Requiem
02/13/20 04:17 PM
1.158.235.15
|
Quote:
I guess the way to wage war isn't something you understand.
The problem with using WMDs
- First the after affects last generations;
- Second the survivors – and they the hate they pass down from one generation to the next – pacification of the planet involved will be generations in the making and even then there will be books written about how evil the perpetrator is that will also be passed down the generations for generations to come;
- Third, once the target is destroyed it cannot be used again – so for targets like star-ports etc – you will find these will be required for your militaries logistical needs in the future to expand upon the next wave.
- Consider the size of the IS and the size of your military – even at the Beginning of the 1st SW it is clear that every House did not have the available forces to win – your available forces should have been ten to twenty times as large as they are – and then you would have to launch a Pear Harbor attack upon every world your enemy has forces on at the same time – and then follow up with military troop lands all at the same time.
- You would also have to make sure you destroy the entirety of your enemies Navy at the same time.
- Remember, even if you use them only against your enemies military units – you enemy will use the same tactic against yours!
- So, the game comes down to who can destroy the most units and command centers the quickest.
- However there will be a tipping point – once one side sees that they are loosing – when using WMDs – they will not just give up they will adopt the Roman strategy – in defeat, Malice!
- What this means is a change in strategy to death ships – the ‘loosing’ side will begin killing off whole worlds to get you stop attacking or to make your victory so costly all you will taste is ash (Pyrrhic Victory).
- So if you destroy almost all of your enemies Naval forces – what-ever remains will cause a level of destruction upon your key worlds as yet unseen – ie. they will use non standard jump points with pirate points to launch world killer attacks upon every one of your key worlds in retaliation.
- This is Basic M.A.D. theory when using WMDs as your primary strike weapon.
So the question you have to ask is – is it worth it for once the nuclear genie is out of the bottle the devastation and loss of life will be beyond counting when you consider the fleet size of each Great House at the time of the 1st SW.
So can you inflict enough damage on your enemy before they retaliate in kind? And are you prepared for what they decide a target is as it may not be military – it may be your most populated worlds – your most important worlds for food production?
And are you ready for what your people are going to think when you (as the House Lord) launch the first strike and from then on it just spirals out of control with no end in sight and no exit strategy?
And again … there is no way anyone can predict how long an interstellar war will last … a few key battles lost in the space of months and you could lose everything or it could grind on year in year out with no end in sight ….
Get thee to Coventry … Now is the winter of our discontent, made glorious by this daughter of Tharkad … Our army shall march through. Well to New Avalon tonight.
|
ghostrider
02/13/20 07:04 PM
66.74.60.165
|
Well first off, how many nukes does the enemy have?
Right now, tell us how many the DC had? The FS? Oh yeah. It isn't written so you only assume how many.
The faster the war ends, the sooner there will be someone standing over the mounds of bodies the war killed.
And malice? The enemy would love you for doing their job for them. Destroy your own, while they sit back and laugh, as your own people revolt against you doing so.
I guess one of the main rules to warfare has slipped your mind. You only have to defeat the enemy's will to fight. Destruction of their military isn't the top priority, though it is high up there.
Destroy the enemy before they can retaliate. Are you seriously asking if that is a good way to fight a war? That is what a sneak attacks primary function is.
|
Karagin
02/13/20 09:06 PM
70.118.172.64
|
Waging war becomes all about nukes...yep I guess that is how it's done.
Karagin
Given time and plenty of paper, a philosopher can prove anything.
|
Requiem
02/13/20 09:09 PM
1.158.235.15
|
M.A.D. – what happens in a society when the war continues and you stop counting the amount of dead?
Quote:
Well first off, how many nukes does the enemy have?
Questions:
How many were used during the Amaris Campaign as well as the 1st Succession War and who used them?
The Terran Alliance once had approximately 600 colonies within 80 to 120 light years (depending on the source material) of Terra – How many remain?
When using the search engine how many worlds pop up which have been noted as dead or dying worlds?
Shouldn’t this give anyone a rough idea of how many each state are willing to manufacture?
Quote:
The faster the war ends, the sooner there will be someone standing over the mounds of bodies the war killed.
