It doesn't. I some how managed to post a reply that should have gone in the 'The True Size Of The Clone Army' thread. I didn't noticed until way after the edit window had closed.Lord Relvenous wrote:What? I don't get how that relates to the discussion at all.Crazedwraith wrote:It was indeed Lorth Needa as a Lt. Commander in charge of a Carrack Cruiser.
Minimum Number of Troops needed for Planetary Invasion
Moderator: Vympel
-
- Emperor's Hand
- Posts: 11950
- Joined: 2003-04-10 03:45pm
- Location: Cheshire, England
Re: Minimum Number of Troops needed for Planetary Invasion
Re: Minimum Number of Troops needed for Planetary Invasion
The inverse of course comes in the those who defend everywhere is weak everywhere.Knife wrote:Plus those in the defense always have the advantage and need less people to exploit it. Sure, attackers get to pick the time of engagement, but defenders get to bonus of covering the avenues of approach which takes less people to cover those area's. They also get the advantage of preparing the defense and putting together defense in depth for the attackers to have to over come further acting as a force multiplier. It gets to the point where ever defender is worth 10 attackers.
Wasn't there a tactic suggesting that a strong "fortress" on a world would be an effective defence, given the possibility of reinforcement offworld?
Let him land on any Lyran world to taste firsthand the wrath of peace loving people thwarted by the myopic greed of a few miserly old farts- Katrina Steiner
- Night_stalker
- Retarded Spambot
- Posts: 995
- Joined: 2009-11-28 03:51pm
- Location: Bedford, NH
Re: Minimum Number of Troops needed for Planetary Invasion
It might, but it needs to be defended from orbital bombardment. I suggest a theatre shield in the fort itself, and maybe have some orbital based guns in orbit over the fort.
If Dr. Gatling was a nerd, then his most famous invention is the fucking Revenge of the Nerd, writ large...
"Lawful stupid is the paladin that charges into hell because he knows there's evil there."
—anonymous
"Although you may win the occasional battle against us, Vorrik, the Empire will always strike back."
"Lawful stupid is the paladin that charges into hell because he knows there's evil there."
—anonymous
"Although you may win the occasional battle against us, Vorrik, the Empire will always strike back."
-
- Youngling
- Posts: 101
- Joined: 2010-03-16 10:58am
- Location: Norwich/Little Rhody
Re: Minimum Number of Troops needed for Planetary Invasion
Unless the fortress projects control over certain vital areas it could simply be left alone by the invaders, could it not?
My sim game of choice Navalism
Re: Minimum Number of Troops needed for Planetary Invasion
Er... that's fine but you don't protect everything. I was already assuming defenders would be defending tactical or strategic assets and not the barren dessert.PainRack wrote:The inverse of course comes in the those who defend everywhere is weak everywhere.Knife wrote:Plus those in the defense always have the advantage and need less people to exploit it. Sure, attackers get to pick the time of engagement, but defenders get to bonus of covering the avenues of approach which takes less people to cover those area's. They also get the advantage of preparing the defense and putting together defense in depth for the attackers to have to over come further acting as a force multiplier. It gets to the point where ever defender is worth 10 attackers.
Wasn't there a tactic suggesting that a strong "fortress" on a world would be an effective defence, given the possibility of reinforcement offworld?
They say, "the tree of liberty must be watered with the blood of tyrants and patriots." I suppose it never occurred to them that they are the tyrants, not the patriots. Those weapons are not being used to fight some kind of tyranny; they are bringing them to an event where people are getting together to talk. -Mike Wong
But as far as board culture in general, I do think that young male overaggression is a contributing factor to the general atmosphere of hostility. It's not SOS and the Mess throwing hand grenades all over the forum- Red
But as far as board culture in general, I do think that young male overaggression is a contributing factor to the general atmosphere of hostility. It's not SOS and the Mess throwing hand grenades all over the forum- Red
- Captain Seafort
- Jedi Council Member
- Posts: 1750
- Joined: 2008-10-10 11:52am
- Location: Blighty
Re: Minimum Number of Troops needed for Planetary Invasion
Large planetary turbolasers perhaps - with the mass of the planet to absorb recoil and the mantle to dump waste heat into, they should be able to mount weapons large enough to deny freedom of action in local space.Knife wrote:Er... that's fine but you don't protect everything. I was already assuming defenders would be defending tactical or strategic assets and not the barren dessert.
