26 réponses à ce sujet

[Ghurshog]

So back a while ago on the old forums there was a thread about nukes vs barriers. It was pointed out that barriers were only used to prevent kinetic strikes and the heat and radiation of a nuke would fry anyone just the same.

However the thread shifted into a discussion of missile tech usage in the ME setting. Where a designer, Chris L'Etoile attempted to explain why a 'nuke' and missile tech wouldn't work in the ME setting. 

Original thread here 
"http://meforums.bioware.com/viewtopic.html?topic=685301&forum=144&highlight="

His quotes are as follows;
---
Chris L'Etoile Posted: Monday, 13 July 2009 09:57AM
Quote: Posted 07/13/09 12:36 (GMT) by Poppadop
nukes aren't mentioned as a part of naval warfare.
Nukes are deliberately excluded from naval warfare because -- contrary to what popular culture says -- they are useless in a vacuum.
Most of the damage of a nuclear blast is heat and shock, transmitted by the medium of Earth's atmosphere. The radiation damage decreases at an inverse square. In order to damage an enemy ship with a nuclear blast, you have to get the bomb redonkulously close to them (which is unlikely, given the capabilities of GARDIAN CIWS suites). It's cheaper to fling a bunch of 20kg slugs at 1.3% of lightspeed than it is to build a bunch of slow-moving nuclear-tipped missiles.
For more in the ineffectualness of nukes in space, refer to Winchell Chung's awesome Atomic Rockets site.---
---
Posted: Tuesday, 14 July 2009 12:35AM
Quote: Posted 07/13/09 21:43 (GMT) by Ghurshog
1. Missle technology obviously exists and is used by Human ships (others could also) as is clearly indicated during the last cut scenes of ME 1.
I've explained this previously,but it's been a while.
Obviously, people can build missiles in the IP. They're well within the tech base. However, canonically, no one builds them for use in space combat.
The final cutscenes of ME1 were far along in development before the designers noticed they relied on missiles. The designers told the animators, "There are no missiles in the IP. Defensive lasers never miss." The animators told the designers, "We have too much work to do to go back and change these."
So, despite what you see in the cutscenes, missiles are not used in Mass Effect space combat.
Anything you saw that you interpreted as a missile was a hallucination caused by Sovereign's indoctrination of you. Please consult a qualified medical specialist.---
Now at the time I accepted this because as the designer in question was in a far better place to know the details of the games development cycle and his explanation while plausable meant there was a serious flaw in the presented Cannon of the Mass Effect universe.

Last night while reading through the Codex I came across the description of 'ship defenses' and it clearly states that 'anti missile' systems are used and exists. 

While I understand that this might seem a bit petty on my part to point out and call out. As a fan of ME's setting and games I felt a no small point of validation for my points and statements made in the original thread.

So now if this entry in ME2's codex is an error as well... I have to say someone in QA or the writer really needs to be double checking their work.

Also in the codex I found entries about Weapons of Mass Destruction and the clear statement while outlawed for use on planets there is no restriction for their use in space combat. Meaning Nukes are apart of space warfare.

Modifié par Ghurshog, 27 janvier 2010 - 05:19 .

[T1nk3rb311]

I just have one thing to say to this thread.



OH SHI-

[HardCache]

well .... how about this.



that codex listing you mentioned didn't say "for space combat" did it? maybe ships have anti missle defences for when/if a ship is inside the atmosphere of a planet. In that instance they would indeed need those defences to keep it safe from ground based missle systems.

[Ghurshog]

While possible the codex I am refering to doesn't make any differential between space and atmospheric combat. And most of all the codex entries refer to space functions and do not to my recollection call out 'any' atmospheric performance or design parameters.

[Homebound]

Did you NOT listen to that guy in front of the Citadel? A 20kg slug going at 1.3% of the speed of light is equal to a 38 kilo-ton ordinance. That is more than the power of the City-Buster dropped on Hiroshima.

EDIT: Bioware made Physics class so badass. 

Modifié par Just_mike, 27 janvier 2010 - 05:35 .

[Ghurshog]

Lol, no I didn't because I spent an hour when I started the game last night reading all the Codex entries that I was given.



I got only as far as the Normandy first reveal and leaving the cerberus doc.

[izmirtheastarach]

Okay, the key point here is in your quotes "Defensive lasers never miss".



No one uses missiles for space combat because the defensive technology has advanced to the point where any missile fired at a **** would immediately be destroyed by it's defensive GARDIAN lasers.

[Ghurshog]

Then why does the Codex clearly state the technology is used to defensed a ship?

And that assumes no Electronic Warfare is involved on either side?

And in point of fact yes lasers can miss because your fire control has to predict the targets trajectory. If the target is actively jinking on its attack vector yes it can miss.

While I agree that a defense 'is' possible the Codex entry inclusion at all in ME2 seems to me (and this is an assumption on my part) an Anti-missile system is needed. Otherwise why even bother listing a technology that never has to be used in the Codex?

Modifié par Ghurshog, 27 janvier 2010 - 05:49 .

[Ken Ueno]

I don't necessarily see a contradiction in what's been said. Missiles aren't in common use specifically because ships carry highly accurate point-defense lasers ("anti-missile" systems), and mass-effect-driven dumb projectiles are cheaper and just as destructive as explosives.



They do mention mass effect field-generating torpedoes though, which are fired en-masse by fightercraft to overwhelm point defense systems.

[Ken Ueno]

Bah! Too slow, someone beat me to it.



