"War! What is it good for?"

For deez nutz!

​@@SilverMKI..... eeeeehhhh kaaay? Something something algoritm....

There's also the 'Empty Fort Strategy'; where an underdefended location (city, fort, etc), will leave its gates open but not have anyone visible, in the hopes that the enemy generals will believe it is some kind of ambush.

Leo major was Canadian

@@SH-qs7ee i remember that one time that happened and the guy defending the fort fully expected to die. instead, the anamies just turned around and retreated.

Lol the quality is greater than the quantity. And the quantity is good! Long live the squirrel

Ah, he has three channels. Each have their own subject fields.

A little extreme but I understand the sentiment

though if we are honest, Charles De Gaulle wasnt that great of a leader and spent most of his time pissing off Churchill and allied generals. after the war, he is the reason the US went into Vietnam once France got kicked out... and to think, Ho Chi Min was actually varry favorable towards the US prior to that bullshit...

Bart had it right, cheese eating........

Frances high command was not much better.

I agree. An inexperienced Rear Admiral held off a force of superior number until reinforcements could arrive. That should be celebrated as a major accomplishment. I'd like to think while other races in the Coalition might make jokes the Humans try not to, because they're all taught the only reason any of those ships survived was because of a bluff.

@@thunberbolttwo3953 Like many armies of the time, their senior generals were mired in WW1. Many French units fought well, even after Dunkirk, but their generals rarely knew what was going on in time to act on it. Their command communications were pathetically obsolete. They had some decent air units, but no command control worth a damn and no way to see the enemy coming. Their navy, sadly, was pretty good, which was why it had to be later written down by the RN. Too good to be left as a wild card.

Unless we are the ones making the jokes...and the military absolutely WOULD make those jokes in good nature. Look at the US armed forces and how the four branches poke at each other. Or how the Brits, Americans, and Canadians poke at each other light heartedly.

Our lighthearted jabbing could be seen as ridiculing by some :P

just don't be a Jhurkan

For the algaba-rythem

🤨

Probably named for Lord Leroy the Unprepared.

Yeah. For instance, most aliens don’t seem to be very good at deploying or detecting mass amounts of BS. If not for that the Bad Guys here would have noticed that the humans did not place three or four of those beacons which would have been a clear sign that the cavalry was coming. Instead they apparently thought that the humans had more ammo than they really did. In any case they bought the BS.

to be fair, when your small ships are the size of their big ships yet have greater mobility, it doesnt really matter how good you are. you are simply out massed and out classed.

I thought the same at first. Might apply to some sort of gravitic stabilizer or something. Everybody always seems to have internal artificial gravity in written SF. If you have any real working AG you can do all sorts of other fun things like not needing blazing thrusters. I’m willing to bestow a little benefit of doubt and allow some AG tech but it’s not sufficiently developed for use as main drive etc.

@@markfergerson2145 honestly the second you have decent control over gravity you might as well use it as propulsion. it would allow your crew to comfortable ignore even the most insane acceleration, as long as your gravity devices can sustain it.

Obviously, a hyper pulse generator would require a 'mast' to have stand off distance from the hull in order to actually aim the beam, without having to spin the vessel. A mast isnt only for holding a sail, they are any protruding scaffolding that gives stand off from the hull. Modern ships have radar arrays on the mast. Duhh... Also, I think you are wrong about a void smoke screen. All matter has it's own gravity, and in the void, away from large planetary bodies, a "smoke" screen of high density particles will 100% stay coalesced, as you know, there is no wind to blow it away, and in fact, likely try to form a solid body, which could probably be offset with reverse polarity magnetics. Obviousy, one wouldnt simply use burnt carbon smoke in the far future, as that only blocks the visible spectrum, ya'd use a mix of other elements, likely in larger 'chunks', as well as small electronic counter measure devices to block visibility, radar, lasers, sensor arrays, and actual projectiles to cover a retreat. More chaff than smoke, but assuredly it would keep the same 'name' as to denote what it does. Even today, ECM 'smoke screens' are a thing, and referred to as such.

To be fair, in this instance "mast" could be just some protrusion from the hull upon which sensors and communication arrays are mounted so as to limit the various effects the hull of the ship has on them. it doesnt have to be very big, just enough to create sufficient separation.

@@hohenzollern6025 I can't disagree. But to "hide" a ship of any kind the smoke screen would need to spread. While it may be possible, I'm not sure how that would happen in a vacuum. Your right about the terminology of a mast though. Brain fart on my part.

@@merlinathrawes746 Have you never used a spray bottle? You could very easily 'spread' your chaff/smoke, since there is no resistance in a vacuum. Wouldnt even need the pressure of your average Windex bottle.

Large smoke screens work in space. but they have to be very large and very dense to clutter and block electro optical sensors and some have obscurants to can counter IR and RF sensors.