I used to play the RTS Supreme Commander a lot, and my strategy was always to build up ground defenses to keep the enemy away from my base, and then start churning out as many drones as possible to create a wall in the sky. Once I had enough drones, I'd expand the wall, and then repeat until I won the game. Glad to see this works in the real world too :-)
251
AWhole2Marijuanas3 days ago
+100
Th crazy (and admittedly scary) thing is this how wars will be fought now on. The next full scale military conflict will be exactly this.
100
mangalore-x_x3 days ago
+54
It won't, if it is between countries with money an tech it will become a lot worse
54
raikou19883 days ago
+35
Two militaries against each other sending autonomus drones, how can it get worse
35
GovernmentBig27493 days ago
+48
They can battle by simulation, in a EA sports match, best contesters from bouth countrues, zero human casualties.
Pay per watch, now streamning on Discovery Conquest
48
gesocks3 days ago
+26
There is a TOS episode about simulated war. They put people in suicide boxes depending on the calculation of the casualties of the simulation
26
littlePosh_2 days ago
+5
Wouldn’t they be murder or death boxes?
5
gesocks2 days ago
+3
They all went in without any hesitation. Fully agreeing to the idea
3
bitknight123 hr ago
+1
Tos?
1
gesocks22 hr ago
+1
Star Trek The original series.
1
bitknight121 hr ago
+1
I thought that's what you meant, I just started star trek for the first time and started with TOS and was like is this person talking about TOS or some other show lol.
1
Mypinksideofthedrain2 days ago
+3
I think Japanese warlords used to settle fights over a game of go
3
mangalore-x_x3 days ago
+6
There was this bout about the tech level of those drones. Which was an a****** move but it is still true. There could be drones capable of a lot worse if they'd be more advanced and coupled with more high tech weapons and doctrine. Terminator end times worse.
6
Herb-Alpert2 days ago
+2
Wait for autonomous ai killer drones
2
fanglesscyclone3 days ago
+10
Russia and Ukraine both have money and tech, any future near-peer ground conflict will probably look very similar to what we're seeing right now especially if neither side can maintain air superiority.
10
mangalore-x_x3 days ago
+10
No, they don't. Ukraine is not in the top tier of economies or tech. They get propped up by others. And Russia showed it has big gaps in its capabilities to be still rated a top tier military, Actually tier 1 powers have a whole host of other opportunities Ukraine and Russia are incapable of which is why they resort to this kind of drone warfare and not another.
10
fanglesscyclone3 days ago
+11
Really the only capabilities both sides lack is real air power, otherwise they really aren't missing much compared to tier 1 countries if you d******* navies. Both countries have access to long range strikes, satellite data, and they're the only countries truly innovating on practical war tech like drones which is now being exported around the world. The tier 1 countries have more stuff but they also can't mass produce 'the good stuff' in the numbers necessary to fight an actual prolonged ground war, so it would 'devolve' to the same thing we're seeing in Russia and Ukraine relatively quickly.
11
hhaattrriicckk2 days ago
+1
Ukraine lacks a significant number of TBM's, along with several dozens of other things tier 1 powers would use.
You might want to read how operation desert storm went down.
Iraq didn't have old tech, they had the most modern Russian stuff available, in serious numbers.
They were at the time, in the top5 tier 1 armies in the world.
1
fanglesscyclone2 days ago
+5
Both times we went into Iraq, they were nowhere close to matching the US military but thats just because the USA is so far ahead of every other country including Russia. Being a top 5 army on paper means nothing when your tech is shit and your morale is even worse. Russian tech has always been c*** and its been proven over and over again in Ukraine, that's why all the stuff thats actually doing work right now for Russia is all the fancy new toys like drones and missiles. They're too afraid to even fly their latest and greatest 'stealth' planes against our cold war era Patriot batteries.
The only country since the collapse of the USSR that could even hope of coming close to a near-peer conflict with the US is China, but that's entirely speculation because their military is untested and so are most of their shiny new toys. They're definitely the only country that has the economic capacity to fight against the US at least but a conflict between the two would eventually end up looking like Russia/Ukraine unless we get some genuine technological breakthroughs. Planes and missiles will quickly get burnt through in a hypothetical war between the two, there will be no Desert Storm type operations in that scenario.
5
jseah2 days ago
+2
Well, a hypothetical US vs China would not look like Ukraine vs Russia. It'll be a naval war, landing is just impossible with all that water in the way of the logistics.
2
Current-Function-7292 days ago
+1
They’ll look more like US vs. Iran. Long range standoff weapons destroying infrastructure.
