True. Then there's asymmetric warfare. Current Aegis systems can be
jammed... or just overwhelmed with saturation (See the 2002 Millennium
Challenge, where the Red Force commander playing Iran was able to take out
a US carrier and about 20 ships using a massive barrage of relatively
primitive ballistic missiles. Then he hit the rest of the task force with
speed boats and dingies packed with explosives, etc).
On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 1:36 PM, John Potter <> wrote:
>
>
> I think you could be possibly making an untrue assumption. Missile combat
> on fleet scales are not about throwing powered boulders into space hoping
> the target stays still.
>
> You are correct in your defensive understanding of the situation but give
> no credit to the ingenuity of those employing the missiles. EW is a
> critical factor into which all those point defense weapon must face.
>
> Intermixing your missiles with EW makes that task infinitely more complex
> (and an opposed skill task for MFD operators when computer technology is
> even).
>
> As I said weapons technology is cyclic in nature. If your going to field a
> weapon platform you usually have put some thought into how to get around
> the 'known' defensive counter-measures.
>
> If an Aegis like system is employed than logically saturation and EW are
> the keys to overpowering it. However its not a given the defender wins when
> done as a thought experiment.
>
>
> On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 1:24 PM, Master Uxi <> wrote:
>
>>
>> IIRC the main issue with KKM is that anti-missile lasers are guaranteed
>> to be able to shoot them down within a hex range with a specified rate of
>> fire. Don't remember the exact math but I want to say between 400 and 800
>> shots in a 30-minute round. Any battle fleet squadron would have a couple
>> Aegis analogues bristling with these.
>>
>> The reality is the prep for them is contingent on their being used, so
>> it's a bit of circular logic. if the KKM's are possible, the anti-missile
>> lasers will be equipped to deal with them but if they're not, then the
>> lasers aren't there, so makes the missiles viable again.
>>
>> As far as nukes/missiles, seems more likely if the Imperium was going to
>> ban them, launchers would be banned entirely. Of course, certain
>> lawbreakers are going to equip them anyway but seems to easy to tamper with
>> the warhead or swap them out on any mid TL world (for primitive fission) on
>> up. I did like the idea of civilian chemically pumped lasers, though.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 1:17 PM, John Potter <>wrote:
>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Don't worry it won't stop me from making a kinetic kill missile and the
>>> launcher. We'll see how it turns out.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 12:56 PM, <> wrote:
>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> I had forgotten about the abstract version in the core rulebook that you
>>>> are using.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> > No I think I am going to fail because the missile won't have enough
>>>> fuel
>>>> > to
>>>> > cover the average distance in range bands that is randomly rolled for
>>>> in
>>>> > the ship combat resolution sequence.
>>>> >
>>>> > I think the overall performance envelope on ship scale is going to
>>>> end up
>>>> > to be too small but we'll see.
>>>> >
>>>> > On Mon, Jun 25, 2012 at 12:49 PM, <> wrote:
>>>> >
>>>> >> **
>>>> >>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> If the world was fair then every bad thing that has ever happened to you
>>> would have been deserved.
>>>
>>
>>
>
>
> --
> If the world was fair then every bad thing that has ever happened to you
> would have been deserved.
>
>