Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you:
No adverts like this in the forums anymore.
Times and dates in your local timezone.
Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance.
Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely.
Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net.
If you are already a member then feel free to login now.
2016/09/25 00:26:08
Subject: What would it take to conquer modern Earth?
Pop off a couple rounds from behind a wall a couple hundred meters away just to land a couple shots near the SM's and then skate away, and you're probably not instantly dead by any means. That sort of thing happens all the time in places like Iraq and Afghanistan. And while it may not delay troops for many hours, it may (or may not) delay them critically for a few minutes while they ascertain what they're being engaged by so they know they're not walking into a bigger ambush or something, which can mean the difference between the SM's accomplishing their mission in time or not.
The auto-senses in the helmet of the PA means you get a bolter round to the grill the second your head pops out around cover. Space Marines are super-humanly fast, with reactions that cannot be matched by unaugmented humans.
Sure they're superhumanly fast and have auto-senses. It doesn't mean that they can instantly react and neutralize every combatant that pops up for the briefest period of times from any direction or distance. Even in the fluff, instances of stuff like that is very rare and generally used to make an impact of how "zomgwtfbbqamazeballs" Space Marines are when initially introduced to the story, in fact I can only recall one such instance of anything like that off the top of my head, the same book that described the inside of a normal Baneblade as being large enough to house a command center that a dozen people could stand up an walk around in despite us having cutaway multiple drawings from both FW and GW showing them easily as cramped as early Submarines
If Space Marines were capable of stuff like that all the time in a routine manner, it would be against most depictions and portrayals presented of them.
IRON WITHIN, IRON WITHOUT.
New Heavy Gear Log! Also...Grey Knights! The correct pronunciation is Imperial Guard and Stormtroopers, "Astra Militarum" and "Tempestus Scions" are something you'll find at Hogwarts.
2016/09/25 00:31:52
Subject: Re:What would it take to conquer modern Earth?
Davor wrote: While you may not get the population to side with you, you can keep them under control. Like the Romans did with many countries. While the population didn't really follow the Romans they did as they said. So the Romans had lots of man power to keep the population in check.
That is not how the Imperium works. The Imperium does not allow xenos and heretics to live as slaves, it exterminates them. If the people are "under control" it is only because it's more efficient to organize them and send them off to death camps and industrialized killing than to have IG execution teams going house to house killing everyone one lasgun shot at a time.
There is no such thing as a hobby without politics. "Leave politics at the door" is itself a political statement, an endorsement of the status quo and an attempt to silence dissenting voices.
2016/09/25 00:41:51
Subject: Re:What would it take to conquer modern Earth?
That is not how the Imperium works. The Imperium does not allow xenos and heretics to live as slaves, it exterminates them. If the people are "under control" it is only because it's more efficient to organize them and send them off to death camps and industrialized killing than to have IG execution teams going house to house killing everyone one lasgun shot at a time.
Question is, would Earth be considered to be a heretical world or not, and on what basis? We're all human, and if psychic energy doesn't exist, then the Imperium just got enough blanks to prevent Chaos from seeping into the material realm once and for all
Still, this thread has got really confusing what are we actually agreeing/disagreeing on here?
Either way, if we can have the XCOM project, Xenos invasion will be impossible
G.A - Should've called myself Ghost Ark
Makeup Whiskers? This is War Paint!
2016/09/25 00:54:42
Subject: What would it take to conquer modern Earth?
Vaktathi wrote: In some sense sure, though and atmosphere would make many of those smaller weapons dramatically less capable at engaging ground targets, but it's also an area where it's never actually differentiated like that in the fluff, at least as far as I can recall. The only torpedoes I can recall for instance are the huge ICBM sized behemoths carrying massive warheads that are used against other gigantic starships and to deliver massive payloads of strategic level devastation to planets. Lances we see used more widely but the background seems to treat them all as being the actual same weapon with just wildly different capabilities depending on the game you're playing
They're definitely not the same weapons. Strike Cruisers have "lance batteries" that can be used to hit relatively small areas on the surface of the planet. Strike Cruisers did not have lances that could engage other starships in BFG, as the 40K Strike Cruiser "lance batteries" would be insignificant. It's more like a point defense weapon, maybe something glossed over in the rolls for fighter action against battleships in BFG.. A BFG style "capital" lance in 40K would be some sort of super-D weapon that would cleave a Warlord Titan in half.
