NationStates Jolt Archive

Keep flaming and finger pointing out of this thread, this is meant to discuss civilly about an issue. Should three strikes be used up because of flaming, I will ask the mods to lock and/or delete the thread.

Logistics. I don't know an exact definition, but it's basically keeping your army supplied. Food, water(Or what ever your race needs.), weapons, ammo, reinforcements and the like. Where has it gone for future tech and some modern tech nations?

Now, I'm not completely innocent of it either, but I've started to take strives to make it more realistic. MASSIVE fleets just seem to pop out of no where during a "suprise" conflict/battle. This unto itself takes away much of the fun in my opinion, where you can't ever properly assault a planet, because the planet's fleet pops out of no where, and so do its allies. I think this may be a reason why ground battles are far and inbetween when it comes to Future Tech.

Even if you have a "Rapid responce" fleet, it would still take a good hour or more to prep them, get all the crew ready and the like, and actually *get* there.(I won't dwelve on the topic of FTL travel, because without some uber fast way of traveling, nothing would ever happen, but it would still take alittle time.)

MAssive fleets. Right, so you have a 2 billion population, and you use 5% or 10% of your population for the military, so you can have big fleets of ships because you can support the man power. Problem is, people use the pop *just* for direct military crafts. No one ever uses the simple transports, hospital ships, ammo barges and the like. Not many put these things into consideration, things that are a necesity for any conflict to stay going.

Express your views on this if you will. I am not bashing anyone, because I've done the same thing, but now must we try to make things a bit more realistic in an unrealistiic time period?

I haven't RPed recently, but...

I am a new FT nation, evolved/bought tech up from PMT. I assume that I do not have the industrial capacity to produce more than about 5 capital ships like ISD's and about 25 smaller destroyers (between about 100-600 meters long) per year.

I have designed a custom Star Destroyer that is 2.4 km long. I assume that in peacetime, I figure I can support about 30 with my defense budget (allowing for smaller craft too), in wartime/emergencies definately no more than 100. I have about 20 in service, about a 100 smaller capital ships, small destroyers and such.

As for actual running costs, I assume that something like an ISD would cost something like $50 billion/year to operate; mine would be more like $100 billion/year because they are larger, more powerful, have larger crew requirements, et cetera. (I'm talking about constant dollars that the heavily-used calculators denominate your economic stats in.) A small destroyer/frigate might be $3-15 billion/year. And so on.

I believe very strongly in not exaggerating my economy or population just because I am FT. If you ever see me with a Super Star Destroyer, I will have purchased it because the production costs for me would easily be $50 trillion. I will never maintain huge überfleets of Super Star Destroyers; for that matter, at no point do I expect to have more than 5.

I realize that a lot of FT roleplayers take fleets of hundreds of überships for granted, but I'm content to RP as a single system, or coalition of systems once I decide to get off my @$$ and do the exploration RP I've been putting off since May.

You make many good valid points. In fact they are the same valid points that so many have made time and time again in so many different threads covering this same topic and topics very similar to this one.

I myself try to do the same but I as most of us are guilty from time to time of doing these things. I accually have designs for medical, resupply, and other similar ships but I rarely RP them as being around. I believe that most FT nations care more about 'space' battles rather then ground conflicts simply because they feel they could do that as an MT nation and therefor you end up with the epic battles of thousands and thousands of ships that after so many times i suppose it is no longer epic. The thing is, being a freeform RP and people RP the way they want to, this debate will go on and on the same as the others. Some reforms are being made by certain nations. The best thing i can sugest is to find a group of people that agree with you and RP with them most of the time. I'm not saying ignore everyone else, Good RPs can still happen with others but you might find it easier to RP with certain groups of people.

EDIT:

As for logistics itself. I have a rather elaberate set up for figureing much of that out, which I haven't done for a while now. I have been thinking of making up a calculater in visual basic so that I can just plug in a couple of basic numbers and it figures the rest but i've just been to lazy to do it as of yet.

I agree with Evil Woody Thoughts, I do not enflate my pop or economy just because I am FT nation.

Give up while you're still sane: it's impossible. Some people are beyond help. You could always come up with a new genre of FT, though -- 'RFT', or 'realistic future tech', and do what MT players do: ignore anybody who doesn't fall within that category. At present, it's virtually impossible for anybody to try RPing at a less advanced level than the "34km intergalactic Sundestroyer" style, and such people are often the ones guilty of lacking any sort of realistic tactics or politics.

I'm not sure about the RFT thing. You would have to define it more. I would say a lot if not most of my technology is not 'realistic' as far as science and the understanding we have of physics at this time. The largets ship i have is 5km and its extremely expensive. In my new line of ships the largest is i think maybe just over 3km but the technology in them is deffently more scifi then bassed on reallity. I agree that ship sizes are going a little overboard. I recently seen development for a 250km uber deathstar style stardestroyer.

I agree that some people can not be helped, this is mainly because they believe themselves right and do not wish to be helped but ignoring everyone that doesn't fall into a single catagory isn't the answer in my opinion. You might loose a lot of good RPing posiblilities if you do that.

A logistical issue that is always overlooked is relativity.

My nation is a sublight empire so relativity is very important to me and I have to take it into consideration constantly. However, even for superluminally-capable empires relativity should be considered (though of course most wont).

A basic rule of thumb: if you are traveling at sublight speeds without somehow warping space-time and your velocity is about one tenth the speed of light relativity becomes important.

Fortunately, there are some calculations to take care of it.

The first, length contraction:

length traveled by starship = real length (to a stationary observer) multiplied by square root of 1 - fraction of light speed squared (L1 = L0*SQRT(1-v^2))

Time dilation. time experienced by crew on journey = length traveled by starship (calculated above) times fraction of light speed. You will notice this is less than the time elapsed to a stationary observer.

An easy way is to create a spreadsheet which instantly computes these things, as I have.

Anyway, just my $0.02

Keep flaming and finger pointing out of this thread, this is meant to discuss civilly about an issue. Should three strikes be used up because of flaming, I will ask the mods to lock and/or delete the thread.

Logistics. I don't know an exact definition, but it's basically keeping your army supplied. Food, water(Or what ever your race needs.), weapons, ammo, reinforcements and the like. Where has it gone for future tech and some modern tech nations?

