Theoretical Equipment

Post by **Balthagor** » Feb 07 2004

Maglevs are already in as a tech item.

As for the optical stealth, it could be done but would simply be a higher stealth number. We can't simulate stealth vs. particluar things. There is simply a stealth rating. I suppose what you're looking for is sort of a second generation stealth moving twoards cloacking. Not sure how far will take that.

ilkhan · Post by **ilkhan** » Feb 08 2004

Actually, I heard about this "Stealth" Aircraft on a radio program a few weeks ago and its not new. We (the US) used it in WWII all it was, was a normal aircraft with a very bright lighting array on the bottem of it. We used it to sneak up on Jap subs.
The Idea was that the bright lighting blocked out the dark shadows and at a range you couldn't see it.
Bad side is it would have showed up like a Hollywood Premere showing Spotlights blazing away.

ilkhan · Post by **ilkhan** » Feb 08 2004

At night that is.

tkobo · Post by **tkobo** » Dec 08 2004

http://www.intellisearchnow.com/pwrpub_ ... 8%7DbfehYm

http://www.roi.bourns.com/weapon/default.asp

Not really a future tech as its already infield being tested.But it appears to be an important tech none the less.

tkobo · Post by **tkobo** » Dec 08 2004

http://www.spacedaily.com/news/missiles-04zzzf.html
^ seems to be some mixed news-some news site are reporting that this study has been stopped already do to political issues.

http://www.spacedaily.com/news/missiles-04zzzg.html

http://www.spacedaily.com/news/missiles-04zzx.html

http://www.spacedaily.com/news/laser-04v.html

^ already in right ?

http://www.spacedaily.com/news/uav-04zzzl.html

http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/ ... t-wars.htm

http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/ ... r-work.htm
^ brings a new meaning to "armored truck"

http://www.eads.net/frame/lang/en/1024/ ... 75347.html

Post by **Balthagor** » Dec 08 2004

Thanks for the links. I've copied all the info and will integrate it later. Yes, the Airborne Laser is already in.

tkobo · Post by **tkobo** » Dec 10 2004

http://www.globalsecurity.org/org/news/ ... -space.htm

http://popularmechanics.com/science/tec ... /1/cannon/

FFDmh2223 · Post by **FFDmh2223** » Dec 12 2004

Look I like the idea of thinking about the future units that will be around in 2010, but I think some of this is getting ridiculus. I hope the game units stay within reason, I doubt we will see a M1A5 by 2010, technology moves fast, but deployable working systems require years of research and testing, and time to make the tech affordable reliable and deployable. Especially things like the A-19 space fighter or exo skeletons, these are things that are not going to be mass produced anytime soon, A-19 is mearly a concept, that if does get built will probably be only used for experimenting. The lessons learned from these type of projects will probably be seen in some other affordable design. I don't think there will be any major new aircraft design before 2010, JSF, F-22/Y-22, V-22 are about it for sometime. Full Exo skeletons, are something I think will be around in 10 years 2015 only small groups 15yrs for large scale production, small groups might use them prior to that but no mass production for some time. I think some elements of the Land Warrior system will be seen within the next 2-5yrs on a large scale, look at those to come up with an idea for future units, but full scale exo skeleton deployment is not likely even under the best of circumstances.

For the purpose of a game where the economy of the world has collapsed and the world is in great depression and war, I don't think govt will be spending lots of money if they have it on technology that is really out there and not to mention extremely expensive. I hope this game doesn't turn into another civilization game where the units are all futuristic and ridiculus. Use great caution when deciding to add futuristic concept units in a game, it could ruin it, Stick to near furture probability, not far off concepts.

Units that I think would be appropriate for near future.

Commanche program could be reactivated and may see light of day in the future.

Laser defense systems against things like mortars and ballistic missiles. Limited but will be seen. ie YAL-1 ABL is Boeing 747 that can engage and shoot down theater ballistic missiles in their boost phase with it's airborne laser ABL, or the High Energy Laser for Rocket, Artillery and Mortar (HELRAM) defence system developed by Northrop could be ready in 18 months see links below.

Missile defense for a country. ie missile intercepting missiles. MIM

There using armed droids /robots in battle in iraq right now. so some minor battle robots, nothing to crazy but something to send in to soften up urban warfare environments I suspect.

V-22 is close to being deployed full scale, will be in greater numbers in 2010

JSF will be available in large numbers by 2010

New stealth ships will be coming on line ie CG-21 or DD-21 Zumwalt

Virginia class SSN will be deployed in greater numbers, the 1st one is in sea trails as we speak.

CVX-78 new carrier should be coming on line 2013-2014

A new class of UGVs, UAV or UCAVs I'm sure is one the horizon.

M1A3 abrams maybe, they seem to just keep adding onto the M1A2
I guess it's all in the name. My guess is hte military likes it designations, and will probably upgrade to M1A3 eventually but in will probably stick with the name for awhile.

boeing 747 ABL
http://fas.org/spp/starwars/program/abl.htm

Northrop mortar laser
http://www.janes.com/defence/land_force ... _1_n.shtml

FFDmh2223 · Post by **FFDmh2223** » Dec 12 2004

I also read the other day the dod is looking into developing a land launched intercontinental missile (conventional) ICM that would make a plane like the A-19 pointless and very expensive waste of money. I'll see if I can find the link.

http://www.net127.com/archives/000172.html

http://www.newsmax.com/archives/article ... 5209.shtml

tkobo · Post by **tkobo** » Dec 12 2004

Okay, the game begins in 2010 i believe.Its doesnt end there.
So if a single player campaign has like 8 scenarios and each scenaio lasts from 1 to 5 years= 8 to 40 more years.

