Aller au contenu

Photo

Wait, so, does humanity have the only nukes?


  • Veuillez vous connecter pour répondre
98 réponses à ce sujet

#26
SharpEdgeSoda

SharpEdgeSoda
  • Members
  • 378 messages

Jigero wrote...

Uh sorry to point this out but Nukes don't work in space, not unless you hit the thing dead on, seeing as how the Reapers have the biggest Ezeo Cores in the known galaxy, they probably won't get anywhere near it.

Wait, back up, they don't?

If that's true then several fictional sources have lied to me... Posted Image
I am going to need a minute...

#27
ERJAK2

ERJAK2
  • Members
  • 624 messages

VanguardtoDestruction wrote...

Roffkaiser wrote...

As is quoted multiple times in ME, a Dreadnought's main gun generates more force than the 2 bombs dropped in WWII, and it can shoot them out every few moments so why spend all the time making a bunch of A-bombs when you can shoot out a chunk of metal that costs like 10 bucks and does the same damage?


Yeah, except I would imagine at the time of ME the nukes far surpass even 1000 megatons if they tried to make one.  Like I said, todays H-Bombs are 50 megatons.  It is only the cheapness, easiness, and effectiveness of it against non-reaper enemies that keeps them using the plain metal chunks.  Now that there are Reapers though, it would be a good idea to research more powerful weaponry. 

Those Thanix Cannons are an example of how outdated the Ship Bases Mass Effect cannons are.  Its just like today, with machine guns.  There is no reason to upgrade since they are still effective against our enemies.  If however, Russia developed a bullet resistent suit that made guns useless, we would need to develop better tech.

Same thing with the advent of the Reapers. 


Nukes are useless. They are a conventional warhead based weapons system. Even the most simplistic ME laser defense grid would require dozen to hundreds of missiles fired at extremely close range for them to ever impact their target.

#28
SharpEdgeSoda

SharpEdgeSoda
  • Members
  • 378 messages
Stealth Nukes.



That's my only answer.



Stealth Nukes that go fast enogh and are small enogh that by the time you notice them, It's too late.



The Normandy while running silent can only get detected by visual, whose the say a nuke can't have similar "heat hiding" tech.

#29
mdp310

mdp310
  • Members
  • 100 messages

Agamo45 wrote...

Nuclear weapons aren't nearly as effective in space as they are on planet surfaces, since much of the damage has to do with the size of the fireball. There is no air in space so there can't be a fireball.

Most of the the energy would be directed AWAY from whatever you're trying to nuke, unlike a mass accelerator where most of the energy goes straight into the target.

#30
Jigero

Jigero
  • Members
  • 635 messages

SharpEdgeSoda wrote...

Jigero wrote...

Uh sorry to point this out but Nukes don't work in space, not unless you hit the thing dead on, seeing as how the Reapers have the biggest Ezeo Cores in the known galaxy, they probably won't get anywhere near it.

Wait, back up, they don't?

If that's true then several fictional sources have lied to me... Posted Image
I am going to need a minute...


Nope, a nukes devistating force is heat and pressure wave, if they blow up before they hit the target they will die right there, no air particals to hold the pressure wave and the heat  will bleed off quickly.  The only thing that will do any damage is the neutrinos from the radiation, but you can hardly call it damage.

#31
Amethyst Deceiver

Amethyst Deceiver
  • Members
  • 937 messages
why are nukes "too slow"



why cant they be launched from a mass accellerator

#32
TuringPoint

TuringPoint
  • Members
  • 2 089 messages
Aren't the kinetic slugs launched by a dreadnaught more devastating in energy output than a normal, city-buster sized nuke? How would a nuke be more likely to overload a kinetic barrier, in that case? Do kinetic barriers simply slow objects that are moving fast? Doesn't that demand raw energy dispersal of some form, which would be equal to what was required for fighting a nuke?




#33
SharpEdgeSoda

SharpEdgeSoda
  • Members
  • 378 messages

Alocormin wrote...

Aren't the kinetic slugs launched by a dreadnaught more devastating in energy output than a normal, city-buster sized nuke? How would a nuke be more likely to overload a kinetic barrier, in that case? Do kinetic barriers simply slow objects that are moving fast? Doesn't that demand raw energy dispersal of some form, which would be equal to what was required for fighting a nuke?


Technically they are more powerful then a nuke circa-1945, i would have imagined some change since then.

#34
The Benster

The Benster
  • Members
  • 19 messages
A nuke wouldn't work well in the vacuum of space because there would be no shockwave.

I like the idea of sovereign's guns shooting molten metal, as mentioned in the codex.

#35
Svest

Svest
  • Members
  • 222 messages
As has already been said, nukes just are not a very effective weapon without an atmosphere. Unless you could find a way to get the nuke inside the reaper's hull before it detonates, it would actually do less damage than a mass accelerated slug. This is of course assuming the reaper is properly shielded from EMP and its organic parts are shielded from radiation.

