what would a flashpack do?

Fine. Then I'll return to a slightly earlier post.

Originally posted by Bandit LOAF
Erm, no -- the torpedo is a weapon that can be used *only* against ships and starbases... the flashpak is a weapon that can be used against any civilian target.
Click to expand...

All I'm saying is that the Torpedo, just like the flashpak, CAN be used against any target, be it civilian or otherwise. Like the torpedo, I doubt that in general use the flashpak would be used against civilian targets. That Seether and the Black Lance did use it against transports, I can put down to two reasons :
1. They were testing the effectiveness of an experimental weapon.
2. They were trying to ignite as much outrage as possible between Confed and the Borderworlds. A bunch of fried civilians inside the remains of their transport is, mentally, much more impressive then just blowing the transport up.

IF the Flashpak is no longer a part of the Confed arsenal in Prophecy times (and there is nothing to say it isn't) then this is unlikely to be due to questions of morality. Other weaknesses/impracticalities of the weapon yes, morality no. I'm sure the US still has plenty of napalm (or thermite plasma or whatever the latest varient is) in its arsenal, despite the horrific pictures we've seen of burning villages/villagers from Vietnam. We know they've got plenty of nukes, and I would be surprised if they don't have bio & chem weapons too. When it comes to military arsenals, morality and public opinion is rarely a valid argument.
 
Originally posted by AzraeL
Fine. Then I'll return to a slightly earlier post.

Originally posted by Bandit LOAF
Erm, no -- the torpedo is a weapon that can be used *only* against ships and starbases... the flashpak is a weapon that can be used against any civilian target.
Click to expand...

All I'm saying is that the Torpedo, just like the flashpak, CAN be used against any target, be it civilian or otherwise. Like the torpedo, I doubt that in general use the flashpak would be used against civilian targets. That Seether and the Black Lance did use it against transports, I can put down to two reasons :
1. They were testing the effectiveness of an experimental weapon.
2. They were trying to ignite as much outrage as possible between Confed and the Borderworlds. A bunch of fried civilians inside the remains of their transport is, mentally, much more impressive then just blowing the transport up.

IF the Flashpak is no longer a part of the Confed arsenal in Prophecy times (and there is nothing to say it isn't) then this is unlikely to be due to questions of morality. Other weaknesses/impracticalities of the weapon yes, morality no. I'm sure the US still has plenty of napalm (or thermite plasma or whatever the latest varient is) in its arsenal, despite the horrific pictures we've seen of burning villages/villagers from Vietnam. We know they've got plenty of nukes, and I would be surprised if they don't have bio & chem weapons too. When it comes to military arsenals, morality and public opinion is rarely a valid argument.
Click to expand...


yes the US does have bioweapons. mostly to use if another country uses them on you.
 
Huh?

I'm sorry...what is this discussion about again? :)

This whole "flash-pack vs. torpedo" thing...I just don't understand it. From what I hear, a flash-pack is effective against most any spaceborne target. A torpedo, geared specifically AGAINST mil-targets, is ineffective against civillian targets. They would still work, just not very well. (I'm guessing cost wouldn't be a factor, since a flash-pack probabvly costs more than a torpede...I'm waiting for someone to contradict me).

I understand that the flash-pack is no longer used because of its image of civilian terror and destruction. If it were used STRICTLY as a military weapon (like the plasma-cannon), there would be no argument. After all, fighter guns and missiles can take down a civvie easily enough. (Not that that's a good thing...I'm just stating the facts, or rather what I know). But because it was used by the Evil Black Lance Space Terrorist Neo-Nazis, it became undesirable and "immoral" (once again, because it was used primaraly against civilians). I'm sure that if a car-bomb deemed effective against structures was produced, the army would be at least slightly hesitant at using such a weapon synonomous with civilian deathes.

This is what I understand, and I'm waiting for somebody to contradict me, and tell me just what the topic here is. :)
 
The flashpak is effective against more than just spaceborn targets -- it can be used against buildings and such.
 
But not against Bug ships? Explain that to me please... :)

From what I read previously, it's because the bug ships have such thick armour...
Well then use the Flashpak against smaller ships like Bug Corvettes or something!
Also, someone said that there weren't any "openings" like the Vesuvius' flight deck for you to fly through, so that you could drop the Flashpak from INside...
Well I don't quite believe that. In bug carriers, the fighters MUST launch from somewhere...
 
Re: Huh?

Originally posted by Bob McDob
I'm sorry...what is this discussion about again? :)
I understand that the flash-pack is no longer used because of its image of civilian terror and destruction.
Click to expand...

My opinion/argument is that IF the flashpak is no longer in the Confed arsenal (and I would suggest that just because we don't get to play with it in Prophecy doesn't mean that it has been abandoned), it is because of other weaknesses, NOT because public opinion deems it immoral.

Weapons like Chemical and Bio weapons, Nukes, Napalm and Landmines can all be considered immoral weapons. Yet the US has significant stockpiles of each.


Originally posted by Bob McDob
I'm sure that if a car-bomb deemed effective against structures was produced, the army would be at least slightly hesitant at using such a weapon synonomous with civilian deathes.
Click to expand...

