Author Topic: Total strength of GTA, PVE and GTVA  (Read 14735 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Mobius

  • Back where he started
  • 213
  • The Lightblue Ribbon
    • Skype
    • Twitter
    • The Lightblue Ribbon | Cultural Project
Re: Total strength of GTA, PVE and GTVA
We're probably forgetting the eventual presence of marines inside warships. They're needed in case of boarding.

 

Offline Blue Lion

  • Star Shatterer
  • 210
Re: Total strength of GTA, PVE and GTVA
Very, very good point, TrashMan. He said pretty much what I would have posted had not I noticed his post.

The others are making major and debatable assumptions on the GTVA's technology and on the Vasudans - we can't base a canon-based discussion on such assumptions. Feel free to add whatever your mom's mom want in your mom's mom's campaign, but don't bring this kind of discussions to canon.

We don't have the knowledge(in terms of FS universe) to even estimate crewnumbers and fleet lists - how do your mom's mom expect to come out with estimates? The Sobek's matter has also proved to be some sort of plothole, and that's 50% of the known knowledge of crewnumbers(with the other 50% being the number of Terrans in destroyers).


Isn't that what he just did in his entire post? Granted, I think it's a plausible and well thought out reason, but how is his speculation any better?

T-Man used known facts about RL Carriers and applied them to the FS Universe, it's better than pulling facts out of one's ass.

Wait, he took a ship from our time that floats on water and compares it to a ship in the future that floats in space and says we should essentially copy paste the roster minus the flight crew?

How many people run life support on the aircraft carriers to produce oxygen or keep it from decompressing all over?

 

Offline AlphaOne

  • !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
  • 210
Re: Total strength of GTA, PVE and GTVA
Arent ppl here underestimating the total number of destroyers available to the GTVA at the time of the beginning of the FS campaign ? I mean we already know they lost a few of them . Also 2 or even 3 destroyers per fleet is not such a uber number when you consider the location and responsabilaties of the fleet/battlegroup . I mean a front line fleet/battle group would in all logic have a higher number of warships then a fleet that guards for example Delta Serpentis.

As for the other numbers i tend to agree actualy . I just think the total number of destroyers available should be about 40 or so . Its not such a high number in fact its a bit low in my personal opinion .

Also do not forget that a ship is put in storage or mothball because they dont want it gone . They want it there in case they need to refit and reequip them for some emergency.

Im sure the GTVA has surpluss storage facilatties that house cruisers corvettes or even destroyers especialy the Orion class which we know was almost phased out.

Also do we know how they went about it with the phasing out of the Orion ? Or the vasudan counterpart ? I mean we know that most of the vasudan destroyers had to be retired from active service and that the Hattie was put as a replacement in the end. However did the Hattie made it out in enough numbers as to fill in all the gaps left out by the predecessor? The same goes for the Hecate.

I suspect that the vasudans were a bit late with the Hattie and that is why we see a LOT of Sobek's out there in missions that would perhaps be better suited for a destroyer.

I mean IMO the war with the shivans couldn't have come at a worse time . They were involved in a full fledged civil war. They were in the process of reequipping the fleets .

IMO a par time solution would be to bring back in service the old Orion's they have in storage. refit them and push them back on the fleets. It it a stop gap solution i know. But even so an Orion is a formidable weapon is used properly. Much more lethal and intimidating in many ways when compared to the Hecate perhaps.


As for the Sobek i can only say this :"keep them coming " they are very lethal and effective .

As for the numbers of crew available. Well i do believe that some ships may have permanent crew's that get time of when the ship gets in for maintenance and such every year or so. but i believe most ships have crews in a rotating sistem. a few months a year perhaps then some time off.

Also we must remember that there are replacements for lost crew in battles and such.

The one thing the GTVA seemed to be lacking is experienced pilots .

That and enough Erynyes and terran maras :P
Die shivan die!!
Then jumps into his apple stealth pie and goes of to war.What a brave lad....what a brave lad say the ladies in red.
 

(\_/)
(O.o)
(> < ) 

This is Bunny . Copy  Bunny  into your signature to help him on his way to world domination!

 

Offline TrashMan

  • T-tower Avenger. srsly.
  • 213
  • God-Emperor of your kind!
    • Minecraft
    • FLAMES OF WAR
Re: Total strength of GTA, PVE and GTVA
Wait, he took a ship from our time that floats on water and compares it to a ship in the future that floats in space and says we should essentially copy paste the roster minus the flight crew?

How many people run life support on the aircraft carriers to produce oxygen or keep it from decompressing all over?

