Hard Light Productions Forums
General FreeSpace => FreeSpace Discussion => Topic started by: Mobius on July 12, 2010, 11:04:02 am
-
I was tempted to create this thread in NTV, but General FreeSpace Discussion is, without any doubt, the most appropriate place. I'd like to get NTV moving again, but there's something in the planning phase that is stopping me. Please note that this thread is not about ground warfare in FreeSpace, which has been already discussed a while ago: it's about the deployment operations that preceed ground battles.
We know from canon sources that the GTVA deployed some 600.000 ground troops to retake Cygnus Prime. If Argo transports can't carry more than 2.000 people, 300 transports (or better, 300 flights) were necessary to deploy all troops. That's a riskful move in a contested system, even with adequate protection, ad we all know what happened to the Inspiration, the Venture, and several GTVA transports under attack by the Shivans. Is it even possible to rely on vulnerable transports to retake a planet? Wouldn't the planetary defenses cause tremendous losses?
The Argo's capacity is also getting me confused. I don't remember when (or if) I heard that it couldn't carry more than 2.000 people... perhaps it was Command who said it indirectly during the evacuation of Capella? :confused: Oh, and do we have any reliable info regarding the capacity of Elysium transports?
-
An Argo is as well protected against hostile attack as just about any troop transport in the history of warfare.
Troops were moved around by the bushel in hundreds of troop transports, exactly like this, during World War II.
-
But in FreeSpace, enemies can sneak from behind and break havoc. Therefore, invasions call for a different approach. The D-Day was successful mostly because the Allies gained air superiority over Normandy, and the Luftwaffe couldn't sink all those warships and troop transports well before they could reach the land. Had Hitler decided to deploy aircraft, the Allied retreat from Dunkerque would have been a carnage. No threats from the air = more chances of success.
I'd say that ground troops are deployed progressively (massive formations of transports are too vulnerable to strikes), but I still don't know how many transports are needed to deliver all those soldiers.
-
Had Hitler decided to deploy aircraft, the Allied retreat from Dunkerque would have been a carnage. No threats from the air = more chances of success.
Wait. What.
Didn't you hear about the Stukas dive bombing those poor blokes on the beach? The story about that soldier whose mates shielded him with their bodies because he was wounded? The stukas attempting to assault the ships? The complaints by soldiers on the ground about the lack of RAF fighter cover?
As for the Elysium, how many people were on that boarding team in hallfight? Perhaps that number plus 10 for capacity?
And those troops probably didn't all get there in one night, they may have landed a few thousand to establish an LZ, and then brought them in in intervals of several wings of transports each. No doubt the GTVA would have been mounting diversionary assaults on other strategic points in system to keep the pressure off.
-
As for the Elysium, how many people were on that boarding team in hallfight? Perhaps that number plus 10 for capacity?
Err, I think you're severely underestimating the size of the Elysium. It's over 130 feet high...
Also, Mobius, Cygnus Prime wasn't 100% under the control of the NTF. I doubt they would have had enough time to set up more than a rudimentary defense of the planet, and only at certain strategic targets.
-
Oh, well fair enough then. :D
-
Wait. What.
Didn't you hear about the Stukas dive bombing those poor blokes on the beach? The story about that soldier whose mates shielded him with their bodies because he was wounded? The stukas attempting to assault the ships? The complaints by soldiers on the ground about the lack of RAF fighter cover?
Eh, I thought I added "en masse" after "aircraft"... :wtf:
Considering its dimensions, the Elysium should carry more than 20 soldiers. Perhaps what we saw in Hallfight was just a special team.
Also, Mobius, Cygnus Prime wasn't 100% under the control of the NTF. I doubt they would have had enough time to set up more than a rudimentary defense of the planet, and only at certain strategic targets.
Sure, but keep in mind that the NTF conquered the planet and forced countless Vasudans to escape using transports. I intend to show the NTF's invasion first and the GTVA's counterattack then, and both of them must look plausible. That's why I'm asking for help. :)
-
But in FreeSpace, enemies can sneak from behind and break havoc. Therefore, invasions call for a different approach. The D-Day was successful mostly because the Allies gained air superiority over Normandy, and the Luftwaffe couldn't sink all those warships and troop transports well before they could reach the land. Had Hitler decided to deploy aircraft, the Allied retreat from Dunkerque would have been a carnage. No threats from the air = more chances of success.
Absolutely wrong. In World War II German submarines attacked Allied troop transports all across the Atlantic theater - 'sneaking behind the lines' exactly as you describe. Why would you assume this is about D-Day?
In modern day war games and invasion plans, troop transports not very different from those brave attack by Soviet bombers and cruise missiles, relying on escorts to keep them safe.
It's no different from FreeSpace.
And your remark about Hitler at Dunkerque is particularly idiotic given that there was plenty of German air attacking Dunkerque.
As far as I'm concerned you've got your answer and the thread is over.
-
What? No, Battuta, air superiority was actually a key contributing factor to the success, as with most invasions. Does the word "Sealion" bring anything to mind? :P He did say all transports, and well, he was right, they didn't all get splashed before Normandy. :D
But agreed on the rest.
