What if the Empire invaded modern day Earth?

[Samuel]

Agreed though, it would be an interesting gameplay mechanic if applying thrust with engines is actually required to cool down a craft. However, moving and shooting are usually both considered "good" things that a player would want to do, so having to accelerate or maneuver is not really a penalty.. usually at the most, a game would make using any of your offensive, defensive and maneuvering systems subtract from the same pool of resources, to make you need to manage that pool.
Of course, a game could be designed so that it's not always desirable to be thrusting.

That isn't too hard. In Gratutius Space Battles they have something similar. There is an optinium range for weapons and firing closer or further reduces the damage they do. Your ships can continue pounding their origional targets, or switch to a new one that just moved into range. It is a trade-off between choosing to deal as much damage as possible and killing owunded targets.

[Sinanju]

a) The Empire doesn't have effective anti-fighter missiles. Despite their turbolasers being very poor fighter killers, and fighters costing them huge amounts of tonnage, they still don't use them. Thus, it is logical to conclude that they don't have them.

They don't? Hm, that's interesting...

We did see them (well, technically the separatists) launch a handful of missiles in the opening of RotS, which were utterly ineffective. They failed to demonstrate impressive firepower (not surprising, because Star Wars is incapable of it), and failed to demonstrate impressive acceleration (not surprising again, because Star Wars is incapable of it) - they just about kept up with the fighters, who were doing single digit g, at best (watch R4's head fall off the back - he isn't thrusting, the ship is. Rate of fall = ship's rate of acceleration. Confirm by checking against the ships). If either fighter or missile could go faster and decisively defeat the other, they would have. But they didn't.

Wow, could you have made that any more vague? They don't demonstrate 'impressive' firepower? What the fuck is that even supposed to mean?

People say TIEs are immune to our firepower, but they are regularly killed by weapons packing a similar punch to what we have.

Because you say so. Or are you still on about that 'ICS doesn't matter because I don't like it SO THERE' thing?

People say SW fighters can out accelerate missiles, but they never do that in the movies, even when directly fighting missiles!

Because you assume that Star Wars missiles are equivalent to modern missiles. Do you really think modern missiles could make the 90-degree turn into the Death Star's exhaust port?

All they had to do was lead their targets. The gunners were there, they were trying to kill the Rebels, but they failed because they kept shooting behind the enemy.

There's NO excuse.

I didn't think this needed to be said because it was blindingly fucking obvious, but if your turrets aren't dedicated anti-aircraft models they're probably not going to traverse fast enough to accurately track starfighters.

[Lord Insanity]

People are saying real world missiles would be useless against TIEs. They claim shooting down a missile is at least as easy as shooting down fighters.... but Star Wars can't reliably shoot down their own fighters, so yeah. People say TIEs are immune to our firepower, but they are regularly killed by weapons packing a similar punch to what we have. People say SW fighters can out accelerate missiles, but they never do that in the movies, even when directly fighting missiles!

Wait are you seriously suggesting that because SW fighters can't out accelerate SW missiles they can't out accelerate modern missiles? We know that SW fighters have straight line acceleration greater than the space shuttle. Even if modern missiles can accelerate that fast they can not do so over long enough distance to matter. Earth also can not blanket the area in SW level ECM and/or jamming like we see in the movies. TIEs (and SW fighters in general) will not be hindered by EW like they are canonically.

- ANH: Nope. If you're talking about the Death Star it's been repeatedly mentioned that its anti-fighter defenses were quite pathetic because nobody believed that anybody would have the balls to send starfighters against an artificial moon...and most importantly nobody thought they were going to be able to do anything even if they could. So why bother?

All they had to do was lead their targets. The gunners were there, they were trying to kill the Rebels, but they failed because they kept shooting behind the enemy.

Yeah because it makes sense for the modern equivalent of a battleship main gun to reliably hit fighters like an actual AA gun would. The fact that they hit fighters at all let alone in a heavy jamming environment is impressive.

[Sinanju]

Why aren't these ever used in the movies?

I know you read my post where I mentioned that air-to-ground actions were pretty thin on the ground in the OT films. Would you like me to repost it for you anyway?

"Impressive" firepower is anything remotely close to what wanker Warsies claim. The missile explosions we see in ROTS is on the order of megajoules, not even remotely close to a kiloton of TNT. Notice how they fail to vaporize even their own shell; there's debris from the blast easily visible.

And because we see one instance of low-explosive missiles that means every missile in the galaxy is built the same way, right? Also, I'm seeing a repeated trend of you throwing out vague criticisms or half-assed calculations and not bothering to back them up. How did you arrive at 'megajoules' anyway?

Who cares? In RotS, they couldn't shake a 1-3g missile, except by confusing their retarded guidance systems. That's the most advanced missile ever seen used against starfighters. If one of those proton torpedoes were used against a starfighter, they'd win.

And how did you get a figure of 1 to 3 gs? Again you're throwing out numbers like they mean something when they could just as easily have been pulled straight out of your ass.

That's why you lead the fucking target! Is this really such an advanced concept that nobody can understand it?

Because if the fighter is moving fast enough and the turret is slow enough, by the time you've already swivelled to a point ahead of it (as determined when you sent the command to traverse), it's already gone?

