Tactical Stupidity in Science Fictions

[Skelron]

hmm, no I disagree given what the 'Swords' they carry actually are, I'm taking the sword. (Chain or Power Sword>bayonet) bayonet's are out dated in the 40K universe, it may sound strange to say this, but they simply don't cut it when compared to say a Marine wielding a Powersword, or an Eldar Howling Banshee.

The weapons used by Space Marine Assault Squads aren't powerswords, they are chainswords (one-hand chainsaws). Powerswords are so expensive that they are reserved for officers plus Deathwatch Kill Squads, Wolf Guard and other elite troops.

sorry your right... but I did include Chainswords in my little 'formula' (Chain or power sword>Bayonet) SO I stand by my original point, I'll take a one handed Chainsaw, with the advantages of it being Sword shaped and able to be used like a sword, over a Bayonet. (Anyway your charge could be extended to any species using similar tactics, and the Eldar Howling Banshee's do use Power Swords...)

[Pablo Sanchez]

sorry your right... but I did include Chainswords in my little 'formula' (Chain or power sword>Bayonet) SO I stand by my original point, I'll take a one handed Chainsaw, with the advantages of it being Sword shaped and able to be used like a sword, over a Bayonet. (Anyway your charge could be extended to any species using similar tactics, and the Eldar Howling Banshee's do use Power Swords...)

How is a sword better than a bayonet? A bayonet has the advantage of being attached to the rifle. You can switch from one weapon to another without any pause, and you can fire the rifle while you're stabbing.

[Sea Skimmer]

sorry your right... but I did include Chainswords in my little 'formula' (Chain or power sword>Bayonet) SO I stand by my original point, I'll take a one handed Chainsaw, with the advantages of it being Sword shaped and able to be used like a sword, over a Bayonet. (Anyway your charge could be extended to any species using similar tactics, and the Eldar Howling Banshee's do use Power Swords...)

How is a sword better than a bayonet? A bayonet has the advantage of being attached to the rifle. You can switch from one weapon to another without any pause, and you can fire the rifle while you're stabbing.

Which is often required to extract it

[Smiling Bandit]

On with the topic of this post, tactical stupidity. I just thought up another one the Hailfire droid in AOTC. They have to be the most tacticaly inept vehicle in the universe, they ride on Two giant wheels(easily disablable), they have about 20 missles per side, completely exposed, easy to hit. There is no known way of refilling expended firepower, it has no secondary weapons. It probably is horrible at close ranges. The whole assortment of Seperatist vehicles is filled with tactical stupidity, walking spider legged vehicles(possibly one leg knocked out and the thing is immobile) Now if the Seperatist made a Highbrid of the Hailfire and say the spiderdroid that would make sense, but otherwise the Hailfire is a wheeled POS.

OK
1) Rarely do people refill portable missile launchers while under fire.

2) Nothing in Star Wars has proven to be very resistant to damage from thier own extremely powerfrul weaponry. Droids are cheap and easy to make. Its presumably easier to make them cheaply and easily, even if the design isn't great. They did display excellent speed and very, very heavy firepower.

[Pablo Sanchez]

Which is often required to extract it

The point is that a bayonet is better than a sword, because it has a gun attached to it. The actual blade is a weapon of last resort, and in that role it is better than a sword because there's no scabbard to pull it from. You just lunge.

[Subnormal]

Read All Quiet on the Western Front or see the movie, you will find that a bayonet at close quarters is useless compared to the powers of the Trench Shovel.

[Master of Ossus]

Please note that a bayonet is essentially useless, except in psychological warfare, because they are almost never used. The gun itself is far more effective, even if used only as a bludgeon. Bayonets are also used for light digging, if nothing else is available, and they have other domestic uses, as well.

Psychologically, it is far easier to slash someone than to stab them. To slash them is psychologically considered a method of making them back off, however to physically stab them is definitely only a means of killing someone. This is why criminal psychologists consider stabbing an extremely personal crime, and when they have a stabbing death they almost always assume that the killer knew the victim. This is largely why the trench shovel was used more as a melee weapon than the bayonet.

The point of a Hailfire is to operate it like a portable SAM site, or as an MLRS. Neither of these systems is easy to reload, but they are both extremely useful, anyway. The point is that those 40 rockets/missiles (more than any modern system), deliver a massive benefit to friendly troops by thinning out an enemy's ranks before the other side can move within range. The Hailfire is kind of the ultimate system, in that manner. It can not only decimate enemy ranks, but also selectively target the right enemies to fire on, hitting important targets first. Note that the missiles scored hits consistently on armored units. Also remember that the cost of a droid is almost certainly MUCH less than the cost of a clone, even if the droid is a Hailfire or other heavily armed/armored/intelligent droid. Thus they are an excellent investment. Although not preferred in combat over people, they also offer significant cost-effectiveness ratio benefits to an army. The Hailfire is not stupid, in fact, it is a very powerful weapon.

[Skelron]

Please note that a bayonet is essentially useless, except in psychological warfare, because they are almost never used. The gun itself is far more effective, even if used only as a bludgeon. Bayonets are also used for light digging, if nothing else is available, and they have other domestic uses, as well.

Psychologically, it is far easier to slash someone than to stab them. To slash them is psychologically considered a method of making them back off, however to physically stab them is definitely only a means of killing someone. This is why criminal psychologists consider stabbing an extremely personal crime, and when they have a stabbing death they almost always assume that the killer knew the victim. This is largely why the trench shovel was used more as a melee weapon than the bayonet.
.

