[UT] Help! Future Combat Revolving Around Ultra-Tech Stabbery

[RyanW]

Originally Posted by Walrus

Maybe it has some sort of contact trigger since it's valuable tactics in that world?

Or, given the right technology, a smart matter surface that becomes sticky after being thrown.

Or just go low tech with a bang stick.

[Icelander]

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

Well, that still requires a direct hit and/or the ability of grenades to figure if they just hit a target or a random wall. Definitely better than knives. Definitely more fiddly than a gun.

They grenades won't be competing against guns, they'll be competing against melee weapons. Except that they won't, because I don't see any weapon to restrict TL11 warfare to melee weapons, as anything that allows a melee weapon to penetrate force-fields also provides some method of introducing an explosive warhead using a similar method.

[Fred Brackin]

Originally Posted by Icelander

I don't see any weapon to restrict TL11 warfare to melee weapons, as anything that allows a melee weapon to penetrate force-fields also provides some method of introducing an explosive warhead using a similar method.

This would be why we should go to Plan B.

This is linking the blade to the shield and the body wearing the shield. A piece of condictive metal physically linked to a shielded body of at least ...eh, call it 40 kilos penetrates a flexible shield with a shower of sparks but no physical resistence.

Said shower of sparks tends to detonate explosives _before_ the shield is penetrated and only the attacker goes boom. This generally prohibits powered blades as well.

Non-flexible shields used on spaceships and so on don't have this vulnerability to physical penetration but do still detonate explosives on contact. This tends to exclude practical use of HEAT warheads but Explosively Forged Penetrators(SEFOP in UT) have adequate stand off distance.

[Flyndaran]

What if the shield protects against temperature extremes too? That would stop hot explosions and work as an environmental encounter suit.

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by Icelander

They grenades won't be competing against guns, they'll be competing against melee weapons. Except that they won't, because I don't see any weapon to restrict TL11 warfare to melee weapons, as anything that allows a melee weapon to penetrate force-fields also provides some method of introducing an explosive warhead using a similar method.

Well, my current setting has a place for non-boomstick mêlée weapons due to the peculiarities of force shields. But those are very TL^ shields operating by near-mystical laws, so definitely inappropriate for hard-ish settings.

[Seneschal]

Oh boy oh boy, that was fast!

Originally Posted by Icelander

You're going to have to do something about the fact that anything which allows a decent punch or kick through is also going to allow lobbing a grenade through. Which is considerably more effective than stabbing someone, if you're on a battlefield and not trying to avoid having anyone know that there is a fight on.

Yes, though if the barriers were close-fitting, even a small bounce would mean an ineffective grenade. Something like limpet-mines from UT would be useful. Let's say you have a launch mechanism (seeing as lobbing isn't very accurate and requires more training than, say, a sticky-nade launcher with sights, targeting programs, and a muzzle velocity of 50 km/h), the grenades stick to whatever they hit, and then they blast a shaped charge into it. Though it might sound instantly fatal, note that something like that would be more expensive, impractical, inaccurate and easily avoided than a bullet. And it may even provoke countermeasures - small shoulder-mounted lasers that detect such grenades and fry them before they make contact (they wouldn't even have to do much damage).

Originally Posted by johndallman

Given nanofabrication, the society needs matter, which it presumably gets from moons, asteroid belts and other shallow gravity wells, and energy. Is that fusion, solar, or what? Can a primary power source be small enough to carry? Without that, simply running an opponent's power supply down seems to be a good tactic.

What is there in the way of computing, AI and robots?

Presumably there are social controls on using large enough explosions to just kill someone through the DR of a personal barrier? Using a lot of small explosions or a machine gun to chew through the ablative DR looks very possible at present.

Sorry, I omitted those things in the OP for brevity's sake, but if they make a difference...