There's one more important thing you're missing: the SW missiles have acceleration less than modern missiles. They couldn't shake SW missiles, and SW missiles are inferior to real missiles. Therefore, by the transitive property, they can't shake real missiles either.

Wow, that was a really pretentious way of saying 'ass-pull' wasn't it? Do you want me to point out the proton torpedoes making a 90-degree turn into the Death Star's exhaust port again? Oh look, I just did.

No, we can do a better job.

Because...? Fuck, this is tedious.

Uhhh, yeah it does. Anti-aircraft guns weren't some magic weapon completely unlike any other gun. Their lower rate of fire means aircraft numbers could defeat them however, which is why there are smaller and faster guns to help out. But, it is completely reasonable to expect a main gun to take down aircraft, especially ones moving in a straight line!

Apparently it needs to be spelled out for you in really tiny words. Anti-ship guns shoot ships. Ships turn slow. Anti-ship guns turn slow. Anti-fighter guns shoot fighters. Fighters turn quick. Anti-fighter guns turn quick.

[Lord Insanity]

Wait are you seriously suggesting that because SW fighters can't out accelerate SW missiles they can't out accelerate modern missiles?

There's one more important thing you're missing: the SW missiles have acceleration less than modern missiles. They couldn't shake SW missiles, and SW missiles are inferior to real missiles. Therefore, by the transitive property, they can't shake real missiles either.

The relative acceleration is less than modern missiles. That does not mean the actual acceleration is.

Earth also can not blanket the area in SW level ECM and/or jamming like we see in the movies. TIEs (and SW fighters in general) will not be hindered by EW like they are canonically.

No, we can do a better job.

Since when can we force modern level equipment let alone SW level equipment to fight in jamming conditions that is like fighting in mud, which is what we see in the movies.

Yeah because it makes sense for the modern equivalent of a battleship main gun to reliably hit fighters like an actual AA gun would.

Uhhh, yeah it does. Anti-aircraft guns weren't some magic weapon completely unlike any other gun. Their lower rate of fire means aircraft numbers could defeat them however, which is why there are smaller and faster guns to help out. But, it is completely reasonable to expect a main gun to take down aircraft, especially ones moving in a straight line!

The fact that they hit fighters at all let alone in a heavy jamming environment is impressive.

Your standards are really low.

Main battleship guns are not designed to track a small, fast, agile target. AA guns are. Never mind the fact that we see Darth Vader's targeting computer requires adjustments because of jamming and he is using a weapon that was actually designed to hit fighters.

[Sinanju]

I watched the movie. Look at the explosion when the two missiles hit each other after Anakin defeats their hyperintelligent Star Wars AI through the inventive tactic of rolling in place.

Oh, you're talking about that scene. Uhm, I hate to break it to you, but those missiles you're talking about? You know what the warhead on them is? It's droids. Of course it scattered pieces everywhere. That was its entire purpose!

Now, we have an absolute number. The next thing to do is compare the background movement; the fighters to the capships during this scene, to the fighters vs background capships in the missile scene. They are unchanged. Hence, the acceleration is in the same ballpark too.

I rewatched the scene just now and I'm going to call bullshit on you getting any sort of relative speed from those scenes. If you're referring to the missiles chasing Obi-Wan, we see Obi-Wan approach a Trade Federation ship and blow past it in two seconds. Then when he sees the buzz droid swarm he takes three seconds to not even clear the length of a Venator. Could he possibly have de-accelerated to avoid blasting through a cloud of what looked like debris? Naaaah, that would make too much sense!

Welcome to the world of Star Wars numbers!

So, basically, you're admitting you're a bullshitter. Can I say 'concession accepted' now or is that considered out of fashion these days?

They have plenty of time to see it coming. I guess their communication, command and control is pure shit too. (And before you furiously scream JAMMING, this is internal to the Death Star - tower A picks up the phone and tells tower B that an X-Wing is coming his way. That wouldn't be jammed.)

And then when you see the X-Wing moving on a very clear path he pulls an Immelman. Now what? If you were an anti-aircraft weapon you would be swivelling fast enough to keep up. Are you really this dense? Starfighters don't have to follow easily-predicted courses so if they swerve and you can't keep up you're screwed.

Yeah, if proton torpedoes were in general use, fighters would be completely worthless, since they are apparently fast and nimble enough to accomplish anything. Their only downside is tied to the unadulterated shit that is Star Wars targetting, and that they are apparently quite rare.

So when canon contradicts you, b'awwww and say how stupid it is. Nice.

Anti-ship guns can also shoot aircraft in the real world.

Some can, some can't. The idea that this is a requirement of an anti-ship gun is apparently something you just made up out of whole cloth.

(Unless the radio communication wasn't actually radio.)

Could it be? Why yes! It is! Or isn't, as the case may be.

(Or, if you're in the Imperial military, eyeballs and math dropouts track... wait, I take that back, sports players are sometimes math dropouts and they are able to do a better job than those Imperial fuckwits.)

Just because it bears repeating: there's a difference between a manned fighter and a ballistic missile. One follows a mathematically-predictable course, the other...does not. Christ, I can't believe I even have to tell you this. Again.

[PeZook]

Are people forgetting the missile Slave-1 fired in AoTC?

[Sinanju]

Ah, right, I just realized I kinda got turned around so let me fix that last post.

