Honorverse system destroyer

Wow Duck good thing you didn't say talking Cats. Talking cats would be crazy... Can you imagine if people rode around on Ponies that could only talk to each other in whinnies. While the riders on their backs talked in a special complex way. Then the Ponies taught the riders to communicate with them showing all the other ponies that the riders were not just dumb pets... Of course the Riders don't speak Pony even if they understand it. But they seem to have figured out that using Pony gestures they have a limited communications now. hmm Deja vue.

MAD-4A wrote:No, he sets the constraints within his books, I set the constraints of Honorverse in my head. When I'm reading the books, if I want to ignore something (like some Star Trek plasma conduit creap) then I can,

Sure you can. But if you then post the stuff happening in your head here and expect us to be on the same page, well, that's not going to happen. Because by that point, we aren't reading the same stories you are reading anymore.

when I'm posting and we're discussing something new, then I can discuss other changes and possible "breakthroughs" (like... oh... IDK... FTL com systems, or new impeller nodes, no-one has developed before) which could be presented if HE chooses to. And, if he does, then it would be you who were wrong.

Except that such speculation follows naturally from the information presented in the book. The ability to detect impellers at FTL speeds implies that it is possible to send signals at FTL, and so it's just a matter of time until that becomes a factor; Improved propulsion systems weren't ruled out by what we got told in OBS, and so speculation about them is also legit, etc etc.

If you don't like it, you don't have to post, if you want to post where you think it "breaks the rules" that's fine, if done curiously, then it could be helpful, and be informative of others who may not have known "that" rule was there. Otherwise, you can leave'em alone.

Except that Skimper, to name the worst offender in this regard, never responds to criticism, no matter how matter-of-fact it is presented.

And, well. If the argumentation goes something like "I have this great idea!" "Yeah, sorry, that would be neat but the books say that that isn't a thing" "You're just lacking IMAGINATION! MAYBE this will be possible in the FUTURE, because this is SF, and there are no limits, so stop posting!", there's just no reason to debate anything anymore. Let's all just post the stupidest bullshit we can come up with, and not read any replies anymore.

The released books are the one thing we have in common. It's the only source (well, that and various posts by RFC) for any hard information about the universe. If you have an idea that is based on something that any of the canonical sources specifically rule out (like, for example, a missile that drops out of hyper inside a hyper limit), then you're going to have to come up with a better justification for why it is possible than "I can imagine this happening". We don't read your imagination. We read RFCs.

If you don't like David's constraints, then there is a simple solution. Baen is always looking for new authors. Write your own books, and if they are any good, Baen will be willing to publish, but if there are no constraints, I suspect they won't be any good.

MAD-4A wrote:

Duckk wrote:... Future technology can do anything!

No, Sci-Fi tech can, it's all imagination anyway.

Duckk wrote:...There is a difference between speculation based on existing facts...

There are no "Facts" (aside from real things like distance and the speed-of-light) there are no "facts" about impeller wedges or hyperspace, or accel comps, none of those exist so it's all speculation.

It's not speculation! They are established facts within the context of the Honorverse. You are making a very disingenuous argument here by trying to comparing established fictional devices to reality.

MAD-4A wrote:

Duckk wrote:...then it's no longer David's Honorverse.

No, we are discussing our ideas. That makes it our Honorverse, and the discussion is how it fits in (or doesn't) with each others and RCF's Honorverse. that's where the exchange of ideas comes from, if someones going to stifle someone else's ideas by calling them names then they don't belong here. It's OK to point out flaws in there idea as compared to what's in the books, just do it courteously and without stifling their imagination and willingness to express that on a forum for that. If you can find ways to make it work then that would also be appreciated.

If you want to discuss ideas that doesn't fit within the established facts of the Honorverse, may I suggest you move your imaginative discussion to the proper forum section - like the Free-Range Topics one.

I may sound snarky but if someone is repeatedly posting about stuff that doesn't fit within the Honorverse framework it gets tedious and they really should post it elsewhere or write their own book.

Duckk wrote:

MAD-4A wrote:No idea is rubbish, except that an idea is rubbish.Skimper has imagination, some of you others need some.

Then taking it to the logical conclusion the hyper generator can rip a hole in the universe to unleash the Chaos God Khorne, or traveling to Equestria where we can have magical adventures with talking ponies. Who says that can't happen? Future technology can do anything!

There is a difference between speculation based on existing facts, where one can find genuinely different interpretations of existing data (such as the BC(P) topics we've had in the past), and speculation based on completely inventing stuff from whole cloth on the basis "just because I can". If you're doing the latter, then it's no longer David's Honorverse.

Also I think it would be reasonable and fair game to speculate on potential plausible continual incremental improvements on tech David has shown us. Kind of a half-step beyond "different interpretations"


The most obvious (in hindsight) example that springs to mind it the improvements in FTL signalling all the way from as far back as HofQ where FTL-code capable recon drones got shown off through ghost rider drones, to Hermes, Apollo, and Mycroft.

At the time we first saw them the FTL data rates weren't any better than smoke signals - they traveled quickly but it took ages to tap out a pre-selected code.

