When you look at a lot of science fiction, there often seems to be some nefarious weapons attainable that are beyond the norm. I know in Frontier we had the energy bomb (which I could never seem to get to work!) but are we going to see any sort of planet killers? Some form of missile that'll be insanely hard to get your hands on but could take out a space station?
Doomsday Weapons?
- Thread starter ubermick
- Start date
WMD have been discussed before and generally frowned on I think. We players should be a part of the galaxy, but not a large part and certainly not be powerful enough to make such big changes on it. It would be a disaster if everyone could eventually get weapons that could destroy space stations.
We each have a story that will unfold, but it shouldn't be able to wreck other peoples.
We each have a story that will unfold, but it shouldn't be able to wreck other peoples.
My feeling is that while players will never have access to WMDs, there's no reason why occasional injected scenarios with NPC-owned doomsday weapons couldn't be generated. By exploiting different moral standpoints it could be a great driver of player conflict. Humanitarian players on one side might be trying to stop the rogue general / mad scientist / supervillain from detonating his planet killer while others, ready to reap financial or political profit from the mayhem, might be trying to ensure he completes his mission regardless of casualties.
If you want a massive weapon, then I think it should be handled in a similar way to the planet killer weapon in Babylon 5 where another race had the weapon which took a long time to set up and they employed the services of others to use and defend the weapon (not really an accurate description ) .
That way no player had the huge advantage of such a weapon and you as a pilot could decide if you should help to defend it and therefore destroy the economy of the system for the benefit of another system or if you should defend the planet by attacking the weapon in order to keep the status quo.
That way no player had the huge advantage of such a weapon and you as a pilot could decide if you should help to defend it and therefore destroy the economy of the system for the benefit of another system or if you should defend the planet by attacking the weapon in order to keep the status quo.
The frame-shift drive is inertialess. Most likely it slows down the lower you get into the planet's gravity well. Even if you managed to drive an FTL frame shift anaconda into the side of a station, there would be no boom as it would be an inertialess "collision".
In FE2, for some military missions, we received a military nuclear missile. Only one was sufficient for destroying a secret military base
I think it completely suffices if nuclear weapons (fission and fusion) remain the strongest weapon in existence. After all, one need not obliterate an entire planet just to obliterate anything on its surface. Heck, even the Empire in Warhammer 40k, known for its excessive use of destructive power, performs an Exterminatus by carpet-nuclear-bombing the surface, for example.
And then, since ED wants to remain mostly realistic, a weapon to unleash enough energy in a sufficiently short amount of time, to disintegrate an entire planet, would likely be so massive, that the mere act of moving it around would cripple the resources of its owner.
If there will be a singular doomsday device in ED, as opposed to just a massive attack with a lot of nuclear weapons, it might come in the form of a huge engine strapped to a large asteroid (like the one that killed the dinosaurs), bringing it on a collision course with the target planet. Still a massive undertaking, but probably doable for a large political entity willing to expend the resources.
And then, since ED wants to remain mostly realistic, a weapon to unleash enough energy in a sufficiently short amount of time, to disintegrate an entire planet, would likely be so massive, that the mere act of moving it around would cripple the resources of its owner.
If there will be a singular doomsday device in ED, as opposed to just a massive attack with a lot of nuclear weapons, it might come in the form of a huge engine strapped to a large asteroid (like the one that killed the dinosaurs), bringing it on a collision course with the target planet. Still a massive undertaking, but probably doable for a large political entity willing to expend the resources.
I want a little doctor!
As FD wants to keep ED close to reality as possible, no planet/star busters/meteoroid guns/etc. I can see nukes to be used for planetary bombing, but that's also depends on why to do so, due of quite easy retaliation. In space to nuke someone you need really big bomb and being really close.
Another class of WMD could be danger nano tech, chemical/bio weapons, but I suspect they could be not so effective due of safety measures against them (currently they work only because they fast, deadly and there's no good protection against them).
In our days already WMD as actual weapons are mentioned very rarely, and mostly countries resort to regular bombing, troops on the ground, or even economical blockades and sanctions.
Another class of WMD could be danger nano tech, chemical/bio weapons, but I suspect they could be not so effective due of safety measures against them (currently they work only because they fast, deadly and there's no good protection against them).
In our days already WMD as actual weapons are mentioned very rarely, and mostly countries resort to regular bombing, troops on the ground, or even economical blockades and sanctions.