950 replies to this topic

[Skylarr]

Quote

The fusion engine is what powers BattleMechs, aerospace fighters and other vehicles (at least one tank, the Von Luckner, is said to have a fusion engine). It functions by harnessing the power of a fusion reaction, as occurs in the core of the Sun. A BattleMech's fusion engine can usually last for decades on a few kilograms of hydrogen. Unlike the research reactors of the real world, a Battlemech's fusion engine runs on "light" hydrogen, protium, rather than hydrogen's heavier isotopes deuterium and/or tritium.

A great deal of heat is released by the engine, which can negatively affect the vehicle's pilot or even the vehicle itself. Simply moving the vehicle creates heat, though this is often a small amount. The greatest source of heat comes from firing the vehicles weapons, especially energy weapons.

In a BattleMech, the fusion engine rests in the center torso. It cannot be relocated elsewhere in the BattleMech, though certain types of engine may intrude into the side torso bays as well. The weight of the engine is proportionate to the mass of the vehicle and its desired maximum speed. Hence a light Mech can use the same engine as an assault Mech, but move much faster.

Fusion engines usually will only shut down if damaged, and they are absolutely no risk of being a fusion bomb. ^[2] There have been a number of cases of fusion engines being "over revved" and exploding with devestating force, but this is more akin to a boiler explosion than a true nuclear explosion. More often a destroyed engine will be punctured by weapons fire. Because the plasma is held in a vacuum chamber (to isolate the superheated plasma from the cold walls of the reactor; contact with the walls would super-chill the plasma below fusion temperatures), a punctured reactor can suck in air where the air is superheated. Normal thermal expansion of the air causes the air to burst out in a brilliant lightshow often mistaken for a "nuclear explosion". The Thermal Expansion damages anything within 90 meters of the destroyed 'Mech.

Such dramatic failures are rare, though. It is difficult to sustain the fusion reaction and very easy to shutdown. Safety systems or damage to containment coils will almost always shut down the engine before such an explosion occurs. The massive shielding of the engine (in the case of standard fusion engines, this is a tungsten carbide shell that accounts for over 2/3 of the weight of the engine) usually buys the safety systems the milliseconds needed to shutdown the engine when severe damaged is inflicted.

[Lord Psycho]

Melcyna, on 04 April 2013 - 09:26 AM, said:

No one said to take the jumpship to battle anymore than they do already

those dropships needed jumpship in the first place to bring the dropship to the target planet THEY ALREADY are involved... except they don't directly engage in frontline

however instead of using dropships as essentially a landing craft, there's technically nothing stopping them from using the same dropship as a gunboat for orbital bombardment and blockade by simply replacing it's carrying capacity for arsenal

The ONLY THING that can effectively stop this jumpship/gunboat combination is an actual warship, as they have an actual advantage vs mere gunboats with an unarmed Jumpship (or alternatively another jumpship/gunboat)

except THERE ISN'T ONE...
supposedly there isn't any working fleet around in IS with warships for a good stretch of a period until the arrival of the Clans... so effectively the only fleet there is in IS for that period with the highest firepower in space...

are these jumpships/dropships

but despite this, they continue to use the same method...

Spoiler

UNTIL FASA got time to think about it and realize later on... that ... hmmm yeah, you know what? it doesn't make sense for them to not do so...

so in the subsequent technical readout where more details are fleshed we get the gunboats... and Q ships

The only thing is that this comes about decades LATE if not longer in BT from chronological order

And shortage of manufacturing capability for either jumpship or dropship only serves to REINFORCE the need to have armed gunboats because whoever controls the space with superior navy will effectively win the control for the war.

if there was shortage of production of either, then the one winning the space battle keeps more of his fleet (and can use it for anything else they might need be it bombardment or to then ferry the troops when the time comes) while the one LOSING the space battle (since they insist on not having a navy in this nonsensical world) would just have less... and less ships as the time pass with each encounter until they do the exact same thing and produce their own gunboats to fight on even term in space.. or they run out of ships that they effectively are sealed in their planets.

alternatively of course, have a warship...

I thought it was sanctioned a war crime to shoot at Jumpships and destroy HPGs? as tleast in the Inner SPhere....


edited: in the Clans, I think it's a crime or something to destroy/attack a jumpship....

Edited by Lord Psycho, 04 April 2013 - 06:28 PM.

[Melcyna]

It wouldn't matter either way, since what the Jumpship carry is the actual problem... rather than the Jumpship itself, once a Jumpship have jumped into the system and released it's payload (ie: dropship, gunboats, etc... the immediate concern becomes what was just released and where they are heading rather than the jumpship which doesn't have direct combat value).

The only time where the jumpship destruction or capture mattered more than the dropship it carries, is when the opposite situation happens... ie: the jumpship with it's payload hasn't jumped yet to it's destination and your navy is in the same location as it is. In such scenario, depending on how vital it is to stop the payload, the jumpship destruction may well be the only practical solution to stop them from going anywhere.

Theodor Kling, on 04 April 2013 - 02:00 PM, said:

@Melcyna:
I think we run in circles here Your point of view is perfectley valid. Exepft for one flaw, that popped up earlier in this thread: Ypu assume that winning the space battle would give you control of a system, so you can land your ground forces in peace, and support them from orbit ( ignoring the ares convention.. but then again, thats just a convention )
If you could achieve true (space) naval superiority in a practical way, then building sublight warships out of dropships makes sense.
But with Bt sensor systems, targeting, and accelerations you can´t controll orbital space, let alone a star system, it´s just to damm big.. You might controll the standart jump points, but that's already hard, and sooner or later somone will use a pirate point.
As was also mentioned, using guided weapons, smart mines and unmaned drones you might stand a chance of controling orbital space.. but then again it´s BT, so those are not an option.
Using BT tech you would need alot of Gunships at the ready around a planet, prefereably teamed in groups and even more fighter patrols. Even then there is a problem that you can´t "slow down" the enemy advance in a space battle. Hell, dropships en route to a planet usually don´t budge from their plotted ourse for anything short of another ship directley in their flight path. And even then they go around it because decelarating hard enough to come to a stop earlier then originally planned results in g forces on the crew that are potentially fatal.Even if they wanted they couldn´t stop and fight.
Or you simply garrison some mechs planetside near the few strategic locations worth guarding, at a fraction of the cost.

Realistically though, that doesn't make sense either...

Most ppl probably are aware that atmospheric entry is a well calculated affair

Wrong entry approach and... well.. you turn into a fireball, even if you are a sufficiently tough object, that basically ends up with an object that is hurtling out of control through the atmosphere, and dropping at terminal velocity to the ground

Regardless if the dropship that is transgressing budge out of it's path or not, it needs 2 things:
1. remain structurally sound all the way through the atmospheric entry till it lands (if the cargo can airdrop or better still space drop then that cut a few miles to dozens of miles off the necessary flight path) so the force it contains can drop safely
2. possess enough thrust and control to actually LAND intact in the first place (being able to lift off again optional)

the dropship complete destruction was not required, since the moment it losses either of the above the dropship ceases to be credible threat (regardless of how tough the ship might be, they are all piloted by humans after all and humans have very low tolerance to being dropped at terminal velocity)

For the defender, there are 2 primary advantage they have especially if they have an actual combat space vessels:
1. They know the atmospheric entry path to land at any vital location in their planets are with it being their own home planet, how they choose to defend those path aside of the orbital lane control is up to them (they have plenty of choice, ranging from simple low tech to fairly advanced depending on what tech they have and what budget or time they have)

2. The attacker regardless of how tough the vessel might be, still can only accelerate to what human tolerance can handle

This limits their approach option and the window of opportunity to actually land before someone react to their presence.

