Imperial Army 50+ (sort of RAR)

[Eleventh Century Remnant]

The scenario; you're a senior VP at Kuat Surface Systems, Arakyd, Taim and Bak, SoroSuub, take your pick. Time frame is Yavin- ish.

Money is pouring into the Imperial military, lots of new things built, the Rebellion is doing wonders for everybody's business except Death Star Construction Inc., but there are some interesting rumours coming out of the ministries and the strategic planning level.

Something about a major reorganisation of surface forces, once the rebellion has been sufficiently crushed a massive re-equipping and realignment. Whispers of campaigns being planned, to take proper control of that huge slice of the periphery the Republic never could police properly- and possibly even further.

No-one is entirely certain what the threat estimate is for an intergalactic enemy- high probability; the Empire, going to threaten somebody else- but it must be impressive, because the word is a major tender is going to be put out, for new equipment of all sorts.

Nothing official yet, but computer time is cheap, and getting your proposal in first might turn out to be priceless. The leaks have it that the tender is going to require initial production by 45 or 46, for numbers available for grand strategic deployment- around the million division, ten billion item mark- by 50 rS.

With a chance to remake the Imperial Army in your own image, what does your recommendation consist of?


Does the apparent success of Spacetroopers indicate that the initial estimates were wrong, and power armour is viable after all? Do you want to abolish ground vehicles entirely and go for a completely dropship- based, aerospace-mobile force? Do you trust to orbital support, or look to as much on the spot, organic firepower as possible?

High-low structure, a spearhead force to outtech, overpower and break organised resistance and a lightly equipped garrison force to hold down the population afterwards? Nexus warfare, high end only and hold the planet by taking the infrastructure hostage?

How much does mobility matter- and how to achieve it, legs, treads, fans, repulsor? Ion, even- or for that matter do you want to operate beneath the surface of the planet? Is it important for an army unit to be able to remove large pieces of the landscape, or is their job precisely to go in and stop that?

How much power is it safe to put in the hands of one individual trooper- are personal assault vehicles worthwhile, or do you want closer control than that? Multicrew, even multiturret vehicles? Mass light and medium, handful of superheavy, a main battle tank solution of a broad spectrum of options?

Back to the old days of heavy long rifles like the DC-15, or are carbines backed by squad automatics enough? There are many, many questions.


Limitations; the navy is quite happy, thank you. The Marines (stormtrooper corps) might adopt some of your ideas if they can be proven to work, but basically, anything that would require the starfleet to change the way it operates is likely to cause a huge interservice pissing match that would ruin your proposal. The Starfighter corps, you have more latitude with.

New technologies may or may not work, and probably won't work at the cost you expect them to. Developing something completely off the wall is a gamble. (No sun-crushers-with-legs.) New ways of using and combining existing technology is a surer bet.

Cost is not an issue as much as cost effectiveness. A massively expensive proposal that produces tactical advantages may get the nod over a merely highly expensive proposal that consists of more of the same with bells on.

So, what does your proposal consist of?

[Master_Baerne]

It's my opinion that coordination, between the Navy, the various branches of the Army, the Stormtrooper Corps, whoever's involved, will be the key to victory in an intergalactic war. As such, Subdirector for Hypothetical Situations James Baerne's proposal will focus on providing measured responses to whatever threat may arise. And by "measured", we mean "most likely to ensure rapid elimination of enemy forces without wasting the Emperor's troops or resources".

The Army will be structured as such:
Small Units - See Below
Firegroup (5 soldiers, corporal or sergeant commands)

Squad (20 soldiers; 2 TTCs, 4 firegroups, sergeant commands)

Platoon (100 soldiers; 10 TTCs; 2 AT-STs; 4 RSVs, lieutenant commands)

Company - See Below
Infantry Company (300 soldiers; 30 TTCs; 10 AT-STs; 10 RSVs; captain commands)

Artillery Company (150 soldiers; 15 TTCs; 10 ATLA; 5 repulsorlift mortars; 1 SPHA-T, captain commands)

Armored Company (150 soldiers; 15 TTCs; 10 AT-STs; 4 AT-ATs; 4 medium repulsortanks, captain commands)

Engineers Company (200 soldiers; 100 combat engineers; 20 TTCs; 10 engineering vehicles; 1 construction droid, captain commands)

Regiment - See Below
Infantry Regiment (4 infantry companies; 1 armored company; 1 artillery company; 1 engineers company, major or lieutenant colonel commands)

Artillery Regiment (3 artillery companies [with a SPHA-T battery of 20 units attached, as well as thermonuclear and concussion weaponry]; 2 infantry companies; 1 armored company; 1 engineers company, major or lieutenant colonel commands)

Armored Regiment (4 armored companies [with 12 AT-SEs attached]; 2 artillery companies; 1 engineers company, major or lieutenant colonel commands)

Brigade - See Below
Infantry Brigade (4 infantry regiments; 1 armored regiment; 1 artillery regiment, colonel or brigadier general commands)

Artillery Brigade (3 artillery regiments; 3 armored regiments, colonel or brigadier general commands)

Armored Brigade (4 armored regiments; 2 artillery regiments, colonel or brigadier general commands)

Division - See Below
Infantry Division (4 infantry brigades, 1 artillery brigade, 1 armored brigade, major general commands)

Armored Division (4 armored regiments, 2 artillery regiments, major general commands)

Corps - See Below
Infantry Corps (6 infantry divisions, lieutenant general commands)

Armored Corps (6 armored divisions, lieutenant general commands)

Army - At this point, no distinction is made between service branches. XXI Army may be composed entirely of armored corps, but it will not be called an armored army, for example. List strength for an army may differ from actual composition of units in the field, to a much greater extend than smaller formations.
(6 infantry corps; 6 armored corps, general commands)

Army Group (6 armies, marshal commands)

Theatre or Campaign Command (10 army groups, surface marshal commands)

New Equipment and Doctrine Changes:
TTC - Tracked Troop Carrier, APC-type device intended to carry ten troopers to and from battle. Mounts a repeating laser cannon and missile launcher, as well as a full electronics suite for managing communications with soldiers and other vehicles.

