Contain xenomorphs with a modern military base

[Wicked Pilot]

Sorry but because the thread kinda jumped track back in page one I didn't read the last six.

To the origional topic, I'd just build the labs in the old missile silos in Wyoming. If the critters ever got to the surface they'd be easily gunned down by two guys in a HUMVEE with their 50 cal in pretty short order.

[ThatGuyFromThatPlace]

sooooo... After careful thought, I've decided to revise the original 'Generic inescapable Prison/Lab/facility' to be located on a ship in the arctic ocean (The Middle of the Pacific is also acceptable, 48 degrees, 30 minutes south, 120 degrees, 30 minutes west to be precise)

The off-site nuclear deterrent has been replaced in this iteration with a nearby Nuclear Missile sub wielding a low-yield nuclear weapon (I would use a MOAB except that it would either need to be flown in, which could take too long, or be centrally located, where it could be disabled by whatever is escaping)

I know the Xenos are supposed to swim well, but how well can they swim in water that is just above freezing, when they are hundreds, if not thousands of freezing miles from civilization?
Or, in the mid pacific, can Xenos swim to civilization when they are 2000 miles from land?

[Stark]

It might be worth noting that when Hudson says 'they were wall to wall etc', this was after the first pair of guns ran out of ammo. At that point they had no cameras, and were simply watching the ammo counters as far as I could tell. Clearly the guns were mowing them down like grass, but there's no direct way of judging how accurate Hudson's statement might be beyond '2 machineguns firing 1,000 rounds kills a lot of xenos'.

[Crayz9000]

And make sure that water has a rather alkaline pH.

I just got this nasty image of a guy feeding an Alien Alka-Seltzers...

[Darth Servo]

And make sure that water has a rather alkaline pH.

I just got this nasty image of a guy feeding an Alien Alka-Seltzers...

You never know, it might work.

[THEHOOLIGANJEDI]

You use objective and logic-sounding words, but you use neither objectivity or logic. You claim there are huge numbers of aliens, you have to provide the evidence. I see evidence for roughly 30 aliens. No evidence whatsoever for more, and your appeal to ignorance fallacy does not qualify as evidence, fucktard.

Appealing to ignorance!?!? Bullshit! The point of me bringing up the fact the Motion tracker doesn't support your quantification is simply speaking: IT DOESN'T SUPPORT IT AT ALL!! Nothing more! You need to find another source for your quantification if you are going to keep arguing that point.

Fact 1: Right after the Last Battle sequence, (just before Newt is captured) we get another direct reading of the Motion tracker, It is very much Identical (if not the same) reading to Hudson's reading before the last Attack. The Point I Make: In the case of the Hudson's readings, it was tracking Multiple targets. Hicks on the other had was only tracking ONE target.
Fact 2: We see another clear reading from the motion trackers in the first Battle. In that case we see a 360 degree viewing and all we get are a series of Grey Blobs coverging on their location.

To conclude: The Point stands, The Motion Tracker doesn't give accurate or any quantifications on what is coming to you. If you want to prove otherwise then present the evidence that you say you have. In this case the burden of Proof is on you. You made the declaration.

And to adress your 30 Aliens argument:

My issue is that seem to be trying to quantify the number of xenos in that attack based on the motion tracker. The Problem with doing that is that in all instances of it's usage it didn't give a clear, consise number of moving targets, it just gave a vague, cloudy representation of an object or being in motion and it's specific distance. If you are basing it on the motion tracker then your quantification is meaningless.

FACT: the characters onscreen clearly believe that the corridor is full of aliens.

A point I don't and haven't disputed. It's how they advanced upon the guns which is the point of debate.

FACT: the aliens are advancing steadily through machine-gun fire. That is impossible without taking massive casualties.

This is where I dispute you claim. You are right in the fact that advancing upon a Machine Guns with High cyclic rates, No I'll One Up you on this, can cause 90-100% casualty rate. My dispute is that the only way you get those typse of Casualties with the perameters set up is to advance upon the position row by row. (or as how you put it: "a wall of Flesh)
There is one alternative that you leave out and that is to dispere you forces as best as you can. Give the machine guns too many targets to shoot at intead of groups. Having groups of any size as a target is otpimal, shooting at an individual is a waste of ammo for a machine gun even with controlled burst. It is even loosely supported by onscreen evidence. We never seen a row or a grouping of Alien getting mowed down in that scene just individual Aliens.

