Hard Light Productions Forums
General FreeSpace => FreeSpace Discussion => Topic started by: Dysko on September 26, 2006, 01:37:06 pm
-
I don't know if this is the right board for this question, but...
Do we know anything about FreeSpace era ground combat, apart from the 600'000 troops on Cygnus Prime in the first mission and the multiplayer mission where you have to stop the NTF landing force? Which weapons and vehicles are used in ground combat?
(If I posted in the wrong board, please move)
-
go watch hallfight.mve (FS1) and intro.mve (FS2). Both show infantry combat suits. hallfight even has weapons fire. the second half of intro.mve (after the big smoke cloud + title) has a whole bunch of dead infantry units in combat suits.
Infantry combat suits are gray:
(http://freespace.volitionwatch.com/fs2/preview/dcfs2t1s01.jpg)
Pilot suits are that odd red suit:
(http://www.firingsquad.com/games/freespace-2/images/14.jpg)
-
go watch hallfight.mve. hallfight even has weapons fire.
I think the soldiers in "Hallfight" can be considered more like commandos than a conventional infantry unit, but anyway it's a clue. Thanks.
Can anybody tell me his opinion (not necessarily evidence from the games) about ground combat in FS?
-
I feel that standard equipment for a standard GTVA infantry unit would include:
Combat suit with movement assist (so you can run faster, jump farther, and throw REALLY big rocks.)
Machine gun
Infared/Computer-assisted sight (that's probably what the thing over the eye is on the combat suits. Allows for Nightvision, Zoom, Hostile Identification / Targetting, etc.)
Grenades of some sort.
-
Volition always confuses me. They said that the Shivans seemed uninterested in taking any planets, but clearly ground combat occurred, as evidenced by the cutscene.
-
Hallfight took place on board an Azrael transport.
And I think it plausible that the dead people in the intro.mve were killed by the Lucy beams? They weren't in the city, they were on the outskirts, where the beam wouldn't have completely vaporized stuff.
EDIT: Just realized that that planet was Deneb, not Vasuda Prime. Still, maybe the Lucy shot up that planet too.
Also, one other instance with ground fighting: The Iceni. During in-mission chatter you hear the Iceni people start talking about onboard battles with Shivans (and they were apparently a lot more successful than the poor Hallfight souls...).
-
Hallfight took place on board an Azrael transport.
And I think it plausible that the dead people in the intro.mve were killed by the Lucy beams? They weren't in the city, they were on the outskirts, where the beam wouldn't have completely vaporized stuff.
EDIT: Just realized that that planet was Deneb, not Vasuda Prime. Still, maybe the Lucy shot up that planet too.
Also, one other instance with ground fighting: The Iceni. During in-mission chatter you hear the Iceni people start talking about onboard battles with Shivans (and they were apparently a lot more successful than the poor Hallfight souls...).
If the lucy bombarded Deneb, those people would be vaporized, not merely dead. Also, they would mostly civilians, not combat troops. So, no. They weren't killed by the Lucy, they were killed in combat, no bones about it.
-
Self-quote:
They weren't in the city, they were on the outskirts, where the beam wouldn't have completely vaporized stuff.
And I can see military people down there if assisting in the evacuation of planet in light of the LUCIFER sitting in mid-orbit!
I don't think the cutscenes should be taken as completely canon though. You can clearly see a crashed Hades in the background, and I thought Jotunheim Installation was in Ross 128, not Deneb...
-
It's worthwhile to remember that practically every explosive weapon seen in FS would be too destructive for atmospheric useage. The lightest explosive weapon we have statistics for, FS1's Fury, has a three kiloton yield, greater then some current-day tactical nukes. Given the known range of the Fury if it were used on the ground then the firer would be at as much risk as the target. (This also creates the interesting situation that in-atmosphere dogfights must almost certainly use only primaries, because any secondary hits would create a shockwave that would cause everyone within a kilometer or more to at the least lose control of their fighter, and without a lot of altitude to burn probably crash.)
Ground combat in Freespace is probably dominated by energy and kinetic-kill ballistic weaponry, with explosives being the exception rather then the rule; explosives powerful enough to penetrate the armor of the day are also too powerful to be used safely. Artillery and grenades as we know them, ones that kill mainly by fragmentation, are probably dead; a plasma-yield shell or a load of kinetic-kill submunitions have replaced them. (Counterpoint: Shivan put down in Hallfight was probably hit by an AP grenade.)
Regarding Shivans on the ground; I think that the FS2 opening cinematic is probably the result of the Lucifer bombarding the planet. Shivans are extremely poorly suited to ground combat by the very short reach of their weapons. What made the Shivans so devastating in Hallfight was that they could get very close before being taken under fire; on a planet they would have this advantage much less often, and would also be subject to the full gamut of heavy weaponry. On a spacecraft you are limited in your weaponry choices by the need to not completely wreck the interior (capturing implies a desire for it intact; punching every bulkhead and piece of machinery full of holes is not intact) or put holes in the hull. Crew-served squad support weaponry loses its usefulness on a spacecraft both for its excess of power and its utility being closely tied to superior range. The GTVA also probably has some kind of armored vehicles and dedicated close air support craft. Shivans as we know them would get murdered on most terrain types in a fight with any sort of tank.
EDIT:
Purely speculative crap on my part: The Vasudans, being traditionally resource-poor, relied on their infantry more then Terrans did during the T-V War; their apparently thicker and (greater?) power-assist armor, seen in several cutscenes and a number of :V: renders, lends credence to this. Armored vehicles and close air support craft were rare in Vasudan units, and Vasudan doctrine in their use poorly developed. Terran units had less-capable infantry but integrated aircraft and armor. While it proved easy for Terrans to smash Vasudan armies in battle, the Vasudans also proved extremely difficult to completely eradicate, leading to the development of a scorched-earth mentality and ultimately the use of Harbinger bombs (with a 5000Mt yield and salting to increase fallout) in preference to ground invasion. Following the formation of the GTVA both groups picked each other's brains to improve their own weapons and doctrine; as of the NTF Rebellion the difference between Terran and Vasudan troops is probably minimal.
-
I think it's possible the dead soldiers on the planet were from a crashed destroyer, the destroyers are big enough and have thick enough armor (they can take gigaton blasts) that at least some wreckage would remain, and potentially people.
-
I think it's possible the dead soldiers on the planet were from a crashed destroyer, the destroyers are big enough and have thick enough armor (they can take gigaton blasts) that at least some wreckage would remain, and potentially people.
yeah I never thought it was becasue of ground combat. that thought never crossed my mind. I mean destroyers could hold 30000 people. thats enough for the intro of FS2
-
I think it's possible the dead soldiers on the planet were from a crashed destroyer, the destroyers are big enough and have thick enough armor (they can take gigaton blasts) that at least some wreckage would remain, and potentially people.
This is the conclusion I always came to.
-
sorry for being a n00b, but what year does FS2 take place?
-
Yup, I think the whole 'ground combat ability' of the GTVA is very much an open book. The only soldiers we see appear to be (though this is not confirmed by anthing) something akin to assault troops, I suspect they normally play the role of boarding damaged enemy ships, not ground combat. The magnetic boots and the fact they seemed well versed in using them does tend to support this.
I don't see Terrans fighting without Tanks and Artillery, it goes against our nature to run in and grapple if we can stand back, throw things, and take out ten enemy at a time.
-
I don't see Terrans fighting without Tanks and Artillery, it goes against our nature to run in and grapple if we can stand back, throw things, and take out ten enemy at a time.
Ah human nature... you'd think with an upbringing like that the human race would be better fighters in the FS universe
-
Shivans are extremely poorly suited to ground combat by the very short reach of their weapons.
Two ideas on shivan ground combat suitability:
1:
I'm sure that ANY species that has an integrated, shoulder-mounted beam cannon has the technology to change the focus of the laser with a simple thought. Think of it like your energy management system. you've got 3 attributes, all of which require that the other be turned down in order to increase that attribute. The three attributes of the Shivan shoulder-laser would be:
Width: The field of effect of the weapon.
Range/Power: The distance at which the laser is still instant death to a human.
# Of Shots: How many shots the laser can do if the energy source is not refilled in any way. (in reality, the laser power source is probably recharged just like your weapon energy, but for the purposes of this definition, we'll ignore the recharge factor.)
I'm sure that, for the hall fight, the shoulder lasers were set to maximize Width and # of Shots, which would be standard operating procedure while in a firefight inside a shivan ship. The lasers would easily wipe out multiple hostiles at close range, while the increased # of shots allows the shivans to continue fighting for a longer period of time. Range/Power would not be nessicary at the close ranges inside a ship, and so the lasers wouldn't burn through the hull or damage critical parts.
For ground fighting, I'm sure the shivans would minimize Width and increase Range/Power, to have a more effective sniper-like weapon, then once they closed with the enemy, they'd revert to the above configuration. This allows the Shivan laser to be more powerful, more useful, and more true to the shivan mindset. Do you think the shivans will settle for a SMALL, NOT-VERY-POWERFUL shoulder cannon? We've already seen that they LOVE giant beams, and will always try to be as deadly as possible.
2:
I've always pictured shivan ground combat much like the movement of a Starcraft Zergling, except exagerated. They would move across the ground in huge, flying leaps, beaming as they go. Each Shivan would launch themselves at a group of Terrans, land either near them or in the midst of them; then let loose with beams until all nearby Terrans are gone; then launch themselves into another group of Terrans.
Well Carl, am I at all close to correct?
Oh ****. I've talked myself into making a cutscene that features Shivan ground combat. :P I've got a place for it in my mod, but I'll wait until I actually finish my mod before I make the movie and release it as an add-on.
Speaking of my mod, I've already got all the details of the ground combat methods of my new species all worked out. I think the cutscene will feature them as well.
Anyone got a high-poly Shivan, Terran, or Vasudan model? I'd love to use it in the cutscene. I'll give you credit. Just pm me if you're interested.
EDIT:
Ah human nature... you'd think with an upbringing like that the human race would be better fighters in the FS universe
you have to remember, in FreeSpace 1, we had just gotten into subspace travel, and we didn't have much ability to test space weaponry before that. Frankly, we did pretty well, considering we had little in the way of experience.
-
Well, that assumes the Shivans indulge in ground fighting at all. For all we know they can't even handle 1G gravity for long periods. The Shivans seem to be specially adapted for hanging out in low/no gravity and in all likelyhood would lose a significant amount of their agility and mobility at a gravity we consider more normal. (Which may help explain the losses the Shivans took in storming the Iceni. And if the interior of the Iceni is anything like the interior of a current warship, a Shivan would find it difficult just to locate a corridor large enough for it to move in.) My basic point is that the Shivans have made themselves well-suited to defending their own ships at the expense of all else, probably because that is the only type of battle they expect to engage in.
The beam in Hallfight was actually fairly tightly focused, as well, meter or so diameter at the most. The charging period is an issue as well. Those few seconds would be very costly. (I'd also point out that the Shivans at that point probably figured themselves for screwed and wouldn't care about damaging their transport. It's already been shot up pretty good and it's surrounded by Terran ships who are just going to keep throwing the marines at them until they fold.)
-
Thing is, we really have precious little evidence to say either way. The Terrans in Hallfight certainly fought in Zero-G, but it's never made clear whether that it normal for a Shivan vessel or was caused through damage. The fight to take the Iceni was fought with greater knowledge of the Shivans, and for all we know, there could have been heavy sentry guns scattered all over the ship which did the most of the damage, it's one of those things we'll never know.
My own take is that even the Ancients don't seem to ever refer to ground combat with the Shivans, so I suspect it is rare if it does happen.
-
oh man, this topic is using all of my "Remember things about FreeSpace" skills.