RSV - Repulsorlift Scout Vehicle, two-man vehicle with a light blaster cannon and extensive scanning devices.

ATLA - All Terrain Light Artillery, six-legged, triangular walker with three dual blaster turrets and a projectile launcher. If authorized at regiment level, may carry nuclear or proton weapons.

Repulsorlift Mortars - Air-mobile 200 mm mortar equipped with a variety of shell types. Carries a shield generator for added protection, as well as a turreted repeating blaster.

Medium Repulsortanks - Floating tank carrying a heavy laser cannon, three missile launchers, and a shield generator.

AT-SE - All Terrain Superheavy Enforcer, essentially a gigantic AT-AT carrying a light turbolaser and a huge number of lesser weapons.

Standard Weapons: From now on, infantrymen will carry a E-17 blaster rifle, a long, high-powered weapon that can, if needed, have it's barrel replaced to make it slightly longer than the E-11. In addition, three thermal detonators and a signal flare will be included in each troopers basic kit. Armor of equivalent strength to that of the Stormtrooper Corps will be worn in all combat situations, but with appropriate camouflage patterns applied.

Air cover will be provided by the Starfighter Corps Atmospheric Operations Units attached at company level.

[The Romulan Republic]

The scenario; you're a senior VP at Kuat Surface Systems, Arakyd, Taim and Bak, SoroSuub, take your pick. Time frame is Yavin- ish.

Well, I'm a Rebel at heart. And frankly, I prefer a lot of the Alliance/New Republic equipment.

Money is pouring into the Imperial military, lots of new things built, the Rebellion is doing wonders for everybody's business except Death Star Construction Inc., but there are some interesting rumours coming out of the ministries and the strategic planning level.

Something about a major reorganisation of surface forces, once the rebellion has been sufficiently crushed a massive re-equipping and realignment. Whispers of campaigns being planned, to take proper control of that huge slice of the periphery the Republic never could police properly- and possibly even further.

Well, controlling the entire Rim is going to require a lot of logistical support, and a lot of big numbers. For this job, the key will not be SSDs or Death Stars to compensate for the Emperor's little dick, but rather the ability to put "boots on the ground," and maintain a fleet presence in millions or billions of systems. I know I have to let the fleet be, but the OP is potentially a little problematic here. First, prestige projects/super weapons may take money from the army budget, and second, it is nessissary to have enough transports to carry the ground forces, enough assault ships/fighters/bombers to support them, and enough frigates/corvettes/cruisers to escort them. Finally, while super ships may expedite an planetary assault, their use is often a brutal tactic that could lead to massive collateral damage, and their are other ways to bring down a planetary shield.

That said, some big ships will likely be useful for an extra-galactic campaign, given their power and likely greater range. These ships, to my mind, have one legitimate use: engaging other dreadnoughts/super weapons.

No-one is entirely certain what the threat estimate is for an intergalactic enemy- high probability; the Empire, going to threaten somebody else- but it must be impressive, because the word is a major tender is going to be put out, for new equipment of all sorts.

Are you implying the Vong? Or something stronger/more ambiguous?

Nothing official yet, but computer time is cheap, and getting your proposal in first might turn out to be priceless. The leaks have it that the tender is going to require initial production by 45 or 46, for numbers available for grand strategic deployment- around the million division, ten billion item mark- by 50 rS.

rs?

With a chance to remake the Imperial Army in your own image, what does your recommendation consist of?

Well, first of all, I'll begin using more droid soldiers as well as recruits. It'll be faster, cheaper, and probably more politically acceptable than using either clones or conscripts. Plus I'm the humanitarian type, so this option appeals to me on this count too.

Really, the Sepperatists were able to build droids that could compete with human soldiers in an age where their had been no galactic war in a thousand years, and military technology was likely a low priority/stagnant. Sure, the basic battle droids may have been cheap pieces of crap, but they could hold their own well enough, and they could be built in huge numbers. Super battle droids were much better, and the top droids like Magnaguards were able to give Jedi Knights trouble.

Also, I build better artillery. Artillery seems to be a neglected area in Star Wars military tech.

Does the apparent success of Spacetroopers indicate that the initial estimates were wrong, and power armour is viable after all? Do you want to abolish ground vehicles entirely and go for a completely dropship- based, aerospace-mobile force? Do you trust to orbital support, or look to as much on the spot, organic firepower as possible?

Power armor is probably viable, but probably too costly for more than a small number of special ops. units. I'm planning to rely on squads of droids with one or two human officers for my infantry forces anyways.

The last thing I want to do is go the TNG Federation route and make an army that is cripplingly dependent on orbital support. I will make sure that I have high quality ground vehicles and artillery support, backed up by but not dependent on air support and orbital support.

High-low structure, a spearhead force to outtech, overpower and break organised resistance and a lightly equipped garrison force to hold down the population afterwards? Nexus warfare, high end only and hold the planet by taking the infrastructure hostage?

A mix of both, probably. I want to maximize efficiency, but I don't want to go in with too few troops and end up in a row of Iraq-like quagmires on backwater planets (or worse, city planets). I'll probably have high quality forces controlling the infrastructure and the cities on major worlds, with cheap droid spam to maintain a presence in the backwaters and wilderness.