If you follow that method of movement, you can reduce the casualties considerably.

FACT: there is no evidence for more than a few dozen surviving xenos for the final battle.

Based on what?? The Motion tracker?
The fact that there were only three xenos at the Queens nest when Ripley arrived? (which did in fact provide Likely scenario)

You haven't done jack shit to disprove the idea that they wasted most of their manpower attacking those sentry guns.

Nor have you done anything whatsoever to justify your bullshit claims about their tactical skills in general, never mind that idiotic "dodging fire" nonsense.

I was saving this for later but:
Alien Resurrection actually shows an Alien actually trying to avoid Gunfire. The scene in question takes place immediately after the underwater sequence. It shows Christie (the guy from CSI) Firing down at an Alien on a ladder. It is clearly shown that the Alien is avoiding the rounds. (Granted they were tracers, but Aliens don't have eyes) This could even be construed as skillfully dodging bullets, but I won't ever allude to that. (it's ridiculous)

[Stark]

Yeah, those Aliens in Resurrection weren't different, hybrid aliens at all, right? They were totally like the aliens found on LV-426!

[brianeyci]

Cool this thread is still alive? .

You know hooliganjedi, if you were honest you'd realize that the aliens threw everything they had at the marines in the command center, and admit that Ripley got all the way to the queen because nearly all the xenos had been wasted. How do you explain Ripley getting so far in without getting hit by a hundred xenos? But noooooooo you have to say something like "we don't see it therefore I don't believe it" I mean come on ask any person who watched the movie. Wall to wall makes it pretty conclusive guess not for you .

[Darth Wong]

Appealing to ignorance!?!? Bullshit! The point of me bringing up the fact the Motion tracker doesn't support your quantification is simply speaking: IT DOESN'T SUPPORT IT AT ALL!! Nothing more! You need to find another source for your quantification if you are going to keep arguing that point.

Wrong, asshole. The motion tracker supports me simply by not supporting you. YOU are the one claiming that there were huge numbers of aliens at the end, so YOU have to provide the evidence. Moreover, YOU made the initial claim, before I ever posted this "30 alien" count. My argument was actually about the sentry guns, and you have run away from that argument so now you're focusing on the end battle in order to distract from the fact that the evidence against your sentry gun bullshit is overwhelming.

Arguing that there were huge numbers of aliens at the end because I can't disprove their existence to YOUR satisfaction is a TEXTBOOK appeal to ignorance fallacy, you fucking liar. I'm seriously losing patience with your dishonesty and fallacious behaviour. You tried to use your ASSUMPTION of huge numbers of xenos in the final assault as EVIDENCE against my statement that the sentry guns caused large numbers of casualties. You clearly do not understand that if you plan to use something as evidence, you have to show that it really is evidence, and not an assumption.

Trying to put the burden of proof on me for denying YOUR claim is so incredibly dishonest that I can only assume you are either a goddamned idiot for thinking I'll fall for this or you are so fucking dishonest that you can't even keep your lies straight in your own head.

To conclude: The Point stands, The Motion Tracker doesn't give accurate or any quantifications on what is coming to you. If you want to prove otherwise then present the evidence that you say you have. In this case the burden of Proof is on you. You made the declaration.

I'm losing patience with your lies, asshole. YOU claimed that the xenos had a "huge" assault force at the end long before I ever mentioned this "30 xeno" count that you're now hopping around demanding absolute proof of. I only showed the count in order to show that there was NO evidence for YOUR claim that the assault force was "huge", asshole. Let's look at your early posts on this matter:

there is little onscreen evidence that showcases that the sentry gun were that effective in repelling the Xenos at all
...
your assumption that The xeno suffered massive causualities is unsupported completely
...
the movie itself may even disprove what you state when you look at the size of the xeno attack force towards the end of the movie. (seeing as how there was a Huge force for a frontal assault and based on the fact that they were flanked from Behind

All of this was said before I ever posted anything about the motion tracker or the 30 xeno count. This was actually about the sentry guns, remember? You claimed there was no onscreen evidence for large numbers of casualties from the sentry guns. This was shown to be a false claim by citing both Hudson and Hicks, not to mention the impossibility of the xenos ADVANCING STEADILY on a machine-gun while it's firing without taking heavy casualties. You never conceded that point, and after claiming that there was a "huge" xeno assault force at the end, which you tried to use as disproof of my statement about the sentry guns, you pretended that the burden of proof for this claim of yours somehow rested on ME for denying it and showing that there was no evidence for more than 30.