Spoiler

Take for example if they just accelerate (at human tolerance) all the way starting from the jumpship drop off to near the planet orbit, they would probably be traveling pretty damn fast by the time they reach the planet and theoretically would zip by the defender before they realize it.

Only problem of course... is that they have to actually decelerate when reaching the planet to make the entry path, and how long it takes them to decelerate is proportional to how how long it takes them to accelerate in the first place assuming both are done at the very limit of human tolerance.

either they travel at high speed and thus necessitating powerful deceleration, both which lit an object like a flare given the background. If we assume their tech is extremely primitive they might miss the acceleration burn.

But they can't possibly miss the deceleration part.

or they travel at more nominal speed, which extends the flight time from jump into the system till entry to atmosphere but requires less deceleration (and obvious signature) possibly only at the entry path.

Gives them less obvious signs to detect, but on the other hand that means a giant dropship hulk is slowly traveling across, and if detected at any point (given the size, material and mass of even the smallest dropship, one literally have to be pretty blind sensor wise not to detect them) they are literal sitting duck until they can accelerate.

Incidentally, since you said short of another ship directly in it's path the dropship wouldn't budge... then logically the obvious course of action is to do PRECISELY that...

ship? no need for that, all you really need is something sufficiently massive that collision will make atmospheric entry lethal if not impossible.

Or, and this is what humanity have been doing in pretty much every war ever since the concept is understood centuries ago...

we mine the path (which we already know beforehand to begin with unless if they intend to drop in far away from anything of strategic value in the planet), if they don't budge from their approach entry... Boom... we get a pretty firework in the sky.... still have to figure out what to do with the pieces that drop but that's for another time.

if they do budge, the transgressing dropship have 2 options:
1. calculate a new entry path, how much time and what entry path is still feasible depends on what path are open, how fast they are traveling, and more importantly... what kind of forces are gunning them.

2. abort the entry path and gain distance from the planet (which opens more options for entry path attempt but gives even more time for the defender to intercept him assuming he isn't intercepted already by that point)

Just as intercepting a space object isn't simple (that's indeed the case), entry to a planet armed with a fleet is EVEN more difficult since the planet itself presents another barrier for the aggressor with the intention to land to overcome, and mistake in any part either ends up with a failed run, or being vaporized in atmosphere...

Spoiler

Incidentally, something to note as well is that when comparing it with sea or space detection we currently have there is one crucial things missing from the comparison.

ie: the background which is what the problem usually is.

in our sea detection for example, the problem that necessitates a lot of eyes or ships to cover the sea is the simple fact that we can't just scan the ocean with radar and expect good coverage since the sea itself being the background plus the earth curvature presents a problem with the radar being also reflected off the ocean and complicating the process

without a sufficient height and sensor quality to discern a ship from the background sea reflection... this is indeed a difficult affair

Similarly, space object detection we have primarily are aimed at detecting objects in space that literally have next to no energy emission

we are trying to pick up a dead cold rock in space or a dead cold satellite, debris or wreck against equally cold (for system range anyway) space as the background, it's not surprising why it's difficult to do so.

The problem for the aggressor dropship... is that unlike in the sea case, they have nothing as background to mask them since they are a multi hundred or thousand tons of metallic mass hulk with thruster and power against the cold space

and unlike our space detection case, they are not dead cold against the background given the power they need to remain operational (and to keep their crew alive), but especially so when they accelerate in any fashion, which is a literal flare against the cold background.

[Theodor Kling]

I think you still underestimate the size of a planet. Controll of the still many entry vectors for landing right next to let´s say an important industrial complex, is already hard. At least without surface to orbit weapons, which seem there, but rare in BT. Mines are a possibility, but space mines and BT don´t go togehter well. Probably because you would all of them to be geostationary.
This is still a wide area to cover. Atmospheric entry needs a certain angle. Even if this holds true for Drophships ( which I doubt, see further down) this leaves a ring of posible entry points. The shallower the needed angle, the bigger the ring. And if there is a variation of the angle due to speed ( is there? don´t know) then you get an even wider area to cover.

And Drophships might be less restricted then our current spacecraft when it comes to that. For one their lower side is made to withstand the stray radiation of giant fusion torches firering from them for days without stopping. So they should be pretty resistant. And furthermore there should be some effect of those fusion torches in themselves when entering an atmoshpere. For that we would need someone better at plasma physics I suppose. Maybe they are actually able to plunge straight in? Maybe they can, and also "traditional" entry, but nothing inbetween because entering in the wrong angle with engines firering makes things worse.. yep..we need somoeone who knows more about this to tell us this.

Moving a dropship of your own directley into the path should be easier, even with BT computers ( they can´t even give a decent targeting on an Atlas only 1km away, moving at 50kh ...have fun calculating the exact path of a dropship in interplanetary distances). But this works only if you happen to have more then the attacker, or else they might simply risk the collision, to clear a path. Might also leed to developent of dedicated ramming ships made to withsthand such collision formin the spearhead of an attack. Actually this might look interesting

And the next big problem is: Even if you block the aproach vectors that lead directley to your base, the enemy could simply land somewhere else, and go the rest by land. Without naval forces they should aim to land on the same continent as their target, but that´s still a pretty large area, with an even larger entry area.

You are right: You don´t need to destroy a ship to make it unfit for planetary landing. But you still need to dish out serious damage agaisnt something fast, potentially several thousands of k away. There BT's notrious bad targeting and accuracy comes again. Detecting a ship is easy, hitting it not so. Actually it should be, a fully loaded dropship is not exactley nimble, so using energy weapons you should be able to hit it probably lightminutes away. But then again.. if you can´t hit an Atlas at 1km...

And to honor the original topic of this thread: They have the technology to make pretty big ships accelerate at several g, but guided weapons? Way beyond them!

Edit: Your turn again. I like this.

Edited by Theodor Kling, 04 April 2013 - 10:31 PM.

[Melcyna]

Technically dedicated ramming ship is not necessary... just a dedicated weapon to do so (and the entire they can't figure out how to work out remote weapon signal is even more ludicrous), logically the weapon depending on the approach vector may not even need to be that fast... because with the correct vector, the dropship's speed works against it

and similarly if we have a geostationary mine or satellite for example, these objects are ALREADY traveling at extremely high speed... if we presume enough propellant charge in one to maintain course to an intercept pattern (it would probably need it to maintain altitude at least as much as needed to ensure interception as it breaks geosync orbit) then we're looking at an object slamming the dropship at speed of 3km/s for an earth based planet...

warhead or no... we're looking at either hull decompression from the breach if the object is sufficiently dense but still small in relation to the dropship size... or pulverizing effect if it's sufficiently massive... either of which will compromise it's landing attempt.

this of course assumes there's enough of them in orbit pattern that there will be one available to reroute on intercept course of the dropship for a given drop attempt... if we think in 2D for example, we need at least 2 assuming the drop can be done within one orbit cycle of the weapon. in 3D this gets a hell a lot more complicated of course (including plotting the intercept course) but ultimately the amount of them needed would depend on how big the planet is, and how fast the dropship is performing the reentry which fortunately is STILL limited to human acceleration limit (whereas the weapon does not)

The weapon does not need to be particularly destructive either... it only needs to be sufficiently dense and thus automatically destructive enough when colliding at several kilometer per second to the dropship that upon impact it imparts enough energy to the dropship that stable atmospheric entry path is not controllable anymore

Let's assume next that the dropship exhaust at least are capable of withstanding the pressure from earth class atmosphere of uncontrolled descent (less issue naturally with planet with less or non existent atmosphere, and vice versa)

This would then work under the assumption that the dropship is capable of orientating itself and maintain this attitude for the descent.

