Battle: Raid at Balmorra

[Tsar Fire]

I was fighting at Bothawui and returned to Denon. However, my character has raided Taris and Tatooine in the past. Both of them are kinda on the opposite sides of the galaxy. Perhaps we could divvy it up on the Republic boards.

Perhaps we should just assume that I'm basically tasked with holding the Hutt border and you're in charge of the core, and therefore, since the war is on the border, launching raids and filling in gaps and such?

I figure, as commander of the outer sphere, the border would be my purview. Since the war is here though, you'd come out and help out.

That sound fair?

 

[Rameth]

It seems that there will be a roster change before we get this thing up. Changes on first post and in the main thread OOC headline.

 

[Santoro]

It seems that there will be a roster change before we get this thing up. Changes on first post and in the main thread OOC headline.

I suggest giving it another day. SWRP can be a little slow.

 

[Gambler]

A little slow? I don't know what you're talking about; my last thread started two months ago and we're finally (almost) done!

 

[Rameth]

Ya it seems there already was some confusion on my end. One of the guys who I took off just PMed me right now. Going to get this sorted lol.

 

[Aluminum Falcon]

Perhaps we should just assume that I'm basically tasked with holding the Hutt border and you're in charge of the core, and therefore, since the war is on the border, launching raids and filling in gaps and such?

I figure, as commander of the outer sphere, the border would be my purview. Since the war is here though, you'd come out and help out.

That sound fair?

Perhaps we could divvy it up on the Republic boards.

This... ^

 

[Rameth]

Grand Vizier are you using optical communications to communicate with the Republic or with your ships? Also how did the MAC cannons lock on and begin firing a minute after we got there? We dropped in close and at best only two or three of the defense platforms would be looking directly at us. I doubt they move that quickly on the ground or in space. Lastly space fighters would be designed for both space and atmospheric combat. You would have no advantage there. Just wanted to throw that out there.

 

[Cailst]

Grand Vizier are you using optical communications to communicate with the Republic or with your ships? Also how did the MAC cannons lock on and begin firing a minute after we got there? We dropped in close and at best only two or three of the defense platforms would be looking directly at us. I doubt they move that quickly on the ground or in space. Lastly space fighters would be designed for both space and atmospheric combat. You would have no advantage there. Just wanted to throw that out there.

At the moment, with Republic ships.

You said you were outside the atmosphere which is said to end somewhere around a 100 miles out. You also said you were near the capital. The distance would indicate that a fair number of MAC cannons would be able to fire without as great a change in their angle. And of course, more defenses would be placed around major cities. At least for the MAC cannons. In space, there's no reason that they couldn't orient themselves within a minute to deal with attackers.

And for the fighters, certainly, I could see them being designed to operate in the atmosphere to some extent. However, there are going to be things that are great in space combat that fare poorly in atmospheric combat and vice versa. If a fighter is designed purely for atmospheric combat, it will have some advantages over those meant to do both.

 

[Rameth]

At the moment, with Republic ships.

You said you were outside the atmosphere which is said to end somewhere around a 100 miles out. You also said you were near the capital. The distance would indicate that a fair number of MAC cannons would be able to fire without as great a change in their angle. And of course, more defenses would be placed around major cities. At least for the MAC cannons. In space, there's no reason that they couldn't orient themselves within a minute to deal with attackers.

And for the fighters, certainly, I could see them being designed to operate in the atmosphere to some extent. However, there are going to be things that are great in space combat that fare poorly in atmospheric combat and vice versa. If a fighter is designed purely for atmospheric combat, it will have some advantages over those meant to do both.

I wasn't referring to the ground side defenses btw. I'm assuming the MAC cannons are made for long range combat and not short range. Also they would have to be fairly large to deal damage to a capital ship. That would make turning in space problematic, thats like saying a space station could turn on a dime. Now I will say I'm thinking of space station cannons, like from Halo. If this is not the case let me know.