-
Sure, but keep in mind that the NTF conquered the planet and forced countless Vasudans to escape using transports. I intend to show the NTF's invasion first and the GTVA's counterattack then, and both of them must look plausible. That's why I'm asking for help. :)
I wouldn't say the NTF conquered the planet so much as were landing on it and beginning to burn and smash things. Judging from the Briefing texts, the situation developed over a period of a few days, not exactly what I would call sufficient time to completely conquer an entire planet.
-
What? No, Battuta, air superiority was actually a key contributing factor to the success, as with most invasions.
Air superiority was key to stopping German submarine raids in the Atlantic, but the Germans didn't use aircraft to carry out most of those raids.
So I don't really know what you're trying to say here.
-
I think we're talking about two different things here. I was talking about the success of the landing.
-
Landing on a planet in FreeSpace would be relatively trivial compared to D-Day. Once you control the orbitals, you control the world.
If anything so much as points a sensor in the direction of your landing force, drop a rock on it.
-
Absolutely wrong. In World War II German submarines attacked Allied troop transports all across the Atlantic theater - 'sneaking behind the lines' exactly as you describe. Why would you assume this is about D-Day?
In modern day war games and invasion plans, troop transports not very different from those brave attack by Soviet bombers and cruise missiles, relying on escorts to keep them safe.
It's no different from FreeSpace.
And your remark about Hitler at Dunkerque is particularly idiotic given that there was plenty of German air attacking Dunkerque.
As far as I'm concerned you've got your answer and the thread is over.
What? No, Battuta, air superiority was actually a key contributing factor to the success, as with most invasions.
Air superiority was key to stopping German submarine raids in the Atlantic, but the Germans didn't use aircraft to carry out most of those raids.
So I don't really know what you're trying to say here.
It's a matter of proportions. Operation Sealion was continuously delayed because, without air superiority, it may have turned into a massacre (both the Royal Navy and the RAF were ready to sink the German invasion force). Operation Overlord turned out into a success thanks to air superiority. I remember a quote from one of the highly ranked members of the military who helped planning the invasion: he told his troops that they would have seen only Allied airplanes flying above them (ergo, air superiority was guaranteed). I don't remember his name, though.
No generals were mad enough to condemn their troops to death in hopeless invasions.
I may add that German ships attacked Allied ships across the Pacific, but that's not the point. Those were sporadic episodes and I don't recall any massive attacks on immense Allied shipping. As for Dunkerque, excluding those air attacks I'd say that Hitler let the Allied troops go to Britain. He didn't deploy his best tank units to take care of those troops and that is widely considered a horrible mistake. Back on topic, it is different from FreeSpace because subspace drives give notable advances: just pick up their EM signals on sensors and jump right behind them to break havoc.
At least I learned that the deployment of troop transports must be quick and progressive in order to be safe.
The thread's not over, I still don't know what people think about the cargo capacity of Argo and Elysium transports. Their table entries are vague:
The GTT Argo has become the standard military transport vehicle for the Terran fleet. Argos sometimes carry new weapon and combat craft prototypes to and from testing grounds or to front-line deployment positions. Military VIPs occasionally commandeer Argos to travel from star system to star system in some semblance of comfort. Argos are most often used as assault transports, carrying squads of Marines through heavy flak to board enemy vessels that Command has decided to capture rather than destroy.
Since the start of space colonization, this standard transport has been used by everyone, both civilian and military. While it has undergone minor changes time and again, it remains a simple design: A vehicle meant to transport personnel from one place to another.
The GTT Elysium class of transports has been in service for over 40 years. Its mission hasn't changed from the time of the Great War - to transport civilian and military personnel from one star system to another. The Elysium is very poorly armed, with a single Subach HL-7 cannon, and also suffers from thin armor plating. Only desperate circumstances find Elysiums anywhere near the front lines. Assaults and dangerous transport missions handled almost exclusively by the much tougher GTT Argo class.
-
there are a few things to take into account
1. How large is the inhabited area of Cygnus prime
2. What is the population of Cygnus prime
3. What is the number expected of hostile combatants
this determines the size of the force you need to deploy on the ground. For example I would say 600,000 is to small a number to assault a planet like Earth in a tech even fight. But if the populated area is about the size of the North American continent then its about right.
4. What anti orbital/atmospheric assets does the enemy have
5. What suppressing capability does the invader have
This determines the excess forces you need to deploy that will be killed before delivery (Operation Overlord had a number far in excess of the number killed)
Also consider that it wont just be the transports descending from orbit, there will be fighters and bombers dropping and climbing as well performing escort for the transports and performing tactical strikes.
another thing is we dont know if the GTVA or others use specialised first wave landing craft to make the initial assault using specialised shield layouts, high manoeuvrability and powerful ECM to improve survivability.
finally all of the above assumes there is no rule in FS that says you cant just jump to 30,000 feet above sea level and land from there
-
The landing might not have been purely done through transports, larger ships may also have taken part.
