7:52 am
  

Champion

Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2012 3:22 am
Posts: 2048
Warshield73 wrote:
but that was before the retcon Fleets and Thundercloud so I'm not sure if such things still exist or would be wide spread.


What retcon is that, exactly?

Also, Phase World itself has planetary defense batteries - so effective that they can lay waste to entire fleets that try to attack the planet, without destroying the ships (because they are Phase weapons). Thats pointed out in at least two books (PWSB, and Dimensional Outbreak, at least).

Quote:
2-Would planets in the Three Galaxies have something like planetary shields like we see in Star Wars on planets like Coruscant or even just shields for a base like we see in Empire on Hoth?


I can see shields for bases, but planetary shields seem unlikely except for perhaps Phase World itself (though it isn't mentioned). If they existed, the Lanator Accords probably wouldn't forbid bombardment of planetary surfaces with WMD.

Quote:
I have never really used this in Phase World as the nature of FTL travel and low speeds means a defense in depth approach that tries to stop a ship from reaching weapons range made more sense but I was wondering what others had done.


I'd go with this, since large space stations seem perfectly capable of slugging it out with even Dreadnaughts (the UWW's Tangent Stations, if they are any example of what the tech powers could do with a static emplacement, are tough as nails.)

Couple that with the statement under the Sentinel Orbital Weapons Platforms that "There are nearly 9000 satellites in orbit around Terra Prime; this can be used as a measure for just how many Sentinels ther might be over any given UWW planet"....

I dont think shields are necessary.

_________________
Im loving the Foes list; it's the only thing keeping me from tearing out my eyes from the dumb.


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: Planetary Defenses
Unread postPosted: Mon Nov 25, 2019 10:02 pm
  

User avatar
Priest

Joined: Tue Sep 02, 2003 8:19 pm
Posts: 43322
Location: Somewhere between Heaven, Hell, and New England
Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
[
I don't think shields are necessary.


If shield technology exists, as for larger space stations, you can bet there will be people who will want to apply it to surface structures, even if only individual buildings. They may not be necessary if you have a good enough orbital defense network, but the truly cautious will remind folks that it's that one lucky golden BB that slips through the net that you have to guard against.

_________________
-------------
"Trouble rather the Tiger in his Lair,
Than the Sage among his Books,
For all the Empires and Kingdoms,
The Armies and Works that you hold Dear,
Are to him but the Playthings of the Moment,
To be turned over with the Flick of a Finger,
And the Turning of a Page"

--------Rudyard Kipling
------------


Last edited by taalismn on Tue Nov 26, 2019 6:35 pm, edited 1 time in total.

          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: Planetary Defenses
Unread postPosted: Tue Nov 26, 2019 2:48 am
  

User avatar
Megaversal® Ambassador

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2011 1:23 am
Posts: 1798
Location: Houston, TX
Comment: "I will not be silenced. I will not submit. I will find the truth and shout it to the world. "
Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
Warshield73 wrote:
but that was before the retcon Fleets and Thundercloud so I'm not sure if such things still exist or would be wide spread.


What retcon is that, exactly?

The Lanator Accords that you mention below is essential a major retcon. The description of the Machine people in DB2 and the Description of Axis 4 and Good Hope all mention Kreeghor either threatening or actually using planetary bombardment to maintain control or to conquer a people but now the Lanator accords seems to do away with that.

Several posters have said that even the Splugorth tend to follow the accords but I'm not sure if that's in the book, they never gave me a reference. If this is true then the entire reason for the Giant cannons on Kreeghor home world, mass attack of Splugorth ships trying to cleanse the planet, seems to no longer exist.

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
Also, Phase World itself has planetary defense batteries - so effective that they can lay waste to entire fleets that try to attack the planet, without destroying the ships (because they are Phase weapons). Thats pointed out in at least two books (PWSB, and Dimensional Outbreak, at least).

I referenced one of these in the OP and is sort of the reason for this thread. How common is this? What are there strategic and tactical purposes?

I have always treated ground based batteries as more area denial then direct attack. These cannons are so large and powerful that ships powerful enough to bombard that area with direct fire would never survive the approach. I was wondering how others approached this.

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
Warshield73 wrote:
2-Would planets in the Three Galaxies have something like planetary shields like we see in Star Wars on planets like Coruscant or even just shields for a base like we see in Empire on Hoth?


I can see shields for bases, but planetary shields seem unlikely except for perhaps Phase World itself (though it isn't mentioned). If they existed, the Lanator Accords probably wouldn't forbid bombardment of planetary surfaces with WMD.

I went this way as well but the idea of planetary shields is kind of interesting for a science fantasy setting like Star Wars or Phase World so I was curious if any had used them or if I missed a reference to them in any of the books.

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
Warshield73 wrote:
I have never really used this in Phase World as the nature of FTL travel and low speeds means a defense in depth approach that tries to stop a ship from reaching weapons range made more sense but I was wondering what others had done.


I'd go with this, since large space stations seem perfectly capable of slugging it out with even Dreadnaughts (the UWW's Tangent Stations, if they are any example of what the tech powers could do with a static emplacement, are tough as nails.)

Couple that with the statement under the Sentinel Orbital Weapons Platforms that "There are nearly 9000 satellites in orbit around Terra Prime; this can be used as a measure for just how many Sentinels ther might be over any given UWW planet"....

I dont think shields are necessary.

I tend to agree. I think big planet based cannons and area shields would be used for import places just in case some enemy can appear within the defense zone but that is all.

As for tech space stations I'm not sure if they could be on par with a tangent as it can draw power form a nexus while there is technological equivalent for a tech station. I do believe that not having engines, especially no FTL, would allow for an station to be built for a fraction of the cost of an equivalent warship. They could also mount larger weapons then equivalent warships as they do not need to have them in the hull or moved by the ships engines. But I think most of the firepower of these stations would be in the unmanned satellites they control (including sentinels and even missile pods) and the fighters they deploy.

_________________
Northern Gun Chief of Robotics
Designer of NG-X40 Storm Hammer Power Armor & NG-HC1000 Dragonfly Hover Chopper
Big game hunter, explorer extra ordinaire and expert on the Aegis Buffalo
Ultimate Insider - WB 32: Lemuria
Ultimate Insider - WB 33: Northern Gun 1
Ultimate Insider - WB 34: Northern Gun 2
Showdown Backer - Robotech RPG Tactics
Benefactor Insider - Rifts Bestiary: Volume 1


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: Planetary Defenses
Unread postPosted: Tue Nov 26, 2019 2:57 am
  

User avatar
Megaversal® Ambassador

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2011 1:23 am
Posts: 1798
Location: Houston, TX
Comment: "I will not be silenced. I will not submit. I will find the truth and shout it to the world. "
taalismn wrote:
Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
[
I don't think shields are necessary.


If shield technology exists, as for larger space stations, you can bet there will be people who will want to apply it to surface structures, even if only individual buildings. They may not be necessary if you have a good enough orbital defense network, but the truly cautious will remind folks that it's that one lucky golden BB that slips through the net that you have ti guard against.

Agreed. Shields also have the advantage that they regenerate from damage so it can be a real cost savings.

_________________
Northern Gun Chief of Robotics
Designer of NG-X40 Storm Hammer Power Armor & NG-HC1000 Dragonfly Hover Chopper
Big game hunter, explorer extra ordinaire and expert on the Aegis Buffalo
Ultimate Insider - WB 32: Lemuria
Ultimate Insider - WB 33: Northern Gun 1
Ultimate Insider - WB 34: Northern Gun 2
Showdown Backer - Robotech RPG Tactics
Benefactor Insider - Rifts Bestiary: Volume 1


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: Planetary Defenses
Unread postPosted: Wed Nov 27, 2019 6:48 pm
  

Champion

Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2012 3:22 am
Posts: 2048
Warshield73 wrote:
Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
Warshield73 wrote:
but that was before the retcon Fleets and Thundercloud so I'm not sure if such things still exist or would be wide spread.


What retcon is that, exactly?

The Lanator Accords that you mention below is essential a major retcon. The description of the Machine people in DB2 and the Description of Axis 4 and Good Hope all mention Kreeghor either threatening or actually using planetary bombardment to maintain control or to conquer a people but now the Lanator accords seems to do away with that.


Its not a ret-con. This is not targeted specifically at you, as it has been super-prevalent lately in all sorts of fandoms. Ret-cons (Retroactive Continuity changes) change something that already existed. This is not that. This is what i'd term an ad-con (Additional Continuity). Ad-cons can explain things that were never explained or explain how a thing we didnt know about before ISNT a ret-con.

The Lanator Accords are not a ret-con. At worst, they are an ad-con.

The Lanator Accords are relatively recent, for one. (Coming out of the end of the last war between the CCW and the TGE). They dont change anything that happened in the past. You can bet that the TGE used to bombard planets indiscriminately before the Accords became a thing.

And the descriptions you're talking about show the Kreeghor using heavy energy weapons against the surface, which is allowed under the Accords. There is even a mention in one of the books (Might be Fleets? Ill try to look for it later today or tomorrow; ill have hours of sitting at the in-laws for Thanksgiving to peruse the books i have e-copies of) that the Kreeghor still will attack planetary surfaces by doing things like scouring farmland clean and leaving the inhabitants to die of starvation or capitulate to the TGE - which is pointed out as being technically within the bounds of the Accords, which seem to apply to things like bombardment with military explosive ordinance, mass drivers, and cruise missiles (the description of Cruise Missiles in Fleets says straight up that their use against planetary targets is strictly forbidden).

Thirdly... the Splugorth Kingdoms are not signatories of the Accords, and unlike a lot of the other 3rd-rate powers out there, are just big enough that the CCW cant/wont come down on them like the hammer of god for violating them. It wouldn't be like going to war with the TGE, for sure, but it is a lot bigger of an ordeal than sending a single fleet to slap down a 10-system upstart for being uncouth.

Lastly.... the Kreeghor are paranoid dictators. It wouldn't matter if every Splugorth Kingdom had signed the Accords... the Kreeghor wold still have massive planetary defense batteries. And prior to the Accords, it was a real fear for them anyway. Its not like theyre just going to shut them down because of a treaty with the CCW that the Splugorth didn't sign (though the UWW did sign on).

Couple that with the fact that even if you have massive orbital defenses, planetary defense batteries are still massively useful - lets say that your enemy somehow manages to slug its way through your orbital defenses... you're not going to have entrenched defenses on th planet to help shoot down his fleet? Just going to let him chill in orbit and land troops at will? I dont think so. Especially not if you're the Kreeghor.

Quote:
Several posters have said that even the Splugorth tend to follow the accords but I'm not sure if that's in the book, they never gave me a reference. If this is true then the entire reason for the Giant cannons on Kreeghor home world, mass attack of Splugorth ships trying to cleanse the planet, seems to no longer exist.


Not sure where people got that, especially considering that one of the Splugorth ship types packs a Mass Driver specifically to terrorize planets into surrender.

They dont abide by the Accords. They didn't sign on to them, and are just big enough that taking them on is a major undertaking, and...

Prove it. If a planet gets Mass-driver'ed into oblivion and its remaining population carried off by a Splugorth slaver fleet....

Prove it. There's no witnesses, the Splugorth will throw up their tentacles and say "not us", and....

You have little to no way to prove it was the Splugorth, and even if you did.... which one?

There are four major kingdoms still out there, a major player on Phase World itself (who does own his own fleets), and dozens of smaller Kingdoms out there, from single-system polities to 10-30 world mini-kingdoms.

Which one do you go after?

