Moderator: NecronLord
No I mean breaking everything down into one line and then answering it with another line. My scroll button has a limited life dude!Batman wrote:I'm not entirely certain what you're referring to, but if it's about me answering 888s paragraphs with a one-liner, yes I do, because not only don't they WARRANT a longer response, they frankly don't NEED one.Aaron wrote: Jesus Batman, do you have to do the one line thing?
As did I. Since when do yours override mine?Batman wrote: ICSes.
Show me a sources showing that reference guides are above novels. Iirc they were both C canon.LFL's official canon policy.
Near reach orbit in what time? A minute? An hour?Since that statement is overridden by higher canon anyway I won't bother looking up anything but I seriously doubt a vehicle that can damn near reach orbit is limited to single figure Mach speeds.
Good point.Speeder BIKE. IOW a LANDspeeder. We were talking about AIRspeeders which can damn near reach orbit in some incarnations.
Perhaps, because I don't understand how it has anything to do with laser cannons.Yes? Do I REALLY have to explain the inverse square rule to you?
Except that I highly doubt that colliding into an asteroid at that speed could produce even a KT explosion.At speeds you...completely failed to provide. Not that that's actually all that comparable.
They couldn't hit the Falcon enough to disable it.Which has what, exactly, to do with their targeting?
Yet they couldn't hit Luke.Not my fault if you can't make your references clear.
Um-the TIEs DID hit a number of X AND Y wings DESPITE massive jamming from the Death Star and possible additional jamming from the rebel fighters.
Except that we were talking about conventional missiles in addition to ICBMs.Yeah. I'm totally talking about artillery when I say ICBMs. Nice goalpost move there.
BS. Sure starfighters can move faster than our missiles, but not by as much as you claim.By Wars standards those missiles are SITTING STILL. Showing we CAN modify those ICBMs and do so in time to matter is up to YOU.
And failed.Bracketing fire. They were trying to CAPTURE it.
That would depend on a lot of factors.With flight times measured in the 10s of minutes.
Your sarcastic statement is actually correct. Refitting ICBMS with conventional warheads wouldn't take that long, and launching them all at the same time could be done with a little math and coordination.But everybody refitting their ICBMs with conventional warheads in time for it to matter and launching them all at the same time is not.
Your dodging the question.Slow as hell by their standards targets moving on highly predictable courses that can neither dodge nor survive their fire. First shot instakills.
But as I said, they wouldn't need to BOTHER. By the time those missiles hit they'll hit empty countryside.
And how does absolute speed have anything to do with what I'm saying? Tie fighters aren't as accurate as you claim, and you still haven't backed up your claim.Yes they did. My point was it doesn't say beans about their ABSOLUTE speed (as far as such a thing can exist).
Show me a source, if you can, of a tie fighter hitting a starfighter that was actually moving at a fast relative speed.The entirety of Star Wars. They routinely hit much faster much smaller much more agile targets. Like, every time a starfighter is shot down.
Because canon says so. Stormtrooper armor cannot stand up to a missile strike, and neither can an AT-ST, which got destroyed by logs.Because-you say so.
How will they detect the missiles (100 tie fighters won't be able to track such a large potential area)? And then they'd have to keep on redirecting their course, which would slow them down and drain their supplies.Yes they can. They have between 10-20 minutes and that's EASILY enough time to get out of the area of effect of any conventional warhead any ICBM can carry.
Mobilize them and move them in range? Or set them up in defensive positions and let them come within range.
Not that I see how you intend to get artillery (which isn't going to do beans against anything but stormtroopers, if that) in range of the Imperial forces.
Can an artillery shell hurt a stormtrooper? Yes. Can it hurt an AT-ST? Yes.Because you're a moron arguing Earth forces could actually HURT the Imperials, which is complete bullshit.I
An AT-STs got destroyed by a log.Evidence.
Actually, they did have trouble hitting the snowspeeders.Strange, they didn't seem to have all that much trouble hitting snowspeeders in ESB.