As for the fighters nearly every ship, at least space transport and lower, would be designed to fly in the atmosphere. There are a lot more things needed to fly effectively in the atmosphere then in space. They would need to be able to cut down wind resistance and have turning rudders (or whatever they are called). It would be stupid to not include these in a starfighter design. While to operate in space you would only need thrusters powerful enough to get you there and thrusters for maneuvering. What I'm basically saying is that my fighters would not be at a disadvantage at all.

 

[Cailst]

I wasn't referring to the ground side defenses btw. I'm assuming the MAC cannons are made for long range combat and not short range. Also they would have to be fairly large to deal damage to a capital ship. That would make turning in space problematic, thats like saying a space station could turn on a dime. Now I will say I'm thinking of space station cannons, like from Halo. If this is not the case let me know.

At the moment, I'm thinking of giant guns in space with some room for humans to operate them. Maybe the size of a house or dorm. Despite their size, I don't see why they wouldn't be equipped with thrusters that would allow them to turn to face whatever threat they face within a minute.

As for the fighters nearly every ship, at least space transport and lower, would be designed to fly in the atmosphere. There are a lot more things needed to fly effectively in the atmosphere then in space. They would need to be able to cut down wind resistance and have turning rudders (or whatever they are called). It would be stupid to not include these in a starfighter design. While to operate in space you would only need thrusters powerful enough to get you there and thrusters for maneuvering. What I'm basically saying is that my fighters would not be at a disadvantage at all.

But when you don't have to worry about air resistance, you can change a fighter to deal with other problems. Without that worry, you could put armor in places that would damage maneuverability in the air but seriously help in space. Or perhaps more places to put weaponry or fuel that would be an issue in the air. Also, in space, there is no air pressure from outside so spacefighters would have to be built with materials which would resist internal pressure. There is much less of a need in the atmosphere so that concern can be ignored.

In short, there are ways which you can specialize a ship for space and for atmospheric combat and any compromise is going to have some disadvantages when facing a specialty where it was built to operate.

 

[Jiang Winters]

Rameth, fighters designed and built to operate in atmosphere will, like it or not, have tremendous advantages in terms of speed and maneuverability in atmosphere over a starfighter. It's also silly to just assume that a starfighter would have proper control surfaces, such as ailerons, flaps, etc etc, as a starfighter can function just fine in atmosphere as long as it has a repulsorlift engine. It just doesn't need those surfaces because the repulsorlift takes their place. However, starfighters are not innately as aerodynamic as an in-atmosphere fighter and will thus be at a disadvantage as they will not be able to turn as sharp or move as fast. They'd be torn apart by air resistance if they tried to keep pace with an atmospheric fighter.

As for the guns, they are about the same size as the MAC stations in Halo. However, it's space. It doesn't take a whole lot of effort or time to pan even a BFG like a MAC platform to get a firing solution on an incoming target if it was in front of them and at a distance greater than 5 or 6 KM. At the longest, it'd take the guns maybe ten or fifteen seconds to shift to get a firing solution. Also note that as we're dealing with orbital gun platforms here, they would have some point defenses in the form of a mix of high-ROF railguns to deal with shields and high-ROF laser cannons.

 

[Santoro]

If you check out the Ujalli fighters, they're relatively aerodynamic and could handle the strain of atmosphere.

Cannons or not, they wouldnt just shred the incoming forces. This was a surprise raid and they'd need time to power up, target, and fire. The Taung are coming fast- not exactly sitting ducks.

Either way, that's what shields are for.

 

[Aluminum Falcon]

Hey Jiang could you direct me to the thread or something where the previous administration placed all this stuff?

 

[Cailst]

If you check out the Ujalli fighters, they're relatively aerodynamic and could handle the strain of atmosphere.

Cannons or not, they wouldnt just shred the incoming forces. This was a surprise raid and they'd need time to power up, target, and fire. The Taung are coming fast- not exactly sitting ducks.