Just because it bears repeating: there's a difference between a manned fighter and a ballistic missile. One follows a mathematically-predictable course, the other...does not. Christ, I can't believe I even have to tell you this. Again.

That should be:

Just because it bears repeating: Star Wars fighters are much more agile than their capital ships. A capital ship requires quite a bit of time to perform an evasive maneuver while we see fighters do all kinds of stunt flying. Which do you think would be easier to target?

Are people forgetting the missile Slave-1 fired in AoTC?

Well, I almost did. Thanks for reminding me!

So, we have an incident with a rather dumb missile (RoTS), a very agile and persistent missile (AoTC), and another very agile missile (ANH). Could it be that Star Wars missiles might come in varying degrees of complexity? Naaaah.

[Junghalli]

I could have sworn that was in there. Huh. It definitely should be a board rule.

I think it's pretty forgivable for people to just lightly skim 20+ pages of people shouting at each other other. That's the equivalent of an appreciable fraction of a full length novel (maybe not that bad since the text here is probably less dense, but still...).

[Stofsk]

The AOTC missile's explosion is impressive, as are its agility and persistence, but it got within a couple metres of Obi-wan's fighter and didn't detonate. So... no proximity fuse? And what about when Obi-wan got R4 to jettison the spare parts canister, as a kind of make-shift countermeasure? If he had dedicated countermeasures it would have made sense, like a flare or something, but basically improvising a solution on the fly out of spare parts and supplies? Whatever the missile was using to track his fighter was obviously not up to the task of discerning between it and some jetsam.

Oh, you're talking about that scene. Uhm, I hate to break it to you, but those missiles you're talking about? You know what the warhead on them is? It's droids. Of course it scattered pieces everywhere. That was its entire purpose!

Well that's a pretty stupid missile then.

[PeZook]

The AOTC missile's explosion is impressive, as are its agility and persistence, but it got within a couple metres of Obi-wan's fighter and didn't detonate. So... no proximity fuse?

Proximity fuses only make sense if you can get a kill with a proximity detonation. Since SW starfighters zoom around space at tremendous speed, and thus can obviously shrug off micrometeorites and other trash, I doubt you could kill one with shrapnel.

And what about when Obi-wan got R4 to jettison the spare parts canister, as a kind of make-shift countermeasure? If he had dedicated countermeasures it would have made sense, like a flare or something, but basically improvising a solution on the fly out of spare parts and supplies? Whatever the missile was using to track his fighter was obviously not up to the task of discerning between it and some jetsam.

I don't remember ; Did it actually veer off course after that stuff?

Well that's a pretty stupid missile then.

Unless it's and adapted or reused law enforcement weapon for stopping smugglers without killing them. The Separatists are a weird amalgam of hi-tech military equipment and adapted civilian gear, after all - for a while their most powerful ship was a freighter with some guns bolted on.

[Bounty]

Unless it's and adapted or reused law enforcement weapon for stopping smugglers without killing them. The Separatists are a weird amalgam of hi-tech military equipment and adapted civilian gear, after all - for a while their most powerful ship was a freighter with some guns bolted on.

ROTS takes places years after that. I find it very hard to believe they'd be stuck bolting police equipment onto some droids when they've been at war for years and evidently have little trouble building and fuelling waves of droid fighters.

Not that those things would make more sense as police equipment anyway.

[Darth Ruinus]

That says the Alliance has a limited number of missiles, it doesn't say that the Galactic Empire/Republic, Confederacy of Independant Systems has limited numbers of them.

[Sinanju]

Huh, conceeded on their firepower. That doesn't change the pitiful maneuvering performance or retarded guidance system though, and I would note megajoules is also a fair order of magnitude estimate for Luke's Death Star strafing.

Since you basically admitted you're a dishonest little shit I don't know why I'm bothering, but: where did you get that number from? Considering it was creating flashes of light and vapor large enough for an X-Wing to be engulfed by. I like how you found one of the most distant shots you could, with nothing to provide a sense of scale beyond your own gut, when you brought this up the first time. If he's firing at an uneven surface, could it be that some of his shots are glancing off the towers and canyons? Naah.

Perhaps he slowed down to see what the debris cloud was, then hit the gas again once they landed on him, hoping the sudden change of speed would shake them off. Naaaah, that would make too much sense, and it is consistent with all observations! This is a Star Wars debate, we can't have either of those.

And perhaps he didn't. He clearly wasn't in full control of his fighter at that point and we have no indication he was going to maximum thrust (since he was clearly going slower), so using this as an example of a high-end calc is highly dishonest. Then again, you've admitted as much, so who cares what you say?

You call the next guy in line and send him corrected numbers while you focus on the next x-wing.

And then he keeps maneuvering, because he still doesn't have to follow the same straight course.

Starfighters don't have to follow easily-predicted courses so if they swerve and you can't keep up you're screwed.

btw, the Starfighters did follow an easily predictable course, and consistently do throughout the Star Wars movies.
[/quote]

...at this point I'm going to have to assume you're watching different movies from everyone else. Do they make a special Trekkie Butthurt Edition? These are the same movies where fighters are dodging and juking constantly. Or were you so fixated on the missiles in the dogfight in RotS that you weren't watching them swerve around capital ships?