I grow weary of your dishonesty, asshole. Keep it up and I'll make sure it ends one way or another.

PS. Your laughable claim about "dispersing" your men in a corridor and advancing steadily on a machine-gun while it's firing at you is so goddamned stupid that I don't believe it even warrants addressing. Try asking members of The Mess about that one, if they can stop laughing long enough to answer you.

FACT: there is no evidence for more than a few dozen surviving xenos for the final battle.

Based on what?? The Motion tracker?

Yes. You obviously don't read what you reply to.

Alien Resurrection actually shows an Alien actually trying to avoid Gunfire.

That's bullshit. You can't dodge a bullet in flight. What you can do is get lucky. At a range of, say, 10 metres, even a subsonic bullet doing 300 m/s is going to cover that distance in 0.03 seconds. Show me evidence for a xeno being able to shift its entire body by more than a foot in 0.03 seconds, moron.

[Nova Andromeda]

-Has anyone considered building the base on the dark side of the moon? It could be made fully automated (robots, etc.) and several large nukes could be used for failsafes (not like a xeno would survive in hard vacuum with barely any ambient heat anyhow). Nevertheless, such as setup could be useful for more dangerous stuff (that I haven't thought of).
-On another note, does anyone really know how smart xeno's are? They start off from ground 0 in the movies (no education, pure instinct). If humans were to start from such as position I wonder if they'd develope anything beyond basic communication. The queen at least seemed to show a high level of intelligence at the end of the second movie with that "truce" with Ripley. The lack of good battle tactics doesn't really count against them much either given their aggresive nature and the fact that humans have done far worse on countless occasions.

[Stark]

The moon? Why not another planet? Nuke failsafes are absurd, the xenos simply can not escape any sensible arrangement of security.

Sorry, comparing xeno growth to human growth is utterly retarded. That's like saying ants must take years to gain knowledge and skills to work for the hive! How do they even communicate with other ants, it takes humans years to learn that!

[Shroom Man 777]

Hey, we can finally have a use for the International Space Station!

[Nova Andromeda]

The moon? Why not another planet? Nuke failsafes are absurd, the xenos simply can not escape any sensible arrangement of security.

Sorry, comparing xeno growth to human growth is utterly retarded. That's like saying ants must take years to gain knowledge and skills to work for the hive! How do they even communicate with other ants, it takes humans years to learn that!

-Too many people type before they think or perhaps are just too dumb, ignorant or arrogant to care.
-I did not suggest the moon because it was necessary, but because I think we could do it and it might be useful for something more dangerous than xenos. It is also better than another planet for numerous reasons: low gravity, no atmosphere, it's close, etc.
-Apparently, you entirely missed the whole point of the comparison with human intelligence: determining a specie's reasoning capacity isn't always straight forward. I have yet to see any evidence from the movies that strongly suggests let alone proves they are just a bunch of creatures with ant like intelligence.

[Stark]

-Too many people type before they think or perhaps are just too dumb, ignorant or arrogant to care.

I detect zero content here. Was I burnt?

-I did not suggest the moon because it was necessary, but because I think we could do it and it might be useful for something more dangerous than xenos. It is also better than another planet for numerous reasons: low gravity, no atmosphere, it's close, etc.

Yeah, other planets don't have low gravity or hostile atmospheres, right? Fuck you're stupid. You could even pick a planet chockers with some substance that's hostile to aliens: I'd love to see them run around like tards on Venus, for instance.

-Apparently, you entirely missed the whole point of the comparison with human intelligence: determining a specie's reasoning capacity isn't always straight forward. I have yet to see any evidence from the movies that strongly suggests let alone proves they are just a bunch of creatures with ant like intelligence.

So, we should assume they're super-intelligent - based on nothing - until we can prove they're NOT?

[Nova Andromeda]

-I did not suggest the moon because it was necessary, but because I think we could do it and it might be useful for something more dangerous than xenos. It is also better than another planet for numerous reasons: low gravity, no atmosphere, it's close, etc.

Yeah, other planets don't have low gravity or hostile atmospheres, right? Fuck you're stupid. You could even pick a planet chockers with some substance that's hostile to aliens: I'd love to see them run around like tards on Venus, for instance.

-Holy red buttons you're dumb! You actually think we can build anything on Venus? Perhaps you'd like to try on Pluto? You should really shut up before that hole you're digging gets any deeper....

