Author Topic: Total size of GTVA armada  (Read 8979 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline Drogoth

  • 28
Re: Total size of GTVA armada
Riptide has made a good point, but I'm thinking, we're using peacetime numbers.

Look at how much military hardware the allies turned out in world war 2. I can't speak for America, because I'm not american and don't really want to look it up, but I do know that by the end of the war, Canada had the 4th largest airforce and the third largest navy in the world (or it might have been the other way around). And that was unheard of for us at the start of the war, never mind now (1/12 of the population were active duty soldiers, with thousands more in service with the British forces). I have no idea how that lines up numbers wise with other countries, but I do know it was incredibly unusual for Canada.

Anyways, the point of that was this: In times of war, military spending in relation to the rest of possible uses for GDP goes drastically up, and it's not like the GTA/PVN beat the shivans, the shivans just.. disappeared. Unlike the Nazis, who were well and truly beaten, the shivans could return at any time, any place, without warning and obliterate us all.

The colossus cut-scene makes that much clear to be sure.

Mix in the neo-terran rebellion and I could easily see Riptide's estimate being a little bit shy, because the GTVA is either AT war, or pretty much has to act like it is, as the genocidal shivans could rear their ugly heads at any time.

And again, we just don't have any idea how densely populated, and how developed a system like say, Delta Serpentis, or Beta Aquilae would be. These places could be economic Juggernauts with populations in the billions.
TC 2 Fan club for Life

 

Offline Mongoose

  • Rikki-Tikki-Tavi
  • Global Moderator
  • 212
  • This brain for rent.
    • Minecraft
    • Steam
    • Something
Re: Total size of GTVA armada
Yeah, the US was pumping out aircraft and warships at an obscene rate by the end of World War II as well.

 
Re: Total size of GTVA armada
Interesting discussion...

What I find truly impressive is the number of vessels the GTVA has in service in Blue Planet: War in Heaven, after the supposed 'economic catastrophe' that the Terran side suffered. A radio transmission from a wingman says something along the lines of "I can't believe the GTVA has two dozen of these things!", referring to an 'old' Hecate-class destroyer. And this is when the Hecates are being phased out.

Assume, conservatively, that there are two newer destroyers (Titan or Raynor class) for every Hecate - and this is considering that the GTD Raynor (pretty much the pinnacle of GTVA tech) is mass-producable, as indicated in the tech database. After economic collapse, they're still fielding roughly 48 uber-tech destroyers - and this is in the wake of economic collapse.

The Vasudans, on the other hand, are doing absolutely fantastic. In one mission, they very casually roll up in a Hatsepshut. The Vasudan war machine, with that kind of prosperity, is probably rolling an armada of 200+ destroyers easily. Maybe more. This is a military on crack. Even when they're just sitting around providing logistical support, they still had a destroyer at the ready, in the Sol system.

It's perfectly reasonable that the GTVA had 100+ destroyers during the NTF rebellion and the second Shivan incursion, especially if 'perpetual Shivan readiness' was on their agenda for thirty-something years.
:divedivedive: <--- This needs to be a smiley.
Developer of the Singularity campaign/mod (WIP)
I call dibs on developing a Capella Barbecue Theory campaign.

 

Offline MatthTheGeek

  • Captain Obvious
  • 212
  • Frenchie McFrenchface
Re: Total size of GTVA armada
A radio transmission from a wingman says something along the lines of "I can't believe the GTVA has two dozen of these things!", referring to an 'old' Hecate-class destroyer. And this is when the Hecates are being phased out.
It's referring to Tevs destroyers in general, not specifically to Hecates.

two newer destroyers (Titan or Raynor class) for every Hecate
It's most likely the other way around. Front-line tevs ships are still rare and are very slowly replacing the outdated Capella-era designs. In the two dozens Tevs desties, probably between 1/2 and 3/4 of those are still Hecates.
People are stupid, therefore anything popular is at best suspicious.

Homeworld: Blue Planet     -     Help us help you     -     FSO Installer     -     BP extras portal     -     My legacy

666maslo666: Releasing a finished product is not a good thing! It is a modern fad.

