[Cobra]

They're original...I don't remember other attempts...

Just because there weren't any publicized attempts at orbital bombardments doesn't mean yours is the only one.

Also, Dysko's reply.

[Koth]

I can also add Sol: A History to that list.

[Mobius]

I didn't mean that kind of bombardment...

Just because there weren't any publicized attempts at orbital bombardments doesn't mean yours is the only one.

Also, Dysko's reply.

Planetary bombardments aren't all the same!

I can also add Sol: A History to that list.

Well, no. That Majesty destroyer doesn't carry out a realistic planetary bombardment. You know that's a bombardment thanks to the messages...in terms of FREDding, the mission with that modified Orion is a normal bombing run.

[Snail]

Point is, you claim to have created something new, when you most certainly haven't.

I'll give you that your missions are frightening in the amount of detail, size, scope, etc., but your claims can get a bit annoying sometimes...

[Admiral_Stones]

Reminds me of two pictures:

a) 'Destruction of the Sathanas' "Woot!"
b) 'Ironic long range bombardment of Earth'

[Mobius]

Point is, you claim to have created something new, when you most certainly haven't.

I'll give you that your missions are frightening in the amount of detail, size, scope, etc., but your claims can get a bit annoying sometimes...

That's a bit offensive...

You act like someone who checked the computers I use to FRED without finding something that gets close to my "claims". That's stupid.

[Solatar]

Maybe this is thinking far too deep into it, but would blob turrets make it to the ground? Being superheated gas or whatnot, would they be cohesive enough to do any damage once they hit the ground or would the men on the base just have to take their jackets off?

[Mobius]

I don't think blob turrets are ok for bombardments, they're energy...I consider solid weapons like torpedoes the best solution. As someone stated before, the Harbinger would have a catastrophical effect with a blast radius(atmosphere needed for this one).

[Snail]

That's a bit offensive...

Then sorry, it was not meant to be.

[Mobius]

Are you sure?

[admiral_wolf]

It could be that the GTA envisioned an end to the war by launching Harbingers from say an Orion onto the surface of Vasuda Prime.  However, bombs can be tracked and easily shot down, although this in itself is a disadvantage, as we've seen that if a Harbinger is shot, the shockwave and no doubt radiation fall out will be massive.  Additionally, I doubt very much an Orion will be able to get that close to the planet without being shot down by Vasudan forces 

So therefore, I believe that the plan was to force their way into Vasuda Prime system eliminating any space based defence forces, and then to bombard Vausuda from above.  However, considering we never got that far before the cease-fire was signed, the bombs were put into storage until time dictated that they were needed.

[Mobius]

In that case Orion destroyers should have been modified to carry torpedoes...

[Solatar]

Torpedos/artillery type shells DO seem to be the ideal solution, however Terran ships appear to simply have no capacity for them. The Fenris fusion mortar is a potent weapon against other cruisers (in FS1) but the Orion had no missile launchers.

I do support the theory that the harbingers might have been in storage for use on Vasuda Prime itself because if every planetary bombardment consisted of multiple harbinger strikes, war would be completely catastrophic. Launching loads of huge nukes at a planet merely to force a surrender wouldn't do much, because it's leave the planet pretty much useless to whoever won.

I theorize that although weapons like harbingers were designed for planetary attacks, they were sort of the "coup de grace" or the "end all" weapon. When the day was to come when Vasuda would have to be made to surrender, nukes would work. But for lesser situations smaller munitions would be in order.

I'm not sure how much damage a fusion mortar could cause, but with advanced targetting technology several cruisers parked in lower orbit aiming at specific targets could cause some damage. Military fortifications would be able to withstand the assault, but above ground facilities might be able to be destroyed. Combine these with other subsidiary methods of attack, like possible pointing an Orion's main guns on a target area, and you have a solution that reduces the enemy forces while not destroying the planet.

[S-99]

Not everything in the game can be easily shot down. Try shooting more than one bomb and you'll be sure to have a chance at punching through. This is demonstrated many times even in the gameplay. Otherwise since everything can be easily blocked and shot down then everyone would be completely invulnerable. The line of thinking where everything can easily be shot down, blocked, or have no effect sucks complete ass.  A harbinger in space is a super nuke that doesn't do much in a vacuum, but get it into an atmosphere and you'll have something a lot more devastating than todays real nukes. Also the fact that blob turrets can destroy other vessels from a prolonged fight, i'm sure blob turrets blobbing the surface of a planet would cause some nice devastation.

I propose that launching some harbingers and a prolonged blobbing of the planets surface would suffice for massive devastation. Another thing about the lucifer firing its side planet devastater beams. The one thing that is not explained in detail in this game is how good beams are at keeping there coherence at extreme distances. Pretty much what i'm saying is perhaps the lucy's beam is a lot more focussed coming from the ship itself and a lot less focussed on the planets surface (like it spread out a good deal coming from the high orbital source). Another thing is that perhaps the reason that the destroyers and cruisers and so on why we don't see them with the holes to push harbingers out of is because of the fact that none of the missions in fs have nothing to do with planetary bombardment (you never go on any gta planetary bombardment missions). The only stuff that has to do with planetary bombardment is the harbinger and the lucifer, and since you never fly on any planetary bombarding missions and the gameplay is completely centered around in space ship to ship combat only, you don't need to put in any ships with harbinger launchers. Just figure that the cap ships have them with your imagination since the game says that harbingers are for planetary bombardment and not for ship to ship combat (until the ursa got made) and that this game isn't perfect.

[Solatar]

But would the GTA and the PVN really want to devestate EVERY planet that becomes a war objective? if I want planet X for a staging around, and I want to capture it from the Vasudans, why would I nuke the planet? When this darned war is over in a few years, I'd like to mine for resources (or even during the war mine for metals and other stuff I'll need in the war).

In that scenario I think blobs turrets would win with, like I said, some fusion mortars or maybe a bit heavier ordinance. But nukes everytime?

[S-99]

Who said nukes every time?

[Solatar]

You seemed to imply that harbingers were standard protocol for orbital bombardment, if I've misread you, I apologize.

[NGTM-1R]

But would the GTA and the PVN really want to devestate EVERY planet that becomes a war objective?

Quite possibly they would. Remember it's been going on for 14 years and nobody's been able to gain advantage enough to hold anything they didn't apparently start with for long. In that case the switch to a scorched earth tactic against enemy territory you know you can't hold is fairly rational. They've been at this a long time and they're getting frustrated, too.


There is absolutely no indictation blobs are suitable for bombarding planetary surfaces, and their short ingame range and their stated nature as plasma makes it unlikely they can reach the ground through atmosphere with any real impact.

[FreeSpaceFreak]

Who said that destroyers bomb planets?
Perhaps those Fusion Mortars on Fenrises and Levis were originally meant for bombing planets. They do enough damage to devastate any planet(if the indications from the FS1 tech room are to be believed) and they fire every second. They would be ideal, IMO.

EDIT: Alright Wanderer, have it your way.

[Wanderer]

'Correct side'... Ships are in space you know

Bottom line is that all weapon ranges and especially capital ship firepower have been extremely heavily attenuated to create classical space opera style combat.