Now, I'm not completely innocent of it either, but I've started to take strives to make it more realistic. MASSIVE fleets just seem to pop out of no where during a "suprise" conflict/battle. This unto itself takes away much of the fun in my opinion, where you can't ever properly assault a planet, because the planet's fleet pops out of no where, and so do its allies. I think this may be a reason why ground battles are far and inbetween when it comes to Future Tech.

Even if you have a "Rapid responce" fleet, it would still take a good hour or more to prep them, get all the crew ready and the like, and actually *get* there.(I won't dwelve on the topic of FTL travel, because without some uber fast way of traveling, nothing would ever happen, but it would still take alittle time.)

MAssive fleets. Right, so you have a 2 billion population, and you use 5% or 10% of your population for the military, so you can have big fleets of ships because you can support the man power. Problem is, people use the pop *just* for direct military crafts. No one ever uses the simple transports, hospital ships, ammo barges and the like. Not many put these things into consideration, things that are a necesity for any conflict to stay going.

Express your views on this if you will. I am not bashing anyone, because I've done the same thing, but now must we try to make things a bit more realistic in an unrealistiic time period?

I am severly guilty of not taking this into consideration. However, I do have an excuse. Usually I have fleets on Patrol around system, so whenever I need one I can have one thats ready. That way, I really don't have to worry about prepping and the like. The only thing I MUST worry about is charging the Sub-Space drives, thats our way of faster-than-light travel.

Anyway, your points are valid, very valid in fact. Glad you brought it up. I just supposed that I could easily have fleets out there with however much month supplies and when they were low, Sub-Space back to home base. Yet, I would see now that that could possibly be a godmod, so I shall look into adding some medical/resupply/fuel/ect. ships ASAP.

The main reason why I particullary don't have such ship classes, is because mainly I haven't thought about them. I'm basically guilty oif having fleets appear to do battle, but never did I think that I would need resupply ships. This is a good point, and I will take this into severe consideration....once I find something to use, lmao.

A logistical issue that is always overlooked is relativity.

My nation is a sublight empire so relativity is very important to me and I have to take it into consideration constantly. However, even for superluminally-capable empires relativity should be considered (though of course most wont).

A basic rule of thumb: if you are traveling at sublight speeds without somehow warping space-time and your velocity is about one tenth the speed of light relativity becomes important.

Fortunately, there are some calculations to take care of it.

The first, length contraction:

length traveled by starship = real length (to a stationary observer) multiplied by square root of 1 - fraction of light speed squared (L1 = L0*SQRT(1-v^2))

Time dilation. time experienced by crew on journey = length traveled by starship (calculated above) times fraction of light speed. You will notice this is less than the time elapsed to a stationary observer.

An easy way is to create a spreadsheet which instantly computes these things, as I have.

Anyway, just my $0.02
I agree that this should be considered more often. However, as i stated before, most if not all of my designs are extremely scifi and only based loosely on what i would consider truely realistic principles and designs. I also have a stong belief that while Relitivity is important to our understanding of the ways things work now, it might not be in the future as we advance. I am sure that there are things out there that could change our entire view of science and physics but that we have just yet to obtain such insight on the topic. I might be wrong but then again I might be right. Most likely we'll never know for sure in our life times but hell ya never know.

Keep flaming and finger pointing out of this thread, this is meant to discuss civilly about an issue. Should three strikes be used up because of flaming, I will ask the mods to lock and/or delete the thread.

Logistics. I don't know an exact definition, but it's basically keeping your army supplied. Food, water(Or what ever your race needs.), weapons, ammo, reinforcements and the like. Where has it gone for future tech and some modern tech nations?

Now, I'm not completely innocent of it either, but I've started to take strives to make it more realistic. MASSIVE fleets just seem to pop out of no where during a "suprise" conflict/battle. This unto itself takes away much of the fun in my opinion, where you can't ever properly assault a planet, because the planet's fleet pops out of no where, and so do its allies. I think this may be a reason why ground battles are far and inbetween when it comes to Future Tech.

Even if you have a "Rapid responce" fleet, it would still take a good hour or more to prep them, get all the crew ready and the like, and actually *get* there.(I won't dwelve on the topic of FTL travel, because without some uber fast way of traveling, nothing would ever happen, but it would still take alittle time.)

MAssive fleets. Right, so you have a 2 billion population, and you use 5% or 10% of your population for the military, so you can have big fleets of ships because you can support the man power. Problem is, people use the pop *just* for direct military crafts. No one ever uses the simple transports, hospital ships, ammo barges and the like. Not many put these things into consideration, things that are a necesity for any conflict to stay going.

Express your views on this if you will. I am not bashing anyone, because I've done the same thing, but now must we try to make things a bit more realistic in an unrealistiic time period?


I completely agree with you. When I started and eventually became FT I wanted to have beeg uber l33t fleets, but then I remembered that I don't want my ass beat down with a big "godmod' stick. So when I created my fleet, mostly comprised of the standard 1.6km Star Destroyers, I left a section of my military man power labeled as "non-combatants" meaning that about 36,000,000 other members of the Thrashian fleet and army are involved in hospitals, supply, transport, and etc; all the things that involve logistics. And when I am taking over a system or series of planets, I always make openings for people to make small stabbs at my supply lines, but they never do, they always wait for my fleet to show up and then fight. Basiclly, any good fashioned and experianced MT player given a system campaign to run in FT could most likely beat the FT player since the first rule of MT is to get behind youyr enemy and cut his supply lines.

I agree, we need some standard of REALITY, but saddly it will be here long after we're all old.

It would seem to me that the one thing everyone here agrees on is the need for realistic tactics. Even if the opponent has an uber ship or something of the such a smaller but highly skilled player could easily eliminate it with the proper tactics. The big problem I see is that many of the uber wanta be rpers tend to throw fleet after fleet and not only ignore the idea of them using tactics but often ignore their oponents tactics saying that such a little fleet could never stand a chance. This is of course a godmode but it is still done and many people continue to reconize just throwing in as much as you can as the only way to win. That in turn brings up the fact that you do not always have to win to enjoy your RPing experience.