How much does mobility matter- and how to achieve it, legs, treads, fans, repulsor? Ion, even- or for that matter do you want to operate beneath the surface of the planet? Is it important for an army unit to be able to remove large pieces of the landscape, or is their job precisely to go in and stop that?

To hell with walkers. The Battle of Hoth and the Battle of Endor show that these units can be vulnerable to tripping. Maybe the shorter-legged walkers can stay, if the legs give them a mobility advantage. However, I'm considering going with Empire at War-style tanks, moving on treads and/or repulsorlifts, as the bulk of my armored and artillery support.

In terms of where they can operate, droids will be able to operate in certain places where humans, even armored ones, probably can't. In any case, I will maintain special-ops forces specially trained and equipped for warfare in various extreme environments. The Empire, of course, already does this with Spacetroopers, Sandtroopers, Snowtroopers, etc.

And no, landscape-shattering fire power is neither needed nor desired. If its absolutely nessissary, well, that's the Navy's job.

How much power is it safe to put in the hands of one individual trooper- are personal assault vehicles worthwhile, or do you want closer control than that? Multicrew, even multiturret vehicles? Mass light and medium, handful of superheavy, a main battle tank solution of a broad spectrum of options?

Personal assault vehicles probably fall in the same catagory as power armor: cost prohibitive when it comes to widespread implementation. I'm going to go with a healthy mix of reconisance vehicles, APCs, battle tanks, artillery, and mobile anti-air platforms.

Back to the old days of heavy long rifles like the DC-15, or are carbines backed by squad automatics enough? There are many, many questions.

It depends on the mission, obviously. For marines, who will likely be doing a lot of close-quarters corridor/street fighting, the carbines should cut it.

For army forces that will be engaging armies in large-scale, long-range field battles like Geonosis, long rifles will probably be a superior weapon. It all depends on the mission.

Limitations; the navy is quite happy, thank you. The Marines (stormtrooper corps) might adopt some of your ideas if they can be proven to work, but basically, anything that would require the starfleet to change the way it operates is likely to cause a huge interservice pissing match that would ruin your proposal. The Starfighter corps, you have more latitude with.

Now, you did allow me the chance to alter the Starfighter Corps, so I will stick with the Rebel designs, thank you. X-wings for superiority fighters, A-wings as scouts and interceptors, and B-wings or Y-wings as bombers.

New technologies may or may not work, and probably won't work at the cost you expect them to. Developing something completely off the wall is a gamble. (No sun-crushers-with-legs.) New ways of using and combining existing technology is a surer bet.

The existing tech is more than satisfactory.

Cost is not an issue as much as cost effectiveness. A massively expensive proposal that produces tactical advantages may get the nod over a merely highly expensive proposal that consists of more of the same with bells on.

So, what does your proposal consist of?

I believe I've already answered that question.

Also, most of this is in no way original, of course. I'm sure that most of "my" ideas are ones I've picked up or heard on these forums at various times. I know I'm especially going off my recollections of the essays on the main site that compare Trek, Wars, and real life weapons.

[Darth Raptor]

I must not be a very good little corporate drone, because I don't think any drastic changes in equipment, personnel or technology are necessary. Surface operations will always be either a game of "capture/defend [target] before/until enemy/allied naval relief arrives" or endgame insurgent or counter-insurgent operations. General war with an extragalactic power on par with the Empire won't change that. Set piece surface battles between colossal armies on a desolate, crater-blasted wasteland won't decide the war and won't, for the most part, even happen. The outcome will continue to be decided in space.

[Master_Baerne]

My dear Darth Raptor, as we all know, the point of a government contract is not to accomplish a task in the most efficient way possible, but to accomplish it while using all the resources you're allowed to. Therefore, while massive changes in Army doctrine are unnecessary, we ought to perform the because we can.

[The Romulan Republic]

I must not be a very good little corporate drone, because I don't think any drastic changes in equipment, personnel or technology are necessary. Surface operations will always be either a game of "capture/defend [target] before/until enemy/allied naval relief arrives" or endgame insurgent or counter-insurgent operations. General war with an extragalactic power on par with the Empire won't change that. Set piece surface battles between colossal armies on a desolate, crater-blasted wasteland won't decide the war and won't, for the most part, even happen. The outcome will continue to be decided in space.

Actually, unless the situation has changed greatly since the Clone Wars, big ground battles will still be important. Specifically, battles to capture theatre-shielded areas where orbital bombardment would lead to unacceptable collateral damage. In fact, we see exactly such a situation on Hoth, which I imagine was a great deal like the "Outer Rim seiges" on a smaller scale.

And how is the counter-insurgency stage unimportant? Fighting a war against an insurgency will be different from fighting a powerful army in the field, and it will require different types of equipment.

I agree that the Navy is ultimately the key element, but ground forces are hardly unimportant. And you haven't explained why the Empire's or anyone else's existing technology and troops are best suited to the jobes these ground forces have to perform.

[Ender]

More of the same.

Navy: Keep doing what we are doing but at a greater rate.

Marines: Increase the number of clone stations, hardening them for better defense. Keep testing for the mk IV trooper armor to give them. Swap from carbines to rifles for ground forces, investigate newer carbines for the bulk of the forces who will be engaging in space infrastructure fighting. Restart production of Clone Wars era vehicles with appropriate modifications where needed. Step up SPHA- series production along with building extra power infrastructure on key worlds (capital ship defense will again be a priority). Start making more mobile theater shields.

