• 0 Posts
  • 38 Comments
Joined 1 year ago
Cake day: June 20th, 2023
  • Zellith@kbin.socialtoGaming@beehaw.org•Let's discuss: Mass Effect
    2·
    4 months ago

    I acutually have many problems with ME3. Some are little things and some are big things. Like I’m not a fan of the click npc and stand around or run in circles while they all talk to each other thing personally. Im much more into the whole chatting thing via the dialogue wheel. (But that’s just a preference. I also wish they had kept Mordins original VA)

    Most problems in ME3 can be boiled down to a poor framework left in ME2. ME3 starts with you under house arrest after a bit of a time skip. So you are instantly dropped off into a situation that you dont really know whats going on with people around you that you have relationships with that you dont really know. Then instantly its all “we need to save earth”… because reasons… like I get it… saving Earth is important… but it’s mostly marketting. “Take Back Earth!”. Earth isn’t important when it comes to stopping the reapers. Then you have to get to mars because the Prothean Archives are bigger than originally thought (because reasons) and they think there are some plans for a superweapon left by the protehans (maybe?). It’s an asspull. The entire crucible thing is just thrown in there because they had nothing set up from the previous games. Don’t get me wrong, the writers did great considering they had written themselves into a corner, but it’s a hell of a lot worse than it could have been.

    The Mass Effect Trilogy will always be known to me as a trilogy that only scratched it’s potential. I eagerly wait a remake of the series with a lot of these problems ironed out.

  • Zellith@kbin.socialtoGaming@beehaw.org•Let's discuss: Mass Effect
    9·
    5 months ago

    I enjoy the mystery around the galaxy in ME1. I enjoy the interactions in ME2 the most. However it’s a TERRIBLE TERRIBLE sequel. ME3… Honestly It’s disappointing compared to what came before, however the multiplayer was some of the best fun I ever had. Then they come out with Andromeda which has some weird retcons or interference with ME3s lore which boggles my mind. Pick a lane Bioware!

    Honestly I’d reccomend the original trilogy. After more than 10 years I have learned that if you are super into ME then its best off not digging too deep if you enjoy it! I dont even go into detail pointing out the problems anymore as I dont want to spoil anyones fun! lol

  • Zellith@kbin.socialtoNonCredibleDefense@sh.itjust.works•The space armament treaty says: no nuclear, biological or laser weapons in space. but kinetics...
    4·
    10 months ago

    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kinetic_bombardment

    2003 United States Air Force proposal

    A system described in the 2003 United States Air Force report called Hypervelocity Rod Bundles[10] was that of 20-foot-long (6.1 m), 1-foot-diameter (0.30 m) tungsten rods that are satellite-controlled and have global strike capability, with impact speeds of Mach 10.[11][12][13]

    The bomb would naturally contain large kinetic energy because it moves at orbital velocities, around 8 kilometres per second (26,000 ft/s; 8,000 m/s; Mach 24) in orbit and 3 kilometres per second (9,800 ft/s; 3,000 m/s; Mach 8.8) at impact. As the rod reenters Earth’s atmosphere it would lose most of its velocity, but the remaining energy would cause considerable damage. Some systems are quoted as having the yield of a small tactical nuclear bomb.[13] These designs are envisioned as a bunker buster.[12][14] As the name suggests, the ‘bunker buster’ is powerful enough to destroy a nuclear bunker. With 6–8 satellites on a given orbit, a target could be hit within 12–15 minutes from any given time, less than half the time taken by an ICBM and without the launch warning. Such a system could also be equipped with sensors to detect incoming anti-ballistic missile-type threats and relatively light protective measures to use against them (e.g. Hit-To-Kill Missiles or megawatt-class chemical laser). The time between deorbit and impact would only be a few minutes, and depending on the orbits and positions in the orbits, the system would have a worldwide range. There would be no need to deploy missiles, aircraft, or other vehicles.

    In the case of the system mentioned in the 2003 Air Force report above, a 6.1 by 0.3 metres (20 ft × 1 ft) tungsten cylinder impacting at Mach 10 (11,200 ft/s; 3,400 m/s) has kinetic energy equivalent to approximately 11.5 tons of TNT (48 GJ).[15] The mass of such a cylinder is itself greater than 9 short tons (8.2 t), so the practical applications of such a system are limited to those situations where its other characteristics provide a clear and decisive advantage—a conventional bomb/warhead of similar weight to the tungsten rod, delivered by conventional means, provides similar destructive capability and is far more practical and cost-effective.[16][17][18]

    The highly elongated shape and high mass of the projectiles are intended to enhance sectional density (and therefore minimize kinetic energy loss due to air friction) and maximize penetration of hard or buried targets. The larger device is expected to be quite effective at penetrating deeply buried bunkers and other command and control targets.[19]

    The weapon would be very hard to defend against. It has a very high closing velocity and a small radar cross-section. The launch is difficult to detect. Any infrared launch signature occurs in orbit, at no fixed position. The infrared launch signature also has a much smaller magnitude compared to a ballistic missile launch. The system would also have to cope with atmospheric heating from re-entry, which could melt non-tungsten components of the weapon.[20]

    The phrase “rods from God” is also used to describe the same concept.[21] An Air Force report called them “hypervelocity rod bundles”.[2]