I find myself agreeing with Azaha on this, even though some might consider me guilty of flinging numbers around. I try to utilize my own special brand of tactics in combat, and it irks me to no end when people pull what I call a 'Tink'.

For instance, I utilize honest tactics when entering into combat. I have fleets split up and hide behind planets and asteroids for cover, line-breaker maneuvers, and all sorts of stuff, and it only leads to aggravation when the other side pretty much says "My fle3t warpz in and st4rts sh00ting at u lol." There's no tactics. There's no counterattacks. Its as if they just imagine the entire fight to be a fleet on either side just shooting cannonfire into each other.

Another thing to consider, however, is that with some FT technologies, the necessity of resupply is massively reduced. Take replicators, in one shot you've wiped out your necessity for any amount of food supply other than emergency rations. Jump gates (or Probability Foci in my case) reduce defensive reaction time dramatically (unless blown up). Hell, atmosphere recyclers!

Logistics is not as much of a concern for FT nations. Its still there, and should be considered, but FT removes a lot of the major issues from the table. Its mostly focused less on supply routes and more on fleet movements.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------

On another note, one thing that irks me is blanket denial of logistics, such as FTLinhibitor fields that have radii measured in lightyears. This is a gimpy gimpy gimpy way of preventing people from getting anywhere near anything that one would consider important. Or pocket dimensions! Or gravimetric anomalies that means you can only come through a specific entry corridor that is heavily mined and defended and there is absolutely no way you can get through without taking heavy casualties nyeah nyeah nyeah!

I prefer fear and deception, myself. That and Interdictor minefields.

For instance, I utilize honest tactics when entering into combat. I have fleets split up and hide behind planets and asteroids for cover, line-breaker maneuvers, and all sorts of stuff, and it only leads to aggravation when the other side pretty much says "My fle3t warpz in and st4rts sh00ting at u lol." There's no tactics. There's no counterattacks. Its as if they just imagine the entire fight to be a fleet on either side just shooting cannonfire into each other.



Kind of reminds you of the old revolutionary tactics: march out into the field, fire your guns into each other until one says hes had enough.

But wait...oh yea, the American's didn't wanna play that way, so they hid behind trees and rocks; and the Brits said it was 'un-sporting'. lmao.

and the Brits said it was 'un-sporting'. lmao.
Yeah that one still makes me laugh. Thats like allowing the other guy to finish reloading before you shoot him... just not realistic.

Logistics in Einhauser (well, in the UFE branch of Einhauser) are an interesting pheonomena. SInce I figured months ago that a nation with only 1.480 billion people had no way to conquer a star empire, I gave myself a higher one. Right now I think ive got an RP population of like, 4 trillion people, and every 7576 of them is in the military.

Some of those soldiers are in the navy, and about 1/3 to 1/2 of them crew what I call "Oilers." These are basically ammo resupply ships, but they carry fuel, replacement parts, and extra crew. A fleet of 1504 of them is divided evenly among my 8 fleets, along with shield ships, factory ships, troop ships, and salvage/ repair ships.

AS a long time FT player, I feel qualified to comment here.

Now, anyone who knows me will know two things: 1) I hate uberships with a fiery passion, and 2) I strive for realism, as far as possible in FT anyway.

Now, to make an RP more interesting, I like to start with maybe one or two ships, and then, if circumstances warrant it, I can bring in more ships, taking into account the passage of time it would take to bring reinforcements over vast distances. The same holds true of a planetary assualt force. The Colonial Marines are the first wave, designed for brute force Blitzkrieg tactics. They perform the initial landings to secure dropzones, and then I can bring in more troops, and heavy armour. That is logistics. In fact, I have thread that details my transports and fleets, so that I know what each fleet is doing and their rough numbers and capabilities. Using ST tech, with some of my own ships and variations upon designs thrown in, the largest ships in the fleet are the BelDragos-class Capital Ship, of which only four exist in Snake Eaters, and only I hold the design plans. They are, I think, 10km long, and this is much better than having huge fleets of Imperial Star Destroyers. My ships, on average, are 850m long. Smaller ships allows greater numbers. Greater tactical flexibility comes with greater numbers of ships, allowing me to out manuver those who I can't take on head-on.

The one thing I do dislike with a passion is people who give themselves a huge population. However, I don't argue with them about it, so this is not a flame. I just choose to not RP with them because I find it makes an RP less enjoyable.

If you strive for realism, you must give yourself a large population. It simply is not possible for a nation with (im not sure what your population rating is, so im just making one up SE) 5 billion to control a planet, much less an empire. Hell, its a stretch for 4 trillion to control an empire.

If you strive for realism, you must give yourself a large population. It simply is not possible for a nation with (im not sure what your population rating is, so im just making one up SE) 5 billion to control a planet, much less an empire. Hell, its a stretch for 4 trillion to control an empire.

Correction, it's entirely possible. If most of the planet remains unoccupied, and you spread the population out across a few planets, using colonies, it's damn well possible.

Not if you want to be productive. To harness the mineral resources in a planet, or the agricultural potential of a heavenly body, workers must be used. You could very well send a squad of five guys down to a planets surface and claim it as your own, but those same guys cannot get any use out of it themselves.

Plus, your capitol world would be largly uninhabited, becuase all of it's residents are forced to go off colonizing. You cant make a person colonize a planet if they dont want to. Physically you can (I do, hehe), but their minds wont be in it and they will either rebel or die strait away. You would need to have every single one of your citizens flying around in space, enroute to some distant world.

Industry on your currently controlled worlds would grind to a halt, famines would start, and your empire would crumble.

An FT nation needs a huge population. It is the only way.

I agree with Snake Eaters. An uberfied population does not a star empire make.

But as long as you use ONLY your NS population for such things as overall economic strength and military power there shouldn't be too much of an issue. It would be godmodding to attempt to use inflated population estimates to bolster your own military.

Godular, if you wouldnt mind, please inform me as to how you agree with SE. People make an empire. You need people, and the NS pop rating simply does not provide enough.

Not if you want to be productive. To harness the mineral resources in a planet, or the agricultural potential of a heavenly body, workers must be used. You could very well send a squad of five guys down to a planets surface and claim it as your own, but those same guys cannot get any use out of it themselves.

