Ground combat

harbringer · Post by **harbringer** » 2003-12-02 04:47am

Since most of what I read in star wars vs trek debates revolves around the space campaign (where IMHO trek is the strongest) I thought I would post something different. Ok a fully equiped Stormtrooper battalion lands on a defended world of your choice in the alpha quadrant. Who do you think wins and why?. Since the only federation verhicle seen to date is a small recon buggy (unarmoured no less) I don't rate the federation much of a chance. Against the klingons and so on I believe it would be worse.

The argument that orbital firepower makes ground combat and especially ground support weapons and AFV's obsolete is not really an argument. After all what if (for whatever reason) there is no starship at hand to support your troops??.

Shinova · Post by **Shinova** » 2003-12-02 04:50am

The Stormtroopers would win.

Now I'm not sure which Trek troops would fare the best. Maybe Jem'Hadar.

neoolong · Post by **neoolong** » 2003-12-02 05:14am

Unless it's stacked in favor of ST, stormtroopers are superior.

The Third Man · Post by **The Third Man** » 2003-12-02 05:21am

harbringer wrote: Against the klingons and so on I believe it would be worse.

...for the Empire. (But only slightly

) While we admittedly see very little of how the average Klingon or UFP citizens live and act, it's a fairly safe assumption that the Klingons would be less likley than most to surrender, more likely to defend in depth and more likely to put up a guerilla or irregular resistance. The competence of the standing army isn't really much of a factor when up against the Empire - the difference between Klingon and UFP miitary competence is trivial compared to the gap between both of them and the Empire.

Allowing any 'defended world of your choice' is a being bit hard on the Empire. Maybe 'conventinally-defended' would be better so as to exclude those worlds that are defended by super-beings, mysterious mind-altering rays, naturally-occurring hippyfying drugs and all the rest.

There's also the question of what constitutes a 'win' - witness current events in Iraq.

harbringer · Post by **harbringer** » 2003-12-02 06:23am

Sure k forgot that trek had to have a boot load of super beings. Sure only conventional defense, but surely against *just* a battalion trekkies won't have to get super beings involved (which BTW I thought was out of bounds for the discussion board??). Otherwise Q or similar would "will" them back to the past and the SW galaxy. Which would be pretty silly

.

I ment any planet in the alpha quadrant including earth kronos etc. but only one held by a major power that is neither immortal or omnipotent.

thanks for the reminder

Darksider · Post by **Darksider** » 2003-12-02 07:06am

A single battalion of Stormtroopers isn't enough to take and hold a major planet, but the defenders will be slaughterd like sheep.

Although they might be able to hold a feddie world through fear. Think about the cushy lives feddie civillians live. How would they react to seeing their planet's entire defensive force get slaughtered horribly?

Ender · Post by **Ender** » 2003-12-02 09:03am

Keep in mind people that fully equiped means all the stuff we saw in AOTC and more.

At a certain point its just no longer funny.

Kazuaki Shimazaki · Post by **Kazuaki Shimazaki** » 2003-12-02 09:30am

harbringer wrote:Since most of what I read in star wars vs trek debates revolves around the space campaign (where IMHO trek is the strongest) I thought I would post something different. Ok a fully equiped Stormtrooper battalion lands on a defended world of your choice in the alpha quadrant. Who do you think wins and why?. Since the only federation verhicle seen to date is a small recon buggy (unarmoured no less) I don't rate the federation much of a chance. Against the klingons and so on I believe it would be worse.

The argument that orbital firepower makes ground combat and especially ground support weapons and AFV's obsolete is not really an argument. After all what if (for whatever reason) there is no starship at hand to support your troops??.

I suppose as long as the place doesn't have defending starfighters, holding out should not be hard. But if we are assuming that phasers do work against stormtrooper armor (seeing smallarms are about the limit of Fed ground weapons, so if the smallarms bounce off there is little more to say,) a battalion of 600 probably won't be enough - not enough depth. But I suppose if you airlanded them right on the planet's capital building, they should be able to eliminate the guards and get a conquest that way.