1
NuclearLunchDectcted2 days ago
+3
[Oh it can get so, so much worse](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HipTO_7mUOw)
3
Juckli3 days ago
+2
It's like WW I but with drones instead of men.
2
Kortok20122 days ago
+13
I did something similar in Planetary Annihilation with the nano-swarm. Truly, armies of cheep drones really is the future. The Separatists from Star Wars were just terrible at combat logistics.
13
Juckli3 days ago
+6
I had a similar realization during BUsh Jr.'s Iraq war. I was playing C&C and always used air superiority to suppress the enemy until it was save to send infantry in. The US did and still does the exact same thing.
6
WorriedMushroom70852 days ago
+5
goated supcom mention
5
gizmo10242 days ago
+2
defEnder’s Game
2
trekie882 days ago
+1
Same. I used to always build a strong perimeter, hold out until I was ready then attack with overkill amounts of force.
When you say drones do you mean the aeon kamakazie missiles?
1
Haru1st3 days ago
+66
Good. Now do Crimea next.
66
TeaAndLifting3 days ago
+58
It's pretty crazy if true. Doubly so when you consider that Ukraine have had some of their most successful months since active US support was proudly withdrawn by the Trump admin. Makes you think how much they'd tied one of Ukraine's arms
58
Current-Function-7292 days ago
+34
The restrictions on attacking energy infrastructure were a disaster for Ukraine.
34
konnichi1wa3 days ago
+60
Damn, had to remind myself where exactly these locations were on a map, but Donetsk is waaay behind the front line. They’ve completely lost all their AA control if Azov can consistently cut off the logistics around the entire city with drones, that far back. If the supplies around there are cut off long enough the entire Povrosk front is going to grind to a halt.
60
[deleted]3 days ago
-28
[removed]
-28
konnichi1wa3 days ago
+27
The entire city of Donetsk and surrounding roads is a little more than a small success, it’s the largest (mostly) undamaged city in the entire region.
Ukraine hasn’t been able to gain any kind of control over Donetsk since 2014, and if taken would make Russian resupply to and from crimea almost be exclusively via the bridge, as land routes would be well within drone and artillery range. Cutting off such a large hub is a big deal if they can keep it up and translate that into a breakthrough/collapse of the frontline.
27
Borne2Run3 days ago
+12
Aspirational; Ukraine's retaken 500km sq in the last few months but not at the point of an armored push until Russian losses significantly increase. Loss of Donetsk would be the end of the War itself frankly.
12
konnichi1wa3 days ago
+11
Yeah, definitely aspirational, but this is also the largest (and most important) area they have held logistics denial on, and the farthest back from an active front where there is significant movement. Just making those daily Russian losses harder to replace makes a future breakthrough eventually possible.
11
Epyr23 hr ago
+1
Ukraine still has a long, long way to go to capture Donetsk. Having air superiority and troops in the city are very different things. Ukraine still has to defeat the majority of the Russian field army to even think of capturing the city
1
New-History79713 days ago
+32
Slava Ucraina!
32
gentleman_bronco3 days ago
+17
Remind me. Are logistics routes important?
(JK)
17
latviansnoopy3 days ago
+20
bad news for ruzzia i guess :D
20
oneplusetoipi2 days ago
+2
Awesome news
2
OkWillingness60593 days ago
+3
3 years of continous war
3
LaDmEa3 days ago
+35
12 years since the initial invasion and 4 year 2 months since the main invasion in feb 2022. In six weeks it will be longer than ww1.
35
Initial-Return88022 days ago
+1
They really should have just given up and gone home with a peace treaty within the first couple of months once it looked like it was going to be a years-long slog
1
passatigi2 days ago
+5
Even if putler wanted more, he could just take the unconditional ceasefire that was proposed by Ukraine over a year ago. That would even let him keep the stolen land for the time being.
Many people don't realize that putler just straight up doesn't want peace. He doesn't want the war to end, period. Unless it's a complete surrender which he can easily sell as a great victory worth all the Russian deaths.
5
Bigchunky_Boy2 days ago
+1
This great news .
1
Emperor_Pedro_II2 days ago
-17
the infamous [neonazi](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Azov_Brigade) brigade
-17
MikelArtetadyce2 days ago
+14
Fighting the ever so peaceful Russians?
14
Emperor_Pedro_II2 days ago
-15
f*** russia and their imperialist agenda and f*** ukranians neonazi. not that every ukranian is a neonazi or every russian an imperialist but they are there...
49 Comments