Plus. your capitol world would be largly uninhabited, becuase all of it's residents are forced to go off colonizing. You cant make a person colonize a planet if they dont want to. Physically you can (I do, hehe), but their minds wont be in it and they will either rebel or die strait away.

An FT nation needs a huge population. It is the only way.
No, it is your way of doing things. Not mine. I respect your way, but that doesn't mean that I have to agree with it. Please show me the same courtesy.

I agree with Snake Eaters. An uberfied population does not a star empire make.

But as long as you use ONLY your NS population for such things as overall economic strength and military power there shouldn't be too much of an issue. It would be godmodding to attempt to use inflated population estimates to bolster your own military.

This is a good point. You could use an expanded population in order to allow you to have an empire, but use your NS population for actual RP's... I like this idea.

Not if you want to be productive. To harness the mineral resources in a planet, or the agricultural potential of a heavenly body, workers must be used. You could very well send a squad of five guys down to a planets surface and claim it as your own, but those same guys cannot get any use out of it themselves.

I shall point out my previous statement about using overinflated population to your advantage. If you say you have several trillion people pumping out weapons and supplies, you're godmodding.

Plus. your capitol world would be largly uninhabited, becuase all of it's residents are forced to go off colonizing. You cant make a person colonize a planet if they dont want to. Physically you can (I do, hehe), but their minds wont be in it and they will either rebel or die strait away.

And a capitol world that is an idyllic paradise is bad, how? Besides, in FT, people can go wherever the heck they want. Moving to a new planet would be like moving to a new city.

An FT nation needs a huge population. It is the only way.

No its not. There's plenty of ways.

Please show me the same courtesy

Fine, but I think if you wanted to close this arguement, you should have at least admitted you ran out of ideas of how to win.

Lets just make it clear that not having a large population is just as much a godmod as having every one of your people in the military (im not saying either of you do, but it would be a godmod).

No its not. There's plenty of ways.

Please, if you wouldnt mind, tell me some?

Fine, but I think if you wanted to close this arguement, you should have at least admitted you ran out of ideas of how to win.

Lets just make it clear that not having a large population is just as much a godmod as having every one of your people in the military (im not saying either of you do, but it would be a godmod).

I wasn't trying to win, but whatever. I was just putting my idea across, and you shot it down because it clashed with your views. But I am a bigger man, so I will not pursue this.

WHAT! How is not having a large population a godmod? Having everyone in your military is, for certain. But choosing, making the active choice, to use your true NS population for RP's, is? I am sorry, but your logic appears flawed to me.

EDIT: I say we move this elsewhere, to avoid thread hijacking.

It is a godmod, because you are saying that each and every one of your people are the equivalent to Superman (but without the stylish tights ;) ). Besides, unless you suffered enormous casualties in some horrible attrition war, any nation would have a population in the trllions by FT time. Think about it: modern day nations are doubleing their pops frequently.

EDIT: Agreed. You want to start the thread?

I agree though that Snake Eaters is quite qualified on his opinion in this subject. I have to agree with all his points as well. Not to say I disagree with what others said on their points though, their all valid in one way or another.

http://forums.jolt.co.uk/showthread.php?p=9816905#post9816905

To continue this conversation, go here.

Back to the FT logisitics here.

Just because your people may be spread out does not mean you are a backwater. Just because a planet may only have several million people on it does not mean its uncivilized.

If you want city-worlds, that's your prerogative, you can have the ultra population, but when it comes to actual resources under your control you must use your NS stats.

Even automagfreek was a 5 million nation once. Coreworlds, Unified Sith, Chronosia, all began with the same 5 million as we all did. You don't need to self buff your own population in order to make yourself as good as the big dawgz. Good RPing will do that for you.

The wonders of FT are open to you, automation, replicators, robots, freaky ass clones. Just remember though, they take money too.

Kendaryn weaponry tends to be very energy-based, so the only ammunition that is needed is stored energy, and sometimes missiles. This can be acquired in the field, if there's wreckage or dust or some such to use as fuel. Of course, this isn't always available, so power transporters are sometimes useful. Food and water can be replicated, but this takes energy that might be needed; the method usually isn't used except in emergencies. On short journeys, it's simple enough to just carry supplies.

As for supply lines, many FTL methods (including mine) involve moving from point A to point B without crossing the intervening space. This tends to make supply lines easier to defend, either because only a few points (jumpgates, etc.) need to be guarded, or because the line can only be attacked at unpredictable locations for very short periods of time. This also allows ships to respond to an attack from virtually any distance, assuming communications permit it, so the most significant factor in response time is mobilization. This, however, should certainly not be ignored.

On the subject of 250 km uberships, talk about an easy target! Sure, they're tough, but a smaller vessel should be able to pound away at one from far enough away that it would be very difficult to return fire accurately. To give a ship that size any amount of maneuverability and acceleration would require enormous amounts of power. It would probably cost more to maintain than a good-sized fleet of smaller vessels, and be less useful. About the only things such ships are good for, I would think, are intimidation and destroying very large objects.

Medical equipment might be made small enough that full hospital ships would rarely be needed, especially in space battles. Anyone injured in space combat isn't likely to survive long enough to receive medical attention.

No doubt I missed a number of points, but there's a start.

I like Balrogga's solution to uberships, personally. A 250m vessel that generates a cloak of black holes around itself and rams uberships. Shoop dead.

I like Balrogga's solution to uberships, personally. A 250m vessel that generates a cloak of black holes around itself and rams uberships. Shoop dead.

I know Balrogga personally (WHite Tower and all that), and I like his style as well.

Heh, that is a nice one. Automated, I assume?

I think its piloted. Heavy shields and armor to prevent the vessel from ripping itself to shreds, but otherwise a simple little frigate.

And of course there's my Voidshields, too. Anybody attempts to bring in a Death Star or Mega Star Destroyer is in for one NASTY surprise... I love them things...

Sound interesting... What d'they do, if you don't mind saying? Although this is getting a bit off topic.

as I see it, any FT nation would have some sort of force-multiplication technology, like robotics, that would reduce the number of human (or whatever your dominant species is) workers required. For routine tasks, you wouldn't even need much of an Ai, just something that can count the number of torpedos in a rack, and refill it. of course, the more automation you have, the more vunerable you are to changing circumstaces and cyberwar attacks.
replicators help, but you still need raw materials, recycling destroyed ships and captured prisoners can meet most of your demands, for a while, but you will still need some method of resupply eventually.

