Recent Posts

Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10
1
The Academy / automate fuel transport from civilian harvesters
« Last post by Seolferwulf on Today at 09:35:41 AM »
Hi there!

I've got a bunch of civilian harvesters sitting at Uranus.
I'd like to automate the fuel transport from there to my colonies and tried that by having my transporter refuel from specific civilian task groups.
The problem is I get errors whenever they replace a harvester, since the order is asking for a non-existent harvester.

What do you do to avoid such a problem?
2
Aurora Bugs / Re: Official v7.10 Bugs Reporting Thread
« Last post by Detros on Today at 07:07:15 AM »
It seems like shipping line managed to deliver part of research facility (RF) to other target than it should.

Planets A, B and C: A was offering 5 RF, B asked for 2 RF and C asked for 3 RF. Each of them is in other system, all JPs have JGs.
A now has no more RF left in supply, B has 0.55 RF and 0.35 RF are on the way there while C got 4.1 new RF.
3
Haji's Fiction / Re: From the Ashes - part 32
« Last post by Admiral Cole on Today at 05:17:37 AM »
Desperately waiting for your next update! Its an amazing read and also helps so much with understanding the game!
4
C# Aurora / Re: Replacing PDCs
« Last post by Bremen on Yesterday at 12:17:22 PM »
Maybe the discussion about nukes should also go elsewhere? It's not really pertinent to the ground forces revamp.
5
C# Aurora / Re: Replacing PDCs
« Last post by alex_brunius on Yesterday at 08:02:35 AM »
No, they aren't.  There isn't a precise boundary for "tactical" nuclear weapons (which have gone out of favor recently), but a W76 definitely isn't one.  Try something more like 10-20 kt.  SLBMs are strategic weapons, plain and simple.  And you're not just going to use fireballs to kill things, as that's inefficient. 

Yes I know, but since there isn't a well defined boundary I used the good old tried "better prove a solid point picking examples favoring the opposing side rather then your own".

Using fireballs to kill things being extremly inefficient is exactly the point I was trying to prove  ;D
6
C# Aurora / Re: Replacing PDCs
« Last post by byron on Yesterday at 07:22:15 AM »
Submarine launched nukes are often considered the upper border of what would be a "tactical" nuke, so let's take one of the most common (W-76) in the US/UK arsenal. It has a fireball radius of 500 meters when detonating on the ground meaning the fireball covers an area of 0.79 km^2.
( Source: https://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/ )
No, they aren't.  There isn't a precise boundary for "tactical" nuclear weapons (which have gone out of favor recently), but a W76 definitely isn't one.  Try something more like 10-20 kt.  SLBMs are strategic weapons, plain and simple.  And you're not just going to use fireballs to kill things, as that's inefficient. 

On the other hand Marski, if you are tossing ground detonation nukes around in such numbers that the fireballs overlap you can be fairly confident that whatever formation existed there does so no longer.
Is this a planet you want to keep?  Because if so, I'd recommend strongly against that.  Groundbursts are very dirty. 

Alright, since it seems I'm possibly the only one here who's actually gone through military service and is in reserve, I should explain couple of things for you folks.
I'm not military, but I've spent quite a bit of time studying nuclear weapons.  Also, please stop being condescending.

Quote
Nuclear weapons aren't magical. They operate on laws of physics like everything else. You don't drop them somewhere and have everything go dead with 100% certainty. Outside the imminent blastzone and lethal air pressure area, you can survive by simply hiding in a foxhole. This means vehicles too; dig in, wait for the blastwave to pass, get out, prepare for fallout unless your mission requires you to keep moving.
This, at least, is true.  Although it's not always the blast that kills you. 

Quote
Modern militaries across the globe have plans and doctrines on how to operate in a nuclear war. They differ and vary from country to country but they all have one thing in common; spread out. Companies have minimum distance of atleast ten kilometers from each other to reduce potential losses from TNW (Tactical Nuclear Weapon) being dropped. Motorized, Mechanized and Armored military formations are the most vulnerable and easiest to find and are on top of the priority list just below HQ's for TNW strike.
No.  10 km between companies is way too much.  Spreading out is good, but you can't fight like that, and most tactical weapons aren't that lethal.  Seriously, show me one tactical weapon with any kind of lethal radius of even 5 km.
And armored/mechanized formations are the most survivable on a nuclear battlefield, not the least.  AFVs are remarkably blast-resistant (hence enhanced-radiation weapons) and can carry NBC protection systems with them.

Quote
Infantry on the other hand are the least vulnerable (yeah, surprising), they can spread out as much as needed thus making it impossible to take out an entire battalion of infantry with just TNW's, infantry can take cover in absolutely anything or create some very fast. They aren't restricted by infrastructure and therefore can move anywhere and are difficult to detect from air or space.
And then are incapable of moving or, you know, actually doing anything useful.  Leg infantry has its uses, but when it has no supporting infrastructure, it's not going to stand up to someone who does.
7
C# Aurora / Re: Replacing PDCs
« Last post by sloanjh on Yesterday at 07:13:27 AM »
(or, at least, the majority of the vocal us)

Sweet!

John
8
C# Aurora / Re: Replacing PDCs
« Last post by chrislocke2000 on Yesterday at 06:13:50 AM »
I'm really looking forwards to the changes in ground combat but think the issues of interaction of ground forces with ships and the differing mechanics is an area that needs some thought. I'd still be keen to see ships having to move to a low orbit for them to be considered involved in ground combat in same phasing as that and for ground to space anti ship weapons that are used by ground forces to be limited to engaging ships that are in such low orbit.

Having ships in such a position being a force multiplier rather than something that is shooting every five seconds v the longer term ground turns feels like a better way of doing it.

I'd also like to see the effects of nuclear strikes being more damaging in terms of impact on economy, reaction of the population etc such that whilst they can of course be used as an effective way to damage ground forces there is more of a decision to be made by the player or NPC on such use.
9
C# Aurora / Re: Replacing PDCs
« Last post by alex_brunius on Yesterday at 05:46:16 AM »
On the other hand Marski, if you are tossing ground detonation nukes around in such numbers that the fireballs overlap you can be fairly confident that whatever formation existed there does so no longer.

It quickly becomes a problem of math and economics...

Earth has a total surface land area of ~150 million km^2.

Submarine launched nukes are often considered the upper border of what would be a "tactical" nuke, so let's take one of the most common (W-76) in the US/UK arsenal. It has a fireball radius of 500 meters when detonating on the ground meaning the fireball covers an area of 0.79 km^2.
( Source: https://nuclearsecrecy.com/nukemap/ )

You would need to drop around 200 million such nukes to cover the entire land surface of the Earth and ensure you wipe out all hiding & dug in spread out infantry.

Even if you use an airburst and the larger air blast radius ( resulting in universal injuries and widespread fatalities for exposed & unprotected, but most dug in infantry probably survives ) we get 33.5km^2 area covered and around 5 million warheads needed to cover the surface of the earth.


See the problem?
10
C# Aurora / Re: Replacing PDCs
« Last post by Hazard on Yesterday at 04:11:45 AM »
*snip*

On the other hand Marski, if you are tossing ground detonation nukes around in such numbers that the fireballs overlap you can be fairly confident that whatever formation existed there does so no longer.
Pages: [1] 2 3 ... 10