Examples of other small munitions are the Orbital Strike from the Witch Hunters codex. Where as a heavy support choice you could buy a Lance Strike, Melta Torpedo, or Psyk-out Warhead as part of a "limited strike" (from the sidebar text) from an orbiting spacecraft.
My understanding of these technologies is that they're intended to detect devices that may be hidden in cargo containers or smuggled in a truck or the like, something where the mild radiation can be picked up, and not a warhead inside a missile deep underground beneath many tons of concrete, steel and earth that will completely block all that mild radiation from escaping.
As any technology for scanning/detection, there's simple, cheaper solutions that can work in ports for example, where proximity can be easy, but there are other (probably more expensive) technologies that seem to work at a much greater distance. There's also different solutions for different threats. "Dirty bombs" are much less specific in their material and much smaller in the amount, but more common and easier to smuggle. (need cheaper, more numerous solutions) Nuclear bombs are a different animal though, and need much greater quantities of more specific material, and so are easier to detect if unshielded. I don't recall specifics, sorry. I remember something about shielding, and something about multiple overlapping techniques, and also being able to easily spot "black" areas where there was obvious shielding. It'd take some digging to have more clear descriptions and unfortunately I don't have the luxury at the moment. Detecting concentrations of radioactive material from space is definitely in the "non-magical" realm of feasibility though. If not reality then "hard" sci-fi.
Asterios wrote: and I repeat you drastically underestimate humans.
And you don't seem to understand how humans react to hopeless situations. You're expecting random thugs with handguns to stand their ground and fight as they're blown apart by the hundreds and their weapons barely scratch the paint on their killers. A gang member might be willing to do a drive-by on a rival dealer, but that's not at all the same as facing certain death to fire one last shot as their best friend is torn in half by a chainsword. Morale would be a serious issue for professional soldiers, gangs are going to break and run when exposed to that horror.
you would be surprised how many drive-bys would be going on and such.
Very few, because a drive-by would be committing suicide for the sake of forcing the marines to spend some bolter rounds. Shooting from a moving car means not being able to concentrate fire and have any hope of penetrating power armor, and return fire from the marines is going to turn the car (and everyone inside) into a ball of blood-splattered wreckage. If you have a car in the horrifying slaughter of a space marine attack you're going to use it to get as far away as possible.
not too mention the military trained gang members which even the FBI is worried over.
And, again, the FBI is not the space marines. The FBI has normal humans that can be killed just like any other humans. Space marines have 10' tall walking tanks that are virtually immune to anything short of anti-tank weapons. An ambush that would kill a whole group of FBI agents probably wouldn't even scratch the paint on a squad of marines. And, unlike the FBI, the marines are free to call in an artillery strike in retaliation and level a whole city block before continuing on.
and i repeat you underestimate humans, they have the option to fight or die, there is no in between, furthermore even our own Government has been forced to send the Military in on gangs, so you drastically underestimate gangs and i'm not talking those teeny bopper wannabe thugs, but real gangs.
people have no clue of the devastation the Space Marines would unleash upon the Earth, they think the SM's will be making deals and nicety niceness, they will not, they have one objective and that is to burn the Heretic and as far as they will be concerned this entire planet is populated by Heretics, we do not worship their God Emperor so we are heratics, we worship other gods if any so we are Heretics, we use Technology of our own designs and worship our technology in its own way, so we are Heretics, so when people realize the SM's are here for one purpose and that is to kill us we will not go quietly into that good night, they will not take prisoners, they will not grant mercy other then a bolter round to the head, its either die or fight, me i'd rather fight and i'm sure many people would do the same enough to outnumber and take down the SM's
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/09/25 04:48:55
Thinks Palladium books screwed the pooch on the Robotech project.
2016/09/25 20:21:53
Subject: Re:What would it take to conquer modern Earth?
Davor wrote: While you may not get the population to side with you, you can keep them under control. Like the Romans did with many countries. While the population didn't really follow the Romans they did as they said. So the Romans had lots of man power to keep the population in check.