Umm, a car bomb is just a lot of explosives hidden in a car. Terrorists use a car because it is cheap, and discrete in a peacetime situations. The military uses expensive rocket-powered flying vehicles and calls them missiles.
 
We've actually *never* seen flashpak's in Confed's inventory... but I digress.


The reason they can't be used against the bugs is, theoretically, because the bug ships aren't made of metal like the standard building or Terran capship...
 
Originally posted by mpanty
But not against Bug ships? Explain that to me please... :)

From what I read previously, it's because the bug ships have such thick armour...
Well then use the Flashpak against smaller ships like Bug Corvettes or something!
Also, someone said that there weren't any "openings" like the Vesuvius' flight deck for you to fly through, so that you could drop the Flashpak from INside...
Well I don't quite believe that. In bug carriers, the fighters MUST launch from somewhere...
Click to expand...

Well, I don't recall seeing any proof that the flashpak CANNOT be used against bug ships, except that we never do use them.

From memory, the flashpak was ineffective against the Versuvius' hull because of the TYPE of armor, rather then the thickness (perhaps it did not transmit heat very well). This armor was not present inside the hanger bay, so delivering the flashpak there circumvented the external armor.

If the material from which the bug ships are made/grown is not conducive to flashpaking, then the paks would be ineffective, regardless of the thickness of the armor.

As for openings in the bug ships, yes obviously the fighters must launch from somewhere. However most Confed (and Kilrathi) carriers had fly-through hanger bays stretching from one end of the ship to the other. These were eliminated in the Midway, and are not evident in the Bug ships. Presumeably you COULD fly into a bug hanger bay, but you would have to try to turn around without smacking into any walls, and hope they didn't close the door on you while you were in there in order to get out.
 
Re: Re: Huh?

Originally posted by AzraeL
My opinion/argument is that IF the flashpak is no longer in the Confed arsenal (and I would suggest that just because we don't get to play with it in Prophecy doesn't mean that it has been abandoned), it is because of other weaknesses, NOT because public opinion deems it immoral.

Weapons like Chemical and Bio weapons, Nukes, Napalm and Landmines can all be considered immoral weapons. Yet the US has significant stockpiles of each.
Click to expand...

True...very true...though its moral implications can't be discounted...

Umm, a car bomb is just a lot of explosives hidden in a car. Terrorists use a car because it is cheap, and discrete in a peacetime situations. The military uses expensive rocket-powered flying vehicles and calls them missiles.
Click to expand...

Eh heh. It was just an expression. ^_^; I was trying to imply that the military would probably have pause about using a weapon with terroristic connotations...after all, terrorists have never detonated a nuke or started a napalm fire, as far as I know...though they have used chemicals, true, like in the gassing of the subway in Tokyo.

I suppose Confed does have large stashes of flash-packs hidden somewhere,...but for various reasons, they're hesitant to use them.
 
part of the reason we dont see them could be that the targeting system is so expensive so that confed may have decide that the cheapness of the flashpack doesnt out weigh the price of the targeting system. where as the torpoe is a complete package that is more expensive but isnt lost if the fighter or bomber that carries it is lost.
 
Originally posted by wcwraith
part of the reason we dont see them could be that the targeting system is so expensive so that confed may have decide that the cheapness of the flashpack doesnt out weigh the price of the targeting system. where as the torpoe is a complete package that is more expensive but isnt lost if the fighter or bomber that carries it is lost.
Click to expand...

Eh?
 
I think it really comes down to this. Torpedoes are designed to destroy ships. Guns on fighters are designed to blow up other fighters. They are meant to inflict as much damage as possible on a target. Its as straight forward and impersonal as you can get. Flashpaks ae designed to burn the crew of a ship alive. It is a malicious weapon designed specifically to inflict pain on the people in the ship (or building as the situation warrants) The fact that the ship becomes a target no longer is a bonus. That is the difference and why it would be moral or immoral.
 
Originally posted by Bob McDob
Originally posted by wcwraith
part of the reason we dont see them could be that the targeting system is so expensive so that confed may have decide that the cheapness of the flashpack doesnt out weigh the price of the targeting system. where as the torpoe is a complete package that is more expensive but isnt lost if the fighter or bomber that carries it is lost.
Click to expand...

Eh?
Click to expand...
ill say it clearly this time torpedoes can be mass produced but so can flashpacks and flashpacks are much cheaper but the targeting systems for flash packs are very expensive and i assume cant be installed on the fly so thus confed would probably deem it a waste of money to use flashpacks instead of torpedoes because the fighters or bombers using the flashpacks become so much more expensive.

ok heres an example lets say have there are 12 bombers on a carrier 6 are equipped to launch flashpacks the other 6 are not now the carrier attacks a dreadnought the 6 with flashpack capability are lost and thus all the flashpacks on the carrier are useless
 
Originally posted by Supdon3
I think it really comes down to this. Torpedoes are designed to destroy ships. Guns on fighters are designed to blow up other fighters. They are meant to inflict as much damage as possible on a target. Its as straight forward and impersonal as you can get. Flashpaks ae designed to burn the crew of a ship alive. It is a malicious weapon designed specifically to inflict pain on the people in the ship (or building as the situation warrants) The fact that the ship becomes a target no longer is a bonus. That is the difference and why it would be moral or immoral.
Click to expand...

