SBC's current 40K's firepower thread

[Lucky]

Mass lowering technologies are used by the Imperium of man(40K) to help interstellar ships takeoff from planets, and maneuver. This comes up at least twice.

At no point are mass lowering technologies stated to be turned off during flight or combat.

Mass lowering systems are stated to be part of the Inertial fields that effect the ship and everything on the ship.

The mass lowering inertial fields lower the mass of both the ship and the things that are on the ship.

The Nova cannon is part of the ship, and therefore must have it's mass lowered..

The Nova Cannon shell is on the ship, and therefore must have it's mass lowered.

The Nova Cannon Shell does not slow down after leaving the ship implying it does not regain it's nature mass.

Nova Cannon shells are not designed to be kinetic impactors. They are designed to explode near the target, and that means a shell with lower mass would be a good thing in the eyes of the Imperium of Man. Calculating the kinetic energy of a Nova Cannon Shell is pointless.

What am I missing?

What is the point of arguing against Mass Lowering Technologies on interstellar ships used by the Imperium Of Man?

_____

Kor/Mith: The Imperium is too stupid to build proper mass lightening, therefore Star Trek wins. Take that evil 40k/Warsie conspiracy!

Why is everyone obsessed with "their" favorite setting being "better" then Star Trek, and playing down the capabilities of Star Trek no matter how hypothetical the method? Why was Star Trek even brought up in the thread?

Since when are Mith and Kor Trekies? Mith is into Dungeons and Dragons last I checked, and Kor just seems to not like things being misrepresented.
_____

- Half a million kilometres is within weapons range for every ship of an Imperial flotilla consisting of an Oberon-class battleship, Exorcist-class grand cruiser, two cruisers and five frigates (two Tempest-class, the others unknown).

- Mention of warships in combat moving "at a considerable percentage of the speed of light".

- 20 seconds of main battery fire from the Chaos battleship TORMAGEDDON MONSTRUM REX (the name demands capitals, and even if it didn't the ship would) "almost bisects lengthways" the fully shielded Exorcist-class Libertus.

All of this paints a space combat theme for 40k that is, to be blunt, pretty un-thematic. One that would be more appropos for Hyperion or other quasi-hard scifi, not one trying to evoke a combination of Age of Steel and Age of Sail naval combat. I'll explain why.

Assuming, for the sake of argument, that a 'considerable percentage of the speed of light' is 10% lightspeed, a warship could go from outer weapons range to point blank - and then out again - in 30-60 seconds. And this time, short as it is, is enough time for a battleship to destroy what is functionally a battlecruiser.

This is absolutely pissing on the (far more appropriate) theme of giant warships lumbering around and pounding each others to bits over battles measured in hours. You can't have boarding actions or giant teams of deckhands labouriously loading the macro-cannons, or attack craft dogfights between the two lines of ships passing by each other, or ramming attacks that don't result in the instant destruction of both ships in petaton-range fireballs.

It's just . . . triumph of Bigger Numbers over what's actually cool about the setting.

This Shrike person seems to be right on the money with the problem with large number for 40K. High combat speed doesn't really make sense for 40K.

[Mith]

In regards to SuperS4's ruling, I resent his declaration of a winner and I vehemently disagreed with his response that I need to go so far to prove something that's plainly obvious. However, I will say I can see where he's coming from, so I don't think anyone here should go for the "corrupt mod" bit.

And where is he coming from exactly?

Me being too nice. >>

[Mith]

Why is everyone obsessed with "their" favorite setting being "better" then Star Trek, and playing down the capabilities of Star Trek no matter how hypothetical the method? Why was Star Trek even brought up in the thread?

Since when are Mith and Kor Trekies? Mith is into Dungeons and Dragons last I checked, and Kor just seems to not like things being misrepresented.

Oh, I am a Trekkie.

But that isn't really the problem.

The problem is, that they're going to lose. As much as Rabbit, Connor, and who the fuck else likes to insult me, call me a wanker, point to my ban history, and otherwise smear my name, they always fail to note one fact about me.

One fact that they probably don't care for when you look at my pasts history. Because there's one thing that is rather glaringly obvious when you look at it. And one thing their fanboy numbers can't abide, let alone their egos:

That I'm right.

Star Wars and Halo; some of the biggest fanboys with the biggest fanboyish numbers they could find. In those threads, most especially Star Wars threads, I've been referred to as a liar, a troll, an idiot, and everything under the sun. And yet just what is the standing of both those franchises? That's right, the ICS is a joke to most forum members, is impossible to defend against the CW, and was on its last legs before 2008 when the Clone Wars started.