From what I am reading, it is like you believe only one side is using them, and the other side is just been wiped out with impunity due to the WMDs being utilized …. And there is no retaliatory strike whatsoever….
Quote:
..... malice…..
Comprehension, yet again?
“they will not just give up they will adopt the Roman strategy – in defeat, Malice! - What this means is a change in strategy to death ships – the ‘loosing’ side will begin killing off whole worlds to get you stop attacking or to make your victory so costly all you will taste is ash (Pyrrhic Victory).”
This means they will use the attacking worlds as target practice – “your” most important worlds will be ash by the time they are finished …. are you willing to accept that level of destruction to your own side?
Quote:
You only have to defeat the enemy's will to fight.
What happens when you enrage a people so far? ……. Pearl Harbor …. A date that will live on in infamy …..prior to this America was isolationist, wanting to stay out of the war, after this they had unleaded the dragon …. Then there has been a more recent example …..
In this case this is what will occur, use them too many times, and the hate will just boil over until all reservation to fighting evaporates like mist before the dawn …
Quote:
Destruction of their military isn't the top priority, though it is high up there.
Patton, “No b_____ ever won a war by dying for his country. He won it by making some other poor dumb b_______ die for his country.”
The destruction of their military is the only priority!
Quote:
Destroy the enemy before they can retaliate.
If you want to down the WMD path then you must be willing to strike at every military base, every naval vessel and every CIC at one moment in time … you miss even one and your side will regret it, one way or another there will be a retaliatory strike that you will regret for all time.
You must also be willing to accept histories verdict …. as she can be very cruel to those who use such tactics.
As an officer in the military, you must be willing to accept the worst case scenario! So how much damage to your own side in retaliation is too far? One world, ten, a hundred ….how many are you willing to accept in exchange for victory?
Get thee to Coventry … Now is the winter of our discontent, made glorious by this daughter of Tharkad … Our army shall march through. Well to New Avalon tonight.
|
ghostrider
02/14/20 12:39 AM
66.74.60.165
|
Doesn't answer the question. How many did each house have?
Even more, how many could they make each month?
That's right. No end numbers to argue the past. So how would each house know what the enemy had?
Same with forces to be honest. You strike with what you know and hope intel is correct.
The example of nukes is the fast way to take down a realm of hundreds of star systems. Not the good way to even go, but it is one of the easiest for an attacker to avoid losses to his troops.
First strike is there to try and stop the enemy from using what they have. It is that simple. If the enemy can't reach you, then you have time to avoid destroying worlds, but if you don't, you have to make sure they don't come for you.
And malice? The enemy would love you for doing their job for them. Destroy your own, while they sit back and laugh, as your own people revolt against you doing so.
“they will not just give up they will adopt the Roman strategy – in defeat, Malice! - What this means is a change in strategy to death ships – the ‘loosing’ side will begin killing off whole worlds to get you stop attacking or to make your victory so costly all you will taste is ash (Pyrrhic Victory).”
Did you understand the enemy would love for you to do their job for them? We are talking nuking worlds. Once you start losing that badly, the only worlds you can nuke is your own. Some how that isn't registering.
Better reread history. The U.S. wasn't staying out of the war, as we were supporting England and a few others. And as this is not causing an enemy to lose their will to fight, it really isn't a response. You anger them, and you just have to destroy more of what they love until they give up. That is the harsh reality of war. If it means wiping out cities, then that will be the end result. I don't like the idea, but when it is all said and done, the only winner is the one still standing. The prize may not be worth it at that point. But dead is dead, and someone still alive will consider themselves the victor.
Retaliations will happen, but how effective will they be? Take out those along the border? You hit the best targets you have as hard as you can, and their return strikes will be poor compared to what they lost.
The destruction of their military is the only priority!
Now this shows just how little you really know about war and tactics. Sieges tend to end with the enemy surrendering because of things like rampant disease and starvation. Most the time a full annihilation of enemy troops is never accomplished. After they surrender, more then a few, but not all, would kill off the troops, but that is only afterwards.