Thats a possible 40 more years of tech advances pushed by a supreme like ruler with an agenda.

Now to my knowledge we dont know how many years a campiagn covers yet.I am just throwing out an example.Im just making the point that the games starts at 2010.We dont know yet how long it lasts.

With this in mind,we really cant say what tech is too far in the future for the game to consider because we dont know how far into the future the game goes.

In addition to this,we as players should NOT be able to complete a tech tree or ever come to a point in which there in NO units we cannot make.
Reseach never ends in realfie,theres no reason to ask for it to end in a game based on realife situations.

I also disagree with your conclusion that an ICM would make a space bomber "useless".
There are tons of advantages a space bomber (if and when they ever exist) would have over a missile.
The first article link you put there,starts out by highlighting a major one.
That is simply, how do you make the rest of the world be happy and relaxed that you are shooting ICMs.
Far too many years of that meaning nukes drilled into peoples minds.
It would be far easier to simply launch a bomber , have it make the run,and then return.
The space bomber is far more likely to create a less "frantic" reaction from other regions than an ICM launch.

Post by **Balthagor** » Dec 12 2004

I understand what you're saying but I'd point you to Tkobo's post in the off topic about "things they used to say"...

...I doubt we will see a M1A5 by 2010, technology moves fast, but deployable working systems require years of research and testing, and time to make the tech affordable reliable and deployable. Especially things like the A-19 space fighter or exo skeletons, these are things that are not going to be mass produced anytime soon...

there are three things that impact this. One, technology always moves faster than predicted. Two, it is a game, so we have the option to accelerate certain technologies a bit, and Three, look at the progress made by the Germans during WWII. Nothing moves techology forward like an imminent threat. If the US suddenly broke apart and you had info on Abrams tanks at multiple US locations, is it that unlikley that they would not start competeing to produce an updated version before someone else? Also, who says that regions in the game will be able to keep up the spending required to achieve one tech year per game year? In our 6-8 hour test games, we have rarely seen players progress more than one tank generation beyond their starting tech level. We have 4 tech years between the M1A3 and the M1A4. That's A LOT of game time.

Predicting which of the armies projects will actually reach completion is even harder to guess. The JSF program could well fall apart before it's ever completed. The Crusader and Comanche programs have shown the nothing is a given till it's done. Also, just because we make the designs available for research doesn't mean the player will have the time or resources to develop them. We want a game where you have a tech tree that you simply can't complete. You always have to make choices, and there is no specific right or wrong, just a multitude of options.

BTW, thanks for mentioning all those programs, I will make sure I have them all in. (I recognize more than half of them, but I'll make sure.)

FFDmh2223 · Post by **FFDmh2223** » Dec 12 2004

Yeah I guess I could see that some problems would exist with an ICM, But a bomber in sub orbit or orbit moving at mach 10 to 25 may look like a missile as well. It's a bad idea for either I think, great capabilities but could have a bad turnout. Yeah I guess by the year in 2020 to 2025 things will start to look very different in the military as they do now and you will have to come up with some units for that time. I hope the game never ends. ends limit players. I just hope that the speed of development like you said isn't too fast. A huge problem I had with the civilization was no time to actually enjoy the era of units you were in.

I'll be honest I'm a big fan of modern military units, My suggestion is this, you have a good story line going here, and what looks like an even better game. Give us the option for multiple start times and scenarios. It would be great to start back in 1960s and 70s or even 80s and work through the cold war and other conflicts along the way and build all the great units we know today. You could rewrite history or even choose to follow the same path and replay all the wars and conflicts leading up to now or even the start of your storyline. Maybe get involved in some conflicts that you shouldn't have along the way. 2010 is a good start point but expand that to incompass more of the past and now. I would love to replay everything that happened in the 20th century from the start of ww2 on. You could have planned events in the game like Pearl Harbor, Cuban Missile crisis, battle of golf tonkin. It may take you a month to do it but a nice long game with an open ending that is up to you, it would be a cool addition to the game. just a suggestion maybe an add-on.

Post by **Balthagor** » Dec 12 2004

To do this kind of thing you'd need the map editor. The scenario starting tech level and starting equipment is placed by whoever makes the scenario. To get something in the 60s, you'd need to change the equipment on the map and adjust the tech levels. Changing what they actually produce and trying to figure out a real GDP/c for those dates would be difficult but would help the economic model work more accurately. Obviously, we don't have time for stuff like this before release.

Good thing we're giving out the map editor with the game, eh?

P.S. Sorry for the Canadian "eh", sometimes they just slip in

FFDmh2223 · Post by **FFDmh2223** » Dec 13 2004

good, there will be an editor. yeah i figured you wouldn't have time before release but keep in mind for future addons or games

tkobo · Post by **tkobo** » Dec 21 2004

http://www.spacedaily.com/news/missiles-04zzzl.html

http://www.spacewar.com/2004/041221144542.zje9yhyx.html

^Not a weapon-but interesting none the less,especially since the recent debate on how Nuclear power would be handled -availability wise.