Depends on the type of replicator really. If you use the direct energy-to-matter replicators like Balrogga (and by extension/tech-gift me) does, the only concern becomes power source. And many FT nations utilize the universe itself as a power source. Or in my case the interdimensional medium... nothing like tapping an infinite source of power (infinite but not uberpowerful. Its a constant supply of not-too-much).

I use mass-energy converters both ways, myself. Whatever's convenient->energy, energy->whatever's needed.

In response to the starting post, I don't use all uberships, in fact, my navy doesn't actually have any. Case in point for my focus on the little ships:

(Obvious attempt at showing off, heh.)

http://i7.photobucket.com/albums/y266/kyanges/FighterCarrier2.jpg

These things are obviously not uber ships, and I strive to continue that focus on the smaller vessels that take up critical positions in any military. These little things would be the first ships to respond to any sort of incursion or unknowing alien exploratory vessel. I hate big OMGDZ!11UBERSHIPDEATHKILLDESTROY!!111!!1!!!!!1!! ships responding to almost everything. Farming crisis? Send the Dreadnought. Rebel uprising? 134512341234 capital ships instant response. Diplomatic meeting? Send them both. :rolleyes: .

If those are air intakes on the front I will cry.

If you strive for realism, you must give yourself a large population.

You only need a massive population if you want to create an uber Empire spanning dozens of worlds. If you are content instead with several main worlds and some colonies you don't need to have trillions of citizens.

I like Balrogga's solution to uberships, personally. A 250m vessel that generates a cloak of black holes around itself and rams uberships. Shoop dead.

I wonder how a 15 mile long ubership would fare up against several 10,500-MT matter-antimatter warheads (which would not need any more antimatter than the mass of fuel used in a 35-MT nuke) fired by long-range rockets accelerated to 99% of c.

I have an Empire; but I try to balance my fleets to my pop; and try to stay relatively close to 40K Canon. I'm mostly here for the RP; thus stats, tech etc, really don't mean that much to me, outside of details of a new canonical Universe.

I completely agree with you. When I started and eventually became FT I wanted to have beeg uber l33t fleets, but then I remembered that I don't want my ass beat down with a big "godmod' stick. So when I created my fleet, mostly comprised of the standard 1.6km Star Destroyers, I left a section of my military man power labeled as "non-combatants" meaning that about 36,000,000 other members of the Thrashian fleet and army are involved in hospitals, supply, transport, and etc; all the things that involve logistics. And when I am taking over a system or series of planets, I always make openings for people to make small stabbs at my supply lines, but they never do, they always wait for my fleet to show up and then fight. Basiclly, any good fashioned and experianced MT player given a system campaign to run in FT could most likely beat the FT player since the first rule of MT is to get behind youyr enemy and cut his supply lines.

I agree, we need some standard of REALITY, but saddly it will be here long after we're all old.


OOC: No offence, but how is a MT player able to cut off the supply lines of a future tech player? I'm making some assumptions here in that the FT player send a capital ship (complete with escorts) over the MT nation and proceeds to bombard the MT nation into dust. Perhaps you can further elaborate on what you mean by "system campaign". The only way I can see it is if the FT nation lands troops in the MT nation and the latter conducts guerilla warfare or something.

An FT nation needs a huge population. It is the only way.

Only if you want to wank yourself an entire empire rather than, say a nation. Or even a planet, for that matter.

By your logic, because China and America are modern-tech, Switzerland and Luxembourg shouldn't be past the stone age.

I wonder how a 15 mile long ubership would fare up against several 10,500-MT matter-antimatter warheads (which would not need any more antimatter than the mass of fuel used in a 35-MT nuke) fired by long-range rockets accelerated to 99% of c.It'd win, as Lorentz transformation rips the missile to shreds, resulting in a premature detonation in the vicinity of the missile's origin?

OOC: No offence, but how is a MT player able to cut off the supply lines of a future tech player? I'm making some assumptions here in that the FT player send a capital ship (complete with escorts) over the MT nation and proceeds to bombard the MT nation into dust. Perhaps you can further elaborate on what you mean by "system campaign". The only way I can see it is if the FT nation lands troops in the MT nation and the latter conducts guerilla warfare or something.

What i'd do is, upon declaration of war, hit their capital ships with my attack satellites, eg kinetic rods, missiles, the like. Back that up with, if you have any, high alt bombers (hypersoars, whatev), launching cruise missiles against the lower down tier ships (frigates, destroyers), backed up with a tactical missile launch against the enemy en masse.

Unless you have ground mounted anti orbital G0DR0Dz like I do (And I don't know many others who do), there isn't really much you CAN do against spaceships from MT -> FT.

Technically, anti-ship and point-defence fire from LAZ0RZ and Particle beams - And Point-defence nukes, if things get ugly - should take care of all of this, so suspension of disbelief re: Effectiveness would still be required, tho.

Personally, I suppose that the diplomatic effects of using spacedy assets vs. non-spacedies would be disastrous, essentially comparable to, say, the effect of the US using Megaton-yield nukes vs. Iraqi insurgents, and as DA happens to have a military that can - in theory - act without using a single sentient at the front (In real terms, there would be a few dozen, most of them backed up), a non-total conflict (I.e. one with limited goals on both sides) would be fought with limited surface assets, to keep $nations happy.

The problem would of curse be a rather drastic numerical inferiority, but as theexhcange would likely be the instantaneous loss of all orbital assets of the surface-dwelling nation, I suppose it'd be fair.

Though a modern nation having orty sats and the likes would generally mean that DA has rather less inhibitions... Once diplomacy has failed, anyway, and DA's not exactly fond of fighting.

Of course, this would be impossible to ICly ustify in a total war, but in minor conflicts - And I've yet to experience a total war - it ought to work out, given that DA could actually lose.

It would of course definitely have less sentient casualities (Zero or single digits), but its monetary casualities could possibly be equal/ higher - Though partially due to the excessive costs for ammunition - and it could suffer a loss over the whole issue.