Note that for it to land it needs to maintain this capability all the way till it touched the ground safely... regardless if the dropship is intact or not on a crash, the occupant inside are much less resistant to it... and if they are all dead then the drop is as much of a failure as it would be if they were destroyed en route.

With their spherical design in particular it presents another problem in that the very same exhaust that are shielding them from the atmosphere is the very same exhaust that ejects the propulsion of their primary drive.... which is to say that once the dropship orientate itself for atmospheric entry, it's capability to accelerate in any direction is for all intent and purpose practically minimal if not existent except in 1 axis... ie: either slowing down on it's current path or accelerating.

we're looking at a multi hundred or thousands of tons of mass here moving in perfectly predictable path...

the only way for it to produce acceleration of any great magnitude would be to orientate the main drive towards it, but whichever way it orientate other than it's current path, it would mean part of it's hull and armor other than the exhaust would be taking the atmospheric entry pressure directly head on.

Targeting wise, we come across a paradox as well... ie: if their targeting capability for space faring objects etc are so poor equivalent to their practically NON EXISTENT targeting solution on the ground... then the very same computer should not logically be able to compute atmospheric entry path and also wouldn't be able to compute intercept course of course for theoretical orbiting intercept weapon.

[Imagine Dragons]

Why the hell would I need to arm my dropships and jumpships for?

I mean, what the hell are all these areospace fighters in my hangar for anyway?

Why would the Houses go backwards in navy spacy development?






Suddenly I feel like Billy Mitchell yelling at the USN back in the 1920s...

[Theodor Kling]

Melcyna, on 04 April 2013 - 11:39 PM, said:

Technically dedicated ramming ship is not necessary... just a dedicated weapon to do so (and the entire they can't figure out how to work out remote weapon signal is even more ludicrous), logically the weapon depending on the approach vector may not even need to be that fast... because with the correct vector, the dropship's speed works against it
[...]
which is to say that once the dropship orientate itself for atmospheric entry, it's capability to accelerate in any direction is for all intent and purpose practically minimal if not existent except in 1 axis... ie: either slowing down on it's current path or accelerating.

we're looking at a multi hundred or thousands of tons of mass here moving in perfectly predictable path...

Targeting wise, we come across a paradox as well... ie: if their targeting capability for space faring objects etc are so poor equivalent to their practically NON EXISTENT targeting solution on the ground... then the very same computer should not logically be able to compute atmospheric entry path and also wouldn't be able to compute intercept course of course for theoretical orbiting intercept weapon.

I am fully aware that it is paradox can´t hit a near stationary target at ranges well below modern amour engagement ranges, but controll engines capable of interplanetary flight and controlled planetary landing.

And problems with your supposed orbital wepons are: you
-need a lot of them. space big, potential enmies many
-need them to be fast., because although a big slow one would also do enough damge it got two problems: close to the planets dropships are near the end of their decalaration phase, so their speed doesn't work against them that much anymoe. And you want to avoid flak fire intended to destroy them.
Said flak fire is less of a problem is you realy hit them at the drive end, next to no weapons point that way. But then you get the problem of trying to get a projectile though engine fire that is powerfull enough to provide several g of thrust for a massive dropship.

And of course BT strange guided/smart weapons problems, that go so well to gether with their targeting , sensors and generaly everything remoteley computer related.

Xenomorphs post reminded me also of another problem: Dropships are tough. The heavier fighters have enough firepower to blast whole assault lances to oblivion if they land direct hits, but need several passes at dropships to do serious dmg.
So you need serious firepower to stop them.
So warheads are in order for mines as well, further increasing the cost.

As to "ramming ships" : I meant them for attackers, not defenders. A way to break blockship blockades.

But you mentioning the (near) 1D manuverability brought me to another idea: Although evasion is relativeley easy in space, once in atmoshere it is not. So ground based weapons should be able to have quite some effect. Since those are easy to stabilize making them powerfull enough should be easier then in space. You also need less of them in coparison to mines or ships.
Sounds great until BT targeting systems come along.. they probably wouldn´t even hit a dropship that can´t evade thier fire

[Melcyna]

Realistically, we don't actually need that many orbiting weapon... or in this case mines, and they can't possibly be slow...

in case you forgot, if the mine is in a geosync orbit it's traveling at over 3km/s on earth sized planet

take an earth sized planet as a base case study for example

Spoiler

a geosynchronous orbit mine (could be geostationary if necessary if they know where the approach vector is) under no power is already traveling at least at 3km/s, for this single mine to reach the furthest point it needs to cover by itself for an earth sized planet... assuming it travels no faster than it's current orbiting speed it would take it a day... assuming the mine needs to come to direct contact to the target (no carrier mines, for simplicity... the military have thought long and hard on these concepts and actually have various way to make them far more lethal and effective but for the moment let's skip them for another day)

not a good figure right? presumably a dropship can do the whole process in less than that... i think...

That's under the assumption that it does not accelerate any faster of course, ie: simply using thrusters for orbit correction... if we assume the mine perform full burn upon detection to maximum acceleration possible with it's thrusters and go in the shortest possible path, we should be able to cut that figure down significantly at the cost of running low of propulsion potentially for final correction and that's with one mine placed in geosynchronous orbit.

But that's not all... what's stopping us from putting a mine in low orbit?

take one mine place it in low earth orbit orbiting at over 7km/s and with tighter orbit and the same mine can reach any point of entry to the planet in 1.5 hour under worst case scenario

that's before the mine accelerate any faster with it's own thrusters

take 2 of said mine and well.. you can see how the window of opportunity for any ship to actually enter an earth sized planet diminishes VERY quickly with just less than handful of orbiting objects.

take 4 of said mines place 2 in geosync orbit and 2 in low earth orbit and we'll have to start questioning how exactly a dropship that can only decelerate at the limit of human endurance is supposed to slip in

that's with... 4 mines...

This all of course under assumption of earth sized planet, but we also assumes for simplicity that the mines are no more complicated than standard direct impact missile effectively... except quite significantly larger, realistically we've already figured out a long time ago how to make interception weapon far more effective than just simply ramming or direct impact.

Orbiting weapons, by virtue of the fact that they are orbiting on the planet itself... cannot possible be slow... they are traveling at such high speed in fact that collision of substantial mass would pretty much pulverize objects... hence why space debris is a lethal threat and potentially fatal to any space program.

Furthermore, since they are orbiting weapons, they are subject to FAR LESS mass restriction than atmospheric weapons and this applies to orbiting gun stations or missile satellite as well, and not just orbiting mines or missiles (nothing stops us from creating a mine the size of the dropship itself for extreme example).

on planet surface with standard gravity, a massive weapon requires substantial effort to move properly to bear on target, the same mass still requires sufficient acceleration to move of course in space orbit especially with limited time but unlike on earth we can still orient a multi thousand tons mass with the smallest thrusters provided there's enough time whereas the same effort would not even budge it on earth

So in space, we in fact have less limitation on the weapon size that we can put on orbit (not to mention it gets a much wider field of fire and no pesky atmospheric interference which hampers lasers in particular), again... depending on the size of the planet, the orbit of said weapon can be adjusted as necessary anywhere from geosync (if we absolutely want the weapon to remain on the same relative position) or orbiting rapidly across the planet in lower orbit if that's not necessary.

incidentally, firepower? no problem... Low Earth Orbit object? that's over 7km/s... over 25000km/h before further acceleration

take any sufficient mass smack it to a dropship at that speed... and well.. the result is self explanatory

XenomorphZZ, on 05 April 2013 - 06:31 AM, said:

Why the hell would I need to arm my dropships and jumpships for?