I didn't claim that they could. 100 tie fighters can't occupy the Earth, as you admitted.It most certainly IS. Not that it MATTERS since there's jack all modern day Earth can do to a TIE that ISN'T sitting on the ground with the pilot out for lunch.
Then a Navy Seal team sneaks up on an AT-ST and opens the hatch like Chewie did.Do the _MATH on those swinging logs some time. Oh, and Chewie DIDN'T rip it open, he just opened it. Apparently the stupid gits driving the thing didn't bother to lock the hatch. Something like that happens in the real world too.
Momentum = mass times acceleration (or velocity). That rock might have a little more of the former, but a LOT less of the latter.Show me the math. Also, it's not just about the KE. Momentum. Which the rock is going to have a lot more of.
Which I'm not denying.And UNTIL then it's essentially invulnerable.
I guess that the OT very much surprised you.Against Imperial technology sensors? That would very much surprise me.
Or they could be the defenders and let the invasion force come within range.Assuming they ever get close enough without being annihilated.
And yet I do not remember one source in which the tie fighters actually dogfight that fast.No they couldn't because modern day fighter are instakills for TIEs and UNLIKE modern day fighters TIEs DON'T need hours to get from one theater to another, they can go, say, from Europe to the americas within MINUTES.
A spear made a nick in a stormtrooper's armor. A spear would not make a noticeable nick in tank armor that armor piercing armor is made to penetrate.You have evidence modern day AP rounds can pierce stormtrooper armour? I'm all eyes (this IS a visual medium),
ROTJEvidence.
Which I doubt that the pilots would do; they'd probably think "oh they might be attacking us!"And be ignored
See above.And be ignored
Or more.For a few seconds.
Going around it takes time and a good understanding of the terrain. Blowing the thing to smithereens takes time and ammo.It's called GOING AROUND IT. Or simply blowiung the blasted thing to smthereens.
Well, the magnets could be held by something. Or they could use something else, such as a lot of TNT, which wouldn't harm the AT-ATs but would harm the AT-STs and stormtroopers.And you know they're magnetic because...? Not that I see what that's supposed to achieve other than resulting the magnets being attached to the walkers' bellies while they go on their merry way.
Except that said cargo ships could be evacuated to the sea by an order from the government, and the Ocean is a big place. How will the tie fighters find the naval forces?THEY. DO. NOT. NEED. TO. The can simply use existing cargo ships as any opposing naval force can be blown away with impunity by the TIE fighters.
Well apparently the Pentagon thinks otherwise.PeZook wrote:
No it can't. It can shift around Marine batallions in their snazzy landing ships (PS, they have no heavy armor on them), but it took months to build up significant mechanized forces on the Iraqi borders in an area of the world with large, developed port facilities and good roads and giant US bases right on the doorstep.
All these problems will be compounded by the fact you'd need to withdraw all those troops from Iraqistan first
An USA force could get supplies from the South American countries that it passes through.
Where? With whom? What does it even mean?
Maybe I'm wrong then, but surface to ground missiles would still do damage to the invasion force.
No, they can't. An upgrade is forthcoming to give them the ability to carry the Small Diameter Bomb, but the software hasn't been written yet, and the bombs themselves are not in mass production.
Yes it does.
No it doesn't.
Get an ICBM and replace the nuclear payload with a conventional payload. It's not exactly something you can do in someone's backyard, but a modern day world power can certainly do that.
I didn't say it was impossible ; I said it would be time consuming because the conventional warheads haven't even been designed.
Then what's your point? Your agreeing with me that their invasion will fail.
Hence why it's a "little empire". Taking over the world is impossible, so they better forget it right away. Their big advantage is the fact they're 25 000 years ahead of us in science ; What they consider basic information is probably radically advanced mind-bending shit for us. Of course, the nature of industry is such that they won't be able to catapult, say, Chile to an interstellar nation, but they could do a lot still.
In terms of combat on land, sea and air, the technological gap between modern militaries and medieval militaries is greater than the gap between Star Wars militaries and modern militaries. Note that I'm referring to land, sea and air warfare, not space warfare.
