MILITARY MATTERS
[
@KlavoHunter , Post 20993568]
NOD keeps on trying to figure out what the next generation of their units will be: Those Centurions seem promising, and the Barghest is more than just pesky. The artillery duels with NOD's stealthies does seem to favor the Scorp-bois to an annoying extent...
Better keep feeding the military more dice to take care of that problem while we chew up lots of YZ tib.
I agree with your general conclusion. The Centurion in particular sounds like a rather more practical and mass-producible successor to the Avatar, something that doesn't rely on inefficient shit like "ripping parts off other Nod vehicles to equip itself." Much more viable as a heavyweight counter to GDI's own heavy metal such as the Mammoth tank.
Also,
holy shit but a 50 cm rocket is intimidating. For reference, a Maverick antitank missile is 30 centimeters in diameter, and those are routinely used for smashing up things a lot bigger than a tank, such as reinforced concrete bunkers. We could easily be talking about 250 kg or larger warheads. That's going to be a tough challenge for our next-generation point defense laser systems, because you
really want to score a hard kill on something like that before it gets too close.
Then again, maybe that means "rockets that are six centimeters wide and fifty centimeters long," in which case that's basically an antipersonnel weapon and there's no way to upsize it beyond that.
The stealth artillery, well, it's a mix. The advantage of stealth artillery is that it's easy to get into range, set up, shoot, and scoot. The disadvantage is that for the system as designed, you have no real sustained presence and can't shoot from any one location for long. You can't even really use it to suppress an enemy position for 5-10 minutes, because enemy counterbattery
will start to dial in, and your stealth self-propelled artillery pieces are too expensive to gamble with.
It's a great argument for us to hurry up and do the naval point defense refit, because I'm pretty sure an Iron Dome-like system, especially one integrating powerful lasers into the design, could counter this kind of sporadic short sharp shower of shells very effectively. They lob a volley of shells over, point defense splashes most of the incoming, and they can't keep putting metal on target until something gets through because otherwise they get flattened by overwhelming firepower and the enemy localizes them despite their stealth.
[
@TheFourthman , Post 20993871]
This really isn't surprising. We're starting to hit goals. So now the purity tests are starting.
I don't think it's even purity testing; there's genuine disagreement within the Developmentalists about "so, where do we go from here?" The 'disadvantage' of GDI no longer seeming to be scrabbling desperately in a losing battle for survival is that people who have incompatible visions but very much want to survive start to disagree with one another again.
Now this is disturbing. If expect we're going to start seeing more cyborgs then.
Gideon's special Avatar variant already used a cybernetically wired-in pilot, as I recall, so this isn't a big change. The Cyberwheels are kind of a logical extension in that they're clearly an evolution of Nod's light vehicle line (the bike/buggy stuff). The light armament and mass makes them usable by the large Nod militias, and they represent a way to 'recycle' some of the many many wounded or incapacitated personnel Nod tends to accumulate over time.
I want to see that gun. Also at some point we may have to look at shields for dealing with these alpha strike style units.
Maybe. On the other hand, this is clearly another 'light vehicle' type. Thin armor and volatility suggest that this is Stahl's attempt to pack as much firepower as possible into a low-profile platform that is cheap and able to be mass-produced, as opposed to a fancy 'starship' weapon system like the Stealth Tank or Avatar. This is in keeping with Stahl's general theme of quantity in acceptable quality.
Depending on what's loaded into the shells in that gun, it may perform adequately in frontal combat against GDI heavy armor, or it may not. Being able to overpenetrate a Guardian doesn't prove much either way unless those things are a lot more heavily armored than I usually expect an APC to be.
Ithillid said:
I was trying to be as close to telling you outright that these are bad faith accusations without directly telling you that these are bad faith accusations. Because this is Initiative First and Free Market trying to find something to leverage into being able to either 1. reserve the good housing for Blue Zone populations. or 2. Force you to hand out cash and restart the economy the way that they like.
They're bad faith, but on the other hand people genuinely do want better housing and you've told us this. So it's good electoral tactics; the lack of extra space in Blue Zone arcologies is definitely the kind of thing that someone might complain about if they're locked out of the government and want an issue they can use to gain voteshare and bargaining power in the legislature.
[
@ramdomperson , Post 20995707]
Sounds like developing high efficiency heat systems will help counter this, as will upgrading artillery and railguns.
Heat systems aren't necessarily the big deal here, because I'm pretty sure the incendiary warheads aren't that effective against tanks (could be wrong). Incendiary warheads aren't usually something you throw at tanks, usually, they're something you throw at buildings.