I mean, what the hell are all these areospace fighters in my hangar for anyway?

Why would the Houses go backwards in navy spacy development?






Suddenly I feel like Billy Mitchell yelling at the USN back in the 1920s...

A good point, which technically falls under arming the dropship...

the difference of course being that instead of arming it with missiles or guns, it's armed with fighters instead...

in either case, similar to our navy the primary point there is that the dropship is used as a means to ATTACK another space vessel... not as a troop transporter which never makes sense in an interstellar warfare with the absence of warships.

to be fair though for Mitchell, he lived in the era when the longest range weapon the ships had was to be delivered via the largest gun that was excessively cumbersome for naval vessel, in his case it was far more practical to reach out the enemy with aircrafts and thus aircraft carriers than battleships with guns.

fast forward to modern days and things shifted quite a bit, aircraft technically are more lethal than ever with guided weapons, but so are naval vessels and smaller warships loaded to bear with guided missiles have become ironically a more cost effective anti naval force than the large carriers reversing the role 50 years ago.

Edited by Melcyna, 05 April 2013 - 10:10 AM.

[Kissamies]

Probably has been mentioned already, but weapons that have the pathetic ranges of few hundred meters on ground have range of kilometers in air and tens of thousands kilometers in space. The ridiculous explanation for this is that the heat sinks work better for aerospace fighters flying through air in high speeds and even better in space, because you know: it's cold in space

[Theodor Kling]

Hmm so you actually can do with less mines. Still wouldn´t work for two reasons: You assume the mines hit the drophsip from the side. Where the weapons are thickest. The bigger, and more lethalthe mine is, the easier it is to shoot it down. Or maybe not, BT targeting systems

But every obribital minig would need something BT lacks: a decent IFF system. Else you would stop ALL travel to that planet.

As for weapon ranges: Makes partial sense: Energy weapons with limited range due to absorbtion in atmosphere would't have that restriction in space. There only the focusing limtis your range, divergence of the beam would make it useless after a certain distance ( a problem less pronounced planetside, since high power lasers tend to be self focusing, long live non-linear optics).
Same goes for projectiles: No friction in space, and far less gravity too, so you baiscly get unlimited range, exept for accuracy issues. ( ever seen the nice lecture about it in Mass Effect 2? )

But that has nothing to do with HS effectivness.
Exept for fighters. The rushing air is far better at transporting heat away the nthe standing air aorund a mech. But if this reluts in higher ranges, this means you pump more energy int the weapons , which should also esult in higher short range dmg. Which is not mentioned anywhere.
Easier and more logical would be to use the added heat efficency to simply fire the same weapons as the mechs do..but more often.

[Morhadel]

there is a very simple explanation for all the things that seem backwards in BT. Centuries of Technological regression. If the original designers had not add in Tech regression then you would have a game where the team who fires first wins and that would be a boring game. And in the BT universe and in real life one of the most expensive things to put on a weapon of war is advanced fire control system.

Ex:
FIM-9 Stinger Missile (infrared seeker) $44,000 (IN 1989)
Javelin Missile (fire and forget AT missile) $145,000 (CLU + 1 FGM-148 missile)
Tow (Wire guided AT missile) $180,000 (launcher) $20,000(each missile)
Hydra 70 (unguided AT rocket developed in 1945 still in use today) less then $1,000 (each missile)
AT4 Anti-tank weapon (Single Use) $1,400
It costs around 2 million for the ballistic FCS of an M1 Abrams and that's to accurately aim a single weapon.

So I am shooting at a Mech with an Anit-missile system. which is more cost effective 20 missiles at $1,000 Each or 1 missiles at $20,000

LRM ammo 166 C-bills per missile
SRM ammo 270 C-bills per missile

Edited by Morhadel, 07 April 2013 - 02:55 PM.

[Melcyna]

If the whole goal is to breach the AMS, then the most logical action is for a FASTER MISSILE that can penetrate the defense layer before the AMS has a chance to shoot them down effectively rather than throwing sheer numbers of missiles in hope of overwhelming the AMS, in another word: the most cost effective solution logically is to have missiles resistant to the AMS (either through speed, jamming, or otherwise) rather than just firing as many cheap missiles as possible in hope of some penetrating through, alternatively for a lower profile missile (hence why we have smokeless rocket motor in missiles)

overwhelming by just sheer numbers doesn't make that much sense either because Anti Missile technology to overcome PRECISELY that kind of swarming tactics exist (very simple too), and unfortunately 20 smaller missiles vs 1 larger missiles typically means the smaller missiles have shorter effective range as well assuming they both have similar total mass.

And which is most cost effective? 20 missiles at 1000 each that miss, or 1 missile at 20000 that hits?

and similarly which do you think is more combat useful? 20 missiles that have a low chance of disabling it's target even if it does hit, or 1 missile that is powerful enough that a hit ensures effective kill if not disabling it?

This is one of the reason why modern warfare very much have focus on precision and lethality... (they technically have always been the focus, it's just that now we have an unreal level of it)

Spoiler

Technology regression unfortunately makes no sense in the context that BT uses them

for one, engineering produces schematic and documentation in every production step (BT apparently doesn't know any)

second, reverse engineering while not always capable of attaining the same level of tech as it was used to manufacture one, can close the gap very quickly (China being a master at it in our world) or at the very least produces the base knowledge necessary to develop them.

third, in BT they maintain and produce many things that logically requires knowledge and access to system that can produce the others.

Case in point with our previous banter, if you don't have a computer capable of making the most BASIC targeting solution for ground combat at point blank range (less than 1km) then one questions how on earth they have a computer that can handle atmospheric entry, handles celestial object parameter for intergalactic jump, etc..

There were some who argued in the past that they simply used automated factories for producing them and not know how exactly they work... it unfortunately doesn't address the 1st point, nor the second.

They attempted to address this somewhat with the Dark Age... you got mechs cannibalizing others defeated in the field to maintain them, etc... but it unfortunately made even less sense (the entire Dark Age is frankly a whole lots of mess of poor sci fi)

And advanced fire control system?? well to paint a picture of how poor BT is, we have combat ranges in excess of it in WW2 with guns, this mind you against target far harder to see and spot at distance than mechs.

Theodor Kling, on 07 April 2013 - 12:07 AM, said:

Hmm so you actually can do with less mines. Still wouldn´t work for two reasons: You assume the mines hit the drophsip from the side. Where the weapons are thickest. The bigger, and more lethalthe mine is, the easier it is to shoot it down. Or maybe not, BT targeting systems

But every obribital minig would need something BT lacks: a decent IFF system. Else you would stop ALL travel to that planet.

As for weapon ranges: Makes partial sense: Energy weapons with limited range due to absorbtion in atmosphere would't have that restriction in space. There only the focusing limtis your range, divergence of the beam would make it useless after a certain distance ( a problem less pronounced planetside, since high power lasers tend to be self focusing, long live non-linear optics).
Same goes for projectiles: No friction in space, and far less gravity too, so you baiscly get unlimited range, exept for accuracy issues. ( ever seen the nice lecture about it in Mass Effect 2? )

But that has nothing to do with HS effectivness.
Exept for fighters. The rushing air is far better at transporting heat away the nthe standing air aorund a mech. But if this reluts in higher ranges, this means you pump more energy int the weapons , which should also esult in higher short range dmg. Which is not mentioned anywhere.
Easier and more logical would be to use the added heat efficency to simply fire the same weapons as the mechs do..but more often.

