Topic Actions

Topic Search

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot], Jonathan_S and 71 guests

Junction defense units

Join us in talking discussing all things Honor, including (but not limited to) tactics, favorite characters, and book discussions.
Re: Junction defense units
Post by Brigade XO   » Thu Oct 23, 2014 10:57 am

Brigade XO
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 3192
Joined: Sat Nov 14, 2009 12:31 pm
Location: KY

One of the reasons that Manticore has Junction FORTS instead of a fleet of hyper-capable ships guarding the Juntion and each of the known termini is that you can pack more defense and offence capability into each fort since you leave out all of the hyper-drive eqipment. You can also use different geometry on the forts since you don't need to allow for the drive.

Another reason is that you can't just divert the forts to another location and use them in other systems. They HAVE to stay relativly near the termini they are to defend and not get pulled out of position to engage hopping systems and hyperspace flight. While this does limit your ability to reorganize you defense (in the whole system or transit to another location) in the short term, it does make sure that your wormhole point-defence stays where it is needed.

The Juntion Forts are part of a layered defence of specific key points for Manticore. If you start pulling that away, you lay everything open to trans-wormhole assault and ending up with the attackers comming though. Once you lose the Junction you are in really deep crap.

Forts are tough. Forts are highly automated and use fewer personal than hyper-capable ships for their size. They are also very large and along with having more capacity to carry weapons, they can have both larger weapons and deeper magazines. Depending on the current philosophy, they each could also have their own squadrons of LACs which would both thicken the defense and provide for more flexible offence.

As far as the wormholes taken in Lacoon II, there is little reason to and a lot of reasons not to transport Forts to them. Mostly it is because of lack of mobility on the part of the Forts. To this point we have NOT been told that Manticore intends to hold onto those wormholes. It does not make tactical sense to move Forts to places that are likely be either abandoned or (hopefully) turned over to a sucessor government of the local system once the OFS or similar management is deposed.

It should be assumed that the SL, at least, is likely to try and re-take at least some of the wormholes and a for would have to be abandoned- under fire- and scuttled. You don't want any of the new tech falling into SL hands and you don't want to set up the situation where you have to leave the crew behind because the Fort can't hyper-out. With full-up warships, they can fight AND can leave (unless crippled) either thorugh the wormhole or into hyperspace. While the forts do have in-system impeller capability, they can't run anywhere. The alternative we have been shown is parking one or more CLAC at each end of a captured wormhole to provide deeper defence/offence capability.
Top
Re: Junction defense units
Post by Zakharra   » Thu Oct 23, 2014 12:02 pm

Zakharra
Captain of the List

Posts: 619
Joined: Fri Jun 27, 2014 3:50 pm

Also building forts at the junctions the SEM has seized would be seen as Manticore intending to keep control of those junctions/wormholes. I don't think any of the systems those ends are in would be happy about that even if they are friendly towards Manticore atm. That would take a lot of revenue away from the systems.
Top
Re: Junction defense units
Post by stewart   » Thu Oct 23, 2014 9:13 pm

stewart
Captain of the List

Posts: 715
Joined: Sat Nov 30, 2013 10:54 pm
Location: Southern California, USA

SWM wrote:[

The Solarian League has already lost all their wormhole termini. It is too late for them to develop a specialized ship to defend termini they no longer hold.


---------------

The Sollies may NOT have lose all their wormholes; They HAVE lost all the wormholes on the Lancoon I / II lists.

There are other wormholes, some controlled by Mesa / RA. I suspect there MAY be other wormholes not on the Lancoon lists.
Only your MWW / RFC knows for sure.

-- Stewart
Top
Re: Junction defense units
Post by stewart   » Thu Oct 23, 2014 9:16 pm

stewart
Captain of the List

Posts: 715
Joined: Sat Nov 30, 2013 10:54 pm
Location: Southern California, USA

Zakharra wrote:Also building forts at the junctions the SEM has seized would be seen as Manticore intending to keep control of those junctions/wormholes. I don't think any of the systems those ends are in would be happy about that even if they are friendly towards Manticore atm. That would take a lot of revenue away from the systems.


---------------

Actually, it would get a lot MORE revenue to the SYSTEM, just a lot less to the local system despot (who all the residents have unswerving loyalty to, of course).

-- Stewart
Top
Re: Junction defense units
Post by Annachie   » Thu Oct 23, 2014 9:20 pm

Annachie
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 3099
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2011 7:36 pm

Wouldn't Moriarty units, or specialized versions there of, be better for junction defense than forts?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You are so going to die. :p ~~~~ runsforcelery
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
still not dead. :)
Top
Re: Junction defense units
Post by Jonathan_S   » Thu Oct 23, 2014 9:48 pm

Jonathan_S
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 8800
Joined: Fri Jun 24, 2011 2:01 pm
Location: Virginia, USA

Annachie wrote:Wouldn't Moriarty units, or specialized versions there of, be better for junction defense than forts?
If all you had to worry about was enemies appearing through the wormhole; yes.