Of course, depending on how we read "6x50 cm..." a 50 cm rocket's blast fragmentation warheads are more than powerful enough to knock out a main battle tank on a direct hit anyway. Upgrading guns to counter the Centurion is definitely a good idea, though. Because it sounds like this is rolling out something comparable to the Avatar but more mass-producible, which means we won't be able to focus it down with massed fire from a large number of gun platforms at once.
Blatant GM signal to upgrade the air force.
Eh no, I think the Banshee-
bis is the signal to do that. This is a platform within a category we already know how to counter with ground forces. Think of it as a successor to the Scorpion light tank. The real threat is that by going with large-caliber shells (the most common reason for a fixed gun mount), and accepting high volatility as the price of storing plenty of ammo, they can probably come up with shit like tiberium-enhanced munitions and pack a lot of punch onto the small platform.
SPAAACE
[
@tenchifew , Post 21001407]
Can you give me a link with some specifics?
Like distance, amperage and voltage?
Since we currently do not have any commercial wireless power transfer system, wired transfer must be more efficient even including the costs of the wires and the rest of the infrastructure like towers, but I would like to read an article or a scientific paper on the topic if you can recommend one.
Well, there's a few obvious reasons we don't have in-atmosphere wireless power transfer, even if beamed power from space is feasible.
1) Transferring large amounts of power requires large transmitter and antenna setups. Over
short distances there is just no practical way for this to be economical compared to stringing a wire between Point A and Point B, because the transmitter and antenna are inherently large and bulky, or require extensive cooling, or both. Thus, over short distances, even if transmission efficiency was literally 100%, it would never make economic sense to use the system.
2) Transferring large amounts of power over long distances
along the Earth's surface means the horizon is a factor; you will need repeater stations, or you will need to build one end of the system very high off the ground, further increasing the cost and regulatory burden, along with the risk of the system being taken down by a storm or something.
Combining (1) and (2), we see that beamed power arrays are unlikely to ever be cost-effective along the Earth's surface for either short distances or long.
3) Safety concerns; if you are slinging around enough microwave radiation between Point A and Point B to cook a turkey, and this radiation is
parallel to the ground, there's a problem. This puts a practical limit on the amount of power that can be beamed laterally point-to-point along the Earth's surface.
4) Sabotage/disruption concerns. You are beaming power through the air, probably the air above other people's property. Stopping them from sticking an antenna up into the beam path isn't necessarily
difficult, but it's a nuisance factor that further complicates the issue. Wired power transfer isn't immune to this issue, of course, but there it's easier to establish legal control over the actual line the power runs along. There is also the risk that some fucker will, I don't know, float a large microwave-reflecting balloon up into the path of your beam.
All in all, it is unsurprising that wireless power transfer has never been seriously pursued along the Earth's surface when a simpler alternative exists for all fixed applications. For mobile applications beamed power might be desirable, but any given mobile platform on Earth is either too small to carry a suitably sized antenna to pick up the microwave beam, or more than large enough that it would be better off just carrying its own engine on board.
[
@tenchifew , Post 21002919]
They had 90.4% losses over one mile in the seventies.
Note that that was for powering a mobile platform. Which means, assuming you actually want to not lose the helicopter the moment it jiggles a little out of the beam path, that you need to be giving a constant microwave path to the entire volume the helicopter occupies and all the space immediately around it. Much of your beam will predictably miss the entire helicopter.
If you are aiming at a fixed antenna that has no weight restrictions, you have rather more options on that front, and can avoid some of the inefficiency.
[
@armentho , Post 21001179]
Space is big,as "launch a needle in the middle of the ocean" chances of hitting anything big
You could fit several planet earths between mars and earth
Tho idwally the kind of body you want to seed tiberium while ensuring nothing scapes are inert moons
No magma means no liquid tiberium explosions that are unwanted
Meteor impacts happen. What if a chunk of space debris impacts the big lump of tiberium-in-space-on-inert-moon?
And gravity means no risk of particles flying away and braking off on differenr directions
Actually, quite the opposite.
In microgravity, any stray fleck of tiberium will keep going forever until it hits something- possibly thousands or millions of years from now.
This may actually already be a concern. Judging by the visuals of the blast, the Temple Prime explosion surely flung chunks of tiberium out into space. Most would have fallen back to Earth eventually, making Earth only marginally more cursed than it already was, but I'm pleasantly surprised if none hit the Moon, and it's entirely possible- even probable- that some hit interplanetary escape velocity and are now swirling around the solar system in Earth-crossing asteroid orbits.
Hopefully none got enough delta-V to reach any of the other planets...