Starfighter Corps: Navy doctrine is geared towards microfighters, so unless I can overhaul the Navy (not feasible in the time frame and limited by the bounds of the OP) I am stuck with the TIE series. Investigate the tradeoffs that led to the abandonment of the Eta and Delta series, try and reincorporate those into TIE design if feasible. Bring heavy starfighters/gunboats like the ARC-170 and Skipray blasboat back to the fore to provide air support for troops (TIE-gt can't carry very much in the way of ordinance) from ground installations and appropriate naval and orbital assets.

Army: Step up recruitment. Filter in clones where needed to expand shortfalls. Bring droids in more and more as an "augmenting" force that provides cheaper fodder when push comes to shove. Train heavily in planetary defense and station fighting. Equip as appropriate.

[Darth Raptor]

Actually, unless the situation has changed greatly since the Clone Wars, big ground battles will still be important. Specifically, battles to capture theatre-shielded areas where orbital bombardment would lead to unacceptable collateral damage. In fact, we see exactly such a situation on Hoth, which I imagine was a great deal like the "Outer Rim seiges" on a smaller scale.

I don't disagree. I'm saying that scenarios like that ARE surface warfare in the Twenty-fifth Millennium. 99% of surface actions will be to either capture or defend some target of strategic importance be it resources, information or personnel. Naboo, Geonoisis, Kashyyyk, Hoth, Endor and every surface battle in the G canon has specific strategic objectives to accomplish. Total annihilation will be done from orbit.

And how is the counter-insurgency stage unimportant? Fighting a war against an insurgency will be different from fighting a powerful army in the field, and it will require different types of equipment.

Good thing the Imperial Army is already optimized for COIN, eh?

I agree that the Navy is ultimately the key element, but ground forces are hardly unimportant.

You misunderstand. I don't think the Army is irrelevant. I think that whatever changes might be made to make it more effective would net such a marginal benefit that the reorganization wouldn't be worth it.

[Agent Sorchus]

The Army needs to move away from super heavy high maintenance transports such as the AT-AT for any large scale battlefield operations. At-ats have good armor and all but must suffer from horrible attrition due to the sheer scope of the size of the repair facilities required.

The MBT of my proposal takes alot from the Tie bomber boarding form. By eliminating the need for (ion) engines and major life support one could easily shield the craft and power some sort of heavy beam weapon as a primary. Secondary would be E-web external mounts and anti-repulser craft rockets/missiles (i.e. plex) integrated with optional mortars. Crawler treads as in the Century Tank would not extend above the nominal mid line. As much as possible the parts would be interrelated to the Tie Bomber to simplify logistics on the battlefield.

Indirect Fire would be the rule for artillery. Some form of simple mass driver in a semi mobile shell should be good enough. For ammo against a shield such as TPM's gungan shield the shell would consist of a trailing line to give good connectivity to the ground and retro's to slow the shell down before impacting the shield. IF impractical then i would make certain that the driver should have as much flexibility of ammo as possible.

Speed Would be the order of the day the MBT should be as air drop-able as possible while recon work would still be done by speeder bikes. hopefully make the bikes semi sealed if it produces less drag. As an addition to their high speed response value a towable missile pod or heavy blaster emplacement.

Bring in more simple war droids to due the grunt work. Something in between super battledroids and regular battledroids. The single most important thing the battledroids can do is provide solid information to coordinate attacks and responses. Armor is unimportant to speed and communication facilities here. same with firepower. last thing to have is ability to dig trenches or other similar menial work. Do not treat them like infantry/ tanks they are only infantry.

otherwise the imperial army needs to eliminate walkers altogether and allow for fast response units in all flavors and firepowers.

[The Romulan Republic]

The Army needs to move away from super heavy high maintenance transports such as the AT-AT for any large scale battlefield operations. At-ats have good armor and all but must suffer from horrible attrition due to the sheer scope of the size of the repair facilities required.

They're also slow as hell. They may be armored, but they're big and cumbersome, so the enemy will have plenty of time to pound them as they drag themselves across miles of open ground to the target. The AT-AT design in particular is questionable, since to the best of my knowledge it can only fire forward, and thus is specially vulnerable to attack from behind, above, below, and the sides.

The MBT of my proposal takes alot from the Tie bomber boarding form. By eliminating the need for (ion) engines and major life support one could easily shield the craft and power some sort of heavy beam weapon as a primary. Secondary would be E-web external mounts and anti-repulser craft rockets/missiles (i.e. plex) integrated with optional mortars. Crawler treads as in the Century Tank would not extend above the nominal mid line. As much as possible the parts would be interrelated to the Tie Bomber to simplify logistics on the battlefield.

Except the Tie Bomber is a space craft, and it probably has radically differnet design requirements than a ground vehicle.

Their was a light ground vehicle based off a Tie design in the game Empire at War. And while I know game mechanics aren't canon, I would point out that the design was rather... fragile.

Indirect Fire would be the rule for artillery. Some form of simple mass driver in a semi mobile shell should be good enough. For ammo against a shield such as TPM's gungan shield the shell would consist of a trailing line to give good connectivity to the ground and retro's to slow the shell down before impacting the shield. IF impractical then i would make certain that the driver should have as much flexibility of ammo as possible.

Its funny that we never see any artillery that simply fires big shells. The only Star Wars artillery that I'm aware of are those big things they used to bring down the fleeing ships at Geonosis, and mobile missile batteries, also from Empire at War.

