StarDestroyer.Net BBS

SirNitram wrote: Because we all know how badly I rampaged with those the last time...

Oh. Wait.

I didn't.

A time when others could actually counter one. And if you're not intent to use it then why should it exist period?

SirNitram wrote:I said not every battle can be won by brute force.

If so, why the bias against brute force? It's a common military doctrine that
in order to successfully assault a defended position, you must have
at least a ratio of 3 to 1 attackers to defanders.

Sea Skimmer wrote:

SirNitram wrote: Because we all know how badly I rampaged with those the last time...

Oh. Wait.

I didn't.

A time when others could actually counter one. And if you're not intent to use it then why should it exist period?

Because my forces need a command craft, because I certainly don't have any planets in the Mainline universe, because it's a part of my story, and because it's fun to take up to diplomatic affairs.

Oh, and, of course, because it's perfectly in line with the history that's been handed out. Were I wanting to powergame, I'd deploy a few hundred and not pussyfoot around. The Lost can certainly afford such, even while at war. But no, I am sticking with my normal deployment. One Naggarok as Command/Control, Eclipses/Executors are group leaders, ISD's as my main ship.

Don't like it, fine. Don't like the STGOD? Don't play. No one's twisting your arm to be here.

MKSheppard wrote:

SirNitram wrote:I said not every battle can be won by brute force.

If so, why the bias against brute force? It's a common military doctrine that
in order to successfully assault a defended position, you must have
at least a ratio of 3 to 1 attackers to defanders.

In general I have no bias against it. I'm merely finding the ranting that it's not fair to require something other than brute force to get through a planetary shield to be amusing. Once your on the ground, deploy that huge army and march. Go for the brute force.

SirNitram wrote:I'm merely finding the ranting that it's not fair to require something other than brute force to get through a planetary shield to be amusing.

Ah, so we should be following the Rogue Squadron/Star Trek model instead,
to be amusing, instead of the archetypical D-Day invasion fleet?

MKSheppard wrote:

SirNitram wrote:I'm merely finding the ranting that it's not fair to require something other than brute force to get through a planetary shield to be amusing.

Ah, so we should be following the Rogue Squadron/Star Trek model instead,
to be amusing, instead of the archetypical D-Day invasion fleet?

I fail to recall the navy on D-Day reducing Eastern Europe to a cinder. Bashing a hole in the enemies defense(Say, with ion cannons or a Torpedo Sphere. I sell the latter cheap) then landing en masse would be an excellent strategy. Can you possibly not post a strawman of what I'm saying, Sheppard?

SirNitram wrote:
Because my forces need a command craft, because I certainly don't have any planets in the Mainline universe, because it's a part of my story, and because it's fun to take up to diplomatic affairs.

Then give them an actual commando ship, if you took a look at every real fleet you note that command vessels are normally specialist ships which are lightly armed and protected because they should never need heavy firepower and it serves only to suck up the massive amounts of deck space and hull volume needed for command facilities. Your justification is a load of crap.

SirNitram wrote: I fail to recall the navy on D-Day reducing Eastern Europe to a cinder. Bashing a hole in the enemies defense(Say, with ion cannons or a Torpedo Sphere. I sell the latter cheap) then landing en masse would be an excellent strategy. Can you possibly not post a strawman of what I'm saying, Sheppard?

Ah, I see you missed the newsreels of scores of Battleships, Cruisers,
and destroyers blasting the hell out of Normandy that day, along with
hundreds of fighters and bombers killing anything that moved. We're
just upping the scale to an appropriate level for a galactic empire invading.

Sea Skimmer wrote:

SirNitram wrote:
Because my forces need a command craft, because I certainly don't have any planets in the Mainline universe, because it's a part of my story, and because it's fun to take up to diplomatic affairs.

Then give them an actual commando ship, if you took a look at every real fleet you note that command vessels are normally specialist ships which are lightly armed and protected because they should never need heavy firepower and it serves only to suck up the massive amounts of deck space and hull volume needed for command facilities. Your justification is a load of crap.