-
Also, generally with infantry, the ratio is generally expected to be 3-1, with the invaders possessing the majority. So I guess you could use that to find roughly the number of men on Cygnus Prime the GalTevs thought they had. Perhaps poor intelligence contributed to the losses?
-
finally all of the above assumes there is no rule in FS that says you cant just jump to 30,000 feet above sea level and land from there
Good point here, that may be the key. Perhaps the transports need to:
1) Prepare themselves for the operation;
2) Muster an escort force;
3) Jump in proximity of the planet, position from which it's possible to execute a more precise jump;
4) Jump right above the planet's surface;
What do you think? :)
The landing might not have been purely done through transports, larger ships may also have taken part.
As escort ships or actual troop carriers?
Also, generally with infantry, the ratio is generally expected to be 3-1, with the invaders possessing the majority. So I guess you could use that to find roughly the number of men on Cygnus Prime the GalTevs thought they had. Perhaps poor intelligence contributed to the losses?
So, in poor words, Cygnus Prime was an easy prey for NTF ground troops and only a few hundred thousands of them were enough to conquer it? That'd explain the numbers.
Uhm, the briefing of "Surrender, Belisarius!" gives us enough info to give a relatively accurate estimate of Cygnus Prime's size. We know the distance between the Vasudan convoy and the planet, so we may use the angle to find out how big Cygnus Prime was. I'm tempted to do it... :drevil:
-
I may add that German ships attacked Allied ships across the Pacific, but that's not the point. Those were sporadic episodes and I don't recall any massive attacks on immense Allied shipping.
Whether or not you 'recall' it, the Battle of the Atlantic happened, and it was extraordinarily intense. The amount of Allied shipping lost was catastrophic.
Back on topic, it is different from FreeSpace because subspace drives give notable advances: just pick up their EM signals on sensors and jump right behind them to break havoc.
That's not particularly different from the way submarines hunt.
-
The Battle of the Atlantic is the name given a series of engagements that occurred between 1939 and 1945 - how is that connected to a one-day long invasion? The difference in terms of time span cannot be ignored.
Can we please remain on topic? :(
-
For the Hallfight crew: I always assumed they were scouts, checking out the inside a bit before the high-ups decided wether to commit a larger force or try something different.
And even if the Argo carried 2000 refugees, I doubt they would cramp that many soldiers in it. When evacuating they are likely to go beyond the optimal capacity and simply put in as many people as possible, to get them out of harms way (or course air is an important factor as well as room).
With soldiers bound for the frontline they have to make sure they are able to deploy fast and they need room for their gear. Maybe some heavier support gear like mortars or even armored vehicles too.
What I wonder is, if the GTVA has something akin to modern day parachute troops who deploy from high altitude or even orbit to secure a landing zone for the troop transports. Or droppods like in Quake, Halo or Warhammer 40K.
-
And even if the Argo carried 2000 refugees, I doubt they would cramp that many soldiers in it. When evacuating they are likely to go beyond the optimal capacity and simply put in as many people as possible, to get them out of harms way (or course air is an important factor as well as room).
With soldiers bound for the frontline they have to make sure they are able to deploy fast and they need room for their gear. Maybe some heavier support gear like mortars or even armored vehicles too.
...not to mention supplies. Maybe 1.000 soldiers are enough for each Argo?
-
The Battle of the Atlantic is the name given a series of engagements that occurred between 1939 and 1945 - how is that connected to a one-day long invasion? The difference in terms of time span cannot be ignored.
Can we please remain on topic? :(
Your argument is that troop transports in FreeSpace are too vulnerable to flanking attack during a landing.
I'm telling you that the situations are totally analogous. Convoy your transports, defend them, perform the landing. It's exactly like anti-submarine or anti-cruise-missile work in near-modern NATO/USSR wargames. Or, as I pointed out, the Battle of the Atlantic, defending a single convoy against sub attack.
Believe me, in Harpoon I've performed amphibious assaults as the Soviets on Keflavik, and defended against them as NATO, using air, surface and sub assets. It is not significantly different from what FreeSpace has to offer, and in fact FreeSpace transports are arguably in less danger even with subspace.
-
Not just the landing but the whole approach-landing maneuver. And I still believe things don't work like they do IRL due to the number of additional parameters FS added to space combat.
-
Then you're just making it more like the situations I described.
Whether or not you 'believe' it is less important than whether it actually holds. And the threats to ships in FreeSpace are limited compared to those in real life.
Secure space superiority over Cygnus Prime. Drop a rock or a beam on anything groundside that threatens your assets. Land.
There's nothing to it.
-
...not to mention supplies. Maybe 1.000 soldiers are enough for each Argo?
Sounds like a reasonable number to me. Of course it would depend on what kind of troopers are on board. I guess they would want differently equiped troopers in the different waves. Maybe something between 800 and 1200 depending on specialization, equipment and situation?
Or do you think they might drop the vehicles in containers, taken by Poseidons? That would be space-effective, but risks that the vehicles get seperated from the crews in the chaos of the invasion.
-
Or do you think they might drop the vehicles in containers, taken by Poseidons? That would be space-effective, but risks that the vehicles get seperated from the crews in the chaos of the invasion.