_________________
Im loving the Foes list; it's the only thing keeping me from tearing out my eyes from the dumb.


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: Planetary Defenses
Unread postPosted: Thu Dec 12, 2019 2:45 am
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2001 1:01 am
Posts: 5867
Location: Clone Lab 27
Jefffar wrote:
I think a lot of different strategies exist. We see UWW orbital defense platforms in Three Galaxies (I think).

Specifically on the Kreeghor, they seem to follow the One Big Gun philosophy for ship design, so it wouldn't surprise me that they build the biggest cannons they possibly can. Surface mounted weapons do have limited arcs of fire so you need to build a network of them.

Orbital defense platforms have wider arcs of fire and are more mobile allowing fewer systems to cover the same area.

Oddly defense gun network was covered in a episode of Stargate. I can't remember if the exact number of guns they said would be needed to protect but think it was 64.

Planetary guns would be kind of the last line of defense. Orbital defense would probably mostly be unmanned satellite defense platforms supported by fighters bombers. (best cost option and does not require planets to all have ship yards to build/maintain capital ships.)
I could see planetary defense shields to protect from orbital bombardment.

FTL ships would patrols would also exist and there may be a plan to send a ftl fleet to help a world under siege. Their may be a network of remote unnamed sensor platforms that serve as a early warning system, allowing further range of detection and more time for FTL fleet to come in. (I seem to recall phase world having FTL comms but do not have my books with me.)

_________________
The Clones are coming you shall all be replaced, but who is to say you have not been replaced already.

Master of Type-O and the obvios.

Soon my army oc clones and winged-monkies will rule the world but first, must .......

I may debate canon and RAW, but the games I run are highly house ruled. So I am not debating for how I play but about how the system works as written.


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: Planetary Defenses
Unread postPosted: Sat Dec 14, 2019 3:46 am
  

User avatar
Megaversal® Ambassador

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2011 1:23 am
Posts: 1798
Location: Houston, TX
Comment: "I will not be silenced. I will not submit. I will find the truth and shout it to the world. "
Sorry, I forgot all about this thread but I wanted to respond.
Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
Its not a ret-con. This is not targeted specifically at you, as it has been super-prevalent lately in all sorts of fandoms. Ret-cons (Retroactive Continuity changes) change something that already existed. This is not that. This is what i'd term an ad-con (Additional Continuity). Ad-cons can explain things that were never explained or explain how a thing we didnt know about before ISNT a ret-con.

Not sure if you're trying to create a new term here but I have never heard of an ad-con and neither has Google so I don't know how to deal with this. But, this is a ret-con as it does contradict already existing information as I described above.

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
The Lanator Accords are not a ret-con. At worst, they are an ad-con.

The Lanator Accords are relatively recent, for one. (Coming out of the end of the last war between the CCW and the TGE). They dont change anything that happened in the past. You can bet that the TGE used to bombard planets indiscriminately before the Accords became a thing.

No, according to the timeline in DB 13, pg. 8 it is 500 years old and predates the machine people incident by more than 100 years.

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
And the descriptions you're talking about show the Kreeghor using heavy energy weapons against the surface, which is allowed under the Accords. There is even a mention in one of the books (Might be Fleets? Ill try to look for it later today or tomorrow; ill have hours of sitting at the in-laws for Thanksgiving to peruse the books i have e-copies of) that the Kreeghor still will attack planetary surfaces by doing things like scouring farmland clean and leaving the inhabitants to die of starvation or capitulate to the TGE - which is pointed out as being technically within the bounds of the Accords, which seem to apply to things like bombardment with military explosive ordinance, mass drivers, and cruise missiles (the description of Cruise Missiles in Fleets says straight up that their use against planetary targets is strictly forbidden).

Again no. DB 14, pg. 8 says any starship borne weapon is forbidden and DB 13, pg. 100 says that all CM's are forbidden as well as Heavy directed energy weapons. If there is some place that contradicts this please let me know. I don't use much from either of these books so I'm not as familiar with them.

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
Thirdly... the Splugorth Kingdoms are not signatories of the Accords, and unlike a lot of the other 3rd-rate powers out there, are just big enough that the CCW cant/wont come down on them like the hammer of god for violating them. It wouldn't be like going to war with the TGE, for sure, but it is a lot bigger of an ordeal than sending a single fleet to slap down a 10-system upstart for being uncouth.

Again I said others had posted this but never gave me a reference for it so I don't know. But, what you put here makes no sense. The CCW will send Three Galaxies to war if the TGE bombs one planet and going to war against a small local empire who hasn't signed it is worth it because(?) but putting together a fleet to take on a Splugorth for hitting one of there worlds isn't worth it. I don't understand this.

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
Lastly.... the Kreeghor are paranoid dictators. It wouldn't matter if every Splugorth Kingdom had signed the Accords... the Kreeghor wold still have massive planetary defense batteries. And prior to the Accords, it was a real fear for them anyway. Its not like theyre just going to shut them down because of a treaty with the CCW that the Splugorth didn't sign (though the UWW did sign on).

Couple that with the fact that even if you have massive orbital defenses, planetary defense batteries are still massively useful - lets say that your enemy somehow manages to slug its way through your orbital defenses... you're not going to have entrenched defenses on th planet to help shoot down his fleet? Just going to let him chill in orbit and land troops at will? I dont think so. Especially not if you're the Kreeghor.

This is what I was looking for with the OP. I actually agree with this but I was wondering how widespread the use of these weapons are. Would Tera Prime have them? Mother Home? Noro Gor? If none of those how many TGE worlds have them.

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
Quote:
Several posters have said that even the Splugorth tend to follow the accords but I'm not sure if that's in the book, they never gave me a reference. If this is true then the entire reason for the Giant cannons on Kreeghor home world, mass attack of Splugorth ships trying to cleanse the planet, seems to no longer exist.


Not sure where people got that, especially considering that one of the Splugorth ship types packs a Mass Driver specifically to terrorize planets into surrender.

They dont abide by the Accords. They didn't sign on to them, and are just big enough that taking them on is a major undertaking, and...

Prove it. If a planet gets Mass-driver'ed into oblivion and its remaining population carried off by a Splugorth slaver fleet....

Prove it. There's no witnesses, the Splugorth will throw up their tentacles and say "not us", and....

You have little to no way to prove it was the Splugorth, and even if you did.... which one?

There are four major kingdoms still out there, a major player on Phase World itself (who does own his own fleets), and dozens of smaller Kingdoms out there, from single-system polities to 10-30 world mini-kingdoms.

Which one do you go after?

The only thing I will say about this is if this was even a semi-common occurrence in the CCW then it would no longer exist. Governments that can not defend there people don't last long. Small colonies and upstarts sure but any planets in the hundreds of thousands no way.

_________________
Northern Gun Chief of Robotics
Designer of NG-X40 Storm Hammer Power Armor & NG-HC1000 Dragonfly Hover Chopper
Big game hunter, explorer extra ordinaire and expert on the Aegis Buffalo
Ultimate Insider - WB 32: Lemuria
Ultimate Insider - WB 33: Northern Gun 1
Ultimate Insider - WB 34: Northern Gun 2
Showdown Backer - Robotech RPG Tactics
Benefactor Insider - Rifts Bestiary: Volume 1


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: Planetary Defenses
Unread postPosted: Sat Dec 14, 2019 5:00 am
  

Champion

Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2012 3:22 am
Posts: 2048
Warshield73 wrote:
Sorry, I forgot all about this thread but I wanted to respond.
Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
Its not a ret-con. This is not targeted specifically at you, as it has been super-prevalent lately in all sorts of fandoms. Ret-cons (Retroactive Continuity changes) change something that already existed. This is not that. This is what i'd term an ad-con (Additional Continuity). Ad-cons can explain things that were never explained or explain how a thing we didnt know about before ISNT a ret-con.

Not sure if you're trying to create a new term here but I have never heard of an ad-con and neither has Google so I don't know how to deal with this. But, this is a ret-con as it does contradict already existing information as I described above.


You didn't describe any contradictions. And am i trying to coin a new term? Sure, i guess, but people use the term ret-con incorrectly almost constantly. in fact, if i had to take a guess, i'd say that MAYBE once out of every 15 or 20 times i see the term used its actually used to describe an actual ret-con.

To be a ret-con, it must contradict, invalidate, and change previously established continuity. Nothing you described does that, and it can, in fact, be explained (absurdly easily) without contradicting anything. The Lanator Accords do not in any way invalidate Kreeghor-Tet having massive planetary defensive batteries. The two things dont even have anything to do with each other.

If it is merely new information that changes the way you look at things or changes an assumption made about something, then it isn't a ret-con. Its just new information. The best example (and one i wish WERE a ret-con, so i could hate it even more) would be in the Halo universe. If spoilers matter to you, dont click.

Spoiler:
In Halo, we are led to assume that Humans are the second coming of the Forerunner race, or at least their designated heirs; this is later proven false: the Humans were contemporaries of the Forerunners, existing at the same time that the Forerunner were at their height of power, and, had they not already been weakened by a centuries-long war with the Flood, the Humans might have been able to defeat the Forerunner. If you just played the Bungie Halo games, you would never have thought that, you'd have thought what the humans in-game assumed: that The Forerunner fought and lost a war with The Flood, and chose Humanity out of all the non-evolved races to eventually replace them, and even that the Forerunner may have specifically advanced human evolution to make this come to fruition, it is only with the additional info that came later (In Halo 4, 5 and the -god awful- Novels) that you learn "the truth". Its not a ret-con, though, as it doesn't actually change anything. It doesn't invalidate the previous info (though the ass-pull that the Halo 4 screwup with the Didact required was epically bad writing), but may change how you view it. Much as i hate it, though, its not a ret-con.


Quote:
Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
The Lanator Accords are not a ret-con. At worst, they are an ad-con.

The Lanator Accords are relatively recent, for one. (Coming out of the end of the last war between the CCW and the TGE). They dont change anything that happened in the past. You can bet that the TGE used to bombard planets indiscriminately before the Accords became a thing.

No, according to the timeline in DB 13, pg. 8 it is 500 years old and predates the machine people incident by more than 100 years.


.. im not sure what the Machine People have to do with anything. The Lanator Accords weren't about the Machine People. No one said they were. Why are you even bringing this up? And 500 years is "relatively recently" in a civilization that has been around for about 15,000 years.

Quote:
Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
And the descriptions you're talking about show the Kreeghor using heavy energy weapons against the surface, which is allowed under the Accords. There is even a mention in one of the books (Might be Fleets? Ill try to look for it later today or tomorrow; ill have hours of sitting at the in-laws for Thanksgiving to peruse the books i have e-copies of) that the Kreeghor still will attack planetary surfaces by doing things like scouring farmland clean and leaving the inhabitants to die of starvation or capitulate to the TGE - which is pointed out as being technically within the bounds of the Accords, which seem to apply to things like bombardment with military explosive ordinance, mass drivers, and cruise missiles (the description of Cruise Missiles in Fleets says straight up that their use against planetary targets is strictly forbidden).


Again no. DB 14, pg. 8 says any starship borne weapon is forbidden and DB 13, pg. 100 says that all CM's are forbidden as well as Heavy directed energy weapons. If there is some place that contradicts this please let me know. I don't use much from either of these books so I'm not as familiar with them.


Honest question: Is English not your first language? Because page 8 does not say what you think it does:

Dimension Book 14, page 8 wrote:
*The use of weapons of mass destruction would no longer be used by either party within the atmosphere of a planet inhabited by intelligent life forms, and belonging to the opposite party


The "and belonging to the opposite party" thing was added in this book; it was not present in any previous version of the Accords that were detailed, so it kind of neuters them.

However... that says absolutely nothing about bombarding a planet with heavy energy weapons.