That is not how the Imperium works. The Imperium does not allow xenos and heretics to live as slaves, it exterminates them. If the people are "under control" it is only because it's more efficient to organize them and send them off to death camps and industrialized killing than to have IG execution teams going house to house killing everyone one lasgun shot at a time.
Please answer the question and stop moving the goal posts to make yourself correct.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/09/25 20:24:45
Agies Grimm:The "Learn to play, bro" mentality is mostly just a way for someone to try to shame you by implying that their metaphorical nerd-wiener is bigger than yours. Which, ironically, I think nerds do even more vehemently than jocks.
Everything is made up and the points don't matter. 40K or Who's Line is it Anyway?
Auticus wrote: Or in summation: its ok to exploit shoddy points because those are rules and gamers exist to find rules loopholes (they are still "legal"), but if the same force can be composed without structure, it emotionally feels "wrong".
2016/09/25 22:03:08
Subject: Re:What would it take to conquer modern Earth?
Davor wrote: While you may not get the population to side with you, you can keep them under control. Like the Romans did with many countries. While the population didn't really follow the Romans they did as they said. So the Romans had lots of man power to keep the population in check.
That is not how the Imperium works. The Imperium does not allow xenos and heretics to live as slaves, it exterminates them. If the people are "under control" it is only because it's more efficient to organize them and send them off to death camps and industrialized killing than to have IG execution teams going house to house killing everyone one lasgun shot at a time.
Yes but manpower is also the currency of the Imperium, there are many examples of uprisings and conquered planets where the human population is allowed to live. The only situation they would be exterminated no questions asked would be if they are following a chaos or xeno relgion, in most other cases they would be killed *until* they decided to surrender and worship the emperor.
2000
1500
Astral Miliwhat? You're in the Guard son!
2016/09/27 16:49:36
Subject: Re:What would it take to conquer modern Earth?
I'll list out what I think it would take for each faction and why. I'm sure I'll miss some detail that would affect outcomes for each faction, but I'll probably miss just as many details that would affect outcomes for earth. Additionally, I'm assuming "conquering" not "destroying" earth, as in an invasion and not exterminatus.
Spoiler:
Astra militarum - Needs a full fleet of ships because while void shields will stop most weapons, we could easily overwhelm small numbers of capital ships with the sheer number and power of our nukes. Once on the ground, the Astra Militarum has the numbers, but not the technology to really win. Their tactics are simply outdated. Masses of guardsmen will die fast to modern ordnance. IG tanks are inaccurate and completely outranged by modern armor. Their aircraft have laughably short effective ranges and would be destroyed by missiles from fighter jets miles away.
Space Marines - All of them. The world is a big place with over 7 billion people in it. You cannot conquer it with 1000 people (the average chapter) sorry. You'd need a lot of chapters, or support from the astra militarum as space marines simply can't be everywhere at once and don't have the bodies to do it. Otherwise space marines fall prey to most of the same flaws the IG does. Even if the drop pods make it to the ground, they will then be stuck on foot or in tanks, and will promptly be wiped out by the sheer amount of ordnance we have (bombs, artillery, rockets, etc...). Their armor may make them immune to most small arms fire, but missiles, .50 cals, cannons, you name it will hurt them especially if you hit an opening between any of those plates.
Ad mech- A small fleet. They would fare much better than most of the other imperial factions for the sole reason that they are skilled in cyber warfare and most importantly logistics. Other than these reasons.. they have the same weaknesses as the other imperial factions.
Sister of Battle- Same as Astra Militarum.
Genestealers - Just 1. Honestly... I think they'd have the easiest time since it is a threat we cannot detect or see easily. That is what makes this dangerous to us.
Tyranids - 1 Hive tendril. They will simply overwhelm us with sheer volume of forces. We would have no chance just as most imperial worlds would have no chance by that point.
Necrons - 1 tomb ship. The crons have the technology to mess with ours and scramble our computers, this is truly what will make them win. Their ability to reassemble themselves, their hyper futuristic weapons, and most importantly, their lack of a need for any real logistics is what will make them win too. 1 tomb ship should provide enough bodies and vehicles to conquer earth.
