What does no space combat/spaceships mean? (Orbital combat)

Re: What does no space combat/spaceships mean? (Orbital comb

Then i don't understand why there's people going "build spaceships cause you can bring your army"

Re: What does no space combat/spaceships mean? (Orbital comb

"Programed" means "dumb". Computers are not smart.

Re: What does no space combat/spaceships mean? (Orbital comb

These aren't exactly regular programs though. (see other topic that was talking about self-replicating/evolving machines, implying the ability to modify their own code).

Re: What does no space combat/spaceships mean? (Orbital comb

nord thinks that in the future computers will be as advanced as they are now.

Re: What does no space combat/spaceships mean? (Orbital comb

Again, I never said that. The fleets use the entire mass of solar systems, but it doesn't have to mean that each individual ship is gigantic. They can simply be very, very numerous. See them as a Dyson sphere where, using the entire system's mass, instead of (or in addition to) a swarm of solar collectors around the star(s), they build a swarm of warships.
Also I read Atomic Rockets too, for what it's worth in a game with giant robots.
IRL I'd say they could go for RKVs (they don't even need to be antimatter-filled), interstellar superlasers (1+km gamma ray lasers can hit other systems), antimatter beams or even black hole launchers if you fin a way to produce micro-black-holes that don't require a galaxy-sized particle accelerator.
Here, I'd say they would go for swarms of warships, and fleets of advanced metal planets depending on how those are effective and how better they can make them compared to the relic ones found around. In any case, I'd expect their riot suppression weapons to be gatling nukes.

I'm pretty sure it's far easier IRL to turn the entire mass of a system into whatever you want than to make a star explode. All you need for the former is a few well-programmed Von Neumann probes. For the latter, well I don't think we have any idea about how to do it with only the system's mass.

That was the argument behind the battlecruiser. Outrun what you can't fight, outgun what you can't flee. It didn't work well.
Mobility isn't an advantage to take on an opponent you can neither damage nor survive.

Too bad the Commander isn't in the fleet itself. It just has to let four lines of script and an IFF setting and it can go its merry way letting the fleets guarding the sector and expand at their own glacial pace.
And as the best way to counter a starfleet is to build another starfleet, the status quo would most probably that everyone is either already building those or long dead.

And what could it possibly be? It has to be a way that makes destroying (and surviving) them easier than building them even for a lone Commander, and it can not be applied to units on the battlefield, obviously.
It also have to be either more believable lore or bring more interesting gameplay, preferably both.

Re: What does no space combat/spaceships mean? (Orbital comb

So what's to stop the fleet from going rogue? After all, we're talking about a universe in which all traces of civilization are gone, and the only remaining evidence are the war machines that rampage across the galaxy with no programmed interest other than killing each other. Going rogue seems to be how this whole mess started in the first place.

If a Commander is not part of a fleet, then there is little he can do to direct it or protect it from the influence of other Commanders. If it's just a bunch of ships with unmitigated orders to "consume, kill, replicate", then they're as much a threat to their creator as anyone else. Chances are that the creator is already long dead (since he was dumb enough to not hide in his fleet), and the fleet exists due to its own directive. A big enough fleet effectively becomes a death wall, obliterating everything in its path (and likely itself), and it is in every Commander's interest to stay out of the way or see it destroyed.

There are certainly plenty of doomsday scenarios, and a giant space fleet is just one more in this troubled galaxy. Despite how terrible it may be, a space fleet still can't keep up pace with the war, and so it won't have any impact on how commanders fight over new sectors.

Its purpose would be more of a "sudden death" mode, as a way of deliberately purging a game that has gone on for a few hours/days, and 90% of everything is destroyed, and you just want a new game. I'm not sure such a thing is needed, since these guys are more than capable of destroying planets on their own.

Re: What does no space combat/spaceships mean? (Orbital comb

I'm sure of it. Cause it's definition of word "computer" - that's a thing performing orders. No matter how sophisticated software and hardware is, no matter how much self-learning you'll implement, it's still predefined behaviour that could be replicated on same input. That's the definition of algorithm.

Actually, the more sophisticated hardware is, the more "dumb" computer is - it makes less errors and therefore it's behaviour even more deterministic.

Computer that makes random decisions is not computer anymore.