It gets better in the trench run, where they act like they have to; there's apparently no other way to get to their target (that, or Star Wars militaries are just fucking retarded and didn't consider the fact that space is 3d - they could have come on the port directly. But let's be generous and assume they didn't do that since that would open them to to dozens of guns at the same time.)

I pulled everything from canon. We never see proton torpedos outside that one part, and there's other illustrated publications that say, and I quote "Proton torpedoes are very expensive and available to Alliance forces only in limited numbers." Man, a side book that's consistent with the movies, that rarely happens too.

I was talking about the turns, dingus. I point out that proton torpedoes clearly do something beyond the capabilities of modern missiles and you b'awww about how stupid and nonsensical it is.

Cool.

Yeah, isn't it? It's like your arguments are complete bullshit and it takes a minimum of effort to point that out.

[Stofsk]

The AOTC missile's explosion is impressive, as are its agility and persistence, but it got within a couple metres of Obi-wan's fighter and didn't detonate. So... no proximity fuse?

Proximity fuses only make sense if you can get a kill with a proximity detonation. Since SW starfighters zoom around space at tremendous speed, and thus can obviously shrug off micrometeorites and other trash, I doubt you could kill one with shrapnel.

1. Jango's missile gets within metres of Obi-wan's fighter.
2. Jango's missile later detonated against jetsam from Obi-wan's fighter, and went up in a large radius explosion (how large I don't know, but put it this way, it would have got Obi-wan's fighter if it had detonated metres away)
3. Obi-wan's fighter has no shields.

So uh yeah.

And what about when Obi-wan got R4 to jettison the spare parts canister, as a kind of make-shift countermeasure? If he had dedicated countermeasures it would have made sense, like a flare or something, but basically improvising a solution on the fly out of spare parts and supplies? Whatever the missile was using to track his fighter was obviously not up to the task of discerning between it and some jetsam.

I don't remember ; Did it actually veer off course after that stuff?

Look - don't make me rewatch AOTC, even for a second.

As I remember, it gave Obi-wan time to tell R4 to jettison the spare parts canister. The whole point though is that it was an improvised solution, and the missile was fooled as a result. It's not like he was carrying dedicated countermeasures like flares or chaff, or some kind of point-defence missile or counter-missile missile, which would have been cool. As it stands Jango's weapon was outfoxed by a floating tool kit.

Well that's a pretty stupid missile then.

Unless it's and adapted or reused law enforcement weapon for stopping smugglers without killing them. The Separatists are a weird amalgam of hi-tech military equipment and adapted civilian gear, after all - for a while their most powerful ship was a freighter with some guns bolted on.

It's still a pretty stupid missile. If it detonated like a nuke or high explosive I wouldn't have a problem. If it released submunitions that were actually effective I wouldn't have a problem. But your idea that it's somehow not a military-grade weapon isn't cogent when you consider that this is a war they're fighting, and have been doing so for years (and have been preparing for such for years as well).

That says the Alliance has a limited number of missiles, it doesn't say that the Galactic Empire/Republic, Confederacy of Independant Systems has limited numbers of them.

Well to parrot adr, if they have them, why don't we ever see them? Firing proton torpedoes at say, the Rebels in the trench, or in DS2's innards, would have been really helpful to the Empire. Yet neither the TIE Fighter or TIE Interceptor has them (I believe that's supported by the EU as well). Vader's TIE I think has them, and so would TIE Bombers, but Vader obviously either didn't have them or eschewed them for personal satisfaction in gunning down each fighter. And we don't see TIE Bombers involved in starfighter sorties.

[Surlethe]

1. Jango's missile gets within metres of Obi-wan's fighter.
2. Jango's missile later detonated against jetsam from Obi-wan's fighter, and went up in a large radius explosion (how large I don't know, but put it this way, it would have got Obi-wan's fighter if it had detonated metres away)
3. Obi-wan's fighter has no shields.

Honestly, this calls for some scaling and fireball modeling. First, think of the explosion as a point burst of hard gammas or something like that; just how much flux would have passed through Obi-Wan's fighter if the missile had detonated within so many meters of it? Second, figure out what would have happened if Obi-Wan's fighter had been enveloped in the fireball (how much energy would it have absorbed?). Third, get some reasonable numbers for the durability of Obi-Wan's fighter (e.g., heat shedding from atmospheric reentry). Compare to see if your argument holds water.

[PeZook]

1. Jango's missile gets within metres of Obi-wan's fighter.

As Surlethe said, it means nothing if it couldn't destroy the fighter if it exploded within metres. Modern missiles have fragmentation warheads because fragments fuck up modern aircraft ; If we somehow could armor aircraft like we can tanks, proximity fuses and frag warheads would quickly be gone from all missiles.

2. Jango's missile later detonated against jetsam from Obi-wan's fighter, and went up in a large radius explosion (how large I don't know, but put it this way, it would have got Obi-wan's fighter if it had detonated metres away)

It would've engulfed the fighter, but it still has to transfer enough energy to destroy it.

3. Obi-wan's fighter has no shields.

It's obviously got re-entry capability, so it's hardly flimsy, even without shields.

EDIT: Also, it obviously has some sort of shield or other countermeasure. Slave One's shots explode all around it...here's a good quality scene.

So uh yeah.