Also, lasers "don't miss" because they impact the target (almost) instantaneously. If you aim at the centre of the target, the margin of error is probably smaller than the size of the target.

[Ghurshog]

Of coarse we are getting in to war theory here, but extrapolating, if you use fighters to overwhelm point defenses then why can't you do the same with missiles carrying a mixture of EW, Nuke, and Kinetic warhead types.



And if you really want to kill something you use fighters in conjunction with missiles to overload the point defense, using 'Time on Target' tactics between the fighters and missiles giving the ship being attacked little to no time to really react to missile fire alone.



So again, it seems missiles are can/could be used in ME cannon.



Also if you can afford to make fighters you can afford to make missiles which just from our own military production experience are usually vastly cheaper to produce.

[izmirtheastarach]

Ken Ueno wrote...

Also,
lasers "don't miss" because they impact the target (almost)
instantaneously. If you aim at the centre of the target, the margin of
error is probably smaller than the size of the target.

Correct. Lasers literally cannot miss, if they are fired by a computer. Fire control does not have to predict trajectory, as trajectory is irrelevant. You cannot jink to avoid a laser.

Modifié par izmirtheastarach, 27 janvier 2010 - 05:57 .

[Loregothe]

In the Vietnam war, they did not include the gun on the F4 Phantom because they believed technology had advanced to the point where they were useless. By the end of the war they put them back on.



Just because your technology is more advanced, it does not follow that you remove the defenses created for technology that you no longer use. You enemy might be using them.

[Ghurshog]

izmirtheastarach wrote...

Ken Ueno wrote...

Also,
lasers "don't miss" because they impact the target (almost)
instantaneously. If you aim at the centre of the target, the margin of
error is probably smaller than the size of the target.

Correct. Lasers literally cannot miss, if they are fired by a computer. Fire control does not have to predict trajectory, as trajectory is irrelevant. You cannot jink to avoid a laser.

This makes the assumption that your fire control isn't spoofed by EW and are shooting at decoys.

[Solmanian]

they told you again and agian. ofcourse they exist. if there weren't lots of anti-missile systems, everyone would be using missiles.

[Ghurshog]

Solmanian wrote...

they told you again and agian. ofcourse they exist. if there weren't lots of anti-missile systems, everyone would be using missiles.

I was assuming that we had moved on from the 'do they exists' to a discussion of how to use them or how effective could they be.

[Br0th3rGr1mm]

So you are stating that ships should NOT have missle defense systems because nobody uses missles anymore because all ships have great msissle defense systems?
I get that the circular logic has you confused, but it DOES make sense to have a missle defense systems...especially if you are going to be in areas of space that have older weaponry in use.

Modifié par Br0th3rGr1mm, 27 janvier 2010 - 06:20 .

[rines]

If you guys wanted something more realistic, all space battles would seem like nothing is happening as it would be lasers only, anything else is obsolete, and lasers in space wont show any color, it will be invisible, nothing. You wont see anything except the ship blowing up. No sound either. Thatd be super fun.

[Ghurshog]

rines wrote...

If you guys wanted something more realistic, all space battles would seem like nothing is happening as it would be lasers only, anything else is obsolete, and lasers in space wont show any color, it will be invisible, nothing. You wont see anything except the ship blowing up. No sound either. Thatd be super fun.

We aren't asking for realism really. We are talking about extrapolating how similar weapon system may or may not work in the ME universe. 

And to address your point 'lasers only' doesn't really seem that viable either. Stealth systems and EW could make fire control system even less effective at medium to long engagement ranges. 

And the writers included a Codex entry for fighters for a reason. I assume because getting in close to a large warship 'can' be effective in the right environments/circumstances.

[Fhaileas]

(wrong thread)

Modifié par Fhaileas, 27 janvier 2010 - 06:45 .

[Vysirez]

Ghurshog wrote...

izmirtheastarach wrote...

Ken Ueno wrote...

Also,
lasers "don't miss" because they impact the target (almost)
instantaneously. If you aim at the centre of the target, the margin of
error is probably smaller than the size of the target.

Correct. Lasers literally cannot miss, if they are fired by a computer. Fire control does not have to predict trajectory, as trajectory is irrelevant. You cannot jink to avoid a laser.

This makes the assumption that your fire control isn't spoofed by EW and are shooting at decoys.

Exactly. Even more so, the accuracy of your lasers is only as good as your fire control systems. How are you sensing the target? Space is big, most sci-fi make up some advanced sensors that work essentially by magic so that things are not restricted to light speed. If you are restricted to light speed, then you are ulitmately guessing where anything is when your working at any reasonable distance in space.

So ultimately it depends on what kind of sensor system is used in the ME universe and how it works. How much info is available, and at what distances, how quickyl you recieve that info, and how possible it is to spoof or not spoof the info. Those kind of things are what would really define the weapon systems that would be used.

[Ghurshog]

^^ this

[SpideyKnight]

Hardly matters when your AI can hack their systems, open their airlocks and eject them all to the harshness of the void. A terrible death, but I must admit, so long as I was on the giving and not receiving end, I'd be laughing.

[mackster2289]

They have missile-defense systems because if they didn't, someone would just use missiles and they would have no defense.

[xMister Vx]

Advanced torpedoes (like the one fired by the Normandy) might have their own shields, who knows? Also, you can probably overwhelm the laser systems, Macross Missile Massacre style.

But it's a fair point. I'm glad someone cares about technical details in the game. I don't think we need more technobabble, just more precise descriptions of weaponry and effects.

Modifié par xMister Vx, 27 janvier 2010 - 08:29 .