You like WWII so much. Did the allies kill off every last trooper of the axis? Destroy even last factory that made anything for the enemy? Germany was hit very hard, but it still had factories and even troops after they surrendered. And even though killing their troops was a big thing, it was the lack of supplies that really ended the war. The battle of the bulge was determined by the lack of gas for the vehicles. Not killing the enemy troops. Oh wait. That's right. Take away the enemy's will and ability to fight... Japan didn't need to have every last ship sunk as well as all their troops killed. That war ended without that. So where is the kill all enemy here?
|
Requiem
02/14/20 04:27 AM
1.158.235.15
|
Quote:
You strike with what you know and hope intel is correct.
What a novel concept when you are planning to commence a nuclear war!
Why have reconnaissance forces and intelligence agencies if hope is the best way to determine if you should go to war.
Quote:
The example of nukes is the fast way to take down a realm of hundreds of star systems. Not the good way to even go, but it is one of the easiest for an attacker to avoid losses to his troops.
This still reads like a retaliatory nuclear strike is not on its way due to the attacking forces using them.
Quote:
First strike is there to try and stop the enemy from using what they have.
Ie. “everything” the enemy has – question has this ever been achievable in the past?
Quote:
Once you start losing that badly, the only worlds you can nuke is your own.
Really?
Quote:
The U.S. wasn't staying out of the war, as we were supporting England and a few others.
How many “official” boots on the ground?
Quote:
You anger them, and you just have to destroy more of what they love until they give up.
Please explain – The Blitz on London, Dresden, Berlin, Nanking, Hiroshima, Nagasaki …. And more recently ……
Did any of these just give up, or did they just continue on fighting?
Quote:
That is the harsh reality of war. If it means wiping out cities, then that will be the end result. I don't like the idea, but when it is all said and done, the only winner is the one still standing. The prize may not be worth it at that point. But dead is dead, and someone still alive will consider themselves the victor.
Dr Srangelove or: How I Learned to Stop Worrying and Love the Bomb
Quote:
That is the harsh reality of war. If it means wiping out cities, then that will be the end result. I don't like the idea, but when it is all said and done, the only winner is the one still standing. The prize may not be worth it at that point. But dead is dead, and someone still alive will consider themselves the victor.
One lost Battleship and how much damage could this one ship do to your empire?
Quote:
The destruction of their military is the only priority! Now this shows just how little you really know about war and tactics.
Really?
Quote:
Germany was hit very hard, but it still had factories.
Please refer to the Nero Decree – Nerobefehl - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nero_Decree
Quote:
it was the lack of supplies that really ended the war.
Er, no https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/End_of_World_War_II_in_Europe
Quote:
The battle of the bulge was determined by the lack of gas for the vehicles.
Over simplification based upon Peiper’s units - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_the_Bulge
Please consider the Casualties and losses table.
Quote:
Japan didn't need to have every last ship sunk as well as all their troops killed. That war ended without that.
Japan surrendered due to Russia’s introduction to the war - https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Surrender_of_Japan
The belief Nuclear weapons ended WW2 - Japan is a complete fallacy.
Get thee to Coventry … Now is the winter of our discontent, made glorious by this daughter of Tharkad … Our army shall march through. Well to New Avalon tonight.
Edited by Requiem (02/14/20 04:28 AM)
|
ghostrider
02/14/20 12:18 PM
66.74.60.165
|
Doesn't matter what type of war or even just a strike, you hope your intel is accurate. For someone that suggests recon will find everything, how this point is missed is another question.
And why it matters? You are talking about taking out the enemy's ability to strike back with them. With a single timed strikes, you want to remove the enemy from having nukes, making your further war that much safer for your troops. Much like taking out the shore batteries when invading a country by water.
Maybe the idea of hitting a few jumps into enemy territory so they can't get to your lands to drop the nukes isn't registering. You know. 90 LIGHT years distance, not a few thousand miles like on Terra. Where you just can't launch them from where they sit.
Not sure how many troops were actually in England, as that was kept a secret. We know it was more then the government said. To my knowledge, some of the aircraft used to defend and attack were flown by U.S. pilots. I would be sure some of the ground units were or had U.S. troops in it. But just shipping in supplies is enough to have us in the war. Germany tried the same tactics that was eventually used against them and couldn't stop England from rebuilding their forces. So yeah. The U.S. was involved in WWII in Europe. Also, the U.S. was helping in Asia as well. Supplying a lot of those resisting Japan. Or were the Wolf Packs destroying U.S. ships for no reason?