As I remember, it gave Obi-wan time to tell R4 to jettison the spare parts canister. The whole point though is that it was an improvised solution, and the missile was fooled as a result. It's not like he was carrying dedicated countermeasures like flares or chaff, or some kind of point-defence missile or counter-missile missile, which would have been cool. As it stands Jango's weapon was outfoxed by a floating tool kit.

It didn't seem to veer off course. We don't clearly see if it hit the debris, or was just trying to avoid it, like it did with the asteroids throughout the chase: reacquiring the target every time!

It's still a pretty stupid missile. If it detonated like a nuke or high explosive I wouldn't have a problem. If it released submunitions that were actually effective I wouldn't have a problem. But your idea that it's somehow not a military-grade weapon isn't cogent when you consider that this is a war they're fighting, and have been doing so for years (and have been preparing for such for years as well).

Stranger things have happened in war ; Could you believe the US issued M16s in Vietnam without any cleaning kits? For all we know, they had trillions of the things in storage and were running low on ammunition, so they armed the fighters with whatever was left in the munitions bay. Hell, it wasn't even that widespread: we never see it used again, so Obi-Wan could've just been unlucky to have it fired at him.

Well to parrot adr, if they have them, why don't we ever see them? Firing proton torpedoes at say, the Rebels in the trench, or in DS2's innards, would have been really helpful to the Empire. Yet neither the TIE Fighter or TIE Interceptor has them (I believe that's supported by the EU as well). Vader's TIE I think has them, and so would TIE Bombers, but Vader obviously either didn't have them or eschewed them for personal satisfaction in gunning down each fighter. And we don't see TIE Bombers involved in starfighter sorties.

They'd need to have launchers in the trench, and on fighters that happened to chase the falcon down the innards (after a long battle). Seeing as the fact they did not anticipate a fighter attack is, well...a major point of the first movie, I can't blame them for not *poof* appearing there. The Rebels have them, the EU gives some more examples, a bounty hunter got them, too in the movies...they seem pretty popular.

[Serafina]

Actually, regarding starfighter shields:

We have several examples of starfighters who are stated to have no shields, but obviously have some. The best examples are the TIEs and Obi-Wans starfighters here.
A simple way to solve this is that they do not carry dedicated combat shields, but some sort of navigational shield. Hence, they are not listed as being equipped with shields because those nav-shields are standard equipmemt, like, say, sparkplug.
They appear to be unable to absorb incoming fire, but they might still dampen such shots.

[Stofsk]

1. Jango's missile gets within metres of Obi-wan's fighter.

As Surlethe said, it means nothing if it couldn't destroy the fighter if it exploded within metres.

That all depends on how powerful the missile is. But with respect to you and Surlethe, I don't really know how to determine that. Would it help if I posted some screenshots?


That's the missile detonating

That's two seconds later.

That's from a distance. The seismic charges give a much more impressive bang than this; it looks pretty wimpy to me. So perhaps it really does need a contact hit to be effective rather than a proximity one.

As for the proximity, well I took screenshots as well, if only to determine how close it got.


My guess is that it was within 5-8 metres, based on the length of the fighter being 8 m according to the ICS, and how the fighter appears to be within that length. I suppose somebody could be more accurate, however it makes me wonder how the missile didn't get any closer to Obi-wan to make a contact detonation. I mean it accelerates quickly enough to get that close, but then it can't get any closer?

3. Obi-wan's fighter has no shields.

It's obviously got re-entry capability, so it's hardly flimsy, even without shields.

Actually, it is shielded. I got confused with the Eta-2 Actis from ROTS, which isn't shielded. So I concede that part.

As I remember, it gave Obi-wan time to tell R4 to jettison the spare parts canister. The whole point though is that it was an improvised solution, and the missile was fooled as a result. It's not like he was carrying dedicated countermeasures like flares or chaff, or some kind of point-defence missile or counter-missile missile, which would have been cool. As it stands Jango's weapon was outfoxed by a floating tool kit.

It didn't seem to veer off course. We don't clearly see if it hit the debris, or was just trying to avoid it, like it did with the asteroids throughout the chase: reacquiring the target every time!

In the first screenshot we see it approach the improvised chaff. The next screenshot, we see it fly sharply below the field to avoid it, and plow straight into the asteroid.

Stranger things have happened in war ; Could you believe the US issued M16s in Vietnam without any cleaning kits? For all we know, they had trillions of the things in storage and were running low on ammunition, so they armed the fighters with whatever was left in the munitions bay. Hell, it wasn't even that widespread: we never see it used again, so Obi-Wan could've just been unlucky to have it fired at him.

What's the point of a weapon system like that? It's not at all lethal.

Of course the other problem is they were outsmarted by Anakin rolling his fighter. I mean come on dude; they're a dumb weapon all-around.

Well to parrot adr, if they have them, why don't we ever see them? Firing proton torpedoes at say, the Rebels in the trench, or in DS2's innards, would have been really helpful to the Empire. Yet neither the TIE Fighter or TIE Interceptor has them (I believe that's supported by the EU as well). Vader's TIE I think has them, and so would TIE Bombers, but Vader obviously either didn't have them or eschewed them for personal satisfaction in gunning down each fighter. And we don't see TIE Bombers involved in starfighter sorties.