We have subs too. And we have rockets, a shuttle and space stations to use too.
If you want to take that into account, then the crew numbers become even LESS, since subs are double-hulled (and space warships will probably be too), so hte usable internal volume decreases.
Not to mention that subs by default have smaller crews than naval ships of comparable size.


I really don't see how you think space ships will have more crew, given that there will probably be more automation in the future.
Exactly what is there to do that wasn't yet accounted for?



Nobody dies as a virgin - the life ****s us all!

You're a wrongularity from which no right can escape!

 

Offline Blue Lion

  • Star Shatterer
  • 210
Re: Total strength of GTA, PVE and GTVA

We have subs too. And we have rockets, a shuttle and space stations to use too.
If you want to take that into account, then the crew numbers become even LESS, since subs are double-hulled (and space warships will probably be too), so hte usable internal volume decreases.
Not to mention that subs by default have smaller crews than naval ships of comparable size.


I really don't see how you think space ships will have more crew, given that there will probably be more automation in the future.
Exactly what is there to do that wasn't yet accounted for?


Not many subs take the beatings ships in FS2 do. I would dare say there would be tons more damage control people in these ships.

As for why there could be so many? They could have crews running 8 hour shifts. Every job could have 4 guys. We don't know how long they stay out of port.

It's not that I disagree with your line of thought (I think it's pretty spot on as a way to gauge crews). It was fact that Mobius jumped on your post with such glee.
You're speculating just like everyone else. You don't know what they do on those ships any more than we do.

Any guessing you do, whether based on current crews on naval vessels or assigning crews based on how many letters are in the ships names, is all speculation. No one has implied we weren't guessing.

Some people , like myself, like to shoot the breeze about what it could be. Mobius has spent this entire thread telling us there is no way to know for sure AND we're all wrong (I dunno how he knows this, he just does).

I'm just curious about it. If he thinks our guesswork is a waste of time, why is he even in here grading our guesses (mine, yours, everyone's)?

 

Offline Scotty

  • 1.21 gigawatts!
  • 211
  • Guns, guns, guns.
Re: Total strength of GTA, PVE and GTVA
Quote
Find a canon list of ships and spacecraft serving one of the GTVA fleets and I may reconsider my opinion

Or you could just go away and let us have fun arguing.   :D

 :D

 

Offline TrashMan

  • T-tower Avenger. srsly.
  • 213
  • God-Emperor of your kind!
    • Minecraft
    • FLAMES OF WAR
Re: Total strength of GTA, PVE and GTVA
Not many subs take the beatings ships in FS2 do. I would dare say there would be tons more damage control people in these ships.

Probably.
But that also means FS2 ships have a lot thicker hulls and more armor...again, less volume.

Quote
As for why there could be so many? They could have crews running 8 hour shifts. Every job could have 4 guys. We don't know how long they stay out of port.

Given canon travel times, serving a destroyer is similar to serving on a naval warship. Actually, I'd say it's less stressfull.
GTVA ships are apparently able to go from one end of GTVA space to the other within days.

I do very much doubt that they have 4 shifts. Not very efficient. Not to mention it's not economicly sound.
Nobody dies as a virgin - the life ****s us all!

You're a wrongularity from which no right can escape!

 

Offline Scotty

  • 1.21 gigawatts!
  • 211
  • Guns, guns, guns.
Re: Total strength of GTA, PVE and GTVA
Economics don't really matter in a war zone.  To keep a ship at high alert for an almost indefinite period, multiple shifts are essential.

 

Offline Dilmah G

  • Failed juggling
  • 211
  • The Token "G" of HLP
Re: Total strength of GTA, PVE and GTVA
Economics don't really matter in a war zone.  To keep a ship at high alert for an almost indefinite period, multiple shifts are essential.

Or lots of stims as BSG taught us
Trendy Lefty. Good music from a good friend of mine.

Freespace Rap: http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php/topic,62924.0.html

The Fighter Pilot Series: http://www.hard-light.net/forums/index.php?topic=72431.msg1431423#msg1431423

The word 'Yo' is only ever to be used as a singular greeting.
It is considered an insult to destroy a perfectly acceptable greeting by misuse. A 'Yo-Yo' is a toy spun from the index finger by small children and enthusiasts,
any such use as a greeting will result in prompt reprimand by any member of the 'African-American' or 'Sri-Lankans-who-think-they're-black' community

Fury`: if General Krav Maga wouldn't be enough, beating up 16 teenagers is going to get me into jail :p /
BlackMan: Maybe if you turned into pedobear you'd be more of a threat

 

Offline Blue Lion

  • Star Shatterer
  • 210
Re: Total strength of GTA, PVE and GTVA
Given canon travel times, serving a destroyer is similar to serving on a naval warship. Actually, I'd say it's less stressfull.
GTVA ships are apparently able to go from one end of GTVA space to the other within days.