One battleship could do a lot or very little. There is too many variables to do more then guess. If that battleship is the only ship in a defenseless area, lots. If you have defenses set up and enough, not much.
So Japan surrendered because Russia got into the pacific war? Did they have to kill the Japanese troops? No.
When German tanks ran out of supplies, ie fuel, the fight continued until they had no more ammo or realized they couldn't win the battle, then the war. Yet they fought on thinking they were the super soldiers. If not for being out of supplies, they would not have lost without causing more casualties.
Nukes sped up Japans surrender greatly. The U.S. was coming to hit their homelands, and was showing it would be a nasty fight, even though they knew the Japanese would exact a horrible toll. Now with Russia getting into it, did they die to the last man? No? Then killing troops isn't the primary goal for war.
|
Requiem
02/14/20 02:15 PM
1.158.235.15
|
Quote:
why it matters? You are talking about taking out the enemy's ability to strike back with them. With a single timed strikes, you want to remove the enemy from having nukes, making your further war that much safer for your troops. Much like taking out the shore batteries when invading a country by water.
The problem is that unless you get all of them, the retaliatory strike will be beyond imaging if the enemy has access to any WMDs or the ability to still manufacture them.
So, rather than a safer universe for your forces the IS has just gotten way more dangerous.
Even if your strikes are many jumps away all the enemy needs is one jump-ship and one drop-ship and a hand full of cobalt tipped nukes and one of your most valuable worlds dies. Then times this by who knows how many – because they were missed on the first attack run – and how many worlds die now and how many in the future as they keep on manufacturing them (due to secret manufacturing facility) and they keep on using them?
There is no winning in using them – only the degree of loss.
Quote:
some of the aircraft used to defend and attack were flown by U.S. pilots.
Yes they joined the RAF - https://warfarehistorynetwork.com/2017/0...-fighter-group/
Quote:
shipping in supplies is enough to have us in the war.
Still not in the war only supplying goods (for very high prices just like the FWL even received a 99 year lease on a UK Base for a number of old warships) –
https://www.history.com/topics/world-war-ii/lend-lease-act-1
Debt – 31 December 2006, Brittan made its final payment of about $83m to discharge the last of its war loans from the US.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Destroyers-for-bases_deal
Quote:
the U.S. was helping in Asia
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Hump
Quote:
Or were the Wolf Packs destroying U.S. ships for no reason?
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ships_sunk_by_submarines_by_death_toll
Quote:
Nukes sped up Japans surrender greatly.
This is complete misconception – historically during the meeting after the second nuclear attack it was pointed out that a thousands plans and tens of thousands of bombs or one plane and one bomb did the same damage so they were willing to fight on at this stage.
The Japanese were requesting that Russia act as an intermediary to stop the war – and they could keep the Emperor.
It was only when Russia joined the war – attacked the Manchurian forces – captured a couple of Japanese Islands at the top (to which they have never returned even to this day) – did the Japanese surrender unconditionally.
The myth that the nukes stopped the war is pure PR propaganda by the US as a means of making them feel better for using them in the first place (especially when the films and pictures began becoming widely distributed within the US).
I would also like to point out the hardliners within Japan attempted to stop the transmission of surrender so that the war would continue.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kyujo_incident
This is why they are so dangerous – historically they did not stop WW2.
As for the Russians at the end of WW2 – their goal was territory not how many they could kill – they wanted bases and taking them from the Japanese gave them these facilities.
Also during the Cuban Missile Crisis – the Russians had short range “frog” Nukes ready to go if the US decided to land any ground forces (something that was missed by the U2s). – also the Russian Sub was armed with nuclear torpedoes and the Captain had full authority to use them.
Once they are used they cross a line that should never be crossed – they will be used until they can no longer be manufactured or one side or the other is completely dead.