However, page 100 of DB13 does seem to imply that Heavy Energy Weapons cant be used this way either (while also pointing out that plenty of people dont obey the Accords, so slaggings happen); but this passage is already incorrect as it says "any inhabited world", when we know because of DB14 that the Accords only apply to worlds owned by the signatories. However, even if it is correct, it doesn't invalidate the tactic the Kreeghor use; we have a clear definition of what a Heavy Shipboard Energy Weapon is; there are plenty of medium-weight energy weapons that can be used to use the described TGE tactic - burning crops, etc - that dont violate the Accords. LRMs are also not "Weapons of Mass Destruction", nor are MRMs, and a bombardment of Plasma missiles can accomplish the task.

Quote:
Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
Thirdly... the Splugorth Kingdoms are not signatories of the Accords, and unlike a lot of the other 3rd-rate powers out there, are just big enough that the CCW cant/wont come down on them like the hammer of god for violating them. It wouldn't be like going to war with the TGE, for sure, but it is a lot bigger of an ordeal than sending a single fleet to slap down a 10-system upstart for being uncouth.


Again I said others had posted this but never gave me a reference for it so I don't know. But, what you put here makes no sense. The CCW will send Three Galaxies to war if the TGE bombs one planet and going to war against a small local empire who hasn't signed it is worth it because(?) but putting together a fleet to take on a Splugorth for hitting one of there worlds isn't worth it. I don't understand this.


Because you made an extremely silly assumption.

Quote:
Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
Lastly.... the Kreeghor are paranoid dictators. It wouldn't matter if every Splugorth Kingdom had signed the Accords... the Kreeghor wold still have massive planetary defense batteries. And prior to the Accords, it was a real fear for them anyway. Its not like theyre just going to shut them down because of a treaty with the CCW that the Splugorth didn't sign (though the UWW did sign on).

Couple that with the fact that even if you have massive orbital defenses, planetary defense batteries are still massively useful - lets say that your enemy somehow manages to slug its way through your orbital defenses... you're not going to have entrenched defenses on th planet to help shoot down his fleet? Just going to let him chill in orbit and land troops at will? I dont think so. Especially not if you're the Kreeghor.

This is what I was looking for with the OP. I actually agree with this but I was wondering how widespread the use of these weapons are. Would Tera Prime have them? Mother Home? Noro Gor? If none of those how many TGE worlds have them.

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
Quote:
Several posters have said that even the Splugorth tend to follow the accords but I'm not sure if that's in the book, they never gave me a reference. If this is true then the entire reason for the Giant cannons on Kreeghor home world, mass attack of Splugorth ships trying to cleanse the planet, seems to no longer exist.


Not sure where people got that, especially considering that one of the Splugorth ship types packs a Mass Driver specifically to terrorize planets into surrender.

They dont abide by the Accords. They didn't sign on to them, and are just big enough that taking them on is a major undertaking, and...

Prove it. If a planet gets Mass-driver'ed into oblivion and its remaining population carried off by a Splugorth slaver fleet....

Prove it. There's no witnesses, the Splugorth will throw up their tentacles and say "not us", and....

You have little to no way to prove it was the Splugorth, and even if you did.... which one?

There are four major kingdoms still out there, a major player on Phase World itself (who does own his own fleets), and dozens of smaller Kingdoms out there, from single-system polities to 10-30 world mini-kingdoms.

Which one do you go after?


The only thing I will say about this is if this was even a semi-common occurrence in the CCW then it would no longer exist. Governments that can not defend there people don't last long. Small colonies and upstarts sure but any planets in the hundreds of thousands no way.


i have no idea why you would make the completely unfounded assumption that i was talking about planets inside CCW territory. (Though it is outright stated in Fleets that small colonies can and do just go missing, with entire populations wiped out or carried off never to be seen again - the dangers of living on the fringes).

Remember: more than half the galactic population does not belong to any of the three major power blocs.

The CCW tends to enforce the Accords on everyone; I.E. if you're some jumped-up Star Kingdom and you start bomarding your neighbors... the CCW is likely to send you a "cease and desist" warning, and when you dont.. theyll stop you. Even if those planets aren't in the CCW. And because of the Accords, the TGE will let them and the UWW might even help.

Its extremely similar to (and based on) the Eridani Edict in the Honor Harrington universe. The Edict is not a treaty countries signed; its an Edict that the Solarian League just announced. You do not bombard planets until they have been called upon to surrender, and their refusal to surrender has been documented by the League. If you do, the League will fall on you hard, fast, and completely, and crush you. No questions, no argument, and it is the one thing you can do that will cause the normally glacially slow League government to act with alacrity and finality.

Manticore, Haven, etc, never "Agreed" to the Edict; it simply Is. Dont like it? Tough.
Spoiler:
(And, ironically, is what leads to the break up of the League eventually)


The Accords are (implied to be, if not outright stated) similar. Its an agreement between the (eventually all 3) major superpowers that the following things are "not civilized" so we dont do them. They can and will use it as an excuse to fall on you hard if you do. Dont like it? Take it up with the Imperial/CCW/Warlock Navy.

Thats why the Splugorth are sorta in a weird spot.

Theyre big enough (the four major kingdoms that are detailed, at least; we know there are smaller Splugorth kingdoms out there, one is described in Three Galaxies, i believe, belonging to a young female Splugorth - its just one or two systems) that even the CCW and TGE cant just take them out at a whim (they could assuredly win a war against them - the TGE has been slowly eroding that kingdom in the Thundercloud for more than a century) - it would be too costly and hard to justify, and the fact that there are four of them provides them with enough deniability that even if you knew the Splugorth did it... how do you prove which Kingdom?

How do you justify undertaking a major military operation (not a situation of simply dispatching the nearest task force to slap down an upstart, 2nd-rate navy from a 3-system nobody power) against them when you aren't even sure which one did it? Its a hard sell to the voters and to the Consortium Congress. The UWW is less likely to act on foreign nations, because thats not their policy, though individual member worlds might. The TGE attacks the Splugorth all the time anyway, so this is just an other excuse to do what they are already doing.

_________________
Im loving the Foes list; it's the only thing keeping me from tearing out my eyes from the dumb.


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: Planetary Defenses
Unread postPosted: Sun Dec 15, 2019 12:10 am
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2001 1:01 am
Posts: 5867
Location: Clone Lab 27
According to fleets of three galaxies orbital bombardment can destroy a planets eco-system. Even energy weapons would through stuff in the air air that would cause catastrophic effects. That makes significant planetary bombardment a weapon of mass destruction.

The main goal when the Sploogy attack a world is capturing slaves. This does not require orbital bombardment it would require shuttles and shifters. Heavy weapons would likely be used against large orbital targets but unless a planet has a large target that is a threat to the orbital fleet their is little incentive to do so on a planet you want the slaves from. Bombarding a planet from orbit would be more a revenge spite thing.

While the Sploogy may not have signed the accords they know if they break them on often it may cause the those that did signed it to ban together and fight them. In addition if you destroy the eco-system of a habitual world it would be hard for new slaves to be to seed it.

Likely the fleets heavy weapons would be limited to other space craft and large heavy surface to space weapons if they do not have a blind spot. Then fighter and attack craft head to the planet, to secure a landing zone. Shuttles deploy troops to catch slaves. Deadly force would be may be used to break resistance but the main goal is live slaves.

So while small collenies with a few hundred people might be captured, I do not see them using orbital bombardment tactics.

_________________
The Clones are coming you shall all be replaced, but who is to say you have not been replaced already.

Master of Type-O and the obvios.

Soon my army oc clones and winged-monkies will rule the world but first, must .......

I may debate canon and RAW, but the games I run are highly house ruled. So I am not debating for how I play but about how the system works as written.


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: Planetary Defenses
Unread postPosted: Sun Dec 15, 2019 10:25 pm
  

User avatar
Megaversal® Ambassador

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2011 1:23 am
Posts: 1798
Location: Houston, TX
Comment: "I will not be silenced. I will not submit. I will find the truth and shout it to the world. "
Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
Warshield73 wrote:
Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
Its not a ret-con. This is not targeted specifically at you, as it has been super-prevalent lately in all sorts of fandoms. Ret-cons (Retroactive Continuity changes) change something that already existed. This is not that. This is what i'd term an ad-con (Additional Continuity). Ad-cons can explain things that were never explained or explain how a thing we didnt know about before ISNT a ret-con.

Not sure if you're trying to create a new term here but I have never heard of an ad-con and neither has Google so I don't know how to deal with this. But, this is a ret-con as it does contradict already existing information as I described above.


You didn't describe any contradictions. And am i trying to coin a new term? Sure, i guess, but people use the term ret-con incorrectly almost constantly. in fact, if i had to take a guess, i'd say that MAYBE once out of every 15 or 20 times i see the term used its actually used to describe an actual ret-con.

To be a ret-con, it must contradict, invalidate, and change previously established continuity. Nothing you described does that, and it can, in fact, be explained (absurdly easily) without contradicting anything. The Lanator Accords do not in any way invalidate Kreeghor-Tet having massive planetary defensive batteries. The two things dont even have anything to do with each other.

I have described many conditions I just didn't repeat them in every single post but my biggest were:
1) the conquest of the Machine People.
2) Axis 5.
3) Good Hope which I'm not sure if I mentioned in this thread but it has always been a problem for me.

The text clearly says that the Machine People were threatened with bombardment and extinction. According to the timeline this happen after the Accords and so should not have been possible. This would radically contradict the idea that the Machine People could even be exterminated.

Likewise the reference to orbital death dealers the FWC description of DB2 and the description of Axis-5 strongly imply TGE policy of orbital bombardment don't directly say it so while I feel this is a significant retcon I could see how others might disagree. At the very least it does contradict the idea that the TGE would have "orbital death dealers" but again I can see how some might see this as vague.

Now in DB2 pg. 71 it talks about how the Kreeghor use to engage routine genocide of conquered races but then they stopped because they feared it would lead to there downfall. It is described as them maturing as a galactic power but now it is just a case of "we can't do this anymore because the CCW is watching us". Again if this was the only reference in the previous books I wouldn't call it a retcon but when you add it in to everything else it contradicts or invalidates then yes I do consider it.

As for the OP yes Kreeghor-Tet would still have these cannons. My question was two fold: 1) and I was sloppy on this but did anything in later books eliminate these? and 2) would other planets have them besides KT especially when we are considering the LA? That's it.

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
If it is merely new information that changes the way you look at things or changes an assumption made about something, then it isn't a ret-con. Its just new information.

There is plenty of new information in the book which radically changes how the game was played but is not a retcon. I will stop picking on DB 13 and hit DB 5. In the years following DB 2 and 3 but before DB 5 I had several players run Star Elves. All we ever did was take an elf from CB1 and give her/him a Phase World OCC, almost always UWW Marine Mage. Not one player ever even thought to suggest "hey how about an Asgardian Elf" because you know pride. Now when DB5 comes out with Star Elves basically being Asgardian Elves that radically changed my games but it was not a retcon.

So yes I'm with you here I follow your arguments I just disagree and I require evidence to change my mind.

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
The best example (and one i wish WERE a ret-con, so i could hate it even more) would be in the Halo universe. If spoilers matter to you, dont click.

Spoiler:
In Halo, we are led to assume that Humans are the second coming of the Forerunner race, or at least their designated heirs; this is later proven false: the Humans were contemporaries of the Forerunners, existing at the same time that the Forerunner were at their height of power, and, had they not already been weakened by a centuries-long war with the Flood, the Humans might have been able to defeat the Forerunner. If you just played the Bungie Halo games, you would never have thought that, you'd have thought what the humans in-game assumed: that The Forerunner fought and lost a war with The Flood, and chose Humanity out of all the non-evolved races to eventually replace them, and even that the Forerunner may have specifically advanced human evolution to make this come to fruition, it is only with the additional info that came later (In Halo 4, 5 and the -god awful- Novels) that you learn "the truth". Its not a ret-con, though, as it doesn't actually change anything. It doesn't invalidate the previous info (though the ass-pull that the Halo 4 screwup with the Didact required was epically bad writing), but may change how you view it. Much as i hate it, though, its not a ret-con.

