Creating an "interesting" GA v SLN naval battle

Galactic Sapper wrote:Of course they can. At the very least you can get a bearing to the transmitter. Recon drones signals are detected in many situations, allowing the enemy to know approximately where the drones are but the FTL signal by itself isn't enough to get a target lock from.

In that case (im not sure, but lets assume that you could have a bearing), we could just use a horde of FTL retranslator drones, spreaded around the system, so there would be no way to determine which is the real command ship. Easy.

As long as it would be impossible to jam FTL coms, the remotr controlled warships would have all advantages.

tlb wrote:But let's assume they develop it. The counter to your suggestion is to find the command ship and destroy it; even if you only drive it into hyper, that breaks the command link.

Dilandu wrote: The command ship did not need to participate in battle; it could safely stay far outside hyper limit, protected by additional squadron of drones and sensor platforms (and if I'm not mistaken, there is no way to triangulate the source of FTL signals?). And there could be quite a lot of redundant command ships, so even if the enemy managed to destroy one, the other would took the functions.

The defenders would force the control ships to participate, once they understood what was happening. Even before understanding, the defenders would take measures against a second force sitting off from a main attack force (unless they were so overwhelmed that they could not). Once the control ships were forced to flee into hyper, then the command link is broken.
But what about repeater stations so the controlling ships cannot be localized? The response could still concentrate where the most defensive strength is. In the end you are going to need as much strength around the controllers as in the main attack force. At that point, why not combine the two into one stronger force being controlled from inside? You still get the advantages of reduced manpower and gain an even shorter control loop.

Dilandu wrote:

Galactic Sapper wrote:Of course they can. At the very least you can get a bearing to the transmitter. Recon drones signals are detected in many situations, allowing the enemy to know approximately where the drones are but the FTL signal by itself isn't enough to get a target lock from.

In that case (im not sure, but lets assume that you could have a bearing), we could just use a horde of FTL retranslator drones, spreaded around the system, so there would be no way to determine which is the real command ship. Easy.

As long as it would be impossible to jam FTL coms, the remotr controlled warships would have all advantages.

You have to remember this would have to contend with Apollo and Ghost Rider. As soon as a retransmitter is detected a drone heads out to localize it for a follow on Apollo volley - or a wedge kill by the drone if for some reason the defender thinks speed is required. Even if you brought along several retransmitters they'd get pooped sooner rather than later - and having a drone near the retransmitter would allow the defenders to get a cross bearing to your control ship in the bargain.

Couple that with the range advantage of Apollo. As soon as the real control ship is localized an Apollo volley can be launched without the defending fleet having to get in range. Even worse if they have the four stage system defense pods available, since those are even faster and might be pre-deployed closer to your control ship than the defending fleet.

Galactic Sapper wrote:You have to remember this would have to contend with Apollo and Ghost Rider. As soon as a retransmitter is detected a drone heads out to localize it for a follow on Apollo volley - or a wedge kill by the drone if for some reason the defender thinks speed is required. Even if you brought along several retransmitters they'd get pooped sooner rather than later - and having a drone near the retransmitter would allow the defenders to get a cross bearing to your control ship in the bargain.

Couple that with the range advantage of Apollo. As soon as the real control ship is localized an Apollo volley can be launched without the defending fleet having to get in range. Even worse if they have the four stage system defense pods available, since those are even faster and might be pre-deployed closer to your control ship than the defending fleet.

Oh please. Just stay over the hyper limit, and make a hyperjump as soon as enemy missiles are closing by. And the other command ship would took your functions from the other edge of system.

And even if - somehow - you took out ALL control capabilities, you would still have the armada of drones, who are continuing to fight. While they might not be capable of complex tactical solutions, without remote control, they clearly would be able to make SIMPLE tactical solutions and at very least inflict heavy casualties to defenders. And while defenders lose SHIPS AND CREWS, we would lose only SHIPS.

tlb wrote:The defenders would force the control ships to participate, once they understood what was happening. Even before understanding, the defenders would take measures against a second force sitting off from a main attack force (unless they were so overwhelmed that they could not). Once the control ships were forced to flee into hyper, then the command link is broken.