Any planet that has air support (not orbital capships, just air) would be a bitch however. Imagine this, ISD jumps into system. It vaporizes a hundred Federation starships. With that done, it hastily gets a few landing barges, shuttles, transports, and covered by about one Assault Gunboat. Everything else, including the hyperdrive-less TIEs stay onboard, since it has 5 other planets to attack before the days' out. The ISD leaves to ensure schedule compliance.

Then the shuttles and stuff have to land on the planet, while being attacked by Federation shuttles, all defended effectively by ONE ASSAULT GUNBOAT and whatever defenses those shuttles might have. It starts to look a little grim.

Rogue 9 · Post by **Rogue 9** » 2003-12-02 10:34am

Hmm. Sounds like a scenario straight out of TIE Fighter.

Put me in that Gunboat. They'll get down.

Kerneth · Post by **Kerneth** » 2003-12-02 01:55pm

Make it a missile boat and you can give the Trek planet a couple of Sovereign-class starships to boot.

This is really one-sided. What do any of the Alpha Quadrant races have that can deal with even a single AT-AT?

Rogue 9 · Post by **Rogue 9** » 2003-12-02 02:07pm

I think you're getting a little overboard there. A single AT-AT? I'd say an orbital phaser strike or three. Its not a starship.

Post by **Ghost Rider** » 2003-12-02 02:09pm

Rogue 9 wrote:I think you're getting a little overboard there. A single AT-AT? I'd say an orbital phaser strike or three. Its not a starship.

If it can hit the AT-AT.

Plus if we give that...we can also present that the Imps have air support enough to take down most if not all orbital defenses(if they haven't done so before hand)

Ground combat between the Federaion and the Empire is not even remotely fair.

Rogue 9 · Post by **Rogue 9** » 2003-12-02 02:12pm

I know its not remotely fair. But a single AT-AT taking out Earth is just fanboy wankery. There's no way it could occupy a planet by itself. Too slow, for starters.

YT300000 · Post by **YT300000** » 2003-12-02 08:07pm

Rogue 9 wrote:I know its not remotely fair. But a single AT-AT taking out Earth is just fanboy wankery. There's no way it could occupy a planet by itself. Too slow, for starters.

Read the opening post. It's any AQ planet.

And an AT-AT shouldn't be expected to do much. All Terrain Armoured Transport. It moves stuff.

Master of Ossus · Post by **Master of Ossus** » 2003-12-02 08:18pm

Rogue 9 wrote:I know its not remotely fair. But a single AT-AT taking out Earth is just fanboy wankery. There's no way it could occupy a planet by itself. Too slow, for starters.

True, but the AQ has nothing that can defeat it, short of possible starship-based attacks. The AT-AT would easily be able to hold a large tract of territory by itself, or destroy defenses and allow ground forces with greater staying power to move in. While I agree that it's unrealistic for the stormtroopers to manage to hold the entire world with only 600 troops, I can't say I see them being driven out very easily. They would more than likely be immensely disruptive of any AQ forces in the region, which would be unable to drive them out without a dedicated strike involving starships (which we know from the Siege of AR-558 isn't usually undertaken). I see the Imperials as being able to stay almost indefinitely, without taking very heavy casualties, particularly since 15 divisions of Klingons were a significant planetary invasion force against the Dominion (wiping out an "entire Cardassian Order," with starship support), and since only a few thousand troops were involved in the aborted Romulan invasion of Vulcan. Both of these events indicate pitiful under-preparedness on the part of the AQ powers, and pathetic defensive capabilities for their planets.

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2003-12-02 08:25pm

The best thing the SW side has going for them is dedicated ground combat units. Because of this technology and capabilities revolve around this philosophy. In Trek dedicated ground combat units don't exist, or exist in small numbers. Tactics and training is ultimately irrelevent because the SW side has the combined arms and military assets to win most scenarios. An infantry groundforce almost always looses against an opposing mechanized or armored ground force.

Admiral Drason · Post by **Admiral Drason** » 2003-12-02 08:40pm

I think the storm trooper battalion could take a moderaltly populated planet. Since the Romulans thought they could take Vulcan a heavily populated planet with 5000 men. Since a stormtrooper with armor to back him up is worth many times more than a romulan trooper a planet of any moderat population should fall fairly easily.

