StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Darth Wong wrote:Cue Woody Allen: voice actor for the new Star Wars TV show.

I was thinking the Jerry Lewis Class Genius Bomb ("Hey, EIGH-tee EIGH-tee!", but that's even better.

andrewgpaul wrote:If your missiles get too intelligent, you end up qith something like:

Dark Star wrote:Pinback: All right, bomb. Prepare to receive new orders.
Bomb#20: You are false data.
Pinback: Hmmm?
Bomb #20: Therefore I shall ignore you.
Pinback: Hello... bomb?
Bomb #20: False data can act only as a distraction. Therefore, I shall refuse to perceive.
Pinback: Hey, bomb?
Bomb #20: The only thing that exists is myself.
Pinback: Snap out of it, bomb.

You rock for that.
"Let there be light"

Where's that from?

Cykeisme wrote:Where's that from?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Star_(film)

TithonusSyndrome wrote:

LordShaithis wrote: EDIT: Aren't artillery shells usually harder to hit than missiles? Mayhap the Empire could use some sort of actual shell-firing artillery somewhere in it's inventory?

I mentioned this before and you didn't take kindly to it, but the technology is within our grasp by a few years to develop laser-based anti-artillery systems.

http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/ ... /THEL.html

If the Empire or Rebellion couldn't develop superior, mobile versions of this system, I'd be pretty suprised. If they were those diamond-tipped boron suckers or lobbed in such volume that they couldn't all be stopped, the story might be different.

By the same logic in ANH the entire Rebel Force should have been splashed by a combination of SM-2/3, SeaRAM, and Phalanx equivalents and any fighter that gets anywhere near a Star Destroyer should simply get blown out of the sky by their significantly more advanced antifighter hardware. The fact we have something doesn't necessarily mean they have it.

That said I agree with you missiles > shells here because the greater durability of shells would be a non-issue with that tech.

FOG3 wrote: I mentioned this before and you didn't take kindly to it, but the technology is within our grasp by a few years to develop laser-based anti-artillery systems.
http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/ ... /THEL.html
If the Empire or Rebellion couldn't develop superior, mobile versions of this system, I'd be pretty suprised. If they were those diamond-tipped boron suckers or lobbed in such volume that they couldn't all be stopped, the story might be different.

By the same logic in ANH the entire Rebel Force should have been splashed by a combination of SM-2/3, SeaRAM, and Phalanx equivalents and any fighter that gets anywhere near a Star Destroyer should simply get blown out of the sky by their significantly more advanced antifighter hardware.
You mean the ones the Death Star didn't HAVE on account of nobody expecting a fighter attack and its defenses instead being geared towards attacks by capital ships?

Manus Celer Dei wrote:

Cykeisme wrote:Where's that from?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Dark_Star_(film)

Definite B-class movie, the only highlight of it is that bomb. Guess how the movie ends...

Batman wrote:

FOG3 wrote: I mentioned this before and you didn't take kindly to it, but the technology is within our grasp by a few years to develop laser-based anti-artillery systems.
http://www.israeli-weapons.com/weapons/ ... /THEL.html
If the Empire or Rebellion couldn't develop superior, mobile versions of this system, I'd be pretty suprised. If they were those diamond-tipped boron suckers or lobbed in such volume that they couldn't all be stopped, the story might be different.

By the same logic in ANH the entire Rebel Force should have been splashed by a combination of SM-2/3, SeaRAM, and Phalanx equivalents and any fighter that gets anywhere near a Star Destroyer should simply get blown out of the sky by their significantly more advanced antifighter hardware.

Don't tell me they shouldn't have one when even fighter carried missiles are something to worry about, and we know the Cap Ships use them.


You mean the ones the Death Star didn't HAVE on account of nobody expecting a fighter attack and its defenses instead being geared towards attacks by capital ships?

Did I say SeaSparrow? No? Pay attention to what's what Bats, those are primarily antimissile equipment.

I was talking about significantly more advanced antifighter hardware in general, genius. Which of course wouldn't be there, on account on nobody expecting a fighter attack. They explicitely said so in the movie for Valen's sake.