They'd need to have launchers in the trench,

They already have turbolasers in the trench, why not missile launchers? Missiles can be used against capships just like turbolasers are, so they're not solely anti-fighter defences but simply weapon systems you'd think the Empire would equip their most important battle station with.

and on fighters that happened to chase the falcon down the innards (after a long battle).

Fighters which are space superiority in role, just like the X-wing is. So if the X-wing has them, why don't TIE Fighters? Or TIE Interceptors?

Seeing as the fact they did not anticipate a fighter attack is, well...a major point of the first movie, I can't blame them for not *poof* appearing there.

It's not about anticipating a fighter attack at all. It's basically outfitting your space superiority fighters with space superiority weaponry.

The Rebels have them, the EU gives some more examples, a bounty hunter got them, too in the movies...they seem pretty popular.

The point I am making is that the Rebels have them but in small quantities because of their price, something which shouldn't affect the Imperials but they don't have them, especially in situations where they'd be useful to have.

[PeZook]

And I'll say it again; I did not claim that the USA or any other country could invade the imperial invasion force with ease. Of course it would be a large war mobilization comparable to WW2.

Uh...yeah, and my entire point is that you can't do it because there's a hard limit on the amount of forces you can supply there. You'd need a massive investment into local infrastructure, which would most assuredly take years.

See above.

A war mobilization doesn't make infrastructure appear.

"in combat" - They won't be in much combat other than perhaps tie fighters. I'll admit that tie fighters would be a big problem, although how big of a problem they would be still hasn't been quantified. How fast are they in atmosphere and how durable they are is still debatable.

Hence why I made calculations for out-of-combat march, but you would eventually have to supply them in combat, since you want to kill Stormtroopers at the end.

Oh, by the way...since killing Stormies requires heavy weapons, the logistical demands would rise (you want as many .50 cal MGs and autocannons as possible, and their ammo weighs more)

Their operational range would be small though; with that plan they'd only have the capabilities of invading Brazil and nearby South American countries. They can't really threaten an invasion of the USA.

Yes, hence why they should limit their short-term objectives.

Who's to say that those weren't clone troopers specialized for fighting in jungles?

Perhaps ; They still has camouflaged armor without any extra preparation, so this wonderful and exotic technology called "paint" is obviously available to SW.

Perhaps, depending on how large their empire would be.

They get a huge bonus because their ammo and equipment is not larger than ours ; An E-11 magazine is the size and shape of a Sterling SMG mag (heh ), yet the weapon is like a light automatic grenade launcher: so a truck which would normally only supply, say, 100 bullets is now equivalent to 100 grenades.

While the US would have to ship loads of 25mm rounds and .50 cal bullets PLUS ammo for rifles, 40mm grenades, etc., they are at a disadvantage even in good logistical conditions.

Since when can they attack from orbit? Others have proposed that, but those who did failed to prove that tie fighters have that large of an effective range capable of hitting moving targets.

Uh...they can go to orbit, and they can descend from orbit at a place of their choosing, hence they can attack a convoy from orbit at an angle where only the SM-3 could engage.

Analogies are generally roughly proportional to the thing they're describing.

You know what? Whatever, it's pointless to argue the point, so I concede.

Except that more than one replica of those ships exist, and said replicas were not made with the backing of trillions of dollars.

No, actually, only one such wooden ship of the line exists currently (HMS Victory) and she couldn't take part in combat. There are many smaller wooden ships, yes, but I was specifically talking about large ships of the line, which no shipyard in the world is equipped to build to XIXth century specifications.

They won't need to design non nuclear ICBMS; the USA and other countries already have them!

*sigh*

The missile is meaningless ; You need to design the re-entry vehicle, which the US only has for the Trident II. The Minuteman force would require a different RV because they have different...everything, from warhead mountings to flight characteristics. Possibly, you will also need a new RV bus. The software, at least.

They don't need to develop a prototype for non nuclear ICBMS; the USA and other countries already have them!

Only on Trident-IIs, and it took a decade to deploy them. Rearming Minuteman-IIIs could possibly take just as much time, same for Russian, Chinese and Indian missiles, even discounting the political difficulties (Hey you Chinese guys, we want you to neuter your entire deterrent! Yeah, we're totally gonna do it, too!)

Whether or not it took a decade to develop them, they already did, and wouldn't need to develop them during this scenario.

Please, try to read with comprehension. You'd need to develop a new RV for every missile type.

*sigh* Strawman.

How? I try to explain my points.

Except that you admitted that said missiles would work once the imperials were established and thus often times stationary and more vulnerable to missiles. By established the imperials would have successfully invaded a South American country, and hence it would be a counter invasion for the USA or other countries to invade the invasion force.

Yes, but they could still only attack known targets with a fixed location, and could be shot down rather easily (cruise missiles aren't very fast), fooled with ECM (they're radar-guided), etc.

They're hardly an instant win.

I didn't claim that you claimed that stormtroopers could survive direct hits by artillery shells. I was making that claim, showing that stormtroopers would be vulnerable to artillery.

And I said the exact same thing...except their armor would make them massively less so, because you'd need to kill them with overpressure, rather than shrapnel.

They had to get specialized equipment. Being in the middle of Coruscant and being funded by a Galactic government, it wouldn't be that hard for them to do that. However, in this case the imperial invasion force does not have the ability to simply call on any items that they don't have with them and want to get, because they're on Earth, not a Star Wars planet.