... On the topic at hand, as far as logistics are concerned, depends. There are (Militarised) Manufacturing Units (Think a small GSV stripped of most Culture-wankiness) available one can use as base/ Factory, and ships generally have mild manufacturing capacities for self-repair issues, so it's essentially taken care of. But then, relatively minor acceleration means considerable ETAs, as well as the option to intercept transports - Not all casualities can be taken care of by a mMU.

It'd win, as Lorentz transformation rips the missile to shreds, resulting in a premature detonation in the vicinity of the missile's origin?

Could you explain what you mean by this? I admit I'm not too well versed on physics, but my understanding of the Lorentz transformations are that they compare things occuring in different inertial frames.

The missile is all one intertial frame, so why would Lorentz transformation destroy it? Let's say the rocket accelerates at a constant 15-g to 99% light speed. Its Lorentz factor is only 7, not so large (so mass is not so greatly affected), but time is dilated by 7 for the rocket as a whole and distance contracted by 7 for the relativistic rocket.

Am I missing something?

By comparison, the technology behind the uber-FTL Star Destroyers is completely ludicrous, but then again it is FT.

Hum. As far as I understand it - Okay, read it - it should effect the missile itself, as well. I shall read up on it. I wont strictly outrule that I may be wrong.

And of course, in comparison, any FTL is vastly more ludicrous. But still.

If the sudden acceleration doesn't compromise the antimatter containment and cause the missile to detonate as a result, relativistic spatial compression will turn it into a coin-formerly-known-as-a-missile, with similar results.

If those are air intakes on the front I will cry.

Lol, no, they're not. They just added some detail to the front. I guess they could be heat exhausts or something?

Right right, so almost all of us can agree that there is a need to use FT logistics. How can we put ourselves forth and strive to make things more realistic to ourselves?

An idea that just now popped into my head is... make a small OOC coalition of people. Now hear me out and bear with me:

Those of us who wish to use logistics form small group(Or large if en0ough people join) that know if we go to war with each other, we will use proper logistics and the like.

I am *not* suggesting we cut ourselves off if we do this. We can RP with anyone we want, but we would just *know* the people who are willing to RP more realistically, thus we couuld start the RPs off with a realistic foot on the get-go. When we don't RP with others in this group, we would simply do FT wars the normal way, mass millions of men, thousands of ships, and slug it out Revolutionary war/WW 1 style in space.

And I thank those who made a seperate thread of their other dispute. It puts faith in me that these forums still have that kind of maturity to do something like that.

What i'd do is, upon declaration of war, hit their capital ships with my attack satellites, eg kinetic rods, missiles, the like. Back that up with, if you have any, high alt bombers (hypersoars, whatev), launching cruise missiles against the lower down tier ships (frigates, destroyers), backed up with a tactical missile launch against the enemy en masse.

Unless you have ground mounted anti orbital G0DR0Dz like I do (And I don't know many others who do), there isn't really much you CAN do against spaceships from MT -> FT.

Unless the FT commander is a complete moron, he should win most any conflict with a MT nation. I will assume that the FT ships have a far greater range than the MT nation (or perhaps a heavily armoured ship that can shrug off nuke strikes in case the range from both parties are equal), otherwise we might as well say FT ground vs FT orbit. Conflict between two powers with a vastly different tech level should result in the advanced nation winning, despite what we see in the movies and video games. I'm not convinced that a MT nation can really harm a FT nation at all. I mean, a single Star Trek Fed ship should be able to inflict considerable if not devastating damage upon Vrak without me being able to counter. If I have the toys that you say then I would be more akin to a PMT nation. Even then, I would loss a lot. The only thing the Fed ship would need to do is to go back to a supply depot (say, on the moon) refuel, reload, repair, and then come back. If I tried to send some ships to the moonbase to "cut off his support" I would place the chances of success at slim to none. And unless I'm playing the idiotic Borg, I would send a FLEET of capital ships to subjucate my soon to be acquired territory. And the first targets would be any floaty kinetic whatevers (or anything else floating about that might actually bother me) to be first served up for dinner.

If a MT nation is able to actually cut off the supply lines of a FT nation then perhaps they are closer in tech level than what we would think. *shrug* It comes down to what everyone will agree on in that rp I guess.

If the sudden acceleration doesn't compromise the antimatter containment and cause the missile to detonate as a result, relativistic spatial compression will turn it into a coin-formerly-known-as-a-missile, with similar results.

Acceleration is only 15-g, well within the limits of some futuristic relativisitc missile.

To your point regarding length contraction of the missile, I'm not sure there is any, I've not encountered it being mentioned anywhere, though of course I could be wrong. This (http://www.daviddarling.info/encyclopedia/O/one-g_spacecraft.html) physics website even talks about about accelerating an interstellar starship to way over 0.99c, enough to reach Andromeda in 60 years (requiring an average velocity greater then -0.999999999c, I believe). It mentions nothing at all of length contraction of the vessel, only the issue of prolonged exposure to gs. If you know otherwise, please show me.

Even if there is (and I'm not convinced so), this contraction is only 7, making a 40m long rocket 5.7m which is no where near "coin sized".

or perhaps a heavily armoured ship that can shrug off nuke strikes in case the range from both parties are equal
How can anything "shrug off nuke strikes"? I personally don't think that being FT should make you have get-out-of-jail-free cards for every dangerous thing out there. An FT nation need not be that much more advanced than an MT nation. Really the only difference needs to be that they have expanded into space, they dont need massive warp drives that propel their ships at 10c, ship shields that can survive impacts with singularities, the technology to manufacture energy and matter quikcly and easily out of nothing, etc.

Well, we don't go on extended campaigns. I have lots of automated farming worlds, and my people are spread out, and generally happy.

Oh, and Einhauser. Have you noticed that, as we get more advanced, our homes grow larger? From 1-room huts, to 7-room family houses? It stands to reason, that, in the future, homes would be huge, simply because they had the space.

Acceleration is only 15-g, well within the limits of some futuristic relativisitc missile.

Then you would need a damn long distance just to get 'em up to speed, and during the acceleration phase the missile would be easily taken down by enemy fightercraft.