Much like half a million modern troops dumped into 1100s Hungary could ; They'd be all using swords and spears within three years, but in a decade the country would've been radically transformed.
The idea that a fictional faction can invade Earth at all is not a very realistic scenario. Hence why its a hypothetical scenario. If you want to make it more realistic, then the USA could nuke the invasion force.
I don't know, it's just not a very realistic scenario, depending on everyone acting like they never, ever did (Vader just mindlessly attempting to take over the planet with a woefully inadequate force, for example).
Actually, I wouldn't be surprised if Brazil joined with other South American nations could stop the invasion force, or maybe significantly weaken it.
Half a million troops is more than any single South American country has right now. If the Imperials take one over, then they get guerillas and an occupation, but the country is also suddendly defended by half a million technologically advanced soldiers. Just do the sensible thing and don't disband the existing security apparatus, hoard blasters for real enemies rather than guerilla fighters, and I can guarantee you the US won't bother with a large scale invasion unless Vader does something terminally stupid. Without the US, the rest of the world can fuck off, since they don't have the force projection capability to do anything.
They sure cared a lot of stopping Saddam.
Are you really saying the US would mobilize its entire labor force for this venture? Why? Why would they possibly care that much about liberating some South American state?
In which they simply withdraw.You would also do well to check how many combat units the US can throw around, rather than just counting heads in the armed forces (hint: it's a wrong number anyway). You will find Iraqistan has practically all of them involved.
I was referring to infantry. Yes, armor units would take longer, but who's going to stop them? It's not like the invading force has a navy.
And no, you can't shift around heavy forces in hours or days. Try months. And you can't move them into South America without securing a large port first. I would not like to see modern light infantry (heliborne, airbone, Marines, whatever) try to take a port city from troops who essentially all tote man-portable rapid-firing grenade launchers and are bulletproof.
You could say the same thing for the invasion force, which does not have the supply system of the USA, and their walkers seem to trip up a lot in places such as rainforests, which are common in South America.
I suppose one could unload these troops in Brazil (or another country next to the one taken over, though Brazil is a little big to occupy with half a million men, so it would probably stay independent), but then you have to march them hundreds of kilometres across rugged terrain...logistical hell for any mechanized force.
Based on what we know, Russia does not have any plans to invade the United States. And Brazil is not a craphole.
They tolerate Russia, which is about as dangerous. South America is close, but not "right next to it". Certainly not the kind of existential threat that would require dropping everything and shipping millions of men around to fight a gruelling jungle war in some craphole nobody cares about.
Yet in the OP I stated that the Earth is united against the invasion force in this scenario.
The only people who'd care would be Brazil, but they're not guaranteed to go to war, either. Not when it would require a total mobilization to have a chance in hell of winning it.
PeZook wrote:No it can't. It can shift around Marine batallions in their snazzy landing ships (PS, they have no heavy armor on them), but it took months to build up significant mechanized forces on the Iraqi borders in an area of the world with large, developed port facilities and good roads and giant US bases right on the doorstep.Star Wars 888 wrote: Actually, the USA can apparently deploy 10,000 troops anywhere in the world within 48 hours, and a million in a a week.
All these problems will be compounded by the fact you'd need to withdraw all those troops from Iraqistan first
Possibly. Tie fighters' durability still hasn't been quantified yet.Thanas wrote:
And even if the US manages to assemble a fleet, the Ties will take any concentrated force out with ease.
Since when are tie bombers in this?Heck, all they have to do is to mass a few TIE Bomber and blast a proton torpedo under the waterline of a transport and it will be out of commission, if not outright destroyed.
There are lots of new weapons and such being developed that could help even the odds. Although much of this isn't scheduled to be completed for quite a while, a war would speed up production.The situation even gets worse when the USA decides to use aircraft instead.
Are you high? None of those are even close to deployment. And seriously, Iron Man suits?Star Wars 888 wrote:
There are lots of new weapons and such being developed that could help even the odds. Although much of this isn't scheduled to be completed for quite a while, a war would speed up production.