IFF... which incidentally we had since WW2

IFF you see is nothing complicated (assuming BT had an ounce of a brain)

all combatants in the field of the weapon are expected to broadcast their IFF signals, it squawks and the weapon analyze it, and determine if it's correct signal code or not...

if it's not... it's a foe, if it's correct it's a friend and if it doesn't broadcast ANY IFF signal then it's automatically a foe
(hence why entering a combat field with no IFF is suicidal)

there's of course a whole process involved in analyzing the signal itself which is encoded but that's basically the simple view of it.

if the IFF fails to be parsed, then the mine assumes it's a foe and heads directly to it... at 25000 km/h (good luck aiming the dropship defense weapon at that) and that's without the mine itself performing full burn acceleration, assuming a mine in low orbit of earth sized planet.

and the dropship weapon doesn't really matter either...

Spoiler

aside of the fact that BT has chronically short weapon range... the BT weapon are horribly out of whack when it comes to it's effect in regard to how much energy it's supposed to impart, ie: weapons that are supposed to be dishing out energy measured in multi hundred Mega Joules for battlemechs (equivalent of bunker buster) are barely doing any real damage to the environment.. and armor capable of withstanding these somehow buckle from low stress pressure of relatively low mass and speed collision.

the short range basically means that even if the mine is shot down (somehow)... unless the mine is completely vaporized, the dropship is still looking at a sizable mass of wreck with volatile material potentially... flying at it at hypersonic speed

This is the same problem naval ships on earth faces with their close range anti missile defenses... if you can't shoot the hostile anti ship missile down from safe distance or PULVERIZE it then whatever is left of it is still potentially heading towards you at high speed and will still do catastrophic damage as it smash into you at high speed.

The abnormal BT weapon effect on the other hand means that the chances of them actually vaporizing the mine or rendering it harmless with their weapon's already short range is highly unlikely.

Edited by Melcyna, 07 April 2013 - 10:18 PM.

[Morhadel]

My Point befor was about game machanics and the reason they chose to justify it. BT universe cheaper is better. In the modern military naval vessels one of the main proponents of AMS. Currently if you where to attack a unit with AMS you start by using 1-4 salvos of HARMs (high-speed anti radiation missiles), thats 4 to 8 missiles at 300,000 a missile, because you have to saturate the targets defence, just to take out the AMS. Then we fire the missiles that kill. We do that because we value life. 30 million aircraft or the pilot, modern US military chooses the pilot. Remember in the 30th century life is cheap. Its why the pilot is in the most unprotected part of the mech.
So if i dont care if the pilot i hired lives but im trying to keep cost down, AM I going to spend in upwards of a million c-bills just to take out the enemy AMS?
Or am I going to have them shoot 300 missile that saturate the target and destorys it for a fraction of the cost.

Edited by Morhadel, 08 April 2013 - 05:48 AM.

[Melcyna]

Firing HARMs towards the target is essentially an attempt to NEUTRALIZE the missile defense

this is substantially different mind you than just overwhelming by sheer numbers because when you simply overwhelm them by sheer numbers, there is no guarantee that the missile defense is down... whereas with Air Defense System suppression mission it's the whole objective of it, you want to neutralize and take out their defenses so you can then follow up with subsequent missions to hit the REAL target in relative safety now that it's missile defense is out of action.

To put things into perspective...

if we take a fleet in the navy which is where one of the densest anti missile system currently exist, we throw in salvos of Anti Ship Missiles towards them for several purposes...

1. is indeed to help overload their defense mechanism
2. to ensure a kill because NO ONE can afford to risk the target surviving the salvo

but note that all this is done with EACH MISSILE already being made as hard as possible to intercept by employing every means, be it flying as long as possible, firing from multiple angle (standard russian anti ship missile attack pattern with aircraft), or having a VERY VERY fast missile not to mention that each of them are also VERY cost effective for their job, take HARM for example... HARM were designed to ensure that the target radar is silenced permanently even if it shuts the radar emitter down... and advanced ASM can retarget a new target on the fly in the event the old target is destroyed or otherwise further ensuring that an ASM salvo does the most effective damage possible and no wasted missiles.

in another word.... they already made sure that the missile is cost effective for the task it does.


to elaborate, if we take fleet vs fleet duel... the longer the target ship is alive the more chances he has to launch his own volley and therefore it's imperative that the target destruction be ASSURED as soon as possible.

aside of that, in a fleet vs fleet duel... the best possible chance for a killing blow is the first volley since it takes time to reload the tubes assuming it's a magazine based, while for VLS tube missiles there are less missiles for second volley etc after each volley launched... which means the best possible chance of killing the target is to make the first salvo as powerful as possible.

So it's not really just a question of life...

it's more of a question of EFFECTIVENESS and the risk taken as well... and no one wants to lose their fleet, so obviously the enemy fleet has to be neutralized first asap.

Note that in this regard, the US technically is significantly behind with missile capability as their Harpoon is substantially less lethal than the russian Sunburn for example

The Russians notably realizing the gap between their navy fleet and the US navy had developed extensive work towards lethal anti ship missiles as a counterbalance to their weaker surface navy. One of such result is that the Russians essentially have a mature family of supersonic (soon to be hypersonic) anti ship missiles... and in every US navy planning, this is one of the headache they had to consider (the Russians sold the base model around especially to china which is yet another headache...)

Ultimately, this is what one expects when developing missiles to penetrate anti missile defenses...

not by mere sheer numbers, but by ensuring that the missiles are as DIFFICULT to intercept... and as LETHAL as possible that even one is sufficient to knock the target out.

in the US case, they did not merely overwhelm the defense either... they NEUTRALIZE the defenses first then they deliver the payload towards the target they really want

Either of them are in direct contrast to mere cheap missiles swarming as an attempt to overload anti missile defense...

Which incidentally would be rendered completely WORTHLESS if this BT missile volley is fired in one massive dense salvo by a SINGLE proximity fused area denial munition that would vaporize all of them at once.

Edited by Melcyna, 08 April 2013 - 08:08 PM.

[Theodor Kling]

Melcyna, on 07 April 2013 - 06:36 PM, said:

IFF... which incidentally we had since WW2

IFF you see is nothing complicated (assuming BT had an ounce of a brain)

all combatants in the field of the weapon are expected to broadcast their IFF signals, it squawks and the weapon analyze it, and determine if it's correct signal code or not...

if it's not... it's a foe, if it's correct it's a friend and if it doesn't broadcast ANY IFF signal then it's automatically a foe
(hence why entering a combat field with no IFF is suicidal)

there's of course a whole process involved in analyzing the signal itself which is encoded but that's basically the simple view of it.

if the IFF fails to be parsed, then the mine assumes it's a foe and heads directly to it... at 25000 km/h (good luck aiming the dropship defense weapon at that) and that's without the mine itself performing full burn acceleration, assuming a mine in low orbit of earth sized planet.

and the dropship weapon doesn't really matter either...

Not saying that the lack of IFF recognition in BT weapons means them to be behind our own tech level Just saying they lack in that department.
BUT I found a great way to circumvent that for you mines. As far as I understood ti BT's main problem with that is not the IFF itself ( they have that in mechs for example), but the minitaurisation of such systems to fit them into missile warheads. Since your mines are far bigger then the average LRM you should be able to fith in an IFF system even with BT tech.

And although I agree dropship weapons probably won´t hit your mine, if they do it is probably neutralized. Their armour is tough enough to withstand the shrapnell I think. I will leave them vulnerable to subsequent attacks, but not uncapable of plantery landing. This is a personal estimate of course.