What a good thing the STGOD doesn't take place in reality, then.

If the Mods don't want me to have a Nag, they'll let me know. But someone whose been complaining about a STGOD-I level conflict the whole time isn't exactly gonna sway me by doing the same thing I've been ignoring since the proposal was first thrown out to the dogs.

MKSheppard wrote:

SirNitram wrote: I fail to recall the navy on D-Day reducing Eastern Europe to a cinder. Bashing a hole in the enemies defense(Say, with ion cannons or a Torpedo Sphere. I sell the latter cheap) then landing en masse would be an excellent strategy. Can you possibly not post a strawman of what I'm saying, Sheppard?

Ah, I see you missed the newsreels of scores of Battleships, Cruisers,
and destroyers blasting the hell out of Normandy that day, along with
hundreds of fighters and bombers killing anything that moved. We're
just upping the scale to an appropriate level for a galactic empire invading.

Yet, I fail to see Eastern Europe flattened totally. You keep missing the point: D-Day style invasions are good, as opposed to 'BDZ BDZ BDZ! I WIN!', which seems to be the sentiment of those wanting this restriction gone.

SirNitram wrote:
Yet, I fail to see Eastern Europe flattened totally. You keep missing the point: D-Day style invasions are good, as opposed to 'BDZ BDZ BDZ! I WIN!', which seems to be the sentiment of those wanting this restriction gone.

No, it's that D-Day invasion isn't possibul on this tech if you have to worry about how much damage is inflicted and don't even have a clear idea of what is acceptable.

Sea Skimmer wrote:

SirNitram wrote:
Yet, I fail to see Eastern Europe flattened totally. You keep missing the point: D-Day style invasions are good, as opposed to 'BDZ BDZ BDZ! I WIN!', which seems to be the sentiment of those wanting this restriction gone.

No, it's that D-Day invasion isn't possibul on this tech if you have to worry about how much damage is inflicted and don't even have a clear idea of what is acceptable.

It will be nice to have the limits laid out more clearly, but funnily enough, ground invasions worked perfectly fine in the STGOD-I, and the world's still had a good chunk of their civilian population left.

Sea Skimmer wrote: No, it's that D-Day invasion isn't possibul on this tech if you have to worry about how much damage is inflicted and don't even have a clear idea of what is acceptable.

Yep In order to land, you first have to silence the anti orbital batteries,
then knock down the shield generators...that takes a lot of firepower thrown
around...and lots of side effects

MKSheppard wrote:

Sea Skimmer wrote: No, it's that D-Day invasion isn't possibul on this tech if you have to worry about how much damage is inflicted and don't even have a clear idea of what is acceptable.

Yep In order to land, you first have to silence the anti orbital batteries,
then knock down the shield generators...that takes a lot of firepower thrown
around...and lots of side effects

Funny, we're going around SW levels, and they wage ground wars without major extinction events on every planet they invade... Again. Ion cannons. EMP blasts. So on. So forth.

SirNitram wrote:
It will be nice to have the limits laid out more clearly, but funnily enough, ground invasions worked perfectly fine in the STGOD-I, and the world's still had a good chunk of their civilian population left.

One of my main points has been we now have more worlds then ever before as the main field of play so such a restriction is a completely unnecessary complication.

SirNitram wrote: Funny, we're going around SW levels, and they wage ground wars without major extinction events on every planet they invade... Again. Ion cannons. EMP blasts. So on. So forth.

Except Hoth didn't have a planet-wide energy shield.

Sea Skimmer wrote:

SirNitram wrote:
It will be nice to have the limits laid out more clearly, but funnily enough, ground invasions worked perfectly fine in the STGOD-I, and the world's still had a good chunk of their civilian population left.

One of my main points has been we now have more worlds then ever before as the main field of play so such a restriction is a completely unnecessary complication.

I frankly don't care, as the Lost have always been more surgical in their strikes than simply obliterating life on a target planet. Of course, there is the old fallback of the immense political fallout of genocide. It's the sort of thing which makes large numbers of countries nervous, before they all gang up on your and kick your teeth in. But again, I'm quite content to let the mods decide.