Let's take your points one by one, shall we?
Well, that assumes the Shivans indulge in ground fighting at all. For all we know they can't even handle 1G gravity for long periods. The Shivans seem to be specially adapted for hanging out in low/no gravity and in all likelyhood would lose a significant amount of their agility and mobility at a gravity we consider more normal.
Any species strong enough to kick through a Vasudan fighter's shields and hull (shiphit06 movie) can easily handle distance leaps in 1G.
If the interior of the Iceni is anything like the interior of a current warship, a Shivan would find it difficult just to locate a corridor large enough for it to move in.
True.
My basic point is that the Shivans have made themselves well-suited to defending their own ships at the expense of all else, probably because that is the only type of battle they expect to engage in.
Then why have shoulder cannons at all if they don't expect to have any sort of attack other than ship-based?
The charging period is an issue as well. Those few seconds would be very costly.
That charging period could be done as the Shivans performed their flying leaps between each group of Terrans. Besides, we saw the Shivans ripping through the commandos WITHOUT beams (only the last commando got beamed), and with claws capable of crushing even the sturdiest of known alloys, (http://www.hard-light.net/wiki/index.php/Shivans) they're not exactly defenseless without a charged beam.
I'd also point out that the Shivans at that point probably figured themselves for screwed and wouldn't care about damaging their transport. It's already been shot up pretty good, and it's surrounded by Terran ships who are just going to keep throwing the marines at them until they fold.
But they would care about damaging it. They SHOULD know that this is going to happen:
Tombaugh Station Attack
We've just received some discouraging news from Terran Command, pilots. At 0300 today, after the captured Taranis was towed to Tombaugh installation in the Ribos system, the Shivans staged a major ambush. There isn't a lot of confirmation from the footage yet, but it's clear that a Shivan destroyer of massive proportions jumped in and destroyed Tombaugh station, along with all its defenses. We have designated this new class of Destroyer "Lucifer".
The Shivans on board either must have gotten a message off to the Lucifer containing their position (which is how the Lucifer knew how to jump), or they would know the Lucifer would be able to follow them using the Shivan's advanced subspace knowledge to track their ship. Either way, they knew they only had to hold out until the Lucifer came, and therefore would like to keep their ship in as pristine a condition as possible for when the Lucifer picked them up and hauled them off to a repair station (like the place you steal the Dragon from).
the MindGames idea about the Shivan groupmind would also work to explain how the Lucifer knew where to jump, and would allow the Shivans on board to know they had to hold out only until the Lucifer arrived.
The beam in Hallfight was actually fairly tightly focused, as well, meter or so diameter at the most.
...
and it's surrounded by Terran ships who are just going to keep throwing the marines at them until they fold.
True, but that's just a point in favor of my adjustable beam theory. If the Shivans cut down on both Width AND Range/Power, they'll have plenty of energy to hold off the Terrans until the Lucifer arrives.
EDIT:
My own take is that even the Ancients don't seem to ever refer to ground combat with the Shivans, so I suspect it is rare if it does happen.
Just because it rarely ever happens, do you think they don't have a plan for how to do it if they need to?
America and Great Britain both have contingency plans for almost every military situation, no matter how rare.
-
Shivans? Ground combat? ha. All they'd do is convince you they were about to land on a planet, and then glass it like Vasuda prime.
There's your ground combat.
-
Just because it rarely ever happens, do you think they don't have a plan for how to do it if they need to?
America and Great Britain both have contingency plans for almost every military situation, no matter how rare.
I didn't say they wouldn't have :) All I said is that evidence suggests that the Shivans don't use ground forces often, everything else is a blank page as far as I'm concerned.
-
Well, we know from :v: (specifically, the FS1 ships.tbl) that Shivan planetfalls are quite rare, if not nonexistent:
"We have yet to see a Shivan land on a planet." (http://freespace.volitionwatch.com/techfs/fsships/sc5.shtml)
-
The Shivans have to get their resources from somewhere. You can't expect them to build that super-armada and 80+ Juggernauts using only stellar gas clouds. They must have used up a system's worth of resources for that!
Maybe they just don't make planetfall in wartime situations, due to afore-speculated weakness in gravity?
-
Or maybe they have planet-sized processing plants that just do the whole lot in one go.... After all, the original plan was for ships the size of planets...
-
And where, may I ask, did they get the material to build said planet-size processors? :D
-
They grew them :nervous: Yes! They grew them on big Star-sized trees. :D
-
The same plae they got material to make 80 sathani
-
They harvested the materials for the planet sized processors using massive planet-sized material processors
-
And where, may I ask, did they get the material to build said planet-size processors? :D
Those annoying things that keep crashing into the Iceni/Hinton/Galatea. Kinda rocky and brown.
Asteroids, fool!
-
can we get back on topic? this is a discussion about GROUND TACTICS, not "'Things with space worms in them' for $300".
-
And where, may I ask, did they get the material to build said planet-size processors? :D
Why not asteroids? The Shivans didn't necessarily start in space, after all, they could quite feasibly have transited to being a solely space-borne species after developing the capacity to build and obtain resources without requiring planetfall or colonisation.
-
And where, may I ask, did they get the material to build said planet-size processors? :D
Do you have any idea how big asteroids really are? There would be no resource problem if the Shivans mined asteroids.
-
The physical structure of Shivan bodies clearly indicates they are either evolved - or were designed - for zero-gravity environments, that's a given. Evidenced by the Iceni incident, the Shivans are obviously at a marked disadvantage in areas with gravity. It's no wonder the Shivans haven't ever landed on planets; they'd be going up against us on our home turf, and the Shivans obviously must prefer having the advantage themselves.
Shivans don't engage in ground warfare, end of story.
-
The physical structure of Shivan bodies clearly indicates they are either evolved - or were designed - for zero-gravity environments, that's a given. Evidenced by the Iceni incident, the Shivans are obviously at a marked disadvantage in areas with gravity. It's no wonder the Shivans haven't ever landed on planets; they'd be going up against us on our home turf, and the Shivans obviously must prefer having the advantage themselves.
Shivans don't engage in ground warfare, end of story.
Evidenced how? By a few dying?
-
Indeed! In-game chatter between Command and the surviving Iceni crew indicates a moderate to high number of Shivan casualties. While Hallfight indicates that Shivans are formidable warriors, the skirmish aboard the Iceni appears to have led to equal losses on both sides, indicating that either the human crew were quite prepared for the scuffle [doubtful given that it was initially a peaceful encounter], or something was different in this instance that put the Shivans at a disadvantage. The only major difference between Hallfight and the Iceni is the presence of gravity.
The Shivans are obviously at a disadvantage when faced with a 0> gravity environment, and thus why the avoid conflicts on planets or other ships like the plague. In short, they avoid planetary combat for the same reason we avoid combat floating around in zero-g.
-
We can basically take it as two ways, either the opening cutscene is canon, or it's not. If it is, then ground combat did occur, because of several reasons.
1. All of those are combat troops. To be massed in such away indicates they were organized. If they were "debris" from a destroyer, they bodies would be scattered, you'd see mostly scattered body parts, not intact humans, not to mention you'd expect to see other debris interlaced between, and indeed, in them, which you don't see.
2. If they were killed by Lucy beams, they'd be vaporized.
3. If they were at the edge of the radius of an attack evacuating civilians, where are all the civilians.
Conclusion: Logically speaking, if the cutscenes is indeed canon, then ground combat did, in fact, occur. There is no other logical explanation for what we see in the cutscene. However, it is possible that the cutscene is not canon, thus ground combat did not occur.
-
Its a safe assumption the ground troops were dead for a while. Maybe they were from the T-V war era.............
-
Its a safe assumption the ground troops were dead for a while. Maybe they were from the T-V war era.............
Not likely, judging from the context of the scene.
-
Its a safe assumption the ground troops were dead for a while. Maybe they were from the T-V war era.............
Not likely, judging from the context of the scene.
Well, considering the apparent Hades on the background, I wouldn't be so sure of anything... :p
Anyway, there might be several reasons for such a large amount of bodies concentrated in the area depicted in FS2 intro.
First, what planet was it again? A planet orbiting Deneb, apparently, if I'm not much mistaken.
There was certainly some troops down on the planet, doing what troops do - mainly arranging evacuation in this case, most likely. Now, there was this bigass space battle on the orbit of the planet. Much debris fell certainly to the planet, even though the Legion apparently stayed in the orbit for decades. So, let's say a ship with critical reactor plunged through the atmosphere and the reactor reached critical point while descending, and blew up? It'd be quite a nuke, I dare say.
So, the soldiers in the cutscene might've been killed by space ship explosions.
Other chance is that they died from Lucy beams that didn't hit them directly. I don't think that planet was completely wiped out like Vasuda Prime.
Had there been ground combat, there should've been Shivan corpses visible as well IMO. :nervous:
-
It's amzing how much 'info' people are pulling from 3 seconds of rendered cutscenes. The scene suggests nothing other than a lot of dead people, and if Shivans fare so badly in gravity, I hasten to note that there are no Shivan bodies, and I don't see command collectiing the Shivans for study and not burying the troops.
All we know is that at some point during the battle over Deneb, A Herc was hit and crashed into the surface of a planet. There is not even any evidence whatsoever to support that the Bodies on the surface are the same age as the Herc Pilots' body, it seems likely, but there little indeed about that cutscene which is 'obvious' in any way.
Edit : It appears I'm not alone in thinking this ;)
-
We can basically take it as two ways, either the opening cutscene is canon, or it's not. If it is, then ground combat did occur, because of several reasons.
Quite a leap of faith there. You're talking out your arse.
Conclusion: Logically speaking, if the cutscenes is indeed canon, then ground combat did, in fact, occur. There is no other logical explanation for what we see in the cutscene. However, it is possible that the cutscene is not canon, thus ground combat did not occur.
It is not concrete proof of ground combat. There is in fact no evidence whatsoever that they were engaging the Shivans. If you examine the scene, there is wreckage in the background that could be solid structures; meaning they were killed during an evacuation, or it could simply be a transport that broke up shortly before impact; spewing the dead troopers across the sand. They could be remnants of a Vasudan push years before, or perhaps rescue team sent years later killed by environmental conditions. It could be a lot of things.
Not likely, judging from the context of the scene.
Granted, context matters. However, there is still no evidence whatsoever that they were engaging Shivans beyond 'there are Shivans earlier in the cutscene'.
There are infinitely more possibilities for how those troopers died, and simply assuming that they were killed by Shivans when canon indirectly contradicts it is folly.
-
Indeed! In-game chatter between Command and the surviving Iceni crew indicates a moderate to high number of Shivan casualties. While Hallfight indicates that Shivans are formidable warriors, the skirmish aboard the Iceni appears to have led to equal losses on both sides, indicating that either the human crew were quite prepared for the scuffle [doubtful given that it was initially a peaceful encounter], or something was different in this instance that put the Shivans at a disadvantage. The only major difference between Hallfight and the Iceni is the presence of gravity.
The Shivans are obviously at a disadvantage when faced with a 0> gravity environment, and thus why the avoid conflicts on planets or other ships like the plague. In short, they avoid planetary combat for the same reason we avoid combat floating around in zero-g.
32 years, the Shivans boarding (rather than being boarded), both sides expressing peaceful intentions (honestly or otherwise), previous GTVA knowledge of Shivans (i.e. allowing automated defenses, improved weaponry), several thousand Terrans onboard the ship (rather than several marines), the possibility of GTVA-developed co-ordinated defense strategies implemented by the crew of the Iceni, etc all spring to mind as differences. Additionally, the concept of Shivan 'moderate' casualties is rather relative, and AFAIK the only reference is actually along the lines of 'there are some Shivan bodies among the dead' rather than any quantifier. Additionally, the ship is - IIRC - referred to as a slaughterhouse, which surely implies Shivan advantage.