Dude, it's either an army, and hence has the basic support equipment we can expect from an army, or it's a mob that doesn't have anything you didn't explicitly specify in the OP, and so appear naked and disarmed.

Yet according to Wookieepedia they were reserved for shock troopers.

Who...are part of the Stormtrooper Corps, and so would be part of a proper army (probably as dedicated heavy weapon units on some level, like, say a heavy weapons platoon in a company.

To be honest, I'm not sure that the imperials would treat us seriously. Many of them didn't view the Rebels seriously, even though the Rebel Alliance was organized, had Star Wars technology and was probably larger than the USA.

"Probably" larger than the USA

They treated them more seriously than they did the Ewoks, which is enough.

Nor does China pose any significant threat to the USA at this time either, or at any time in the near future.

They are perceived as possible future adverasy, though, yet are not being RAR ANNIHILATED AT ALL COSTS before they can become one.

Upon further examination, I'll concede that the USA probably won't nuke the invasion force at the get go; a) the OP in this thread rules that out and b) there would be civilians in the area.

And out of it, too: fallout is a real bitch.

Perhaps, but they would still slow the imperials down.

Not really enough to mobilize significant resistance.

Sovereignty, especially in such a large scale, would be a very big deal to us.

Again, a big deal doesn't automatically translate to RAR RESISTANCE AT ALL COSTS: some people might want to prepare for a war. They have plenty of time.

Actually, I'm not sure about 100 tie fighters making a successful air raid on the USA. They'd be targeted at by every AA weapon within range. Again, this would depend largely on their still unquantified speed and durability.

That would be great if the US had any sort of significant anti-air defence network outside Washington.

Actually, possibly; sovereignty would be very important.

Lives and money too, especially with time to spare.

Actually, the USA could hardly have defeated the USSR. The two were comparable on military terms, and MAD would make a full scale invasion almost impossible.

There were point in history where the US could've easily done this while only sacrificing European cities. Why didn't it?

What nations are a threat to the USA?

Russia - the Cold War's over. Although tensions aren't completely gone, Russia is democratic, which sort of negates the main thing that caused the tensions between the USA and the USSR.

Uh, no. Russia is still pursuing its own interests and ambitions in Europe.

China - China is too dependent economically on the USA (and vice versa) to invade us, although there's a possibility that they may surpass us someday, but that doesn't necessarily make them a threat to us.

China is actually the closest analogy to the Imperials, except for their tech. You seem to think a country needs to have the ability to invade the US (Which the Imperials don't, anyway) to be a threat, which isn't the case.

"large amounts" is often a vague term. How much ammo per person? Hundreds? Thousands?

Well, in Vietnam ammo expenditure per casualty was on the order of 100 000 rounds. It's hard to estimate it with heavy weapons (which can pierce stronger cover, etc.) but even with an order of magnitude less, that's 10 000 rounds per dead stormie or 5 billion rounds for heavy weapons (well, less, since you probably don't need to kill every single stormie to beat them. Let's assume 20% casualties will be enough to cause a rout).

So, 1 billion .50 cal rounds at the minimum. That's 10 million 100 round boxes, each weighing 16 kilograms, 160 000 tonnes of heavy ammo alone (32 000 5 tonne truckloads)

...or enough ammo to weigh down 80 000 soldiers if you want to carry it without any vehicles

Except that the technological difference between an AT-ST and Ewoks is technically greater than the difference between a humvee and cavemen.

Yes, and? A vehicle needs to meet its design specifications, not some arbitrary technological standard.

Actually, IDK about that and how good at scouting tie fighters are.

They just need a pair of binoculars and a list of places to visit to see if a gigantic fleet is unloading there.

Couldn't they simply bring AA with each company?

Have fun providing enough heavy AA for that.

Since you seem to know more about logistics than me, how large would a port have to be to do that?

I don't know, since I don't have precise supply requirements ; It would need at least a concrete pier, a crane and a rail siding (to avoid the problem of supplies stacking on the quay)

Actually, it would hinder them from doing that.

I'm starting to think you have no idea what an LCAC actually is...

They were willing to "cripple their economy" (although it didn't cripple their economy)for WW2.

To fight the Nazis, yeah. Not to liberate a South American country from a threat of an as-of-yet unknown capabilities.

Sure; they put up a fight, but were almost always on the retreat by that time.

Doesn't matter ; Without that pressure, the war would never have been won.

If one stormtrooper goes missing, since when would they assume that it would because of an attack? The stormtrooper could simply have gotten lost or something.

Obviously a stormtrooper would be just wandering around all by himself, right?

Which is surely why Rome decided to wage war with Carthage.

The difference was that Rome felt that it could win, and was willing to tolerate heavy casualties.

To leave them alone would in this case be very foolish to do.

Maybe not leave them alone, but it would make more sense to bide your time until you can equalize your technology somewhat and wait for them to go through their supplies.

Star Wars technology is thousands of years ahead of us. Some of it may be infinitely ahead of us. The technology they have in this scenario is probably closer than that though; probably hundreds of years ahead of us or maybe even less. However, it would still take a while for technology that advanced to transfer to us.

The US would have an easier time of implementing the tech they can get because of their large industrial base.

Didn't the USA stop supporting a lot of the dictators after a while?