To missiles: Yeah I allways wondered why BT missiles where so inacurate and so many small ones. Looks cooler then one bigger missile though
I also never understood the SRM/MRM/LRM distinction. Someone making it thought so too it seems, else they wouldn´t have introduced the long overdue MMLs

[alexivy]

in the future, people create a fictional world in which soldiers beat each other with blunt objects, stab each other with sharp ones, and, impossibly, ride hairy quadrupeds into battle. they all **** and moan, claiming no one could ever be dumb enough to march in a straight line through gunfire.

[Illydth]

Quietly Crazy, on 03 August 2012 - 09:22 PM, said:

Lunar, I believe you're talking about the Ares conventions...if I recall correctly (and I probably don't), the basic point of it was to reduce losses to basic industry and civilian life. Which is why most of the battles took place in the middle of forests or plains or deserts or canyons.

Sorry if this has already been posted, but I thought I'd jump in on this one.

The Ares conventions came down because of the history of the BT Universe. Once man took to the stars with our current technology (and perhaps significantly better than we have now) they went to war against each other.

In the first and second wars of succession, combat went pretty much like you'd expect world war three to go for us today...WMDs, massive destruction, complete lack of care for collateral damage.

The result was that after the second succession war, humanity had LITERALLY bombed itself back to the stone age...or at least the pre-computer renaissance we enjoy today. The scientists, thinkers and military minds of the age had been killed along with their gear, production capabilities, understanding of the technology, and much of the infrastructure to support and build the systems we take for granted today. Even the most basic things like Radar and Guidance Systems were considered lost technology (Lostech).

The Ares Conventions weren't necessarily about protecting the citizens of the inner sphere (though it was understood that wholesale destruction of the populace was a contributing factor to the dark age of civilization they were in, and parts of the Ares Conventions did separate military from civilian), they were about protecting what little technology was left to the people in the stars. When you were down to a mere handful of jumpships and only a few factories still capable of producing those ships (and what you do have becoming centuries old) humanity itself realized that it was truly on the brink of the inability to travel or communicate across the stars.

As happens with humanity, the farther from the point of danger we get, the less we feel the rules should apply. That perspective is brought forth in the BT History very well. When we are first introduced to BT in The Sword and the Dagger, and through the entire series of the Gray Death Legion (Before finding the core), battlemechs are treated almost reverently and certainly as lostech themselves...most techs have no idea how to repair battlemechs, only to patch them up and make some systems works correct.

As the series goes on, you see more and more abuses of the Ares Conventions as technology and understanding of it improves...a VERY Human mentality.

Quietly Crazy, on 03 August 2012 - 09:22 PM, said:

Lunar, I believe you're talking about the Ares conventions...if I recall correctly (and I probably don't), the basic point of it was to reduce losses to basic industry and civilian life. Which is why most of the battles took place in the middle of forests or plains or deserts or canyons.

Sorry if this has already been posted, but I thought I'd jump in on this one.

The Ares conventions came down because of the history of the BT Universe. Once man took to the stars with our current technology (and perhaps significantly better than we have now) they went to war against each other.

In the first and second wars of succession, combat went pretty much like you'd expect world war three to go for us today...WMDs, massive destruction, complete lack of care for collateral damage.

The result was that after the second succession war, humanity had LITERALLY bombed itself back to the stone age...or at least the pre-computer renaissance we enjoy today. The scientists, thinkers and military minds of the age had been killed along with their gear, production capabilities, understanding of the technology, and much of the infrastructure to support and build the systems we take for granted today. Even the most basic things like Radar and Guidance Systems were considered lost technology (Lostech).

The Ares Conventions weren't necessarily about protecting the citizens of the inner sphere (though it was understood that wholesale destruction of the populace was a contributing factor to the dark age of civilization they were in, and parts of the Ares Conventions did separate military from civilian), they were about protecting what little technology was left to the people in the stars. When you were down to a mere handful of jumpships and only a few factories still capable of producing those ships (and what you do have becoming centuries old) humanity itself realized that it was truly on the brink of the inability to travel or communicate across the stars.

As happens with humanity, the farther from the point of danger we get, the less we feel the rules should apply. That perspective is brought forth in the BT History very well. When we are first introduced to BT in The Sword and the Dagger, and through the entire series of the Gray Death Legion (Before finding the core), battlemechs are treated almost reverently and certainly as lostech themselves...most techs have no idea how to repair battlemechs, only to patch them up and make some systems works correct.

As the series goes on, you see more and more abuses of the Ares Conventions as technology and understanding of it improves...a VERY Human mentality.

[PaintedWolf]

The Taurians one-hundred percent refused to see any of their use of WMDs as war-crimes until the Roughriders went through their lands and applied their own tactics against them.

Then in peace negotiations they ranted endlessly and belligerently about "war criminals" and "war crimes". It is amazing how fast people change when the shoes go on the other foot- before the enemy was acting foolish by not doing everything they could to win- but after they get sucker punched, all of a sudden rules become paramount, and "geez guys let's not take it too far okay."

Unfortunately, that is what it takes sometimes otherwise the enemy might just interpret you as weak and decide it is okay for them to make endless amounts of attacks which obey no rules of civility at all. Rules only hold so long as both parties agree to certain standards, once one-sided starts abandoning standards and ignores warnings, then there have to be consequences or the other side will renege all future rules and agreements.

People follow the Ares Conventions because they were smart enough to realize, unfortunately the hard way, that if one does not act in accordance with rules, one is not protected by said rules. The Taurians and Blakists decided that they could afford to eschew ALL rules of engagement, and the Blakists paid the ultimate price while the Taurians were crippled so bad they could no longer protect their own people from pirates and raiders.

It would be wise if various rogue nations and radical political parties were able to learn from fictional examples, but unfortunately they seem heck bent on seeing any kind of boundaries as something that can be completely ignored and all civilians as targets.

The difference is I doubt the Blakists and Taurians would have been dumb enough to ignore the threats of the SLDF. Well the Taurians did I guess, and that is why the Periphery is the backwater it is two-hundred years after the Reunification Wars:

Quote

Campaign Against the Taurian Concordat

At the outset of the Reunification War the SLDF focused its efforts on the Taurian Concordat, the strongest and most advanced of the Periphery states. With assistance provided by the AFFS, SLDF Corps I, III, IV and VI were tasked with the pacification of the Hyades Cluster. The day after receiving the Pollux Proclamation, Protector Mitchell Calderon placed the TDF on high alert, and all Taurian defense industries increased production. With hostile forces massing on the Taurian border, the Concordat Defense Board devised the defensive strategy Case Amber, in 2576.
[edit] Taurian Tactics

Faced with overwhelming odds, the Taurian Concordat fought the invaders through a combination of regular and irregular tactics. Irregular tactics on planet surfaces included (but were not limited to) scorched earth defenses; surprise attacks (even concealed on open ground); insurgency bombings; mass poisonings; assassinations; passive resistance demonstrations; and herding placing BattleMechs and combat vehicles through strategic placement of unarmed civilians, in preparation for saturation artillery shelling.