I have played all of these games and I have read a few of the books and while I agree that it's not a retcon I guess it doesn't bother me as much as most people.
Spoiler:
Truthfully the whole "humanity is the chosen race to save the universe" trope just kind fell flat with me anyway and was kind of the least interesting part of Halo story anyway. And I liked Halo 4

Now more to the point these revelations do not, in any way, change how people play that game. You can go back and play the first game over while knowing this information and it doesn't change, because you know it is a video game. Now a TTRPG is a different story and the addition of the accords, whether you think it is just new information or a full on retcon, does radically change the way a lot of people have played this game based on the descriptions previously given. Just look at the TGE ships posted on these forums and count up the ones that have mass drivers on them. Now this does not make this a retcon in and of itself but it does say that a lot of other people had a radically different interpretation of the character of the TGE.

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
Warshield73 wrote:
Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
The Lanator Accords are not a ret-con. At worst, they are an ad-con.

The Lanator Accords are relatively recent, for one. (Coming out of the end of the last war between the CCW and the TGE). They dont change anything that happened in the past. You can bet that the TGE used to bombard planets indiscriminately before the Accords became a thing.

No, according to the timeline in DB 13, pg. 8 it is 500 years old and predates the machine people incident by more than 100 years.


.. im not sure what the Machine People have to do with anything. The Lanator Accords weren't about the Machine People. No one said they were. Why are you even bringing this up? And 500 years is "relatively recently" in a civilization that has been around for about 15,000 years.

OK seriously. First you said it was "recent" and "coming out of the last war" which was 25 years ago. If you made a mistake just own it. Second, the CCW is 700 years old and the oldest faction in it goes back about 5,000 years. 15,000 years takes us to the Interim before the Third Galactic Age. Also, European history goes back more than 4,000 years and no one would ever describe Galileo as recent history. These accords have been around 85% of the history of the CCW and most of the TGE (not its precursor the Kreeghor Dominion just the TGE). So no not at all recent and not a product of the last war but the first war.

I did site the Machine people as being one of my reasons for this being a retcon so yes I needed to point out that the conquest of the Machine People came after. If it came after it would be less of a retcon.

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
Warshield73 wrote:
Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
And the descriptions you're talking about show the Kreeghor using heavy energy weapons against the surface, which is allowed under the Accords. There is even a mention in one of the books (Might be Fleets? Ill try to look for it later today or tomorrow; ill have hours of sitting at the in-laws for Thanksgiving to peruse the books i have e-copies of) that the Kreeghor still will attack planetary surfaces by doing things like scouring farmland clean and leaving the inhabitants to die of starvation or capitulate to the TGE - which is pointed out as being technically within the bounds of the Accords, which seem to apply to things like bombardment with military explosive ordinance, mass drivers, and cruise missiles (the description of Cruise Missiles in Fleets says straight up that their use against planetary targets is strictly forbidden).


Again no. DB 14, pg. 8 says any starship borne weapon is forbidden and DB 13, pg. 100 says that all CM's are forbidden as well as Heavy directed energy weapons. If there is some place that contradicts this please let me know. I don't use much from either of these books so I'm not as familiar with them.


Honest question: Is English not your first language? Because page 8 does not say what you think it does:

Listen I don't know why asking you to site references is such a problem for you that you have to lower yourself to personal insults. I mean if I wanted to sink to your level I could ask if it is just laziness or taxing of your...well that seems rude. Also, you do provide some below including one I had not thought of so clearly you could do it, you just chose not to.

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
Dimension Book 14, page 8 wrote:
*The use of weapons of mass destruction would no longer be used by either party within the atmosphere of a planet inhabited by intelligent life forms, and belonging to the opposite party


The "and belonging to the opposite party" thing was added in this book; it was not present in any previous version of the Accords that were detailed, so it kind of neuters them.

I'm with you here and it does point out a significant limitation on it. I wish I had noticed this when I was discussing them in an earlier thread.

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
However... that says absolutely nothing about bombarding a planet with heavy energy weapons.

Oh so close. It says "Starship borne weapons" very clearly and my other citation from DB13 makes it even clearer. Again this is from the text and using plain language.

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
However, page 100 of DB13 does seem to imply that Heavy Energy Weapons cant be used this way either (while also pointing out that plenty of people dont obey the Accords, so slaggings happen); but this passage is already incorrect as it says "any inhabited world", when we know because of DB14 that the Accords only apply to worlds owned by the signatories.

I'm not sure how you can call this incorrect as it was in a book that was released earlier and written by the same writer.

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
However, even if it is correct, it doesn't invalidate the tactic the Kreeghor use; we have a clear definition of what a Heavy Shipboard Energy Weapon is; there are plenty of medium-weight energy weapons that can be used to use the described TGE tactic - burning crops, etc - that dont violate the Accords. LRMs are also not "Weapons of Mass Destruction", nor are MRMs, and a bombardment of Plasma missiles can accomplish the task.

Not sure why you are mentioning LRMs or MRM's. I have said nothing about those and to my my knowledge there is nothing in the relevant text about them. Now, most Medium energy weapons lack the range to do attacks from orbit and most do not even have the stats for planetary damage but I didn't mention them either. I was staggeringly specific.

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
Warshield73 wrote:
Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
Thirdly... the Splugorth Kingdoms are not signatories of the Accords, and unlike a lot of the other 3rd-rate powers out there, are just big enough that the CCW cant/wont come down on them like the hammer of god for violating them. It wouldn't be like going to war with the TGE, for sure, but it is a lot bigger of an ordeal than sending a single fleet to slap down a 10-system upstart for being uncouth.


Again I said others had posted this but never gave me a reference for it so I don't know. But, what you put here makes no sense. The CCW will send Three Galaxies to war if the TGE bombs one planet and going to war against a small local empire who hasn't signed it is worth it because(?) but putting together a fleet to take on a Splugorth for hitting one of there worlds isn't worth it. I don't understand this.


Because you made an extremely silly assumption.

Since you didn't make a point here, I'm going to assume it was just to be insulting. I asked a question based on what you said in an earlier post. That's it.

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
Warshield73 wrote:
Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
Lastly.... the Kreeghor are paranoid dictators. It wouldn't matter if every Splugorth Kingdom had signed the Accords... the Kreeghor wold still have massive planetary defense batteries. And prior to the Accords, it was a real fear for them anyway. Its not like theyre just going to shut them down because of a treaty with the CCW that the Splugorth didn't sign (though the UWW did sign on).

Couple that with the fact that even if you have massive orbital defenses, planetary defense batteries are still massively useful - lets say that your enemy somehow manages to slug its way through your orbital defenses... you're not going to have entrenched defenses on th planet to help shoot down his fleet? Just going to let him chill in orbit and land troops at will? I dont think so. Especially not if you're the Kreeghor.

This is what I was looking for with the OP. I actually agree with this but I was wondering how widespread the use of these weapons are. Would Tera Prime have them? Mother Home? Noro Gor? If none of those how many TGE worlds have them.

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
Quote:
Several posters have said that even the Splugorth tend to follow the accords but I'm not sure if that's in the book, they never gave me a reference. If this is true then the entire reason for the Giant cannons on Kreeghor home world, mass attack of Splugorth ships trying to cleanse the planet, seems to no longer exist.


Not sure where people got that, especially considering that one of the Splugorth ship types packs a Mass Driver specifically to terrorize planets into surrender.

They dont abide by the Accords. They didn't sign on to them, and are just big enough that taking them on is a major undertaking, and...

Prove it. If a planet gets Mass-driver'ed into oblivion and its remaining population carried off by a Splugorth slaver fleet....

Prove it. There's no witnesses, the Splugorth will throw up their tentacles and say "not us", and....

You have little to no way to prove it was the Splugorth, and even if you did.... which one?

There are four major kingdoms still out there, a major player on Phase World itself (who does own his own fleets), and dozens of smaller Kingdoms out there, from single-system polities to 10-30 world mini-kingdoms.

Which one do you go after?


The only thing I will say about this is if this was even a semi-common occurrence in the CCW then it would no longer exist. Governments that can not defend there people don't last long. Small colonies and upstarts sure but any planets in the hundreds of thousands no way.


i have no idea why you would make the completely unfounded assumption that i was talking about planets inside CCW territory.

OMG seriously. We are talking about the Lanator Accords, that is CCW if you had intended to take us on a tangent letting readers know would have helped. I was very specific when I made my reference to the Splugorth that that had simply been posted at me on another thread and that I had no reference. See when leaving the topic specifics help.

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
(Though it is outright stated in Fleets that small colonies can and do just go missing, with entire populations wiped out or carried off never to be seen again - the dangers of living on the fringes).

I conceded this in the underlined statement above because I had read the same passage.

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
Remember: more than half the galactic population does not belong to any of the three major power blocs.

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
The CCW tends to enforce the Accords on everyone; I.E. if you're some jumped-up Star Kingdom and you start bomarding your neighbors... the CCW is likely to send you a "cease and desist" warning, and when you dont.. theyll stop you. Even if those planets aren't in the CCW. And because of the Accords, the TGE will let them and the UWW might even help.

Its extremely similar to (and based on) the Eridani Edict in the Honor Harrington universe. The Edict is not a treaty countries signed; its an Edict that the Solarian League just announced. You do not bombard planets until they have been called upon to surrender, and their refusal to surrender has been documented by the League. If you do, the League will fall on you hard, fast, and completely, and crush you. No questions, no argument, and it is the one thing you can do that will cause the normally glacially slow League government to act with alacrity and finality.

Manticore, Haven, etc, never "Agreed" to the Edict; it simply Is. Dont like it? Tough.
Spoiler:
(And, ironically, is what leads to the break up of the League eventually)


The Accords are (implied to be, if not outright stated) similar. Its an agreement between the (eventually all 3) major superpowers that the following things are "not civilized" so we dont do them. They can and will use it as an excuse to fall on you hard if you do. Dont like it? Take it up with the Imperial/CCW/Warlock Navy.

Thats why the Splugorth are sorta in a weird spot.

Theyre big enough (the four major kingdoms that are detailed, at least; we know there are smaller Splugorth kingdoms out there, one is described in Three Galaxies, i believe, belonging to a young female Splugorth - its just one or two systems) that even the CCW and TGE cant just take them out at a whim (they could assuredly win a war against them - the TGE has been slowly eroding that kingdom in the Thundercloud for more than a century) - it would be too costly and hard to justify, and the fact that there are four of them provides them with enough deniability that even if you knew the Splugorth did it... how do you prove which Kingdom?

How do you justify undertaking a major military operation (not a situation of simply dispatching the nearest task force to slap down an upstart, 2nd-rate navy from a 3-system nobody power) against them when you aren't even sure which one did it? Its a hard sell to the voters and to the Consortium Congress. The UWW is less likely to act on foreign nations, because thats not their policy, though individual member worlds might. The TGE attacks the Splugorth all the time anyway, so this is just an other excuse to do what they are already doing.

Yeah I read through this twice and it adds nothing, and I am a huge Honor Harrington fan. Also does it say in the book that the CCW enforces the accords on others or are you just adding that.

Now I did have to read through way more of DB 13 & 14 then I wanted to find this information, but it did lead me to this:

DB 14: Thunderclud Galaxy, Pg 8 wrote:
Note: Though heralded as a great achievement in the CCW, the Agreement was forgotten by the TGE almost as soon as it was signed. The Empire was more concerned with rebuilding its armed forces in the Corkscrew and Anvil Galaxies so it might one day have its revenge on the Consortium of Civilized Worlds.