SpardaSon21: it seems like you exist in a permanent state of half-joking misanthropy

Axem: when you put it like that, i sound like an insane person

bigchunk1: it's not retarded it's american!
bigchunk1: ...

batwota: steele's maneuvering for the coup de gras
MatthTheGeek: you mispelled grâce
Awaesaar: grace
batwota: oh right :P
Darius: ah!
Darius: yes, i like that
MatthTheGeek: the way you just spelled it it means fat
Awaesaar: +accent I forgot how to keyboard
MatthTheGeek: or grease
Darius: the killing fat!
Axem: jabba does the coup de gras
MatthTheGeek: XD
Axem: bring me solo and a cookie

 

Offline General Battuta

  • Poe's Law In Action
  • 214
  • i wonder when my postcount will exceed my iq
Re: Total size of GTVA armada
BP discussion should probably go to BP, but yeah, there are not yet as many Titans/Raynor as Hecates. However the combined Terran-Vasudan military machine is indeed on crack, and there's a lot of hardware out there.

 

Offline Marcov

  • Chicken Little
  • 29
  • My Sig Is Spam
Re: Total size of GTVA armada
Hey? Why use Blue Planet numbers?

I think I've extended the destroyer count from around 50 to around 70.

It clearly says that "at least 3 Orion-class destroyers were vanquished by Amun-class bombers" and that "very few Orions have been destroyed during the 14-year T-V war". So that means "at least 3 Orion-class destroyers were destroyed, and that's very few". So we can put an Orion count of about 20-25.

So let's say there are about 22 destroyers during the course of the T-V war. Let's say 4 of them were crushed (3 were said to be caused by Amun attacks) so 18 are left. Then, Shivans come and probably destroy a great number of 'em (let's say, 6 destroyers) so there are only 12 are left.

Then during Reconstruction let's say the Orion count was put to 20. Plus the Hecates, so perhaps becomes 30. Take note however that the NTF had AT LEAST TEN DESTROYERS. Imagine. TEN DESTROYERS for a large rebel group. That's rather large. So perhaps we can make the GTA navy have about 2.5 times that amount, so 25. Don't forget to add the NTF ships themselves because remember, they're formerly part of the GTVA.

Oh, plus the Vasudans. So 35+35 = 70.

I think 70 is a slightly low-end number considering the huge amount of ships WWII United States had (if I remember correctly, several hundred ships were sent into Leyte Gulf, which was arguably the largest naval battle in history) or whatever. Whatever the exact amount of warships the US had in WWII, it's very, very large, in my opinion (anybody care to give the exact amount?) surpassing 1,500, or perhaps over 2,000. And...that's huge.

Now imagine ALL HUMANITY AND VASUDANITY uniting to FIGHT OFF A PARTICULARLY APOCALYPTIC-SCALE WAR AGAINST A GALACTIC-SCALE ANNIHILATOR. That should be A LOT. Not just 1,000, 2,000, several dozen thousand. But perhaps that's too large, simply because of the given small references fleet assets implied throughout the FreeSpace series.
« Last Edit: March 09, 2011, 08:07:04 am by Marcov »
With the rapid increase of FS fan-made campaigns, we're giving the GTVA a harder time with more violence and genocide.

~FreeSpace: The Battle of Endor (voice dub)~
Part 1/4 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9K9-Y1JBTE
Part 2/4 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dtQanXDRAXM
Part 3/4 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yoBLKYt_oG0

Old (original) videos:
Part 1/4 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C1ygskaoUtE
Part 2/4 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f0uoPTksBlI

 

Offline General Battuta

  • Poe's Law In Action
  • 214
  • i wonder when my postcount will exceed my iq
Re: Total size of GTVA armada
US World War II ships were tiny tin cans compared to FS ships

 

Offline Marcov

  • Chicken Little
  • 29
  • My Sig Is Spam
Re: Total size of GTVA armada
Don't forget that 4 centuries of advanced construction technology should be able to do stuff much easier.
With the rapid increase of FS fan-made campaigns, we're giving the GTVA a harder time with more violence and genocide.

~FreeSpace: The Battle of Endor (voice dub)~
Part 1/4 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9K9-Y1JBTE
Part 2/4 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dtQanXDRAXM
Part 3/4 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yoBLKYt_oG0

Old (original) videos:
Part 1/4 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C1ygskaoUtE
Part 2/4 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f0uoPTksBlI

 

Offline General Battuta

  • Poe's Law In Action
  • 214
  • i wonder when my postcount will exceed my iq
Re: Total size of GTVA armada
Actually yeah, I think I will forget that. We have no idea how difficult it is to manufacture these warships, or what kind of technologies involved. FreeSpace mankind hasn't been in space or even possessed interstellar travel for very long at all.