Metal Storm - one million rounds a minute, no recoil, no jamming
Exoskeleton suits - yep
Iron man suits - yep
Lasers - yep
Are you guys agreeing with me though? The general consensus seems to be that the invasion force cannot occupy the Earth, and I agree with that.
What's your stance on this topic? Because the invasion force clearly cannot occupy the USA or any other major world power. Production on war stuff generally speeds up during a war. The USA may recall its troops in the Middle East to be better prepared in case of an invasion. That money being spent on the war in Iraq could be spent on other things, including, since they'd want to better defend themselves against a possible invasion, the development of that stuff (yes, they actually are developing suits similar to Iron Man's suit).Aaron wrote: Are you high? None of those are even close to deployment. And seriously, Iron Man suits?
Durability does not really matter if one side can just shoot straight down from orbit with no weapon being able to intercept them.Star Wars 888 wrote:Possibly. Tie fighters' durability still hasn't been quantified yet.Thanas wrote:
And even if the US manages to assemble a fleet, the Ties will take any concentrated force out with ease.
Ah, ok. In that case, just attach missile racks to TIEs, something we know the Empire can do.Since when are tie bombers in this?
Only by virtue of not having enough manpower, which will be changed in ten years or so down the line.Are you guys agreeing with me though? The general consensus seems to be that the invasion force cannot occupy the Earth, and I agree with that.
My stance? That Earth wins but only due to attrition of SW forces and kit. I don't completely buy all the ICS numbers and stuff but it's obvious enough that the TIE's alone will make any attempt to engage the SW forces directly a non-starter and you conveniently removed our only real chance of outright victory (nukes).Star Wars 888 wrote:What's your stance on this topic? Because the invasion force clearly cannot occupy the USA or any other major world power. Production on war stuff generally speeds up during a war. The USA may recall its troops in the Middle East to be better prepared in case of an invasion. That money being spent on the war in Iraq could be spent on other things, including, since they'd want to better defend themselves against a possible invasion, the development of that stuff (yes, they actually are developing suits similar to Iron Man's suit).Aaron wrote: Are you high? None of those are even close to deployment. And seriously, Iron Man suits?
In ANH it was stated that an X wing with a targeting computer would have a very small chance of hitting that 2 meter exhaust port that was the weak point of the Death Star. Note that the X wings were firing from a few hundred feet or a few hundred meters away.Thanas wrote:
Durability does not really matter if one side can just shoot straight down from orbit with no weapon being able to intercept them.
Where will they get those missiles? If they get them by capturing modern day ones, then said modern day ones would not have the destructive capability of Star Wars ones that would be needed to one shot or one volley aircraft carriers. Oh, and who's to say that tie fighters have the hardware and programming to do that? Since when would they have a button to press that activates missiles that they aren't equipped with?
Ah, ok. In that case, just attach missile racks to TIEs, something we know the Empire can do.
That contradictory. If they are indeed a threat, then why would the USA and other countries leave them alone.
Only by virtue of not having enough manpower, which will be changed in ten years or so down the line.
But the Empire does not need to conquer anything - most nations would most likely just join them or give them basing rights. And I bet that a few million Earthers will nearly immediately join up with the Empire when they promise the end of famines, the end of aids, Ebola, free medicine for all etc.
I bet that even first world nations like the USA will voluntarily join or enter an alliance with the Empire, which is enough to give them planetary control.
I bet he read it in Popular Mechanics or something. The US military looks into pretty much everything, batshit or not, remember the psychic research? Yet we don't have guys in combats mind fucking goats now do we?Stark wrote:Ok, he's a moron. He won't source anything because he's a google warrior - his metal storm example proves it. The 'million round' thing was 90s marketing.
And seriously, iron man suits? He's either 12 or a complete fantasist.
Proof?Stark wrote:Ok, he's a moron. He won't source anything because he's a google warrior - his metal storm example proves it. The 'million round' thing was 90s marketing.
Actually, they are working on advanced suits, although maybe that's redundant with my claim of them making exoskeletons.
