Remove ads

Shepard Quest Mk VI, Technological Revolution

Reader mode
Oceans, basically. Land based equivalents are nonsensical, and aquatic races have no need for the whole concept, so if you assume no one else's homeworld has full out oceans that land dwellers with flight capable combat craft have to deal with, then the problem carriers are designed to solve never comes up. (also, without said oceans, you don't get the naval influence on space forces. Who knows what that means in practice.)
 
anemone221 said:
The main reason that I can see is that we had a second world war that included the pacific where we had just enough technology to fly planes off of a carrier and not enough technology to allow 300+ mile standoff missiles that would negate a water born carrier. Another thing was operating range of radar and intermediate bases in the pacific which considering both did not have enough range to be able to suffeciently hunt out a carrier battle group if they really tried to hide.

We are going about this the wrong way. We need to design a drone carrier on a cruiser platform running a 2x dreadnaught strength barrier. Drones are our future right now and it would be a lot more man power smart to run drone carriers out of a cruiser class. Or if you just want to get OP about it run it out of a dreadnaught class. The next gen Gerald F Ford carrier is 1/3 of a dreadnaught minimum distance and its fighter complement is 75+ planes if we were to use space efficient drones on a dreadnaught I would not be surprised at a 250+ fighter complement easy. And if we really want to get to bullshit attitudes we make the missiles like 50% more expensive and then we make them like Japanese anime missiles that pull off bullshit maneuvers with vector thrusters which we would input into the design. After that its all about the missile spam and we would take a hint from the 2007 game ace combat: skies of liberation and model the drones after the CFA-44 with its first special weapon witch if you look into jap animes is just pure fucking missile spam thats what we need to do if we really want to use missiles in space its about japanese missile spam from miniature CFA-44's launched like mass relay from a drone carrier sitting a half a system away. I mean cause if you look at it if you can make the missiles cheap enough but in great enough numbers where throwing 75 drones with 12 missiles each and make it cost effective the navy will lap it up faster then a cat with a cream addiction. The thing about the missiles is that if you throw 450 missiles at anything it will over tax any point defense system unless its prodigal not to discount throwing 900 missiles with decent warheads at a dreadnaught.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
so

you want a bigger version of the Variable Fighter with more missile
 
anemone221 said:
As I said... Japanese Missile Spam or the JMS system that makes space based missiles a thing in any enviroment.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
wonder what people reaction would be like if they found out that we got the idea of making a ship that can missile spam from watching 21st century cartoon
 
Hoyr said:
Not really. The targeting system uses IR and Visual light among other factors, stuff that you need an out and out cloaking system to defeat. Radar noise isn't useful since radar is a support targeting element not a primary.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Let's see here. No one is going be able to track a tiny object like a missile through space manually, so that means they have a computer doing it. Tricking the pattern recognition software should be possible without full cloaking. There will be exploits and vulnerabilities like any sort of software. We just have to identify these weaknesses and take advantage of them.
 
Z000 said:
wonder what people reaction would be like if they found out that we got the idea of making a ship that can missile spam from watching 21st century cartoon
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Considering that most of our sci fi are at least one persons projection of what they think space combat would be like if certain techs didn't get made or whatnot...

Probably not many.

After all, the...novelty...of manned spacefighters comes from Star Wars.

Actual Combat Speeds in outer space pretty much remove the human part of controlling the ship, the eye to hand arc caps human reflexes at around Mach 4/5, which considering that a fusion torch can give any ship its installed on a maximum of 4Gs worth of acceleration per second, is pitifully slow.

Drones, high speed computers, automated turreted main guns and sitting back, praying that a lucky hit doesn't rip through your hull and take out your CnC room is pretty much as realistic as you can get.
 
Cassiemouse said:
Let's see here. No one is going be able to track a tiny object like a missile through space manually, so that means they have a computer doing it. Tricking the pattern recognition software should be possible without full cloaking. There will be exploits and vulnerabilities like any sort of software. We just have to identify these weaknesses and take advantage of them.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
eh
why do something as complicate as that
if you throw enough stuff at it then it would eventually couldn't keep up and overheat
a computer can only track so much before it will say "fuck it"
 
Tabron89 said:
Considering that most of our sci fi are at least one persons projection of what they think space combat would be like if certain techs didn't get made or whatnot...

Probably not many.

After all, the...novelty...of manned spacefighters comes from Star Wars.