That's a nice idea, really.
It may not be a convenient move in the early stages of invasion, but it'd help later on, when soldiers need additional supplies and equipment. Those freighters would become the primary target of opposing space forces due to their capacity to deliver goods as quicker as possible. Nice idea, indeed! I will almost certainly put it to good use. :)
-
The problem you have is that in a landing situation you need everything shooting as soon as you can and armoured vehicles are a significant asset to spend 10 minutes idle while you get the crew with the vehicles and they power up. and that's assuming both make it down in one piece during separate drops.
I'd go with some transports configured for pure infantry drops, some configured for tank or their equivalent drops with the crew on-board if not actually in the vehicle and some carrying APC's loaded with infantry.
as a basic invasion hour to the beachhead being established
pure infantry would deploy to secure the immediate landing zone, the armour assist the infantry in the initial securing process while probing to expand the beachhead when they get the chance. the APCs would drop slightly after the others (only by a few minutes to allow the other transports to drop and leave) once landed the APCs would follow the armour as it advances to secure defensive points along the assault path. Artillery/supporting fire units and transportation for the securing infantry would follow next once a reasonably secure beachhead is established.
-
If AFVs were deployed via container, they would have the crews inside.
-
Maybe the GTVA have dedicated invasion ships for full-scale planetary invasions like Cygnus.
Mobius: You planning any atmospheric missions? :cool:
-
Mobius: You planning any atmospheric missions? :cool:
Kind of, but I need proper a proper skybox for Cygnus Prime... ;)
-
Would it be a real atmospheric mission with ground and all, or just a prettyful skybox? Or both? ;7
-
No ground, sorry. NTF transports enter the atmosphere and land (I'm planning to use some FRED tricks for that ;)) while some Vasudan assets attempt to stop the onslaught.
-
The problem you have is that in a landing situation you need everything shooting as soon as you can and armoured vehicles are a significant asset to spend 10 minutes idle while you get the crew with the vehicles and they power up. and that's assuming both make it down in one piece during separate drops.
That's what I think as well... hence my comment about the crews ranging. First come the "pure" infantry transports with the 1.200 or so troopers and in the later waves, they supplement the established beachheads with some of the lighter vehicles, which need room on board and thus there are fewer infantrymen on board, though those landingzones would still be considered hot.
Once a beachhead is secured enough, they move in the heavy tanks and artillary on bulk with the Poseidons.
-
Maybe the GTVA have dedicated invasion ships for full-scale planetary invasions like Cygnus.
I've always assumed the GTVA has dedicated assault transports designed to lift, deploy, and support about a battalion-sized unit for intial assaults. Admittedly you could simply assume retrofitted Argos, but the problems of amphibious power projection make a dedicated platform seem more likely. There probably aren't many of them though. The heavy lifting would be down to regular transports, as it always is.
The problem you have is that in a landing situation you need everything shooting as soon as you can and armoured vehicles are a significant asset to spend 10 minutes idle while you get the crew with the vehicles and they power up. and that's assuming both make it down in one piece during separate drops.
You forget this is an orbital assault. The attacker has unlimited mobility and can land on any reasonably flat surface large enough to support his transports. He doesn't have to, and probably won't, go where the defenders are. Even if he does, he can easily prepare the the hell out of his DZ with orbital bombardment and heavy bomber-deployed ordnance, rendering it unlikely anyone will survive. Buying yourself ten minutes isn't very hard either way.
-
Exactly.
Once you control the orbitals you can completely dictate the terms and position of the landing.
-
You forget this is an orbital assault. The attacker has unlimited mobility and can land on any reasonably flat surface large enough to support his transports. He doesn't have to, and probably won't, go where the defenders are. Even if he does, he can easily prepare the the hell out of his DZ with orbital bombardment and heavy bomber-deployed ordnance, rendering it unlikely anyone will survive. Buying yourself ten minutes isn't very hard either way.
I would like to point out that bombardment tends to put big holes in potential landing zone. Secondly to spend time focusing on one lets say 10km area for the landing zone you need to thin out or remove orbital range defences in the surrounding quarterish of the planet to stop your bombardment craft being taken out by direct line of fire weapons which if it's an Orion is a very expensive piece of kit to loose securing a landing zone, this takes time. Also think of the range and power of beams mounted on destroyers now what range and power would fixed planetary based systems put out. Yes i know fixed is easier to hit fixed positions but you have to get in range first.
and what to you do about local aero/space fighters, by the time you arrive in orbit the enemy know your coming so can have reserves in the air or otherwise disbursed away from fixed bases to make them harder to find and render any intelligence you have on those locations unreliable.
-
All of which fails to address or detract from my point. All that you say is true, but completely irrevelant to the point that you will not launch the invasion without control of orbit, and once you have that your options are almost unlimited.
And for that matter we have yet to see any surface-to-orbit weaponry in FS. We know destroyer beams can reach the ground, but we have yet to hear of a case of any weapons that can reach space.
Beam cannon might carve huge trenches, or they might not, but airburst Cyclops will solve many or all of your problems without cratering the DZ.
