What if the Empire invaded modern day Earth?

[Korgeta]

(note: no, I did not copy this from another forum, that was me that made it)

An Imperial invasion force consisting of:

Vader as the commander
500,000 stormtroopers
1000 AT-STs
100 AT-ATs
100 tie fighters

Invades Earth. To be fair, the countries of Earth unite together in an organized fighting force.

The invaders have:

enough supplies to last them from North to South America
as much knowledge on the world's militaries as is available to the public

They start off in the middle of South America

No nukes or other "weapons of mass destruction" allowed.

Unless the empire has parked it's star destroyers on earth's orbit then the cause is lost for them. I can't see how a 100 tie fighters are not only be able to pin point and destroy all the world's non military or military facilities, but counteract all the ICM and other long ranged non nuclear weapons that may be going for all their troops and them and having to engage with any airborne combatants. Of course they could go at the fast speeds they do at space but in terms of combat in space and ground they slow down (such as flying around the falcon and being shot by man stationed guns) or any of the fighting in the movies. And they didn't move as fast as they should when trying to catch up on the falcon as it made it's escape from the city in the empire strikes back. If they have to provide any sensible protection then they cannot go beyond the limitations of the standing army, they have to cover the area where they are about to occupy. if they go venturing off to attack like say china then they are going to leave the ground troops to terrible damage. The strategy the OP has set out for star wars is flawed, for one thing the number needed for planetary occupation is too low.

[Serafina]

Unless the empire has parked it's star destroyers on earth's orbit then the cause is lost for them. I can't see how a 100 tie fighters are not only be able to pin point and destroy all the world's non military or military facilities, but counteract all the ICM and other long ranged non nuclear weapons that may be going for all their troops and them and having to engage with any airborne combatants.

Then you did not read this thread AT ALL.

First of all, the TIEs have unprecedented speed, altitude and firepower. They are immune to everything the world could possibly throw at them, and they have the firepower and sensors to quickly destroy strategic targets such as large ports, sattelites, power plant and military centers of command (and everything else they want to).
That capability alone, once demonstrated, will deter nearly every counter attack, since TIEs can cripple an enire nation within minutes.

Which brings us to the second point: That it is moronic to assume thaht earth will stand united against the imperials, and that they will resist at all costs. That just plain contradicts all about politics and human psychology.
It's therefore very unlikely that you will have thousands of ICBMs launched at the imperials.

And even if that happens due to everyone suddenly being a moron, then the TIEs CAN intercept the nukes. Their flight times to Brazil would be long enough for that, and TIEs are easily fast enough for that. At any rate, such a nuclear strike would not eleminate the imperials - mostly because you would not know what exactly you need to strike, and also because many nukes would not get trough anyway.
But as i said, such a strike is extremely unlikely, since i would mean that the nation commiting it would get wiped out. Hence, no one will be willing to do so, and that would be the rational choice.

Meanwhile, non-nuclear long-range missiles do not only not exist, but are too imprecise and weak to do any real damage.

And they didn't move as fast as they should when trying to catch up on the falcon as it made it's escape from the city in the empire strikes back.

You do not understand the concept of relative speed then, moron.

The strategy the OP has set out for star wars is flawed, for one thing the number needed for planetary occupation is too low.

The OP has not set out a strategy, but the strategy by Star Wanker 888 is indeed flawed.
Because they do not HAVE to occupy the planet. They can just set themselves up as a very powerfull nation and achieve other goals by diplocamcy. There is just no reason they should be interested in global domination by direct occupation of territory, they have other means from oppression by terror, diplomacy and other things.

[Korgeta]

Unless the empire has parked it's star destroyers on earth's orbit then the cause is lost for them. I can't see how a 100 tie fighters are not only be able to pin point and destroy all the world's non military or military facilities, but counteract all the ICM and other long ranged non nuclear weapons that may be going for all their troops and them and having to engage with any airborne combatants.

Then you did not read this thread AT ALL.

So Tie fighters can cripple a nation within minutes but not a cargo ship called the falcon...interesting concept. More interesting is that you spent an entire post not answering or even debating issues i raised on my post and instead you go on about 'tie fighters can resist everything etc etc and if you disagree then your a moron' Well if that is your style of arguments fair enough but I don't see many example from someone who says that the movies have shown examples of intercepting missile strikes.