I'm definitely more in favor of 70 destroyers than over 2000.

 

Offline Marcov

  • Chicken Little
  • 29
  • My Sig Is Spam
Re: Total size of GTVA armada
I don't think it should be above 200. 70-200 may be just fine, but never anywhere near to a thousand or so. We have 6,000 Bakhas and 3 Bakhas shouldn't equal a destroyer. :WTF:
With the rapid increase of FS fan-made campaigns, we're giving the GTVA a harder time with more violence and genocide.

~FreeSpace: The Battle of Endor (voice dub)~
Part 1/4 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9K9-Y1JBTE
Part 2/4 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dtQanXDRAXM
Part 3/4 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yoBLKYt_oG0

Old (original) videos:
Part 1/4 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C1ygskaoUtE
Part 2/4 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f0uoPTksBlI

 

Offline NGTM-1R

  • I reject your reality and substitute my own
  • 213
  • Syndral Active. 0410.
Re: Total size of GTVA armada
Actually yeah, I think I will forget that. We have no idea how difficult it is to manufacture these warships, or what kind of technologies involved. FreeSpace mankind hasn't been in space or even possessed interstellar travel for very long at all.

I'm definitely more in favor of 70 destroyers than over 2000.

We do know that underway repairs, even of serious damage, are reasonably trivial. This suggests they're not terribly difficult to build.
"Load sabot. Target Zaku, direct front!"

A Feddie Story

 

Offline Marcov

  • Chicken Little
  • 29
  • My Sig Is Spam
Re: Total size of GTVA armada
I'd been always wondering, considering that the Colossus took 20 years to build, which is ridicolously long to build a ship that is JUST 6 kilometers long might change the way we think on shipbuilding capabilities.

For one, it took what, over 30 Terran and Vasudan industries and a massive load of work to finish it. It wouldn't take THAT much amount of work to be applied on a single Orion destroyer. Take note, the Orion destroyer is probably just 10 times smaller in volume than the Colossus. Let's say building an Orion would usually take 10 times less manpower than the construction of a Colossus. But the Orion is 10 times smaller than the Colossus. So does it mean it STILL TAKES TWENTY DANG YEARS TO BUILD A DESTROYER? No. Based on how casual Command deploys them in FreeSpace 2 (we lost the GTD Delacroix. Well, we lost it. It's a bad loss. But whatever. We're now scrambling a few bomber wings to destroy the Ravana.) or (hey, look, it's the Vindicator! Eh, nevermind. Just shatter the damn thing to pieces, we don't care in capturing it. It's right there. You're all armed with Cyclops torpedoes, so do us a favor, please, we're too lazy to board it.), destroyers shouldn't be that valuable it'll take 2 decades to construct one of them.

Also, if it truly took 2 decades to build one destroyer, then why do we have numerous Hecates by the time of FS2? So it's a little confusing to analyze, but the answer would be more in favor of the latter explanation.
With the rapid increase of FS fan-made campaigns, we're giving the GTVA a harder time with more violence and genocide.

~FreeSpace: The Battle of Endor (voice dub)~
Part 1/4 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Q9K9-Y1JBTE
Part 2/4 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dtQanXDRAXM
Part 3/4 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yoBLKYt_oG0

Old (original) videos:
Part 1/4 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=C1ygskaoUtE
Part 2/4 - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=f0uoPTksBlI

 

Offline Kie99

  • 211
Re: Total size of GTVA armada
I'd been always wondering, considering that the Colossus took 20 years to build, which is ridicolously long to build a ship that is JUST 6 kilometers long might change the way we think on shipbuilding capabilities.

For one, it took what, over 30 Terran and Vasudan industries and a massive load of work to finish it. It wouldn't take THAT much amount of work to be applied on a single Orion destroyer. Take note, the Orion destroyer is probably just 10 times smaller in volume than the Colossus. Let's say building an Orion would usually take 10 times less manpower than the construction of a Colossus. But the Orion is 10 times smaller than the Colossus. So does it mean it STILL TAKES TWENTY DANG YEARS TO BUILD A DESTROYER? No. Based on how casual Command deploys them in FreeSpace 2 (we lost the GTD Delacroix. Well, we lost it. It's a bad loss. But whatever. We're now scrambling a few bomber wings to destroy the Ravana.) or (hey, look, it's the Vindicator! Eh, nevermind. Just shatter the damn thing to pieces, we don't care in capturing it. It's right there. You're all armed with Cyclops torpedoes, so do us a favor, please, we're too lazy to board it.), destroyers shouldn't be that valuable it'll take 2 decades to construct one of them.