Get thee to Coventry … Now is the winter of our discontent, made glorious by this daughter of Tharkad … Our army shall march through. Well to New Avalon tonight.
|
ghostrider
02/14/20 05:04 PM
66.74.60.165
|
There is no arguing that nukes don't win wars. The type of winning isn't one that you take lands, but remove the enemy's life force.
A retaliation should always be planned for. But the scope of the retaliation is the key. A single ship that is destroyed in a suicide run isn't bad considering how many other areas you would have being he head of a realm. Especially if you take out a nice chunk of the enemies forces.
This is not saying you have to make the entire world glow. Just wiping out the enemy's ability to strike at you.
All those links get ignored as they go to websites that conflict with others, and none of them have the whole truth in them. The quote of one plane one bomb is not different from lots of planes lots of bombs is false. One bomb destroys a city. Many planes with those bombs destroys the country. Only one had to hit and you can spread out bombers to carpet bomb style a country if you have enough nukes. It is a poor victory, but you don't have to worry after a while as no one is left to resist.
I hate this line of thought, but that is where nukes were for deterring others.
The pilots left the RAF at the end of the war, so we know it was just a scam to say they were on their own. This was a political ploy to say the U.S. was not involved in the war. The same ploy used today by countries when spec ops teams get caught. And in the future, the same thing will happen.
Russia was always in the war. When Germany fell, they could turn all their attention to the pacific coast. And think about what was written. Japan wanted Russia to broker a cease fire, yet Russia was only after land? What isn't right about this?
The Japanese offer up the lands they took as bribe to get the cease fire?
|
Requiem
02/14/20 11:39 PM
1.158.235.15
|
Quote:
A retaliation should always be planned for. But the scope of the retaliation is the key.
How can this be planned for when the enemy has a thousand’s of populated worlds and their moons and tens of thousands of systems (Those not populated) in which to hide their nuclear arsenal as well as the ships and crews that will use them?
https://nationalpost.com/news/did-the-atomic-bombings-of-hiroshima-and-nagasaki-really-end-the-war
and Russia just took the land – there was no bribe …..
Get thee to Coventry … Now is the winter of our discontent, made glorious by this daughter of Tharkad … Our army shall march through. Well to New Avalon tonight.
|
ghostrider
02/15/20 12:54 AM
66.74.60.165
|
Part of why you hit everything that you can, when you can. You hope intel has it right on where all their weapons are that you can wipe out before they are activated. And as much as it would be suggested that they have them scattered all across the stars, the isn't going to happen. You have to protect those weapons or risk radical elements of not only the enemy, but your own population getting ahold of them. This is part of why you can't concentrate all your mobile forces into one location. One shot could kill it all and losing your stocks because no one was there, or so weak they could only say they were under attack. Time to get units there, and loading up into transports, flying there, then unloading is not quick. And no. You are not going to have full RCTs on dropships ready to move out.
So you suggested Japan wanted to use Russia to broker a surrender, but yet they didn't even do that? Why did you even bring that up if they didn't do anything to broker the surrender?
National opinions of how things went. Like suicide pilots not being welded into the cockpits to make sure they slammed their planes into ships as they were volunteers. The pilots that just splashed their planes giving an interview in several documentaries were all lying then?
|
Requiem
02/15/20 04:04 AM
1.158.235.15
|
Quote:
…… You hope intel has it right on ……
I hope you are you willing to accept the consequences if they are not right on …..
Quote:
Why did you even bring that up if they didn't do anything to broker the surrender?
Historical fact!
Quote:
The pilots that just splashed their planes giving an interview in several documentaries were all lying then?
Where is this from?
Get thee to Coventry … Now is the winter of our discontent, made glorious by this daughter of Tharkad … Our army shall march through. Well to New Avalon tonight.
|
ghostrider
02/15/20 01:07 PM
66.74.60.165
|
There have been several programs that interviewed those pilots on several stations, from around the 1980's on up. But then I would guess they are lying in order to cover the fact that they didn't follow orders. Or so the argument would go.
Any strike, any combat, you have to be willing to face facts if your intel isn't right. Nothing new here. With the silos in the world, the countries move their nukes between them on occasion, so it keeps others guessing.