MKSheppard wrote:

SirNitram wrote: Funny, we're going around SW levels, and they wage ground wars without major extinction events on every planet they invade... Again. Ion cannons. EMP blasts. So on. So forth.

Except Hoth didn't have a planet-wide energy shield.

And we all know Hoth was the only ground engagement in the Galactic Civil War.

MKSheppard wrote:

SirNitram wrote: Funny, we're going around SW levels, and they wage ground wars without major extinction events on every planet they invade... Again. Ion cannons. EMP blasts. So on. So forth.

Except Hoth didn't have a planet-wide energy shield.

The only major planetary ground invasion in Star Wars that I'm aware of was the Vong on Coruscant, and that did a fair job of destroying the planet and killing most of the population.

The only major planetary ground invasion in Star Wars that I'm aware of was the Vong on Coruscant, and that did a fair job of destroying the planet and killing most of the population. Hoth meanwhile was defended by a single battalion of Rebel light infantry whose fortifications lacked even basic overhead cover.

Sea Skimmer wrote: So they get not only unstoppable ships but also ones no one can ever match? A uber battleship that outmanuvers starfighters and blows up death stars isn't giveing someone a morep owerful fleet, its giving them a couple extra ones.

All of Nitram's Naggaroks are fighting the Zerg. Considering I'm the continuity editor, it appears, I just made that decision.

One generator for every 10,000 square kilometers and several teratons impacting on each one will come pretty damn close

Since when do generators occur that often? Most planets have a central generator, you know, like the one on Endor. Even if they did occur that often, you could just take down one and land forces there, then advance on the ground and capture the others.

Great so for every invasion it thrown to the mod.

No, just massive uses of firepower. Basically, my thought is that mass extinction events are okay, but things bigger than mass extinction events are not. It's the mod's judgement call as to when a mass extinction event becomes something bigger than a mass extinction event, essentially. Okay? Does that sound agreeable?

VSD can't pass through the shield, I'd need my own uber tank with equally great firepower to go through the shield and do battle and throw around multi.... wait what was the point of all this again?

Bolos aren't that bloody powerful. See above--you really just need to take down a section of a layered shield, assuming the planet has layered shield. Or, indeed, land your own "uber-tanks" and advance on the ground.

And yet we can exterminate countless major species and fill the stratosphere with ash, so if I kill the species first and then destroy the planets ability to support it doesn't count? And I'm still waiting for an answer on why any of this is necessary when we have a hundred million planets in the game.

The goal is to prevent the capricious level of destruction seen in the last STGOD without having to arbitrarily lower firepower levels--that is, to use a story device consistant with STGOD history to limit firepower capabilities.

What's the basic territory limit for new arrivals

Basically, how big should i make my empire.

The Duchess of Zeon wrote:

Sea Skimmer wrote: So they get not only unstoppable ships but also ones no one can ever match? A uber battleship that outmanuvers starfighters and blows up death stars isn't giveing someone a morep owerful fleet, its giving them a couple extra ones.

All of Nitram's Naggaroks are fighting the Zerg. Considering I'm the continuity editor, it appears, I just made that decision.

Then the mighty and famous Sovereign-class vessel Savior will be pushed back into service.

At least it has the No-Spill(tm) cup.

Darksider wrote:What's the basic territory limit for new arrivals

Basically, how big should i make my empire.

Were you in the SD.net STGOD-II?

SirNitram wrote:
Then the mighty and famous Sovereign-class vessel Savior will be pushed back into service.

At least it has the No-Spill(tm) cup.

That's the spirit. Who needs inertialess drive when you can always be assured of a full cup of coffee?

The Duchess of Zeon wrote:

Darksider wrote:What's the basic territory limit for new arrivals

Basically, how big should i make my empire.

Were you in the SD.net STGOD-II?

The one that fizzled after nothing happned???

Yes, but i only made a few posts

(I'm re-using my Mk. 2 empire.)