To your point regarding length contraction of the missile, I'm not sure there is any, I've not encountered it being mentioned anywhere, though of course I could be wrong. This physics website even talks about about accelerating an interstellar starship to way over 0.99c, enough to reach Andromeda in 60 years (requiring an average velocity greater then -0.999999999c, I believe). It mentions nothing at all of length contraction of the vessel, only the issue of prolonged exposure to gs. If you know otherwise, please show me.

Even if there is (and I'm not convinced so), this contraction is only 7, making a 40m long rocket 5.7m which is no where near "coin sized".

I can also point to a website where it says we can acquire free energy from harnessing the very vacuum of space, and that the russians developed electromagnetic mind control weaponry during the cold war... almost in the same sentence. Using conventional methods, you CAN'T reach 'more than C', ya can't break the barrier, only get around it. That's the whole reason behind gamma.

The length contraction aspect would normally not affect a missile, I should think. However, you would need very sophisticated means of containing antimatter just so the stuff doesn't annihilate the missile with a flashy pop. The length contraction might not do anything to the missile itself, but I would be fairly willing to bet that it would play hell with the containment mechanisms, be it a shaped electromagnetic field or... well a shaped electromagnetic field is the only way. Any kind of matter would be annihilated by the antimatter, so you can't really use simplicity. Any form of shielding would likely be compromised by the relativistic stresses.

To say nothing of how costly it would be to create antimatter in sufficient quantities...

Then you would need a damn long distance just to get 'em up to speed
23.6 days actually, so what? I recognise the limitations.

and during the acceleration phase the missile would be easily taken down by enemy fightercraft.
Fightercraft which usually violate the laws of physics but I digress. Anyway, these are extreme long range weapons, so fightercraft aren't a major issue.

I can also point to a website where it says we can acquire free energy from harnessing the very vacuum of space, and that the russians developed electromagnetic mind control weaponry during the cold war... almost in the same sentence.
The website doesn't describe some crazy technology, it describes physics. And it doesn't mention length contraction tearing appart the craft. I fail to see why contraction should destroy a missile if it is all in the same inertial reference.

As far as I understand, relativity would dictate the rocket look compressed to a stationary observer, but to the rocket itself it would look completely fine. Instead the rocket perceives the outside world as distorted, not itself. Therefore there is no way relativity would damage my high velocity missile.

Using conventional methods, you CAN'T reach 'more than C'
Yes I know, that's the whole point of why I travel only at fractions of c. Where have I said anything about going at multiples of c?

ya can't break the barrier, only get around it.
We may be able to find ways of getting around the light barrier, but maybe we can't (likely, actually). No one knows if it will ever be practically possible, and many believe it won't ever be (Hawking recently questioned the possibility of wormholes based on violating causality principles). My empire only uses what is far more feasible, and that's travel only at fractions of c, not multiples like most of the other FTers.

I admit my missile is not completely realistic (I have to assume the technology I use, which is theoretically feasible, is nontheless advanced enough to allow constant acceleration despite relativisitic increases in mass, which fortunately is only 7 times at 99% of c), but it is infinitely more realistic then what you do and it is feasible for an FT nation. I can explain my technology using real world physics. It invloves high-yield matter-antimatter reactions to accelerate to high velocities and Bussard ramjets to harvest increasing amounts of hydrogen fuel to get to the high fractions of c.

R.W. Bussard, who designed the concept, calculated that a 1000-ton starship with a highly efficient reactor (which we can assume as we are RPing FT nations), which collects fuel from a medium with 1 charged nucleon per cubic centimetre (the average density of the interstellar medium) would accelerate almost indefinitely at 1g. In a year the craft would reach within a fraction of the speed of light. My concept is therefore remotely feasible (with a bigger scoop).

Can you explain your technology using proper physics principles?

The length contraction aspect would normally not affect a missile, I should think.
So where is the problem?

However, you would need very sophisticated means of containing antimatter just so the stuff doesn't annihilate the missile with a flashy pop.
This is an engineering problem, not a theoretical one. It can be solved by using supercold, evacuated electromagnetic bottle containers. It's feasible for an FT nation (far more feasible than FTL).

Any form of shielding would likely be compromised by the relativistic stresses.
Why?

To say nothing of how costly it would be to create antimatter in sufficient quantities...
Not even as remotely costly as FTL. It is also something we can do today (the creation of antimatter), whereas FTL (involving either Albuirre warp drives or wormholes) is only a theoretical possiblity as an alternative solution to Einstein's equations. It does have some very serious theoretical problems though, including causality. Possibilities for FTL travel might one day be feasible but will likely never be borne out.

Improvements in antimatter creation technology however are far more likely.

How can anything "shrug off nuke strikes"? I personally don't think that being FT should make you have get-out-of-jail-free cards for every dangerous thing out there. An FT nation need not be that much more advanced than an MT nation. Really the only difference needs to be that they have expanded into space, they dont need massive warp drives that propel their ships at 10c, ship shields that can survive impacts with singularities, the technology to manufacture energy and matter quikcly and easily out of nothing, etc.

OOC: Again, depends on how far future tech and the gap between the two is agreed upon. As far as shrugging off nukes, I seem to recall the Zentradi being able to do that. But yes, FT shouldn't be a free card out of jail. It needs to have limits, but again, a FT commander would have to be a frigging Pakled to let a MT commander own him. The odds favour the more advanced nation. I fail to see why people have a problem with this.

Oh, and Einhauser. Have you noticed that, as we get more advanced, our homes grow larger? From 1-room huts, to 7-room family houses? It stands to reason, that, in the future, homes would be huge, simply because they had the space.

I realize that you are addressing Einhauser, but many people in the world still live in one room huts. Do you seem to think that in the far future everyone will have a mansion akin to Hearst's castle?

Godular, you use quantum dimensional ripper thingies for your ship guns. I really don't think you're in any way qualified to criticize a simple missile.

Antimatter can easily be contained in a magnetic bottle and a missile would not be subject to being torn apart since it's all being accelerated at the same speed at the same time.

Godular, you use quantum dimensional ripper thingies for your ship guns. I really don't think you're in any way qualified to criticize a simple missile.