Halo is also dead, with their literal glassing argument twisted into a cruel joke when in-game AIs from Halo Reach outright stated that such a thing were impossible and that they'd use the foolish human tendency to take things literal to help motivate them.

And it isn't like I'm some great messiah of debating or anything; the fact of the matter is that it's a movement of thought. People are starting to understand what sort of energies people are really talking about and the means people use to try to evade these facts. Star Wars teratons was bullshit, Halo teratons was bullshit, and...oh my, where does that leave 40k?

That's right, it's also bullshit. The fact is, the more and more popular 40k gets, the more and more we'll see this unravel. As much as Rabbit and Connor like to claim that these authors are going on about this and that--the fact is that people tend to get rather liberal with descriptions. They want you to feel what they write; not give the technical read-outs of weapon yields.

As 40k moves more and more towards the visual medium, we'll see these descriptions that are supposed to invoke awe, fear, and destruction be replaced with things more quantifiable. In regards to this, instances like the DoW II cut scene. It's only a matter of time. And the more people keep seeing these debates, the more interest they show, and the more they read and read, the more knowledge is accumulated.

The more we see that these fanboys are cherry picking their evidence, just like the last batch of fanboys that claimed gigatons and teratons, because they can't stand that their pet franchise warships can't steamroll another franchise entire fleet with just three ships while screaming some mindless dogma.

[Kor_Dahar_Master]

Why is everyone obsessed with "their" favorite setting being "better" then Star Trek, and playing down the capabilities of Star Trek no matter how hypothetical the method? Why was Star Trek even brought up in the thread?

Because the top shelf trek abilities are a match for a lot of franchises that consider themselves uber, that is why they always try to limit what is allowable.

Since when are Mith and Kor Trekies? Mith is into Dungeons and Dragons last I checked, and Kor just seems to not like things being misrepresented.

I dislike the attitudes Trek and the dismissal of the canon abilities they have by those who constantly go on and on about DET calcs ect.

Shit we are talkng about a franchise that has races in the low/mid tier bracket that can erase shit from history in a ship that is immune to anything in real space time due to being outside it.

That shit is fucking Timelord de-mat gun level tech but people act like you are trying to muff dive their granny when you point out such things even as a indicator of the sort of tech trek races at that level have, then demand you only use the federation instead of trek along with just photons and phasers ect....

[Mike DiCenso]

I dislike the attitudes Trek and the dismissal of the canon abilities they have by those who constantly go on and on about DET calcs ect.

Shit we are talkng about a franchise that has races in the low/mid tier bracket that can erase shit from history in a ship that is immune to anything in real space time due to being outside it.

That shit is fucking Timelord de-mat gun level tech but people act like you are trying to muff dive their granny when you point out such things even as a indicator of the sort of tech trek races at that level have, then demand you only use the federation instead of trek along with just photons and phasers ect....

It does say a lot and is very depressing when you realize that this sort of wank-fest immaturity has plagued the Versus debates from Day One.
-Mike

[Kor_Dahar_Master]

I dislike the attitudes towards Trek and the dismissal of the canon abilities they have by those who constantly go on and on about DET calcs ect.

Shit we are talkng about a franchise that has races in the low/mid tier bracket that can erase shit from history in a ship that is immune to anything in real space time due to being outside it.

That shit is fucking Timelord de-mat gun level tech but people act like you are trying to muff dive their granny when you point out such things even as a indicator of the sort of tech trek races at that level have, then demand you only use the federation instead of trek along with just photons and phasers ect....

It does say a lot and is very depressing when you realize that this sort of wank-fest immaturity has plagued the Versus debates from Day One.
-Mike

I think as other popular sci-fi franchises grew people looked for ways to win the debates and preaching about DET while dismissing "technobabble" does allow them to level the playing field a bit.

Trek i fully admit is a bag of pissed monkeys in regards to abilities but they are still abilities none the less.

[Mr. Oragahn]

It's rather interesting that on the pieces chosen by inflaters, many tend to be extremely flowery and exaggerated, without having any clue if technically, the results would be anything like what an author or character claims. Simply put, even the author can fall prey to hyperbole and such forms of accentuation. I've once shown in one of the 40K threads that an author used the term *atomized* to describe destructive events which never ever describe any physical phenomenon that literally turns a given target or piece of the scenery to atoms, and that because we could see the effects and judge them rather easily by the description provided by the same author; the words he used were meant to convey an epic tone at any possible time, while certainly NOT meant to be taken literally.

