The Gaming Den

Posted: **Mon Jan 07, 2019 11:11 pm**

Realistically speaking, Power-Armor will never, ever, realistically be about making an actual Suit of Bullet Proof Armor . . It will be more about making your infantry into even more of a bigger glas cannon that is much more mobile to boot.

Also, missle defence is a joke.
There are so many missles that even if one side can reliably stop 99% of the enemies missles from reaching their target, the remaining 1% is still enough to turn the planet into a glowing ball of glass several times over.

Posted: **Mon Jan 07, 2019 11:47 pm**

Stahlseele wrote:There are so many missles that even if one side can reliably stop 99% of the enemies missles from reaching their target, the remaining 1% is still enough to turn the planet into a glowing ball of glass several times over.

There are ~3600 deployed strategic warheads in the world. 36 unstopped nukes would be terrible, but they wouldn't end human civilization, let alone glass a meaningful fraction of the planet.

Posted: **Tue Jan 08, 2019 12:00 am**

angelfromanotherpin wrote:
Stahlseele wrote:There are so many missles that even if one side can reliably stop 99% of the enemies missles from reaching their target, the remaining 1% is still enough to turn the planet into a glowing ball of glass several times over.
There are ~3600 deployed strategic warheads in the world. 36 unstopped nukes would be terrible, but they wouldn't end human civilization, let alone glass a meaningful fraction of the planet.

That's what they tell us, but as Sun Tzu said, all warfare is based on deception. You're free to believe that there's only 3600 nukes ready to go off, just as you're free to believe that there were totally weapons of mass destruction in Iraq or that Trump will totally build a wall between the USA and Mexico.

Posted: **Tue Jan 08, 2019 12:33 am**

My numbers are sourced by international experts and scientists, and your non-numbers are sourced by baseless conspiracy theory, and I'm the one who's been taken in by right-wing propaganda. Seems legit.

Posted: **Tue Jan 08, 2019 2:29 am**

Bush the Second got plenty of international people to back him up on Iraq totally having weapons of mass destruction, even formed a coalition to invade it, so yep you're the one drinking right-wing propaganda if you think the USA and Russia just give guided tours to all their secret nuke silos. Because why would a military ever want to keep secrets, right?

Posted: **Tue Jan 08, 2019 2:57 am**

Doubling down on your conspiracy theory while constructing an increasingly-dumb straw man to attack in my stead isn't very persuasive.

Then again, maybe I'm being too harsh. You persuaded me to put you on ignore.

Posted: **Tue Jan 08, 2019 12:19 pm**

I thought the whole point of nuclear weapons is precisely telling your enemies you have them to deter their attacking. Keeping them a secret is a waste, it’s the plot of Doctor Strangelove after all.

Posted: **Tue Jan 08, 2019 1:20 pm**

There's a difference between letting the world know you're in the nuclear club and giving out precise details. Different countries have (very) different levels of transparency regarding their systems and stockpiles. That said, manufacturing and deploying the weapons is an industry with infrastructure that can't be completely concealed, and knowledgeable people can make some pretty shrewd deductions based on the information that is visible.

Posted: **Tue Jan 08, 2019 9:17 pm**

There used to be literally several thousands of nukes in america and russia alone.
And that does not even factor in the probably vastly smaller but still decidedly devastating arsenals of other nuclear powers.
And you really think all of those nukes are gone?

Posted: **Tue Jan 08, 2019 11:36 pm**

Well, there still are 'several thousands' of nuclear warheads in America (~6.8K) and Russia alone (6.4K), but quite a lot of them are 'retired' (unreliable) or in reserve and wouldn't be launched in the event of something triggering a nuclear exchange. Maintaining those weapons in a state of deployment is expensive, and ~1700 each seems to be what each country thinks is necessary.

Now that's obviously a lot less than there used to be. The US made ~70K warheads and at its peak had ~31K of them ready to be used. And yes, I believe the experts who say that most of those are, one way or another, gone. What happened to them? They've been powering your house for decades.

But even if that was all some giant fraud and the US and Russia still had tens of thousands of warheads, the arms limitations treaties also sharply limit the number of delivery systems either one can have, and those are much more visible and easy to confirm whether or not they exist. The missiles, launch tubes, and long-range bombers simply are not present to deliver tens of thousands of nuclear weapons any more.

Posted: **Wed Jan 09, 2019 6:05 am**

angelfromanotherpin wrote:Now that's obviously a lot less than there used to be. The US made ~70K warheads and at its peak had ~31K of them ready to be used. And yes, I believe the experts who say that most of those are, one way or another, gone. What happened to them? They've been powering your house for decades.

That is some serious swords-to-plowshares shit going on there; thank you for sharing the link.

Posted: **Sun Jan 13, 2019 1:39 am**

kzt wrote:Ground pressure kills walkers. Tracks have really low ground pressure, even a very big tank like the M1 has a ground pressure of just 15 PSI. They can occasionally drive across snow or sand surfaces that won't reliably support infantry walking. (Note that the ground pressure tables usually is for a standing human, not an infantryman walking with a typical 100+ lb combat load.)

A galloping horse does up to 500 PSI and does fine. Bipedal dinosaurs weight up to an estimated 9 to 14 tons and got by on a footprint about 2.5' in length. The M1 has a track foot print of 2.9 square meters per track, or about 5.8 total meters squared to reach that ~13 PSI for 60 tons (15 PSI would be an M1A2).