Eldar - 1 fleet or a few webway gates. The speed of the Eldar would be their greatest asset as that is the only viable counter to today's weaponry besides cyber warfare, however they suffer again from most of the same drawbacks as the other imperial factions. Their weaponry is simply too short range, too inaccurate, and their armor will be defeated by sheer amounts of ordnance. They will fare better than most imperial armies though since their machines seem to move by methods that don't produce any heat, making heat seeking ordnance harder to use. They will have a harder time in other ways though as they require logistics unlike space marines or crons. They do still have to eat after all.
Dark Eldar - Same as Eldar
Orks - Just 1... kind of, or a fleet. Robust bodies are largely useless against modern small arms fire without some kind of armor, and the armor they do use is made up of the materials present around them.. mainly.. the metals we have here on earth, which will be totally useless against most heavier modern weapons. I don't think orks would have any sort of easy time as their weapons fall pray to the same problems the imperial army's weapons do, and they have completely non-existent cyber warfare. I think the orks would pretty much land, cause a nuisance, and not ever be able to be completely wiped out, but would never accomplish anything close to conquering the world.
Chaos Space marines- Hard to say. If taking the planet by force, they will be in the same boat as Imperial Space marines. If taking planet by religious conversion, they will fare better. I still don't think they'll win as a bunch of demon worshippers isn't going to go unnoticed by most religions and countries in the world once they got big enough and we've already shown to ourselves that holy wars are totally a thing we are willing to do.
Chaos Demons- A full scale incursion, or at least a stable warp gate. Demons break all the rules of reality. Modern weapons may or may not work based on the whims of the warp and they can appear literally anywhere in the world that the chaos gods want them to. They will terrify and destroy the morale of most soldiers and corrupt many others. Chaos demons would probably have the easiest time taking he planet by force as even just 1 demon prince or greater demon can cause a chain effect and just keep bringing in numberless amounts of demons before we would be able to stop them.
Tau- 1 small fleet. They still need bodies like most other factions, however they have better ranged weapons than the other factions, and more importantly, a concept of cyber warfare. They are probably the best at surviving nukes in orbit as they seem to have the best tracking systems for shooting them down. Additionally, they understand logistics and adaptive lightning tactics. Their crisis suits are fast enough and well armored enough that they would be a major problem for troops on the ground as they move too quick for most ordnance to work on them and they are able to close in fast enough that close support aircraft won't want to fire on them for risk of hitting our own guys. Tau have a good set up because they are technologically advanced, understand tactics, understand logistics, have long range weaponry, and are a highly mobile, professional army. Admittedly though, their aircraft still can't shake a stick at ours.. we simply outrange theirs by miles, and with no air support they will have a very tough time with us.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/09/27 16:50:11
- 10,000 pts
2016/09/27 16:59:32
Subject: Re:What would it take to conquer modern Earth?
I would say 1 Ork could conquer the entire world... In time.
One Ork shows up, starts a fight, kills some people, then gets shot to death. Even if the body is cremated, spores have already been released.
Then, a few years(?) later (I don't know how long it takes Orks to grow), more Orks show up. They still get killed, but they cause a little more damage this time. More spores are released.
Repeat the cycle ad nauseam, until eventually the Orks have the numbers to win.
Clocks for the clockmaker! Cogs for the cog throne!
2016/09/27 17:10:51
Subject: What would it take to conquer modern Earth?
All it takes is someone (like a 40k fan, maybe) to figure out the spore thing and then have people destroy said spores. Also heard that fungi are vulnerable to disease because of something about their DNA, so that would work too.
1 thing i find interesting is the frequent use of Nukes as an argument in this thread. We would not want to use nukes on orbiting ships for 1 simple reason. EMPs, detonating a nuke in orbit is well within the ionosphere, that thing protecting us from space death wind, so the full EMP effect would cover all the land in LOS underneath it (whole continents in this case) and fry all those precious electronics we love using and communicate with. all but the hardest shielded that is. So by nuking an orbiting ship, we would destroy ourselves.
if the ship was farther out, they can just scoot out of the way in time.
2016/09/27 17:19:04
Subject: What would it take to conquer modern Earth?
40k society is till "human" society, but with 38K more years of immuno-resistance built in. so if it works on them (which it does) it would work on us.