-
[ think of the range and power of beams mounted on destroyers
Hrm...less than ten kilometers...
now what range and power would fixed planetary based systems put out.
Probably about the same since they'd have to actually support their own weight, but we'll be optimistic and give them hundred times the range, at a thousand kilometers...still not enough to reach geosynchronous orbit. Not even close.
The Lucy could bombard Vasuda Prime from orbit all day long, but even if you decide to extend the range of beams to realistic values, it's still just easier to drop rocks on things. No weapon at the bottom of a gravity well will stand a chance when you can just RKV it.
and what to you do about local aero/space fighters, by the time you arrive in orbit the enemy know your coming so can have reserves in the air or otherwise disbursed away from fixed bases to make them harder to find and render any intelligence you have on those locations unreliable.
Look at them flying around, wait for them to land, drop rocks on them.
-
I haven't seen any evidence of rock throwing in FS, just glassing.
-
Well, I wouldn't take to the letter the beam range limit we see ingame: beams are the way too powerful to dissipate in 10 kms. We know what the Lucifer did to Vasuda Prime and we also know what the Hades was about to do...
Light beams on the surface may hit ships orbiting the planet unless it's proven that gravity reduces their range.
-
I haven't seen any evidence of rock throwing in FS, just glassing.
There are rocks.
There is gravity.
There is rock throwing.
Well, I wouldn't take to the letter the beam range limit we see ingame: beams are the way too powerful to dissipate in 10 kms. We know what the Lucifer did to Vasuda Prime and we also know what the Hades was about to do...
Light beams on the surface may hit ships orbiting the planet unless it's proven that gravity reduces their range.
It doesn't matter. They're at the bottom of the gravity well. They will be RKVed or KKVed from well outside their own effective range.
-
Remember that thrusters in freespace have a maximum speed (below the hundreds of m/s at that).
You're not getting anywhere near relativistic velocities. Otherwise we'd see warships doing the same.
In real life, sure, but I don't see RKVs or KKVs in FS, they're not "freespacy".
Freespace is not realistic. Realistic orbital siege tactics need not apply. Basically, I feel you could do whatever makes for good storytelling. Rocks fall everyone dies doesn't really do that...
Why else would the NTF send in transports in "Rebel Intercept" before orbital control was secured?
Why didn't they just throw rocks? They wanted to kill the zods anyway.
Cause asteroid intercept is boring, and RKV intercept is...
Eh, whatever, its hazy, do what you want.
-
The NTF aren't exactly smart.
-
Uhm, has the maximum beam range been boosted by the SCP in the past few months? I'd really like to use small, SGreen/AAAf-like beams to represent planetary defenses. The last time I attempted something like that was... uh... 4 years ago... :nervous:
-
Remember that thrusters in freespace have a maximum speed (below the hundreds of m/s at that).
You're not getting anywhere near relativistic velocities. Otherwise we'd see warships doing the same.
If you invoke the 'realistic' beam ranges you invoke 'realistic' velocities. Mixing and matching is just insane.
In real life, sure, but I don't see RKVs or KKVs in FS, they're not "freespacy".
Neither are non-Lucifer-mounted long range beams, then.
Uhm, has the maximum beam range been boosted by the SCP in the past few months? I'd really like to use small, SGreen/AAAf-like beams to represent planetary defenses. The last time I attempted something like that was... uh... 4 years ago... :nervous:
Just fire the beams from points on the skybox. Not all that hard.
-
Beam range maximum by default is 30km.
And by range I mean effective range. Combat range (ie. targeting, is 4-8km)
You can extend it...however much you want through a weapons.tbl field :D
The NTF aren't exactly smart.
Tru dat.
Remember that thrusters in freespace have a maximum speed (below the hundreds of m/s at that).
You're not getting anywhere near relativistic velocities. Otherwise we'd see warships doing the same.
If you invoke the 'realistic' beam ranges you invoke 'realistic' velocities. Mixing and matching is just insane.
In real life, sure, but I don't see RKVs or KKVs in FS, they're not "freespacy".
Neither are non-Lucifer-mounted long range beams, then.
Well, yes...
Let's go with neither?
Now I'm lost XD
EDIT: Right, it's still secure orbit, drop some bombs (helios, harbingers, whatever) on anything that'd try to shoot the transports, land.
-
Same procedure as before, then: WCSaga-like invisible ships fire beams 30kms away from the transports. ;)
-
Same procedure as before, then: WCSaga-like invisible ships fire beams 30kms away from the transports. ;)
Axem has a beam firepoint model in Vassago's Dirge you can use.
-
It's just a Watchdog with an invisible texture and custom table. :p Hardly anything special.
-
Yeah sentry guns are great for that :D
-
The NTF aren't exactly smart.
Bosch didn't need them to use advanced battlefield tactics such as baited ambushes or anything, he just needed them as a smoke-screen. And as long as they existed and made an ass out of themselves, that was good enough.
-
Bosch didn't need them to use advanced battlefield tactics such as baited ambushes or anything, he just needed them as a smoke-screen. And as long as they existed and made an ass out of themselves, that was good enough.
