StarDestroyer.Net BBS

Artemas wrote:Thanks for clearing that up. Is Imperial Marines as a formal name mentioned outside of Pax Empirica? Because it seems quite contrary to everything else. Why are they referred to as stormtroopers all of the time? That's like referring to US Marines as Riflemen, but almost never actually mentioning the word "Marine".

There's the Imperial Marines, and before them, the Galactic Marines.

Why shouldn't they be called stormtroopers? That's what they are. Rifleman is a less distinct term. Generally speaking, a soldier with a rifle as primary weapon. You find those in the Imperial Army as well.

Calling them Stormtroopers is like calling them marines. As in, a separate branch of the military. Even though only some of them serve as 'actual' marines, ie, marine troop detachment aboard starships. I recall that when Palpatine visited DS2, you had navy and army detachment stormtroopers lined up on separate sides. Also, it's not like the US Marines have had a lot of amphibious assaults since WWII.

Stormtroopers are the Emperor's own, loyal troops (much as we saw in the prequels). They're separate and work alongside (and keep an eye on) the other factions like the Imperial Army and Navy, or COMPNOR (and its military branch Compforce) or any other group. There's a stupidly huge number of military groups and formations of varying size in the Galactic Empire, some part of the government in some fashion and others private or more local (EG Tagge's forces, the Corporate Sector military forces, Kuat's military, etc.) I'm sure all of this has been covered by Publius' articles already so I'm just repeating myself.

Anyhow, Imperial army vs Rebel troops is varied. I believe the differences were covered in the Rebel Alliance Sourcebook in greater detail but there might be an element of bias there (they factor in "we're freedom fighters and thus better motivated than our Imperial counterparts" stuff for example.). The significant differences I recall is that the Imperial Army would fight more like an actual army (more combined arms) whereas the Rebels basically fight like light infantry or Guerillas (depending on circumstnaces and context). The Rebels don't really have much of an actual standard military structure on the ground (outside cretain groups like Specforce) since much of their military forces tend to be concentrated in separate bases, cell networks, and suchnot, and the insignia/dress (if any dress) and the like can vary alot. Inconsistent logistics also plays a role (the Empire holds the logistical advantage and so can better standardize) but again what I recall from the RASB is that the Rebels generally favor range and firepower (basically heavy blaster rifles) and mobility (little or no armor) against the Empire. In some situations (like hoth) we can expect heavy weapons support of some kind (including man portable, self propelled and fixed emplacement weaponry.) VEchiles and such are more of a mixed bag, but liekly to be more along the lines of airspeeders and repulsorcraft, especially converted, highly mobile stuff in all likelihood (the RASB may mention vehicles but again memory doesn't help me and I dont feel like digging it out ATM)

So tactics and who does "better" will depend on a number of factors - the troops involved, the terrain/situation, force disparities, etc. A well-equipped Rebel force might be able to match or even exceed an Imperial force in equal numbers (or maybe even at a numerical disadvantage) while a bunch of Rebels armed with long rifles against a combined arms Imperial Army force (artillery, repulsortanks, etc.) would be screwed.

The Rebel Alliance Sourcebook indicates that the majority of combat vehicles used by the Rebels are repulsorlift, and their heaviest-armored vehicle (the Mekuun Heavy Tracker, on p107) is a mobile sensory unit. They appear to also make use of guerrilla and hit-and-run philosophy in their choice of vehicles. Curiously, the book does not describe any artillery beyond the towers at Hoth and the Ion Cannon.

The alliance does make use of tracked heavy tanks and mobile artillery in pitched battles, but those pitched battles are extremely rare, and usually a loss for the rebellion because even if they can defeat the empire on the field, the Empire has essentially endless reinforcements while the rebels have none.

A good overview of the alliance's armor and artillery units can be found here

Any heavy vehicles the Rebels possess are probably going to be saved to defend strategic points, or are being saved for the time when the Rebels hope they can fight the Imperials on a some-what even basis. Because realistically the Rebels could invade a world with heavy armor, but sooner or later the Imperials will arrive with more and heavier armor. Then the Rebels just lost their armor and for what? To hold a planet for a couple weeks or months. No strategic gain.

Nearly every recorded engagement in the pre-Endor Galactic civil war that involved the Rebel's heavy armor was a result of the Empire attacking a fortified Rebel position and winning due to superior numbers and firepower. The rebels never used their heavy armor in an offensive capacity, but they did have them.

Darksider wrote:Nearly every recorded engagement in the pre-Endor Galactic civil war that involved the Rebel's heavy armor was a result of the Empire attacking a fortified Rebel position and winning due to superior numbers and firepower. The rebels never used their heavy armor in an offensive capacity, but they did have them.