2016/09/27 18:53:14
Subject: What would it take to conquer modern Earth?
pumaman1 wrote: 40k society is till "human" society, but with 38K more years of immuno-resistance built in. so if it works on them (which it does) it would work on us.
not necessarily, their entire history differs from ours so odds are our physiology would differ too.
Thinks Palladium books screwed the pooch on the Robotech project.
2016/09/27 19:02:20
Subject: What would it take to conquer modern Earth?
pumaman1 wrote: 1 thing i find interesting is the frequent use of Nukes as an argument in this thread. We would not want to use nukes on orbiting ships for 1 simple reason. EMPs, detonating a nuke in orbit is well within the ionosphere, that thing protecting us from space death wind, so the full EMP effect would cover all the land in LOS underneath it (whole continents in this case) and fry all those precious electronics we love using and communicate with. all but the hardest shielded that is. So by nuking an orbiting ship, we would destroy ourselves.
if the ship was farther out, they can just scoot out of the way in time.
Plus we don't actually have proven ground-to-space delivery systems fit for combat applications.
One Ork shows up, starts a fight, kills some people, then gets shot to death. Even if the body is cremated, spores have already been released.
Then, a few years(?) later (I don't know how long it takes Orks to grow), more Orks show up. They still get killed, but they cause a little more damage this time. More spores are released.
Repeat the cycle ad nauseam, until eventually the Orks have the numbers to win.
One ork dropped in the African jungle. It wouldn't even have to kill people, just tear around with the hostile wild life (which they do) for so long that it'd be a legion of the things before anyone relevant was aware of it.
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/09/27 19:03:51
Some people find the idea that other people can be happy offensive, and will prefer causing harm to self improvement.
2016/09/27 19:14:24
Subject: What would it take to conquer modern Earth?
pumaman1 wrote: 1 thing i find interesting is the frequent use of Nukes as an argument in this thread. We would not want to use nukes on orbiting ships for 1 simple reason. EMPs, detonating a nuke in orbit is well within the ionosphere, that thing protecting us from space death wind, so the full EMP effect would cover all the land in LOS underneath it (whole continents in this case) and fry all those precious electronics we love using and communicate with. all but the hardest shielded that is. So by nuking an orbiting ship, we would destroy ourselves.
if the ship was farther out, they can just scoot out of the way in time.
Plus we don't actually have proven ground-to-space delivery systems fit for combat applications.
Or even meteor defense at this point.
Yeah, actually we do have proven ground to space delivery systems especially for combat. Maybe not a lot, but anti-sattelite capability definitely exists. At least three countries have successfully tested them.
Every time a terrorist dies a Paratrooper gets his wings.
2016/09/27 19:17:52
Subject: What would it take to conquer modern Earth?
pumaman1 wrote: 1 thing i find interesting is the frequent use of Nukes as an argument in this thread. We would not want to use nukes on orbiting ships for 1 simple reason. EMPs, detonating a nuke in orbit is well within the ionosphere, that thing protecting us from space death wind, so the full EMP effect would cover all the land in LOS underneath it (whole continents in this case) and fry all those precious electronics we love using and communicate with. all but the hardest shielded that is. So by nuking an orbiting ship, we would destroy ourselves.
if the ship was farther out, they can just scoot out of the way in time.
Plus we don't actually have proven ground-to-space delivery systems fit for combat applications.
Or even meteor defense at this point.
Yeah, actually we do have proven ground to space delivery systems especially for combat. Maybe not a lot, but anti-sattelite capability definitely exists. At least three countries have successfully tested them.
Pardon, I meant specifically for nuclear weapons.
Some people find the idea that other people can be happy offensive, and will prefer causing harm to self improvement.
2016/09/27 19:28:19
Subject: What would it take to conquer modern Earth?
pumaman1 wrote: 1 thing i find interesting is the frequent use of Nukes as an argument in this thread. We would not want to use nukes on orbiting ships for 1 simple reason. EMPs, detonating a nuke in orbit is well within the ionosphere, that thing protecting us from space death wind, so the full EMP effect would cover all the land in LOS underneath it (whole continents in this case) and fry all those precious electronics we love using and communicate with. all but the hardest shielded that is. So by nuking an orbiting ship, we would destroy ourselves.
if the ship was farther out, they can just scoot out of the way in time.
