Re: Re[2]: Re[2]: Re[2]: coupla Full Thrust questions inspire some tactics

Recently Jon wrote:

> I hope they have
>good computers in the (whatever)th century :-). I always thought it was
>somewhat odd that scifi authors could quite willingly accept that there
>are computers that fast around in their 'time' but not that they could
>be equipped with AI pilots who wouldn't care less what G they were
subjected
>to..

Joe Haldeman actually referred to the problem you describe in "Forever
War".
His warship/troop transport would enter a target system with the crew
and
marines sedated in jelled "anti-acceleration capsules".  The ship's
onboard
AI would then fight the battle without worry for how many Gs were being
pulled at what time, subject to the structural limits of the spacecraft.
 No
reaction time problems, hesitation, or second thoughts.  If the computer
awakened you then you'd won the battle.  If not, you never knew it.

The excellent "Aliens" Tech Manual by Lee Brimmicombe-Wood describes
similar
procedures for the Conestoga-class (Sulacco) warships.	They sometimes
have
a human bridge crew during battle, however. 

The comment made uptopic about "realistic" space combat being a lot like
submarine warfare is right on.	Theoretical detection ranges could be
huge,
IF you knew which way to look.	For that reason "stealth" would be an
important part of ship design and tactics.  It would also tend to shrink
down the size of the battle.  Big, multi-class battle fleets would
probably
be easier to detect than single multi-purpose ships.  Using active
sensors
would just finalize the enemy's firing solution for him so that's out.

Add to all this the problem of energy weapon beam divergence over
distance
and you get tactics and weapons as indicated in the "Aliens" book: 
Missiles
(puncturing or submunition, rather than blast warheads, stealthy,
multi-sensor), railguns (possibly with terminally guided projectiles),
and
point-defense lasers.  Most of the scientist types I talk to tell me
that
the concept of particle accelerators as weapons over long distances is
still
a bit premature.  This scenario also lends itself well to the "combat
drone"
idea discussed on this list earlier this year and featured in the
computer
game "Mission: Critical".  

I'd like to see some ideas for using the FT rules to simulate this type
of
"realistic" space combat.  Yes, it probably isn't quite as romantic as
massive space fleets blasting away at one another but could still be fun
in
a different way.  Detection and development of firing solutions would be
as
important as the firing itself.  This could be handled by treating the
sensors as "batteries" in their own right.  One would have to "hit" the
target for a certain number of "detection points" in order to get a
firing
solution for their weapons.  Stealth ("shielding") would be based on
target
thrust, aspect (facing relative to firer), and active sensor or weapons
use.  

Yes, it could get complicated but:  a.	only a few ships per side would
be
involved, and b. I know that there are some *very* clever individuals
out
there among us who can come up with elegant solutions to complex
problems.
Have at it then.

Rob Pruden
Suddenly sig.-less