Bring in more simple war droids to due the grunt work. Something in between super battledroids and regular battledroids. The single most important thing the battledroids can do is provide solid information to coordinate attacks and responses. Armor is unimportant to speed and communication facilities here. same with firepower. last thing to have is ability to dig trenches or other similar menial work. Do not treat them like infantry/ tanks they are only infantry.

otherwise the imperial army needs to eliminate walkers altogether and allow for fast response units in all flavors and firepowers.

I'd go with scout speeders (not just bikes), possibly retain the AT-ST as a scout for any terrain where legs are better than treds or repulsorlifts, and deploy two diffenet moddles of tank: one with repulsorlifts and one with treds. Or maybe a design that uses repulsors but can switch to treads if nessissary. If you've played Empire at War, the Rebel tank designs should give you an idea of what I'm aiming for.

[Eleventh Century Remnant]

I just tried to post a reply to this that the computer ate. Crashed in mid- composition, fraggit- possibly just as well, given that it's Burns (cuts and bruises) night. No, that's usually training on Wednesdays.

From what I remember, given that I have apparently reached the babbling stage of drunk; Master Baerne of unforeseen contingencies, you're trying to operate treaded, repulsor and walker vehicles in one company.

The disparity in speed is going to make operating together awkward, I'm not sure AT-ATs do urban very well, and the maintenance teams are going to love you.

From what I recall of the existing ToE, the situation isn't actually much better, companies were homogenous but there were a lot more different types of them, but advanced logistics capabilities existed fairly low down in the chain- regiments could manufacture their own spare parts, corps could manufacture pretty much everything in their order of battle and operate essentually without resupply. Are you deliberately leveraging that?

Hexagonal order, I thought that was more than the usual span of command but with advanced info management technology it might be doable. The artillery company, mortars and tubes together, that low down? Wouldn't you be better off with separate mortar, projectile launcher and line of sight heavy batteries coordinated at the regimental level?

Romulan, you're a sadist for wanting to saddle the Imperial Starfighter Corps with B-wings. I have to agree about the AT-ATs though, they are at the heavy end of the spectrum and should not have been sent out without a more effective escort- I think they could work better as combined arms with AT-TE, but their height is always going to make them vulnerable.

Ender, I know you know what you're talking about, so I wish you would; if you could go into more detail about which clone wars vehicles, and what, beyond the obvious carbines and grenades, is appropriate for defence and station fighting.

The Eta and Delta series I'm less optimistic about- they could move, they were great flying machines, but I think the TIE series' big tradeoff was for heavier cannon. Most of what they sacrificed they did so for greater firepower- witness their relatively successful performance against Rebel heavy fighters on screen.

As far as heavy fighters go, there is the current Starwing, which I rate highly and would like to see more of.

Sorchus, on one hand I think yes, repulsors, on the other I look on the TIE tank as a misbegotten abomination and a waste of a starfighter chassis.

For my own take on this I was thinking pentagonal, emphasising speed and reach; leave the burning deserts, the aquatic and subterranean to the Stormtrooper Corps,and concentrate on the livable sections of the environment where all the industry and people are. More detail later, but heavily repulsor based, not sure how type- identified I want divisions to be but probably minimally, use of droid troopers under human noncoms. More later.

[The Romulan Republic]

Romulan, you're a sadist for wanting to saddle the Imperial Starfighter Corps with B-wings. I have to agree about the AT-ATs though, they are at the heavy end of the spectrum and should not have been sent out without a more effective escort- I think they could work better as combined arms with AT-TE, but their height is always going to make them vulnerable.

What's so bad about the B-wing? I've heard negative descriptions of its performance before, but I've never heard exactly what the problem is with that design. It certainly packs a lot of fire power in a small craft. They were used quite heavilly at Endor, and by the Mon Calimari as a system defense force if I recall the Jedi Academy Trilogy correctly.

Regarding the walkers, I do wonder if their are any situations where the legs would give improved mobillity. Obviously it also makes them vulnerable to tripping, but improved mobillity might be a justification for keeping at least some walker designs.

Sorchus, on one hand I think yes, repulsors, on the other I look on the TIE tank as a misbegotten abomination and a waste of a starfighter chassis.

Hell yes.

[Agent Sorchus]

On the MBT proposal: I was not thinking to literally take a TIE bomber chassis and weld treads to it, but rather to take the standard power-plant and general dimensions of the Tie Shuttle along with other equipment (like repulser's or electronics's) as is possible. Then fit a primary weapon such as a AtAt chin gun onto a Ventral Turret. The Missle fit is a purely defensive anti-airspeeder and the mortars for Urban close in-fighting where the main gun would be more likely to cause friendly fire incidents. Final addition would be the shields as main draw of the former fighter grade powerplant. If Repulsers were to be added the goal should be for them to alow the MBT to be high altitude air dropped.

The starfighter corps as a whole are mostly well off, except in covering a landing zone. TIE's are supposedly not very good in low speed atmosphere combat. Thus I would suggest the I7 howlrunner as a close air support fighter.

As to B-wings: they have been consistently portrayed as a very high maintenance fighter bomber, so much so that they were almost not worth the effort of bringing them along to Baruka after the battle of Endor. The closest thing in the Imperial armory is either the skipray or the starwing.

Edit: any thoughts on my proposal to defeat theatre shields with artillary? I don't think it would work but any one else have a guess?

[Vehrec]

Romulan, you're a sadist for wanting to saddle the Imperial Starfighter Corps with B-wings. I have to agree about the AT-ATs though, they are at the heavy end of the spectrum and should not have been sent out without a more effective escort- I think they could work better as combined arms with AT-TE, but their height is always going to make them vulnerable.