What recorded engagements are these? The majority of the vehicles on that page are from RTS games, whose authority on the exact composition of Rebel forces at battles is dubious, to say the least. A number of others are toys that have not appeared anywhere else.

Artemas wrote:Stormtroopers only sound like the USMC because they are both "armies within armies". Better examples would be the Waffen-SS, or the Iranian Pasdaran. Both are organizations distinct and seperate from the regular army, but both are also based around political reliability. The USMC only falls into the first category, despite their official motto being Semper Fidelis. Of course, in Star Wars there is also COMPFORCE, which is even more like the IRGC or SS. Especially with the "well equipped, fanatical, and incompetent" parts. In this regard, the Stormtroopers also combine some aspects of the old-school European Guards regiments, in addition to their absolute loyalty. In the end, Stormtroopers seem to be an elite in every way.

The Stormtroopers or Imperial Marines are a fully normative branch of the Armed Forces, and not separate, though they have a fully independent command structure and report directly to the Throne. The Military or Armed SS was a literally parallel army formed from within the paramilitary forces of the National Socialist Party; they were completely separate from the normative German Armed Forces subject to the Supreme Command of the Defense Force (Oberkommando der Wehrmacht), though they were subject to operational control under overall Army leadership. The COMPForce (Assault) was comparable to the Armed SS in that it was a totally external body belonging to the political organization COMPNOR.

Pretty much the only Imperial Army members we see in the films were the AT-ST drivers in Jedi and General Veers in ESB. It's probably safe to assume that the vast majority of the Army is made up of conscripts. They would be "unprogrammed" conscripts, most likely, while the stormtroopers and CompForce are the brainwashed branches of Imperial belligerence. The Naval officer corps is probably made up of Republic holdovers that believed in the Empire or, at the very least, feared it and would not leave. The job of an enlisted man in the Navy is probably a lot more cushy than that of your average Army trooper.

So, to answer the question, I'd say that Alliance soldiers would be better simply because they believe what they're fighting for. And actually want to fight.

ObsidianTailor wrote:So, to answer the question, I'd say that Alliance soldiers would be better simply because they believe what they're fighting for. And actually want to fight.

Wait, wait...are you saying a government army is not motivated to want to fight? Why? Can you provide anything except your assumption on this?

And why are the Imperial soliders lower in their belief of their government? You can provide evidence of something that the were forced to stay under the assumption of fear.

The Stormtrooper branch doesn't necessarily have a real world equivelant, since at the height of the Empire they outnumbered the combined forces of the Army and Navy, both of whom had personnel levels numbering in the tens of trillions between them anyway.

Just think of them as an entirely different corps unto themselves.

Ghost Rider wrote:

ObsidianTailor wrote:So, to answer the question, I'd say that Alliance soldiers would be better simply because they believe what they're fighting for. And actually want to fight.

Wait, wait...are you saying a government army is not motivated to want to fight? Why? Can you provide anything except your assumption on this?

And why are the Imperial soliders lower in their belief of their government? You can provide evidence of something that the were forced to stay under the assumption of fear.

No, I am saying that the Imperial Army was likely made up of conscripts, with the candidates of higher caliber going to the stormtrooper corps and Navy. Conscripts would be less inclined to fight with any kind of fervor.

I have no doubt that the stormies and a larger portion of enlisted Navy personnel were "true believers," so to speak, but I just don't see the "boots on the ground," the leftovers, being gung ho about fighting for the Empire.

Right now, I don't have any evidence; it's just conjecture on my part. I hope to bring out my library of SW books soon, and when I do I will be sure to do some quick research and post in this thread.

ObsidianTailor wrote:

Ghost Rider wrote:

ObsidianTailor wrote:So, to answer the question, I'd say that Alliance soldiers would be better simply because they believe what they're fighting for. And actually want to fight.

Wait, wait...are you saying a government army is not motivated to want to fight? Why? Can you provide anything except your assumption on this?

And why are the Imperial soliders lower in their belief of their government? You can provide evidence of something that the were forced to stay under the assumption of fear.

No, I am saying that the Imperial Army was likely made up of conscripts, with the candidates of higher caliber going to the stormtrooper corps and Navy. Conscripts would be less inclined to fight with any kind of fervor.

And you base this assumption why again?

Given that 40% of the Stormtroopers were still clones, that limits the amount of people entering and why would the higher caliber be used solely for the Navy? Given that they gave equal ground to both, this particular leap makes no sense unless you can present evidence.