-
Good point- er, points. Well, I can't be stuffed arguing a point at midnight, so I concede; there is no canonical evidence that Shivans are hindered at all by the presence of gravity.
Still, I maintain that Shivans landing on Terran or Vasudan planets is complete bullshot.
-
Good point- er, points. Well, I can't be stuffed arguing a point at midnight, so I concede; there is no canonical evidence that Shivans are hindered at all by the presence of gravity.
Still, I maintain that Shivans landing on Terran or Vasudan planets is complete bullshot.
I agree, and I may add that I personally think that most of the opening cutscene is crap. There were no ground battles, despite what the cutscene suggests. To try to work around the cutscene to say they were anything other than combat troops doing anything other than combat, and coming up with all these deranged explanations to prove so is completely bull. It makes a good intro, but it doesn't tie into the history of FS at all. Didn't somebody say the cutscene was made by an independent company? My personal take is that what we see in the opening FS2 intro simply did not happen.
-
If you examine the scene, there is wreckage in the background that could be solid structures; meaning they were killed during an evacuation, or it could simply be a transport that broke up shortly before impact; spewing the dead troopers across the sand.
If that was true, then the bodies would not be intact. The same goes for orbital bombardment.
They could be remnants of a Vasudan push years before, or perhaps rescue team sent years later killed by environmental conditions. It could be a lot of things.
There are infinitely more possibilities for how those troopers died, and simply assuming that they were killed by Shivans when canon indirectly contradicts it is folly.
The problem with your arguments is that you're assuming that the people who made the cutscene were following, or indeed even cared about the canon story. They probably just used "what looked cool." My point is that the original intent of the cutscene was to show the devestation of the Great War, not the T-V War. Everything in there implies the death and destruction at the hands of the Shivans, not of anything else.
Simply put, the cutscene was made to look cool, but I don't think they were concerned about preserving canon when they made it. Intentionally or not, they broke with canon, and :v: rolled with it, because they wanted to show the devastation caused by the Shivans, so having all those dead soldiers did the job. Despite the fact that it implies ground combat occurred between the Shivans and Humans, it served its purpose. The break with canon did not concern them.
You see, you have to seperate two things, what's canon, and what was the intent of the creators of that scene. Were they concerned with preserving canon? Probably not.
-
Good point- er, points. Well, I can't be stuffed arguing a point at midnight, so I concede; there is no canonical evidence that Shivans are hindered at all by the presence of gravity.
Still, I maintain that Shivans landing on Terran or Vasudan planets is complete bullshot.
Absolutely; it's totally unnecessary for them and a waste of time and resources.
-
Good point- er, points. Well, I can't be stuffed arguing a point at midnight, so I concede; there is no canonical evidence that Shivans are hindered at all by the presence of gravity.
Still, I maintain that Shivans landing on Terran or Vasudan planets is complete bullshot.
Absolutely; it's totally unnecessary for them and a waste of time and resources.
It's a dangerous thing to rely on canon, because writers can and do regularly ignore their own canon when they create new stories.
-
Good point- er, points. Well, I can't be stuffed arguing a point at midnight, so I concede; there is no canonical evidence that Shivans are hindered at all by the presence of gravity.
Still, I maintain that Shivans landing on Terran or Vasudan planets is complete bullshot.
Absolutely; it's totally unnecessary for them and a waste of time and resources.
It's a dangerous thing to rely on canon, because writers can and do regularly ignore their own canon when they create new stories.
what would you rather do, just randomly make **** up?
-
Haha! I was waiting for someone to say something. The problem I see with a lot of fan sites, is that they always get befuddled with contradictions in canon. As I just said, I think the people who made the intro cutscene ignored, intentionally or not, the canon. But :v: rolled with it because it looked cool. That's it.
My only point was that those who made the cutscene wanted to show the remains of a ground battle because they want the viewer to visualize the human impact of the devastation wrought by the Shivans. The fact that the whole scene is contrary to canon doesn't matter, but people are like "NO! THAT CAN'T BE WHAT IT IS! OMF GOD N00B, THEY WOULD NOT HAVE CONTRADICTED CANON!!!11ONE" Because they can't fathom the fact that the creators really don't give two ****s about their own canon (that the fans are so attatched to) when it comes right down to it.
-
My only point was that those who made the cutscene wanted to show the remains of a ground battle
That's a rather gigantic assumption. What makes you think they weren't just wanting to show lots of dead bodies?
-
To be blunt, The cutscene was made by a third party, so we cant really take it as gospel anyway, now can we......
-
If they wanted to show lots of dead bodies, why not have civilians and navy pilots and navy officers interlaced among the dead marines? Why is it only dead marines? Likely, because they are dead Marines who died in the manner that you'd expect a bunch of Marines to die. In direct combat.
What I'm trying to say is don't try to fit the cutscene around canon, because it doesn't. Just acknowlege that it contradicts canon, and you can either say it's an alternative canon or (as I believe) is not a part of canon. I mean you have the Hades and all kinds of other contradictions, so maybe its better to say it's not part of canon. Or you can say it represents another side of the story that the canon line doesn't show. Anyway as Dekker said, we cant really take it as Gospel anyway. I know I don't.
Personally, I don't think ground combat ever occurred, but I understand what I think the creators of the cutscene were trying to convey, that is the human loss due to the Shivans. I think that it was meant to represent a ground battle (that didn't happen according to canon). Its purpose was to help us visualize the human loss that a bug hunk of floating debris can't. and the fact that it's all dead combat troops emphasizes the power and the threat that the Shivans represent.
However, since my view really isn't in line with the topic, I'll close and say that I think that the Shivans are capable of fighting in 1G evironments, as the Iceni battle shows. "Some Shivans are amongst the dead" means that some of them were killed, but in the Hallfight cutscene the attack squad was able to kill at least one Shivan, so that doesn't surprise us. But when the Lieutenant said that it was a slaughterhouse in there implies that it was a slaughter of humans, not Shivans. This is also evidenced by his nervousness. If they were able to fend off the Shivans handily, he wouldn't be quite as anxious to get off the ship.
-
Yes death in honorable COMBAR !!!!!!!!
It does make sense now you mention it.......... :nervous:
-
Thanks for pointing out my typos! :hopping: :lol:
-
If they wanted to show lots of dead bodies, why not have civilians and navy pilots and navy officers interlaced among the dead marines? Why is it only dead marines?
Because they already had the models for Freespace marines perhaps? Never attribute to design what can be attributed to laziness. It will bite you on the arse every time.
-
Why do the bodies in the FS2 cutscene have to be from a shivan ground attack? alternate theories:
1.) GTI rebellion, those corpses are from a massive infantry battle over a GTI compound/mine/base/something on a planet abandoned after the great war and the losing side didn't get picked up. Don't ask don't tell.
2.) Vasudan battle: Terrans and vasudans were engaged on ground ops here but the shivans showed up, so the survivors got recalled before they could bury their dead, and were forgotten about as the shivans swept the system.
3. Lord of the Flies Scenario: Shivans ravaged the system, leaving a base cut off for months. No resources, no contact, and sense of impending doom leads to different factions of ground troups forming tribes and killing eachother off over old cans of cheese whiz and spam.
Anyway, I imaging that FS2 ground combat uses air superiority for domination and bombardment, and then uses perfected close quarter urban combat infantry. Heavy mechanized units are probably obsoleted by handheld banshee lasers and orbital troop drops and fighter cover. Step 1 is blockade the planet, step 2 is to pound all facilities from orbit, and step 3 is to send in the infantry to root out the straglers, set up check points, and occupy the cities.
-
Why did they have to have died in ground combat? I see no evidence of this, as far as I'm concerned they died when, or shortly after, their ship crashed (or maybe fell out of the wreckage as it was still falling), and I see no evidence against this.
-
Actually, considering the timeframe of the movie in which you see the base, GTI sounds likely.
You can't pick and choose your canon, folks...particularly in regards to actual game content. Stuff the developers say, things that were cut from the game, those can be treated as a lesser form, but anything that was actually in the game is as canon as it gets.
-
Are there any Shivan bodies among the dead in that shot? It's kinda hard to see.
-
Are there any Shivan bodies among the dead in that shot? It's kinda hard to see.
As far as I can tell...no.
-
Seriously, is there any evidence that ground combat occured? The exoskeletons seem intact, which they wouldn't be after combat with the Shivans
-
Seriously, is there any evidence that ground combat occured? The exoskeletons seem intact, which they wouldn't be after combat with the Shivans
None whatsoever, just people jumping to conclusions.
-
The only evidence is the dead bodies in combat gear.
-
Seriously, is there any evidence that ground combat occured? The exoskeletons seem intact, which they wouldn't be after combat with the Shivans
The only evidence that we have of ground combat are...
1) The opening cut scene of FS2.
2) The debriefing after "Surrender, Belisarius" which states that 600,000 ground troops are going to retake the planet.
But as far as Shivans taking part in ground combat, there is zero evidence. Considering their nature, it makes absolutely zero sense for the Shivans to even conquer planets. They could've conquered Vasuda Prime, instead, they razed it. They could've conquered planets on their way to Sol, but they didn't. As far as we can tell, the Shivans are a zero gravity loving species who are at home in the vacuum of space.
-
The only evidence that we have of ground combat are...
1) The opening cut scene of FS2.
2) The debriefing after "Surrender, Belisarius" which states that 600,000 ground troops are going to retake the planet.
But as far as Shivans taking part in ground combat, there is zero evidence. Considering their nature, it makes absolutely zero sense for the Shivans to even conquer planets. They could've conquered Vasuda Prime, instead, they razed it. They could've conquered planets on their way to Sol, but they didn't. As far as we can tell, the Shivans are a zero gravity loving species who are at home in the vacuum of space.
You miss my point, I was saying "Is there any evidence of ground combat in the opening cutscene?"
-
What a lot of people are missing here is that the Shivans are not the only enemy the GTVA has. The Hammer of Light, the Neo-Terran Front, the GTI Rebellion, random groups that pop up on minor planets. People are only thinking of fighting the Shivans on the ground.
I'm sure that plenty of fighting against the Vasudans was on the ground, before we allied ourselves with them. The Neo-Terran Front had to be fought on some ground, given the afore-quoted Bellisarius briefing. I'd wager that the Hammer of Light had bases of operations on Deneb, Vasuda, or Sirius, that needed to be cleaned out. There's plenty of ground combat in FS, just none of it is ever witnessed due to the fact that the game's name is Freespace, and therefore we only see the high-flying, beam-shooting side of it.
-
We only see the planets surface after The colossus is complete dont forget that, There could have been all sorts of problems, but this is diversive conjecture, At the end of the day it should be dead Zods not Humes.......... :(
-
If they wanted to show lots of dead bodies, why not have civilians and navy pilots and navy officers interlaced among the dead marines? Why is it only dead marines? Likely, because they are dead Marines who died in the manner that you'd expect a bunch of Marines to die. In direct combat.
GTVA ships carry marines, and probably in large numbers. Just look at them standing around in the mainhall, guarding every door. And there's no reason why said marines wouldn't, y'know, be housed together within the ship superstructure or - in a crashing ship - be assembled together for evacuation. (moreso, there's no reason to assume their bodies were thrown clear - the ships outerstructure could have simply corroded in the atmosphere of the planet)
Moreso, the image of skeletons encased in body armour is more indicative of military death (not to mention that it's not clear the Shivans killed civvies on the ground other than in Vasuda) than what in would be indistinct and tattered rags, not to mention more visually effective and that it'd be a lot more difficult for the cutscene animators/modellers to create a bunch of new 'tattered' models.