What's so bad about the B-wing? I've heard negative descriptions of its performance before, but I've never heard exactly what the problem is with that design. It certainly packs a lot of fire power in a small craft. They were used quite heavily at Endor, and by the Mon Calimari as a system defense force if I recall the Jedi Academy Trilogy correctly.

Regarding the walkers, I do wonder if their are any situations where the legs would give improved mobility. Obviously it also makes them vulnerable to tripping, but improved mobility might be a justification for keeping at least some walker designs.

The B-wing is several things. First and foremost, it's a heavy-fighter with all the guns and payload that implies. Secondly, it has all the drawbacks of the Y-wing in terms of maneuvering and acceleration. A Star Destroyer might be easily able to outrun it, nevermind a Tie that can sit merrily on its Six all day. Thirdly, its a goddamned hanger queen. S-foils and a gyroscopic cockpit and modular gunpods mean that the damn thing has more things to do on it every time it lands than a whole squadron of the old Y-wings. It's dependent on Proton Torpedoes for a lot of its striking power. It has a good front-back profile, but a lousy side profile with that awful wing. Most damning of all is the political connections this fighter-bomber has. Rebel scum built this thing, and I won't have it in His Imperial Majesty's armed forces.

[PainRack]

The B-wing is several things. First and foremost, it's a heavy-fighter with all the guns and payload that implies. Secondly, it has all the drawbacks of the Y-wing in terms of maneuvering and acceleration. A Star Destroyer might be easily able to outrun it, nevermind a Tie that can sit merrily on its Six all day. Thirdly, its a goddamned hanger queen. S-foils and a gyroscopic cockpit and modular gunpods mean that the damn thing has more things to do on it every time it lands than a whole squadron of the old Y-wings. It's dependent on Proton Torpedoes for a lot of its striking power. It has a good front-back profile, but a lousy side profile with that awful wing. Most damning of all is the political connections this fighter-bomber has. Rebel scum built this thing, and I won't have it in His Imperial Majesty's armed forces.

It also has significant shield durability and guns maneveurability, giving it better survival performance against TIE fighters as seen in the X-wing series. The New Rebellion suggest that the B-wing has high kill ratios against TIEs, although one suspect this is against TIE bombers and basic fighters.

Combined it with superior turreted guns, and the possibility of superior ion cannons given WEG game mechanics, its quite a good fighter bomber.

You definitely need SOMETHING to replace the TIE bomber. The TIE bomber is useful in its COIN duties, given its long range, varied payload and sensors. However, the lack of hyperdrive, shields and survivability against defences and aerial opposition would make it less than useless in a galactic war.

Ground wise, we already see stormtroopers carry rifles in Tatooine, so they have that in their armouries. Probably respecialised the stormtroopers and army regiments in terms of roles. The EU optimisation of stormtroopers is for environmental such as snowtroopers and etc. I rather specialise them in terms of the traditional heavy/light brigades, with light infantry being heavy on speeders, flying fortresses and Chariots, optimised for speed with Spacetroopers/Darktroopers attached for heavy firepower. Give them droid support in terms of hunter killer probe droids, some assasin droids modified to operate in the army spec role so that they're commandoes......
Given the air mobility of Republic walkers and the possibility that AT-STs and chariots are just as airmobile, these units would be different from heavy units in the sense that they're designed to be able to operate in theatre much longer without heavy logistical support, meaning less spare parts needed, less lubricant and fuel and less reliance on proton torps and other ammunition.

Heavy brigades would be more chock full of logistic heavy stuff, giving them superior firepower and durability. Theatre shields, Juggernauts, AT-AT and AT-TEs with the Imperial equivalent of the LAAT, along with Loronar Turbolaser batteries.
I would also look into the possibility of deploying an AT-AT equivalent which can project a mobile theatre shield, equivalent to the mobile shield generator found in the Battlegrounds games, however, with firepower capable of supporting the ground troops inside.

[Eleventh Century Remnant]

Thinking about it, the B-wing is kind of wierd. There are at least three separate sets of data about it; the game and game derived numbers which are truly pathetic, even comparing apples to apples it's slower and less agile than almost any other fighter, and certainly any other fighter of it's late war generation;
it's survivability is only marginally better than that of the X-wing in west end, and in the computer games I understand it gains a great deal, but not enough to put it out of reach of anyone who can fly up behind it.

In the books, you know more about those than I do I think, it being a long time since I read the novels, but they seem to give the B-wing a lot of credit.

Looking at the ICS drawing is actually a bit of a shock; it seems to have engines. The thing's power to weight ought to be a lot better than it's game stats apply, and surely power to feed through weapons and power to feed through drives are two sides of the same coin? I wonder if it was intended to be a fast hit and run, flyby-strafing fighter, dependent on straight line speed for survivability, and the EU's been misreading it all these years?

Much as there's a part of me that'd like to believe the Alliance got it that badly wrong, they are basically too competent to produce something that is as much of a lemon as the game performance of the B-wing seems to be.

Anyway, any starfighter should be able to move on ion drive to anywhere on the planet in short order, going suborbital if necessary, to give tactical support from kiloton-range weapons at short notice. The TIE/gt has the weaponry (assuming the proton bombs are guided, and with the technology available they should be); it can do the job, although not necessarily in the face of an alerted enemy.
I'm not sure the official B-wing can, either; it has the guns for defence suppression, but it's too slow and too easy a target- likely to be who shoots first, wins. That and it might just be too much fighter for the job.

Air- aerospace- defence is going to be fun to plan out.

Anyway, I'm posting this now because my computer's been very crashy these last few days, ate one reply already.