I have no doubt that the stormies and a larger portion of enlisted Navy personnel were "true believers," so to speak, but I just don't see the "boots on the ground," the leftovers, being gung ho about fighting for the Empire.

Which requires you to provide something to the former. Some evidence to demonstrate that the Army was a lower branch of the Imperial military, other then your assumption.

Right now, I don't have any evidence; it's just conjecture on my part. I hope to bring out my library of SW books soon, and when I do I will be sure to do some quick research and post in this thread.

So...you made a leap of logic that is based on your gut? You do realize that is foolish unless your gut has some basis within the material.

This still doesn't contend of why do you think the Alliance is better because they believe more in their cause. In fact one should believe the Empire's soliders are closer knit since the Alliance is attacking their homes claiming liberation from a tyrant.

Ghost Rider wrote:And you base this assumption why again?

Given that 40% of the Stormtroopers were still clones, that limits the amount of people entering and why would the higher caliber be used solely for the Navy? Given that they gave equal ground to both, this particular leap makes no sense unless you can present evidence.

As I described above, working on a ship would be a lot more cushy. Feel free to disagree in the absence of evidence.

Which requires you to provide something to the former. Some evidence to demonstrate that the Army was a lower branch of the Imperial military, other then your assumption.

As I stated, I will research and post my findings.

So...you made a leap of logic that is based on your gut? You do realize that is foolish unless your gut has some basis within the material.

This still doesn't contend of why do you think the Alliance is better because they believe more in their cause. In fact one should believe the Empire's soliders are closer knit since the Alliance is attacking their homes claiming liberation from a tyrant.

I might point out that you are taking as much of a leap of logic in this contention.

If the army is in fact primarily made up of local conscripts, then there wouldn't be much to believe in. Let's table it until I can get to my books. I moved twice a few years ago and still haven't unpacked them.

The Empire used both conscription and recruitment to draw in troops - its likely they would only resort to recruitment when the situation was deemed necessary (outbreak of a local conflict and for some reason they couldn't transport troops in from elsewhere.) or depending on locale (some places are more willing than others, obviously)

Rama wrote: The Stormtrooper branch doesn't necessarily have a real world equivelant, since at the height of the Empire they outnumbered the combined forces of the Army and Navy, both of whom had personnel levels numbering in the tens of trillions between them anyway.

Trillions of navy crewers as I recall, tens of trillions of Army troops. I've posted the quote before.

And the storm troopers don't have one specific RL equivalent. You can liken them to multiple groups quite easily.

ObsidianTailor wrote:

Ghost Rider wrote:And you base this assumption why again?

Given that 40% of the Stormtroopers were still clones, that limits the amount of people entering and why would the higher caliber be used solely for the Navy? Given that they gave equal ground to both, this particular leap makes no sense unless you can present evidence.

As I described above, working on a ship would be a lot more cushy. Feel free to disagree in the absence of evidence.

Yet, you are making the assertion. Why would a ship be more cushy?

ObsidianTailor wrote:

Ghost Rider wrote:Which requires you to provide something to the former. Some evidence to demonstrate that the Army was a lower branch of the Imperial military, other then your assumption.

As I stated, I will research and post my findings.

Yet, it stands why do you believe the Imperial forces would fight...less so? This is an idealogical reasoning that doesn't quite follow. Maybe specific people that do not care for the New Order, maybe even whole units, but the assertion that the Imperial Army would fight less so is something that doesn't follow. You have to logically show that the Empire oppresses their army into fighting on a scale that envelops huge swaths of said army.

Again, research or no...what the hell made you come to that conclusion?

So...you made a leap of logic that is based on your gut? You do realize that is foolish unless your gut has some basis within the material.

This still doesn't contend of why do you think the Alliance is better because they believe more in their cause. In fact one should believe the Empire's soliders are closer knit since the Alliance is attacking their homes claiming liberation from a tyrant.

I might point out that you are taking as much of a leap of logic in this contention.

If the army is in fact primarily made up of local conscripts, then there wouldn't be much to believe in. Let's table it until I can get to my books. I moved twice a few years ago and still haven't unpacked them.

I am concluding that the Imperial Army isn't oppressed to any point that they would fight in a lesser fashion. You are making the assertion:

So, to answer the question, I'd say that Alliance soldiers would be better simply because they believe what they're fighting for. And actually want to fight.

that they are being oppressed enough that the Alliance is better due to the thought they are just idealogical better. Where the hell has it ever been shown that the Imperial Army is oppressed to this degree? And before you come up with research, understand that your claim is extraordinarily bold. This requires you showing massive oppression of said army and a general malaise in their conditions.