[-Norbert-]

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.

[Mobius]

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?

[General Battuta]

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.

[Mobius]

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.

[General Battuta]

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.

[-Norbert-]

...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.

[Mobius]

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.

[headdie]

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.

[General Battuta]

If AFVs were deployed via container, they would have the crews inside.

[Snail]

Maybe the GTVA have dedicated invasion ships for full-scale planetary invasions like Cygnus.


Mobius: You planning any atmospheric missions?

[Mobius]

Mobius: You planning any atmospheric missions?

Kind of, but I need proper a proper skybox for Cygnus Prime...

[Snail]

Would it be a real atmospheric mission with ground and all, or just a prettyful skybox? Or both?

[Mobius]

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.

[-Norbert-]

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.

[NGTM-1R]

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.

[General Battuta]

Exactly.

Once you control the orbitals you can completely dictate the terms and position of the landing.

[headdie]

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.

[NGTM-1R]

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.

[General Battuta]

[ 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.

[Droid803]

I haven't seen any evidence of rock throwing in FS, just glassing.