-Apparently, you entirely missed the whole point of the comparison with human intelligence: determining a specie's reasoning capacity isn't always straight forward. I have yet to see any evidence from the movies that strongly suggests let alone proves they are just a bunch of creatures with ant like intelligence.

So, we should assume they're super-intelligent - based on nothing - until we can prove they're NOT?

-Guess you can't read, but I suspose that has to do with being an idiot. For those of you reading this who aren't idiots and can read, let me quote my original post on the subject: "... does anyone really know how smart xeno's are? ... The queen at least seemed to show a high level of intelligence at the end of the second movie with that 'truce' with Ripley." In other words, I wonder if anyone can really say how intelligent the xenos' are (although I've only seen the movies a couple times). The scene I mentioned seemed suggestive to me, but is hardly a definitive study and perhaps there are better interpretations than intelligence. Nevertheless, the assumption that they are as dumb as ants is as flawed as an unsupported assertion they are highly intelligent. The appropriate answer in the face of a lack of evidence is: we don't really know.

[Shroom Man 777]

-Holy red buttons you're dumb! You actually think we can build anything on Venus? Perhaps you'd like to try on Pluto? You should really shut up before that hole you're digging gets any deeper....

So, how do we contain xenomorphs in a modern military base?

We build one on the moon. The fucking moon.



Might as well incarcerate pedophiles twenty thousand leagues under the sea.

[Nova Andromeda]

-Holy red buttons you're dumb! You actually think we can build anything on Venus? Perhaps you'd like to try on Pluto? You should really shut up before that hole you're digging gets any deeper....

So, how do we contain xenomorphs in a modern military base?

We build one on the moon. The fucking moon.



Might as well incarcerate pedophiles twenty thousand leagues under the sea.

-Look another idiot that can't read ^. Better lay off those Shrooms dude. Lets look at another one of my quotes: "I did not suggest the moon because it was necessary, but because I think we could do it and it might be useful for something more dangerous than xenos."

[Shroom Man 777]

Something more dangerous than xenos? What can possibly warrant the construction of a containment facility on the fucking moon, smartass?

Build on the moon so we can have a pit stop for interplanetary flights. Okay.

Build on the moon so we can harvest moon resources. Okay.

Build on the moon so we can put a bunch of stupid animals in moon-cages and have a bunch of moon-scientist do moon-experiments on them? What?

What else would you put in the moon, then? Velociraptors? Rapists? Terrorists? Pedophiles? The Blob? The Thing? Graboids? Giant Ants? Godzilla? Saddam Hussein?

You're worse than that idiot who suggested rigging the xeno facility with the fucking Tsar Bomba.

Gee. Let's make a juvenile detention hall. In the Marianas Trench. Rigged with a MOAB. And have extra room because it might be useful for something more dangerous, like tax-evaders.

[Stark]

-Holy red buttons you're dumb! You actually think we can build anything on Venus? Perhaps you'd like to try on Pluto? You should really shut up before that hole you're digging gets any deeper....

Okay, it wasn't an act. You're really just fucking stupid.

Get this. It's a bit of a secret.

Aliens are science fiction. The movie, Aliens, is science fiction. ZOMG! And check this out: I even SPECIFICALLY POINTED OUT that it would be a useful place because IT'S SO HOSTILE TO LIFE. The aliens (science fiction aliens) can get out all they want, they'll just die. I wonder what the atmo would do to aliens bizarre biochemistry? Fun to find out!

PS what's so hard about slapping a base on Pluto? Aside from distance (that scifi thing again, sorry to harp) it's just your average cold dark wasteland. Nowhere near as hostile as Venus.

-Guess you can't read, but I suspose that has to do with being an idiot. For those of you reading this who aren't idiots and can read, let me quote my original post on the subject: "... does anyone really know how smart xeno's are? ... The queen at least seemed to show a high level of intelligence at the end of the second movie with that 'truce' with Ripley." In other words, I wonder if anyone can really say how intelligent the xenos' are (although I've only seen the movies a couple times). The scene I mentioned seemed suggestive to me, but is hardly a definitive study and perhaps there are better interpretations than intelligence. Nevertheless, the assumption that they are as dumb as ants is as flawed as an unsupported assertion they are highly intelligent. The appropriate answer in the face of a lack of evidence is: we don't really know.