Actual Combat Speeds in outer space pretty much remove the human part of controlling the ship, the eye to hand arc caps human reflexes at around Mach 4/5, which considering that a fusion torch can give any ship its installed on a maximum of 4Gs worth of acceleration per second, is pitifully slow.

Drones, high speed computers, automated turreted main guns and sitting back, praying that a lucky hit doesn't rip through your hull and take out your CnC room is pretty much as realistic as you can get.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
computer have the "can be hack" issue and the whole combat judgment thing, it can be a bit stupid in battle when unfamiliar situation pop up and it just stand there to get shot ( like most exploit in game where the AI get stupid and got trap in a corner and we just stand still and shoot it)
some of degree of human decision making + creativity are need for the drone to not suck
 
Z000 said:
computer have the "can be hack" issue and the whole combat judgment thing, it can be a bit stupid in battle when unfamiliar situation pop up and it just stand there to get shot ( like most exploit in game where the AI get stupid and got trap in a corner and we just stand still and shoot it)
some of degree of human decision making + creativity are need for the drone to not suck
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Um, no, not really. Anyone using unencypted radio comms should be tossed out an airlock, mainly for wasting the ships power supply to power a high intensity radio to cover the distances in space.

Laser and Maser comms are pretty much unhackable because you cannot intercept them in RL, thus cannot get an encrypted file to use as a base, not to mention you can even use the number of laser/maser pulses as a passcode, so you can just program your computer to flat out reject any files that have an form of encyption that it doesn't recognise, like ones in alien languages or not transmitted correctly, not to mention that there is actually a type of encyption that requires you to power the computer what is doing the brute force decryption with a dyson sphere for one second of runtime.

So no, its pretty much impossible for an enemy outside of your CnC network to hack into your spaceship in RL.

If an enemy does somehow board one of the ships, re-format the computers, wave a high powered electromagnet over the hard drives and smash them.

There was only a few things Halo did right: The Cole Protocol was one of them.

If its a drone, you just need to send it on a collision course, while firing its weapons. If the enemy doesn't dodge, it gets hit with the weight of the drone if it isn't destroyed, if it does dodge, the drone can be preprogrammed to track, like an old ICBM that used to use photographs to track its flightpath.

Hacking in outer space only exists in tv and games, I'm afraid.
 
um

Drone still have the dumb factor
we seen how dumb VI can get sometime ( both in-game and in-in-game)
and no way i will ever trust an AI to run anything that can be weaponize
 
Z000 said:
um

Drone still have the dumb factor
we seen how dumb VI can get sometime ( both in-game and in-in-game)
and no way i will ever trust an AI to run anything that can be weaponize
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

You do realize that the reason for that is so you can win the game? Even on the hardest difficulty, it is still like that. They program the AI to make mistakes, because, if they didn't, the game would be impossible to beat.
 
Is there any reason we couldn't make an external biotic-imitation suit? I mean basically power armor with Eezo nodules controlled via ANI. Keep the flexibility and nuance of hooking it up to sapient kinesthetics, while removing the population limitation. Well, other than resource cost.
 
Cassiemouse said:
Let's see here. No one is going be able to track a tiny object like a missile through space manually, so that means they have a computer doing it. Tricking the pattern recognition software should be possible without full cloaking. There will be exploits and vulnerabilities like any sort of software. We just have to identify these weaknesses and take advantage of them.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
So basically all the accuracy in the world won't do you any good if you aren't actually firing at the target in question.

Maybe we give all our missiles a false mustache! That's trick the enemy for sure! ;)
 
undead frog said:
So basically all the accuracy in the world won't do you any good if you aren't actually firing at the target in question.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Since the entire point of sensors is to receive information there is no way to isolate them which means they are always vulnerable to being hacked. If the targeting program mainly works through visual light and IR then that is the vector we use to hack the device. We don't need to gain control of the device, just confuse it enough to reduce it's accuracy.

That may not even be the easiest way to do it. If they rely on visual light and IR then can't we just try to blind their sensors with a bright light? We don't actually have to damage them, just target their sensors with a non-damaging laser so that it can't actually see anything. Or even just a really bright cone of light.
 
Last edited:


The Itano circus lets make it happen people

my favorite part is the 12:02-15:38
 
Cassiemouse said:
Let's see here. No one is going be able to track a tiny object like a missile through space manually, so that means they have a computer doing it. Tricking the pattern recognition software should be possible without full cloaking. There will be exploits and vulnerabilities like any sort of software. We just have to identify these weaknesses and take advantage of them.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Knowing the targeting profile and spoofing that can help. The problem is the targeting profile is "hot" and "coming at us" plus or minus some IIF. We can detect the space shuttle firing it engines in the asteroid belt for goodness sake. Hot is easy to detect and missiles are hot. Especially compared to the near zero of space, pretty much everything is hot then. The Normandy basically had a IR cloaking system.