For reference, the rut depth for average unpacked soil at 35 PSI is 2", and PSI of 14-18 is considered acceptable for soft sand driving.

There are a lot of engineering issues for legged vehicles, but PSI problems are generally not one of them.

Posted: **Mon Jan 14, 2019 3:11 am**

Thanks for the info Previn, I was looking for dinosaur PSI but it only brings up vs crocodile bite strength.

Yeah dinosaurs, moose and so on are my measuring points of how much a walker robot/armor/suit should be able to handle. Did Heinlein ever detail how much a mobile infantry armor weighed?

Interestingly a loaded up apache attack chopper empty and loaded weighs on the lighter half of the estimated range of a tyrannosaurus rex

Posted: **Mon Jan 14, 2019 3:56 am**

So this is a lie?

A tank running over you is more like ashiatsu by an average sized man? Or am I neglecting the significance that that's pressure everywhere rather than just localized?

Posted: **Mon Jan 14, 2019 4:06 am**

erik wrote:So this is a lie?

A tank running over you is more like ashiatsu by an average sized man? Or am I neglecting the significance that that's pressure everywhere rather than just localized?

It is and is not. If the supporting surface is soft enough you'll be pressed down, however if the tank can't push you down, you get significantly more PSI applied to you as you're now a bump for the tank reducing the area in contact with the ground. There are numerous records of people being run over by tanks with only minor injuries (though those cases are in the minority compared to the times being run over by a tank has indeed resulted in death).

Posted: **Mon Jan 14, 2019 5:57 am**

Tankers call infantry 'crunchies' for some reason... It's probably less bad to get run over by a tank off-road than get run over by the wheel of a 30 ton HEMTT on that same spot, but it's likely to be a bad day either way.

Posted: **Mon Jan 14, 2019 6:12 am**

Hrmph. Move over bird box challenge and hold ma beer!

Posted: **Tue Jan 15, 2019 4:09 am**

As an aside, in 2007, the US military had 92 deaths in training, one of which was someone being run over by a tank. 46 involved a handgun.

As another aside, if you dig your foxhole right, a tank should be able to run over it without harming the occupant. However, if you have a big rock outside on the ground nearby, if the tank goes over it, it tends to push it into the ground, which tends to push the ground out sideways which can collapse your foxhole.

Posted: **Mon Feb 25, 2019 1:37 am**

Muv Luv's Alternative is basically this scenario, aliens known as the BETA have invaded earth and they field laser-shooting air defence units that can intercept artillery bombardments, missiles and aircraft. They prioritize air targets so they can be neutralized by ground forces but since BETA tend to vastly outnumber said ground forces it's not very effective.

Laser-class BETA wrote: Scientific name: Luxcius: Duo oculus
Common name: "Lux"

At 3 meters tall, 1.2 meters long and 1.6 meters wide, the Laser-class BETA are some of the smaller anti-TSF units the BETA field, and are lightly armored enough that they can be easily taken down with heavy machine guns. Their giant eyes fire lasers that are effective against targets of up to 10 kilometers high and 30 kilometers from where the Laser-class stands.

With the capability to track targets from 38 kilometers away, 12 seconds in-between each shot, and a perfect record of never hitting allied BETA strains in a crossfire, the Laser-class played an instrumental role in shutting down mankind's air superiority on the field of battle, and continues to be a deadly anti-air force to this day.

Due to the G-Elements required in their production, Laser-class are not normally produced by smaller Hives. Their deployment at Kashgar in the early stages of the BETA War was an emergency measure. Although best known for their adaption to be used against human aerial units, they are primarily used to break down rock and materials.

Heavy Laser-Class wrote:
Scientific name: Magnus Luxcius: Unioculus
Common name: "Magnus Lux"

Towering over the Laser-class at (excluding the cooling fins) 21 meters tall, 15 meters long and 11 meters wide, the Heavy Laser-class is a larger strain with firepower to match. Their large size affords them some protection against 36mm cannon fire, necessitating the use of 120mm cannons; even then, a quick kill is only possible with a direct attack on its laser-emitting "eye" when it is not closed; its only physical weakness. Their giant eyes fire lasers and are effective against targets of up to a mere 500 meters high, and a spectacular range of over 100 kilometers with 36 seconds in-between shots. Likewise with the Laser-class, the Heavy Laser-class shares the distinctions of never hitting allies in the crossfire, and requiring some time for its laser to reach maximum output.

As the Heavy Laser-class is G-Element intensive, it is not suitable for mass production like other BETA of similar size. However, their firepower is of several orders of magnitude higher than that of the Laser-class, and cases have been documented in Operation Ouka where HSSTs were shot down by Heavy-Laser class BETA from more than 26 000 kilometers away, during atmospheric re-entry, though it is unclear if that feat was accomplished by these strains or the newer Laser strains from Total Eclipse.

Common countermeasures include Anti-Laser shells (heavy metal warheads that explode into a diffracting cloud when hit by lasers) and Anti-Laser Coating (effective for about 3 seconds of exposure to a Laser-class' beam; as mentioned earlier in this thread, Laser-classes use a low-power beam to illuminate targets before powering up to destroy them and onboard sensors can detect this).

The Gaming Den

Setting jam: lasers vs air power