Stofsk wrote:
If you only require a single example of Trek combat ranges that approach a 100K km, then 'The Changeling' adequately answers that challenge, and 'The Wounded' does as well.
They at least prove that, under limited circumstances, they CAN engage at long distance. So why are most fights are what would be considered point-blank range then?
Since the Klingon ship had no cloaking device, its possible it was at the outer range band of their detection radius. What that radius is is impossible to determine, but the ship did not even appear on screen when the Enterprise fires a barrage from its phaser banks. (I am going by the classic series here not the remastered series, as I have not seen the latter) So if the onscreen visual evidence shows no visual contact, I would confidently suggest that that combat example took place at BVR.
Does it show no visual contact because the ship was BVR, or because of the limitations of the original series? If we can establish what the outer range of the Enterprise's detection radius is, then we can say for certain. Otherwise, "confidentally suggesting" means little other than "it doesn't disprove my version of events, therefore it must support it". I'm inclined to agree with you on this one, but I want it nailed down more concretely before settling on a position.
Not really relevant. Most Star Trek combat takes place whilst at warp velocities, and it's shown in two of the above examples how relative parity of speeds is crucial for winning battles. Also it doesn't have to be common for it to be effective. I personally hate how TNG and the later shows dismissed and disregarded TOS, and changed the setting too much for my liking. In TOS warp speed is a lot faster than it was in TNG - the Enterprise visited the edge of the galaxy three times throughout the course of the show.
Since it's the modern era we're discussing, shouldn't we be discussing modern tactics and technology in Trek?
Furthermore, I only need to provide one instance of it.
Right, because there's no such thing as an exception to a rule or special circumstances that make it an outlier.
And the reason why there is only one example of it is explained due to the other examples where warp drive is engaged whilst in battle.
Out of all the starship battles in TOS, how many are at warp and how many are at STL speeds? What about later series?
And if you count TNG, then the Picard Maneouvre is all you need to take out ME ships.
Oh, if ME ships have no FTL sensors, certainly. But the Picard Maneuver was described as some inspired, clever thing that Picard came up with on the fly out of desperation and it just happened to work; further, don't we only see it done one other time in the series? Both of which make sense if we consider that just about everyone they encounter has FTL sensors and that it wouldn't be effective against them, but that just means that any Federation captains fighting ME ships aren't likely to think of using the Picard Maneuver against them.
Fortunately Sean Robertson has come to my rescue here and provided an example of photorps with MT yields.
Really? Where?
Generally speaking, because who ever has space supremacy can dictate the terms of whatever ground combat does occur.
No shit. But again, we were speaking
exclusively in terms of ground forces. As I said, Trek would utterly rape Troopers in space combat.
In Trek, they don't even need to fight on the ground if they don't want to. They can use photon torpedoes or phaser strikes for ortillery. They can even set their phasers to stun and take the entire opposing army prisoner ('A Piece of the Action') if they wished.
It's incredibly rare, and we've only seen the orbital stun thing once, even when it would have been really handy to use in later series.
With the transporter, they can beam ground forces to advantageous locations, which they have done in the show ('Tomorrow is Yesterday' Spock transports from one room to another to sneak up behind someone). It should be noted that in TOS, transporters were far, far far more reliable than they were in TNG and beyond. (This is to quickly dismiss the lame 'transporters are unreliable' fallacy that tends to crop up, which I think is overstated quite a bit)
Except, again, we're discussing modern Trek and not TOS. Besides, it hardly matters. Unless Troopers' ships/base power plants make some sort of interference that messes with transporters (like 20th century nuclear reactors do), I don't think they have any of jamming or interfering with transporters. Then again, we've never seen their electronic warfare ability because their enemy didn't have electronics to jam.
Yes, but not in the form of oribital and space support. A starship in orbit over a planet can use pinpoint phaser strikes to take out such vehicles.
Have we seen a starship in orbit hit individual vehicles that were moving at speed and maneuvering on a planet below them? All I can think of for examples are, say, a shuttlecraft that was skimming the atmosphere and getting shot at or the pursuing ship going into the atmo right behind them.
Well the Feddies have phaser artillery ('The Cage') though effectiveness is difficult to ascertain. It can punch through solid rock. The beam is also bright and landing party operators had to wear protective eyewear, which may indicate that the beam could be blinding.
Yes, phaser artillery that has no advantages over a heavy machine gun except "zap stuff into thin air" firepower, is bulky and heavy, and relies on an orbiting starship to power it. Phaser artillery we never saw again in any episode of TOS, TNG, DS9, or VOY.
They also have grenade/mortars from 'Arena', even if all they do is stun the fascists then so what? They can't shoot their tactical nukes if they're lying on the ground unconscious.
Already covered.
Probably because they were never engaged in planetary invasions at any point throughout the series.
Except for when they have. Then again, in the Dominion War, they seemed to focus mostly on taking out starships/bases and then letting the drunken space vikings (Klingons) handle the ground combat.
Incidentally they do have phaser rifles,
..... No shit. I was pointing out that most members of a landing team don't seem to get them, just the action hero main characters, though VOY was a bit better about that. And the TNG films.
It might have a longer range, but a phaser rifle is not going to literally have a rifled barrel. It's simply nomenclature.
Noooooooo! Really?! Here I was basing my entire argument on phaser rifles being projectile weapons with rifling-stabilized bullets and chemical propellants! I feel like such an idiot!
Incidentally the fascists had difficulty with giant bugs who were restricted to melee weaponry, so I have a hard time feeling sympathetic towards them.
Giant bugs who could lose multiple limbs and still be combat effective, came by the millions, were faster than a man could run, far stronger than a man with greater reach, and could pop out of the ground. I think those 5.56mm rounds they were using on bugs might be just a tad more effective against humans clad in one-piece pajamas.
I'll also point out the flying bugs, giant bugs that shot fire hot enough to incinerate bone over a distance of several dozen meters, and even giant bugs that shot some sort of plasma artillery out their asses, amongst others.
Still, they really ARE a dumb enemy. The bugs in the novel had freaking guns and spaceships at least.
Your ad here.
) being a uniquely human innovation!