This is so important. I've seen "the atom" at SBC, in the part deux thread about firepower, use some of those meticulously picked quotes that contain a lot of such flowery language.
I also notice that the bloke never ever references the quotes that clearly dispute "his" interpretations. For one, he'll constantly hold to the old and multi-revised 610 GT quote, but never honestly cite any of those that simply cap the firepower at anything from kilotons to megatons for the most powerful guns.

What was most funny, in the precedent thread, was seeing Connor pull quotes that ascribed extremely low levels of firepower to weapons which we'd certainly expect to be some several orders of magnitude more potent, and then pull his now classic "stop the presses!!" sarcastic tagline bullshit like if he had made a great point, only to cite a super duper quote in the next post, giving us another of those extremely flowery descriptions, condensed in like half a dozen words, out of which he'd happily derive massive lumps of digits, probably to counter the first low-level quote.
That, without realizing that he was most certainly proving that the descriptions were all over the floor then. And that, in his mind, was quite the proof that he was right to go for the troutatons?
Beats me.

As said times and times again, his figures have no semblance of plausibility in an universe where an Exterminatus is the be all and end all of a world's tragic fate. Yet, such devices would have effects that would dramatically pale in light of the mundane main weapons of even a mere destroyer.
It's so foolish.

As for the extreme ranges, do they matter? A bit in Star Wars, since ships have been seen to drop on top of their targets in TCWS, although lacking some capacity for in system jumps (and it's a matter of discussion if the convenient close exits are luck or due to information relayed by nearby ships, stations or else), but not in Star Trek or Stargate. In Star Wars, ships can cut the distance with warp engines which can be activated in system, even to obtain relativistic speeds.
In Stargate, relativistic are documented possibilities, even for old dustbins like the Prometheus, and ships can already get a reading of a system before arriving in it. They can also FTL right on top of you and know your position at any time with FTL sensors.
As for the new Battlestar Galactica show, if the forces portrayed in it had FTL sensors and force fields of some kind, they'd certainly be a very potent enemy as well, especially the Cylons, who master pin point jumps which easily allow them to literally jump Basestars, Raiders and Heavy Raiders behind long range defense stations and spam their holes with nuclear missiles.

[Ultra late edit: despite atom having quoted me, I wanted to make my post a bit easier to read]

[User1663]

It's rather interesting that on the pieces chosen by inflaters, many tend to be extremely flowery and exaggerated, without having any clue if technically, the results would be anything like what an author or character claims. Simply put, even the author can fall prey to hyperbole and such forms of accentuation. I've once shown in one of the 40K threads that an author used the term atomized to describe destructive events which never claim to close to turn to atoms a given target or piece of the scenery, and that because we could see that by the description provided by the same author, the words he used were meant to convey an epic tone at any possible time, while certainly being meant to be taken literally.

So because it's hyperbole it clearly must be orders of magnitude lower right? Funny how that sort of logic is never once applied to Star Trek on any issue ever. While I agree the 'atomized' is obvious hyperbole, the fact of the matter is that according to the quote, said weapons do have an area of effect that, by lowest interpretations, is probably around 1000km or so (depending on your definition of 'continent'). Assuming that we're talking about thermal burn radius alone, that gives as a yield of 100 gigatons per-shot.

This is so important. I've seen "the atom" at SBC, in the part deux thread about firepower, use some of those meticulously picked quotes that contain a lot of such flowery language.
I also notice that the bloke never ever references the quotes that clearly dispute "his" interpretations. For one, he'll constantly hold to the old and revised 610 GT quote, but never honestly cite any of those that simply cap the firepower at anything from kilotons to megatons for the most powerful guns.

I'm quite all ears if you have a bunch of examples that dispute the quotes that were posted by me and others. It's just as of yet, people like ricery and Mith just seem to whine as opposed to putting forward their own quotes or evidence.

Really though, if you have something to say about the issue, say it there and don't go snivelling around behind people's back like a rat

[User1663]

Oh, I am a Trekkie.

Well at least you said something honest in this mess of a post.

But that isn't really the problem.

The problem is, that they're going to lose. As much as Rabbit, Connor, and who the fuck else likes to insult me, call me a wanker, point to my ban history, and otherwise smear my name, they always fail to note one fact about me.