Considering that the defenders are rushed by the droneships with thousand-g acceleration, it is quite hard to think about any tactical solution that would allow defenders to move any significant force against control squadron, without said force being intercepted and mauled by drones. Most importantly, even if the defenders - somehow - managed to avoid the droneships (which would probably require sending all avaliable system defense missiles against them just to force them to deviate and miss the interception), what would forbade the control ships to just make hyperjump, hyper-sneak to the other edge of the system and return to realspace again?

But what about repeater stations so the controlling ships cannot be localized? The response could still concentrate where the most defensive strength is. In the end you are going to need as much strength around the controllers as in the main attack force.

They could, but only if they could discriminate all the decoys and other factors on extreme distances. And if the controlling ships have a squadron of drones to protect them, they could quite easily spoil any such attempt just by throwing the reserve droneships against enemy forces.

At that point, why not combine the two into one stronger force being controlled from inside? You still get the advantages of reduced manpower and gain an even shorter control loop.

Because advantage of thousand-g acceleration is too effective to ignore it.

In short - I agree, that in SOME cases, the defenders MIGHT be able to pull the trick and took out the control ships, thus forcing drones to rely on their own limited AI. Which would PROBABLY allow defenders to eventually defeat them, even under primitive AI control, droneships would inflict tremendous casualties upon defenders (and probably would wipe out all system off-planetary infrastructure, despite any defenders attempt to save it). But in most cases, control ships would not allow themselves to be easily destroyed, and defenders would be forced to cope with droneships, remote-controlled by human tacticians.

And, frankly - even mediocre commander could easily win battles if the have a fully disposable force that he could use to probe the enemy without thinking twice about it being trapped and destroyed.

Dilandu wrote:Oh please. Just stay over the hyper limit, and make a hyperjump as soon as enemy missiles are closing by. And the other command ship would took your functions from the other edge of system.

And even if - somehow - you took out ALL control capabilities, you would still have the armada of drones, who are continuing to fight. While they might not be capable of complex tactical solutions, without remote control, they clearly would be able to make SIMPLE tactical solutions and at very least inflict heavy casualties to defenders. And while defenders lose SHIPS AND CREWS, we would lose only SHIPS.

Considering that the defenders are rushed by the droneships with thousand-g acceleration, it is quite hard to think about any tactical solution that would allow defenders to move any significant force against control squadron, without said force being intercepted and mauled by drones. Most importantly, even if the defenders - somehow - managed to avoid the droneships (which would probably require sending all avaliable system defense missiles against them just to force them to deviate and miss the interception), what would forbade the control ships to just make hyperjump, hyper-sneak to the other edge of the system and return to realspace again?

Even a thousand gees is not enough to make a drone fleet capable of dodging long-range fire. As long as they're still on sensors, even a 10 minute ballistic flight would still have enough range on the last stage to retarget the drone fleet no matter where it went. They could only get about 1.8 million km from their projected position in a 10 minute ballistic phase and the last phase has more range than that.

The other alternative is to keep a defending force outside the hyper limit, so that when your control ship translates up to evade fire they translate into energy range of an ambush force. Massed graser fire means never having to say you're sorry.

And, frankly - even mediocre commander could easily win battles if the have a fully disposable force that he could use to probe the enemy without thinking twice about it being trapped and destroyed.

You're getting into territory such that EE violations are the logical counter. Eliminating the industrial base - by any means required - is the only counter.

Galactic Sapper wrote:
Even a thousand gees is not enough to make a drone fleet capable of dodging long-range fire. As long as they're still on sensors, even a 10 minute ballistic flight would still have enough range on the last stage to retarget the drone fleet no matter where it went. They could only get about 1.8 million km from their projected position in a 10 minute ballistic phase and the last phase has more range than that.

You forgot about the terminal evasion. I.e. drone ship, capable of changing her acceleration by several thousands of "g" would be enormously harder to hit (especially by high-velocity missiles like "Apollo", which reaction are slowed by relativistic time dilation). To put it simply, she could change her position by changing her acceleration much more than traditional ships possibly could.

Galactic Sapper wrote:You're getting into territory such that EE violations are the logical counter. Eliminating the industrial base - by any means required - is the only counter.

Why exactly? Orbital infrastructure - i.e. shipbuilding - is not covered by Edict (with the possible exception of space station purposely build as habitats, i.e. space colonies).