As a thought regarding ground combat - how many weapons do you see lying next to them? Or tanks or similar support vehicles?
-
This opens up a new line of converation, ie in FS land, obviously they would have tanks, but would they be as abundant seeing as how the GTA at the time used to bomb planets with (i forget) Harbingers or Tsunamii, They could use some fighters to blap ground support vehicles too.But yeah i've wondered about that, it all harks back to wether the third party animators could be arsed to make :v: come up with new non-requirement models...... :D
-
This opens up a new line of converation, ie in FS land, obviously they would have tanks, but would they be as abundant seeing as how the GTA at the time used to bomb planets with (i forget) Harbingers or Tsunamii, They could use some fighters to blap ground support vehicles too.But yeah i've wondered about that, it all harks back to wether the third party animators could be arsed to make :v: come up with new non-requirement models...... :D
That's assuming the ground forces didn't have potent air-defense weapons or technology, of course. Perhaps in the form of energy shielding, at least in the post-FS2 world.
-
In hallfight, The bird thats buys the farm, "FIRE !!" shoots the shivan with a man portable rocket IIRC, so a reasonable assumption would be that can get MANPADS too, Although the yield would have to be drropped or range increased.....
-
In hallfight, The bird thats buys the farm, "FIRE !!" shoots the shivan with a man portable rocket IIRC, so a reasonable assumption would be that can get MANPADS too, Although the yield would have to be drropped or range increased.....
Don't actually know what she uses, natch, because the Shivan explodes. there was a big debate over whether a grenade, etc, was used a while back with no consensus reached.
-
In the spirit of Ground Combat i reckon it was a mini missile with a shape charge, A grenade would have taken the squad out.
:nod: :)
-
Seriously, is there any evidence that ground combat occured? The exoskeletons seem intact, which they wouldn't be after combat with the Shivans
This is a good point. Maybe the soldiers were evacuating the planet, the transport for some reason didn't depart (mechanical failure, was destroyed by Shivan ships before entering the atmosphere etc.) and the soldiers may have been killed by famine.
-
Seriously, the only people who would look at that cutscene and assume it couldn't have been the site of a battlefield are you guys, extreme fans and well versed canon people. People who are unfamiliar to the Freespace universe would have come to the conclusion that all those Marines died in combat somehow. And that's the point. That cutscene is so contradictory to canon precisely because the creators don't care about canon. The intended audience is not to attract people who are familiar to the FS universe, but to attract people who are not. It's intended to simultaneously visually demonstrate how devastating the Great War was in terms of human lives, and the terrible power of the Shivans to those who are unfamiliar. Just showing hulking space debris would not convey that image.
Does that mean ground combat actually did occur? No. The problem you guys are having is that you're trying to fit the cutscene around your concept of canon.
Now, I dare anyone to prove this next statement wrong: the people who made the cutscene did not give a sh*t about the official canon, and Volition rolled with it because they also don't really care about their own canon, when it comes right down to it.
Don't try to fit things like that cutscene around canon, it's fruitless and pointless. You can't try anyway. Why would one image, the marines for example, conform to canon when the crashed Hades clearly doesn't. Why would any of that entire cutscene conform to canon at all? It doesn't. Acknowledge its purpose, which is not to add anything to canon, or even to conform to canon, but to visually convey a concept.
-
Cutscenes are there to be enjoyed as vibrant luxurious imagery, True and i agree, But .....
As true fans it is our right,... NAY! our duty to pick holes in it at every oppertunity :nod: :lol:
-
I don't see what holes you have to pick. The whole thing is like a giant black hole in canon to begin with. :nervous:
-
Seriously, the only people who would look at that cutscene and assume it couldn't have been the site of a battlefield are you guys, extreme fans and well versed canon people. People who are unfamiliar to the Freespace universe would have come to the conclusion that all those Marines died in combat somehow.
bollocks. I first saw that cutscene as - shockingly - never having played an FS game before and interpreted no such thing. It's a site of many dead people; nothing more, nothing less - you're the one reading in some vast story of ground warfare from it.
-
Seriously, the only people who would look at that cutscene and assume it couldn't have been the site of a battlefield are you guys, extreme fans and well versed canon people. People who are unfamiliar to the Freespace universe would have come to the conclusion that all those Marines died in combat somehow.
bollocks. I first saw that cutscene as - shockingly - never having played an FS game before and interpreted no such thing. It's a site of many dead people; nothing more, nothing less - you're the one reading in some vast story of ground warfare from it.
Actually, I'm not. You must be missing my point. You're reading into the cutscene by trying to portray some far-fetched story of some marines falling from some hole from a crashing ship, or dying from some other thing. What I'm trying to say is that I think the whole cutscene was probably made to convey an image. But I can say with certainty that it wasn't made to conform to or perpetuate canon. The people who made it didn't care about canon, so it's pointless to try to conform the cutscene to canon or to try to extract some other form of canonical idea from it.
-
Actually, I'm not. You're must be missing my point. You're reading into the cutscene by trying to portray some far-fetched story of some marines falling from some hole from a crashing ship, or dying from some other thing. What I'm trying to say is that I think the whole cutscene was probably made to convey an image. But I can say with certainty that it wasn't made to conform to or perpetuate canon. The people who made it didn't care about canon, so it's pointless to try to conform the cutscene to canon or to try to extract some other form of canonical idea from it.
Are you still arguing that ground warfare occured or what? You're argument is all over the whole damn place.
-
Best conclusion, the battle of Deneb killed loads of people, nuff said...... :nod:
-
Seriously, the only people who would look at that cutscene and assume it couldn't have been the site of a battlefield are you guys, extreme fans and well versed canon people. People who are unfamiliar to the Freespace universe would have come to the conclusion that all those Marines died in combat somehow.
bollocks. I first saw that cutscene as - shockingly - never having played an FS game before and interpreted no such thing. It's a site of many dead people; nothing more, nothing less - you're the one reading in some vast story of ground warfare from it.
Actually, I'm not. You must be missing my point. You're reading into the cutscene by trying to portray some far-fetched story of some marines falling from some hole from a crashing ship, or dying from some other thing. What I'm trying to say is that I think the whole cutscene was probably made to convey an image. But I can say with certainty that it wasn't made to conform to or perpetuate canon. The people who made it didn't care about canon, so it's pointless to try to conform the cutscene to canon or to try to extract some other form of canonical idea from it.
So according to you what killed the pilot of the crashed Herc? Signs of a battle while he was holding on to an holographic emitter? Bullsh*t.
They just wanted to show a lot a dead people, you know, like a mausoleum?
And now, we live in the mausoleum of history. We inherit the legacy of ghosts, who haunt these ruins.
-
I think the point FF is trying to make is this.
How many of you have tried to explain why there is a Hades class superdestroyer crashed on the planet? Probably no one. It's simply written off as artistic license in order to make the cutscene look cool.
So why is everyone clamouring to explain the dead troops away?
Of course the point he's missing is that we explain away the troops because we can. No amount of fanon can explain away the Hades :D
-
Actually that topic goes back 5 and a half years nealry.....
But we need to leave it be........
-
Of course the point he's missing is that we explain away the troops because we can. No amount of fanon can explain away the Hades :D
Put simply: why?
We don't actually know the Hades was unique. It is possible, though unlikely, that there was more then one of them. Nothing canonical states the Hades was unique. The tech room comes closest, but it is not, as we well know, an infallible narrator. More than one Hades would actually bring Silent Threat much more in line with other FS campaigns; as with FS1 and FS2 main campaigns there was a mopup period we missed.
Clearly the term retcon has no meaning to you people.
-
Karajorma nailed it. If it makes your world make a little more sense in your mind if you simply imagine that the reason for all those dead troops is caused by some strange accident (troops falling out of a transport or ship) or anything other than troops dying in battle, then go ahead, but I think it overrides the artistic and emotional point of the scene.
To have them die fruitlessly or by, essentially, some force beyond their control invalidates the image that the entire cutscene is trying to convey. However, the image it does try to convey does contradict canon, but the point is, so what?
-
Karajorma nailed it. If it makes your world make a little more sense in your mind if you simply imagine that the reason for all those dead troops is caused by some strange accident (troops falling out of a transport or ship) or anything other than troops dying in battle, then go ahead, but I think it overrides the artistic and emotional point of the scene.
To have them die fruitlessly or by, essentially, some force beyond their control invalidates the image that the entire cutscene is trying to convey. However, the image it does try to convey does contradict canon, but the point is, so what?
Massive speculation.
You assume we think they died by some strange accident yet, I've asked you, how do you think the pilot of the fallen Herc died? A ground battle? Fell off the fighter? No, he got out of it and died from an unknown non violent cause (think injuries, illness, starvation, whatever...). Why can't the same have happened to the crew of the fallen Hades? Does it override whatever you think the cutscene tries to show? Why and what do you think the cutscene is trying to convey? And why do you think you are correct in your assumption of what it is trying to convey? Does the pilot of the fallen Herc died "fruitlessly" then? Was it some force beyond his control (I always thought death was beyond anyone's control but...)? And how does the "message" contradict canon?
-
What makes you think they were from the Hades, hmmm? And you're still missing my point. The pilot of the Herc was shot down, and died later. Where did the Marines come from? Did you see them somewhere before in the cutscene? No. Where did they come from then? What I'm trying to say is it's up to you. However, to try to say with authority "No, they can't have died from ground comat, that violates canon!" would be wrong because the whole scene violates canon, regardless of how those troops died. Don't try to make an authority on how they died, if it makes sense for you to have them die falling from a ship or whatever, sure, but I don't think you should do so just so you can make it fit canon, because nothing in that scene fits canon to begin with. Instead admire the scene for what it is, and don't try to make it fit anything.
-
We don't actually know the Hades was unique. It is possible
Yes it's possible. But if you built a campaign around that it would be regarded with about as much believability as that campaign with 10 Colossi and numerous Saths. Quite simply no one is going to buy that there was a second Hades in the same way that no one will believe that the GTVA secretly built 9 more Colossi.
Sure nothing canon states that it didn't happen but you show me one non-noob who believes that it did?
You assume we think they died by some strange accident
You're missing FF's point. He isn't saying that. He's saying that explaining away the marines as being the crew of the Hades is similarly ridiculous to trying to explain who could possibly have made the size 500 shoes that Godzilla wore when you saw him tap dance down your road yesterday. First you must explain where Godzilla came from and why he was tap dancing :p The shoes are a minor detail.
Explaining the marines away as being the crew of the Hades doesn't get you around the point that the Hades doesn't make any bloody sense in the first place! :D
-
Seriously, the only people who would look at that cutscene and assume it couldn't have been the site of a battlefield are you guys, extreme fans and well versed canon people. People who are unfamiliar to the Freespace universe would have come to the conclusion that all those Marines died in combat somehow.
bollocks. I first saw that cutscene as - shockingly - never having played an FS game before and interpreted no such thing. It's a site of many dead people; nothing more, nothing less - you're the one reading in some vast story of ground warfare from it.
Actually, I'm not. You must be missing my point. You're reading into the cutscene by trying to portray some far-fetched story of some marines falling from some hole from a crashing ship, or dying from some other thing. What I'm trying to say is that I think the whole cutscene was probably made to convey an image. But I can say with certainty that it wasn't made to conform to or perpetuate canon. The people who made it didn't care about canon, so it's pointless to try to conform the cutscene to canon or to try to extract some other form of canonical idea from it.
No, I'm providing contrary analysis to indicate why the assumption that ground troops implies ground combat is wrong. If you notice, I indicated on the previous page
Moreso, the image of skeletons encased in body armour is more indicative of military death (not to mention that it's not clear the Shivans killed civvies on the ground other than in Vasuda) than what in would be indistinct and tattered rags, not to mention more visually effective and that it'd be a lot more difficult for the cutscene animators/modellers to create a bunch of new 'tattered' models.