And seriously, iron man suits? He's either 12 or a complete fantasist.
On that pentagon statement, I already said that I do not have the source. You said that you know about that stuff except for the iron man suits, which are basically the exoskeletons I mentioned.Aaron wrote:Look, you've been asked to provide sources for a number of things in this thread and you haven't bothered to provide even one. Why should we bother with you?
Basically, Earth wins the war due to logistics.
Hell I'm actually interested in discussing the tech side topic with you, military kit being one of the things I can speak with any authority on but I'm not going to waste my time if you can't provide some proof.
Right, well we'll go with the Pentagon claim being wrong (I knew that anyways) but the exoskeletons are no where close to iron man suits, there not even close to the one from Aliens, being basically a strap on pack mule.Star Wars 888 wrote: On that pentagon statement, I already said that I do not have the source. You said that you know about that stuff except for the iron man suits, which are basically the exoskeletons I mentioned.
Err...OK.Basically, Earth wins the war due to logistics.
You make a claim, you back it up. I won't put up with your horseshit much longer.Star Wars 888 wrote:On that pentagon statement, I already said that I do not have the source. You said that you know about that stuff except for the iron man suits, which are basically the exoskeletons I mentioned.
That's pretty funny. I'll make you a deal - you prove ANYTHING and I'll introduce you to how cyclic measures of fire rates are inappropriate to metal storm systems.Proof?
Working on advanced suits = skintight immune to bullets flying hypersonic infinite fuel suits?Actually, they are working on advanced suits, although maybe that's redundant with my claim of them making exoskeletons.
Try giving any actual content besides 'trust me on this'.BTW, you're nitpicking. That part was a semi off topic part of my post.
I have actually backed up all of my important claims, yet you take a minor point that I make and focus on it.Stark wrote:
That's pretty funny. I'll make you a deal - you prove ANYTHING and I'll introduce you to how cyclic measures of fire rates are inappropriate to metal storm systems.
Even Stark had to go through several models to get to the suit level he had in current comics. Early advanced suits may have some of Iron Man's earlier features.
Working on advanced suits = skintight immune to bullets flying hypersonic infinite fuel suits?
And that was also a minor semi off topic part of my post.
Try giving any actual content besides 'trust me on this'.
Stark wrote:How do you know nuking the bunker would even work? You are familiar with the intent of bunkers, right?
That's pretty funny. I'll make you a deal - you prove ANYTHING and I'll introduce you to how cyclic measures of fire rates are inappropriate to metal storm systems.Proof?
Working on advanced suits = skintight immune to bullets flying hypersonic infinite fuel suits?Actually, they are working on advanced suits, although maybe that's redundant with my claim of them making exoskeletons.
Try giving any actual content besides 'trust me on this'.BTW, you're nitpicking. That part was a semi off topic part of my post.
Stark wrote:How do you know nuking the bunker would even work? You are familiar with the intent of bunkers, right?
That's pretty funny. I'll make you a deal - you prove ANYTHING and I'll introduce you to how cyclic measures of fire rates are inappropriate to metal storm systems.Proof?
Working on advanced suits = skintight immune to bullets flying hypersonic infinite fuel suits?Actually, they are working on advanced suits, although maybe that's redundant with my claim of them making exoskeletons.
Try giving any actual content besides 'trust me on this'.BTW, you're nitpicking. That part was a semi off topic part of my post.
So you're not going to back up this metal storm silliness and you think you've supported your claims? OK.Star Wars 888 wrote:I have actually backed up all of my important claims, yet you take a minor point that I make and focus on it.
You're a fucking lunatic if you think 'load carrying exoskeleton' has anything to do with childish fantasy like infinite-power godsuits. Why do you think jetpacks just don't work?Even Stark had to go through several models to get to the suit level he had in current comics. Early advanced suits may have some of Iron Man's earlier features.
But again that was a semi off topic part of my post. You're nitpicking.
So when we trust you on your unsourced claims, is this always a minor off topic part of your post?And that was also a minor semi off topic part of my post.