#36
marshalleck

marshalleck
  • Members
  • 15 645 messages

SharpEdgeSoda wrote...

Stealth Nukes.

That's my only answer.

Stealth Nukes that go fast enogh and are small enogh that by the time you notice them, It's too late.

The Normandy while running silent can only get detected by visual, whose the say a nuke can't have similar "heat hiding" tech.


You're right, stealth totally works against Reaper tech, that's how the SR-1 was able to evade the Collectors in the opening scene of ME2.

#37
Svest

Svest
  • Members
  • 222 messages

marshalleck wrote...

You're right, stealth totally works against Reaper tech, that's how the SR-1 was able to evade the Collectors in the opening scene of ME2.


I actually wondered about that myself.  In ME1 the Normandy seemed to have little trouble hiding from Sovereign at Virmire, yet the collectors could detect it no problem.

#38
Vaenier

Vaenier
  • Members
  • 2 815 messages
NOVA bomb

"Big bada boom"

#39
TheDFO

TheDFO
  • Members
  • 199 messages
I'm just gonna repeat what a few people have said: Nukes don't work in space. Most of the damage is from the tremendous shock wave generated. Shock waves need a medium to transmit through (air), of which there is none in space. There could be optics damage from the huge flash, and maybe some radiation in the form of an EMP, but my guess is any war ship should be hardened vs these. Ground forces must not be properly shielded to resist whatever causes the overload.



Oh, and it would be amazingly easy to make a mass accelerator nuke gun. If the acceleration is too high for the detonator electronics (tear them apart), then just send a hole tube with a chunk of uranium at one end, and a chunk of free uranium on the other. The sudden deceleration of the mass hitting a kinetic barrier should cause the free end to slam into the fixed in, creating a critical mass and BOOM. Of course, like I said, this wouldn't be that devastating in space (even if it went off right next to a ship).Of course, if you could get the bomb to go off INSIDE the ship, that's another matter.

#40
Vaenier

Vaenier
  • Members
  • 2 815 messages
nvm, got ninja'd

Modifié par Vaenier, 09 février 2010 - 02:21 .


#41
Arijharn

Arijharn
  • Members
  • 2 850 messages

Roffkaiser wrote...

That have been researching more powerful weaponry in the form of the guns you can research for the Normandy. Those puppies dusted a highly advanced Cruiser, so who knows what Dreadnought sized cannons of that type would do. Not to mention we have only seen one Dreadnought in the game and it was crewed by crappy Asari, where as a fleet of twenty something Cruisers killed a Reaper, what would happen in the "Final Battle" against the Reapers where you have dozens of Dreadnoughts? It would be a true Battle of the Titans.


You know, I actually think dreadnoughts would, as a whole, perform rather badly against Reapers and the human 'pioneering' with dedicated Fighter carriers would prove to be far more effective (and cheaper) against them. I say this because:
A) Their mention in ME2's codex as a form of foreshadowing
B) The Reapers were devastating against cruisers, while not confirmed of course, a fighter could prove harder to hit due to the firing lag the Reaper suffers with at least its main armament. We don't know if they have GARDIAN equivalents but it's safe to assume they might (if not at least their lightning conductive abilities). Fighters piloted by VI's at least would make them quite 'expendable.'
C) Thanix weapon systems can be mounted on Fighters.

I think the SR2 Normandy will prove to be quite effective against Reapers too.

#42
The_mango55

The_mango55
  • Members
  • 888 messages
Honestly humanity probably doesn't have nukes anymore either at this point.



Remember the mission where you had to disarm the nuke, Hackett claims if the council even found out about the nuke there would be sanctions.



It's not because it does a lot of damage that they are banned, but because they leave long term environmental problems.

#43
Roffkaiser

Roffkaiser
  • Members
  • 12 messages

The_mango55 wrote...

Honestly humanity probably doesn't have nukes anymore either at this point.

Remember the mission where you had to disarm the nuke, Hackett claims if the council even found out about the nuke there would be sanctions.

It's not because it does a lot of damage that they are banned, but because they leave long term environmental problems.

The use of all weapons of mass destruction on planet populations is illegal at this point, and yes Dreadnought main guns are considered WMDs. So the nuke is illegal as you say as well as having booby trapped probes flying through space may not seem the most responsible thing ever.

#44
Kenshen

Kenshen
  • Members
  • 2 107 messages

Nyaore wrote...

I'm pretty sure nukes have become obsolete by this time, or were changed into a much more efficient format. The Krogan apparently nuked their planet to oblivion, so it's obvious that at least one other species was able to make that technology.


They used them but I don't think they devoloped them.  I think Mordin comments on this.

#45
thesovereign

thesovereign
  • Members
  • 34 messages
If I recall correctly ME1 had a bonus mission that involved Shepard disarming a human nuke that got lost during the First Contact War. Apparently humans were so worried about getting their asses handed to them that they randomly launched nukes into what they believed to be Turian space.