[fractalsponge1]

I think from the game mechanics B-wing is equivalent in performance to a tie bomber, except maybe in the turn rate, and of course shields and increased hull durability. Of course, game mechanics you have to take with a big pinch of salt. I don't think it has been described anywhere as having a turreted gun though.

The ln at Yavin could crisp an X-W with a pair of hits. It's obvious a B-W is a tough piece of metal, but is it going to be that much tougher than an X-W to survive a full burst from behind from a TIE? Which, given the acceleration deficit, is going to be the case more than not. In the initial head-on clash of fighters, it might do well, but in a swirling fight, I doubt it. And, for that matter, is it going to mount shields to take a full LTL hit? Shields on snubfighters seem to be more of a low-grade insurance policy than real defense, from the combats on screen. Useful in some situations perhaps, but in grey area of effectiveness where cost, weight, and maintenance issues can potentially tip the scale in favor of having no shields.

Some random thoughts:

Pretty much all the late generation starfighters seem like too much for close support. Especially the Starwing and B-W - why do you need a hyperdrive for atmo? Maybe take the starwing, strip out the hyperdrive, and add bomb bays.

For persistent fire support you could take the cygnus escort shuttle as a base and strip out the hyperdrive. That'd give you a tough, shielded platform for LTL-scale support fire that can self-deploy from orbit. Can operate closer to the line than a warship, is harder to hit, longer ranged than fighter lasers, much more endurance than a fighter as well.

That doesn't obviate the need for organic fire support in a ECM heavy environment, where calling in support is going to be difficult except at close range. Light walker/repulsor NLOS tube or missile artillery, all deployable by LAAT/c-class craft. Repulsor-assisted heavy weapons at lower levels. SPHA-class firepower you'd probably only need in mass operations where if you'd need them mobile, you might as well operate an acclamator as a support platform.


I'm not trying to get into the walker/repulsor/treads debate, but as for tripping - in a combined arms environment, is that really viable? It worked at Hoth presumably by surprise and due to the skill of the rebel pilots, and the fact that Blizzard force apparently had no organic air defense (despite that, the snowspeeder unit that tried it took near total losses all the same). Adding a small antipersonnel weapons pod on the underside (which is a pretty good idea for the AT-AT anyway, imo), a walker crew knows that the legs are entangled can shoot the cable off with light fire. The key is more situational awareness. At Hoth, if the snared walker had just stopped, it could have remained in action (unless you want to argue the speeder had enough power to drag the walker down. The real way of dealing with that kind of armor is to have turbolaser-scale artillery or use an air/orbital strike.

[PhilosopherOfSorts]

[quote="Eleventh Century
What's so bad about the B-wing? I've heard negative descriptions of its performance before, but I've never heard exactly what the problem is with that design. It certainly packs a lot of fire power in a small craft. They were used quite heavilly at Endor, and by the Mon Calimari as a system defense force if I recall the Jedi Academy Trilogy correctly.

Aside from E.C.R's points about it, another reason not to use B-Wings is that the Empire already has machines that perform the same role, and are (or should be) better at it. I was thinking specifically of Sienar Fleet Systems' Skipray Blastboat, which, if I remember correctly, boasts speed and manuverablity comparable to that of an X-Wing, while carrying a heavier weapons fit than a B-Wing. There might be some argument over weather its a heavy fighter or a light shuttle, but that seems insignifigant to me.

[Eleventh Century Remnant]

By and large I think Vehrec has it right; I was just trying to be generous to the B-wing and see where that got me. It should be better than it is- but it isn't.

I like the idea about the escort shuttle; it's got enough weight and shielding to survive some defensive fire, could serve as top cover- it's got enough room for fairly impressive sensors too, making it a good potential AEW unit- note, not AWACS. It's too visible, and undoubtedly the enemy would try to kill it. Goes for everything else on the field, though.

Tripping is a bit of a freak tactic, and shouldn't have been possible but for that I think Blizzard Force were something of a long shot, an 'into the valley of death'- esque move by Veers. My theory is that he chose to deploy a very top-heavy force, without the escort it should have had and is certainly possible looking at the other units that exist, to prove the power of the type, and validate his own theories about the AT-AT. And by Vader's only-success-matters standards, he succeeded.

LAATs are purely repulsor drive, and I'm not entirely clear on the conceptual difference between a repulsorlift tank and a repulsorlift gunship; do they simply trade off firepower for armour, and vice versa- is there, does there deserve to be any clear difference between the two? I have to admit to being unimpressed by the repulsortanks that actually exist, a convergence of the two concepts might do them both good.

I know this is going back to the dawn of armour, but the Mk IV of 1916 came in 'Male' and 'Female' forms- the actual difference being one with light artillery, a pair of relatively large guns, one with mass anti-infantry. What about a similar set of options?
Go for a prime platform based on a set of naval fighter grade repulsors for the speed and altitude, ground vehicle standard shielding, and weapon pods- fixed at construction, modularity in the field seems likely to lead to a landscape strewn with abandoned modules.

Say we're looking at something like a delta lifting body with dorsal- turret, wingtip and nose hardpoints? Dorsal turret options heavy laser cannon, light artillery convergence beam, mass driver for beyond the horizon work, or possibly a pair of the LAAT's missile launchers.
Nose hardpoint similar but fixed-forward with limited traverse, wingtips rocket/light missile pod like half a Hailfire unit, grouped repeaters, light antivehicle cannon.

Back that up with something like a genuine IFV, repulsor driven with a missile pod, and adaptable to light artillery with the troop pod replaced by a mass driver, MLRS unit like the existing Leveler-1 (hopefully with greater range) or light convergence beam; two man swoops with infantry-support grade pintle mounts, speeder bikes, etc, backing all that up.

