Re: Space tactics

> 1. You'd need sensors that exceed your speed by an order of 2 to 10 
> times - otherwise you'd be foolishly risking your ships by such 
> velocity - and that would give warning of your arrival. 

No argument, but note your sensor platform need not be your weapons
platform--nor do they need to approach with same vector.

> 2. You'd need to be capable of sweeping or avoiding mines, which 
> suggests a slower approach or at least a sacrificial wave of ships to 
> take the hit, far outvaluing the minefields value. 

Who cares about the minefield value?  It's the target's value we're
interested in.	If I lose a few cruisers to mines (or anything else),
but
take out your main naval base, then I've succeeded.  I do think
minefields
are one of the best defenses against this sort of tactic, I just quail
at
the thought of how many mines we'll have to place to cover everything. 
Consider a sphere at least 37MU radius--what is the surface area?  Times
however many sq km per square MU.  And don't forget to deploy in depth. 
This is why I think a mine-layer missile (or high speed drone) would be
a
good idea.

> Plus the political consideration that if you do it to them.... they 
> do it to your worlds too. Most governments have the sanity to realize 
> what this means. 

There may be classes of weapons that are restricted (Thou Shalt Not Use
Antimatter Bombs On Planets or Stars; Thou Shalt Not Drop an Asteroid on
Thy Neighbor), but I can't see anyone feeling too confined about using
normal weapons with different attack profiles, ie high velocity
raids--unless the defenders can find a way to make them too expensive
for
the benefits.

> I don't think this attack is the 'be all and end all' in space 
> combat,and I think kamikazee captains whose speeds exceed their 
> ability to manoevre or their sensor ranges would get yanked by an 
> Admiralty board so fast it would make your head spin.

And I think captains who insist on waddling in, giving the defenders
time
to prepare, would also get yanked, if they survive the party.  You do
whatever works.  The way to deal with a tactic we don't like is not to
stubbornly say "That's stupid because I don't like it" [despite the fact
that political leaders, and sometimes generals, do it all the time] but
to
find or create reasons it won't work.  Minefields, strict application of
sensor rules, limited jump points, and restricted fuel are all
possibilities.	No doubt there are more.