Hilarious. So after saying, and I quote, 'I have yet to see any evidence from the movies that strongly suggests let alone proves they are just a bunch of creatures with ant like intelligence' you actually try to claim you're not asking me to prove a negative? Prove the animals that marched into machinegun fire TWICE aren't dumb as dishwater? They might be intelligent so I have to prove they aren't! Well, I can certainly prove that YOU aren't intelligent!

PS are you mentally retarded. I like mocking people, but you honestly seem to be damaged. Damaged in the brain.

[Aaron]

Having groups of any size as a target is otpimal, shooting at an individual is a waste of ammo for a machine gun even with controlled burst. It is even loosely supported by onscreen evidence. We never seen a row or a grouping of Alien getting mowed down in that scene just individual Aliens.

Actually there's a real good argument for firing a MG a target rather than a rifle. They are equiped with bipods or tripods (in the case of some GPMGs and HMGS) and therefore provide a more stable firing platform than a rifle. And GPMGs and HMGs considerably outrange a rifle as well as having more stopping power. Even the the SAW has a greater effective range than the M16 as the bipod provids a more stable firing platform for the weapon and makes it easier to hit the target at long range with the weapons cone of fire. And cut down versions exist for close quarters combat.

[THEHOOLIGANJEDI]

Cool this thread is still alive? .

You know hooliganjedi, if you were honest you'd realize that the aliens threw everything they had at the marines in the command center, and admit that Ripley got all the way to the queen because nearly all the xenos had been wasted. How do you explain Ripley getting so far in without getting hit by a hundred xenos? But noooooooo you have to say something like "we don't see it therefore I don't believe it" I mean come on ask any person who watched the movie. Wall to wall makes it pretty conclusive guess not for you .

I already gave a good reason why Ripley wasn't hounded by one hundred xenos. Two actually. The main one is thatshe got a head start on all the xenos in the command center complex. It's obvious that it is a considerable distance from the Processing station. The xenos were obviously either in the complex while Ripley was on Route to the Processor via the Dropship (which is fast enough to hit escape velocity) or were on their way to aid the Three Xenos left to guard the nest.
It was a simple problem of distance. Xenos are fast but they don't begin to compare to the speed of a Dropship.

[THEHOOLIGANJEDI]

Appealing to ignorance!?!? Bullshit! The point of me bringing up the fact the Motion tracker doesn't support your quantification is simply speaking: IT DOESN'T SUPPORT IT AT ALL!! Nothing more! You need to find another source for your quantification if you are going to keep arguing that point.

Wrong, asshole. The motion tracker supports me simply by not supporting you. YOU are the one claiming that there were huge numbers of aliens at the end, so YOU have to provide the evidence. Moreover, YOU made the initial claim, before I ever posted this "30 alien" count. My argument was actually about the sentry guns, and you have run away from that argument so now you're focusing on the end battle in order to distract from the fact that the evidence against your sentry gun bullshit is overwhelming.

Arguing that there were huge numbers of aliens at the end because I can't disprove their existence to YOUR satisfaction is a TEXTBOOK appeal to ignorance fallacy, you fucking liar. I'm seriously losing patience with your dishonesty and fallacious behaviour. You tried to use your ASSUMPTION of huge numbers of xenos in the final assault as EVIDENCE against my statement that the sentry guns caused large numbers of casualties. You clearly do not understand that if you plan to use something as evidence, you have to show that it really is evidence, and not an assumption.

Trying to put the burden of proof on me for denying YOUR claim is so incredibly dishonest that I can only assume you are either a goddamned idiot for thinking I'll fall for this or you are so fucking dishonest that you can't even keep your lies straight in your own head.

To conclude: The Point stands, The Motion Tracker doesn't give accurate or any quantifications on what is coming to you. If you want to prove otherwise then present the evidence that you say you have. In this case the burden of Proof is on you. You made the declaration.

I'm losing patience with your lies, asshole. YOU claimed that the xenos had a "huge" assault force at the end long before I ever mentioned this "30 xeno" count that you're now hopping around demanding absolute proof of. I only showed the count in order to show that there was NO evidence for YOUR claim that the assault force was "huge", asshole. Let's look at your early posts on this matter:

there is little onscreen evidence that showcases that the sentry gun were that effective in repelling the Xenos at all
...
your assumption that The xeno suffered massive causualities is unsupported completely
...
the movie itself may even disprove what you state when you look at the size of the xeno attack force towards the end of the movie. (seeing as how there was a Huge force for a frontal assault and based on the fact that they were flanked from Behind

All of this was said before I ever posted anything about the motion tracker or the 30 xeno count. This was actually about the sentry guns, remember? You claimed there was no onscreen evidence for large numbers of casualties from the sentry guns. This was shown to be a false claim by citing both Hudson and Hicks, not to mention the impossibility of the xenos ADVANCING STEADILY on a machine-gun while it's firing without taking heavy casualties. You never conceded that point, and after claiming that there was a "huge" xeno assault force at the end, which you tried to use as disproof of my statement about the sentry guns, you pretended that the burden of proof for this claim of yours somehow rested on ME for denying it and showing that there was no evidence for more than 30.