Drawing the suggestion of alternatives to be a statement of definitive events is a pretty poor debating tactic, IMO; I'm just saying why the assumption of the cutscene proving ground combat occured is an unsafe one..... and I note your response is along the lines of 'well, it's not canon anyways', which leads me to wonder why on earth you said
We can basically take it as two ways, either the opening cutscene is canon, or it's not. If it is, then ground combat did occur, because of several reasons.
1. All of those are combat troops. To be massed in such away indicates they were organized. If they were "debris" from a destroyer, they bodies would be scattered, you'd see mostly scattered body parts, not intact humans, not to mention you'd expect to see other debris interlaced between, and indeed, in them, which you don't see.
2. If they were killed by Lucy beams, they'd be vaporized.
3. If they were at the edge of the radius of an attack evacuating civilians, where are all the civilians.
Conclusion: Logically speaking, if the cutscenes is indeed canon, then ground combat did, in fact, occur. There is no other logical explanation for what we see in the cutscene. However, it is possible that the cutscene is not canon, thus ground combat did not occur.
because that statement is logically incorrect given the positing of sensible alternatives.
So, i guess, you came up with a point based on the assumption of canon, and when said canonical point was disproven, you retreated to 'it's not canon anyways' rather than addressing or acknowledging the disproof.
-
Neither FS1 or FS2 cutscenes are 100% canon. Many things have changed between FS1 and FS2,like beam cannons,so we aren't able to say what is valid and what isn't valid. FS2 cutscenes suffer of poor graphics,particularly the intro is full of errors.
-
I've decided that the theory of the marines falling out of ships is now my favorite theory.
"It's raining men, hallelujah!"
-------------
Canon vs non-canon baffles me. V builds an intriguing story and a great game, and the canon is assembled later from the material presented in the game by rabid fans. So basically that means the cutscene by definition is canon.
So how do you get a hades on deneb? well, I guess in the official version of silent threat (the storyline that violition plays off of), maybe the hades tries to jump out to deneb because alpha 1 is wasting it, but didn't disable the engines, but the hades is so badly damaged that it is scuttled. Maybe a new super destroyer hull was being built at deneb. The first hull became the hades, and the second was basically an empty unfinished shell that fell out of orbit after the shivan attack.
As far as I see it, there are dead guys in space suits on deneb, and a hades hull on deneb, and that's canon because it's part of the game. speculation on how they may have gotten there without violating other canon is internet fun.
-
I've decided that the theory of the marines falling out of ships is now my favorite theory.
"It's raining men, hallelujah!"
:lol:
Anyway, yeah I agree that my explanations are confusing, and that's because I knew what I was trying to say, but just couldn't really get the message across the way I've been meaning to.
I'm not saying that they died in ground combat, although I do think that's what the writers originally thought when they put them there. All other explanations might be just as plausible. What I guess I'm trying to say is that you can't say my explanation is invalid simply because it violates canon. I know it violates canon, but you're not getting that the writers ignored canon in the first place. Besides, canon is something mostly decided by fans, anyway, not by the writers. They really don't care if they contradict themselves.
Let's do a thought experiment. Let's pretend we were to show that clip of marines to people who have never seen or heard of Freespace before in their lives (not that hard to do), and we asked them which of the following scenarios they think best describes how they think those soldiers died. Do you think they would most likely pick:
A: They fell out of exploding space ships/transports of some sort.
B: They died because they got hit by some sort of bomb evacuating civilians or just "hanging around" not doing much of anything.
C: They died in combat with some force completely unrelated to those bad guys earlier in the cutscene.
D: They died in combat with those same baddies that were kicking everyone's arse earlier in the cutscene.
I think you and I would both agree that they'd probably pick "D." "But that violates canon!!!!!!" So? The creators either didn't know much of or didn't care about canon, so it's likely the writers were thinking "D" as well. Sure, it's possible the other explanations are valid, and hey, they even conform to canon! But, "D" is just as valid even though it violates canon, because the writers probably ignored canon anyway. In fact, it's probably just as valid because it violates canon.
-
Yes it's possible. But if you built a campaign around that it would be regarded with about as much believability as that campaign with 10 Colossi and numerous Saths. Quite simply no one is going to buy that there was a second Hades in the same way that no one will believe that the GTVA secretly built 9 more Colossi.
You know in combination with your complaint about everyone who plays Revenge: Final Conflict in the Campaigns forum, this is kinda amusing. Clearly people are willing to believe in 10 Colossi. (And Hecates with BFreds, and god-knows-what.) Besides, this is a straw man; a second Hades is much more doable then 10 more 20-year-construction ships. The Hades could only have been under construction for a year or two tops, and was nearly complete. Pretty impressive considering the whole problem of systems integration of Terran and Shivan technologies.
The question should actually be why the Colossus took 20 years to build, not why there could not be a second Hades.
Sure nothing canon states that it didn't happen but you show me one non-noob who believes that it did?
Speaking.
-
Its a safe assumption the ground troops were dead for a while. Maybe they were from the T-V war era.............
I'd wager, given the Hades in the background and that only human troops are present, and the state of body decay (only skeletons, jsut as that pilot that died fighting the Lucifer) that those bodies are from the GTI rebellion period.
Probably humans fighting humans.
However, the scale of destruction of the sorrounding structures confuses me.
Either the shivans bombed Deneb (before, during or after the human fought) or one of hte human sides decided it's easier to nuke the enemy than take it in ground combat (high losses)...
-
I've decided that the theory of the marines falling out of ships is now my favorite theory.
"It's raining men, hallelujah!"
:lol:
Are we sure that those Vasudans were wearing troop uniforms? Do we have infos regarding their normal clothes?
-
Judging from the silent threat super secret movie folders, Vasudans do it in the nude.
-
You know in combination with your complaint about everyone who plays Revenge: Final Conflict in the Campaigns forum, this is kinda amusing.
I've never played Revenge. I have no idea what the plot entails. My complaints about it were based on the fact that
1) It doesn't work very well judging from the long list of complaints about it.
2) When the missions contain so few events that the scrollbar doesn't even appear in FRED I start to seriously doubt the quality of a campaign.
Clearly people are willing to believe in 10 Colossi. (And Hecates with BFreds, and god-knows-what.) Besides, this is a straw man; a second Hades is much more doable then 10 more 20-year-construction ships. The Hades could only have been under construction for a year or two tops, and was nearly complete. Pretty impressive considering the whole problem of systems integration of Terran and Shivan technologies.
The Colossus on the other hand was built with the full knowledge of the governments and agencies involved. The parties behind the Hades had to hide it not only from their own government but also parts of their own agency within that government. Building two would mean a significantly increased risk.
The question should actually be why the Colossus took 20 years to build, not why there could not be a second Hades.
Assuming that construction of the Hades didn't begin before the start of the Great War. It's been a long time since I played Silent Threat but as far as I remember it never says when construction started. Hell for all we know the rogue parts of GTI could have had contact with the Shivans way before the start of the Great War. And that's assuming that the Shivan parts of the design weren't retro-fitted.
Besides your argument misses one important point. Perhaps the Colossus took 20 years precisely because they were building 9 more of them in secret. I doubt it somehow but it explains the discrepancy.
-
Judging from the silent threat super secret movie folders, Vasudans do it in the nude.
...which gives all new dimensions to comm message "You fight like a Vasudan!"
:nervous: :shaking:
-
Vasudan's fighting hand-to-hand combat. THAT I've gotta see...
-
Personally, I think I'd go to great lengths to avoid seeing it ;)
-
yea, it'd be better if they had some sort of uniform on....
-
For some reason when I see dead Marines on the ground I don't think battle. If it was a battle I could see them collecting the remains.
If it were a crash or something else, I could also see them not collecting the remains.
It just kinda got me when someone said "when you look at that, don't you see a battle?"
And I thought no, cause who would leave them all behind? Even if they were wiped out I would still think someone would go to see.
-
There is the wreckage of ships all over the planet, which looks uninhabitable, I don't think it was ground combat, people crawling out of their ships and dieing seems far more likely to me... as far as I can tell, only about two or three people here have come to your conclusion.
-
Who's conclusion is that?
-
My own, just as yours is your own, and how else would you explain the herc pilot?
-
You've completely lost me. I just said the image of the soldiers on the ground didn't exactly say "battle" because they wouldn't really have left them behind.
-
Regarding the GTD Hades #2:
If the FS2 Techroom takes the time to mention this:
"There are rumors that the Alliance has attempted to reconstruct the Hades to learn more about the GTI's activities. These reports have yet to be confirmed by government sources."
That's canon enough for me.
-
:wtf:
Wow. You're telling me, that if you went back in time, walked onto Omaha beach in Normandy, and looked at all the dead American soldiers lying around, you'd say "Hmmmm, looks like these soldiers fell from out of a transport plane that blew up in the air. Yes, I see no evidence that they died in combat." :wtf:
You guys are so clung on to your canon that you can't see past it. It's pretty amazing, actually.
YES, ACCORDING TO CANON MY THEORY IS SIMPLY NOT POSSIBLE. BUT SINCE THE WRITERS IGNORED CANON, YOU ALSO MUST TAKE YOUR CANON, THROW IT OUT THE WINDOW, AND PRETEND IT NEVER EXISTED!!!! :D
Okay, now let's watch the cutscene anew. Again, pretend you never even heard of the FS universe. Now, first we see what are apparently human fighters. We can say that because they look familiar to us. They have bubble canopies that we are familiar with today. Now we see they are involved in a war with some alien looking bad dudes, and the humans are getting their butts royally kicked. After watching one fighter get shot down and barrel towards the planet, we emerge on what is apparently the surface of that planet, but the subtitles say we are now 32 years later. We see a bunch of dead soldiers. We can tell they are soldiers because their equipment and helmets and all are reminiscent of soldier garb in our lifetime. They are all soldiers; no other dead people in other garb are around. Now, from the context of what we just saw, and REMEMBER WE ARE COMPLETELY IGNORING CANON, we must ask ourselves, what is the most likely explanation of their deaths?
1) Is it possible they fell from a starship that exploded in the atmosphere, or crash landed on the planet and they died later?
*ding* Yes.
2) Is it possible they died evacuating refugees or some other such occurrence?
*ding* Yes.
3) Is it possible they died from a battle completely unrelated to the one we just saw two seconds ago?
*ding* Yes.
4) Is it possible that they died in a battle against the same bad guys we just saw kicking everyone else’s but two seconds ago?
*ding* Yes.
In short, any explanation is possible, but our point is to try and determine which scenario is most likely. According to canon, the last scenario is impossible, because as we all know, the Shivans never fought in ground warfare. BUT REMEMBER WE ARE COMPLETELY IGNORING CANON, BECAUSE THE WRITERS DID SO WHEN THEY CREATED IT.
So, let's look at possibility 1. Answer: *eh eh* not likely. Why? Because if that did happen, the bodies would not likely be intact. Furthermore, we would see all kinds of other people, enlisted personnel, navy officers, and anyone else you'd expect to see on a ship interspersed amongst the dead.
Possibility 2. Answer: *eh eh* not likely. Again, were all the civilians? Why don't we see them interspersed amongst the dead Marines?
Possibility 3. Answer: *ding* Possible. However, what does it have to do with the events that took place just two seconds ago in the cutscene? Answer: Nothing. So, if it has nothing to do with anything else going on in the cutscene, why would they include it? Answer: they wouldn't. So, possibility number 3 just got knocked down to *eh eh* not likely.