How do you get that????
The flashpak is designed to destroy ships (and their crew) by incinerating everything inside. If it were deliberately designed to cook/boil/torture the crew slowly then I would agree that its use was immoral. But NOWHERE have I seen anything that the pak was designed for this purpose. Its job is to kill, and it does so very efficiently and quickly.

Where is the difference in morality between incinerating someone with a flashpak and blowing them into fleshy chunks with a torpedo?
 
Originally posted by Supdon3
I think it really comes down to this. Torpedoes are designed to destroy ships. Guns on fighters are designed to blow up other fighters. They are meant to inflict as much damage as possible on a target. Its as straight forward and impersonal as you can get. Flashpaks ae designed to burn the crew of a ship alive. It is a malicious weapon designed specifically to inflict pain on the people in the ship (or building as the situation warrants) The fact that the ship becomes a target no longer is a bonus. That is the difference and why it would be moral or immoral.
Click to expand...

No, I don't think the designers of the Flash-pack woke up and said, "Hey, let's build a spinning disk that microwaves people alive and makes them suffer excrutiating pain!" They were just trying to build an efficient weapon, and also came up with one that was exceptionally evil and cruel. Kind of like the Black Lacne itself.

In other words...

"IT'S EEVHAL I TELL YOU!!! EEEEEEEEVHAL!!!!!"
 
Seriously, i think they were trying to be cruel. They got up one morning and said "We need a weapon that can effectively take out a ships crew without much effort. But lets make it as painful as possible in the process. They were stupid enough to let the weapon hit them in the first place, they dont deserve a quick death!"

And do you know why I know this? CAUSE I BUILT IT!!!!!

Just kidding:)

I know because the bioweapon the also developed was extremely painful and slow way to die when they could have designed something that just made the body shut down, not bleed from open sores as your body melts.
 
If you look at the entire PHILOSOPHY of the Black Lance, it's a sort of Neo-Nazi "Victory at any Cost" that favors maximum efficiency. And I think the creators of the Flash-pack were aiming for efficiency over all else. Maybe they decided to throw in a Really Gruesome Death afterwards - after all, we know the Black Lance are sadistic bastards. :)
But then again, we never see the remains of a ship with its crew burned alive...still, that's kinda like asking whether its better to be nuked or napalmed. The short answer is I'd prefer not to die in the first place. But enough about me...on to Bio-weapons! (Leaves computer to hurl) :)

Actually, I seriously don't think the BL was aiming for an excrutiatingly painful demise with their bio-weapons...I think, for the most part, they tried to kill humanely (is that possible?). Of course, these are people who blend the worst elements of religious fanaticism and evolutionary fervor, the sort of guys who probably enjoy "striking down the weak with Rightous Fire" and watching nature vids of jaguars tearing their victims apart, so I suppose anything is possible...

Still, I don't think the Black Lance really wanted a disgusting death for victims. Technology just wasn't there yet. Bio-war is a messy business. And let's not forger Roberts had to make the BL as sadistic and evil as possible so you'd really -hate- them.
 
Originally posted by wcwraith

ill say it clearly this time torpedoes can be mass produced but so can flashpacks and flashpacks are much cheaper but the targeting systems for flash packs are very expensive and i assume cant be installed on the fly so thus confed would probably deem it a waste of money to use flashpacks instead of torpedoes because the fighters or bombers using the flashpacks become so much more expensive.

ok heres an example lets say have there are 12 bombers on a carrier 6 are equipped to launch flashpacks the other 6 are not now the carrier attacks a dreadnought the 6 with flashpack capability are lost and thus all the flashpacks on the carrier are useless
Click to expand...

Eh heh...thanks. I'm a bit tired. :)

Still, I think we need to know more about how the pac actualy -works- before we can make any comments on it...I mean, does -anybody- know how the flash-pack -really- works? I mean, the really nitty-gritty technical aspects? LOAF? Anybody?
 
Still, I don't think the Black Lance really wanted a disgusting death for victims. Technology just wasn't there yet. Bio-war is a messy business. And let's not forger Roberts had to make the BL as sadistic and evil as possible so you'd really -hate- them.
Click to expand...

Yeah, my heart just bleeds for the Black Lancers, forced to commit mass murder with weapons whose methord of killing troubled their consciences. How those noble Nazis must have suffered...

Best, Raptor
 
Originally posted by Supdon3
I think it really comes down to this. Torpedoes are designed to destroy ships. Guns on fighters are designed to blow up other fighters. They are meant to inflict as much damage as possible on a target. Its as straight forward and impersonal as you can get. Flashpaks ae designed to burn the crew of a ship alive. It is a malicious weapon designed specifically to inflict pain on the people in the ship (or building as the situation warrants) The fact that the ship becomes a target no longer is a bonus. That is the difference and why it would be moral or immoral.
Click to expand...

And the fact that with modern military ships being immune to the effects of the falshpak, the *only* way that it can be used is against civilian targets.

Best, Raptor
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top