Why sci-fi space warfare is just WW2 naval combat with lasers? Why can't writers and directors be more creative and put more work into It?
 Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
 DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68 |
Thalidomide Vintage Ad Shirt $22.14 |
ZNYDER'S COAL POWERED SPACESHIP
>be more creative
Surely you have some suggestions.
They could have taken some inspiration from modern naval combat
>modern naval combat
You mean WWII naval combat? Because its still essentially the same.
>modern naval combat
>You mean WWII naval combat? Because its still essentially the same.
You mean that back in WW2, navies were already capable of attacking ships and thousands of km away with cruise missiles and antiship missiles and defending themselves with interceptor missiles and using electronic warfare to fool enemy missiles into hitting the water instead?
>enemy missiles
They were called kamikazes.
And back then ships only had their flak guns to deal with them, this they were extremely dangerous. Nowadays any frigate , let alone destroyers or cruisers would be able to intercept them with anti-air missiles easily, on top of being able to hit targets 2000km way with tomahawk cruise missiles.
My understanding is Chinese drone swarms will sink the capitalist Americans' carriers with east.
So why is China building, or buying used, aircraft carriers?
I wonder about those chinese balloons from time to time. I used to think it was prep work for Kessler Syndrome. But I'm more leaning to modern take of the WW2 bat bombs with drones.
the MIC always claims they lose in simulations so they can get more $$$
I always like the simulations too.
>We have to handicap our ships and detection because we're in a civilian shipping lane while wargaming this.
>Oh no our detection system is so weak, you can totally wipe out this task force.
>seriously
>money please
I don't even mind the tax dollars to it. But we gotta get back on task of pipelining education and careers to war.
ever since the "Bomber gap" they have been telling the same story and it works every time.
Noone invests nearly as much money into their military yet the american one seems to be constantly at threat of being outclassed and outgunned.
almost like there is someone profiting off of peddling that story.
No bucks, no Buck Rogers
It's that frickin simple
>You mean that back in WW2, navies were already capable of attacking ships and [hundreds] of km away with cruise missiles and antiship missiles and defending themselves with interceptor missiles and using electronic warfare to fool enemy missiles into hitting the water instead?
Now it fits fine yea.
Literally just take inspiration from all the moronic shit that happens in Eve Online.
>Capital ships have a jump drive that can either jump the capital to a cynosural beacon, or create a bridge so other ships can jump to that beacon
>Recently had a huge battle caused by a Titan pilot accidentally jumping instead of bridging
>Regularly have people getting jumped by Black Ops groups who use a scout to light a Covert Ops Cyno on people then jump their entire Black Ops battlegroup (frick blops Black folk)
>The Cavalry Raven meme, where the Raven would start at range and accelerate towards the target while launching Cruise Missiles. The Raven would be fit to be as fast as the missiles causing all the missiles to land at the same time dealing obscene amounts of damage
>High skill frigate gangs absolutely dunking on bigger ships while outnumbered due to their small size and high speed enabling them to control engagements
I want to play this game so bad but its too intimidating.
It has a huge learning curve, the community is full of gremlins, and it's autistic as frick, but I recommend trying it. It might not be for you, but there's nothing quite like it.
It's a game you need to commit a few years to
children of a dead earth proved that realistic space combat is boring and too complex for normies to understand. so its ww2 battleships in space forever, sometimes even locked to a 2d plane or with non-newtonian flight/speed limits
>realistic space combat
Do tell.
>realistic
>weapons with limited range
nah, realistic space-combat would involve missile salvos at maximum detection range, lots of drones and ballistic weapon bombardment from thousands of kilometers away.
Terra Invicta does an interesting take on space battles
they wish they were as dramatic as real ww2 battles. It's more like age of sail line battles but with lasers and none of the context or challenges that makes real AoS battles interesting
Age of Sigmar isnt very interesting. Thats why they brought back the old world.
>e like age of sail line battles but with lasers and none of the context or challenges that makes real AoS battles interesting
>Age of Sigmar.
Get the frick back to /tg/ and one of the 30 different containment threads, homosexual.
>NOOOOO YOU CANT MAKE FUN OF MY SIGMARINES!
They just arent cool. Sorry. Any other army arriving to the battlefield on lightning bolts would be cool but the somehow managed to make even that seem lame.
Look, homosexual, is someone mentions age of sail and then abbreviates it. Then you bust in with the kool-aid man Age of Sigmar. Then you're a homosexual. And now you're doubling down on it. Get the wiener out your mouth and leave, and fricking play anything that isn't GW.
>mad about people playing games on a gaming image board
Sounds like you haven't defined homosexual correctly.
The Expanse shows a more realistic version of both space travel and combat.
The Forever War had some interesting descriptions of space combat. Something to the tune of "they launched a missile, to dodge it we have to change trajectory, which will add 70 earth years to our subjective time".
That's not even remotely realistic.
No one would ever use a physical missile in space combat, unless they found a way to teleport it to the target destination.
Lasers or plasma beams make more sense.
Except we have actual nuclear missiles that can intercept a maneuvering target and will do actual damage instead of fictional laser guns that can't do anything more than generate a frickton of heat
I don't want to argue much because I don't remember the book that well. But I think this is meant to be while traveling at near-light speeds and at astronomical unit distances. Beams are relatively short-range. Imagine it more like submarine combat except in space.
Because it would literally just be about who decides to instantly delete the other party first, with no chance of retaliation or parlay.
Realistic space combat would pretty much be the same as realistic submarine combat. Dark, silent, boring and ridiculously dangerous.
Because that's unironically what Space Combat will be. In space combat, only projectile weapons are effective, akin to Napoleonic warfare. However, instead of cannonballs, it involves railguns firing hundreds of miles away with advanced targeting systems.
Even in anime where animators are allowed to go all out, space combat is just pretty much WW2 ships as well because it's way cooler to watch than realistic space combat.
Isn't "real" space combat relativistic weapons that fire from 1000 lightyears away and you can't detect or fight them in any way?
>WW2 naval combat with lasers
Lol. Dude, go look up like the battle of midway or something.
The two fleets would be sailing around trying to stay hidden while they sent out reconnaissance to find the enemy fleet and then send sorties of bombers to take them out. Low visibility, shitty reconnaissance, very very limited range on the bombers, and the "big" ships were rarely used. How is that like typical sci-fi warfare?
Its not just that its also WW2 Air combat.
>why are ships acting like ships????
Bravo
Laser cannons are just cooler and more of a spectacle than missiles
>debris field
why would there ever be a debris field in open space? Whats stopping the debris from just floating apart?