This one little quote makes your point and completely changes my mind. All the things I sited happened because the TGE ignores them and the CCW isn't doing crap about it. I do maintain that if the Accords were enforced and if the TGE actually followed them that would be a retcon but it clearly isn't. So less a retcon and more just irrelevant. I wish I had spotted this during my previous discussion on the Accords, it would have been so much shorter.

Blue_Lion wrote:
According to fleets of three galaxies orbital bombardment can destroy a planets eco-system. Even energy weapons would through stuff in the air air that would cause catastrophic effects. That makes significant planetary bombardment a weapon of mass destruction.

The main goal when the Sploogy attack a world is capturing slaves. This does not require orbital bombardment it would require shuttles and shifters. Heavy weapons would likely be used against large orbital targets but unless a planet has a large target that is a threat to the orbital fleet their is little incentive to do so on a planet you want the slaves from. Bombarding a planet from orbit would be more a revenge spite thing.

While the Sploogy may not have signed the accords they know if they break them on often it may cause the those that did signed it to ban together and fight them. In addition if you destroy the eco-system of a habitual world it would be hard for new slaves to be to seed it.

Likely the fleets heavy weapons would be limited to other space craft and large heavy surface to space weapons if they do not have a blind spot. Then fighter and attack craft head to the planet, to secure a landing zone. Shuttles deploy troops to catch slaves. Deadly force would be may be used to break resistance but the main goal is live slaves.

So while small collenies with a few hundred people might be captured, I do not see them using orbital bombardment tactics.

Agreed. Sploogies are about slaves and power and those are a lot easier to get by hitting small unprotected places than major worlds.

_________________
Northern Gun Chief of Robotics
Designer of NG-X40 Storm Hammer Power Armor & NG-HC1000 Dragonfly Hover Chopper
Big game hunter, explorer extra ordinaire and expert on the Aegis Buffalo
Ultimate Insider - WB 32: Lemuria
Ultimate Insider - WB 33: Northern Gun 1
Ultimate Insider - WB 34: Northern Gun 2
Showdown Backer - Robotech RPG Tactics
Benefactor Insider - Rifts Bestiary: Volume 1


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: Planetary Defenses
Unread postPosted: Sun Dec 15, 2019 10:26 pm
  

User avatar
Megaversal® Ambassador

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2011 1:23 am
Posts: 1798
Location: Houston, TX
Comment: "I will not be silenced. I will not submit. I will find the truth and shout it to the world. "
I would really love to bring this back to the original topic, if anyone has any ideas, or specifics from the books, on planet based guns and shields I would love to hear it.

_________________
Northern Gun Chief of Robotics
Designer of NG-X40 Storm Hammer Power Armor & NG-HC1000 Dragonfly Hover Chopper
Big game hunter, explorer extra ordinaire and expert on the Aegis Buffalo
Ultimate Insider - WB 32: Lemuria
Ultimate Insider - WB 33: Northern Gun 1
Ultimate Insider - WB 34: Northern Gun 2
Showdown Backer - Robotech RPG Tactics
Benefactor Insider - Rifts Bestiary: Volume 1


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: Planetary Defenses
Unread postPosted: Thu Dec 19, 2019 3:14 am
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2001 1:01 am
Posts: 5867
Location: Clone Lab 27
Warshield73 wrote:
I would really love to bring this back to the original topic, if anyone has any ideas, or specifics from the books, on planet based guns and shields I would love to hear it.
There is a major problem with planet based weapons. Many weapons have half range in a planets atmosphere. I know of no book examples of planet based weapons to defend against bombardment.

The issue with planetary shields be with trapping stuff in the atmosphere. If for example the orbital foe dropped large mass attack weapons such as meteor bombardment would cause debris in the atmosphere so while you stop a direct hit you could still suffer catastrophic climate change.

So the main goal of defense against planetary bombardment is intercepting before they come in range.

Placing long range heavy weapon platform/siege cannons in orbit would be more effective than planetary based ones and not draw risk of planetary bombardment. These satellites would be high priory targets for a invading forces long range weapons so they would likely be mostly unmanned (to reduce size and cost of upkeep) controlled remotely or by a simple shoot all unauthorized targets. They would not have complex AI.

_________________
The Clones are coming you shall all be replaced, but who is to say you have not been replaced already.

Master of Type-O and the obvios.

Soon my army oc clones and winged-monkies will rule the world but first, must .......

I may debate canon and RAW, but the games I run are highly house ruled. So I am not debating for how I play but about how the system works as written.


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: Planetary Defenses
Unread postPosted: Thu Dec 19, 2019 1:25 pm
  

User avatar
Megaversal® Ambassador

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2011 1:23 am
Posts: 1798
Location: Houston, TX
Comment: "I will not be silenced. I will not submit. I will find the truth and shout it to the world. "
Blue_Lion wrote:
Warshield73 wrote:
I would really love to bring this back to the original topic, if anyone has any ideas, or specifics from the books, on planet based guns and shields I would love to hear it.
There is a major problem with planet based weapons. Many weapons have half range in a planets atmosphere. I know of no book examples of planet based weapons to defend against bombardment.

The range was something that I had considered but if ships can fire down and hit the planet then the same cannon can fire up. Also cannons on the planet can be bigger with greater range then there space based cousins. I do agree though that the range limitation is a big factor here. We are not going to see a 3 Galaxies weapon firing at ships in orbit the way the Hoth ion cannon did in Empire. These weapons would strictly be for area denial, prohibiting ships from getting into low orbit for there own bombardment. For this reason I have always thought there would be very few of these around the Three Galaxies.

The only examples are: 1) the Phase Cannons which are clearly unique to Center or at least Phase World and Prometheans and 2) Just the description of the giant cannons on Kreghor-Tet which have no stats but can melt battleships in orbit.

Blue_Lion wrote:
The issue with planetary shields be with trapping stuff in the atmosphere. If for example the orbital foe dropped large mass attack weapons such as meteor bombardment would cause debris in the atmosphere so while you stop a direct hit you could still suffer catastrophic climate change.

The example I used, the planetary shields in SW, tend to go out past the atmosphere so that is something that would be prevented. I just don't believe we are likely to see these.

The local shield would be more for protecting a ground asset (fighter bases, power plants, command centers, medical facilities, etc.) so any attack would do damage to the planets environment.

Blue_Lion wrote:
So the main goal of defense against planetary bombardment is intercepting before they come in range.

I think this is true of not just the planet but all orbital infrastructure around the planet.

Blue_Lion wrote:
Placing long range heavy weapon platform/siege cannons in orbit would be more effective than planetary based ones and not draw risk of planetary bombardment. These satellites would be high priory targets for a invading forces long range weapons so they would likely be mostly unmanned (to reduce size and cost of upkeep) controlled remotely or by a simple shoot all unauthorized targets. They would not have complex AI.

I agree that a lot (maybe 1/3 to 1/2) of planetary defenses would be unmanned but I still think they are more likely to be remote controlled by nearby platforms with a backup drone AI for when they are jammed or controllers are killed.

_________________
Northern Gun Chief of Robotics
Designer of NG-X40 Storm Hammer Power Armor & NG-HC1000 Dragonfly Hover Chopper
Big game hunter, explorer extra ordinaire and expert on the Aegis Buffalo
Ultimate Insider - WB 32: Lemuria
Ultimate Insider - WB 33: Northern Gun 1
Ultimate Insider - WB 34: Northern Gun 2
Showdown Backer - Robotech RPG Tactics
Benefactor Insider - Rifts Bestiary: Volume 1


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: Planetary Defenses
Unread postPosted: Sat Dec 21, 2019 12:34 am
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2001 1:01 am
Posts: 5867
Location: Clone Lab 27
Warshield73 wrote:
Blue_Lion wrote:
Warshield73 wrote:
I would really love to bring this back to the original topic, if anyone has any ideas, or specifics from the books, on planet based guns and shields I would love to hear it.
There is a major problem with planet based weapons. Many weapons have half range in a planets atmosphere. I know of no book examples of planet based weapons to defend against bombardment.

The range was something that I had considered but if ships can fire down and hit the planet then the same cannon can fire up. Also cannons on the planet can be bigger with greater range then there space based cousins. I do agree though that the range limitation is a big factor here. We are not going to see a 3 Galaxies weapon firing at ships in orbit the way the Hoth ion cannon did in Empire. These weapons would strictly be for area denial, prohibiting ships from getting into low orbit for there own bombardment. For this reason I have always thought there would be very few of these around the Three Galaxies.
Nope does not work that way. Kinitic/gravity kill weapons can be used outside of the range of any surface cannon. You can drop a rock on a path to hit a planet well outside any weapon range. A ship can shoot a missile at a surface installation and fly out of range for return fire. Do to flight time. In addition different weapon types have different base ranges there is no grantee of mutual weapon range. Even without the penalty to surface weapons.
Also what surface gun can match the range of the most likely faction to do orbital bombardment the dominators 1000 mile.

As written it could be said that the range penalty is based off where the weapon is fired, as there is no rule for range partially in atmosphere that I know of. Space in most treaties starts at about 62 miles. (no official starting point beyond that, and that could change at planetes.) there are weapons in the TGE and CCW that have a space range of 70 miles and 120 these would be able to fired at space range from orbit, while the same weapon fired from the surface would have of half or less. So as the rules are the could shoot 120 miles from space and 60 miles from the planet surface with the same weapon.

Warshield73 wrote:
The only examples are: 1) the Phase Cannons which are clearly unique to Center or at least Phase World and Prometheans and 2) Just the description of the giant cannons on Kreghor-Tet which have no stats but can melt battleships in orbit.

Blue_Lion wrote:
The issue with planetary shields be with trapping stuff in the atmosphere. If for example the orbital foe dropped large mass attack weapons such as meteor bombardment would cause debris in the atmosphere so while you stop a direct hit you could still suffer catastrophic climate change.

The example I used, the planetary shields in SW, tend to go out past the atmosphere so that is something that would be prevented. I just don't believe we are likely to see these.

The local shield would be more for protecting a ground asset (fighter bases, power plants, command centers, medical facilities, etc.) so any attack would do damage to the planets environment.
what is generating shields outside the mesosphere layer at 53 miles?

Warshield73 wrote:
Blue_Lion wrote:
So the main goal of defense against planetary bombardment is intercepting before they come in range.

I think this is true of not just the planet but all orbital infrastructure around the planet.

Blue_Lion wrote:
Placing long range heavy weapon platform/siege cannons in orbit would be more effective than planetary based ones and not draw risk of planetary bombardment. These satellites would be high priory targets for a invading forces long range weapons so they would likely be mostly unmanned (to reduce size and cost of upkeep) controlled remotely or by a simple shoot all unauthorized targets. They would not have complex AI.

I agree that a lot (maybe 1/3 to 1/2) of planetary defenses would be unmanned but I still think they are more likely to be remote controlled by nearby platforms with a backup drone AI for when they are jammed or controllers are killed.
[/quote] Why would they build the control center in orbit to be a target. If you require a local control center make it planet side, it would be hard to jam a laser com from the surface from outer space. Also the surface would need communication centers to radio space even without the control center. This would require getting passed the siege guns for most ships, and not require the expense of building in space. Depending on how comms work, some factions may have remote commands not in the system like the TGE, as they may not want the planet to have control.

_________________
The Clones are coming you shall all be replaced, but who is to say you have not been replaced already.

Master of Type-O and the obvios.

Soon my army oc clones and winged-monkies will rule the world but first, must .......