-
- Youngling
- Posts: 101
- Joined: 2010-03-16 10:58am
- Location: Norwich/Little Rhody
Re: Minimum Number of Troops needed for Planetary Invasion
Something like this perhaps?
A strongly fortified static antiaircraft position, which Allied aircraft essentially avoided. Couldn't warships just avoid the space within range of the heavy turbolasers? When the idea of a strong "fortress" came up I thought of these because they were pretty powerful against air targets and they did a good job defending against ground forces as well. If you built something like that into a mountain with a shield projector and lots of ground defenses it would be nearly impregnable, wouldn't it?
A strongly fortified static antiaircraft position, which Allied aircraft essentially avoided. Couldn't warships just avoid the space within range of the heavy turbolasers? When the idea of a strong "fortress" came up I thought of these because they were pretty powerful against air targets and they did a good job defending against ground forces as well. If you built something like that into a mountain with a shield projector and lots of ground defenses it would be nearly impregnable, wouldn't it?
My sim game of choice Navalism
- Night_stalker
- Retarded Spambot
- Posts: 995
- Joined: 2009-11-28 03:51pm
- Location: Bedford, NH
Re: Minimum Number of Troops needed for Planetary Invasion
Yes, it would
If Dr. Gatling was a nerd, then his most famous invention is the fucking Revenge of the Nerd, writ large...
"Lawful stupid is the paladin that charges into hell because he knows there's evil there."
—anonymous
"Although you may win the occasional battle against us, Vorrik, the Empire will always strike back."
"Lawful stupid is the paladin that charges into hell because he knows there's evil there."
—anonymous
"Although you may win the occasional battle against us, Vorrik, the Empire will always strike back."
- Captain Seafort
- Jedi Council Member
- Posts: 1750
- Joined: 2008-10-10 11:52am
- Location: Blighty
Re: Minimum Number of Troops needed for Planetary Invasion
They could, but that would mean avoiding the entire system, other than the bits on the lee side of the sun, planets and other major bodies, given the range of even ship-mounted weapons. In Enemy Lines, a NR ship hit a Vong worldship over Coruscant from the edge of the system (which presumably means the Kuiper Belt at the very least).recon20011 wrote:Couldn't warships just avoid the space within range of the heavy turbolasers?
- Night_stalker
- Retarded Spambot
- Posts: 995
- Joined: 2009-11-28 03:51pm
- Location: Bedford, NH
Re: Minimum Number of Troops needed for Planetary Invasion
To be fair, it was firing at a big target so the odds of it missing were pretty slim
If Dr. Gatling was a nerd, then his most famous invention is the fucking Revenge of the Nerd, writ large...
"Lawful stupid is the paladin that charges into hell because he knows there's evil there."
—anonymous
"Although you may win the occasional battle against us, Vorrik, the Empire will always strike back."
"Lawful stupid is the paladin that charges into hell because he knows there's evil there."
—anonymous
"Although you may win the occasional battle against us, Vorrik, the Empire will always strike back."
- Captain Seafort
- Jedi Council Member
- Posts: 1750
- Joined: 2008-10-10 11:52am
- Location: Blighty
Re: Minimum Number of Troops needed for Planetary Invasion
True, but I've yet to see any decent 'Wars ship that isn't a big target, and from the description given it was no glancing blow but a good solid hit.Night_stalker wrote:To be fair, it was firing at a big target so the odds of it missing were pretty slim
- Night_stalker
- Retarded Spambot
- Posts: 995
- Joined: 2009-11-28 03:51pm
- Location: Bedford, NH
Re: Minimum Number of Troops needed for Planetary Invasion
So they got lucky, or maybe they had experience aiming at the proper weak points. What did they hit it with?
If Dr. Gatling was a nerd, then his most famous invention is the fucking Revenge of the Nerd, writ large...
"Lawful stupid is the paladin that charges into hell because he knows there's evil there."
—anonymous
"Although you may win the occasional battle against us, Vorrik, the Empire will always strike back."
"Lawful stupid is the paladin that charges into hell because he knows there's evil there."
—anonymous
"Although you may win the occasional battle against us, Vorrik, the Empire will always strike back."
- Captain Seafort
- Jedi Council Member
- Posts: 1750
- Joined: 2008-10-10 11:52am
- Location: Blighty
Re: Minimum Number of Troops needed for Planetary Invasion
No idea - it was described as a capital ship laser batter, and striking with the force of a turbolaser, but nothing more specific than that. It was able to punch a hole in a YV worldship before they could magic up a singularity to absorb it, but the damage was repairable within a day.Night_stalker wrote:So they got lucky, or maybe they had experience aiming at the proper weak points. What did they hit it with?