#46
Shinigami013

Shinigami013
  • Members
  • 109 messages
Why not just radiation beams. itd kill organic tissue and soften metal so the reapers collapse on themselves?

#47
Giantevilhead

Giantevilhead
  • Members
  • 506 messages

VanguardtoDestruction wrote...

GooftyGoober wrote...

Yeah nukes are useless by the time ME takes place since they can get bigger explosions from Mass Effect rounds fired from their dreadnoughts.


Not Necessarily, I think it is only a 37 kiloton impact.  Even the Hydrogen Bombs today are 50 Megatons.

I just think it is much faster and more accurate then trying to fire a slow Nuke Missile, especially when you have GARDIAN lasers like the above posters said. 


Actually, the most powerful nuke ever built/tested had a yield of 50 megatons. The average nuclear warhead has a yield in the hundreds of kilotons.

Jigero wrote...

SharpEdgeSoda wrote...

Jigero wrote...

Uh
sorry to point this out but Nukes don't work in space, not unless you
hit the thing dead on, seeing as how the Reapers have the biggest Ezeo
Cores in the known galaxy, they probably won't get anywhere near it.

Wait, back up, they don't?

If that's true then several fictional sources have lied to me... ../../../images/forum/emoticons/crying.png
I am going to need a minute...


Nope,
a nukes devistating force is heat and pressure wave, if they blow up
before they hit the target they will die right there, no air particals
to hold the pressure wave and the heat  will bleed off quickly.  The
only thing that will do any damage is the neutrinos from the radiation,
but you can hardly call it damage.


The radiation is more than enough to melt through metal. Warheads can be designed to shape the direction of the nuclear blast so you'll get more than 20% to50% of the energy hitting the target, depending on how far the nuke detonates from its target.

The biggest problems with using nukes or any kind of missiles is that they're way too slow and they need computerized components for navigation. They'll fall to easily to ECM's and point defense weapons.

Mass effect fields also protect against radiation. Look at Haestrom. Light from the star vaporized that bug but your shields still protected you.

Modifié par Giantevilhead, 09 février 2010 - 03:13 .


#48
Shinigami013

Shinigami013
  • Members
  • 109 messages

Giantevilhead wrote...

VanguardtoDestruction wrote...

GooftyGoober wrote...

Yeah nukes are useless by the time ME takes place since they can get bigger explosions from Mass Effect rounds fired from their dreadnoughts.


Not Necessarily, I think it is only a 37 kiloton impact.  Even the Hydrogen Bombs today are 50 Megatons.

I just think it is much faster and more accurate then trying to fire a slow Nuke Missile, especially when you have GARDIAN lasers like the above posters said. 


Actually, the most powerful nuke ever built/tested had a yield of 50 megatons. The average nuclear warhead has a yield in the hundreds of kilotons.

Jigero wrote...

SharpEdgeSoda wrote...

Jigero wrote...

Uh
sorry to point this out but Nukes don't work in space, not unless you
hit the thing dead on, seeing as how the Reapers have the biggest Ezeo
Cores in the known galaxy, they probably won't get anywhere near it.

Wait, back up, they don't?

If that's true then several fictional sources have lied to me... ../../../images/forum/emoticons/crying.png
I am going to need a minute...


Nope,
a nukes devistating force is heat and pressure wave, if they blow up
before they hit the target they will die right there, no air particals
to hold the pressure wave and the heat  will bleed off quickly.  The
only thing that will do any damage is the neutrinos from the radiation,
but you can hardly call it damage.


The radiation is more than enough to melt through metal. Warheads can be designed to shape the direction of the nuclear blast so you'll get more than 20% to50% of the energy hitting the target, depending on how far the nuke detonates from its target.

The biggest problems with using nukes or any kind of missiles is that they're way too slow and they need computerized components for navigation. They'll fall to easily to ECM's and point defense weapons.

Mass effect fields also protect against radiation. Look at Haestrom. Light from the star vaporized that bug but your shields still protected you.

Again, Why not just shoot the radiation in beams?

#49
GtarTravis

GtarTravis
  • Members
  • 142 messages
Wow! Haha glad to see many of the people on these forums have studied both history and physics/chemistry! (Not sarcastic btw) The arguments about the vacuum of space hindering the power of H/A-bombs make sense from a scientific point of view. But let's just think this logically, from a story-teller's point of view.



If there really was an easy way to kill the reapers... we would have done it already and the series would have ended a long time ago. xP Clearly, the developers made the Reapers to be "resistant to all these Mass Accelerators" so that they would actually be a worthy enemy, otherwise they would only be another problem easily solved by a bullet to the head.

#50
Giantevilhead

Giantevilhead
  • Members
  • 506 messages

Shinigami013 wrote...
Again, Why not just shoot the radiation in beams?

Because all their technology is based on what the Reapers left behind and the Reapers didn't leave a super laser for them.