Prev: Re: New Armor Next: Re: New Armor

Base Destruction

From: "Jon Holloway" <jholloway@c...>
Date: Fri, 9 May 1997 05:13:23 -0400
Subject: Base Destruction

     Pearl Harbor, Hiroshima, etc.
     
     Well I think we all know by now that if you throw several million
tons 
     of dirt and ice at a immobile construct said construct will be 
     effectively neutralized.  Same for missile swarms vs. immobile 
     constructs. Maginot Lines do not work although they make for nice 
     tours. 
     
     I think that we also need to delineate the attack parameters much
more 
     clearly. So far we are assuming a clean attack with no
interference, 
     this IMHO is highly unlikely.  I can see where a forward repair 
     facility (dry-dock) may be caught unawares/lightly defended. But to

     pull off an honest to god Pearl Harbor  on a "real base" you would 
     need to be really good. And a real Death Star and "escorts" would 
     probably eat most strike forces (missile boats or not) for lunch. 
     Actually Death Stars would probably be the coolest way to take out 
     your opponents bases.
     
     I have not seen many "real" naval bases that did not have air
stations 
     and warship support. You missile boats, or rock tugs need to
actually 
     be able to make the attack before we even worry about PDAF, or Nova

     cannons etc. Again IMHO if you are not able to put up that mobile 
     defense, what the heck are you doing with an immobile base
insystem?
     
     If your immobile base is sitting insystem with no supports, it is
time 
     to negotiate or hit the lifepods man!! 
     
     While this is a neat topic to get all hot and bothered over, isn't
the 
     whole point of "naval" combat to force your opponent to submit or
have 
     his "base" destroyed??????
     
     
						Semper Fi
						   Jon


______________________________ Reply Separator
_________________________________

Prev: Re: New Armor Next: Re: New Armor