I do very much doubt that they have 4 shifts. Not very efficient. Not to mention it's not economicly sound.


That was more hyperbole. I could see ships have a double/triple crew however.

 

Offline Pred the Penguin

  • 210
  • muahahaha...
    • Minecraft
    • EaWPR
Re: Total strength of GTA, PVE and GTVA
Economics don't really matter in a war zone.  To keep a ship at high alert for an almost indefinite period, multiple shifts are essential.
Economics always matter, but keeping your warships at high efficiency is also very important.

 

Offline Scotty

  • 1.21 gigawatts!
  • 211
  • Guns, guns, guns.
Re: Total strength of GTA, PVE and GTVA
Rewording a little:  Economics take the back-seat in a war zone.

 

Offline Androgeos Exeunt

  • Captain Oblivious
  • 212
  • Prevents attraction.
    • Wordpress.com Blog
Re: Total strength of GTA, PVE and GTVA
I thought there was a "money no object" option.
My blog

Quote: Wednesday, 6 November 2019, 1845hrs UTC, #gaming
The_E
behold the power of this fully armed and operational recluse

z64555
but does it destroy planets with a turbo laser

 

Offline TrashMan

  • T-tower Avenger. srsly.
  • 213
  • God-Emperor of your kind!
    • Minecraft
    • FLAMES OF WAR
Re: Total strength of GTA, PVE and GTVA
Economics don't really matter in a war zone.  To keep a ship at high alert for an almost indefinite period, multiple shifts are essential.

Give me any sane reason why would ships in the future have more crew shifts than ships have now?
It obviously works quite fine as it is.

And I beg to differ, in war, economics are very important. The side with better economy and industry usually wins.
Nobody dies as a virgin - the life ****s us all!

You're a wrongularity from which no right can escape!

 
Re: Total strength of GTA, PVE and GTVA
Rather than build more advanced fighters and bombers, why don't they build ten times as many Apollos and anubi

Likely because it would be a pain to have to train ten times the number of pilots and expect the same level of performance from the pilots...
Must Crush Shivanism!

 

Offline Mobius

  • Back where he started
  • 213
  • The Lightblue Ribbon
    • Skype
    • Twitter
    • The Lightblue Ribbon | Cultural Project
Re: Total strength of GTA, PVE and GTVA
Not to mention that the concept of "horde" may be outdated at the time of FreeSpace. Factions should rely more on good training and cutting edge technologies, the numbers aren't that important.

 

Offline Androgeos Exeunt

  • Captain Oblivious
  • 212
  • Prevents attraction.
    • Wordpress.com Blog
Re: Total strength of GTA, PVE and GTVA
Quality training means better pilots, higher survivability rates and lower maintenance and production costs with the disadvantage of fewer numbers. Still, it's three to one, so there is no contest.
My blog

Quote: Wednesday, 6 November 2019, 1845hrs UTC, #gaming
The_E
behold the power of this fully armed and operational recluse

z64555
but does it destroy planets with a turbo laser

 

Offline Mobius

  • Back where he started
  • 213
  • The Lightblue Ribbon
    • Skype
    • Twitter
    • The Lightblue Ribbon | Cultural Project
Re: Total strength of GTA, PVE and GTVA
Destroyers have relatively limited carrier capabilities, meaning that if you have only 400 or so spacecraft to protect a fleet(and carry out strikes) they necessarily have to be good at it.

At this point, I guess that the training levels of regular GTVA forces(spacecraft based on planets, regular soldiers, etc. etc.) aren't comparable to those of the "Navy".

 

Offline Androgeos Exeunt

  • Captain Oblivious
  • 212
  • Prevents attraction.
    • Wordpress.com Blog
Re: Total strength of GTA, PVE and GTVA
Well, keep in mind that a wing of four to eight elite fighters can more or less defend a destroyer from anything. That leaves the other 100+ pilots to do whatever they want. :wtf:
My blog

Quote: Wednesday, 6 November 2019, 1845hrs UTC, #gaming
The_E
behold the power of this fully armed and operational recluse

z64555
but does it destroy planets with a turbo laser

 

Offline Snail

  • SC 5
  • 214
  • Posts: ☂
Re: Total strength of GTA, PVE and GTVA
Well, keep in mind that a wing of four to eight elite fighters can more or less defend a destroyer from anything. That leaves the other 100+ pilots to do whatever they want. :wtf:
Err, no. 8 fighters isn't enough to defend a destroyer unless they have unlimited respawns and they're all SquadWar homies.