What, no planet kablooey?

cthia wrote:

Loren Pechtel wrote:How about the nutcracker (Lensman)? An amalgamation of the three planets involved was left behind.

Or the n-space planet strike on Ploor (Lensman)? It's fate was considered undescribeable--C-frac has nothing on what happened to it.

Three planets were destroyed then coalesced into one??? That's a triple brain freezing scoop of geewhiz on a cone.

Loren Pechtel wrote:The thing is there was nothing they could do about the Bergenholm on Jarvenon--and so long as it was operating hitting it with a planet would just come down to the power of the planet vs the power of the tractors holding it in place--effectively zero damage to anything that mattered.

Thus they hit it with two planets with opposing vectors. Being free wouldn't protect it from being squashed. One gargantuan splash but the main part of the mass would simply be furiously hot. Since you now have basically three planetary masses at the target location it's going to have plenty of self-gravity and it will shape them into a new very big planet.

Now that's a new implementation of pincering between two forces. I have got to read this series. New application of the Kiss principle too. Bend over and kiss it goodbye.

I can't imagine looking up into the sky and seeing it fill with ominously cloudy planet growing ever so larger. What are you going to hide under? I'm sure people still run for their fallout shelters.

I've always enjoyed? this talent? of putting myself in others' shoes. Increases Sci-Fi reads even more. I can smell the stench of burnt flesh pinned under electrical wires.

cthia wrote:

Dauntless wrote:take crusade first. its not vital but it does lay a lot of ground work for ship, weapons etc.

then in death ground, followed by shiva option.

insurrection is the weakest one in my opinion but is not terrible

Thanks.

I agree with what Dauntless said. And yes, In Death Ground and the Shiva Option are essentially two halves of one story. I really don't recommend reading TSO first.

In addition to those four novels being published separately, they were also reproduced in the Stars at War volumes - two books with the four stories in internal chronological order with some cut content restored.

phillies wrote:If you do not mind war games: In several of the Taurus games intergalactic warfare games, the battlecruisers could take out an enemy solar system, it would appear, by *ramming*.

After all, they were heavily armoured throughout.

And

four light years long.

Are we sure there shouldn't be a genre that's an amalgam of Sci-Fi and Fantasy -- Sci-Fantasy? A battlecruiser four light years long? Wait. What?

Okay, wait until you get the author's autograph before you ask, "WTF were you smoking" when you came up with that one? What's it powered by, an actual star at its core? What a heck of a turning radius that baby must have. That thing couldn't even use a wormhole.

This thread makes me think of a scene in Star Trek: Space Seed when Khan set his ship on self destruct as a last ditch effort to strike at Kirk "even from death" because the Enterprise's main engines were offline and it was questionable if she'd manage to put enough distance between Khan's ship and themselves before the explosion.

What kind of explosions would some of the ships in this thread yield on self destruct? My oh my.

I don't know about you guys, but considering a lot of the implications of much of this technology makes my head hurt.

cthia wrote:

phillies wrote:If you do not mind war games: In several of the Taurus games intergalactic warfare games, the battlecruisers could take out an enemy solar system, it would appear, by *ramming*.

After all, they were heavily armoured throughout.

And

four light years long.

Are we sure there shouldn't be a genre that's an amalgam of Sci-Fi and Fantasy -- Sci-Fantasy? A battlecruiser four light years long? Wait. What?

Okay, wait until you get the author's autograph before you ask, "WTF were you smoking" when you came up with that one? What's it powered by, an actual star at its core? What a heck of a turning radius that baby must have. That thing couldn't even use a wormhole.

This thread makes me think of a scene in Star Trek: Space Seed when Khan set his ship on self destruct as a last ditch effort to strike at Kirk "even from death" because the Enterprise's main engines were offline and it was questionable if she'd manage to put enough distance between Khan's ship and themselves before the explosion.

What kind of explosions would some of the ships in this thread yield on self destruct? My oh my.

I don't know about you guys, but considering a lot of the implications of much of this technology makes my head hurt.

Nit Pick. It was not Space Seed where Khan tried to to blast Enterprise it was in the movie Star Trek Wrath of Khan.

Just to point out, any link to tvtropes is supposed to come with a warning due to the amount of time you will loose cruising the various links.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

cthia wrote:

phillies wrote:If you do not mind war games: In several of the Taurus games intergalactic warfare games, the battlecruisers could take out an enemy solar system, it would appear, by *ramming*.

