StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Ryan Thunder wrote:Well, as long as we're all waving our mecha dicks around...

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:Bah.

You will all bow before the God Machines.

<snip>

Praise the Emperor.

Meh.

If I have to build an Emperor Titan the size of a city, I shall do it!

Shroom Man 777 wrote:Doesn't matter when Wilkins will land his space army across Nova Miratia's space river and Nova Miratian fortifications and defenses can't do anything to stop them or anything!

*facepalm*

Shroom, that's not exactly how it went down.

Shroom Man 777 wrote:Doesn't matter when Wilkins will land his space army across Nova Miratia's space river and Nova Miratian fortifications and defenses can't do anything to stop them or anything!

That seriously never grows old.

Steve wrote:

Shroom Man 777 wrote:Doesn't matter when Wilkins will land his space army across Nova Miratia's space river and Nova Miratian fortifications and defenses can't do anything to stop them or anything!

*facepalm*

Shroom, that's not exactly how it went down.

No no.

What really happened that the Giant Walking Robot tried to swim and got stuck.

Then Wilkins launched an orbital bombardment and that was the end of it.

[Whistles up the 38921st through 39247th assault divisions]

[Bragulan-esque series of nuclear time on target barrages converges on Fin's giant robotstrosity]

Who needs uberwalkers when you have hordes of conscript minions with howitzers?

Simon_Jester wrote:[Whistles up the 38921st through 39247th assault divisions]

[Bragulan-esque series of nuclear time on target barrages converges on Fin's giant robotstrosity]

Who needs uberwalkers when you have hordes of conscript minions with howitzers?

A giant monstrosity that fires a buckshot of nukes over a 1000km radius.

Simon's are pretty much my thoughts. Spot walkers from a continent away, circle around, nuke from orbit. Mop up wreckage with combat engineers.

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:

Simon_Jester wrote:[Whistles up the 38921st through 39247th assault divisions]

[Bragulan-esque series of nuclear time on target barrages converges on Fin's giant robotstrosity]

Who needs uberwalkers when you have hordes of conscript minions with howitzers?

A giant monstrosity that fires a buckshot of nukes over a 1000km radius.

That's what air defense vehicles driven by hordes of conscript minions are for, silly!

Siege wrote:Simon's are pretty much my thoughts. Spot walkers from a continent away, circle around, nuke from orbit. Mop up wreckage with combat engineers.

I think if the said walker was like 100 points, it'd take a bit more than a nuking to kill it. The said walker might be big enough to house some anti-orbit munitions given its size.

In any case, I don't plan to deploy anything like that beyond what I have. A city sized mech is probably going to cost 200 points thereabouts anyway.

Simon_Jester wrote:That's what air defense vehicles driven by hordes of conscript minions are for, silly!

I'll be sure to make sure to coat them with sensor/heat absorbing material.

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:I think if the said walker was like 100 points, it'd take a bit more than a nuking to kill it. The said walker might be big enough to house some anti-orbit munitions given its size.

Then someone with sense would assign an orbital cruiser to do the bombing. Look, much as I enjoy the concept of Titans at some point you're going to have to face the reality that they're, especially compared to other means of trucking overwhelming firepower around, slow as molasses. I'm allergic to points accounting to begin with, but even then I never saw the sense in locking up that many points in a single ground-bound fighting machine when for the same price you could have a gazillion Space Marines fitted with melta bombs and orbital jump gear or whatever other gee-what gadgetry you might wish to dream up.

When these vast lumbering war machines are concerned I would much prefer we don't bother with points at all and just write engaging battle scenes whenever the situation calls for it. Hero machine versus swarm of pesky dudes with AT rockets can very well be an interesting story, but in a framework of points v. points it just doesn't make much sense to me.

I agree with Siege- superheavy ground units 'feel' wrong to me. Even in the 20th century we'd already passed the point where concentration of firepower was the key to warfare: two 30-ton tanks were often better than one 60-ton tank of the same generation. The atom bomb just underlined that.

Pretty much ever since the Second World War the trend has been towards increased dispersal of firepower at all levels- bigger and more powerful weapons handed to individual soldiers, units spreading out to cover more and more ground per man or vehicle, and constant effort going into communications and coordination of those men.

And so working out a coherent doctrine that bypasses the problem of "what can be seen can be killed" by sheer concentration of physical might in one place seems... perverse, to me. It's an outmoded approach, sort of like trying to replicate knights in shining armor in space- amusing as an exercise, but not my vision of the future.

So I'd rather just have several thousand artillery tubes spread out over a continent to drop suborbital rocket-assisted shells on one place than try to mount all several thousand tubes on the same platform to dominate-by-fire the entire continent (as Ryan does).

It's only one part of my army that's like that anyway. The rest of it is, by and large, pretty conventional.

Could certain people perhaps spare the rest of us the OSF style anti-giant mecha/tank rants? In a universe with Space Triremes, Kraken, Deamons and freaken Superman himself I don't think anyone really cares unless it actually unbalances the game in some measurable way.

