[karajorma]

Like I said it was a contested planet. IIRC the population was actually largely vasudan.

[TrashMan]

Well, if you recall the FS1 Ursa animation, it showed the bomber flying over the surface uneasing a hail of Fury missiles.

thus, if a brick like Ursa can fly in the atmosphere that means they must prolly use some anti-grav drive or something, since Ursa isn't aerodinamical at all, and I doubt it has any lift...

[Pilot Of The US]

FS1 Ursa animation...... i dont seem to recall that one...

[aldo_14]

Originally posted by TrashMan
Well, if you recall the FS1 Ursa animation, it showed the bomber flying over the surface uneasing a hail of Fury missiles.

thus, if a brick like Ursa can fly in the atmosphere that means they must prolly use some anti-grav drive or something, since Ursa isn't aerodinamical at all, and I doubt it has any lift...

I'm not aware of any FS1 animation that shows the Ursa even flying, let alone in atmosphere.

EDIT; cb_fury has a small inlay animation of an Ursa firing missiles, but it's clearly against a nebula background.

[Unknown Target]

What are you talking about Trashman? Aside from that single scene in the FS2 intro, there is no endo-atmospheric flight in any of Freespace.

[Carl]

Originally posted by Pilot Of The US
FS1 Ursa animation...... i dont seem to recall that one...

me neither. the only atmospheric flight i ever saw in FS1 was in the Lucifer bombaring Vasuda animation.

[Pilot Of The US]

quote: "the only atmospheric flight i ever saw in FS1 was in the Lucifer bombaring Vasuda animation"

Was that a cutscene or a command animation?

[aldo_14]

cbanim.

EDIT; cb_vprime in root.vp

[Pilot Of The US]

Quote: "cb_vprime in root.vp"

Umm ive just had a look into the root.vp file and is no cb_vprime file in there.

[aldo_14]

cbanim.vp, sorry.  I had the wrong filenam and right vp name, then edited it to the right ani filename & wrong vp

[Pilot Of The US]

ok let me get this straight, the file is called cb_vprime and it is inside the cb_anim.vp. right?

[aldo_14]

probably.

[pyro-manic]

I suspect that ballistic weapons would still be the norm for ground combat. Lasers have problems with accuracy and dissipation, and plasma weapons would be very dangerous for the user in the event of a malfunction. They'd probably be very advanced though - small caliber (perhaps 3-5mm or so), with explosive and/or armour-piercing tips, fired by magnetic fields - in essence, small railguns. You'd have higly accurate, long-ranged, powerful weapons, and the ability to carry lots of ammuntion, possibly of different types to suit the situation at hand.

There could be special weapons as well, though - plasma area-suppression weapons (like really nasty flamethrowers), and probably laser-based anti-armour weapons (like a big sniper rifle).

[willy_principal]

Excellent ideas!!!
i conccurrrr

i wonder if they already developed optical camouflage and stuff (like Predator)

[aldo_14]

they wouldn't have shielding for ground forces, would they?  I tend to think not, because I'd imagine the simple physics of maintaining a forcefield (electromagnetic?) in an atmospheric environment are different to a a vacuum.  Or maybe even gravity has some effect upon it.

[willy_principal]

yes...........it's improbable that the marines have shields...they would need to carry a 'pocket' reactor to power it............it would be un-tactical.............

and what about the camouflage..........................they have already invented the optical camouflage, like the one Predators had...

[pyro-manic]

It all depends on the technology of the shield, I suppose. It could be some sort of EM field, as you suggest, or it could be a layer of charged particles suspended in a field, or it could be something else entirely. I think that shielding for individual troops would be somewhat difficult to implement - they'd probably have some sort of reactive adaptive armour, though - it does different things depending what hits it.

I think "chameleon" camouflage would be commonplace (armour changes colour to suit background), but full optical diffusion camouflage - like Predator cloaking - would be hellishly expensive. It might also be easily defeated by using broad-spectrum vision technology - using IR and UV goggles for example...

[aldo_14]

Of course, the optical camo could have been outlawed by the (equivalent to) Geneva Convention; say if they common response to it was simply to scatter-burn possible enemy positions with napalm.

[FireCrack]

you mean BETAC?

I'd think that using the guns on spacecraft would take the place of a sea navy. And some fightercraft seem atmosphere capable (ex perseus)


I'd say the weapons used in hallfight would be used only in space where gravity (or lack thereof) makes them more portable.

[aldo_14]

Maybe... I don't think it's explicitly clear what BETAC covers.