Also, if it truly took 2 decades to build one destroyer, then why do we have numerous Hecates by the time of FS2? So it's a little confusing to analyze, but the answer would be more in favor of the latter explanation.
The Colossus took 'over 20 years' from announcement to deployment, the design of such a monstrosity could take years alone, it could present engineering challenges, and being the first of it's kind, a lot of things would need to be prototyped and tested before being implemented.  Technological advantages essential to the ship such as beam weapons or a new type of engine could have been developed during the design phase, or during the construction, which would delay it further.  That 20 years estimate certainly shouldn't be taken as representative of GTVA construction capabilities, a second Colossus would almost certainly take much less time to go from the drawing board to the battlefield.
"You shot me in the bollocks, Tim"
"Like I said, no hard feelings"

 

Offline headdie

  • i don't use punctuation lol
  • 212
  • Lawful Neutral with a Chaotic outook
    • Minecraft
    • Skype
    • Twitter
    • Headdie on Deviant Art
Re: Total size of GTVA armada
I'd been always wondering, considering that the Colossus took 20 years to build, which is ridicolously long to build a ship that is JUST 6 kilometers long might change the way we think on shipbuilding capabilities.

For one, it took what, over 30 Terran and Vasudan industries and a massive load of work to finish it. It wouldn't take THAT much amount of work to be applied on a single Orion destroyer. Take note, the Orion destroyer is probably just 10 times smaller in volume than the Colossus. Let's say building an Orion would usually take 10 times less manpower than the construction of a Colossus. But the Orion is 10 times smaller than the Colossus. So does it mean it STILL TAKES TWENTY DANG YEARS TO BUILD A DESTROYER? No. Based on how casual Command deploys them in FreeSpace 2 (we lost the GTD Delacroix. Well, we lost it. It's a bad loss. But whatever. We're now scrambling a few bomber wings to destroy the Ravana.) or (hey, look, it's the Vindicator! Eh, nevermind. Just shatter the damn thing to pieces, we don't care in capturing it. It's right there. You're all armed with Cyclops torpedoes, so do us a favor, please, we're too lazy to board it.), destroyers shouldn't be that valuable it'll take 2 decades to construct one of them.

Also, if it truly took 2 decades to build one destroyer, then why do we have numerous Hecates by the time of FS2? So it's a little confusing to analyze, but the answer would be more in favor of the latter explanation.
The Colossus took 'over 20 years' from announcement to deployment, the design of such a monstrosity could take years alone, it could present engineering challenges, and being the first of it's kind, a lot of things would need to be prototyped and tested before being implemented.  Technological advantages essential to the ship such as beam weapons or a new type of engine could have been developed during the design phase, or during the construction, which would delay it further.  That 20 years estimate certainly shouldn't be taken as representative of GTVA construction capabilities, a second Colossus would almost certainly take much less time to go from the drawing board to the battlefield.

I would probably estimate halve the time due to to design changes as a result of "Lessons Learned"
Minister of Interstellar Affairs Sol Union - Retired
quote General Battuta - "FRED is canon!"
Contact me at [email protected]
My Release Thread, Old Release Thread, Celestial Objects Thread, My rubbish attempts at art

 

Offline Luis Dias

  • 211
Re: Total size of GTVA armada
They've invented nanorobotbuilders who can create destroyers within a week, if given sufficient materials to do so. They are also incredibly cheap to manufacture.

I mean, only that way we can justify why, for instance, destroyers are used as a discotheque lighting session in one of our not-so-serious campaigns out there.

 

Offline Drogoth

  • 28
Re: Total size of GTVA armada
US World War II ships were tiny tin cans compared to FS ships

All things in relation thought. Once again we don't know and cannot know the industrial capacity of the GTVA. They could be cranking out ships, and they could easily have the tech to make most of it automated.