The OP did state the world was united against this threat so I have no idea where you got the idea world would not be unified against it etc because the whole setup is designed with the idea in mind that it's a total war scenario.

[Serafina]

So Tie fighters can cripple a nation within minutes but not a cargo ship called the falcon...interesting concept.

Hey, guess what:
-The Falcon was not a stationary target
-The Falcon has SW-level technology
-The Falcon was not pursued by 100 TIEs

re interesting is that you spent an entire post not answering or even debating issues i raised on my post and instead you go on about 'tie fighters can resist everything etc etc and if you disagree then your a moron' Well if that is your style of arguments fair enough but I don't see many example from someone who says that the movies have shown examples of intercepting missile strikes.

As i've said, you did not even read this thread.
But here we go, short version:
-No anti-air equipment/fighters we have can touch TIEs due to their speed and maneuverability
-For that reason, they can intercept and destroy ballistic missiles
-They have enough firepower to level targets like dams, power plants, harbors and non-fortified military targets
-There are 100 TIEs
-The OP gives them enough fuel for half a year of operations while under heavy combat, that translates to much more if you do not fight that much

The OP did state the world was united against this threat so I have no idea where you got the idea world would not be unified against it etc because the whole setup is designed with the idea in mind that it's a total war scenario.

Because that part of the OP is moronic. There is absolutely NO REASON for the world to go to total war. Even if they did, they would stop doing so very quickly. And other than nukes, they can't do much to the imperials due to logistical issues.

You don't get the latter?
Simple, South America does not have the infrastructure to support giant armies. You can have 50 million soldiers, that's no use if you can't supply them there. And all of the worlds airforce and navies can be annihilated very fast by TIEs anyway - or in the case of planes, even by Storm Troopers with a few missile launchers they carry. And they also have no sattelites anymore, since the TIEs can destroy those with ease.
So you are stuck with no airforce, no navy to speak off and no real-time communication and trying to fight an enemy in the midst of a jungle. The USA are not the only country that can fight there at all (and Canada, Mexiko etc.), and they have to march their soldiers all the way down to Brazil without air support or a rail network to supply them. Result: They can send millions of soldiers into a meat grinder one tiny army after the other (due to supply limits) and not achieve anything.

The world has no interest in fighting this fight. We have nothing to gain from this fight, but it would destroy our world economy, kill millions of our people and cripple our homes.
Real life nations and people do not go "hurf hurf, resistance at all costs". Only morons like hte OP do that.

[Korgeta]

-The Falcon was not a stationary target
-The Falcon was not pursued by 100 TIEs
-No anti-air equipment/fighters we have can touch TIEs due to their speed and maneuverability
-For that reason, they can intercept and destroy ballistic missiles
-They have enough firepower to level targets like dams, power plants, harbors and non-fortified military targets

So no anti equipment can touch the tie's but effectively disabling a cargo ship is beyond them not to mention that same cargo ship destroyed three tie's with it's guns. Of course it evaded them quite well for a non aerodynamic design. If you gave evidence that tie's have shot down missiles, then there will be more weight in your argument and not a case of this is what SW would be like if I wrote it

[Serafina]

-The Falcon was not a stationary target
-The Falcon was not pursued by 100 TIEs
-No anti-air equipment/fighters we have can touch TIEs due to their speed and maneuverability
-For that reason, they can intercept and destroy ballistic missiles
-They have enough firepower to level targets like dams, power plants, harbors and non-fortified military targets

So no anti equipment can touch the tie's but effectively disabling a cargo ship is beyond them not to mention that same cargo ship destroyed three tie's with it's guns. Of course it evaded them quite well for a non aerodynamic design. If you gave evidence that tie's have shot down missiles, then there will be more weight in your argument and not a case of this is what SW would be like if I wrote it

So you ignore everything i just said. Great.

Anti-air missiles are too slow to hit TIE-fighters. So are planes, and aa-guns are not going to do anything either.
The "cargo ship" you are talking about is faster than anything we have on earth, and also extremely tough. And being aerodynamic doesn't matter for maneuverability, especially not in space.