I may debate canon and RAW, but the games I run are highly house ruled. So I am not debating for how I play but about how the system works as written.


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: Planetary Defenses
Unread postPosted: Sat Dec 21, 2019 4:11 am
  

User avatar
Megaversal® Ambassador

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2011 1:23 am
Posts: 1798
Location: Houston, TX
Comment: "I will not be silenced. I will not submit. I will find the truth and shout it to the world. "
Blue_Lion wrote:
Warshield73 wrote:
Blue_Lion wrote:
Warshield73 wrote:
I would really love to bring this back to the original topic, if anyone has any ideas, or specifics from the books, on planet based guns and shields I would love to hear it.
There is a major problem with planet based weapons. Many weapons have half range in a planets atmosphere. I know of no book examples of planet based weapons to defend against bombardment.

The range was something that I had considered but if ships can fire down and hit the planet then the same cannon can fire up. Also cannons on the planet can be bigger with greater range then there space based cousins. I do agree though that the range limitation is a big factor here. We are not going to see a 3 Galaxies weapon firing at ships in orbit the way the Hoth ion cannon did in Empire. These weapons would strictly be for area denial, prohibiting ships from getting into low orbit for there own bombardment. For this reason I have always thought there would be very few of these around the Three Galaxies.

Nope does not work that way. Kinitic/gravity kill weapons can be used outside of the range of any surface cannon. You can drop a rock on a path to hit a planet well outside any weapon range. A ship can shoot a missile at a surface installation and fly out of range for return fire. Do to flight time. In addition different weapon types have different base ranges there is no grantee of mutual weapon range. Even without the penalty to surface weapons.
Also what surface gun can match the range of the most likely faction to do orbital bombardment the dominators 1000 mile.

First, Dominators are not the most likely to attack anything, they are an incredibly rare faction. Given the information in Thudercloud the most likely would be either pirates or the TGE. Second, if you are planning just for Dominators there is no reason to have a military. As I pointed out in a few threads a friend and I ran the numbers with wide cariety of ship mixes, even a fleet that had several times more Emancipators than actually exists, and nothing touched the Dominator ship. Any fixed defenses in orbit from satellites to especially giant defense stations will be obliterated from way past the range that they could ever return fire.

Now you are right about kinetic weapons and missiles but not talking about them. This is strictly energy weapons

Blue_Lion wrote:
As written it could be said that the range penalty is based off where the weapon is fired, as there is no rule for range partially in atmosphere that I know of. Space in most treaties starts at about 62 miles. (no official starting point beyond that.) there are weapons in the TGE and CCW that have a space range of 70 miles and 120 these would be able to fired at space range from orbit, while the same weapon fired from the surface would have of half or less. So as the rules are the could shoot 120 miles from space and 60 miles from the planet surface with the same weapon.

Warshield73 wrote:
The only examples are: 1) the Phase Cannons which are clearly unique to Center or at least Phase World and Prometheans and 2) Just the description of the giant cannons on Kreghor-Tet which have no stats but can melt battleships in orbit.

As for energy weapon ranges I have never heard of anyone doing the ranges that way, it makes no sense to me but there is nothing in the rules one way or another. Most of what I've seen people divide the ranges between the atmosphere distance and puts the remaining in space value. We know that planet based weapons can reach orbital space because of the cannons on Kreeghor-Tet. If you do the ranges your way though then yeah planet based weapons, including those described in DB 2 pg.73.

Blue_Lion wrote:
Warshield73 wrote:
Blue_Lion wrote:
The issue with planetary shields be with trapping stuff in the atmosphere. If for example the orbital foe dropped large mass attack weapons such as meteor bombardment would cause debris in the atmosphere so while you stop a direct hit you could still suffer catastrophic climate change.

The example I used, the planetary shields in SW, tend to go out past the atmosphere so that is something that would be prevented. I just don't believe we are likely to see these.

The local shield would be more for protecting a ground asset (fighter bases, power plants, command centers, medical facilities, etc.) so any attack would do damage to the planets environment.

what is generating shields outside the mesosphere layer at 53 miles?

That is the question I was asking in the OP. I'm that planets in the Three Galaxies would at least use local force fields to protect important areas but the idea of a planet wide shield I wasn't sure about. So what are your thoughts about it?

Blue_Lion wrote:
Warshield73 wrote:
Blue_Lion wrote:
So the main goal of defense against planetary bombardment is intercepting before they come in range.

I think this is true of not just the planet but all orbital infrastructure around the planet.

Blue_Lion wrote:
Placing long range heavy weapon platform/siege cannons in orbit would be more effective than planetary based ones and not draw risk of planetary bombardment. These satellites would be high priory targets for a invading forces long range weapons so they would likely be mostly unmanned (to reduce size and cost of upkeep) controlled remotely or by a simple shoot all unauthorized targets. They would not have complex AI.

I agree that a lot (maybe 1/3 to 1/2) of planetary defenses would be unmanned but I still think they are more likely to be remote controlled by nearby platforms with a backup drone AI for when they are jammed or controllers are killed.
Why would they build the control center in orbit to be a target. If you require a local control center make it planet side, it would be hard to jam a laser com from the surface from outer space. Also the surface would need communication centers to radio space even without the control center. This would require getting passed the siege guns for most ships, and not require the expense of building in space. Depending on how comms work, some factions may have remote commands not in the system like the TGE, as they may not want the planet to have control.

I see your point here but I'm not sure if I agree. Most defense satellites would not be in geosynchronous orbit so you would need multiple planetary bases to be line of site or orbital relays which would be as or more vulnerable than a station. Now if it is a planet with limited defenses I could see controlling them from the ground but if you have a defense platform I see at least using it as a primary if for no other reason than people in orbit are going to be the first to see the trouble coming and are going to be the most involved in Stopping it. Also the platforms are most likely going to be between the planet and the shell of defense satellites anyway.

_________________
Northern Gun Chief of Robotics
Designer of NG-X40 Storm Hammer Power Armor & NG-HC1000 Dragonfly Hover Chopper
Big game hunter, explorer extra ordinaire and expert on the Aegis Buffalo
Ultimate Insider - WB 32: Lemuria
Ultimate Insider - WB 33: Northern Gun 1
Ultimate Insider - WB 34: Northern Gun 2
Showdown Backer - Robotech RPG Tactics
Benefactor Insider - Rifts Bestiary: Volume 1


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: Planetary Defenses
Unread postPosted: Sat Dec 21, 2019 10:33 am
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2001 1:01 am
Posts: 5867
Location: Clone Lab 27
I never said the dominators where the most likely to attack I said they where the most likely to use orbital bomardment as they would do it 100%.
The TGE attacks to gain territory, orbital bombardment renders planets uninhibited and would only be done as spite if they are unable take the planet would only be done in a state of open war.
Sploorgorth attack to capture slaves.
Demons seam to capture or eat worlds.

I do not accept this moving goal post attempt. You said to orbital bombard a surface gun you need to be in range of said gun. Removing attacks that have greater to have your statement true is a false standard. For your statement to be true you have to look at all ways a ship could bombard a planetary gun.

The rules say that range in space is X range in atmosphere is Y. Y is always less than X so with the same weapon space always have a better range.(some weapons do not specify range for space and atmosphere)
That means if you use a weapons in space it has a range of X and if you use it in a atmosphere it has a range of Y. There are no hybrid range rules.

What you described people doing from your experience is a house rule. One that adds a unstated step to combat. So is not the standard.

Rules do not always make sense to every one but they are still the rules even if they do not make sense.

Multiple command stations would not be needed. You just need up link sites linked to the command center by cable. Likely the cable is already run for internet. (However I should point out you would need multiple orbital command stations for line of site.)

_________________
The Clones are coming you shall all be replaced, but who is to say you have not been replaced already.

Master of Type-O and the obvios.

Soon my army oc clones and winged-monkies will rule the world but first, must .......

I may debate canon and RAW, but the games I run are highly house ruled. So I am not debating for how I play but about how the system works as written.


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: Planetary Defenses
Unread postPosted: Sat Dec 21, 2019 11:39 pm
  

User avatar
Megaversal® Ambassador

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2011 1:23 am
Posts: 1798
Location: Houston, TX
Comment: "I will not be silenced. I will not submit. I will find the truth and shout it to the world. "
I was not attempting to move the goal post here. I made an assumption that the Planetary cannons that we know exist can in fact hit a target as described.
Blue_Lion wrote:
I never said the dominators where the most likely to attack I said they where the most likely to use orbital bomardment as they would do it 100%.
The TGE attacks to gain territory, orbital bombardment renders planets uninhibited and would only be done as spite if they are unable take the planet would only be done in a state of open war.
Sploorgorth attack to capture slaves.
Demons seam to capture or eat worlds.

The only thing a Dominator is more likely to do than anyone else is be on a Dominator ship. As was pointed out to me above the Splugorth have a ship with a mass driver on it and it book says that the TGE just ignore the rules that say they can't bombard a planet. Also, planetary bombardment is not just used to render a planet uninhabitable, in fact that would take a lot of bombardment. You can force a surrender, demand a payment in slaves or money anything. Also, and I'm sorry but the post on this was clear I was talking about specific targeted attacks from orbit on things like fighter bases and power plants which is still bombardment and is apparently not just done but allowed under the L. Accords.

Blue_Lion wrote:
I do not accept this moving goal post attempt. You said to orbital bombard a surface gun you need to be in range of said gun. Removing attacks that have greater to have your statement true is a false standard. For your statement to be true you have to look at all ways a ship could bombard a planetary gun.

The rules say that range in space is X range in atmosphere is Y. Y is always less than X so with the same weapon space always have a better range.(some weapons do not specify range for space and atmosphere)
That means if you use a weapons in space it has a range of X and if you use it in a atmosphere it has a range of Y. There are no hybrid range rules.

What you described people doing from your experience is a house rule. One that adds a unstated step to combat. So is not the standard.

No. It is not a house rule it is a reading of the text. You assume, with no basis what so ever, that it is where the beam is fired. It could very well mean, and is actually more realistic, to ask where the target is. I read it as where the beam is traveling that's all. If you want to keep it simple a beam traveling through two mediums will always have the lowest range. Also a valid reading of the rules and having the benefit of making sense. If you read weapons descriptions it often says things like "Effective Range: 16 miles (25 km), or 7 miles (11 km) in an atmosphere" with no mention where it is fired as you said it did. You are just making that assumption. My assumption has the benefit that it does not negate a portion of DB 2 as yours does.

Blue_Lion wrote:
Rules do not always make sense to every one but they are still the rules even if they do not make sense.

OK, then why discuss it? If its not going to make sense then two individuals really can't have a discussion that makes sense. :lol: Sorry couldn't resist.

_________________
Northern Gun Chief of Robotics
Designer of NG-X40 Storm Hammer Power Armor & NG-HC1000 Dragonfly Hover Chopper
Big game hunter, explorer extra ordinaire and expert on the Aegis Buffalo
Ultimate Insider - WB 32: Lemuria
Ultimate Insider - WB 33: Northern Gun 1
Ultimate Insider - WB 34: Northern Gun 2
Showdown Backer - Robotech RPG Tactics
Benefactor Insider - Rifts Bestiary: Volume 1


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: Planetary Defenses
Unread postPosted: Sun Dec 22, 2019 12:00 am
  

User avatar
Supreme Being

Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2000 1:01 am
Posts: 8578
Location: Unreality
Comment: Being a moderator doesn't mean I speak for Palladium Books. It just makes me the lifeguard at their pool.
I'm going to say that the sum of the history of warfare has repeatedly demonstrated that fixed fortifications rarely are able to overcome a determined aggressor.