How about the fact that your flat out refused multiple demands for evidence on at least 2 occasions I can name (Warhammer 40k Firepower 1/2)? You were indeed asked to provide evidence for your position, and you could not, or would not deliver. That's a fact, no matter how much you'd like to bitch about it. You needed evidence to support your claims. You did not deliver.

One fact that they probably don't care for when you look at my pasts history. Because there's one thing that is rather glaringly obvious when you look at it. And one thing their fanboy numbers can't abide, let alone their egos:

That I'm right.

'I'm right because I say I am and they suck' isn't an argument for anything no matter how big and bad you think you are.

Star Wars and Halo; some of the biggest fanboys with the biggest fanboyish numbers they could find. In those threads, most especially Star Wars threads, I've been referred to as a liar, a troll, an idiot, and everything under the sun. And yet just what is the standing of both those franchises? That's right, the ICS is a joke to most forum members, is impossible to defend against the CW, and was on its last legs before 2008 when the Clone Wars started.

I've seen at least three trekkies try to argue planet-busting firepower for trek weapons, so don't even fucking talk about other fanbases coming up with the "biggest fanboyish numbers they could find". The worst trekkies will literally try to get away with whatever high firepower showing they can get away with, and you fucking know it.

And it isn't like I'm some great messiah of debating or anything; the fact of the matter is that it's a movement of thought. People are starting to understand what sort of energies people are really talking about and the means people use to try to evade these facts. Star Wars teratons was bullshit, Halo teratons was bullshit, and...oh my, where does that leave 40k?

Oh spare me the martyr bullshit. Star Trek is no exception to any of this and you know it.

That's right, it's also bullshit. The fact is, the more and more popular 40k gets, the more and more we'll see this unravel. As much as Rabbit and Connor like to claim that these authors are going on about this and that--the fact is that people tend to get rather liberal with descriptions. They want you to feel what they write; not give the technical read-outs of weapon yields.

Sorry but your personal interpretation is not, nor has it ever been, valid evidence for a debate. You can fuck around about 'interpretation' and 'hyperbole' all you like, but until you answer white_rabbit's question here: http://forums.spacebattles.com/showpost ... stcount=67 (in the actual thread) and start putting forward your own ideas and evidence, you're just mucking about, and nobody but your fellow ST wankers here will support you.

The more we see that these fanboys are cherry picking their evidence, just like the last batch of fanboys that claimed gigatons and teratons, because they can't stand that their pet franchise warships can't steamroll another franchise entire fleet with just three ships while screaming some mindless dogma.

The fact that you can post on a site like SFJ and not notice the same thing happening in nearly every goddamn thread shows that you're blinkered beyond all rational belief.

[Khas]

Ya know, given SDN's love for WH40K, and leftist membership, what kind of reaction do you think they'd have if told the little fact that a good chunk of the 40K Fandom is comprised of Neo-Nazis?

Do you have proof that a large portion of WH40k's fandom is made up of Neo-Nazis?
-Mike

Yes, I do. Just check deviantArt. One of the most popular 40K artists there is a Russian Neo-Nazi living in Norway, who has a fucking tribute to Timothy McVeigh: http://torture-device.deviantart.com/

[Mr. Oragahn]

Somehow, the atom had something to say but he deleted his post.

[Mr. Oragahn]

Ya know, given SDN's love for WH40K, and leftist membership, what kind of reaction do you think they'd have if told the little fact that a good chunk of the 40K Fandom is comprised of Neo-Nazis?

Do you have proof that a large portion of WH40k's fandom is made up of Neo-Nazis?
-Mike

Yes, I do. Just check deviantArt. One of the most popular 40K artists there is a Russian Neo-Nazi living in Norway, who has a fucking tribute to Timothy McVeigh: http://torture-device.deviantart.com/

Seems to be one deranged man, nothing about a whole community.

[Khas]

It's just the fact that he's so popular over there that has me making this claim.

Granted, I've met a few nice people in the WH40K fandom over there, so I know not everyone in that fandom is one, but still.

[User1663]

It could be one of three things I suppose.

1: The people there like his art

2: DeviantArt users are a little unbalanced to begin with.

3: We are all in fact neo-nazis, and despise jewish people.

[User1663]

Somehow, the atom had something to say but he deleted his post.

Actually I had to edit something, but for some reason my posts don't show up until 2 hours after the fact, even if it's to edit something.