Either way, that's what shields are for.

I'm not saying that they would break apart, they just would be poorer at atmospheric combat than fighters designed for the atmosphere.

Of course the Taung aren't just sitting ducks. But the Cannons should be able to aim and get off a shot within a minute. I'd imagine they weren't built merely to start fighting several minutes into an existing battle but rather to provide a fairly quick response to forces that pop right out of hyperspace.

 

[Jiang Winters]

Hey Jiang could you direct me to the thread or something where the previous administration placed all this stuff?

I would, but information like that is kept in the Rep Leadership's private board for safekeeping. We'll happily reveal defensive information if an enemy wants to take the time to properly scout out a world, though.

If you check out the Ujalli fighters, they're relatively aerodynamic and could handle the strain of atmosphere.

Cannons or not, they wouldnt just shred the incoming forces. This was a surprise raid and they'd need time to power up, target, and fire. The Taung are coming fast- not exactly sitting ducks.

Either way, that's what shields are for.

The orbital defenses aren't designed to sit in a zero-power state. They'd idle with their gun's capacitors partially charged so that they could get off at least one or two quick shots to buy themselves enough time to bring their reactors and power systems fully on-line. Saying that they wouldn't have the ability to fire at least one shot immediately is like saying a soldier on guard duty would be walking around with the magazine out of his rifle and no round in the chamber. Also, projectiles bypass shields altogether unless you're running both anti-projectile shields and anti-energy shields simultaneously, which would suck up a tremendous amount of energy.

 

[Will]

The orbital defenses aren't designed to sit in a zero-power state. They'd idle with their gun's capacitors partially charged so that they could get off at least one or two quick shots to buy themselves enough time to bring their reactors and power systems fully on-line. Saying that they wouldn't have the ability to fire at least one shot immediately is like saying a soldier on guard duty would be walking around with the magazine out of his rifle and no round in the chamber. Also, projectiles bypass shields altogether unless you're running both anti-projectile shields and anti-energy shields simultaneously, which would suck up a tremendous amount of energy.

This is true. It's how I designed them. They were planetary defences for a REASON.

Them minefields will **** with enemies as well...

 

[Santoro]

Also, projectiles bypass shields altogether unless you're running both anti-projectile shields and anti-energy shields simultaneously, which would suck up a tremendous amount of energy.

Projectiles are also a major weapon type in this timeline, and a rudimentary scan would show the presence of slug-based weapons. It takes more than a couple installations to repel a fleet.

 

[Will]

Projectiles are also a major weapon type in this timeline, and a rudimentary scan would show the presence of slug-based weapons. It takes more than a couple installations to repel a fleet.

Planets normally have more than a couple of installations. There's normally ten in orbit, minimum.

 

[Tsar Fire]

Guys, this is freaking star wars. Star destroyers. Ion cannons. Space stations. Small moons.

Stop with all the quasi-science, and just try and... make it starwarsy. That's my advice. Starwars was not a "science" fiction. It is space fantasy. Love the lasers, not the "Precision guided projectile weapons which can track within 5 seconds."

That said, I feel like an unprepared system would be unable to get shots off too fast. Also, for some reason. Weapons in Star Wars don't seem to go super far. I don't really know why.

Just thoughts.

 

[Will]

Guys, this is freaking star wars. Star destroyers. Ion cannons. Space stations. Small moons.

Stop with all the quasi-science, and just try and... make it starwarsy. That's my advice. Starwars was not a "science" fiction. It is space fantasy. Love the lasers, not the "Precision guided projectile weapons which can track within 5 seconds."

That said, I feel like an unprepared system would be unable to get shots off too fast. Also, for some reason. Weapons in Star Wars don't seem to go super far. I don't really know why.

Just thoughts.

Laserd didn't, because of the degradation of energy as the bolt travelled. And MAC systems were always at a state of readiness.