Repulsors screw with that as they aren't hot. The missile still heats up from other components, but it far colder than a missile normal and yes this does screw with targeting.

mastigos said:
Is there any reason we couldn't make an external biotic-imitation suit? I mean basically power armor with Eezo nodules controlled via ANI. Keep the flexibility and nuance of hooking it up to sapient kinesthetics, while removing the population limitation. Well, other than resource cost.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

There is a tech for that, it also allows for other artificial biotics projects.

Cassiemouse said:
Since the entire point of sensors is to receive information there is no way to isolate them which means they are always vulnerable to being hacked. If the targeting program mainly works through visual light and IR then that is the vector we use to hack the device. We don't need to gain control of the device, just confuse it enough to reduce it's accuracy.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Sensor are in no way vulnerable to hacking. Hacking requires code execution. If I don't execute the code you give me you can fire viruses at me all day and it'll do shit all. Sensors take in and analyze the data given they don;t execute code off of that data

To hack via sensor you'd have needed to compromise the sensors software in advance and have included an execute received code trigger into the analysis. Say like the Cyclons did in the Battlestar Galactic miniseries.
 
Hoyr said:
Sensor are in no way vulnerable to hacking. Hacking requires code execution. If I don't execute the code you give me you can fire viruses at me all day and it'll do shit all. Sensors take in and analyze the data given they don;t execute code off of that data

To hack via sensor you'd have needed to compromise the sensors software in advance and have included an execute received code trigger into the analysis. Say like the Cyclons did in the Battlestar Galactic miniseries.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I understand that hacking requires code execution but what I was saying is that you could use the sensors to insert the code then have the program execute the code as part of processing the incoming information by exploiting a security vulnerability. Is that not possible?
 
Last edited:
Cassiemouse said:
I understand that hacking requires code execution but what I was saying is that you could use the sensors to insert the code then have the program execute the code as part of processing the incoming information by exploiting a security vulnerability. Is that not possible?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

It's possible, in theory data is data. However, lets put it this way, that level of security vulnerability would imply active sabotage it's so bad.

Senors should be passing their data to buffer/file/stream that gets analyzed, that buffer/file/stream ever getting put into execution mode or the option existing in the program is a criminal level of incompetence. Master commands passed via visuals to the sensor are also a horrible security flaw and any force using devices like that is genuinely retarded.

That's also not including any difficulty of knowing such things and them changing from system to system if the did exist. Which they shouldn't.
 
Hoyr said:
It's possible, in theory data is data. However, lets put it this way, that level of security vulnerability would imply active sabotage it's so bad.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
Hrm. Well I assumed that since Revy is magically genius she could find a way to break software security over her knee. Or, at least, be able to write an AI that does it. Is something like that a possible technology she could develop?
 
Cassiemouse said:
Hrm. Well I assumed that since Revy is magically genius she could find a way to break software security over her knee. Or, at least, be able to write an AI that does it. Is something like that a possible technology she could develop?
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
I don't think so. Seriously, Revy could create the universe's greatest virus, and it wouldn't matter. This is because, unless your enemy is beyond incompetent, there will never ever be an excution mode inside the sensors.
 
Dark Ness said:
I don't think so. Seriously, Revy could create the universe's greatest virus, and it wouldn't matter. This is because, unless your enemy is beyond incompetent, there will never ever be an excution mode inside the sensors.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...
The way I see it is this, humans make mistakes and in big projects like software development they make a lot of them. So any form of software is going to be riddled with flaws. Since Revy is a magical genius she could figure out how to exploit those flaws. It's less people being incompetent and more people being people. I mean if she can do magical bullshit science then why can't she do magical bullshit programming?
 
Last edited:
Cassiemouse said:
The way I see it is this, humans make mistakes and in big projects like software development they make a lot of them. So any form of software is going to be riddled with flaws. Since Revy is a magical genius she could figure out how to exploit those flaws. It's less people being incompetent and more people being people.
Click to expand...
Click to shrink...

Flaws? Certainly. Maybe we can confuse the sensors or something like that. I was saying, that we can't hack a ship through its sensors.
 
Reader mode
You must login or register to reply here.
Remove ads
Back
Top