They'd be cheaper, and could fire more than enough missiles to shred any mass transit or any sane sequential assault. But you wouldn't want the missiles out at their max range, you'd want to be able to deliver warheads in under 2 minutes (including detection and reaction time); before transiting ships could clear the "lane". And even with multiple drives at full power that puts all the missile pods within about 5 million km of the terminus; ~110 seconds at 96,000g.


However you also have to worry about people assaulting through hyperspace to try to clear the defenses around a wormhole. And since you're way, way outside the hyperlimit (and only some approaches are protected by the resonance zone) enemies can pop out of hyper within firing range of your defenses. If all your defenses are pods then they're vulnerable to proximity kills from nukes. A smart attacker could drop out and spray even SDM missiles around and take out many of your pods. Sure their first wave would still get shredded, but now you're vulnerable to an assault through the wormhole. Better to have many of your pods behind sidewalls and armor, in your forts, which can also fight beam to beam should someone drop out of hyper within energy range.
Top
Re: Junction defense units
Post by Zakharra   » Thu Oct 23, 2014 10:57 pm

Zakharra
Captain of the List

Posts: 619
Joined: Fri Jun 27, 2014 3:50 pm

stewart wrote:
Zakharra wrote:Also building forts at the junctions the SEM has seized would be seen as Manticore intending to keep control of those junctions/wormholes. I don't think any of the systems those ends are in would be happy about that even if they are friendly towards Manticore atm. That would take a lot of revenue away from the systems.


---------------

Actually, it would get a lot MORE revenue to the SYSTEM, just a lot less to the local system despot (who all the residents have unswerving loyalty to, of course).

-- Stewart


If Manticore keeps control of the junctions, any revenue would go to Manticore, not to the system the junction is in. That's why it would be a sore point. The systems in question might not like some of their rulers, but the fact is by taking control of the junctions from the systems, and removing the system personnel from the forts/dispatch bases orbiting the junctions, any and all revenue has been cut off from that system. Even the systems that are friendly to Manticore (Idaho was one I believe), still wasn't that happy with the SEM when Lacoon 2 went into effect.

Trade might end up flowing through the junctions again, but most of the revenue would be the SEM's, not the systems as long as the SEM controls those junctions. And I can see some in the SEM pushing for the SEM to retain control of the junctions specifically for the revenue increases when trade starts going again.
Top
Re: Junction defense units
Post by Annachie   » Thu Oct 23, 2014 11:28 pm

Annachie
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 3099
Joined: Fri Jun 17, 2011 7:36 pm

Shoot at what exactly? The stealthed pods that you wont see until after they fire? The Moriarty controllers that are even more stealthed?
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
You are so going to die. :p ~~~~ runsforcelery
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
still not dead. :)
Top
Re: Junction defense units
Post by Weird Harold   » Fri Oct 24, 2014 12:12 am

Weird Harold
Fleet Admiral

Posts: 4478
Joined: Thu Apr 24, 2014 10:25 pm
Location: "Lost Wages", NV

Zakharra wrote: If Manticore keeps control of the junctions, any revenue would go to Manticore, not to the system the junction is in.


That hasn't been Manticore's established policy on wormhole transit fees:

A Rising Thunder
Chapter Three wrote:
The result was an official Solarian consulate in Effingham, Zunker’s capital city, an equally official OFS observation post right next door to it, and a clear understanding that although the League would be permitted influence in Zunker, it would not be allowed the sort of puppetmaster control it exercised in so many other “independent” star systems. As a sort of quid pro quo for the League’s … restraint, it was understood that Zunker fell ultimately under Solarian “protection,” rather than Manticoran. The terminus itself, on the other hand, was granted Idahoan extraterritoriality, recognized by both Manticore and the League, although Prime Minister Cromarty of Manticore had insisted that the Zunker System government receive one third of all transit-fee revenues it generated.
.
.
.
Answers! I got lots of answers!

(Now if I could just find the right questions.)
Top
Re: Junction defense units
Post by Zakharra   » Fri Oct 24, 2014 1:03 am

Zakharra
Captain of the List

Posts: 619
Joined: Fri Jun 27, 2014 3:50 pm

Weird Harold wrote:
Zakharra wrote: If Manticore keeps control of the junctions, any revenue would go to Manticore, not to the system the junction is in.


That hasn't been Manticore's established policy on wormhole transit fees:

A Rising Thunder
Chapter Three wrote:
The result was an official Solarian consulate in Effingham, Zunker’s capital city, an equally official OFS observation post right next door to it, and a clear understanding that although the League would be permitted influence in Zunker, it would not be allowed the sort of puppetmaster control it exercised in so many other “independent” star systems. As a sort of quid pro quo for the League’s … restraint, it was understood that Zunker fell ultimately under Solarian “protection,” rather than Manticoran. The terminus itself, on the other hand, was granted Idahoan extraterritoriality, recognized by both Manticore and the League, although Prime Minister Cromarty of Manticore had insisted that the Zunker System government receive one third of all transit-fee revenues it generated.



I believe that was before Lacoon 1 and 2, right? If so, the earlier agreement ids now null and void since Manticore has taken direct control over -all- wormhole termini it can. And from that same book it mentions how unhappy, even if understanding, the Idaho government was at Manticore for taking control of the junctions. That's lost revenue.
Top

Return to Honorverse