When it stopped suiting their interests ; They happily deal with the Saudi Royal Family still because of all the oil these medieval jackasses have.

Sorry; what was this part of the post about again?

That after generations, the Imperials couldn't help but lose ideological purity.

I'm not sure if conscripts would be good enough to put down a guerrilla movement within any short amount of time, especially a guerrilla movement supported by external forces.

Probably not, but you don't need to completely defeat guerillas ; Just make them a nuisance, rather than a threat.

Wasn't that part of the post about locating satellites?

No, about figuring out where an allied fleet would be unloading.

AT-ST stands for all terrain scout transport, right?

Yes, with two seats it can transport two people

It's obviously primarily a scout.

Are you saying that the stormtroopers couldn't simply locate a 'civilian' coming too close to them with their sensors and even simply their eyes? It makes the idea that stormtroopers have uber advanced sensors a little sketchy.

Locating someone and identifying them as a threat is not the same thing ; We have no idea what sort of tactics the Noghri used, but for some reason people like to assume they just rushed the Stormies when they had all sorts of other options. Again, in WWII partisans could pull of all sorts of outrageous shit in the middle of occupied territories ; Like stealing cars of high German officials, knifing soldiers at guard posts, etc.

[Junghalli]

Stofsk:

If you're talking about the seismic charges from AoTC aren't they probably unquantifiable technobabble? It's been a while since I watched the movie but I seem to remember them having some weird disk-shaped effect and generally not looking anything like a conventional explosion. Then again, maybe I'm misremembering a little and they're just some kind of shaped charge.

[Stofsk]

Stofsk:

If you're talking about the seismic charges from AoTC aren't they probably unquantifiable technobabble? It's been a while since I watched the movie but I seem to remember them having some weird disk-shaped effect and generally not looking anything like a conventional explosion. Then again, maybe I'm misremembering a little and they're just some kind of shaped charge.

I guess. I only pointed it out because those explosions were impressive if peculiar, while the missile Jango fires on Obi-wan doesn't really look that great.

[PeZook]

(can't properly comment on the explosion, so I'll just let it stand on its own)

Actually, it is shielded. I got confused with the Eta-2 Actis from ROTS, which isn't shielded. So I concede that part.

Well, I couldn't remember if it officially had shields or not, so I assumed it didn't.

In the first screenshot we see it approach the improvised chaff. The next screenshot, we see it fly sharply below the field to avoid it, and plow straight into the asteroid.

Yeah, it looked like it got briefly confused by the debris. It was smart enough to disregard it later and do an evasive maneuver (like it did when flying through the asteroid field: that's way beyond any of our current missiles, which can tell flares and chaff from fighters, but can't dodge debris and reacquire their targets)

What's the point of a weapon system like that? It's not at all lethal.

They could've had large stocks of them, that particular fighter could have simply been carrying a few for years (remember, none of the Jedi were attacked by another swarm of buzz droids again), or it might've been an experiment to try and "cheat" l337 Jedi skills. The point is that a military is not this super-perfect machine incapable of doing weird or stupid things which in retrospect had a reason.

Of course the other problem is they were outsmarted by Anakin rolling his fighter. I mean come on dude; they're a dumb weapon all-around.

Yeah, they're pretty dumb, but they didn't lose a lock, they collided with each other. And they're clearly a non-standard weapon - all the other missiles just plain explode.

They already have turbolasers in the trench, why not missile launchers? Missiles can be used against capships just like turbolasers are, so they're not solely anti-fighter defences but simply weapon systems you'd think the Empire would equip their most important battle station with.

Because their defences were oriented against capital ships? Really, it's like asking why a Ticonderoga-class cruiser doesn't have MOAR GUNZ in weird places.

Fighters which are space superiority in role, just like the X-wing is. So if the X-wing has them, why don't TIE Fighters? Or TIE Interceptors?

Uh...let's see, because the fighters chasing the Falcon were a random bunch that followed it straight from a battle? The question would be good if they launched straight from a hangar.

It's not about anticipating a fighter attack at all. It's basically outfitting your space superiority fighters with space superiority weaponry.

I was talking about DS1.

The point I am making is that the Rebels have them but in small quantities because of their price, something which shouldn't affect the Imperials but they don't have them, especially in situations where they'd be useful to have.

We never really get a good, solid sight of fighter-on-fighter combat, just random cuts and glimpses. The longer sequences like the ROTJ tunnel chase happen after the battle has been going on for a while.

[PeZook]

Here's something else that just came to mind: if the Imperials didn't consider small, one manned fighters to be a threat to the Death Star, then why did they load it up with shitloads of small, one manned fighters, who's sole main was to defeat other small, one manned fighters?

What about scouting, control of space and oh yeah bombing raids against capital ships? It was a mobile base in addition to supporting a giant fuck-off space laser.

It also had ISDs docked to it.

[Batman]

Stofsk:
If you're talking about the seismic charges from AoTC aren't they probably unquantifiable technobabble? It's been a while since I watched the movie but I seem to remember them having some weird disk-shaped effect and generally not looking anything like a conventional explosion. Then again, maybe I'm misremembering a little and they're just some kind of shaped charge.

He's not. They're talking about the decidedly homing missile Jango fired at Obi-Wan's fighter about a minute AFTER the seismic charges incident.