But even back then we might plausibly have looked at all the ways you might be able to take advantage of FTL signalling if the data rates continued to improve. That might have led people to predict something like Apollo. (Though of course David might have, by authorial fiat, decided there was some limit on the pulse rate - or miniaturization that stopped the progression short of that)



But that's taking something we already know is possible in-universe, FTL signals, and speculating whether they might be improved to higher bandwidth -- and if so what additional uses that might open up. At least on that we can have a debate on a plausible evolution of the tech in the Honoverse.


Where-as with an 'anything I imaging', about all we can say is "my what an interesting, or boring, idea". You can't really talk about its plausibly, nor can you explore any limits because it has no limits. So aside from an "that's cool" what would be the point of speculation about out of the blue quantum shifts in the tech?

Joat42 wrote:If you want to discuss ideas that doesn't fit within the established facts of the Honorverse, may I suggest you move your imaginative discussion to the proper forum section - like the Free-Range Topics one.

I may sound snarky but if someone is repeatedly posting about stuff that doesn't fit within the Honorverse framework it gets tedious and they really should post it elsewhere or write their own book.

Amen, brother, AMEN

Somtaaw wrote:Gee, that sure looks like you are putting sidewalls and bubblewalls in with nodes. We don't even actually know where/how a forts nodes are placed, since they aren't actually ships. We know due to the general wedge physics, they absolutely MUST be within 20% of the ends, but are the forts larger spindle shapes like ships, or are they more like shorter & rounder/fatter CLAC's?

Actually RFC has said in some other posts that that placement limit is only for starships that need to produce sails. Non-hyper ships (pinnaces, shuttles) with a single impeller band appear to have much more flexibility about where it's placed.
Though I'm not sure how much additional flexibility you have on placement with a ship, like a LAC, that has 2 impeller rings (fore and aft beta-squared) despite being non-hyper.

And finally I don't know if forts are usually single impeller ring or double impeller ring.


(Wow, that was a long way of saying that I'm not sure if the within 20% and well within the maximum beam limits apply to forts)

Jonathan_S wrote:

Somtaaw wrote:Gee, that sure looks like you are putting sidewalls and bubblewalls in with nodes. We don't even actually know where/how a forts nodes are placed, since they aren't actually ships. We know due to the general wedge physics, they absolutely MUST be within 20% of the ends, but are the forts larger spindle shapes like ships, or are they more like shorter & rounder/fatter CLAC's?

Actually RFC has said in some other posts that that placement limit is only for starships that need to produce sails. Non-hyper ships (pinnaces, shuttles) with a single impeller band appear to have much more flexibility about where it's placed.
Though I'm not sure how much additional flexibility you have on placement with a ship, like a LAC, that has 2 impeller rings (fore and aft beta-squared) despite being non-hyper.

And finally I don't know if forts are usually single impeller ring or double impeller ring.


(Wow, that was a long way of saying that I'm not sure if the within 20% and well within the maximum beam limits apply to forts)

There's actually a LOT of information we have no idea about, regarding forts.

What we do know:
-they're BIG
-they pack more firepower than an equal tonnage of superdreadnoughts
-they're incredibly slow, ~100 gravs at max
-they can generate a spherical bubble wall
-later forts were built to handle pods and even fortress(p)'s that are the same as podlayers for combat endurance


What we don't know:
-actual dimensions & shape
-strength of the bubblewall
-ratio of energy weapons to missiles, both pre-pod return, and post-podlaying fort
-armor scheme compared to superdreadnoughts
-[too lazy to list more]

Duckk wrote:

MAD-4A wrote:No idea is rubbish, except that an idea is rubbish.Skimper has imagination, some of you others need some.

Then taking it to the logical conclusion the hyper generator can rip a hole in the universe to unleash the Chaos God Khorne, or traveling to Equestria where we can have magical adventures with talking ponies. Who says that can't happen? Future technology can do anything!

There is a difference between speculation based on existing facts, where one can find genuinely different interpretations of existing data (such as the BC(P) topics we've had in the past), and speculation based on completely inventing stuff from whole cloth on the basis "just because I can". If you're doing the latter, then it's no longer David's Honorverse.

For everyone else arguing about "how we could do X if Y constraint didn't exist in the Honorverse", and saying "we could do X if we could do Z to get around Y constraint in the Honorverse":

What blows up your argument is in Duckk's last sentence:

Duckk wrote:If you're doing the latter, then it's no longer David's Honorverse.

Emphasis mine.

For the argument that "we could do X if we could do Z to get around Y constraint in the Honorverse", you could do that, but then it would be Fifth Imperium.

NOT the Honorverse.

And the author already has explored many of the ideas in the three books covering the Fifth Imperium.

Jonathan_S wrote:And finally I don't know if forts are usually single impeller ring or double impeller ring.

(Wow, that was a long way of saying that I'm not sure if the within 20% and well within the maximum beam limits apply to forts)

Forts don't have "impeller" rings (per-say) they have an all-round 'sidewall'. As far as I know, they cant produce a full-up impeller band an move. the tech for [producing impellers and sidewalls are the same though so any ability or restriction of one would apply to the other.