I grow weary of your dishonesty, asshole. Keep it up and I'll make sure it ends one way or another.

PS. Your laughable claim about "dispersing" your men in a corridor and advancing steadily on a machine-gun while it's firing at you is so goddamned stupid that I don't believe it even warrants addressing. Try asking members of The Mess about that one, if they can stop laughing long enough to answer you.

FACT: there is no evidence for more than a few dozen surviving xenos for the final battle.

Based on what?? The Motion tracker?

Yes. You obviously don't read what you reply to.

Actually I do. And the motion Tracker still doesn't indicate that there were 30 Aliens. But I'll get to that.
As for me making my declarations as to how I theorize how the movie went down, I'll be More than Glad to post them and respond to this post's individual points. I will concede that I didn't try to back up my point in a rush to counter yours. I should have a clear set of points minus the vagaries. As for me running away from the point on the sentry guns, I never did run from it, I think you missed one of My posts, but I'll get to that in my response.

Alien Resurrection actually shows an Alien actually trying to avoid Gunfire.

That's bullshit. You can't dodge a bullet in flight. What you can do is get lucky. At a range of, say, 10 metres, even a subsonic bullet doing 300 m/s is going to cover that distance in 0.03 seconds. Show me evidence for a xeno being able to shift its entire body by more than a foot in 0.03 seconds, moron.[/quote]Watch the Damn Movie! It's there. I know that bullet dodging is an impossiblity of any normal living thing. Don't take it up with me, I know that the scene based on realism doesn't make much sense at all. Take that up with the filmakers. They threw in a lot more ridiculous nonsense in that film. Aliens Spitting acid was the most ridiculous example that I can remember. But regardless, it shows what I've been talking about, That Aliens will TRY to Avoid Gunfire, nothing more. Whether or not it's successful is another story, luck is the onlyreason I would say that Alien Resurrection just takes the basic point I was making and runs with it to a point that it appears that it is skillfully dodging bullets. (when you see the entire scene it fails to do so because it is summarily gunned down)

[Knife]

Having groups of any size as a target is otpimal, shooting at an individual is a waste of ammo for a machine gun even with controlled burst. It is even loosely supported by onscreen evidence. We never seen a row or a grouping of Alien getting mowed down in that scene just individual Aliens.

Actually there's a real good argument for firing a MG a target rather than a rifle. They are equiped with bipods or tripods (in the case of some GPMGs and HMGS) and therefore provide a more stable firing platform than a rifle. And GPMGs and HMGs considerably outrange a rifle as well as having more stopping power. Even the the SAW has a greater effective range than the M16 as the bipod provids a more stable firing platform for the weapon and makes it easier to hit the target at long range with the weapons cone of fire. And cut down versions exist for close quarters combat.

Pfft, what's he on about. You don't shoot a target with a MG unless it's a huge target?

You, Cpl, are absolutely correct. Most MG's are inherently more accurate than rifles when deployed from a tripod or bipod. Disapating the recoil with them is WAAAAY better than anything a human skeletal structure and mucles can ever do.

I'll have to dig out the books and charts and figure out the deviation at various ranges for the 'optimal shot'. Something like 3 mils. but I'll have to check that. I've got the tables for beaten zones sitting somewhere.

Anyway, the beaten zone is what Hooligan is refering. If that beaten zone or cone of fire is as small as an individual target, it's a good thing. If the beaten zone is larger, then yes you'd be better to put it on a larger target. The size and shape of the target come into play though, as well as max ordinates too. Wouldn't want to waste grazing fire or create dead space......

[Shroom Man 777]

I say we build the facility in the sun. If the aliens get out, the sun falls on them.

[Darth Servo]

I say we build the facility in the sun. If the aliens get out, the sun falls on them.

I guess you plan on building this facility at night?