Re: [VVerse] Trickier FTL gates

  There's a bunch of wonderful defense ideas here.  Thing is, if you
build 
 defenses like this and I'm the opponent, I build my much smaller,
cheaper 
 mobile fleet and launch periodic minor attacks.  Then I just wait for
the 
 cost of maintenance and staffing to bankrupt your government and move
in after
 your civilization has collapsed.  Sure, you can build *something* that
can't
 be beat, given near infinite resources and time.  Where do you get
infinite
 resources and time though?  The Magninot Line *could* have been
extended to 
 the coast and probably would have worked.  If Germany doesn't attack
for the
 next 25 years though, you've just built the biggest boondoggle of all
time!
 Eventually Germany just *buys* the bankrupt French government.  The
biggest
 problem with "The Mote in God's Eye" is that eventually the human
governments
 are going to have something happen to them and not be able to hold the
line,
 and the Motie's are going to get out.

   grant

> 
> At 11:27 AM -0500 2/1/05, Grant A. Ladue wrote:
> >   I still say though that any "wormhole" or "gate" system that would
allow
> >  large numbers of unmanned weapons to pass through it effectively
eliminates
> >  the usefulness of fixed defenses.	First you send through huge 
> >numbers of very
> 
> If you can send weapons through one way, I can send them the other. 
> And it comes down to who has more to send. If I'm next to my home 
> planet and I have nearby fixed positions, I've got a super short 
> logistics train and you have a super long logistics train. In this 
> case think of the entire Normandy defenses condensed down to one 
> small area against the Overlord forces. Because it's a point as 
> opposed to a long border, the fixed defenses gain benefit from 
> interlocking fire.
> 
> You and I or someone else (John Atkinson) need to play a game of 
> Dirtside or Full Thrust with Fixed defenses and you run a mobile 
> force. Then you'll see about the problem of just expecting technology 
> alone to win the day. It takes more than just saying you'll launch a 
> bunch of missiles. Against a weaker foe it's the different tech 
> levels. Against a foe that you have parity with, it all depends on if 
> you bring what you need to crack the nut to the table. And even then 
> you'll pay the butchers bill one hundred fold.
> 
> >  small seeker weapons to wipe out the minefield, then a bunch of 
> >nukes to knock
> >  out the weapons positions with EMP effect, then missile swarms to
overwhelm
> >  point defenses and knock out any remaining sensors and exposed
positions. 
> >  Repeat until there is a hole in the defenses sufficient for a
manned fleet to
> >  move through with impunity.  Nova cannon type weapons only make
this easier.
> 
> What stops other NUKEs from being sent back through at you?
> >
> >    Conversly, mobile fleets are far less vulnerable to this type of
attack
> >  because they aren't "fixed" near the wormhole and as the volume of
space that
> 
> And they have to be there to do the job. They're also more expensive. 
> Which is back to where my point of fixed defense platforms would be 
> cheaper for the same tech level and more armor and weapons.
> 
> 
> >    I would think the best way to defend a gate point would be to
have a small
> >  number of fixed defenses with a significant fleet able to back them
up.  The
> >  trick is to have enough defensive positions to be able to hold up
the enemy
> >  for your fleet to arrive, but not so many that the other side feels
the need
> >  to build specific weapons systems to obliterate them.
> 
> Personally, I'd build some hulking huge asteroids that are in some 
> kind of stationary defense around the jump point (gate), Some smaller 
> ones in from the the FTL limit from the star and then some more in 
> from the most likely transit point from the Jump point (gate). There 
> would also be a number of hulking huge asteroids at the various 
> Lagrange points around the system for additional long base sensor 
> resolution and as refueling points for system patrol craft and 
> fighter basing. Then there would be the home fleet and the core 
> planet defenses.
> 
> The basic Hulking huge asteroid is bigger than a dreadnought has 
> super strong hull, no drives, no ftl, lots of armor and more beam 
> weapons, fighters and missiles/torpedos/screens than you can stuff in 
> anything remotely mobile.
> 
> A 200 mass station with no drives and engines has an additional 60 
> mass left over assuming you give a 200 mass ship NAC style mobility 
> (Thrust 4) and average hull with 140 for weapons. Ramp up the 
> integrity to Super and you have 100 points for weapons, but 100 
> damage points. Sure it can't maneuver, but it's like the NSL ships, 
> why maneuver if you can pound your foe senseless when he gets into 
> range? The only trick is that with a station you have to place 
> weapons on 360 mounts or pay more for all around protection. But, 
> given the preference for not giving the enemy a base to fire at you 
> with, when you're guarding a wormhole junction, you'll have your 
> closest stations with arcs only on the wormhole to prevent them being 
> used against your other stations if they're captured somehow.
> 
> Pay a bit more for more mass and armor and you can build some 
> freaking huge stations that don't move, but pack a whallop. The 
> amount of damage they can soak up is staggering.
> -- 
> --
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> -		    Data Center Operations Group		-
> -		  http://web.turner.com/data_center/		 -
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> - Ryan Montieth Gill			 One CNN Center SE0813 E -
> - Internet Technologies   --	 Data Center Operations Manager  -
> - Hours 11am - 7pm Mon - Fri	      (8Sdc, 10Sdc IT@3Ndc)	 -
> - Cellular: 404-545-6205	       e-mail: Ryan.Gill@cnn.com -
> - Office: 404-588-6191					 -
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
> -		Emergency Power-off != Door release!		 -
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>