In the Battletech world, getting information to home is a bit slower then on a single planet. So there is a greater chance of something being moved, or newly built that intel misses. But there is only so many places you can house nukes. The bigger threat would be chemical and biological weapons. But then not targeting this stuff first means you run the greater risk of the enemy using them, even with suicide squads you can disavow when they get caught.
Using nukes isn't the brightest idea for warfare. The original statement was not understanding why you would use nukes in a war to bring about a quick victory for your side.
Simple answer was to destroy as much of the enemy's ability to counterstrike as you can. With this, you can get deeper into the enemy territory and shock those that thought you would chew on the defenses longer then you did.
|
Requiem
02/15/20 02:39 PM
1.158.235.15
|
Quote:
But there is only so many places you can house nukes.
Within multiple specialized bunkers hidden throughout the realm;
With RCTs;
With Specialist WMD Units;
Upon Warships / Specialist Drop-ships with their own launch systems;
Utilizing Infantry / Long Range Armor / Conventional Fighter / Aerospace Fighter Carriers;
Long term storage however is going to be a nightmare – also specialist facilities are required also for their destruction when they get too old;
Quote:
But then not targeting this stuff first means you run the greater risk of the enemy using them.
However, not using them at all is the real way to minimizing their risk.
Quote:
even with suicide squads you can disavow when they get caught.
Don’t you mean you hope they will not get caught and under interrogation they will to reveal everything.
Quote:
to bring about a quick victory for your side.
At what expense? Your reputation is shot …. You will be branded a war criminal for all time ….the death toll will be unimaginable ….. and you enemies will say they are now to free to use your own tactics against you (That is as you have used WMDs so to are they now free to use them against you!)
So, rather than be a short war this could extend the war, with hate in their hearts can you ever see your enemy accepting the idea of peace? …. This hate will be passed down from one generation to the next …. Even in the distant future the phrase “Remember Kentares!” is used within the Draconis March when going to war with the DC.
Quote:
Simple answer was to destroy as much of the enemy's ability to counterstrike as you can.
And if you can’t …. Prepare for a retaliatory strike of a size and scope that cannot be predicted!
Quote:
With this, you can get deeper into the enemy territory and shock those that thought you would chew on the defenses longer then you did.
And when nuclear mushroom clouds begin to appear on your home home-worlds / your units …. What will you do next? Just press on and hope your enemy does not have access to too many?
In my opinion they are more a hindrance than a boon on the battlefield – they should only be considered if you have no option.
For example – Clan Warships – once an orbital bombardment is used and without your own fleet you have no choice but to use them to protect your people. Fear, by the Clans using this just once has open a box that cannot be closed until both sides come together and reach an agreement upon non-proliferation ….
To think the DC would just sit there and just take it, it is just not in their nature to do so ….
And the Jaguars, their inflated ego and sense of self importance as being the chosen ones would mean they would have to have the idea of not using this tactic / be forced to come to the negotiation table hammered into them through the use of multiple warheads and the death of many units.
However, in all probability this will spiral out of control very quickly and will last a long time before it can be brought under control.
The process of finding non-proliferation between the Jags. And the DC will require a third party to bring them both to the table – and I cannot see anyone fulfilling that role!
Get thee to Coventry … Now is the winter of our discontent, made glorious by this daughter of Tharkad … Our army shall march through. Well to New Avalon tonight.
|
ghostrider
02/15/20 07:34 PM
66.74.60.165
|
Who said anything about specialized units that use nukes?
There are a few issues that seem to be overlooked, so I guess I have to spell it out.
First off, if you are going to strike and enemy like this, you don't announce it. So the enemy does not have anything ready to be used, except normal patrols.
Second off, you use your spec ops to rig up the bases you can't reach in the first strike to blow when you do your attack. You don't have to rig the nukes with explosives, just bring the roof down.
Third off, the use of nukes is not for the entire realm to burn from, just hit those targets that pose the biggest threat. If you intend on invading worlds, not just wiping them out, then you use normal ordanance on those worlds.
Reputation shot.. This really depends on who is doing this, and if there are any other combatants. In battle tech, nukes and other WMDs have been used the people got away with it. They were used when people of the FWL rebelled against WOB taking refuge in FWL space. Kali is known. As this is a Battle tech thread, I do have to limit the topic to it. Interstellar war could well be outside the game and into other scenarios.