Plus we don't actually have proven ground-to-space delivery systems fit for combat applications.
Or even meteor defense at this point.
Yeah, actually we do have proven ground to space delivery systems especially for combat. Maybe not a lot, but anti-sattelite capability definitely exists. At least three countries have successfully tested them.
Pardon, I meant specifically for nuclear weapons.
At least the US has indeed tested that, just without the warhead. The purposely aimed X distance from the target satellite with a nuke capable missile, and hit the point in space they were shooting for. That was quite a bit ago, current targeting systems are a lot better. A 'hard kill' (actually hitting the satellite) is MUCH harder.
And by definition ICBMs exit the atmosphere and are nuke capable. Would not be too difficult to reprogram warhead release points to engage targets in orbit.
Every time a terrorist dies a Paratrooper gets his wings.
2016/09/27 19:37:16
Subject: What would it take to conquer modern Earth?
Further, the damaing principal of the nuke in atmosphere is the intense heat and pressure wave. heats needs a medium to travel through, and so does pressure. Not that the radioactive blasts would do nothing, but with nothing to concuss the in orbit ships with, the larges to parts of the nuke will be neutered, and need more or less a direct hit to do damage.
2016/09/27 19:42:24
Subject: What would it take to conquer modern Earth?
pumaman1 wrote: Further, the damaing principal of the nuke in atmosphere is the intense heat and pressure wave. heats needs a medium to travel through, and so does pressure. Not that the radioactive blasts would do nothing, but with nothing to concuss the in orbit ships with, the larges to parts of the nuke will be neutered, and need more or less a direct hit to do damage.
Are 40k space ships bigger than our satellites? We can hit those satellites.
Every time a terrorist dies a Paratrooper gets his wings.
2016/09/27 19:43:58
Subject: What would it take to conquer modern Earth?
Just gonna repost this about comparing those ships to near orbit satellites (the kind we shot down)
1 thing i find interesting is the frequent use of Nukes as an argument in this thread. We would not want to use nukes on orbiting ships for 1 simple reason. EMPs, detonating a nuke in orbit is well within the ionosphere, that thing protecting us from space death wind, so the full EMP effect would cover all the land in LOS underneath it (whole continents in this case) and fry all those precious electronics we love using and communicate with. all but the hardest shielded that is. So by nuking an orbiting ship, we would destroy ourselves.
if the ship was farther out, they can just scoot out of the way in time.
2016/09/27 19:52:11
Subject: What would it take to conquer modern Earth?
pumaman1 wrote: Just gonna repost this about comparing those ships to near orbit satellites (the kind we shot down)
1 thing i find interesting is the frequent use of Nukes as an argument in this thread. We would not want to use nukes on orbiting ships for 1 simple reason. EMPs, detonating a nuke in orbit is well within the ionosphere, that thing protecting us from space death wind, so the full EMP effect would cover all the land in LOS underneath it (whole continents in this case) and fry all those precious electronics we love using and communicate with. all but the hardest shielded that is. So by nuking an orbiting ship, we would destroy ourselves.
if the ship was farther out, they can just scoot out of the way in time.
actually the only way an EMP would effect the Earth bound Electronics is if it was a low orbit/high atmosphere explosion, and any ships in such a low orbit would crash and burn. next?
This message was edited 1 time. Last update was at 2016/09/27 19:52:52
Thinks Palladium books screwed the pooch on the Robotech project.
2016/09/27 19:56:10
Subject: What would it take to conquer modern Earth?
Congrats! you took out 1 ship, and a continent you were trying to defend!
They probably had a void shield, and more than 1 ship. and and EMP will affect earth electronics as long as it is within the Ionosphere, which starts at 60 km and continues to 1000 km.
and again, the farther out it is, the longer they have to "redirect energy to the forward shields!" or just move, because our missiles out of atmosphere are going to be hard pressed to make a fairly tight turn.
2016/09/27 20:11:34
Subject: What would it take to conquer modern Earth?
pumaman1 wrote: Congrats! you took out 1 ship, and a continent you were trying to defend!