Missile ranges in SW strongly suggest that point-defenses in both space and ground make long-range attacks futile. That they bother with walker-mounted and very tall tank turrets in order to field LOS-artillery strongly suggests that ground-based active interception technology is easily able to cope long-range artillery strikes. Perhaps its possible to make sufficiently small, shielded and intelligent manouvering warheads, but by then the cost to the payload is too much to make it able to threaten heavy armor or its simply cheaper to rely on solutions like the tank droid or AT-AT. Even the walker assault in TESB showed a very high volume of AA and point defense fire using both energy and flak weaponry that successfully decimated Rebel airspeeder assaults, and this by non-dedicated platforms with obvious tactical trade-offs and vulnerabilities such as scout walkers and walker artillery platforms, not dedicated AAA vehicles, and without MANPAD support.

Perhaps once you've uparmored and shielded your missiles and shells it makes more sense to give them short-range weapons of their own and crews because they're too costly to lose, at which point you're really fielding airspeeders and Floating Fortresses. Short range artillery fire is either LOS mass driver artillery (AT-TE), LOS energy artillery (AT-AT, tank droid) or intelligent, highly evasive and numerous short-range missiles (Hellfire droids). That is it so easy and of low marginal apparent cost suggests that the most common long-range ballistic and guided missile weaponry involves large ground-hugging stealth cruise missiles for highly unusual missions or overwhelming saturation attacks with massed ballistic fire.

Not to mention, if you've already landed troops, in most cases you're dealing with a local shield and fortifications which can be managed by your large LOS artillery (tank droids and AT-ATs), or the englobing planetary shield is down, and why work so hard making long range missiles that'll successfully hit the target when you can call in orbital artillery support?

Batman wrote:I was talking about significantly more advanced antifighter hardware in general, genius. Which of course wouldn't be there, on account on nobody expecting a fighter attack. They explicitely said so in the movie for Valen's sake.

I suppose the zillion TIE fighters were just for show, then? Well I guess we'll take your word on it. The utter stupidity of leaving a hole in your defenses, instead of being prepared to meet them is a historically recognized fact since at least Ancient China.

Capships using missiles is a know fact, so give me even one good reason that you don't insist on including antimissile systems, and why with SW tech they can't do double duty vs fighters.

Of course, by admitting that they don't have the kind of paranoid 'swat everything that moves out of the sky' level of defensive systems we in the real world have begun to insist on you admit those systems wouldn't be present, and thus are restating the point you challenged. Congratulations, you just backpedaled yourself onto the very point you challenged and now have impaled yourself on it.

Why would you worry about complex anti-fighter suites to protect the Death Star? Without the thermal exhaust port Achillies Heel, it is literally impossible to do any statistically meaningful damage to the Death Star.

Those paranoid systems deployed by AEGIS are because everything from a Cessna filled with Semtex to Silkworm missiles to a dinghy full of ANFO can cause mission-critical damage to the vessels.

FOG3 wrote:

Batman wrote:I was talking about significantly more advanced antifighter hardware in general, genius. Which of course wouldn't be there, on account on nobody expecting a fighter attack. They explicitely said so in the movie for Valen's sake.

I suppose the zillion TIE fighters were just for show, then?

You mean the ones that can be used for a ton of other duties, unlike antifighter defenses? The ones that weren't launched until Vader personally saw to it because fighters being a threat to the DS was preposterous?

Well I guess we'll take your word on it. The utter stupidity of leaving a hole in your defenses, instead of being prepared to meet them is a historically recognized fact since at least Ancient China.

Exactly. And we do it to this very day. Why would the GE be any different, especially as they TELL us that their defenses AREN'T geared to deal with fighters?

Capships using missiles is a know fact, so give me even one good reason that you don't insist on including antimissile systems, and why with SW tech they can't do double duty vs fighters.

The fact that those missiles aren't likely to do any appreciable damage, that they are unlikely to hit (space-warping ECM, remember?), that the capships launching might never get to release range in the first place...

Of course, by admitting that they don't have the kind of paranoid 'swat everything that moves out of the sky' level of defensive systems we in the real world have begun to insist on you admit those systems wouldn't be present, and thus are restating the point you challenged. Congratulations, you just backpedaled yourself onto the very point you challenged and now have impaled yourself on it.

Like hell I have. You used a scenario that was explicitly stated to NOT HAVE ANTIFIGHTER DEFENSES in universe on account of nobody considering fighters a threat to conclude that they don't have them, period, when explicit antifighter defenses canonically exist. Lancer frigate anyone?