-
- Youngling
- Posts: 101
- Joined: 2010-03-16 10:58am
- Location: Norwich/Little Rhody
Re: Minimum Number of Troops needed for Planetary Invasion
If they have the capability to build such a powerful planet-based weapon then why would you bother doing anything other than building a fortress or two on every planet and garrisoning it? It would probably be pretty cheap. Although I don't know if the shields could hold up to sustained bombardment.
My sim game of choice Navalism
- Night_stalker
- Retarded Spambot
- Posts: 995
- Joined: 2009-11-28 03:51pm
- Location: Bedford, NH
Re: Minimum Number of Troops needed for Planetary Invasion
They could for a time, depending on the firpower leved at it. A BDZ would mean the shields would drop pretty quickly however.
If Dr. Gatling was a nerd, then his most famous invention is the fucking Revenge of the Nerd, writ large...
"Lawful stupid is the paladin that charges into hell because he knows there's evil there."
—anonymous
"Although you may win the occasional battle against us, Vorrik, the Empire will always strike back."
"Lawful stupid is the paladin that charges into hell because he knows there's evil there."
—anonymous
"Although you may win the occasional battle against us, Vorrik, the Empire will always strike back."
Re: Minimum Number of Troops needed for Planetary Invasion
The rebels were able to set up a tactical-level shield capable of repelling 'any bombardment' in TESB, on a shithole ice planet.Night_stalker wrote:They could for a time, depending on the firpower leved at it. A BDZ would mean the shields would drop pretty quickly however.
"No, no, no, no! Light speed's too slow! Yes, we're gonna have to go right to... Ludicrous speed!"
- Captain Seafort
- Jedi Council Member
- Posts: 1750
- Joined: 2008-10-10 11:52am
- Location: Blighty
Re: Minimum Number of Troops needed for Planetary Invasion
Hoth's theatre shield was a piece of black-market junk, and Vader still expected it to prevent a "clean bombardment". Whether that meant it would hold up to Death Squadron's attack or simply that it would prevent them selectively taking out the generators from orbit with flattening the entire base is open to question.Night_stalker wrote:They could for a time, depending on the firpower leved at it. A BDZ would mean the shields would drop pretty quickly however.
More generally, the technology clearly exists to completely block all starship weapons short of a DS-scale superlaser, given the requirement for the weapon, but whether or not such defences exist for theatre shields is another matter. There's obviously no point discussing full planetary shields, as such defences would prevent a planetary assault outright
- Darth Yoshi
- Metroid
- Posts: 7342
- Joined: 2002-07-04 10:00pm
- Location: Seattle
- Contact:
Re: Minimum Number of Troops needed for Planetary Invasion
There's obviously an implied "reasonable" in that statement. It isn't literally any bombardment, because otherwise the shield would have prevented the Imperials from landing ground troops. But reducing the rest of the planet to slag, while certainly a way to neutralize the Rebels, isn't what Vader wanted, since he was trying to capture Luke alive. He can't do that if he melts the planet beneath the base.Srelex wrote:The rebels were able to set up a tactical-level shield capable of repelling 'any bombardment' in TESB, on a shithole ice planet.
Fragment of the Lord of Nightmares, release thy heavenly retribution. Blade of cold, black nothingness: become my power, become my body. Together, let us walk the path of destruction and smash even the souls of the Gods! RAGNA BLADE!
Lore Monkey | the Pichu-master™
Secularism—since AD 80
Av: Elika; Prince of Persia
Lore Monkey | the Pichu-master™
Secularism—since AD 80
Av: Elika; Prince of Persia
-
- Youngling
- Posts: 101
- Joined: 2010-03-16 10:58am
- Location: Norwich/Little Rhody
Re: Minimum Number of Troops needed for Planetary Invasion
But Death Squadron's capacity to bombard the shield had nothing to do with landing troops because it wasn't a planetary shield, it was a theater shield, thus it only covers a theater of planetary operations, not the whole planet. But you are right, he didn't want to take down the shield from orbit because he wanted to capture the Rebel VIPs.Darth Yoshi wrote:There's obviously an implied "reasonable" in that statement. It isn't literally any bombardment, because otherwise the shield would have prevented the Imperials from landing ground troops. But reducing the rest of the planet to slag, while certainly a way to neutralize the Rebels, isn't what Vader wanted, since he was trying to capture Luke alive. He can't do that if he melts the planet beneath the base.Srelex wrote:The rebels were able to set up a tactical-level shield capable of repelling 'any bombardment' in TESB, on a shithole ice planet.