After all, they were heavily armoured throughout.

And

four light years long.

Are we sure there shouldn't be a genre that's an amalgam of Sci-Fi and Fantasy -- Sci-Fantasy? A battlecruiser four light years long? Wait. What?

Okay, wait until you get the author's autograph before you ask, "WTF were you smoking" when you came up with that one? What's it powered by, an actual star at its core? What a heck of a turning radius that baby must have. That thing couldn't even use a wormhole.

This thread makes me think of a scene in Star Trek: Space Seed when Khan set his ship on self destruct as a last ditch effort to strike at Kirk "even from death" because the Enterprise's main engines were offline and it was questionable if she'd manage to put enough distance between Khan's ship and themselves before the explosion.

What kind of explosions would some of the ships in this thread yield on self destruct? My oh my.

I don't know about you guys, but considering a lot of the implications of much of this technology makes my head hurt.

saber964 wrote:Nit Pick. It was not Space Seed where Khan tried to to blast Enterprise it was in the movie Star Trek Wrath of Khan.

You are absolutely correct and I deserve a demerit for crossing those wires. And I call myself a Trekkie. I'm ashamed of myself. Space Seed sets the stage between Kirk & Khan. Space Seed was one of the best episodes of the series. The Wrath of Khan was sort of its sequel.

Thanks for picking that zit er nit.

Annachie wrote:Just to point out, any link to tvtropes is supposed to come with a warning due to the amount of time you will loose cruising the various links.

Sent from my SM-G920I using Tapatalk

So you're the one actually responsible for seeding this thread with those very interesting and time consuming, wife-irritating why-aren't-you-doing-what-you're-supposed-to-be-doing tropes? Without a warning on the label?

Such rampant irresponsible posting should be frowned upon. That's why my wife was frowning upon me at the time. You could get sued that way. If my newly bought wife (cost of my wedding) divorces me it's your fault.


Thanks, I'm still wasting time with them!

cthia wrote:*To note, is the account at the end of this post indicating how much this idea has permeated the minds of Americans.

I had not heard of that before!

cthia wrote:Eridani Edict!

This Edict is responsible for something else missing in the Honorverse -- a planet killer! And relatedly, attitudes that wish to destroy planets -- though not always human -- and oftentimes not -- throughout my media excursions.

What follows are some examples, though in no way even close to exhaustive. I guess we should be thankful that RFC deviated from the norm. The worry is there, less the effort.

How about adding an unusual one to the list?
Sailor Saturn. Cutest planetkiller ever!


Then the possibly most disgusting one, the Vogon construction fleet from "Hitchhikers guid to the galaxy".


The androids in "Once upon a time, Space" has a planetkiller but no name ever given.

Spaceballs MegaMaid.

Protoss motherships from Starcraft-verse.


Probably Hayate from the Nanoha-verse as well. She´s not an outright planet destroyer as such, but when you´re at the point where you can throw the raw power of tactical nukes around like confetti, i think that effectively starts getting into the category of "planetkiller".

cthia wrote:** And the real life Doomsday Machine built by the cold cold Soviets during the Cold War -- The technical name was Perimeter, but some called it Mertvaya Ruka, Dead Hand.

Actually, that one never happened. It was considered, a functional design was made, but it was never actually implemented in any kind of automation, as that was considered too risky.
(ref: general Danilevich of USSR general staff 1984-90, Surikov, deputy director TsNIIMash(that designed it) and marshal Akhromeyev)

Annachie wrote:Just to point out, any link to tvtropes is supposed to come with a warning due to the amount of time you will loose cruising the various links.

I am pleased to see I am not the only one who lost an afternoon zoning on that website. I am now feeling less foolish, thanks.

munroburton wrote:
I agree with what Dauntless said. And yes, In Death Ground and the Shiva Option are essentially two halves of one story. I really don't recommend reading TSO first.

In addition to those four novels being published separately, they were also reproduced in the Stars at War volumes - two books with the four stories in internal chronological order with some cut content restored.

also if you do read insurection there are a couple of books that carry the story on, written by the co-writer.

RFC no longer involved after the original four but he has helped craft so much of the framework that he continues to mould it even when he no longer directly contributes. I'm not sure they are as good as the first 3, but if you have the spare money or can get them from library they are worth a read.