Possibility 4. Answer: *ding ding ding ding ding* Likely. Why? Because of all the different possibilities, it's the only one that explains why it is only Marines who are dead. Also, if you are completely ignorant of the FS universe, it's the first thing that'll come to mind. Unless you're the type who as I mentioned before would walk upon Omaha beach and say "Oh, they must have fallen out of a military transport plane, how clumsy." Remember we are forming our conclusions solely on what we saw in the cutscene, not on any prior knowledge of the FS universe. In the context of the cutscene, we just saw a bunch of ugly bad dudes kicking human arse, and it would be most logical to conclude that all these soldiers must have died in a similar manner.
You see, it is symmetry. All the events that we see in the cutscenes are all inter-related. All of it revolves around a single concept, a theme. Remember back to your creative writing class. To throw some random thing in there that doesn't have anything to do with anything else in the scene doesn't make sense from an artistic point of view, because it's not in step with the theme. Of course, we see events happening all the time that don't have a thing to do with anything else going on everyday in real life. But we're not looking at real life, we're looking at art. And in art, every part of the piece is interconnected, and related to everything else in that scene. That's the very definition of following a theme.
So, possibility #4 is the most likely explanation. Of course, it contradicts canon, but remember WE ARE IGNORING CANON! :) It's the most likely because it is the one explanation that fits the THEME, yes that word that all us nerds hated in creative writing. All the other explanations are possible, but since they don't fit the theme of the piece, it wouldn't make sense for the writers to include it in the piece.
@Blue Lion
My good sir,
You raised the question on why the dead weren't collected if it was a battlefield. So now I ask you, why weren't the dead collected if any of the other scenarios are correct? There's no reason why they couldn't have collected the dead for any of the possible explanations. Any possible explanation would have the problem of why the bodies weren't collected, and for all possible scenarios, the only logical explanation is that there was no one left to collect them, and/or it was too costly to do so.
Thank you and good night!! Of course, most likely no one going to read the entire thing so I probably just wasted my breath. Or fingers. Or whatever. :p
-
I'm gonna hazard a guess that the remains on Normandy weren't down to skeletons. I could be wrong though.
My good sir,
You raised the question on why the dead weren't collected if it was a battlefield. So now I ask you, why weren't the dead collected if any of the other scenarios is correct? There's no reason why they couldn't have collected the dead for any of the possible explanations. Any possible explanation would have the problem of why the bodies weren't collected, and for all possible scenarios, the only logical explanation is that there was no one left to collect them, and/or it was too costly to do so.
A. They don't know they are there. The landscape didn't look too populated. A Hades could have crashed and no one knew it was there.
B. The planet was inhospitable for some reason in that area.
-
:wtf:
YES, ACCORDING TO CANON MY THEORY IS SIMPLY NOT POSSIBLE. BUT SINCE THE WRITERS IGNORED CANON, YOU ALSO MUST TAKE YOUR CANON, THROW IT OUT THE WINDOW, AND PRETEND IT NEVER EXISTED!!!!
You're missing one thing. The writers created the canon. Only they can change it
-
I'm gonna hazard a guess that the remains on Normandy weren't down to skeletons. I could be wrong though.
Yes, but I can tell already you didn't read my entire post. :P
Supposed the invasion of Normandy was a failure, all the Americans died and were not able to collect their dead. What if the Nazis didn't care about burying the enemy dead and left them to rot? Suppose the Allies never won and those bodies were left there for years, and then you walked on the beach, and saw all the dead American soldiers. What would you conclude? Would you say "Hmmm, they must have fallen from a military transport. How clumsy!" No! You'd say, "Oooh, how grusome! They must have died tragically in battle." That was the point I'm trying to make.
-
You're missing one thing. The writers created the canon. Only they can change it
And you're misunderstanding one thing. I'm not trying to recreate canon. Again, for the record. I PERSONALLY DON'T BELIEVE A GROUND BATTLE EVER TOOK PLACE ACCORDING TO CANON, but that cutscene is a circumvension of canon, if you will. The conclusions I have about the writer's intention with that cutscene are seperate from what I think really happened according to canon. Now, please, if you will, my good Taristin, continue.
-
I'm gonna hazard a guess that the remains on Normandy weren't down to skeletons. I could be wrong though.
Yes, but I can tell already you didn't read my entire post. :P
Supposed the invasion of Normandy was a failure, all the Americans died and were not able to collect their dead. What if the Nazis didn't care about burying the enemy dead and left them to rot? Suppose the Allies never won and those bodies were left there for years, and then you walked on the beach, and saw all the dead American soldiers. What would you conclude? Would you say "Hmmm, they must have fallen from a military transport. How clumsy!" No! You'd say, "Oooh, how grusome! They must have died tragically in battle." That was the point I'm trying to make.
Not even close. IF you assume it was a battle, IF you assume they were slaughtered, it was a long time ago. Long enough for them to skeletonize. Why weren't they buried?
They wouldn't have left them there years after the fact. Families would have wanted remains and higher ups would have wanted to know what happened. That means sending people down, that means burials.
You can't honestly assume the GTVA left soldiers on the ground to rot.
And I did read your post, i was editing.
-
If they fell from a crash landed ship, why didn't the GTVA go back and bury them? If they died escorting civilian refugees, why didn't the GTVA go back and bury them? For any possible explanation whatsoever, why didn't the GTVA go back and bury them? So that argument holds equally for any explanation, and can't invalidate my theory anymore than it would invalidate any other theory. As I said, for any theory, the only explanation I can think of as for why they weren't buried is because there was not one left to bury them, and/or it was too costly to do so.
-
Because in my previous post I was editing when you already replied. Maybe they didn't know they were there?
Battle of Deneb it's entirely possible a ship went down and crashed but no one knew where. You can't bury what you can't find. Is it possible they couldn't find it? Absolutely. As I already the said, the fact it's a Hades lends me to think it's possible no one really knew where it was in the first place.
I mean I look at the picture and I see skeletons of soldiers and crashed Hades.
Land battle that was left where it was for years and years or an unknown crash?
-
A. They don't know they are there. The landscape didn't look too populated. A Hades could have crashed and no one knew it was there.
B. The planet was inhospitable for some reason in that area.
Again, what would that have to do with the THEME of the piece. Why would the creators put something in there that doesn't have a damn thing to do with the events we just saw two seconds earlier? Remember, it's the theme, the theme, the theme. That dreaded word from creative writing. We're not talking about theories that require prior knowledge of the FS universe, we're talking about the perspective of people who are largely ignorant of it, because obviously the writers fairly ignored canon on this one.
Simply put, the unknown crash theory is inconsistent with the theme of the piece, and that is humanity locked in a life and death struggle with ugly alien bad dudes.
-
What if the Nazis didn't care about burying the enemy dead and left them to rot?
That dovetails with my point quite nicely.
All we know about the Battle of Deneb comes form two places: The FS2 intro, and the FS1 Doomsday mission.
Doomsday ends when the Galetea is destroyed. We know the Lucifer leaves to go blow Vasua Prime, but the Shivans own Deneb now. What's to say that another shivan ship didn't drop some troops and wipe the terrans still on the planet? The Shivans could have picked up the few dead they had and gone away.
The reason it says (somewhere) that we don't know about any Shivan ground fighting is because there would be no one left to repeat the tale.
You can't honestly assume the GTVA left soldiers on the ground to rot.
Quite frankly, there couldn't have been more that 100,000 troops on deneb. We wouldn't have had time to go back to Deneb until after the Lucifer was destroyed, and at that point, we were more concerned about losing TWO PLANETS FULL OF PEOPLE!!!
My personal belief is that there was a Terran military outpost on Deneb, and that it got destroyed by the Shivans after the Galetea got beamed. It could have even been a GTI outpost, which MIGHT explain the hulk that looks like a Hades.
-
Hmmm. as far as I know, the only reason that it is considered canon that Shivans didn't wage ground battles is because in FS1, during a command brief, it is mentioned "Interestingly enough, the Shivans don't seem interested in controlling any planets, but instead seem interested in controlling individual jump nodes."
However, this doesn't mean that ground combat never took place, although I'll take that as a not likely. However, if it's true that the Shivans aren't interesting in controlling any planets, why was the battle of Deneb waged in orbit? In the main FS1 campain, it wasn't. However, in the cutscene, it was. Another area where the cutscene is apparantly divergent from canon.
This actually brings me to my final point. Canon or not, if the Shivans did or were to fight humans on the ground, I'd say with certainty they'd kick human but in 1G or 0G or whatever G battle conditions, merely to keep in step with the THEME of FS, and that is that the Shivans can kick our butts no matter what we do. That is, unless you're name is Alpha 1. :cool:
-
Again, what would that have to do with the THEME of the piece.
Because they mention "inhabited by ghosts" It shows the after effects of the war with the Shivans. Dead humans goes towards that theme.
Why would the creators put something in there that doesn't have a damn thing to do with the events we just saw two seconds earlier? Remember, it's the theme, the theme, the theme. That dreaded word from creative writing.
Because it does have something to do with the events. You don't know it doesn't.
It's not part of the theme? I beg to differ. The cutscene has 3 parts. A battle, the aftermath of bodies and broken ships, and then the new ships heading off into.... whatever. The soldiers on the ground clearly deal with the fact that GTVA lives surrounded by reminders of battle. The Herc pilot is another example. My assumption is no one knew he was there. Simply because he is still there.
We're not talking about theories that require prior knowledge of the FS universe, we're talking about the perspective of people who are largely ignorant of it, because obviously the writers fairly ignored canon on this one.
Exactly, if I see skeletons on the ground, I think accident. I think missing, I think something other than battle. I don't see them leaving bodies if they knew where they were. They would know a battle took place there.
Simply put, the unknown crash theory is inconsistent with the theme of the piece, and that is humanity locked in a life and death struggle with ugly alien bad dudes.
You don't know that's not why they crashed. Just cause it crashed doesn't mean they got lost on a trip. They could have crashed there after a battle. The crash itself doesn't have to be accidental in nature.
-
And you're misunderstanding one thing. I'm not trying to recreate canon. Again, for the record. I PERSONALLY DON'T BELIEVE A GROUND BATTLE EVER TOOK PLACE ACCORDING TO CANON, but that cutscene is a circumvension of canon, if you will. The conclusions I have about the writer's intention with that cutscene are seperate from what I think really happened according to canon. Now, please, if you will, my good Taristin, continue.
But it's ingame. It is therefore as friggin' canonical as anything gets. Your point is, regardless of what the hell you think took place, invalid. You can't pick and choose your canon. It's all or nothing. If you think that represents a ground battle then you have to fit it into your canon. You can't just go "bah, it's a cutscene, who cares?" That's not the way canonicity works.
FOR THE LAST FRIGGIN' TIME: RETCON.
-
I think the point that is being made here is that if Freespace Freak wants to make a cutscene or whatever about a ground battle, there is no problem with that, but that is by no means saying that it would be canon simply because it is a 'viable' explanation. After all, the ShivanBBQ or Shrikes' theory is a 'viable' theory, even if a silly one, it still takes all visible factors into account.
The thing is, I have a feeling you are all trying to say the same thing, but all saying it different.
I don't want to have to lock this thread because it turns into a shouting match, so everyone calm down a little :)
-
Just poping in. My opinion:
The ground troops, were not they those exact 600,000 troops mentioned in one of the first briefings? They fought the NTF for Deneb right? I never thought they were the bodies of those who fell out of a destroyer or cap ship. They are in battle gear, normal officers and crew, would they wear those infa red scopes around the deck and halls? I'd think not.
Off topic: Zman i like the last part of your sig. Il join in.