Leave most of the harsh-environment, close quarters work like pioneering through sewers to droids, under human direction- I wouldn't say human officer, that might be reaching too far up the chain of command, sargeant maybe. Artillery, short version, yes- but counterorbital is going to be tricky.

[Master_Baerne]

So the final verdict is repulsor-driven vehicles all around, hyperdrive-less naval fighters for ground support, and droids for urban warfare? With some form of repulsortank/gunship to serve as the basic armored unit, walkers mostly eliminated, and artillery sharing duties with orbital or sub-orbital Starfighter Command units?

[PainRack]

Thinking about it, the B-wing is kind of wierd. There are at least three separate sets of data about it; the game and game derived numbers which are truly pathetic, even comparing apples to apples it's slower and less agile than almost any other fighter, and certainly any other fighter of it's late war generation;
it's survivability is only marginally better than that of the X-wing in west end, and in the computer games I understand it gains a great deal, but not enough to put it out of reach of anyone who can fly up behind it.

You neglect to mention that unlike the sim games, the B-wing can actually shoot behind it, similar to the improved Y-wing. However, the guns are potentially superior.

I think from the game mechanics B-wing is equivalent in performance to a tie bomber, except maybe in the turn rate, and of course shields and increased hull durability. Of course, game mechanics you have to take with a big pinch of salt. I don't think it has been described anywhere as having a turreted gun though.

The ln at Yavin could crisp an X-W with a pair of hits. It's obvious a B-W is a tough piece of metal, but is it going to be that much tougher than an X-W to survive a full burst from behind from a TIE? Which, given the acceleration deficit, is going to be the case more than not. In the initial head-on clash of fighters, it might do well, but in a swirling fight, I doubt it. And, for that matter, is it going to mount shields to take a full LTL hit? Shields on snubfighters seem to be more of a low-grade insurance policy than real defense, from the combats on screen. Useful in some situations perhaps, but in grey area of effectiveness where cost, weight, and maintenance issues can potentially tip the scale in favor of having no shields.

If starfighter shields work similarly to the shield model seen in ICS, the B-wing "capacity" may be larger than the X-wing, allowing it to absorb more damaging hits. Similarly, given that the Y-wing is traditionally stated to be "tougher" than the X-wing, the B-wing comparable durability in combat would suggest that their shield rating and capacity is the same.

So the final verdict is repulsor-driven vehicles all around, hyperdrive-less naval fighters for ground support, and droids for urban warfare? With some form of repulsortank/gunship to serve as the basic armored unit, walkers mostly eliminated, and artillery sharing duties with orbital or sub-orbital Starfighter Command units?

There's always the good old Juggernaut:D However, given the pecularity of SW walkers, (look at those AT-TEs scale that damn clift), they're still quite useful

[The Romulan Republic]

Regarding the B-wing, I wouldn't give much credence to game mechanics. Aren't they basically non-canon?

Obviously the design wasn't perfect, but it was good enough that the Rebellion was still using it to defend a critical world like Mon Calimari several years after Endor. For whatever that's worth. I suppose it might have been political though, since I thought Ackbar had a hand in designing the thing?

[Eleventh Century Remnant]

Baerne, nothing's certain, we're just gathering ideas and exchanging viewpoints; basically, I found myself in the position of having to ask this question anyway, and decided I might as well throw it open instead of keeping all the fun to myself.

You've opted for combined arms from the bottom up, personally I'd reckon treads a good compromise, with traction sufficient to go through shields and more speed than legged transmission, but why them and walkers and repulsors all together?

There are a lot of things I like about your proposal, for one thing it includes an order of battle which I'm still working out in my head (and will no doubt forget something along the way) and you've covered all the bases- I was about to forget combat engineers, for instance; but it is definitely a heavyweight option- how long would it take a division to drop, from how many drop ships?

Counting single AT-AT capable landing barges, I get (guesstimate) seven for an infantry, seven for an artillery, eleven for an armoured, and eight for an engineer company; it would probably be easier to use an Acclamator or updated version, land and let them walk out.

On the other hand, being on the recieving end of that lot would be, to say the least, fraught. There is no 'diz is how it iz grr arg' final verdict, at least not yet.

PainRack, I thought it was the A-wing which could do that? The laser cannon there do have pivot mounts- which are also stated as being one of the reasons it's a hangar queen, ('the weapons mount has a high rate of mechanical failure and contributes to the craft's extremely high maintenance-to-flight ratio' complete ICS p 137); the B-wing's weapons look too structural for that. Almost certainly they are capable of the same off-axis fire as so many other things, but that's not a turret.

Game mechanics are very low canon, superseded by almost everything else, but if there's no more authoritative source they are the fallback position. Remember that a lot of the West End stuff was used as writing guide material by the early EU, and how much of that influences the reputation of things as we see them now.

[fractalsponge1]

It is indeed the A-W that has swivel mounted guns. ICS doesn't mention anything about it on a B-W. But frankly, A-W or B-W, there's hardly a better way to get yourself killed in a furball than trying to aim a gun behind you as you weave. Would be another thing if you had a gunner, like the ARC170.

This is not to say that B-Ws are useless - they are obviously well armed. That would be like saying A10s are worthless because they can't survive one-on-one vs F-22s. Same goes for the TIE/sa - you have to use them with their limitations in mind. That said, starwings replacing TIE/sas would be a good deal, if it could be afforded and the big fighter gets a more compact storage form to work with existing hangars.

[Rawtooth]

Some variants of the B-Wing include a dedicated gunner, although I don't recall any mention of swivel guns on it.