My sim game of choice Navalism
Re: Minimum Number of Troops needed for Planetary Invasion
Well, to my knowledge how the Imperials got troops through the shield is something that hasn't been made clear in canon--I'm not sure if they didn't land outside it and then slowly bring the slowass AT-ATs through it. Either way, it's pretty much definite that theater shields in SW can take quite a beating, otherwise there'd be no need for Piett's comment on that.Darth Yoshi wrote:There's obviously an implied "reasonable" in that statement. It isn't literally any bombardment, because otherwise the shield would have prevented the Imperials from landing ground troops. But reducing the rest of the planet to slag, while certainly a way to neutralize the Rebels, isn't what Vader wanted, since he was trying to capture Luke alive. He can't do that if he melts the planet beneath the base.
"No, no, no, no! Light speed's too slow! Yes, we're gonna have to go right to... Ludicrous speed!"
- Sea Skimmer
- Yankee Capitalist Air Pirate
- Posts: 37390
- Joined: 2002-07-03 11:49pm
- Location: Passchendaele City, HAB
Re: Minimum Number of Troops needed for Planetary Invasion
They could if you only had one installation. But you would not need many guns spread around a planet at all before no space in orbit was out of the line of fire. The flak guns the Germans put on flak towers did not have a large enough effective reach to defend an entire city with just 2-3 towers. However turbolasers can go thousands of kilometers, so coverage is purely a LOS issue.recon20011 wrote: A strongly fortified static antiaircraft position, which Allied aircraft essentially avoided. Couldn't warships just avoid the space within range of the heavy turbolasers?
In any case, if the enemy avoids the space above the turbolaser battery then he also can't use his own sensors to look down at the surface and figure out what the defenses look like. So it would be a stalemate, which the defender inherently wins.
"This cult of special forces is as sensible as to form a Royal Corps of Tree Climbers and say that no soldier who does not wear its green hat with a bunch of oak leaves stuck in it should be expected to climb a tree"
— Field Marshal William Slim 1956
— Field Marshal William Slim 1956
- Darth Yoshi
- Metroid
- Posts: 7342
- Joined: 2002-07-04 10:00pm
- Location: Seattle
- Contact:
Re: Minimum Number of Troops needed for Planetary Invasion
That's precisely my point. Because it's a theater shield, it didn't stop troops from landing. Ergo, the rest of the planet was unshielded, and so it's obviously not protected from literally any bombardment. After all, slagging the rest of the planet is a perfectly valid way to take care of the base. But that's not a good way to capture prisoners, so "reasonable" must have been implied.recon20011 wrote:But Death Squadron's capacity to bombard the shield had nothing to do with landing troops because it wasn't a planetary shield, it was a theater shield, thus it only covers a theater of planetary operations, not the whole planet. But you are right, he didn't want to take down the shield from orbit because he wanted to capture the Rebel VIPs.
Again, it doesn't matter how powerful a theater shield is, because it doesn't protect the rest of the planet. You can have the best theater shield in the galaxy and still lose if the rest of the planet melts around you. If the shield were literally impervious to any bombardment, then by definition it has to protect the rest of the planet, which means that ground forces wouldn't be able to land. The fact that troops did land means that the entire planet wasn't protected, which means the base is vulnerable to a BDZ. But since Vader wanted to capture Luke alive, he obviously wasn't going to melt the planet around the base. Ergo, Piett wasn't being literal when he said "any," and was only referring to Death Squadron's ability to bring down the shield without killing everyone on the surface.Srelex wrote:Well, to my knowledge how the Imperials got troops through the shield is something that hasn't been made clear in canon--I'm not sure if they didn't land outside it and then slowly bring the slowass AT-ATs through it. Either way, it's pretty much definite that theater shields in SW can take quite a beating, otherwise there'd be no need for Piett's comment on that.
Fragment of the Lord of Nightmares, release thy heavenly retribution. Blade of cold, black nothingness: become my power, become my body. Together, let us walk the path of destruction and smash even the souls of the Gods! RAGNA BLADE!
Lore Monkey | the Pichu-master™
Secularism—since AD 80
Av: Elika; Prince of Persia
Lore Monkey | the Pichu-master™
Secularism—since AD 80
Av: Elika; Prince of Persia