Raw feedstock for nanofabricators would come in many varieties, but it would be quite universal. A 2 lb. tube of generic paste would probably be all you need to fabricate a simple object such as a 2-lb. pistol. Electronics might require more expensive feedstock. Plot-device phlebotinum (like contragravity boosters, reactionless drives and FTL jumps) and extremely complex stuff (neural implants) couldn't be made at home, and may require specialized feedstock and better-than-commercially-available nanofabricators. But for most consumer goods, you purchase a license (or you don't, if you know what I mean), stick the blueprint into your home or neighborhood fabricator and build yourself a nice couch.

I assumed fusion (specifically, Deuterium/Helium-3 reactions) would provide enough power. Gas giants are a common sight, judging by the number discovered so far, and even just one would provide thousands of years of fuel. Raw materials could be mined from moons and asteroids, yeah.

For no other reason than keeping computers familiar to us puny 21st century people, I decided to stall computing a bit in comparison to other technologies. So, computers are conservatively TL11. Processing power has reached a plateau long ago; it's impressive by our standards, but not outlandish or revolutionary. AIs are nonvolitional at best; the most sophisticated ones may superficially seem sapient, but they aren't. Drones, AI assistants, and maintenance bots are all common, and considered personal property. Quantum computers aren't consumer goods, and are reserved for mainframes.

Communication has advanced, however, so most people don't bother with hard drives - they rent a gajillion petabytes from a local provider and access them remotely. UIs have greatly improved: keyboards and screens have been replaced with augmented-reality glasses or eye-implants, controlled with hand & eye movements, voice commands and (for those with the proper cybernetics) even thoughts. One can immerse himself completely in a multitude of digital worlds. People send and receive huge amounts of data directly from their brains, to the point where it resembles digital telepathy. They can also share memories, sensations and feelings between each other, and messages may have "subjective runtimes" - you experience a week inside, but a small amount passes in real time. Of course, one needs heavy cognitive augmentation to reap all of these fruits of progress.

In essence, think of Iain M. Banks' Culture series, only the eponymous Culture is somewhat less advanced, less stable, more fragmented, and largely leaderless - it's a good model for about half of humanity in the setting.

Regarding that last part about powerful weapons, I assumed one couldn't exactly field something that would reliably cause 80+ damage and still be man-portable, convenient, accurate and have multiple uses. Sure, you can blow someone apart with a thermobaric missile regardless of his barrier, but unless you can make Bulk -4 weapons that shoot such missiles, preferably more than one at a time, you're don't have a viable individual weapon.

[Flyndaran]

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

Well, my current setting has a place for non-boomstick mêlée weapons due to the peculiarities of force shields. But those are very TL^ shields operating by near-mystical laws, so definitely inappropriate for hard-ish settings.

It should go without saying that bringing a knife to gun fight is always dumb in the real world. But fiction can get away with stuff, just because it's cool.

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by Flyndaran

It should go without saying that bringing a knife to gun fight is always dumb in the real world. But fiction can get away with stuff, just because it's cool.

In ÆS, bringing only a knife to a gunfight is still stupid. But the fact that a proper knife can get past the 50 or so points of conditionally ablative DR means that a knife can still be of use under certain circumstances. Mostly for ambushes, or very close quarters combats (when you can still charge through the room before your shield is brought down).

[Polydamas]

Originally Posted by Icelander

It's a lot more effective than using knives.

In what way would grenades which have to be within a metre of the target when they go off and can only ever injure one person be more effective than swords, javelins, and bows?

[Seneschal]

Originally Posted by vicky_molokh

Well, my current setting has a place for non-boomstick mêlée weapons due to the peculiarities of force shields. But those are very TL^ shields operating by near-mystical laws, so definitely inappropriate for hard-ish settings.

I remember a thread about some kind of biogenic shields that depend on one's orgone energy or something, and are cancelled out by other shields (like the AT fields from Evangelion). I think people could only use unarmed attacks or organic melee weapons (bone, diamond or graphite blades), otherwise the shields wouldn't touch and cancel out.

That was one of my first inspirations for trying out this kind of sci-fi idea. Was that yours?