[Cykeisme]

Heh, the Millenium Falcon itself would be a real bitch if it decided to fuck around with Earth.
It really doesn't reflect badly on Earth's technology if it has trouble with anything built with the technological base of a 25,000 year old galaxy-spanning civilization.


The title of the thread is stupid to begin with. "What if the Empire invaded modern day Earth?" is definitely not what this is. It's more like a tiny landing force stranded on Earth without fuel, food and other critical supplies.

[Surlethe]

ointing to a ship being in space doesn't say anything about its capabilities. But the straight lines they zip away from planets from does. Star Wars ships outright ignore gravity.

Which tells you something about energy generation. It doesn't matter how fast you do it, to leave an Earth-like planet behind means that you're capable of generating at least 61 million J/kg. If you do it in less than five minutes, then you're capable of generating at least 200 kW/kg. If, say, the Millennium Falcon has a mass of 1500 tons (c.f. http://www.stardestroyer.net/Empire/Tec ... Calc1.html) then that makes its power generation capabilities at least 300 billion W.

Since you have the movies, if you want to scale how far the MF is from Tatooine I'd be happy to do the relevant math to get an absolute lower limit on its power generation capabilities. (Edit2: To do this, estimate its angular cross-section and multiply (the sine of?) that angle, in radians, by the radius of the Earth. You don't need to bother with correcting for distance from the MF because it's much much closer to the camera than Tatooine.)

Edit: And its acceleration too. (That will be implied by its power generation, though.)

[Korgeta]

[/quote]So you ignore everything i just said. Great.[/quote]

Really? Cool, i'll remember to do that more often.

I suppose you like to think I ignored you, couldn't argue your points etc fact is why should I argue points to someone regarding a military structure and politics when that person has no clear idea what their talking about? I gave my points and all you given was under your own personal belief and not facts or examples. What am more interested in is you being able to answer the key question that I raised to you (twice) and to which you ignored (twice) Give me proof that tie fighters have shot down intercepting missiles and other forms of projectiles and I'll be perfectly fine with that.

[Serafina]

Yawn. No such direct proof is required. They have the speed to keep up with them. They have the precision to hit them (they only need proximity hits anyway). They've got the time to do so.
Hence, they can do it. The missiles can't dodge or anything.

[Korgeta]

Yawn. No such direct proof is required. They have the speed to keep up with them. They have the precision to hit them (they only need proximity hits anyway). They've got the time to do so.
Hence, they can do it. The missiles can't dodge or anything.

I like the defeatist tone of your post, we should talk more often.


Now am looking on wookipedia and it's saying the max speed in the atomsphere is 800km/h in regards to cruise missile speeds, they travel at 3000km/h so if no further proof is required...

[Sinanju]

Wait, wait, wait. So we are talking about cruise missiles?

Like the ALCM with its top speed of 500mph, or the Tomahawk with its top speed of 550 mph? Compared to the TIE Fighter's speed of at least 750 mph, if not faster?

[Korgeta]

Wait, wait, wait. So we are talking about cruise missiles?

Like the ALCM with its top speed of 500mph, or the Tomahawk with its top speed of 550 mph? Compared to the TIE Fighter's speed of at least 750 mph, if not faster?

Or the brahmos http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BrahMos which travels at a max speed of mach 3 which equates to 2304mph

Those ties have to be pretty damm fast. (bear in mind the brahmos is 2yrs old and we hypersonic missiles in devlopment)

[Cykeisme]

Cruise missiles have a large enough size and low enough speed that hitting them should be at the most similar to hitting an opposing starfighter (quite likely easier). Additionally, cruise missiles won't make evasive maneuvers. Plus, since the TIE can keep up with the missile, it should be able to tail the missile and have a significant time to make multiple weapon attacks if for some reason it misses one or more times.

Granted, the presence of the atmosphere may for some reason make it more difficult for the TIEs to target a cruise missile, and perhaps cruise missiles can have their software modified to have them make rudimentary evasive maneuvers.