Antimatter can easily be contained in a magnetic bottle and a missile would not be subject to being torn apart since it's all being accelerated at the same speed at the same time.
The only way antimatter can be safely contained is within an evacuated bottle, with opposing magnetic fields to keep the antimatter in suspension. Just to clear that up. You didn't mention the evacuation. No point suspending it if the matter is still in the bottle anyway.

The only way antimatter can be safely contained is within an evacuated bottle, with opposing magnetic fields to keep the antimatter in suspension. Just to clear that up. You didn't mention the evacuation. No point suspending it if the matter is still in the bottle anyway.

Well, yeah, I considered that so obvious I didn't say it.

But since this missile would only be used in a vacuum I don't consider that a terribly bad handicap.

The only way antimatter can be safely contained is within an evacuated bottle, with opposing magnetic fields to keep the antimatter in suspension. Just to clear that up. You didn't mention the evacuation. No point suspending it if the matter is still in the bottle anyway.

Well, that's the MT method. As some of us have stasis fields, you can store the stuff in one of those, too.

Well, that's the MT method. As some of us have stasis fields, you can store the stuff in one of those, too.

I stick to the tried and tested method, without having to come up with a stasis field design. That way, I have a point of reference.

I realize that you are addressing Einhauser, but many people in the world still live in one room huts. Do you seem to think that in the far future everyone will have a mansion akin to Hearst's castle?

....Sigh. Not many. Third-world countries have one-room huts. Second-world countries like the US have people living in cardboard boxes. First-world countries like Australia (I'm using it as an example, as we have lots, and lots of space) have huge houses.

Look at it this way. People live in one-room huts because they have no choice. Space, and resource limitations prevent them from having larger houses.

Now, I'm not talking about the far future. I'm not a prophet. I have no idea what the future holds, however, if the far future was like FT.... Take a look! We have boundless territory, an entire UNIVERSE to exploit for resources! If you could purchase a mansion, replete with builders, for a tenth of your yearly income, you'd live in a mansion.

I'm saying that, on the off-chance that we developed FTL travel (As, you know, FT uses), we'd have endless worlds. Now, if we developed it to the extent that anyone could buy a spaceship, say, in the same manner you or I might buy a car, then you have space. An incredible amount of space. I mean, assuming 1/100 000 000 worlds are habitable, and assuming there are infinite worlds.... Ergo we have infinite space. Likewise, if you could run out to a world, build a few automated electric perimeters, sow some seeds, and come back a year later for a huge harvest, would you? Sure, you might lose half the crop, but when you can do this on potentially thousands of worlds, its no big loss.

The fact is, people are only limited by the availability of resources and space. Once we take away those limitations, only choice decides whether you sleep in a one-room hut or a mansion. What would you choose?

Another thing to consider, however, is that with some FT technologies, the necessity of resupply is massively reduced. Take replicators, in one shot you've wiped out your necessity for any amount of food supply other than emergency rations. Jump gates (or Probability Foci in my case) reduce defensive reaction time dramatically (unless blown up). Hell, atmosphere recyclers!

Logistics is not as much of a concern for FT nations. Its still there, and should be considered, but FT removes a lot of the major issues from the table. Its mostly focused less on supply routes and more on fleet movements.


Are you thinking Star trek replicators or whatever? As far as I know, they don't change gold into bacon and eggs, but rather some kind of organic slush into 1001 menu items on the Enterprise. So something like the slush is stored in a container that needs to be replendished once in a while. Perhaps everytime they visit a star base?

Unless starships have a complete factory on board that can produce all the items the ship needs, logistics will still be an issue. Ships may carry some spare parts and maybe even have a machine shop, but that's it. Self sustaining ships are more akin to giant colony ships.

That is, I think logistics will always be there and don't think the need will diminish. It will just change.

Indeed. However, my strategies reduce the need for logistics. We get in there, kill as many civilians as possible, and then run out. We have the occasional 'non-essential' crew, who mysteriously 'go missing', if we really run out of supplies, but otherwise, extended campaigns aren't my gig.

AN: Just cuz I use freaky stuff on my ships doesn't mean I'm inherently restricted from commenting on prohibitively-expensive-to-maintain weaponry, and that missile would count as exactly that.

Vrak: Actually I use Balroggan replicators. Direct energy to matter conversion.

AN: Just cuz I use freaky stuff on my ships doesn't mean I'm inherently restricted from commenting on prohibitively-expensive-to-maintain weaponry, and that missile would count as exactly that.

Vrak: Actually I use Balroggan replicators. Direct energy to matter conversion.

OOC: It sounds very expensive then to make food.

Meh. It all depends on the power source and how much energy it can pump out. Balrogga replaces entire sections of his vessels' hulls as they're damaged as a defensive measure.

I have a few points.

1) Resources in FT isn't really a problem. You want resources just build a few million self-replicating robots, send them to a system. They start mining and building more of themselves and all of a sudden you have an exponential growth rate of robots and within months you can strip mine a planet and have them build starships for you.

2) Space fighters are unrealistic. You'd be better off making a missile, but since no one wants to read about the life and times of a computer chip fightes will exist.

3) In FT you can assume you can make extremely high percentages of c missiles without them destroying themselves through relatavistic means via some handwavium. Of course you don't have to do that if you want to be realistic but you have to remember that not all people want to be realistic.

4) In general Space Opera style FT large ships are far better than smaller ships in terms of cost ratios. It would take a fleet of smaller ships that would cost more to build and maintain than the single large ship to take the large ship down.

5) No MT nation can feasibly beat an FT nation. The tech disparity is to great. Sure an AK will kill you just as good as the ray gun, but the guy with the ray gun has armor that can stop the AK's rounds without a scratch. He mows down the guys with the AKs with abandon.

6) Gravity is the weakest fundamental force in the universe, quit wanking it.

Now for some pet peeves.

1) Gravity is the weakes fundamental force in the universe, quit wanking it.

2) If you have something that can only be beat with technobabble, you are quilty of godmodeing and of wanking to technobabble.

3) For the love of god obey conservation laws. Momentum us conserved when you shoot someone, you can't get more energy out of a machine than you put in. You can shit on the rest of physics as I do but obey them for crying out loudl.

4) A 50 megaton nuke has no chance in hell of harming an FT ubership. None at all.