For the record, I call dibs on Space Godzilla. (seriously )

In any case, decentralization of firepower only becomes a rule when you have a runaway ration of offense to defense. As that's not a universal rule in this setting (See: Killing RKS/MC warships!) it doesn't really apply.

I don't disagree, WH; it's just my perception of the trends of land warfare, which I choose to reflect in my own ground forces. I mean fuck, I write the space trireme shit too, I just don't expect anyone to take it seriously.

Formless wrote:Could certain people perhaps spare the rest of us the OSF style anti-giant mecha/tank rants? In a universe with Space Triremes, Kraken, Deamons and freaken Superman himself I don't think anyone really cares unless it actually unbalances the game in some measurable way.

For the record, I call dibs on Space Godzilla. (seriously )

I've got nothing against giant mecha. I've just got my own doctrine.

Tomato, tomat-oh.

I mean, I prefer gee-whiz '50s and '60s SCIENCE! to cyberpunk, too; that doesn't mean I'm in some kind of vendetta with Siege.

But I don't see why I shouldn't mention it, if people are going to start strutting up and down and beating their chests.

Uh... actually, that was as much directed at the chest beaters as anyone else.

We're all unleashing our inner Tarzan.

[Birdies]What are ground vehicles?[/birdies]

[line cheep cheep]

Mayabird wrote:[Birdies]What are ground vehicles?[/birdies]

[line cheep cheep]

...I MUST sell you bolo tanks. Bolo tanks, and nothing else. Enormous, monstrous tanks driven by tiny, cute little birdies. Good god.

Simon_Jester wrote:I agree with Siege- superheavy ground units 'feel' wrong to me. Even in the 20th century we'd already passed the point where concentration of firepower was the key to warfare: two 30-ton tanks were often better than one 60-ton tank of the same generation. The atom bomb just underlined that.

Pretty much ever since the Second World War the trend has been towards increased dispersal of firepower at all levels- bigger and more powerful weapons handed to individual soldiers, units spreading out to cover more and more ground per man or vehicle, and constant effort going into communications and coordination of those men.

And so working out a coherent doctrine that bypasses the problem of "what can be seen can be killed" by sheer concentration of physical might in one place seems... perverse, to me. It's an outmoded approach, sort of like trying to replicate knights in shining armor in space- amusing as an exercise, but not my vision of the future.

So I'd rather just have several thousand artillery tubes spread out over a continent to drop suborbital rocket-assisted shells on one place than try to mount all several thousand tubes on the same platform to dominate-by-fire the entire continent (as Ryan does).

You do realise that there's such a term as "critical mass" right? As much as it is romantic to you and appeals to your sense of aesthetics for something to get cut by "a thousand cuts", there are countless other parameters to be considered, not least reactor efficiency that typically sweet spot with regard to the mass/performance ratio.

And that trend you speak of? You do realise that the real reason behind it was more budget cuts than anything else? Which resulted in issues when America invaded Iraq in Iraqi Freedom because they couldn't cover enough ground with the scanty few soldiers they could bring? Set piece battles aren't the norm nor should they be expected.

ANd in any case, if I were ever to be crazy enough, I'd construct a giant mech to carry a monstrous anti-orbital weapon, that so happens to be able to turn that weapon against another city. So not only can I shoot down the random puny frigate, I can blast cities to pieces.

fuck y'all

Well geez. My autonomous units are stupidly powerful giant spiky robots because that entire section of my military is designed by madmen, not because I thought it'd be efficient to do it that way.

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:If I have to build an Emperor Titan the size of a city, I shall do it!

To what end, good man? You seem to be on some kind of bizzare Zorian quest to have the biggest and bestest of everything. I mean, you totally lost your shit when I noted that I had, entirely by accident, created robot troops that were worth more than Astartes man for--well, man for spiky robot, I guess. Do you have some kind of deep-seated feelings of inferiority you need to talk about?

Fingolfin_Noldor wrote:You do realise that there's such a term as "critical mass" right? As much as it is romantic to you and appeals to your sense of aesthetics for something to get cut by "a thousand cuts", there are countless other parameters to be considered, not least reactor efficiency that typically sweet spot with regard to the mass/performance ratio.

And that trend you speak of? You do realise that the real reason behind it was more budget cuts than anything else? Which resulted in issues when America invaded Iraq in Iraqi Freedom because they couldn't cover enough ground with the scanty few soldiers they could bring? Set piece battles aren't the norm nor should they be expected.

ANd in any case, if I were ever to be crazy enough, I'd construct a giant mech to carry a monstrous anti-orbital weapon, that so happens to be able to turn that weapon against another city. So not only can I shoot down the random puny frigate, I can blast cities to pieces.

Everyone makes fun of chest beating. Your response... beat your chest harder!

This is hilarious, and you totally misunderstood my points in the context of 20th century warfare, and I really shouldn't get dragged into it any more.

At least no one brought up the galaxy-sized mecha...

Our new best friends.