Note I say engine output though: this is technically power generation, but isn't necessarily usable for other purposes. The Saturn V drew > 100 GW while launching too. The Saturn V, of course, ate through fuel like nobody's business and was dry in a matter of minutes.

But yeah, SW engines rock. They just don't rock1000.

Engine power output is not necessarily usable for other purposes in all vehicles, but in this case the Saturn V is a chemical rocket that combusts fuel with oxidizer in a combustion chamber. Tapping this to power other kinds of systems will be difficult and inefficient.

However, the Falcon has ion engines powered by an on-board reactor. The reactor should similarly be able to power a directed-energy weapon that projects a focused beam of high-energy ions at the very least; meanwhile, we'll take it at face value that they can also use it to power other types of directed-energy weapons as the ICS typically shows a single reactor in ships of various sizes, that powers both engines and weapons.
Thus, in the case of a Star Wars vehicle, engine output does directly reflect on power generation capability.
Just saying, that's all.

[Sinanju]

Or the brahmos http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BrahMos which travels at a max speed of mach 3 which equates to 2304mph

Those ties have to be pretty damm fast. (bear in mind the brahmos is 2yrs old and we hypersonic missiles in devlopment)

And the Indian military has enough of those to risk using them on TIE Fighters instead of their intended targets? Cite? This isn't like the Tomahawk or ALCM which have been in service for so long that there are hefty stockpiles built up.

But, if you are in front of it, or if it is driving by you, it becomes a matter of timing, not speed. And the math isn't hard to get that timing right. At least, not for the real world. The Empire apparently can't do it.

Are you trying to say the Empire can't do anti-aircraft missiles? I am misreading that sentence, right?

[Korgeta]

Or the brahmos http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/BrahMos which travels at a max speed of mach 3 which equates to 2304mph

Those ties have to be pretty damm fast. (bear in mind the brahmos is 2yrs old and we have hypersonic missiles in devlopment)

And the Indian military has enough of those to risk using them on TIE Fighters instead of their intended targets? Cite? This isn't like the Tomahawk or ALCM which have been in service for so long that there are hefty stockpiles built up.

Obviously there isn't going to be a google how many are there of these super fast missiles but this will depend on what timeline were setting SW troops in the 'modern' world. Brahmos has been around for 2yrs (or 3 at most) and they intend to make 2000 by 2017, given these weapons are likely to be in production during the latter half of testing then as a rough estimate of 200-400 (assuming they have been making them from 2007 and want to get it done by 2017)

Don't forget other countries will try to create their own varation such as china, who proarbly are not only making their own version but may be able to make more of it, as well receiving the ones made by India and Russia. Then we have the USA with it's X-51 Hypersonic cruise missile with a speed of 5.1 mach and can strike anywhere on the world within an hour. Still being tested, but you can bet one or two are already operational in waiting for deployment (unofficially) Unless there are star destroyers in orbit and with more tie fighters then a 100 won't be effective especially as their speed is not enough and that there is too low a number to deal with the world against them.

[Cykeisme]

However, the Falcon has ion engines powered by an on-board reactor.

Real ion engines don't work like that. I figure Star Wars "ion engine" is similar to Star Wars "lasers" being nothing like the real world ones.

But it doesn't really matter, if they come off the reactor, it does say good things about the generator. Something interesting I brought up in the Gundam thread is what if the reactor must power the engine - the propellant flow also keeps it cool? We never see SW ships turn their engines off, even when not really moving, so perhaps it does. It's pretty cool if it works out that way, actually. To fire a full broadside, they'd have to slow down, then immediately thrust to get rid of the heat!

It'd be fun in a video game.

Haha yes, to be honest I realize that they don't work like ion engines should, for example not destroying the city/continent below them (especially with Venators and the like) when they thrust into space, neither accidentally not deliberately.
Anyway, from the behavior of the ships, it seems that they can ramp up and down the current power output of their reactors fairly quickly as and when it's needed. Meanwhile, waste heat (both from inefficiencies in internal systems and enemy weapon energy absorbed by shields) are disposed of using funky magi-tech neutrino radiators.

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.

They have a pathetic track record of taking fighters down in the movies, even when it should have been easy.