-
(not to mention that it's not clear the Shivans killed civvies on the ground other than in Vasuda)
The Lucifer is the greatest threat to the survival of the GTA, the PVN, and both the Terran and Vasudan species. It wields three massive Flux Cannons which can destroy one of our capital ships in a few hits. These same cannons have been seen bombarding colonized worlds.
Note "worlds", plural. :)
How many of you have tried to explain why there is a Hades class superdestroyer crashed on the planet? Probably no one.
We have. :nervous:
-
Assuming that construction of the Hades didn't begin before the start of the Great War. It's been a long time since I played Silent Threat but as far as I remember it never says when construction started. Hell for all we know the rogue parts of GTI could have had contact with the Shivans way before the start of the Great War. And that's assuming that the Shivan parts of the design weren't retro-fitted.
it says the hades is an attempt to reconstruct the lucifer
-
I think it is entirely possible that the the skeletons are in there because the were simply left there. I'm not going to why they died, but I think it was battle (or they were preparing for battle) because they were armed and in battle gear. But about the bodies. It is reasonable to assume that the planet is inhabited. Perhaps the battle was so brutal or important or otherwise memorable, that they decided to let the brave souls to rest where they died. Why not?
Remember how the intro narrator talked about the lost generation? Perhaps many of the soldiers had no family left? Perhaps the were left there to finally rest away from the GTVA. Perhaps the battlefield was left there as a scar, to remind us of the horrors past. Just like the derelict in the orbit.
And a final note. Sorry if these thoughts were presented earlier. I just glanced over the 5 (!) pages of the topic.
-
You assume we think they died by some strange accident
You're missing FF's point. He isn't saying that. He's saying that explaining away the marines as being the crew of the Hades is similarly ridiculous to trying to explain who could possibly have made the size 500 shoes that Godzilla wore when you saw him tap dance down your road yesterday. First you must explain where Godzilla came from and why he was tap dancing :p The shoes are a minor detail.
Explaining the marines away as being the crew of the Hades doesn't get you around the point that the Hades doesn't make any bloody sense in the first place! :D
But the problem is that not explaining something on the basis that another situation is not explained is much more ridiculous. It's like someone invalidating everything we know about the shivans by simply saying "We don't know how they blew up Capella nor why!". We know the shivans blew Capella, Godzilla tapdanced ( :nervous: ) and that the Hades was there, it's not like we're adding stuff into the equation. I have no problem with someone believing in canon diferently (unless these things involve stuff like 99 colossi, you know the drill), but when someone starts saying that a seemingly plausible explanation which you believe cannot be true by means of a strawman, it is a bit irritating.
In the attempt to try to explain everything, you must start somewhere. You go bit by bit and if someone here says they actually figured out all they know about canon in one go, I'd say they are either lying or worked for V or should join the SCP.
PS.
Sorry about this late post but this thread's growth is intimidating.
-
Its a safe assumption the ground troops were dead for a while. Maybe they were from the T-V war era.............
I'd wager, given the Hades in the background and that only human troops are present, and the state of body decay (only skeletons, jsut as that pilot that died fighting the Lucifer) that those bodies are from the GTI rebellion period.
Probably humans fighting humans.
However, the scale of destruction of the sorrounding structures confuses me.
Either the shivans bombed Deneb (before, during or after the human fought) or one of hte human sides decided it's easier to nuke the enemy than take it in ground combat (high losses)...
What structures?
Vasudan's fighting hand-to-hand combat. THAT I've gotta see...
Its pretty much grabbing a bloke by the face, looking at him, then chucking him into the ground.
-
Okay, now let's watch the cutscene anew. Again, pretend you never even heard of the FS universe.
:sigh:
Why does no-one actually read my posts? It's not like I don't try to be clear......
I had never heard of the FS universe when I first saw that cutscene; and I drew no such conclusion of ground combat as you - arrogantly - assume I would make. Strangely, I've stated exactly that before, exactly my impressions as a first time viewed, and you ignored that statement flat-out.
You think I was given an injection of FS to the brain before first playing the game? Tres bizarre.
-
I heard what you said, and I said it's actually kind of a strange view. If you were to go to Iraq, and see a bunch of dead soldiers lying on the ground, you probably would not say "Hmmm, the must have fell out of a transport plane. How clumsy." No, you'd probably say "OMG! What a terrible battle that must have taken place here!" Granted, you know it's Iraq and know ground battles took place there. What if you didn't know you were in Iraq? Would you still think they fell out of a plane? No, you'd assume they died from battle. The problem with your idea, is that it's overly complex, and not in line with the theme of the piece. You're assuming the creators had some comlex backstory unrelated behind the dead soldiers, completely unrelated to everything else that's going on with the piece. To be quite honest, that is an extremely strange viewpoint, but then again, us nerds aren't known for thinking normal. Most likely, the people who created it, who have degrees in this stuff and are always are thinking with themes, are not going to put something in their piece that has some complex backstory unrelated to the events happening in the piece. Most likely they were thinking along simple lines, and that is: humanity getting its butt kicked by ugly alien bad dudes, and everything you see is the aftermath of that conflict. Even the crashed Hades, which we all know doesn't belong there, those guys must have put in there to conceptually show some wreckage from the same battle we saw moments before. You see, it's all very simple, and very straightforward. The simplest answer is always the most likely one.
-
See; I thought i had been very clear, but no. I have to reiterate again.
My initial reaction as a new player was simply 'lots of dead bodies relating to the huge space battle seen previously' - not inventing some hypothetical ground conflict not even hinted at in the cutscene to justify them (particularly in dint that the cutscene clearly shows ship wreckage on the planet as part of the battle aftermath, creating a logical join between that wreckage and those bodies).
I have merely provided some examples as to why your singular interpretation cannot be said to be the only interpretation as a background to indicate why your supposition is wrong.
Amazingly, I'd add, you've actually discounted the simplest explanation - the bodies are battle casualties from the battle we just witnessed and are seeing the wreckage of. If those same bodies were floating in space, would it thus mean there was infantry space combat?
-
If those same bodies were floating in space, would it thus mean there was infantry space combat?
That'd be so cool.
-
If those same bodies were floating in space, would it thus mean there was infantry space combat?
That'd be so cool.
I made a spacesuit-man for it a while back, but no-one ever used it :)
-
I made one with a rifle Moonraker style, For Shadowolf IH.
He never got round to finishing it, conversion and subs etc. I might dig it out, convert it and use SEXP tricks to make a Mission where............"GASP" you leave your fighter.................. ;7
-
I made a spacesuit-man for it a while back, but no-one ever used it :)
You built a Exo-ship marine for use in boarding manouvers outside a ship etc. Had you built a standard marine sucked out into space I'd definitely have used it :)
-
I made a spacesuit-man for it a while back, but no-one ever used it :)
You built a Exo-ship marine for use in boarding manouvers outside a ship etc. Had you built a standard marine sucked out into space I'd definitely have used it :)
Well, the debris sort of worked.
-
I heard what you said, and I said it's actually kind of a strange view. If you were to go to Iraq, and see a bunch of dead soldiers lying on the ground, you probably would not say "Hmmm, the must have fell out of a transport plane. How clumsy." No, you'd probably say "OMG! What a terrible battle that must have taken place here!"
First off, I don't know about anyone else. But I don't recall saying they fell out of a transport. I simply said it was a crash.
Granted, you know it's Iraq and know ground battles took place there. What if you didn't know you were in Iraq? Would you still think they fell out of a plane? No, you'd assume they died from battle.
Absolutely not. Let me repeat that, absolutely not. If I see US soldiers down to skeletons, that's not the remains of a battle. I cannot believe the governments of today would leave bodies there after a battle for that long.
The problem with your idea, is that it's overly complex, and not in line with the theme of the piece. You're assuming the creators had some comlex backstory unrelated behind the dead soldiers, completely unrelated to everything else that's going on with the piece. To be quite honest, that is an extremely strange viewpoint, but then again, us nerds aren't known for thinking normal.
Not at all. If you look at it like you want us to, as a new person to the FS universe then nothing makes sense, everything is taken at face value. There is no complex storyline. I see a crashed ship and I see dead bodies. Skeletons at that. I've never thought a battle happened there, ever.
Most likely, the people who created it, who have degrees in this stuff and are always are thinking with themes, are not going to put something in their piece that has some complex backstory unrelated to the events happening in the piece. Most likely they were thinking along simple lines, and that is: humanity getting its butt kicked by ugly alien bad dudes, and everything you see is the aftermath of that conflict. Even the crashed Hades, which we all know doesn't belong there, those guys must have put in there to conceptually show some wreckage from the same battle we saw moments before. You see, it's all very simple, and very straightforward. The simplest answer is always the most likely one.
And the dead soldiers, like the Hades and the dead Herc pilot, showed "some wreckage from the same battle we saw moments before"
My question though is this.... If
[They] are not going to put something in their piece that has some complex backstory unrelated to the events happening in the piece
Then why do you assume a ground battle took place, since it has nothing to do with that's happening in the piece. Wouldn't a ground battle that only leaves you dead human soldiers have a complex backstory unrelated to the humans getting their asses kicked at Deneb? It shows a dead pilot we assume is the one we saw in combat before, we see wreckage in orbit above Deneb. A ground battle wouldn't work with that.
You're telling me to think the ship (or ships) crashed on the surface and they died can't be a reasonable or even likely event because it creates an unrelated complex backstory but the fact that a ground battle happened around a crashed Hades is more likely because it doesn't create a complex backstory that pulls away from the main theme of the intro.
I'll put it as plain as I can, if I see skeletons, I don't think battle. Period. We don't leave bodies on the battlefield for that long.
-
Oh, I see what you're saying. My thing is that I never really saw a connection from the wrecked spaceship to the dead soldiers, except that I always thought they all were the results of the battle seen moments before. You don't see the soldier dead with the hades in the background, nor do you see the Hades, then zoom in and see the soldiers. To me they always seemed like seperate entities, as seperate as the Hades is to the downed Herc. However, the Herc and the Hades are related in that the viewer would probably expect both of them to have been destroyed in the battle we saw moments before.
So, I always saw three scenes in that part, one showing the wreckage of the Hades, another showing a bunch of dead marines (apparantly the after effects of a battlefield), and another showing the wreckage of the downed Herc. You saw only two scenes, that of the Hades, and that of the Herc. I don't think either perspective is wrong, however I still believe that either way the creators intentions were to show the after-effects of that battle, so in their minds all of that is the result of the battle at the beginning of the cutscene.
So, in my mind, I think there are actually three parts to that cutscene, with three seperate, but related themes. The first is the struggle between humanity and the Shivans, the second is how that struggle is affecting the present, and the third is how humanity has reacted to it ("and so we forge a new alliance").
-
A simple solution:
To make it look cooler.No battles,no fallen warships/transports but something better than ruins.
-
I'm still not completely convinced that the ship we see is actually a Hades, but when I first saw it, I definately wouldn't have thought that, since I never had seen one before. The thing is, I'm watching the cutscene, but I don't see anything around it that would indicate scale. I see little brown "splotches" that could be those cross-beam structures we see later on, but it's too small and pixelated to be sure. To be honest, it wasn't until recently when people were talking about it on this forum that I even thought it could have been anything larger than a fighter in the first place. Since I have no real sense of scale, I always assumed it was merely a crashed fighter, which wouldn't explain the prescence of the soldiers at all. If you knew it was a "big ship," then that might make sense, but since I always thought it was small, I never thought the soldiers came from it.
-
Giving the camera movements,the debris should have been little.It's just my sensation...
It's colours remind the Hades,but nothing more.
-
What structures?
The clearly destroyed buildings in the background.. You know, lots and lots of twisted metal support poles
----------
Why were the bodies left?