This isn't to say they are worthless, but that they typically are at best, a way to buy time until you can engineer a defeat of your attacker's mobile forces.

So ultimately, the best defence of a planet will be its fleet. Orbital platforms, surface emplacements and shield generators have deterrence value, but if you don't have a fleet that can drive the enemy off, you are doomed.

_________________
Official Hero of the Megaverse

Dead Boy wrote:
All hail Jefffar... King of the Mods

Co-Holder with Ice Dragon of the "Lando Calrissian" award for Smooth. - Novastar

Palladium Forums of the Megaverse Rules

If you need to contact Palladium Books for any reason, click here.


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: Planetary Defenses
Unread postPosted: Sun Dec 22, 2019 12:12 am
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2001 1:01 am
Posts: 5867
Location: Clone Lab 27
Jefffar wrote:
I'm going to say that the sum of the history of warfare has repeatedly demonstrated that fixed fortifications rarely are able to overcome a determined aggressor.

This isn't to say they are worthless, but that they typically are at best, a way to buy time until you can engineer a defeat of your attacker's mobile forces.

So ultimately, the best defense of a planet will be its fleet. Orbital platforms, surface emplacements and shield generators have deterrence value, but if you don't have a fleet that can drive the enemy off, you are doomed.

I would have to say that is correct. Although fleets in my opinion will be mostly FTL so they can go where needed and reduce over all cost of fleets for an empire.

_________________
The Clones are coming you shall all be replaced, but who is to say you have not been replaced already.

Master of Type-O and the obvios.

Soon my army oc clones and winged-monkies will rule the world but first, must .......

I may debate canon and RAW, but the games I run are highly house ruled. So I am not debating for how I play but about how the system works as written.


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: Planetary Defenses
Unread postPosted: Sun Dec 22, 2019 2:34 am
  

User avatar
Supreme Being

Joined: Mon Oct 02, 2000 1:01 am
Posts: 8578
Location: Unreality
Comment: Being a moderator doesn't mean I speak for Palladium Books. It just makes me the lifeguard at their pool.
I think it depends on the power we are talking about.

A real world precedent is the the variety of costal defence ships, coastal defence monitors and coastal defence battleships made in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. They were popular in countries that needed protection for their coasts, but didn't need an ocean going navy. In the 20th century these ships were replaced with fast torpedo and (later on) missile boats.

The common thread is a boat able to move fast enough for combat with big ocean going ships, but not really built for ocean travel.

I could see dedicated system defence ships having a low end FTL drive to jump around the system quickly, but being optimized for sunlight speed instead.

If you never leave the system, the difference in arrival time going 1 light year per hour and going 7 light years per hour is probably seconds or minutes.

_________________
Official Hero of the Megaverse

Dead Boy wrote:
All hail Jefffar... King of the Mods

Co-Holder with Ice Dragon of the "Lando Calrissian" award for Smooth. - Novastar

Palladium Forums of the Megaverse Rules

If you need to contact Palladium Books for any reason, click here.


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: Planetary Defenses
Unread postPosted: Sun Dec 22, 2019 9:31 pm
  

Champion

Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2012 3:22 am
Posts: 2048
Warshield73 wrote:
I have described many conditions I just didn't repeat them in every single post but my biggest were:
1) the conquest of the Machine People.


Is not, in any way, shape, or form, a retcon. The TGE 'threatened them with extinction'. OK. Did they actually bombard them? No? Then they didn't violate the Accords. And.. on top of that... there's a pretty big "would the CCW even consider that a violation of the Accords since they dont recognize sentient AI (at least, at the time) as alive?" hanging above this.

The entire reason they didnt get into the CCW is because the Humans didn't consider them people and blocked it.

Quote:
2) Axis 5.


Is not a retcon.

Quote:
3) Good Hope which I'm not sure if I mentioned in this thread but it has always been a problem for me.


Is not a retcon.

Quote:
The text clearly says that the Machine People were threatened with bombardment and extinction. According to the timeline this happen after the Accords and so should not have been possible. This would radically contradict the idea that the Machine People could even be exterminated.


As i mentioned above, it would only matter if the CCW even considered the Machine People, well, people. Which they didn't, at the time, and, it's not a retcon because as you so astutely pointed out, the Accords only apply to worlds that are members of signatory governments. As the Machine people were not a member of any planetary collective that had signed the Accords... bombs away, matey.


Quote:
So yes I'm with you here I follow your arguments I just disagree and I require evidence to change my mind.


You literally just pointed out the evidence, but then say it isnt evidence. Can you at least make a passing attempt at being remotely consistent?

Quote:
I did site the Machine people as being one of my reasons for this being a retcon so yes I needed to point out that the conquest of the Machine People came after. If it came after it would be less of a retcon.


As pointed out for several reasons, its not a retcon. No bombardment actually took place, and (because of the addition of "of planets belonging to the other parties" in DB14) since they werent CCW or UWW members.... wouldn't have mattered anyway.

Quote:
Listen I don't know why asking you to site references is such a problem for you


It isn't. I was pointing out that your claim was 100% false because it doesn't say what you claimed it said. Not even remotely.

Quote:
that you have to lower yourself to personal insults.


Legitimately asking you if english is not your primary language (as it is NOT, for several of the regular posters here) because you tried to claim a passage said something that it emphatically DID NOT SAY or even imply is not an insult. Its an honest question to help me understand how you could even begin to come to the conclusion you did.

Youll know if i start insulting you. It will be obvious.

Quote:
I mean if I wanted to sink to your level I could ask if it is just laziness or taxing of your...well that seems rude. Also, you do provide some below including one I had not thought of so clearly you could do it, you just chose not to.


... and now you're just making stuff up. I debunked everything you said. All of it. With quotes.

Quote:
Oh so close. It says "Starship borne weapons" very clearly and my other citation from DB13 makes it even clearer. Again this is from the text and using plain language.


Uh.. no. You're inventing something that is not there.

Just for shiggles, because im tired of you inventing things and trying to move the goalposts in a desperate attempt to not appear totally incorrect:

DB 14, page 8 wrote:
The Final peace treaty included the ratification of the Tanet Agreement to run concurrent with the Lanator Accords. This meant that everytyhing agreed to in the armistice also applied to the exploration and settling of the Thundercloud Galaxy.
* The Transgalactic Empire (TGE) would immediately and unconditionally surrender in Oswoe's Arm, and a demilitarized zone with a diameter of 3,500 light-years from SY-124-616-628 would be established.
* The TGE would relinquish any and all former Thundercloud colonies to the Consortium, and could never occupy said colonies.
* The use of weapons of mass destruction would no longer be used by either party within the atmosphere of a planet inhabited by intelligent life forms, and belonging to the opposite party.
* Such inhabited planets would no longer be attacked from orbit by starship-borne weapons.
* The Transgalactic Empire would accept full responsibility for causing the Great War.
* The Empire would no pay war reparations to the Consortium of Civilized Worlds


I see where you went astray here:

The assumption that other than WMD, Starships even have weapons capable of blasting a planet from Orbit. Only the big guns on Battleships and Dreadnaughts can even reach the surface from orbit. If the planet has an atmosphere deeper than ~70 miles, not even a Doombringer can hit the ground from orbit with anything except... LRMs and CRMs.

So, i guess this would prevent them from using LRMs from orbit.

Or they could just launch their 600+ Flying Fangs and pepper the surface with incendiaries. Or (oh, and i found where its described; Smasher-class Cruiser description) they could just do what they always do, and drop out of orbit and use their guns to set the planet on fire. Or MRMs. Or fighter mounted weapons. Or, or, or.

DB3, page 94 wrote:
Smashers are the bane of the Free World Council. The flotillas sweep down on liberated worlds, destroy defense satellites and local defense fighters, and then scour cities and farming fields with laser fire, setting them ablaze. Since the small fleets dont have enough troops to conquer a planet, they content themselves with ravaging it and condemning the survivors to hardship and/or starvation.



Quote:
Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
However, page 100 of DB13 does seem to imply that Heavy Energy Weapons cant be used this way either (while also pointing out that plenty of people dont obey the Accords, so slaggings happen); but this passage is already incorrect as it says "any inhabited world", when we know because of DB14 that the Accords only apply to worlds owned by the signatories.


I'm not sure how you can call this incorrect as it was in a book that was released earlier and written by the same writer.


Because writers dont make mistakes? He contradicts himself three or four times in the same book; the timeline presented in Thundercloud doesn't coexist with the other timeline in DB13. (THAT could be considered a retcon, if it provided hard dates, as it is, its just nearly impossible to reconcile but isn't necessarily a retcon since it isn't terribly specific.)

Quote:
Since you didn't make a point here, I'm going to assume it was just to be insulting. I asked a question based on what you said in an earlier post. That's it.


You asked a question based on your incorrect assumption.

Yeah I read through this twice and it adds nothing, and I am a huge Honor Harrington fan. Also does it say in the book that the CCW enforces the accords on others or are you just adding that.

Quote:
Now I did have to read through way more of DB 13 & 14 then I wanted to find this information, but it did lead me to this:

DB 14: Thunderclud Galaxy, Pg 8 wrote:
Note: Though heralded as a great achievement in the CCW, the Agreement was forgotten by the TGE almost as soon as it was signed. The Empire was more concerned with rebuilding its armed forces in the Corkscrew and Anvil Galaxies so it might one day have its revenge on the Consortium of Civilized Worlds.

This one little quote makes your point and completely changes my mind. All the things I sited happened because the TGE ignores them and the CCW isn't doing crap about it. I do maintain that if the Accords were enforced and if the TGE actually followed them that would be a retcon but it clearly isn't. So less a retcon and more just irrelevant. I wish I had spotted this during my previous discussion on the Accords, it would have been so much shorter.


Because you're wrong... again.

This is discussing the aforementioned Tanet Agreement, not the Lanator Accords. Thats why "Agreement" is capitalized. The Tanet Agreement has to do with settling the Thundercloud, nothing more. Its literally the top of the very next column after the Accords on page 8. (PART of the Agreement is that the Lanator Accords will also apply to holdings in the Thundercloud) So, basically, the TGE went right back to conquering more worlds, and re-conquering their old colonies (things forbidden by the Agreement, but not mentioned in the Accords), and the CCW is ignoring them, because as Thundercloud tells us (though this entire book -verges- on being a retcon since NOWHERE prior to this are we led to believe that the Thundercloud is some wild, unsettled frontier galaxy, especially since two of the MAJOR CCW races, one of them a near-founding member (The Catyr) are from here. However, since we were also never told that it WASNT a wild frontier, its not really a retcon. Much like the Star Elves being rebranded Asgardian Elves) the CCW concerns in Thundercloud are managed by a thoroughly corrupt for-profit colonization company (Similar to the Dutch East India company IRL).

But its not discussing the Accords at all. Merely the Agreement.

Also, i will point out one thing where i think we were talking past each other:

There has only been a single major war between the TGE and the CCW. This was 500 years ago (and led to the Accords). There was a "border conflict" 25 years ago, that you latched on to, but it was NOT a major galactic war. You assumed i was referring to that. I was not.

_________________
Im loving the Foes list; it's the only thing keeping me from tearing out my eyes from the dumb.


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: Planetary Defenses
Unread postPosted: Sun Dec 22, 2019 9:38 pm
  

Champion

Joined: Sat Nov 10, 2012 3:22 am
Posts: 2048
Jefffar wrote:
I'm going to say that the sum of the history of warfare has repeatedly demonstrated that fixed fortifications rarely are able to overcome a determined aggressor.


As long as we caveat this with "after the introduction of gunpowder".

Pre-gunpowder and explosives, fixed fortifications could be nearly impregnable, and you couldn't just leave it behind you, because the people inside it could then come out and chop up your rear or cut your supply lines.