In space combat, guerrilla tactics were even more extreme. Within Flannagan's Nebula, the large debris field was laced with laser batteries; each laser battery required clearance by infantry in zero gravity - BattleMechs, Aerospace Fighters, and naval assets were useless within the debris fields of Flannagan's Nebula. Soldiers clad in environmental suits from abandoned ships would float in the void to nearby hostile ships, and, in tandem with kamikaze attacks, would penetrate the hull and commandeer the ship. The Taurian navy also used "fire ships", ships packed with explosives, to deliver devastating kamikaze attacks.
[edit] Case Amber

In 2577, the TDF implemented "Case Amber". On the eve of the invasion, the AFFS fleet and invasion force assembled in the As Samik and Naka Pabni systems. Taurian ships garrisoning nearby systems started to depart, and radio communications traffic suggested these departures were intended to bolster a reserve fleet. Convinced that no such fleet existed, Admiral Sarah Vincent split her forces and engaged a small Taurian fleet in the Tentativa system. In her absence, a massive Taurian force jumped into the Panpour system, destroying the AFFS rear armada. When word reached Admiral Vincent of the sneak attack, Vincent ordered her ships to withdraw. On route to the Jump point, a second Taurian fleet emerged from hiding in the system and ravaged the Federated Suns assault group. By the conclusion of Case Amber, the AFFS had lost more than twenty-four warships/jumpships, while the TDF had lost only three. Though the ground forces of the AFFS remained unscathed, they were effectively stranded due to lack of transportation.
[edit] Wexworth's Invasion

Early in 2578, the SLDF, commanded by General Charles Mainstein Wexworth, commenced its invasion of the Taurian Concordat. Wexworth conducted a cautious advance through Taurian territory, for several reasons:

• the Star League wanted the Concordat's industry left intact
  
• 
  
• minimizing casualties
  
• 
  
• the TDF had demonstrated its prowess through the immobilization of the AFFS
  
• 
  
• Wexworth desired victory to advance his social standing in the Terran court

Wave one involved the simultaneous invasions of Taurian systems. All told, the naval engagements cost the SLDF three ships and the TDF four vessels.

• I Corps advanced into Ridgebrook, but was stalled; the 2nd and 15th Taurian Fortress Battalions held Ridgebrook for 4 months. The Corps then moved to the Wrentham system, where the 7th and 12th Regulars took heavy casualties.
  
• 
  
• III Corps advanced into the agricultural world of Keuterville, and was defeated on the open plains.

Wave two began in 2580. Naval engagements result in the destruction of fifteen Star League and thirteen Taurian ships.

• IV Corps attacked the Pleiades Cluster, with simultaneous operations on Electra, Maia, Merope and Lothair. The 28th Diomede Regulars took heavy casualties on Maia; the 40th Gordon Regulars and the 18th Light Horse were fought to a standstill on Lothair.
  
• 
  
• VI Corps took Anaheim, but made little headway in the wake of an insurgent uprising.

Wave three occurred in 2581. Wave three witnessed the two largest naval engagements of the Reunification War. In total, the Star League navy lost around 50 vessels ships (~33%), but the remainder of the Taurian navy (~100 ships) was either destroyed or forced to return home for repairs. The remnants of the Taurian navy required three years to recover from the third wave.

• I Corps landed in the northern industrial centers of the planet Flintoft, only to be bombed by conventional aircraft.
  
• 
  
• III Corps assaulted Robsart. Before landing on the surface, the SL navy suffered heavy casualties. In retaliation, Admiral Janissa Franklin ordered an orbital bombardment, killing 30,000 civilians. The Robsart Bombardment became a rallying cry for the TDF throughout the remainder of the war.
  
• 
  
• IV Corps advanced on Brusett, where the 16th and 19th Tamara Regulars were decimated by poison dust.
  
• 
  
• AFFS advanced on the agricultural world of Weippe, and industrial world of Pierce. On Weippe, food stores were torched before they could be captured by the AFFS. On Pierce, the 107th Light Cavalry took heavy casualties after insurgents set off demolitions in the capital.
  
• 
  
• Deifenbaker was taken in the only infantry-infantry engagement in the entire war. The Corigan "hills", overlooking the capital, were too rugged for 'Mech combat. The 88th Light Horse took the hills, suffering over 5,000 casualties in the process.

[edit] Case Black


Unpleased with General Wexworth's lack of progress in the Hyades Cluster, and appalled by the number of casualties, the SLDF High Command recalled IV and VI Corps, and replaced Wexworth with General Amalthia Kincaid. Gravely injured early in her career, Kincaid was an "armchair MechWarrior" with cunning strategic skills, and demonstrated her competence with a successful completion of wave four in 2582. During the fourth wave, the SLDF conquered Horsham with little collateral damage and living prisoners taken, while the recently created XI Corps took Bromhead and Rollis.

In repsonse, Taurian Defense Command commenced "Case Black", a two-pronged strategy to stop the SLDF. The remnants of the Taurian navy engaged the Third Star League Fleet under Admiral Kristopher Minn. Drawing the fleet as far as Cohagen, Taurian commandos then infiltrated League-occupied space, and assassinated General Kincaid on the planet Firgrove on 3 June, 2583.
With General Kincaid dead, and fearful of the new "miracle weapon" used by the Taurian commandos, the SLDF floundered for more than a year before recommencing the Taurian invasion.
[edit] Total War

Kincaid was eventually replaced by General Amos Forlough, veteran of the ongoing war with the Outworlds Alliance. Forlough was unscrupulous, resolving to conduct a scorched-earth campaign against the Concordat. However, he failed to inform his superiors of his tactics (or, for that matter, any losses or atrocities committed). Discipline and defection became significant problems under the leadership of General Forlough; the SLDF instituted severe corporal punishments for any infractions committed against orders.

Forlough commenced wave five in 2584, favoring scorched-earth tactics against his adversaries. Caldwell and Warren quickly fell to the SLDF; all attempts to relieve the beleaguered worlds were thwarted by the Star League navy.
In order to prevent the complete destruction of the Concordat, Mitchell Calderon ordered his House regiments, thus far held in reserve, to bring war to the Star League. the Taurian Guard, the Concordat Velites and the Calderon Red Hand were deployed to Deifenbaker to destroy III Corps. Though most of the Taurian units were lost, III Corps was decimated, and unable to continue the invasion.

As Taurian resistance faded, Forlough pressed his advantage. Wave six occurred in 2585-2586.

• I Corps took Lindsay
  
• IV Corps took Carmichael
  
• the AFFS conducted a scorched earth campaigns against Montour, Sartu, and Mavegh. Attempting to relieve the planet Montour, the remaining Taurian fleet was trapped and destroyed by the Star League Fourth Fleet.

Wave seven (2587) was even more successful for the Star League, conquering Warren and the surrounding systems without resistance.


Early in 2588, Mitchell Calderon died of a heart attack. His daughter, Marantha Calderon, decided to withdraw all remaining Concordat forces into the Hyades Cluster and Flannagan's Nebula, and prepare for one last stand. The withdrawal of the TDF left New Vandenburg alone with a garrison of 5 regiments.

Seizing the opportunity, General Forlough assaulted New Vandenburg (2588-2589). I Corps landed on the planet uncontested, and proceeded to defoliate the northern continent. Unwilling to be drawn out, the Taurian garrison maintained its position in the city of Harmony near the defense industries. Frustrated, Forlough ordered I Corps to take Harmony by force. I Corps was met by an irregular mix of anti-BattleMech trained infantry, conventional vehicles and aircraft - and chemical weapons. Though ultimately successful, the SLDF required many months eliminating pockets of resistance from caves and tunnels throughout the planet, and took heavy casualties. Shortly after completion of the conquest of New Vandenburg, Director-General Ian Cameron removed the recently promoted Field Marshal Forlough from command, as he had destroyed too much of the Concordat's valuable industry.
[edit] The Final Waves

General Lord Damien Onaga replaced Field Marshall Forlough, and commenced Wave Eight in 2590. With virtually no resistance, Desolate Plains, Brockway and Midale fell to the Star League juggernaut. All that remained was penetrating Flannagan's Nebula, the asteroid field, and bringing war to the Hyades Cluster.