How much retaliation did the FS have in the first war when the DC did tactics like this and almost took New Avalon?
In a nuke war, the only one that writes the history tells what they want. The topic is not if nukes are bad, but nukes in an interstellar war.
Now making an agreement not to use them? Been done more then once and ignored. Given fusion power is readily available, nuclear materials are not needed so much. They are still needed in medical facilities, but not in weapons.
And with the suggestion that enemy units will see the mushroom clouds and respond, is assuming that they are not the target. The will not get word that other worlds were nuked, as it would be quick and shut down the HPG on that world. Doesn't have to destroy the HPG, just kill power to it. So like the beginning of the clan invasion, only a loss of contact with worlds would tell you something is up. Though this scenario probably would not have Comstar assisting the strikes.
So basically, if you use nukes, might was well use them.
This tactic is for removing the hardest of enemy units and military bases. Once the enemy units are neutralized, then you go about conquering worlds you want, if the enemy didn't force a pure glowing world.
|
Requiem
02/15/20 09:57 PM
1.158.235.15
|
Quote:
Who said anything about specialized units that use nukes?
Since when do you provide nukes to regular forces? Only highly specialized forces (and the Navy) become are assigned to these units …. on both sides.
Sensors,
Another item in the Novels Not in the game – Within Betrayal of Ideals – warships could identify fighters armed with nukes at long range – ie. the could detect and designate them of high importance due to the ordinance they carry.
Question – would worlds also have satellites with the same sensors? once you unpack a warhead a satellite could detect the missiles presence just by the type of warhead alone?
Thus getting to the target may pose a more difficult challenge than first believed?
Assigning targets,
Depending on what your objectives are will determine the target assigned – military (Bases and military units), turn the world dark (energy grid’s power plant), terror (an entire city), CIC (government and military command buildings).
Reputation,
No matter who you are the other side will vilify you for all time in using these.
Quote:
How much retaliation did the FS have in the first war when the DC did tactics like this and almost took New Avalon?
And the writers have gotten the story correct all the time?
Remember the FS survived this war – so there will be two sets of history books as to this era – the FS’s and the DC’s – both with their slant on historical events.
Quote:
Now making an agreement not to use them? Been done more then once and ignored.
True.
However I would like to say, with the absence of the thuggee chemical attach, there was an absence of WMDs for the longest period of time prior to the 4th SW and afterwards ….
Some weapons are just too frightening and as Leaders they must not be used.
Medical uses - the yield is next to nothing compared to weapons grade. Thus highly specialized equipment required to refine to this level. (not something anyone can make or acquire.)
Quote:
The will not get word that other worlds were nuked, as it would be quick and shut down the HPG on that world.
Congrats … ComStar will Interdict you entire empire for this once they have worked out what happened!
As, given the size of BattleMech engines, and the power they can generate, isn’t it logical to assume every HPG has their own backup Fusion Engine? Ie. they have a contingency for just this case – loss of external power …. So shutting down a HPG will require it’s dish’s destruction at the minimum.
Thus everyone will know about the use of nuclear attacks very quickly.
I would also like to say - would each House Lord provide ComStar with a contingency fund so that their military commanders, in the field as it were, can send messages to each house’s CIC without having to pay funds at the initial relay site – these contingencies could include – worlds invasion, use of nuclear weapons, retreating from the world, medical emergency on the world etc ….. and it will be a priority message!
Also one other point – Politics, you were ordered to use them, you did what you were ordered to do …. Something occurred beyond anyone’s understanding …. so now your own politicians must now save face so now your own government has declared your unit a rogue … now you are being hunted by not only your enemy’s forces but your own at the same time ….
Also there are instances where some Castle Brian’s survived multiple nuclear attacks …
Also remember – “No plan survives contact with the enemy!”
So basically, if you use nukes, then you must be prepared for the consequences of using them …..
Get thee to Coventry … Now is the winter of our discontent, made glorious by this daughter of Tharkad … Our army shall march through. Well to New Avalon tonight.
|
ghostrider
02/15/20 11:22 PM
66.74.60.165
|
I believe one of the books actually says that there is some sort of agreement to send priority messages like worlds being under attack.