There were some sieges that went on for more than a decade, and only ended because the attackers simply ran out of people because the soldiers got so bored they literally left, leaving the besieging army to retreat.

But post-gunpowder.. sure.

But given that FTL communications exist, a decent enough fixed defense can probably buy you enough time for a friendly fleet to arrive, if one is even coming.

_________________
Im loving the Foes list; it's the only thing keeping me from tearing out my eyes from the dumb.


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: Planetary Defenses
Unread postPosted: Sat Dec 28, 2019 3:59 am
  

User avatar
Megaversal® Ambassador

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2011 1:23 am
Posts: 1798
Location: Houston, TX
Comment: "I will not be silenced. I will not submit. I will find the truth and shout it to the world. "
Jefffar wrote:
I'm going to say that the sum of the history of warfare has repeatedly demonstrated that fixed fortifications rarely are able to overcome a determined aggressor.

This isn't to say they are worthless, but that they typically are at best, a way to buy time until you can engineer a defeat of your attacker's mobile forces.

So ultimately, the best defence of a planet will be its fleet. Orbital platforms, surface emplacements and shield generators have deterrence value, but if you don't have a fleet that can drive the enemy off, you are doomed.

First I think your assertion depends on what era of history you are talking about. During long stretches of time entrenched fortifications or walled cities/castles where real deterrence to an attack. This all comes down to the technology involved and who has the advantage defense or offense.

The technology of Rifts as a whole and Phase World in particular give a lot of advantages to the defender including high MDC armor values, force fields, and the advantage missiles have as defense over offensive missiles (a volley of 4 guided MRM, which can not be dodged, can destroy any size of volley of attacking missiles 4 out of 5 times according to rules in the book). This means that whoever has the most MDC and the deepest missile Magazine wins.

I was skeptical of Colonel_Tetsuya idea of Orbital Defense Platforms but it's convincing. That much MDC and those large CM magazines would be a real road block.

Jefffar wrote:
I think it depends on the power we are talking about.

A real world precedent is the the variety of costal defence ships, coastal defence monitors and coastal defence battleships made in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. They were popular in countries that needed protection for their coasts, but didn't need an ocean going navy. In the 20th century these ships were replaced with fast torpedo and (later on) missile boats.

The common thread is a boat able to move fast enough for combat with big ocean going ships, but not really built for ocean travel.

This is where all of my inspiration for planetary defenses came from. In fact a lot of it came from my friend Brian, who was in the navy at the time, brain stormed with me what defenses a TGE shipyard would have. Again I created most of this when there was just DB 2 and 3 and just kept it as new books came out.

Jefffar wrote:
I could see dedicated system defence ships having a low end FTL drive to jump around the system quickly, but being optimized for sunlight speed instead.

If you never leave the system, the difference in arrival time going 1 light year per hour and going 7 light years per hour is probably seconds or minutes.

I mention this in the other thread but if the prices in DB 6 really do cover every ship from fighters to mile long battleships then there is no reason for any ship bigger than a destroyer that has sub-light to not have FTL. Furthermore there is no reason for any ship that costs over 1 billion credits to not have the fastest FTL drive because the difference in cost amounts to a rounding error.

Now, we have no sources on sub-light drives in PW so we must assume that the cost of sub-light drives does depend on weight, just as it does in MiO and AUGG. So for this reason you would still have a massive savings by making Colonel_Tetsuya's platforms as you could just layer it in armor and fill it to brim with missiles.

If you assume that there is some sort of mass cost to an FTL drive then Monitors/large sub-light defenders or local defense ships with the cheapest FTL drive become more rational.

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
Warshield73 wrote:
I have described many conditions I just didn't repeat them in every single post but my biggest were:
1) the conquest of the Machine People.


Is not, in any way, shape, or form, a retcon.

I could have sworn I already covered this in a previous post but I agree, you win. Not because of anything you said but when I was reading through the LA I found this:
DB 14: Thundercloud Galaxy, Pg. 8 wrote:
Note: Though heralded as a great achievement in the CCW, the Agreement was forgotten by the TGE almost as soon as it was signed. The Empire was more concerned with rebuilding its armed forces in the Corkscrew and Anvil Galaxies so it might one day have its revenge on the Consortium of Civilized Worlds.

Apperantly it is not a retcon just irrelevant. Again I believe I said this last time but I really wish I had found this the last time I was arguing over the accords as it would have saved me a great deal of agrivation.

Colonel_Tetsuya wrote:
The TGE 'threatened them with extinction'. OK. Did they actually bombard them? No? Then they didn't violate the Accords. And.. on top of that... there's a pretty big "would the CCW even consider that a violation of the Accords since they dont recognize sentient AI (at least, at the time) as alive?" hanging above this.

The entire reason they didnt get into the CCW is because the Humans didn't consider them people and blocked it.


Yeah I can't agree with you on this point

DB 2: Phase World, Pg. 78 wrote:
Desperate, the machine people asked the Consortium of Civilized Worlds for help and petitioned for membership. The Consortium's Congress, however, became hopelessly deadlocked in a debate on whether or not they were a "true" life-form and worthy of the Consortium's protection. Before a decision could be made (and in the end, the Congress voted to accept them), the machine people had to choose between surrender or destruction. They chose the former and felt betrayed by the CCW, a feeling that continues to this day.

First, They did eventually recognize them as a life form but too late for them to avoid conquest.

Second, in DB 2 it makes no mention of humans blocking it. This is what I believe you would call an add-con but it's inclusion does completely change the way the game is played in terms of humans and AIs. I have had PCs running Machine People visit Tera-Prime which seems unlikely given the new information in DB 13 & 14 and at the very least that visit would have been very different. This is what I mentioned earlier about the difference between a TTRPG and say a video game. The revelations in Halo do not change how you play the game one bit. The additions of humans being majority of the anti-AI sentiment in the CCW radically changes how you would run and play in that game.

I think this is my bigger point about the effects of "additions" or changes to information in previous books in an RPG vs TV/movies/video games that I don't think I have been able to adequately articulate. We play and create in the world we are given. The PC playing the Machine Person was well liked and hailed as a hero in human space because there was nothing in the text that said that wasn't going to happen. Now if DB 13 had created a new race that was AI phobic and made them the ones that stopped the MPs admition into the CCW that would change nothing that was played before but by doing it to an existing relationship that existed for four books and 15 years of play. I'm not saying it's all bad, I use the AI war as background for several of my convention games, but it is a change worthy of the title retcon.

Now, this is purely subjective and not something we are going to agree on but that is how I see it.

Jefffar wrote:
I'm going to say that the sum of the history of warfare has repeatedly demonstrated that fixed fortifications rarely are able to overcome a determined aggressor.

This isn't to say they are worthless, but that they typically are at best, a way to buy time until you can engineer a defeat of your attacker's mobile forces.

So ultimately, the best defence of a planet will be its fleet. Orbital platforms, surface emplacements and shield generators have deterrence value, but if you don't have a fleet that can drive the enemy off, you are doomed.

I agree with most of this but just to add that formidable enough defenses would simply scare off most aggressors moving the threat from the system itself to any ships in interstellar space. Slavers or pirates or wartime commerce raiding I think defenses as described in several of these threads would move them out of systems and into the space ways.

_________________
Northern Gun Chief of Robotics
Designer of NG-X40 Storm Hammer Power Armor & NG-HC1000 Dragonfly Hover Chopper
Big game hunter, explorer extra ordinaire and expert on the Aegis Buffalo
Ultimate Insider - WB 32: Lemuria
Ultimate Insider - WB 33: Northern Gun 1
Ultimate Insider - WB 34: Northern Gun 2
Showdown Backer - Robotech RPG Tactics
Benefactor Insider - Rifts Bestiary: Volume 1


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: Planetary Defenses
Unread postPosted: Sat Dec 28, 2019 5:18 am
  

User avatar
Knight

Joined: Tue Oct 16, 2001 1:01 am
Posts: 5867
Location: Clone Lab 27
Jefffar wrote:
I think it depends on the power we are talking about.

A real world precedent is the the variety of costal defence ships, coastal defence monitors and coastal defence battleships made in the late 19th and early 20th centuries. They were popular in countries that needed protection for their coasts, but didn't need an ocean going navy. In the 20th century these ships were replaced with fast torpedo and (later on) missile boats.

The common thread is a boat able to move fast enough for combat with big ocean going ships, but not really built for ocean travel.

I could see dedicated system defence ships having a low end FTL drive to jump around the system quickly, but being optimized for sunlight speed instead.

If you never leave the system, the difference in arrival time going 1 light year per hour and going 7 light years per hour is probably seconds or minutes.

That is the role of fighters fill in planetary defense small fast mobile and able to deliver cruise missiles.

Once you start building sub-capital ships a low end FTL is no longer significant price increase so it not really cost effective to limit them to just one planet.

Small fast and mobile often lacking FTL so unsuited to long range deep space combat without some sort of transport. There High sub light speed means they can go out and intercept incoming fleets fall back and reload before the fleet reaches the planet.

_________________
The Clones are coming you shall all be replaced, but who is to say you have not been replaced already.

Master of Type-O and the obvios.

Soon my army oc clones and winged-monkies will rule the world but first, must .......

I may debate canon and RAW, but the games I run are highly house ruled. So I am not debating for how I play but about how the system works as written.


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: Planetary Defenses
Unread postPosted: Thu Feb 13, 2020 1:16 pm
  

User avatar
Champion

Joined: Wed Sep 21, 2011 1:25 pm
Posts: 1664
Location: Rio de Janeiro, Brazil
On the matter of planetary shields, i can't avoid the hilariously ambitious - and foolhardy - idea of someone trying to exploit a planet's magnetic field direct relation with the rotation of its metalic core to attempt to convert it in a sort of turbine the basis of a planetary shield or both.

Maybe using some backward underpopulated world as a testbed of sorts. It could even be tinkered with in the terraforming of some barely habitable ones with little loss, maybe.


          Top  
 
 Post subject: Re: Planetary Defenses
Unread postPosted: Fri Feb 14, 2020 2:37 am
  

User avatar
Megaversal® Ambassador

Joined: Tue Mar 01, 2011 1:23 am
Posts: 1798
Location: Houston, TX
Comment: "I will not be silenced. I will not submit. I will find the truth and shout it to the world. "
SolCannibal wrote:
On the matter of planetary shields, i can't avoid the hilariously ambitious - and foolhardy - idea of someone trying to exploit a planet's magnetic field direct relation with the rotation of its metalic core to attempt to convert it in a sort of turbine the basis of a planetary shield or both.

Maybe using some backward underpopulated world as a testbed of sorts. It could even be tinkered with in the terraforming of some barely habitable ones with little loss, maybe.

I'm a hack GM and I don't care who knows so yeah I've used the "uninhabited world has a secret lab on it, something malfunctions, wackiness ensues" trope to death. I never used the Magnetic field but I did use the ionosphere while stealing from GI Joe Resolute.

Again, I never really did much with this but watching Star Wars, especial the animated Clone Wars and Rebels got me thinking.

_________________
Northern Gun Chief of Robotics
Designer of NG-X40 Storm Hammer Power Armor & NG-HC1000 Dragonfly Hover Chopper
Big game hunter, explorer extra ordinaire and expert on the Aegis Buffalo
Ultimate Insider - WB 32: Lemuria
Ultimate Insider - WB 33: Northern Gun 1
Ultimate Insider - WB 34: Northern Gun 2
Showdown Backer - Robotech RPG Tactics
Benefactor Insider - Rifts Bestiary: Volume 1


          Top  
 
 
Post new topic Reply to topic



Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users


Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Jump to:  

You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum


Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group