They often are if they are hard to reach or you have more pressing buisness. In a battle for survival of the species you won't spend men and resources to dig graves when the enemy is about to blow up your home planet.
Even after that, there would be far more pressing issues - the rebuilding of the shatterd worlds.
Deneb IV (it was that, right?) looks uninhabited in Fs2 time, prolly nobody went back there.
Many dead soldiers trought the history were never burried properly, but were just left to rot.
The battle of Deneb in the cutscene was not the batlte with the Galatea (altough that also took place in Deneb).
We can see a tow fleets colliding - there are various cruisers and destroyers from all races. Something the FS1 engine couldn't really handle.
As to how the soldiers got there...
Falling out from a ship? Impossible, there are only soldiers there, armed to the teeth.. unless all of them fell out with their weapons.
Battle with the Shivans? Possible, but where are the shivan bodies? We know terrans are capable of taking thenm out, espcially with heavier weaponry. And I doubt the bodies would be so "neat" - they look like they were killed by bullets/laser fire. A shivan would slice them in two or fry them.
Lucifer bombardment? Being hit by the lucifers beam would vaporize the bodies. tehy could have been away from the city and killed by the blast that hurled them far away..But then again, there are no civilian bodies that would also be hurled in that situation.
The whole custscene talks about the past and ghosts that haunt the ruins (the GTA being a ruin in some way too). Three great threats emerged in the FS past - the shivans, the HOL and the GTI rebellion.
So the cutscene references them.
I still think those are the ruins of some other battle and not a batlte with the shivans.
If they bombarded the planet, why send ground troops for that useless peace of rock? A few surviving humans are no threat or imeddiate concern of the shivans - tehy would die anyway without help.
HOWEVER, givan that this IS a cutscene that does appear to hold some conflict with in-game cannon (like the Hades..IF it is the Hades in the first place..It might be some older GTA destroyer) it should probably be tied more to hte shivans than anything else.
-
Why were the bodies left?
They often are if they are hard to reach or you have more pressing buisness. In a battle for survival of the species you won't spend men and resources to dig graves when the enemy is about to blow up your home planet.
Even after that, there would be far more pressing issues - the rebuilding of the shatterd worlds.
Deneb IV (it was that, right?) looks uninhabited in Fs2 time, prolly nobody went back there.
Many dead soldiers trought the history were never burried properly, but were just left to rot.
I agree with you on that, but,
The battle of Deneb in the cutscene was not the batlte with the Galatea (altough that also took place in Deneb).
No. It's the same battle. They make a big deal of showing the Galatea getting raped by the Lucifer.
-
No. It's the same battle. They make a big deal of showing the Galatea getting raped by the Lucifer.
Actually, :v: have stated that the destroyer in the cutscene is not the Galatea.
Its actual identity is supposedly the GTD Legion, but mostly because :v: consented to call it that rather than because they decided its name beforehand.
-
As far as I can remember, both GTD Galatea and GTD Legion perished in the Battle of Deneb.
I would also say it was the GTD Legion getting killed in cutscene even without confirmation from :v:, because Galatea was (supposedly) destroyed right after the GTD Eva was destroyed by bombers, and in the intro cutscene the Demon-clas destroyer is still there, more or less intact.
Both got destroyed in same battle AFAIK.
-
Who ever said that that particular Demon was the SD Eva? I think the Shivans had FAR more than two Demon-class destroyers (that's all we ever see directly in FS1, right?).
-
The cutscene text said it was Battle of Deneb (senior), and AFAIK there were no other Demon class destroyers in that particular battle... or were there? :nervous:
-
If there were any more demon class destroyers in the battle of Deneb, I would've blown them to hell.
FS1 era destroyers weren't immune to fighter level blasters.
-
My attempt at explaining cutscenes:
#1 To explain why the surface of the planet was so scarred up, there was a major battle take place in orbit of the same planet. I would like to think those may be the cause of shots that didn't hit their target.
#2 To explain the Hades, I would like to assume that Alpha 1 did not destroy the Hades single handedly, and made the jump to Deneb, but then, suffered a massive system failure and crash landed into the planet.
#3 As for the soldiers on the planet, that was a little harder. The soldiers that are shown are now skeletons. However, the pilot seemed a little more "intact". The only thing that could make sense was a ground battle involving Vasudans previously on the planet, as I honestly don't see Carl and his gang going down to the surface (plus, that still wouldn't explain why the pilot was a little more "juicy".)
-
What structures?
The clearly destroyed buildings in the background.. You know, lots and lots of twisted metal support poles
You think wreckage doesn't corrode or seperate from a ships' body?
-
The most feasible explanation I've heard is that this battle was in another part of Deneb, basically a force that encountered and delayed the Lucy before the Galatea arrived, entire 'Battle of Deneb' may have lasted for a day or so, and in the confusion that probably accompanied the Shivan's appearance, it's not certain that command are going to confirm all losses to their pilots. There's also, of course, the question of morale.
My own take on the cutscene really is that, if you have a line like 'They call us the Lost Generation...etc' and you are talking about a massive war, you really couldn't depict it better than to have hundreds of dead bodies. Basically, it was imagery to suit the dialogue.
-
The most feasible explanation I've heard is that this battle was in another part of Deneb, basically a force that encountered and delayed the Lucy before the Galatea arrived, entire 'Battle of Deneb' may have lasted for a day or so, and in the confusion that probably accompanied the Shivan's appearance, it's not certain that command are going to confirm all losses to their pilots. There's also, of course, the question of morale.
My own take on the cutscene really is that, if you have a line like 'They call us the Lost Generation...etc' and you are talking about a massive war, you really couldn't depict it better than to have hundreds of dead bodies. Basically, it was imagery to suit the dialogue.
:nod:
My attempt at explaining cutscenes:
#1 To explain why the surface of the planet was so scarred up, there was a major battle take place in orbit of the same planet. I would like to think those may be the cause of shots that didn't hit their target.
#2 To explain the Hades, I would like to assume that Alpha 1 did not destroy the Hades single handedly, and made the jump to Deneb, but then, suffered a massive system failure and crash landed into the planet.
#3 As for the soldiers on the planet, that was a little harder. The soldiers that are shown are now skeletons. However, the pilot seemed a little more "intact". The only thing that could make sense was a ground battle involving Vasudans previously on the planet, as I honestly don't see Carl and his gang going down to the surface (plus, that still wouldn't explain why the pilot was a little more "juicy".)
Explanation 2 and 3 are not in sync with the "theme" of the cutscene, which was what I was trying to say all along. Those theories seem tailored to fit what you see around canon, not with the context of what happens in the scene. I can see Aldo's point of view because at the beginning of "32 years later" he saw a large ship, but I didn't. I saw what I thought was a fighter. So, he concluded the soldiers came from the ship, I concluded they came from somewhere else, possibly a ground battle, a part of the same battle that took place in orbit.
-
1: Even if a Fenris cruiser hit the ground, it would bang the ground up pretty good
2: The Hades was just a generic large ship that the third party used because they didn't know better
3:The pilot is skeletal too... don't you see the nose?
-
If any cruiser hit the ground, the resulting crater would either match or rival the crater in Winslow Arizona...
-
Combined with toxic/radioactive fallout even small amount of capital ships falling down onto surface of a planet could result in planet becoming uninhabitable, or at best more hostile to life.
A là Honoghr...
-
Maybe the crew has used some kind of thrusters to slow the fall of the ship. Or maybe it was a crash landing like the one that can be seen in Star Wars Episode 3.
-
If any cruiser hit the ground, the resulting crater would either match or rival the crater in Winslow Arizona...
Yeah, that's why I always thought it was just a small fighter, not a gigantic ship or something.
3:The pilot is skeletal too... don't you see the nose?
Um, not quite sure what your point is with this one, Mars. Care to explain where you were going with this?
The cutscene text said it was Battle of Deneb (senior), and AFAIK there were no other Demon class destroyers in that particular battle... or were there? :nervous:
Yes there was, actually. The Eva. However, as the ship that got destroyed in the cutscene wasn't the Galatea, the Demon in that cutscene also could have been something other than the Eva.
-
The Tantalus?
First of all,are you sure that it was the Galatea?
-
the problem with the fighter theory is that a crater could only be created if the fighter dived STRAIGHT at the planet, then exploded...but it's more likely that it would explode during re-entry. If it was coming in at an acute angle, there wouldn't be a crater, but a long dirt streak....can't exactly describe it well, kinda like this:
(http://www.itn.co.uk/news/story0d663a5e57a893997df95434178ceaf3.jpg)
ouch...
-
The Tantalus?
First of all,are you sure that it was the Galatea?
The Tantalus was in Sirius, which Alpha 1 and the Bastion engaged just before entering Delta Serpentis. This is the famous Clash of the Titans mission.
The Eva was destroyed by Alpha 1 and company in Deneb. There are two missions for the battle of Deneb in the Main FS1 Campaign, the first mission is to destroy the Eva, and then you have the "incoming message" sequence and you jump in to help defend the Galatea's escape pods as they evacuate. The Lucifer jumps in during the mission and destroyes the Galatea.
However, :v: mentioned that the Orion seen in this cutscene being pulverized by the Lucifer is not the Galatea. I would also suspect that the Demon seen in the cutscene is also probably not the Eva, although it very well could be.
the problem with the fighter theory is that a crater could only be created if the fighter dived STRAIGHT at the planet, then exploded...but it's more likely that it would explode during re-entry. If it was coming in at an acute angle, there wouldn't be a crater, but a long dirt streak....can't exactly describe it well, kinda like this:
Exactly right, and a very big ship would probably leave a crater at no matter what angle it hit the ground. The very fact that there doesn't appear to be a crater made me think the ship was small, and thus was a fighter, not a big huge cruiser or destroyer. Which is why I didn't think "oh, those soldiers must have come from that ship" because I thought at most, that ship would have only held two people.
-
YEah, I beleive it was decided likely that the cutscene destroyer was the GTD Leigon, or somesuch...
-
YEah, I beleive it was decided likely that the cutscene destroyer was the GTD Leigon, or somesuch...
Well, yeah! :v: said it! Although, I wasn't there so could be just rumor or something, or he said it without official authorization or somesuch.
-
The Tantalus could have been in Sirius after taking part in the Battle for Deneb, uhm maybe not :lol:
-
The Tantalus could have been in Sirius after taking part in the Battle for Deneb, uhm maybe not :lol:
Ya know what? That actually might be possible.
-
Sirius is near Deneb,but with the subspace node mess in FS1 it's difficult to create theories remaining in canon field...
-
Yes, besides, there's so much that went on as far as fleet movements in between Deneb and COTT that it's merely speculation that cannot be proven one way or another.
-
There's a lack of infos,alike any other game.
-
There was only ever one Hades, ( CANON WISE)................................Alpha one however, Different story......... :cool:
-
Well, yeah! :v: said it! Although, I wasn't there so could be just rumor or something, or he said it without official authorization or somesuch.
They didn't say yes and they didn't say no, really. Somebody else just brought it up and they said "Sure, fine, whatever."
-
Hmmm, so in other words who the hell knows.
-
Hmmm, so in other words who the hell knows.
I've been away a week and this is the most accurate comment here :) :lol:
-
There was only ever one Hades, ( CANON WISE)................................Alpha one however, Different story......... :cool:
We have reason to believe it was re-constructed.
-
[cult leader voice] In the words of Aldo...............[/cult leader voice]
Source? :doubt:
-
Source? :doubt:
How's the tech room grab you?
-
Yes there was, actually. The Eva. However, as the ship that got destroyed in the cutscene wasn't the Galatea, the Demon in that cutscene also could have been something other than the Eva.
IIRC the Orion that was destroyed was the Legion.
-
Source? :doubt:
How's the tech room grab you?
By the nuts.............