Making the wrong impression on new players

[Occam Razor]

It's indeed very logical to judge things wich "could" occure approximely after 1000 years from current date, and basing our judgment on historical things, which have occured around 70 years ago in past.

We indeed have to base it on something, since we have only a few ideas how "real" space combat is gonna look like. And that's not how it looks in sci-fi games and movies.

Same could be told in oposite way. I like capital ships, and why my fun should be ruined, because someone thinks, that capships are cancer of disco? If Im doing missions with my battleship, and not harming anyone, why then 4 players can log bombers and just blow my ship up, right in the end of a mission? Why their fun should ruin mine?

If you don't want interaction with other players you should play Singleplayer. Of course sometimes one group has fun and another hasn't, but later maybe you have fun while someone else does not? That's just how it works.

The key word is Idea. We have a fleet of "things". Smaller will be called fighters, larger will be corvetes, even larger frigates and so on. They might even have nearly same role: Fighters will be pewing each others and larger, corvets will do same, frigates will do same.

But how they will do it- it's completely different story, don't you think?

It's still the idea from where the military sci-fi was taken from.

Let's say, that in space, both battleship and fighter will be in much same situation, not like floating in sea battleship and plane in the air.
Both will be affected by same laws and factors.

While that is true it does not really influence how the combat works. It simply does not matter, you cannot fully take the Pacific War model and take it to space without changing anything, bringing Capital Ships to the third dimension is a logical adaption, which does not influence the combat.

---

"Common sense is the best distributed commodity in the world, for every man is convinced that he is well supplied with it."
René Descartes

[Lonely_Ghost]

We indeed have to base it on something, since we have only a few ideas how "real" space combat is gonna look like. And that's not how it looks in sci-fi games and movies.

So, it won't be like WW II air to sea combat neither, still, some players like to compare those seperate things. I think, that all what human pilot going to do is not take a choice: Engage, run away, ignore. All piloting stuff going to do millions of computers and actuators, and act much faster than any human's reaction.

If you don't want interaction with other players you should play Singleplayer. Of course sometimes one group has fun and another hasn't, but later maybe you have fun while someone else does not? That's just how it works.

Firstly, interaction with players doesn't always means a PvP combat. I could wait for a fellow player to make missions together, and earn some money, or we should create our own server for this?
However, my post was referenced to this one:

Maybe because one's fun could ruin someone else's?[/align]

So basicly, you are saying same things. If caps interfered snub fight today, and pretty much screwed it, there is nothing holding those snoobs to log bombers and revenge. Both groupe of players have ships they want, and everybody is happy, regarding aspect of ship's choice.

While that is true it does not really influence how the combat works. It simply does not matter, you cannot fully take the Pacific War model and take it to space without changing anything, bringing Capital Ships to the third dimension is a logical adaption, which does not influence the combat.

Im sorry, but Im kinda finding hard to understand what do you mean here.

Yes we can't put WW II combat into space, however, there are being numerouse references to WW II airplane vs sea ships combat, as explain, why Disco's caps should be weak. So where is the point then? Should space combat been related much to WW II or not?

[Fluffyball]

The concept with big ships and fighters around it derives from old good WW2. But yes, if we came to the factors there wouldn't be any need for fighters in space - like most of military sci-fi titles, no matter if books, games or movie, share the idea - because it would be a risk for a pilot and waste of research time just to figure how to make life support small.

However, in current age of electronics, there's a possibility that huge vessels may be either controlled only by few crew members or even one person, yet we all know that the technology used in current space age (not sure about Chinese one, because we don't know what THEY have) is more like 10-20-30 years old, because of the reliability.

According to the big article about warfare in space, only big vessels would fight each other, but the problem is they would need to be very agile, if the lasers will have suitable powercore (leaving the miniaturisation away). But the laser idea may be bad because what if the hull had big mirrors? There's also the missile idea with nuclear device onboard (nukes in space behaves differently than on the planet), but either weapon or tech we use, crew onboard would be really in trouble...

---

User was banned for: http://discoverygc.com/forums/showthread.php?tid=138636
Time left: (Permanent)

[Thyrzul]

It's indeed very logical to judge things wich "could" occure approximely after 1000 years from current date, and basing our judgment on historical things, which have occured around 70 years ago in past.

I'm not sure if you noticed or not, but there are a massive list of things we both have in Disco and had in WWII (and also in real life of present days):

• Fighters, bombers, interceptors
  
• Gunsips, gunboats
  
• Destroyers, cruisers, battlecruisers
  
• Battleships, dreadnoughts, juggernaughts
  
• Carriers
  
• Free 3D movement (think about submarines)
  
• Guns and roses turrets, tracking and dumbfire missiles
  
• Nations, navies, police
  
• Governments, absolute and constitutional monarchies, dictatorships, republics, federations
  
• International politics, diplomacy, conflicts, wars
  
• Most importantly: humans, human way of thinking, human logic, human decisions

You can try to get as far from reality as you wish, keeping yourself away from real life comparisons, but one main aspect of sci-fi things is that a significant portion of it is realistic, and if you overdo the fiction part of sci-fi, at a point it'll turn into fantasy. And then there are things you can't escape no matter how hard you try.

@Toji
The existence of small strike-craft is highly plausible in space too, at least their agility should be an advantage over bigger ships. Once you'll understand snubcraft don't have less pros and more cons, but different ones comprated to caps, you'll realize it won't be a waste of research and resources to develop and manufacture smaller spaceships.

---

[Fluffyball]

@Toji
The existence of small strike-craft is highly plausible in space too, at least their agility should be an advantage over bigger ships. Once you'll understand snubcraft don't have less pros and more cons, but different ones comprated to caps, you'll realize it won't be a waste of research and resources to develop and manufacture smaller spaceships.[/color][/align]

Yeah, I have forgotten about the stuff like UAV, or rather USV - so Drones.

But the reason is if we make lasers happen, the battles will be rather deadly, because laser is hitting almost at the time of shot (in the planetary and moon-planet scale). Even now U.S. Navy is experimenting with laser systems that are rather point-defence, shooting at the missiles in the skies with 99% accuracy.

---

User was banned for: http://discoverygc.com/forums/showthread.php?tid=138636
Time left: (Permanent)

[Fluffyball]

For all those who were discussing warfare in space and Pacific War tactics used in sci-fi titles:

FWS Topics: Space Combat Weaponry

---

User was banned for: http://discoverygc.com/forums/showthread.php?tid=138636
Time left: (Permanent)