Sure he did. They had to meet at least an 18-month definition of success. For that matter, he likely didn't know that he would only need 18 months and probably thought he'd need them longer than that.
-
He didn't need them to be smart, he just needed them to be smart enough to be a lasting distraction.
-
The NTF were fine and hardly stupid. Their military successes evince this.
-
Sure he did. They had to meet at least an 18-month definition of success. For that matter, he likely didn't know that he would only need 18 months and probably thought he'd need them longer than that.
He didn't need them to be smart, he just needed them to be smart enough to be a lasting distraction.
Yeah, what he said. They were quite a dogmatic bunch however. :P Their local battlefield tactics didn't seem to be so sophisticated, however on a larger scale, they seemed to be fairly competent. Obviously they must have had a good bunch lying around somewhere, because Petrarch says they splash around 200 of our ships at the beginning of the campaign.
-
Actually what I think is that towards the end of the 18 months, Bosch had no further use for the large majority of the Neo-Terran Front which explains how they start dying off rather quickly. He already had all the information he needed for ETAK, so to him they were acceptable losses. Some people around here seem to think thart Bosch isn't all that of a bad guy because of the monologues and all, but to me he seems like he's fully willing to sacrifice tens of thousands of lives for some remote fantasy. The NTF were willing to die for Bosch, but Bosch didn't give half a damn about them "stupid cattle".
Sooo, the NTF aren't really stupid, but their fanatic willingness to die for Neo-Terra in conjunction with the fact that their leader is fully willing to sacrifice their lives is what caused their eventual defeat (in addition to other stuff liek teh deployment of teh Kolosus). IMO.
More relevant to the topic, to Bosch, the battle for Sirius III was utterly pointless since it was in the opposite direction to which he wanted to go (Gamma Draconis), which is probably why he didn't give a toss about any of the ships in Rebel Intercept and let them all die for nothing.
-
It's not that he wasn't that bad, he was obviously a tremendous c*nt, but he was a lot smarter than that.
I agree, the NTF's dogmatic following of Bosch, his cult of personality, was ultimately their demise as a military force. He was a real exploitative wanker wasn't he? In that way, he's a bit like a cult leader, except possessing more of a brain than most modern day wankers running around conning people out of their money.
In that way, I feel almost sorry for the boys and girls of the NTF, who went down fighting and thinking they were doing the right thing. Bosch was almost a Hitler figure, these masses of dogmatic young men and women probably weren't bad people, but they were victims of probably the most charismatic man of that time.
-
No denying Bosch was smart. He was simply an enormously manipulative basterd.
-
Yes, indeed.
-
More relevant to the topic, to Bosch, the battle for Sirius III was utterly pointless since it was in the opposite direction to which he wanted to go
how much of the GTVA fleet did that action put out of position for his lunge at Gamma Draconis
-
Uh.
2 fighter wings? :P
Okay no seriously, you got a point thar. Still didn't help him much though. 99% of his forces got destroyed.
-
Freespace Universe is sometimes not logic.
After the capture of the Taranis, the player is informed that a destroyer (the Lucifer) made a great assault to retake the Taranis.
In the little animation, there are a lot of shivan fighters escaping from Lucifer's fighterbay... I didn't count them, but I estimate them to one hundred fighters approximatively.
Surprise : in the last mission (where you have to destroy the Lucifer's reactors), there are no more than 2 wings of fighters protecting the Lucifer at the same time...
-
Freespace Universe is sometimes not logic.
After the capture of the Taranis, the player is informed that a destroyer (the Lucifer) made a great assault to retake the Taranis.
In the little animation, there are a lot of shivan fighters escaping from Lucifer's fighterbay... I didn't count them, but I estimate them to one hundred fighters approximatively.
Surprise : in the last mission (where you have to destroy the Lucifer's reactors), there are no more than 2 wings of fighters protecting the Lucifer at the same time...
the problem is we don't know how many were destroyed between the Lucy's last replenishment and the subspace attack
-
Concerning the topic, i recall that the FS1 Harbinger is described in its introduction during the campaign as origionally being purely for planetary bombardments, so the GTA seem to have specialised equipment for such roles. I suspect Elysiums are a big role, but there may have been other ship classes and technologies that we simply did not see in the campaigns.
Another thing to consider is having orbital support during a landing. Considering simple fighter missiles in Freespace (if what i've heard is correct) have power equalling modern nukes, Harbingers, beam cannons, maybe even the ol' plasma blobs are on the 'wipe out entire enemy base\battleline\regiment in one go' level. A group of Elysiums each carrying say 300-500 or so soldiers, entering the atmosphere to land at an LZ, sound silly and easy pickings for ground defences or ships. A group of Elysiums doing the same after an Orion with its fighter/bomber complement and attending cruisers have taken up position over the LZs hemisphere (if not the whole world) and are making the sky rain fire, suddenly become much harder to resist successfully. You might be able to stop them long-term with a determined gurilla or subterranean war (like in Vietnam), but trying to hit them while they're landing would be risky unless you can retake orbital dominance with ships of your own.