They probably had a void shield, and more than 1 ship. and and EMP will affect earth electronics as long as it is within the Ionosphere, which starts at 60 km and continues to 1000 km.
and again, the farther out it is, the longer they have to "redirect energy to the forward shields!" or just move, because our missiles out of atmosphere are going to be hard pressed to make a fairly tight turn.
no we just crashed all those ships that got too low in our atmosphere you do know the Ionosphere is like 40 to 600 miles up ? and that it is made up of Electrically charged particles? and you do realize our own satellites orbit much higher then that in the sweet zone (for Geosynch orbit) around 36,000 Kilometers or so above the planet surface which is considerably higher then the 1,000 kilometers the Ionosphere ends at ? or that anything orbiting in the Ionosphere will not last long? take our own ISS which orbits at about 249 miles and is constantly having to make changes in its orbit. and it is constantly orbiting the earth, the SM ship would want to plant its behind in one spot so would need to go higher to the sweet spot mentioned above. furthermore the use of void shields in the Ionosphere would pretty much mess up the ship itself with a charged shield in a charged atmosphere, make not for good bedfellows.
This message was edited 2 times. Last update was at 2016/09/27 20:26:34
Thinks Palladium books screwed the pooch on the Robotech project.
2016/09/27 23:50:46
Subject: What would it take to conquer modern Earth?
Void shields aren't power fields (which Orks have), they're bubble shaped warp gates dumping impacts and radiation directly into the warp... depending on who's writing.
As for electric interference on the Imperial ships, I suddenly get why they have bio-based servitors and clockwork driven computation systems. There's at least one AdMech ship (HellForged) which was noted as using parchment and compasses for real-time navigation & targetting.
Some people find the idea that other people can be happy offensive, and will prefer causing harm to self improvement.
2016/09/28 00:00:19
Subject: What would it take to conquer modern Earth?
malamis wrote: Void shields aren't power fields (which Orks have), they're bubble shaped warp gates dumping impacts and radiation directly into the warp... depending on who's writing.
As for electric interference on the Imperial ships, I suddenly get why they have bio-based servitors and clockwork driven computation systems. There's at least one AdMech ship (HellForged) which was noted as using parchment and compasses for real-time navigation & targetting.
on Void Shields I know but the "gate" as you call it is encased within an electric stasis type field to essentially prevent it from sucking everything up., and yet the ships systems themselves are Electrically ran.
Thinks Palladium books screwed the pooch on the Robotech project.
2016/09/28 00:03:18
Subject: What would it take to conquer modern Earth?
It would take one inquisitor and a shiny red button to destroy Earth.
H.B.M.C.- The end hath come! From now on armies will only consist of Astorath, Land Speeder Storms and Soul Grinders!
War Kitten- Vanden, you just taunted the Dank Lord Ezra. Prepare for seven years of fighting reality...
koooaei- Emperor: I envy your nipplehorns. <Magnus goes red. Permanently>
Neronoxx- If our Dreadnought doesn't have sick scuplted abs, we riot.
Frazzled- I don't generally call anyone by a term other than "sir" "maam" "youn g lady" "young man" or " HEY bag!"
Ruin- It's official, we've ran out of things to talk about on Dakka. Close the site. We're done.
mrhappyface- "They're more what you'd call guidlines than actual rules" - Captain Roboute Barbosa
Steve steveson- To be clear, I'd sell you all out for a bottle of scotch and a mid priced hooker.
2016/09/28 00:45:33
Subject: What would it take to conquer modern Earth?
pumaman1 wrote: Further, the damaing principal of the nuke in atmosphere is the intense heat and pressure wave. heats needs a medium to travel through, and so does pressure. Not that the radioactive blasts would do nothing, but with nothing to concuss the in orbit ships with, the larges to parts of the nuke will be neutered, and need more or less a direct hit to do damage.
Er, what? Heat does pretty well on its own without any atmosphere. Or maybe you can explain how the sun warms the earth?
what are we actually agreeing/disagreeing on here?
2000
1500
- 10,000 pts 
Member of 
DKoK Blog:
Have a look, I guarantee you will not see greyer armies, EVER! Now with at least 4 shades of grey
bag!"