In order to accomplish this task, Lord Onaga deployed the elite Star Guard Corps in Wave Nine in 2591. The Star Guard was tasked with clearing Flannagan's Nebula. Fighting within the nebula was drawn out and brutal, with the SLDF requiring four full years to clear the Taurian defences. Asteroid laser emplacements were removed by zero-gravity infantry operations, as the debris was too dense for BattleMechs, Aerospace fighters, or capital ships.

With the SLDF poised for a final invasion of the Hyades Cluster, Protector Marantha Calderon surrendered rather than see the Hyades Cluster razed. The Taurian Defense Force and all irregular resistance lowered their arms on 22 September, 2596, after a simultaneous radio broadcast was transmitted throughout all worlds currently or previous held by the Taurian Concordat. The next morning, Protector Marantha committed suicide. Her remains were cremated, and her ashes scattered in space.

Quote

Aftermath

With the governments of the Periphery brought to heel, the Star League conferred Territorial State status in the Reunification Treaties. As Territorial States, the Periphery would be able to voice opinions before the Star League High Council. Further, Territorial States were obligated to pay taxes, including a tithe of soldiers towards the SLDF. Territorial States were allowed to conduct internal affairs, and Star League fiscal policies had to be ratified by the legislative councils of Territorial States. However, all Territorial States were non-voting members, so the Star League (at least in theory) could institute unpopular policies against the "Territories", and the council vote amounted to nothing more than a rubber stamp, giving the Star League an air of legitimacy.

Another result of the Reunification War was the "Second Invasion of the Periphery". After the armies of the Inner Sphere had destroyed the governments, industries and cultures of the major Periphery realms, the central governments of the Periphery were in shambles. This power vacuum resulted in the influx of many of the undesirable elements of the Inner Sphere. This migration did more to cripple the long-term growth of the Periphery than the Star League accomplished. Even as of 3050, the Taurian Concordat and the Outworlds Alliance still have not fully recovered from the economic and logistical nightmare caused by the mass immigration.

http://www.sarna.net...urian_Concordat

And so lay Carthage.

Edited by PaintedWolf, 09 April 2013 - 03:21 PM.

[PaintedWolf]

Quote

Star League Economics

From approximately 2600 to 2750, the major Periphery realms were forced to participate in the Star League High Council as non-voting Territorial States. Territorial States were forced to pay steep taxes, with little return. Those people who did not emigrate to new colonies were gravely mistreated by the heavy-handed economic policies of the Star League, policies which ultimately led to the death of many worlds after the demise of the Star League. Though the Periphery had been self-reliant for centuries, the Star League Bureau of Economics, Agriculture and Technology attempted to dissolve most of this independence to insure that the Periphery would never leave the Star League fold.

Through the creation of (mainly) short-lived "co-prosperity spheres" shortly after the Reunification War, systems were forced to specialize in a specific industry and rely on interstellar trade for everything else in order to survive. The intention was simple: if a world revolted, an embargo would pacify the world relatively quickly. Massively unsuccessful, the co-prosperity sphere resulted in more famines, unrest, lost production and outrage, and did little to avert revolt during the trying times following the Reunification War. The program ceased expansion in 2602, and was all but completely dissolved in 2612.

The Star League then turned its efforts to two resources it could control, energy and water. Using the economic might of the Inner Sphere, the Star League outcompeted nearly all domestic production of water purification equipment and power plant equipment. Less than 3% of these domestic industries survived until the fall of the Star League. The cessation of much of the interstellar trade late in the 28th century resulted in the demise of many worlds, unable to generate power or purify their own water. The crisis became so grim, neighboring Periphery systems began depredating each other in the event of a boom in industry, savaging industrial expansion and independence. Concerted efforts by several worlds or a larger, centralized governments, were also savaged; an Inner Sphere power would generally take interest, and raid the new facilities to alleviate their own crises.
[edit] Educational "Reforms"

Propaganda campaigns were also implemented, and nationalistic activities were at best frowned upon. Not limited to media, propaganda also included "higher educational reforms" in the 2670s, and "primary education reforms" in the 2680s. Though these reforms increased literacy and basic education through some sections of the Periphery, these reforms were really intended to inculcate Periphery denizens, attempting to increase loyalty to the Star League. The common student in a primary school would be forced through the following indoctrination daily:

• Pledge allegiance to the Star League and the First Lord
  
• Meditate on "the many benefits that the bountiful Star League has bestowed on us"
  
• Give a prayer of thanksgiving to the First Lord
  
• Turn to Terra to offer thanks

[edit] Migrations


The "Second Invasion of the Periphery", the migration of undesirables (including the poor and uneducated, anarchists, carpet baggers and speculators, and political and religious extremist), increased the economic burden on the already crippled, post-war Periphery economies, leading to even greater mistrust. Though some Periphery and Deep Periphery settlements were located well over 500 light years from Terra, it was during this "winter of our discontent" in which another outward migration commenced; this time, Periphery denizens decided to migrate even farther from Terra in order to escape the unwanted Star League.
[edit] Beyond the Stereotypes: the Periphery Denizen

Inner Sphere stereotypes of the Periphery are not altogether unwarranted, especially given the history of the Amaris Civil War. Today, many Periphery worlds are indeed little more than hideouts and havens for groups of criminals (bandits, pirates, assassins, renegades and deserters) or undesirables (misfits, expatriates, religious extremists and fanatics). Those who have resorted to violence and piracy often find it difficult to become legitimate. The lack of society and the presence of privateers makes interstellar trade quite dangerous, reducing the availability of needed supplies, which in turn forces locals to resort to more privateering in order to maintain their settlements - a clear vicious cycle.

For those who do not want to be found, the relative lack of centralized authority and communications in the Periphery is well suited to providing refuge or seclusion. For just such reasons, large corporate interests have also colonized or occupied Periphery worlds in hopes of conducting business beyond prying eyes and (sometimes) ethical constraints, a trend begun during the Territorial Period. During the Territorial Period, backwater Periphery worlds were used as testing grounds for the latest in Star League BattleTechnology (frequently to the terror of the local inhabitants).

Ironically, the fringe demographic of the Periphery was an unintended consequence of the Inner Sphere's Reunification War. Much of the fringe elements common in the Periphery emigrated between 2610 and 2680 during the "Second Invasion of the Periphery", a migration made possible by the lack of central governments (disrupted or destroyed by the Star League) and the removal of Star League garrisons.

http://www.sarna.net/wiki/Periphery

Edited by PaintedWolf, 09 April 2013 - 04:05 PM.

[Melcyna]

Neither of which technically makes much sense

As with all wars, the thinkers, scientists, and other ppl generally considered high value and thus indispensable are always placed in the most secure location the nation can put them at.. where they can still work.

for them to be annihilated means generally that the nation itself is more or less annihilated, and the situation such that they could not relocate them anywhere else safer.

The same applies with information and technology repository, along with administration control or database...

BT unfortunately have no concept of either...

And unlike the BT's concept... our WW3 in all likelihood is not a trade of WMD weapons, instead it's far more likely to be a trade of laser precision guided munitions obliterating every war asset with razor accuracy in order to keep as much infrastructure intact for subsequent takeover.

For BT to have destruction of such scale at the best of their technological height that collateral is everywhere means:
A. they got NON EXISTENT accuracy whatsoever even at that tech level
B. they have no concept of warfare other than general 'ATTACK' instead of a directed thrust to isolate and neutralize or force surrender of planets/territories.

And our real world politic is irrelevant to BT because BT has NON EXISTENT politic which governs how most nations (including rogue political power in our world) operates.

BT's politic can be summed up as: a 10 years old summer homework on how he thinks world politic works. Not that there are no 10 years old with great knowledge and acumen, but BT isn't one of them...

with Hanse Davion... probably the biggest fictional character joke of all of them... as far as fictional politic goes.