So yeah, your landing teams might seem small, and would probably use fragile ships like Argos and Elysiums, but the key is what's covering up above (like today's wars really). The Lucifer glassed the whole of Vasuda Prime single-handedly in just over half a day. I'd vote its not to hard to imagine an Orion and its beams supressing a planet enough for a quick takeover.
-
Concerning the topic, i recall that the FS1 Harbinger is described in its introduction during the campaign as origionally being purely for planetary bombardments, so the GTA seem to have specialised equipment for such roles. I suspect Elysiums are a big role, but there may have been other ship classes and technologies that we simply did not see in the campaigns.
Another thing to consider is having orbital support during a landing. Considering simple fighter missiles in Freespace (if what i've heard is correct) have power equalling modern nukes, Harbingers, beam cannons, maybe even the ol' plasma blobs are on the 'wipe out entire enemy base\battleline\regiment in one go' level. A group of Elysiums each carrying say 300-500 or so soldiers, entering the atmosphere to land at an LZ, sound silly and easy pickings for ground defences or ships. A group of Elysiums doing the same after an Orion with its fighter/bomber complement and attending cruisers have taken up position over the LZs hemisphere (if not the whole world) and are making the sky rain fire, suddenly become much harder to resist successfully. You might be able to stop them long-term with a determined gurilla or subterranean war (like in Vietnam), but trying to hit them while they're landing would be risky unless you can retake orbital dominance with ships of your own.
So yeah, your landing teams might seem small, and would probably use fragile ships like Argos and Elysiums, but the key is what's covering up above (like today's wars really). The Lucifer glassed the whole of Vasuda Prime single-handedly in just over half a day. I'd vote its not to hard to imagine an Orion and its beams supressing a planet enough for a quick takeover.
With the harbinger's payload, it'd be used more for glassing planets. A fury would be enough to wipe out a base with its payload, and if you're shooting off nukes at the planet, why even land there? :p
Beams would likely have a similar effect as the Lucifer's bombardment beams.
(Note, the Harbinger has 5 gigatons of power. The Fury has 3 kilotons, the equivalent to a modern day tactical nuke.)
-
The problem with the Orion beaming a planet is that the beam's effective range wouldn't be far enough to hit it from orbit accurately.
-
Given how modular beam cannons are (High Noon) I'd say it can't be hard to calibrate beams for planetary bombardment.
-
Freespace Universe is sometimes not logic.
After the capture of the Taranis, the player is informed that a destroyer (the Lucifer) made a great assault to retake the Taranis.
In the little animation, there are a lot of shivan fighters escaping from Lucifer's fighterbay... I didn't count them, but I estimate them to one hundred fighters approximatively.
Surprise : in the last mission (where you have to destroy the Lucifer's reactors), there are no more than 2 wings of fighters protecting the Lucifer at the same time...
the problem is we don't know how many were destroyed between the Lucy's last replenishment and the subspace attack
Ok, right in this point. But, when we first meet the Lucifer (and when she destroys the Galatea with her beams), there isn't so many fighters protecting her.. And, another thing I don't really understand is that the Lucifer has a great shield system that makes her indestructible out of subspace. Why the superdestroyer Sathanas doesn't have this shield system ? Did the Shivans lose this technology with the Lucifer's destruction ?
Another thing I find bizarre is with the upgrade of the weapons.
Let's take the Avenger : the damage potential per energy unit is : 66.7 45.3 18.7 (Hull Shield Subsystem)
Now, let's take the Subach : 67.5 52.5 22.5
Ok, there's a little improvement, but not enough..
Another one : let's compare the Flail with the Morning Star :
Flail : 15 119 6
Morning Star : 4.4 11.4 1.8
Yeah it's the damage potential per energy unit, let's see the potential damage per second :
Flail : 10 80 4
Morning Star : 23.3 60.7 9.3
If I had to choose between FS1 weapon or FS2 weapon, I'll choose FS1 weapon ! :D
-
For the Sath not having shields I have a theory (apart from gameplay issues that is). Maybe they couldn't fit them with the shield, because of that subspace thing the Sath' used in the end-cutscene.
-
Or they were entirely different classes of ships, like the Lucifer was a dedicated destroyer/carrier, and the Sath was... something else? It's been theorized that they were some sort of colony ships.
Or, that the GTVA figured out how to nullify the Lucy's shields so that their weapons could pass through.
-
I don't think the GTVA can actually nullify the shield, but if the Shivans though that, because of the loss of the Lucifer, it would make sense to send ships that pump the power into much stronger weaponsystems instead.
-
I'm of the belief that beams would pierce the Lucifer's shields like any other.
-
I'm of the belief that beams would pierce the Lucifer's shields like any other.
There is that theory, but then what about GTVA bombs and blobs?
-
I'm of the belief that beams would pierce the Lucifer's shields like any other.
There is that theory, but then what about GTVA bombs and blobs?
Do bombs or blobs pierce shields in FS2? No.
Do beams pierce shields in FS2? Yes, all the time.
edit: owait, you mean defending against them? It's a fair question. If you want an in-universe explanation - they just didn't give a crap.
