Posts from Sacred Haven of Debauchery Auto-translated

In general, ground warfare in the space age is like the Polish using cavalry with sabers when Germany and the Soviet Union attacked Poland with tanks...

It can't.

If the AI is unable to properly defend against ground attacks, that doesn't mean the player can't either.

I still don't understand what Ment meant by these words. If it's about real-life, it's already been explained why it's absurd. If it's about the game, it's absurd because it doesn't provide war score. What exactly did Ment want to say with this phrase?

Can you produce soldiers on a planet that is being bombarded? Even if you can, it's still not possible with a near-zero overall income.

I wanted to say that not giving war scores is stupid.

That's a weakness, not a strength, because your fleet is tied down and can't operate further.

And what was the point of the phrase about horses and sabers? Charging with sabers against tanks is a suicidal maneuver. Suppressing ground resistance and establishing an occupation regime is a military necessity.

Nothing like that, you can fly away whenever you want.

A phrase about outdated methods of warfare. Even now, we are increasingly seeing that major powers prefer bombings (of various Syrias, for example), and they don't really send in soldiers.

And instantly lose all of your military "advantage." And if the planet is controlled by ground forces, then you can really fly away whenever you want and lose nothing.

It's one thing to fight with barbarians, and another thing to fight with developed countries.

As a rule, it is not even always called a "war," but some kind of counter-terrorism operation or something.

So far, these bombardments have been of no use, and the only potential benefit from them is to give ground forces of the Syrians the opportunity to defeat someone there.

Everywhere where developed countries introduced a military contingent, they performed poorly. The only exception I can remember recently is Russia's operation in Ossetia, but there the local population was on our side.

If we are talking about developed countries, such as the United States, it has long been known that they use non-citizens who want to obtain citizenship, as well as mercenaries from private armies, to artificially reduce the number of casualties among US military personnel.

It's one thing to try to bomb a small but proud country, and another thing to bomb a planet, a PLANET, you are a scientist, you understand the huge scale we are talking about.

Of course.

No. The only question is the presence of anti-aircraft guns. In Stellaris, they decided that this is not possible against orbital attackers. How realistic this is is another question.

Well, one raid – yes.

I would say that, no, it is of little use. And I don't think ground forces feel it, probably not. There's just a lot of politics involved, and they can't figure out who the enemy is and who the friend is. Anyway, with a clear goal and motivation, World War II showed the effectiveness of bombing quite well. A decisive factor? Well, not necessarily. But it is one of the important ones.

A strange statement, considering that developed countries usually fight each other in such cases. And when they don't fight each other, they either quickly achieve their goals (Iraq, Libya – the governments were changed to those that the United States needed. More precisely, to those that no longer show direct hostility), or they simply lose interest because there is nothing more to do there (well, they can't just protect the local population from spawned terrorists, can they!).

This scales a little more cunningly... In modern conditions, there are not only ordinary bombs, but also atomic ones, as well as those based on nuclear fusion. The United States has already bombed a couple of Japanese cities, right? Now imagine that you have even more powerful or just the same weapon at your disposal, you are not bound by any pacts, and the enemy on the planet has areas with power plants – atomic or whatever, even betarion ones, that is, with a huge energy density and potential harm... Do you think that significant damage will not be done? I doubt it.

Firstly, you are bound by agreements. In the settings, civilized nations set a ban on full-scale bombardments and only use limited ones. Of course, there are those who don't do this, but we are talking in general, which means we take into account all possible scenarios, including those who only carry out limited bombardments.

Given the extremely slow population decline even with the most aggressive bombardment mode, I don't think nuclear weapons are being used on a massive scale.