Prev: Re: [GZG] Artillery considerations Next: Re: [GZG] Help me, Obi-Wan Kenobi!

Re: [GZG] Help me, Obi-Wan Kenobi! - Artillery

From: Indy <indy.kochte@g...>
Date: Wed, 9 Jul 2008 06:41:16 -0400
Subject: Re: [GZG] Help me, Obi-Wan Kenobi! - Artillery

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu
http://vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lOn
Wed, Jul 9, 2008 at 1:10 AM, Don M <dmaddox1@hot.rr.com> wrote:

>  Yeah. But not in a day, and not visually. If the atmo were to have
> something that impedes non-visual detection? (see last
paragraph/sentence of
> mine above ;-) ).
>
> Mk
> Saw it, most invasions take a bit more than a day to pull off, add to
that
> technology may compensate for those factors.
> Think it's been mentioned before, what's to stop the attacker from
> blanketing the place with drones for example.
>

If the defender has the resources, then said resources (someone
mentioned a
cloud of micro sats at one point; counter to that would be micro HK sats
or
a cloud of sand or something).

This also assumes the attacker has that blanket of drones available (not
necessarily a stretch to imagine they do, but I would not just
automatically
assume it).

All that aside, I think a gentlemen's agreement on how off table assets
are
> to be used is the best option here.
>

I'd rather think of it as everyone coming up with one all-powerful
example
for the attacker, w/out taking into account the defender's role in
countering or reducing the attacker's intel effectiveness. :-)

Mk


Prev: Re: [GZG] Artillery considerations Next: Re: [GZG] Help me, Obi-Wan Kenobi!