-
Certain primaries have an annoying habit of piercing shields partially, for reasons I've never determined.
-
Certain primaries have an annoying habit of piercing shields partially, for reasons I've never determined.
It's probably the horribly outdated collision detection in the code.
-
[ think of the range and power of beams mounted on destroyers
Hrm...less than ten kilometers...
now what range and power would fixed planetary based systems put out.
Probably about the same since they'd have to actually support their own weight, but we'll be optimistic and give them hundred times the range, at a thousand kilometers...still not enough to reach geosynchronous orbit. Not even close.
The Lucy could bombard Vasuda Prime from orbit all day long, but even if you decide to extend the range of beams to realistic values, it's still just easier to drop rocks on things. No weapon at the bottom of a gravity well will stand a chance when you can just RKV it.
and what to you do about local aero/space fighters, by the time you arrive in orbit the enemy know your coming so can have reserves in the air or otherwise disbursed away from fixed bases to make them harder to find and render any intelligence you have on those locations unreliable.
Look at them flying around, wait for them to land, drop rocks on them.
Sorry to bring this post back up, but this is relevant - Rocks. They throw rocks. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EkUz6Ht9_t4&fmt=18)
-
Sorry to bring this post back up, but this is relevant - Rocks. They throw rocks. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EkUz6Ht9_t4&fmt=18)
Well if you're going to do that...
Rocks are NOT “free”, citizen.
Firstly, you must manoeuvre the Emperor’s naval vessel within reach of the asteroid belt, almost assuredly sustaining damage to the Emperor’s ship’s paint from micrometeoroids, while expending the Emperor’s fuel.
Then the tech priests must inspect the rock in question to ascertain its worthyness to do the Emperor’s bidding. Should it pass muster, the Emperor’s Servitors must use the Emperor’s auto-scrappers and melta-cutters to prepare the potential ordinance for movement. Finally, the tech priests finished, the Emperor’s officers may begin manoeuvring the Emperor’s warship to abut the asteroid at the prepared face (expending yet more of the Emperor’s fuel), and then begin boosting the stone towards the offensive planet.
After a few days of expending a prodigious amount of the Emperor’s fuel to accelerate the asteroid into an orbit more fitting to the emperor’s desires, the Emperor’s ship may then return to the planet via superluminous warp travel and await the arrival of the stone, still weeks (or months) away.
After twiddling away the Emperor’s time and eating the Emperor’s food in the wasteful pursuit of making sure that the Emperor’s enemies do not launch a deflection mission, they may finally watch the ordinance impact on the planet (assuming the Emperor’s warship does not need to attempt any last-minute course correction upon the rock, using yet more of the Emperor’s fuel).
Given a typical (class Bravo-CVII) system, we have the following:
Two months, O&M, Titan class warship: 4.2 Million Imperials.
Two months, rations, crew of same: 0.2 MI
Two months, Tech Priest pastor: 1.7 MI
Two months, Servitor parish: 0.3 MI
Paint, Titan class warship: 0.9 MI
Dihydrogen peroxide fuel: 0.9 MI
Total: 9.8 MI
Contrasting with the following:
5 warheads, magna-melta: 2.5 MI
One day, O&M, Titan class warship: 0.3 MI
One day, rations, crew of same: 0.0 MI
Dihydrogen peroxide fuel: 0.1 MI
Total: 2.9 MI
Given the same amount with under one third of the cost, the Emperor will have saved a massive amount of His most sacred money and almost a full month of time, during which His warship may be bombarding an entirely different planet.
The Emperor, through this – His office of Imperial outlays – hereby orders you to attend one (1) week of therapeutic accountancy training/penance. Please report to Areicon IV, Imperial City, Administatum Building CXXI, Room 1456, where you are to sit in the BLUE chair.
For the Emperor,
Bursarius Tenathis,
Purser Level XI,
Imperial Office of Outlays.
-
Sorry to bring this post back up, but this is relevant - Rocks. They throw rocks. (http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EkUz6Ht9_t4&fmt=18)
Well if you're going to do that...
Rocks are NOT “free”, citizen.
...
Given a typical (class Bravo-CVII) system, we have the following:
Two months, O&M, Titan class warship: 4.2 Million Imperials.
Two months, rations, crew of same: 0.2 MI
Two months, Tech Priest pastor: 1.7 MI
Two months, Servitor parish: 0.3 MI
Paint, Titan class warship: 0.9 MI
Dihydrogen peroxide fuel: 0.9 MI
Total: 9.8 MI
Contrasting with the following:
5 warheads, magna-melta: 2.5 MI
One day, O&M, Titan class warship: 0.3 MI
One day, rations, crew of same: 0.0 MI
Dihydrogen peroxide fuel: 0.1 MI
Total: 2.9 MI
I wonder how competetive the exchange rate between Imperials and Centauri Ducats is....
-
Well the Centauri brought their rocks with them and fired them out of mass drivers rather than accelerating them to impact velocity from a faraway asteroid belt and sitting around to make sure they weren't intercepted. So I'd say they were certainly cheaper than giant melta warheads.