Look, the Eridani Edict is NOT connected with the technology. It is connected with the then-unquestioned ability of the Solar League to punish the violator, and lack of prolonged conflicts before First Manticore-Havenite war. Basically, no one was fighting the resource-dragging attrition wars, and everyone knew that it is hopeless to challenge the League. So no one actually have a reasons to start glassing the planets, and League make perfectly clear that anyone who might try that would lose. Of course, the downside was that weaker states could not use threat of countervalue strikes to deter the aggression of more powerful star-nations, but it was the inevitable compromise.

The SL-GA was is threatening the Eridani Edict generally because it clearly demonstrated that League MIGHT be challenged - and anyone who would came in place of League MIGHT be challenged also. I.e. if Alliance replaced the League, it would not have the same unquestioned authority - simply because Alliance already question (successfully) authority of the League. So any attempt from victorious Alliance to maintain the Edict would unavoidably be less effective, than of League. Simply because the Alliance gave a destructive example of challenging the "galactic policemen".

The other thing, of course, is the size of situation. IF Alliance would not be able to defeat the League fast, it would quite likely turn into the war of attrition. And sooner or later someone would start to glass the opponent planets simply to lower the opponent productivity.

So in short - the Eridani Edict is not linked to military technology. It is linked with the specific political situation, that no longer existed.

Dilandu wrote:You forgot about the terminal evasion. I.e. drone ship, capable of changing her acceleration by several thousands of "g" would be enormously harder to hit (especially by high-velocity missiles like "Apollo", which reaction are slowed by relativistic time dilation). To put it simply, she could change her position by changing her acceleration much more than traditional ships possibly could.

No, I very specifically accounted for terminal evasion, and even ran the numbers at 10k G. The only way your drone ships are getting out of the range basket of final stage MDMs is if they have missile-level acceleration themselves. The math simply DOES NOT WORK, even for MDMs with a large ballistic flight component.

And if you're thinking of taking incoming fire on the wedge, that's a joke. An incoming missile at 70% c crosses the effective range of its warhead in maybe a tenth of a second. An entire salvo of them spends that tenth of a second spread out over multiple bearings to the target so that no matter now fast you can turn your wedge it can't cover all angles at once. So you'll undoubtably catch some of them on your wedge but certainly not all of them.

Why exactly? Orbital infrastructure - i.e. shipbuilding - is not covered by Edict (with the possible exception of space station purposely build as habitats, i.e. space colonies).

Look, the Eridani Edict is NOT connected with the technology. It is connected with the then-unquestioned ability of the Solar League to punish the violator, and lack of prolonged conflicts before First Manticore-Havenite war. Basically, no one was fighting the resource-dragging attrition wars, and everyone knew that it is hopeless to challenge the League. So no one actually have a reasons to start glassing the planets, and League make perfectly clear that anyone who might try that would lose. Of course, the downside was that weaker states could not use threat of countervalue strikes to deter the aggression of more powerful star-nations, but it was the inevitable compromise.

The SL-GA was is threatening the Eridani Edict generally because it clearly demonstrated that League MIGHT be challenged - and anyone who would came in place of League MIGHT be challenged also. I.e. if Alliance replaced the League, it would not have the same unquestioned authority - simply because Alliance already question (successfully) authority of the League. So any attempt from victorious Alliance to maintain the Edict would unavoidably be less effective, than of League. Simply because the Alliance gave a destructive example of challenging the "galactic policemen".

The other thing, of course, is the size of situation. IF Alliance would not be able to defeat the League fast, it would quite likely turn into the war of attrition. And sooner or later someone would start to glass the opponent planets simply to lower the opponent productivity.

So in short - the Eridani Edict is not linked to military technology. It is linked with the specific political situation, that no longer existed.

Precisely. If the SL has the tech to crush an opponent, the only reason that opponent has to avoid EE violations is morality. The practical reasons for doing so are nil; what's the SL going to do, declare war on them? They already have! (effectively, anyway)

To put it another way: a system put in the position you've postulated has no reason not to take out the shipyards building that fleet by any means necessary, even if those means result in massive debris strikes dozens of times worse than Yawata. Even better if the workforce for those shipyards get killed in the process.