Also look at the Bakha numbers alone. We have what, 6000 of these? And this is one class of fighter/bomber, and most fighter/bombers are carried by destroyers, if we have 6000 of them, and we're carrying other fighters and bombers as well, then if we only had 70 destroyers, then a VERY large number of fighters would be rotting away in storage most likely. That would seem like a waste. I imagine we probably have lift capacity for about half of the bakhas, now mulitply that by all the different types of fighters and bombers in the fleet, and we have a ship count way higher then 70.
TC 2 Fan club for Life

 

Offline General Battuta

  • Poe's Law In Action
  • 214
  • i wonder when my postcount will exceed my iq
Re: Total size of GTVA armada
Sorry, I think 70 is probably on the high end of the destroyer count. The Bakha numbers are a bad place to start reasoning from because we have no idea how many of those are on destroyers, or even flying at all. It's more sensible to look at the way destroyers are deployed in the campaign - they're pretty uncommon even given the briefing/CB losses.

There's a lot of wiggle room to alter the numbers to fit your campaign, but the higher the destroyer count goes the dumber your missions are going to get.

 

Offline Drogoth

  • 28
Re: Total size of GTVA armada
Sorry, I think 70 is probably on the high end of the destroyer count. The Bakha numbers are a bad place to start reasoning from because we have no idea how many of those are on destroyers, or even flying at all. It's more sensible to look at the way destroyers are deployed in the campaign - they're pretty uncommon even given the briefing/CB losses.

There's a lot of wiggle room to alter the numbers to fit your campaign, but the higher the destroyer count goes the dumber your missions are going to get.

Arguing that high destroyer counts make for bad missions isn't  good base for armada size estimates either.

I agree, high cap ship counts make for a bad flight sim, because the pilot has less of an influence on the outcome, because its just the two battle lines of the opposing fleets slugging it out.

But logically, from the way command just throws around ships, and all the reasons listed before hand, I think 70 is easily on the low end, and thats on destroyer count, nevermind total ship numbers. I dont think the numbers are anywhere near the thousands, but I could see 150-200 destroyers and their accompanying fleet assets.
TC 2 Fan club for Life

 

Offline General Battuta

  • Poe's Law In Action
  • 214
  • i wonder when my postcount will exceed my iq
Re: Total size of GTVA armada
Quote
Arguing that high destroyer counts make for bad missions isn't  good base for armada size estimates either.

Of course it is. It's the only reasoning that matters. FreeSpace as a universe exists to service its mission design and gameplay, and the missions and narrative are built around small numbers.

The way destroyers are employed in FreeSpace 2 makes it very clear that they're not very common. The initial reaction to A NEW SHIVAN INCURSION is one destroyer and one corvette. When the NTF starts failcascading it loses a couple destroyers, not 20. When the Psamtik goes down it's a tragedy. Taking out the Ravana is a big ****ing deal (the Ravana took out the GTD Delacroix, which was apparently the centerpiece of a battle group; why would you send in only one destroyer if you have 200 of these things lying around?).  The NTF consisted of Sixth Fleet plus some more defectors. Loss of one Orion caused the Epsilon Pegasi forces to surrender. Loss of another (the Cyrene) was a huge blow to morale. The simultaneous destruction of the NTD Andronicus was cause to declare the effective end of the NTF, within thirty days! And in the NTF's last gasp, when they threw caution to the wind and ran everything for the portal, they lost the Uhuru, the Vindicator, and the Vasa.

The NTF didn't have many destroyers, we've seen Fleet numbers up to 12 (iirc), we can guess at the total number of destroyers from there. Give the NTF ten destroyers - the canonical named count if you're generous and include multiplayer missions - and it's a credible force only if the total GTVA strength is small enough to be given trouble by ten destroyers.

Logically, from the way command deploys ships, and all the reasons listed before hand, I think 70 is easily on the high end, and that's on destroyer count, never mind total ship numbers. I don't think the numbers are anywhere near two hundred, but I could see 70-80 destroyers and their accompanying fleet assets.

If it was 150-200, Jesus Christ, the campaigns would be so much dumber than they are right now. I would be unable to do anything but laugh at the GTVA's pitiful strategic acumen. The campaign only makes sense with low destroyer counts.
« Last Edit: March 10, 2011, 11:04:39 am by General Battuta »

 

Offline StarSlayer

  • 211
  • Men Kaeshi Do
    • Steam
Re: Total size of GTVA armada
US World War II ships were tiny tin cans compared to FS ships

Not to mention that's encompassing all types of ships, everything from fleet carriers to LCVPs.  Essex class carriers, the most powerful fleet carriers we fielded, which we were churning out as fast as possible still only numbered 24 units total.  There were only 4 Iowa class BB units and Cleveland class light cruisers numbered 27.  Its only when you get to wartime tin can designs that you start seeing class numbers top 100 units.
“Think lightly of yourself and deeply of the world”