Re: What does no space combat/spaceships mean? (Orbital comb

Treat the randomness as an input. Holy ****; you suddenly have a computer with an algorithm that is never going to see the same input twice.

Re: What does no space combat/spaceships mean? (Orbital comb

Why would it go rogue in the first place? They aren't sentient, they are the product of millennia of development and refinement, and they have IFF.
Commanders may have gone rogue, but they are probably sentient. Those starships wouldn't go rogue anymore than a missile would.

But let's admit that for some unknown reason, this can't work. Then how would you see the galactic war happening? If it's simply a matter of assassination (each player has one life), then it's just a tournament, not a conquest game. The only difference would be that it may be possible to attack with superior numbers to gain an advantage, which generally makes it for a less interesting game for everyone.

Again, what could take on such a fleet? Something that doesn't make for a less believable lore, a less interesting gameplay and that can't be used in a Commander's fight?

That's an interesting idea. If the GW lasts for too long and/or depending on the setting, some NPC unstoppable fleet begins to eat the galaxy, shrinking the playable sectors.

Re: What does no space combat/spaceships mean? (Orbital comb

Ok, so you guys are saying you want orbital units to support combat by being able to fire and/or give intel on the surface, but not fire upon other orbital units?

Idk, I think orbital units should be able to fire at each other, but be the least ineffective unit on each other so it doesn't take the front stage over the entire game (there should be ground weapons to take shots at orbitals, and there is always invading them and/or hitting them with meteores).

Also, it shouldn't be a god unit against the ground either. It should be vass, but not strong. Know what I mean? It should be able to pressure other orbitals, shoot a lot at the ground, have a fairly strong radar, but not be absolutely necesary for that radar and not be stronger than radar jamming and not instakill buildings.

I think there is a damage that would make it effective at damaging multiple units in the field, without making it able to wipe out all armies. This would probably balance it against other orbitals too, having a limited dps but being able to sustain it with the right resources. Then you could always build more to get more dps until you do "earn" the rights to take the land under the enemy's feet.

Re: What does no space combat/spaceships mean? (Orbital comb

Sadly, but no. Computer data types are limited and discrete. So by using random as input and utilizing every possible bit of all possible information that could be stored in mass of our whole star system, you just got insanely big number of possibilities, but still - finite.

Quantum computers do extend this even more, but not indefinitely either.

Re: What does no space combat/spaceships mean? (Orbital comb

This has gone off topic.

Re: What does no space combat/spaceships mean? (Orbital comb

Oh then, predict the results generated on this site. Hint: if you can then there is a nobel prize in it for disproving chaos theory.

Re: What does no space combat/spaceships mean? (Orbital comb

It's from -99999999 to 999999999, maybe perfectly distributed, so you should get same result each 1099999998 times. It has nothing to do with chaos theory and chaos theory is theory of mathematical order of chaotic behavior.

Sadly, but there is no nobel prize for disproving people ignorance.

Re: What does no space combat/spaceships mean? (Orbital comb

Someone didn't read how they got the numbers. You also fail at probability.

Re: What does no space combat/spaceships mean? (Orbital comb

Theres no such thing as random in a computer. The random function used in programming uses the time and aloot of math, but its sure as hell not truly random.

Re: What does no space combat/spaceships mean? (Orbital comb

Don't venture out into the wild. The dumb beasts of nature turn out to be surprisingly cunning and dangerous, even though they don't write poems.

They actually sell USB randomisers these days that take random data from their surrounding area to generate numbers that are truly as random as anything in existance can be.

Re: What does no space combat/spaceships mean? (Orbital comb

The thing your talking about generates "avalanche noise" (Not real noise btw, its just called that) thats highly unpredictable and generates a random number out of that. Its still not truly random however.

Just becuse humanity cant easily predict something dosent make it random.

But it may be, as you said, "as random as anything in existance can be". Since random is more a theoretical concept anyway, (unless someone here have proof of the chaos theory).

Re: What does no space combat/spaceships mean? (Orbital comb

Yeah exactly, if you discount those things as "not random" then effectively there is no such thing as random anymore They are, for all intents and purposes, 'random'.

Those things are very likely to be more random then a die-roll.

Re: What does no space combat/spaceships mean? (Orbital comb

I'm sorry, but I'm an electrical engineer and a little bit of me died when you said avalanche noise isn't real noise. Just because it has a non-white distribution, doesn't make it not truly random.