Not sure why the repeat of prepare for consequences keeps coming up. It is already established that no matter what you do, you always need to be prepared for consequence, both with and without nukes.
As that is the only novel that has anything like that in it, I would think it was just for the book. And with that, wouldn't the clans have figured out the Ravens had a fighter equipped with one that was shot down? It would be stupid for those clans not involved in the fight to keep an eye out anyways.
So everyone knows you used them. What are they going to do? Tell you off? Stop talking to you?
The history of the game shows that there is no real effect for using such weapons, with the possible exception of Kali, and even then she wasn't executed like she should have been. The entire Thugee cult should have started to be hunted down. Otherwise, the others have showed their disgust, but nothing more. Not even the hint of slowing down any trade. It is very stupid, but fact. Those that might want blood would be those that were hit, and that is expected.
This discussion was to try and clear up the use of nukes in warfare, to force a surrender quickly. Not that it is a bad idea to use them. I understand why they would be used, and don't think they should have even seen the light of day.
|
Requiem
02/16/20 01:09 AM
1.158.235.15
|
Quote:
wouldn't the clans have figured out the Ravens had a fighter equipped with one that was shot down?
Why would Nicholas allow the Clans to know about this?
They are finally a unified force against a common enemy …. Better to have it all hushed up and blame the whole thing on the Wolverines.
Quote:
So everyone knows you used them. What are they going to do?
Retaliate!
Quote:
The history of the game shows that there is no real effect for using such weapons, with the possible exception of Kali, and even then she wasn't executed like she should have been.
Agreed, the game and the idea of rules of war / ethics of war are a completely lost. With the exception of a very few rare passages in which they discussed the destruction caused by fighting in a city.
The idea of justice and retribution were completely lost within the game.
And yes the idea of any WMD in the game should have never seen the light of day within the canon history.
Get thee to Coventry … Now is the winter of our discontent, made glorious by this daughter of Tharkad … Our army shall march through. Well to New Avalon tonight.
|
ghostrider
02/16/20 02:01 AM
66.74.60.165
|
Ok. Maybe not thinking is making this sound odd. How do you stop other clans that are in the combat area from seeing on their own sensors that a nuke is in the area? Nicholas can now wave his hands and not only block those sensors from detecting them and erase the memories of the people that seen it? It isn't like the only thing people find news from is Nicholas's mouth.
A gag order could be issued, but it doesn't change the fact, anyone can detect the nuke.
The problem seems to be the lack of resources in the canon universe. The states did not have them to do more then condemn someone from using them. You may understand the story a lot more if you get the notion that resources were great in the IS at the 3025 and beyond period. Maybe you should take a look at the game with that in mind. It might give you a better perspective of the game.
|
Requiem
02/16/20 02:20 AM
1.158.235.15
|
Quote:
How do you stop other clans that are in the combat area from seeing on their own sensors that a nuke is in the area?
With warship sensors – as they fly above a vast geographical area they can pick it up (as long s it is not shielded in some way);
With ‘Mech Sensors – given the games range on sensors – if you see it then you know that it is there – if the sensors were a little more realistic – within a 100Km range you should be able to detect it.
Quote:
Nicholas can now wave his hands and not only block those sensors from detecting them and erase the memories of the people that seen it?
The only ones who know the truth are those on each of the warships – The Wolverines ran away – and as for the crew of the other ship, if they want to live they will keep their mouths shut.
Quote:
A gag order could be issued, but it doesn't change the fact, anyone can detect the nuke.
Anyone with the right sensor array … and in the presence of the battle ….
Get thee to Coventry … Now is the winter of our discontent, made glorious by this daughter of Tharkad … Our army shall march through. Well to New Avalon tonight.
|
|
|
Extra information
|
3 registered and 149 anonymous users are browsing this forum.
Moderator: Nic Jansma, Cray, Frabby, BobTheZombie
Print Topic
|
Forum Permissions
You cannot start new topics
You cannot reply to topics
HTML is enabled
UBBCode is enabled
|
Topic views: 4982
|
|
|
|
|
|
|