Johnm81 wrote:Even if it wasn't difficult to do in game, would that really be the most 'realistic' manner of space fighting for the NA universe? As far as my very limited understanding of FTL in this game, its more like folding space and instantly traveling between two points.

Regardless of your FTL abilities, basic orbital mechanics will still apply. You can be "at rest" to something in space, but to maintain station with another object either requires A) physical locking, B) extreme proximity and very fine station-keeping or C) very powerful and very fine station-keeping, which would, in time, destroy your orbit and either send you off into IP space or into the body you're orbiting.

Space is a game of ellipses. No matter what, we can't change that. You always orbit something. You can't just sit "still" in an absolute sense.

Therefore, whipping around in space at low fraction of C makes rather more sense than using up the dV to come to a relative rest next to your foe and pound on them. Especially since, unless we've all got reactionless drives, the mass of armor is prohibitive...and against, say, 100kg of depleted uranium moving at 0.1 C, pretty darned useless. The kinetic energy of our hypothetical projectile is 4.5x10^16 N. One Newton (N) is equivalent to the force required to push 1kg of something at 1m/s^2 acceleration. Therefore, our 4.5x10^16 N can accelerate 4.5x10^16 kilograms of material at 1m/s^2 (approx 3 feet per second.)

Think of it this way. The Atlas V has 1,270 kN. That's 1.27x10^6 N. Each time you add one to the exponent, you're multiplying your number by 10. So 1.0x10^1 is 10. 1.0x10^2 is 100. 1.0x10^3 is 1000, and so on and so forth. So our theoretical projectile has something like 3.5x10^10 more power than something which we use to put almost 20 metric tons of mass into orbit.

In fact, stopping to run through the numbers makes the whole concept of combat in space seem ridiculous...you'd need planet-sized ships in order to avoid getting your fleet pulped by a relativistic BB gun.