After the reduction of the SL in UH, the EE could survive as a multilateral treaty; an agreement that violators are the enemy of all humanity and obligating ALL signatories to dog-pile the violator. Of the ten biggest navies in the galaxy, no one of them could stand up to the other nine in a coordinated attack.

Galactic Sapper wrote: Why exactly? Orbital infrastructure - i.e. shipbuilding - is not covered by Edict (with the possible exception of space station purposely build as habitats, i.e. space colonies).

Look, the Eridani Edict is NOT connected with the technology. It is connected with the then-unquestioned ability of the Solar League to punish the violator, and lack of prolonged conflicts before First Manticore-Havenite war. Basically, no one was fighting the resource-dragging attrition wars, and everyone knew that it is hopeless to challenge the League. So no one actually have a reasons to start glassing the planets, and League make perfectly clear that anyone who might try that would lose. Of course, the downside was that weaker states could not use threat of countervalue strikes to deter the aggression of more powerful star-nations, but it was the inevitable compromise.

The SL-GA was is threatening the Eridani Edict generally because it clearly demonstrated that League MIGHT be challenged - and anyone who would came in place of League MIGHT be challenged also. I.e. if Alliance replaced the League, it would not have the same unquestioned authority - simply because Alliance already question (successfully) authority of the League. So any attempt from victorious Alliance to maintain the Edict would unavoidably be less effective, than of League. Simply because the Alliance gave a destructive example of challenging the "galactic policemen".

The other thing, of course, is the size of situation. IF Alliance would not be able to defeat the League fast, it would quite likely turn into the war of attrition. And sooner or later someone would start to glass the opponent planets simply to lower the opponent productivity.

So in short - the Eridani Edict is not linked to military technology. It is linked with the specific political situation, that no longer existed.

Galactic Sapper wrote:Precisely. If the SL has the tech to crush an opponent, the only reason that opponent has to avoid EE violations is morality. The practical reasons for doing so are nil; what's the SL going to do, declare war on them? They already have! (effectively, anyway)

To put it another way: a system put in the position you've postulated has no reason not to take out the shipyards building that fleet by any means necessary, even if those means result in massive debris strikes dozens of times worse than Yawata. Even better if the workforce for those shipyards get killed in the process.

After the reduction of the SL in UH, the EE could survive as a multilateral treaty; an agreement that violators are the enemy of all humanity and obligating ALL signatories to dog-pile the violator. Of the ten biggest navies in the galaxy, no one of them could stand up to the other nine in a coordinated attack.

I agree that the Eridani Edict will be enshrined in interstellar law, the same as the Deneb Accords and the Cherwell Convention. Although it was just an edict by the League, it was a firm part of the foreign policy: which means that every one of the member worlds agreed and supported it.
That sort of unanimity will not die with the old league and there is no reason why the GA would disagree. Specifically, it is not just morality but practicality that dictates this. The GA hoped that the League would fracture and then they could reach an accommodation with the resulting pieces. If the GA were to "glass" a planet, it is difficult to see how this would be maintained. Crash programs across the Core worlds would start to try to negate GA military advantage and at some point this would result in a "interesting" GA naval battle.

tlb wrote:That sort of unanimity will not die with the old league and there is no reason why the GA would disagree. Specifically, it is not just morality but practicality that dictates this. The GA hoped that the League would fracture and then they could reach an accommodation with the resulting pieces. If the GA were to "glass" a planet, it is difficult to see how this would be maintained. Crash programs across the Core worlds would start to try to negate GA military advantage and at some point this would result in a "interesting" GA naval battle.

The reason is simple; the Eridani Edict was based largely on the impossibility of challenging the League. Even assuming that GA would manage to replace the League (let's not forget, GA is the alliance of imperialistic powers. As soon as the common enemy would be dealt with, Manticora, Haven and Andermani would again be reado to tear each other throats - just recall how fast Entente failed after WW1 and how fast Allies and USSR parted ways after WW2) - even in that case, the GA would not have such aura of invincibility. Simply because, hey, they just defeated the League, which hold such aura previously.

And that's why Eridani Edict, enforced by GA wouldn't be as effective as enforced by League. Because if GA was able to successfully challenge the League, then someone else could successfully challenge the GA.

At very least, the lesser star nations would start to use the threat of countervalue strikes against planetary targets to stop the imperialistic advances of the great galactic powers against them.