It may be because of some property of the fighters, or something the fighters are doing..?

[Sinanju]

They have a pathetic track record of taking fighters down in the movies, even when it should have been easy.

Uhm...wow. And just when were air-to-ground operations shown in the movies anyway?

- 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? It would have been a pointless extra expense, and it very nearly was until Luke decided to go with the voices in his head.
- Empire Strikes Back: The Empire didn't use TIE Fighters in the Battle of Hoth for what I should hope were obvious reasons.
- Return of the Jedi: How would air support have helped them during the Battle of Endor, when they were ambushed? Strafing runs would have had a good chance of hitting your own guys in that kind of confusion.

It's the EU where this kind of thing was developed, such as the PLX-2M missile launcher (which has been discussed repeatedly in this very thread) and various kinds of turrets.

Obviously there isn't going to be a google how many are there of these super fast missiles but this will depend on what timeline were setting SW troops in the 'modern' world. Brahmos has been around for 2yrs (or 3 at most) and they intend to make 2000 by 2017, given these weapons are likely to be in production during the latter half of testing then as a rough estimate of 200-400 (assuming they have been making them from 2007 and want to get it done by 2017)

Don't forget other countries will try to create their own varation such as china, who proarbly are not only making their own version but may be able to make more of it, as well receiving the ones made by India and Russia. Then we have the USA with it's X-51 Hypersonic cruise missile with a speed of 5.1 mach and can strike anywhere on the world within an hour. Still being tested, but you can bet one or two are already operational in waiting for deployment (unofficially) Unless there are star destroyers in orbit and with more tie fighters then a 100 won't be effective especially as their speed is not enough and that there is too low a number to deal with the world against them.

You really haven't been reading the thread, have you? Go take a look at the last couple of pages where it's been repeatedly pointed out that having something in development is very different from having it in production.

[Korgeta]

You really haven't been reading the thread, have you? Go take a look at the last couple of pages where it's been repeatedly pointed out that having something in development is very different from having it in production.

read them all?! c'mon it's not like you read all 21 pages of quoting and counter quoting!

I have read a few pages (or as much as time can spare) but I will say that if something is in 'development' then it's proarbly already in production. I can't or pretend to claim how many of these weapons there could be but remember that the F-117 Nighthawk was denied to have existed by the U.S despite being in operations as far back as 1983 and was only officially unveiled at 1988. Whilst tests and developments of these weapons have been shown it is also likely that they may be in production already.The supersonic missiles are in existence though today that's a cert.

[The Vortex Empire]

Board rules state you must read the entire thread before posting in it.

[Korgeta]

Board rules state you must read the entire thread before posting in it.

I'll remember that in the future thanks.

[Stofsk]

Board rules state you must read the entire thread before posting in it.

Where do the board rules state that?

[Lord Insanity]

TIE fighters can at an absolute bare minimum match the feat of the real space shuttle. At the end of the solid booster rocket stage at about 2 minutes after launch the shuttle is going nearly 5000 kph and it is still in the upper atmosphere. The TIEs are shown to easily exceed this in Empire Strikes Back by virtue of chasing the Falcon into space from cloud city. Bespin is a gas giant. The canon speed for an unshielded TIE in an atmosphere is 9000 kph. Nothing in the movie contradicts this but it does contradict stupidly low numbers like 1200 kph. Nothing we have on Earth can match a TIE. We also can't blanket the battlefield with SW level ECM and/or jamming like we see done in the movies. This is the canon reason ships fight at slower relative speeds in the movies. It neatly explains why we routinely see ships leave a planet as easily as a modern plane leaves an airport yet they don't necessarily make use of this acceleration in combat. There is nothing on Earth to hinder a TIE like that. TIEs would make the Great Marianas Turkey Shoot from World War 2 look like a pathetic failure.

[Batman]

Board rules state you must read the entire thread before posting in it.

Where do the board rules state that?

They don't actually (at least not that I could find), but I must admit that I too assumed they did. Anyway, even if it's not required by the rules, I think it generally is a wise thing to do, as shown by this very thread.

[The Vortex Empire]

Board rules state you must read the entire thread before posting in it.

Where do the board rules state that?

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