Howedar · Post by **Howedar** » 2003-12-02 09:26pm

harbringer wrote:Since most of what I read in star wars vs trek debates revolves around the space campaign (where IMHO trek is the strongest)

Hahaha!

Post by **weemadando** » 2003-12-03 12:56am

About the only thing that could potentially damage an AT-AT is a set piece trap laid by the Feds... Which they likely wouldn't a) think of doing and b) if they did think of, wouldn't because its "unfair"...

Rogue 9 · Post by **Rogue 9** » 2003-12-03 01:32am

Well, as for that, Luke took out an AT-AT on foot with a mine, a magnetic grappler, and a lightsaber. I'm sure the Feds could get some way of opening the hatch, and do you really think they don't have climbing equipment? Explosives, of course, are the easy part; once its under the armor it doesn't have to be that big of a bomb. A battalion of stromtroopers could do it (and wouldn't a battalion of stormtroopers have walkers in its complement?), but not a single AT-AT.

Post by **Darth Wong** » 2003-12-03 01:36am

I think it was sort of assumed that the AT-AT would be used as their centrepiece, rather than being completely alone.

Connor MacLeod · Post by **Connor MacLeod** » 2003-12-03 01:57am

Alyeska wrote:The best thing the SW side has going for them is dedicated ground combat units. Because of this technology and capabilities revolve around this philosophy. In Trek dedicated ground combat units don't exist, or exist in small numbers. Tactics and training is ultimately irrelevent because the SW side has the combined arms and military assets to win most scenarios. An infantry groundforce almost always looses against an opposing mechanized or armored ground force.

Except that SW infantry still can be superior. Armor is superior, even if this might not help against phasers (I suppose thats more of a material dependence issue, and there is always the chance of personal shielding, evne though that isn't standard issue insofar as I know.) Weapons appear to be of superior power and have greater range (Geonosis and Hoth for one thing, the aOTC ICS as another) and their infantry have greater varieties of weapons (Carbines and rifles, and even SAW-type weapons as well as grenades.)

Post by **The Yosemite Bear** » 2003-12-03 04:22am

Armour+tactic+intimidation=more hurt then the AQ races can take.

harbringer · Post by **harbringer** » 2003-12-03 04:32am

for the person laughing at my comment that a space combat gives trek more of a chance since they are more capable in this area <ie strongest in this area> yes I know bad phrasing

I noticed it when you pointed it out....

I was under the impression that a battalion (the compliment of troops aboard a star destroyer) had 40 AT-AT walkers and a smaller number of AT-ST walkers as well as the 900 or so men. With the normal E-11 blaster and the high powered assault version (the long one...) plus E-webs. I figured that a small to mid size planet would fall easily with larger planets having a decent chance through large numbers of defending troops. I might be wrong im more a fan of the clone troopers out of ATOC

.

Alyeska · Post by **Alyeska** » 2003-12-03 10:30am

Connor MacLeod wrote:
Alyeska wrote:The best thing the SW side has going for them is dedicated ground combat units. Because of this technology and capabilities revolve around this philosophy. In Trek dedicated ground combat units don't exist, or exist in small numbers. Tactics and training is ultimately irrelevent because the SW side has the combined arms and military assets to win most scenarios. An infantry groundforce almost always looses against an opposing mechanized or armored ground force.
Except that SW infantry still can be superior. Armor is superior, even if this might not help against phasers (I suppose thats more of a material dependence issue, and there is always the chance of personal shielding, evne though that isn't standard issue insofar as I know.) Weapons appear to be of superior power and have greater range (Geonosis and Hoth for one thing, the aOTC ICS as another) and their infantry have greater varieties of weapons (Carbines and rifles, and even SAW-type weapons as well as grenades.)

Much of this stems from the combined arms capabilities of the SW forces. They have dedicated infantry forces and because of this they have a wide range of assets for their infantry.

StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Ground combat

Ground combat

Re: Ground combat

Re: Ground combat