Normally yes... To stab is an obvious attempt to kill while a slash isn't neccersary... but when your slashing with a Chainsaw... well lets just say you arn't trying to do anything but kill them. Also although the Bayonet may allow you too fire as well, assult troops in 40K usually carry Pistols as well. A Bolt Pistol is nothing to sneeze at, the differance between a Bolt pistol and a Bolt Gun is one of range mostly, it'll still take most of your chest with it.

[Master of Ossus]

I know all that. In fact, I agree with everything you said. The fact is, that psychologically it is far easier to slash at an opponent instead of stabbing them, even if both are equally lethal. I was saying that bayonets are ineffective weapons, and then you attacked me!

Only the actual gun of a bayonet is useful as a weapon, in almost all circumstances (note that the gun is the part most often used in melee combat, as well as ranged combat). I agree with what you said about both chainswords and bolt pistols/guns.

[Skelron]

I know all that. In fact, I agree with everything you said. The fact is, that psychologically it is far easier to slash at an opponent instead of stabbing them, even if both are equally lethal. I was saying that bayonets are ineffective weapons, and then you attacked me!

Only the actual gun of a bayonet is useful as a weapon, in almost all circumstances (note that the gun is the part most often used in melee combat, as well as ranged combat). I agree with what you said about both chainswords and bolt pistols/guns.

Cool sorry, I didn't mean it as an attack on you, I guess I need to be a little more careful in what I write. (I got too used, more than likely, to defending my position in this thread that I took that whole tone in responding to what you said without meaning it.)

[Master of Ossus]

Cool sorry, I didn't mean it as an attack on you, I guess I need to be a little more careful in what I write. (I got too used, more than likely, to defending my position in this thread that I took that whole tone in responding to what you said without meaning it.)

That's cool. I get attacked all the time (mostly by rabid trekkies or B5ers). I was just surprised you were rebutting my statements when I was trying to tell you that you were right.

[IRG CommandoJoe]

Emperor Palpatine was pretty stupid for getting so close to complete galactic domination, only to piss it all away because he let the Rebels know about the Death Star II. And the entire manner in which the Battle of Endor was run was ridiculous. He shouldn't have relied too much on his power to forsee things. Remember Yoda saying that the future is always in motion? He should have considered that. Had the Death Star II been complete in secret, the Emperor could have seeked out and destroyed the entire Rebellion at will. With shielding that wouldn't even let ships near it, it would be unstoppable. But no, he had to take all of those stupid risks just for kicks. Idiot. And as someone pointed out before on these message boards, the tactics at the Battle of Hoth were needlessly dangerous. The Rebel snowspeeders went head-on with the AT-ATs instead of flanking them. They didn't even attempt to try to blow out the ground under or in front of the AT-ATs. Unless they encountered these monsters for the first time, they weren't really thinking too much about the situation. All of the times I ever played Shadows of the Empire, Rogue Squadron, and Rogue Leader, I NEVER went head-on with AT-AT's. I ALWAYS advanced on their sides. The very first time I ever played the Battle of Hoth level in Shadows of the Empire, I thought to myself, "I don't want to get in the way of those AT-AT's..." It's just common sense that you should avoid their "heads."

[Akm72]

Had the Death Star II been complete in secret, the Emperor could have seeked out and destroyed the entire Rebellion at will.

The problem is if the DS2 is completed, the Rebel Alliance arn't going to come out and play. They wouldn't dare go head to head with a fully operational DS (unless they've isolated a technical weak point). The problem the Empire always had in fighting the Rebels in finding them in the first place.

They didn't even attempt to try to blow out the ground under or in front of the AT-ATs..<snip>..It's just common sense that you should avoid their "heads."

In the particular circumstances on Hoth, the snowspeeders had to provide cover for the ground forces. Attacking from the sides and rear might keep the speeders safe, but it does zilch for the guys in the trenches. Attacking from the front takes the walker's attention away from the trenches.
Blowing the ground out is probably just ineffective using blasters on the glacier, maybe it just penetrates deep into the snow & ice without making a suitable depression to destabilize the walkers (or something).

[Patrick Degan]

[quote="IRG CommandThe problem is if the DS2 is completed, the Rebel Alliance arn't going to come out and play. They wouldn't dare go head to head with a fully operational DS (unless they've isolated a technical weak point). The problem the Empire always had in fighting the Rebels in finding them in the first place.

Not a problem, really. After the Death Star's blown up a few planets, the rest would surrender soon enough. In Palpatine's place, I'd target the main homeworlds of the Rebel Alliance, such as Calamar for a start. You'd have the populations of the other Rebel worlds selling out their own troops simply because they don't want to die. After that, the Rebellion would have been little more than a terrorist organisation. Palpatine blew everything, as Mike Wong has argued several times, because he became personally obsessed with the Skywalker family drama instead of keeping his mind on his objectives.

In the particular circumstances on Hoth, the snowspeeders had to provide cover for the ground forces. Attacking from the sides and rear might keep the speeders safe, but it does zilch for the guys in the trenches. Attacking from the front takes the walker's attention away from the trenches.
Blowing the ground out is probably just ineffective using blasters on the glacier, maybe it just penetrates deep into the snow & ice without making a suitable depression to destabilize the walkers (or something).

The Rebels at Hoth essentially had to scramble, once they knew their position had been compromised, and had little time to prepare a defence. In any case, the Rebels had decided to evacuate Hoth VI, and even if their speeders had followed the tactic outlined here, the Imperials could have landed more AT-ATs. The imperative was to get out as quickly as possible before the Imperials had thrown up a solid enough blockade to prevent any escape. But I agree that attacking the walkers from the sides is the best approach.

[Master of Ossus]

Perhaps it would have been difficult to attack an AT-AT walker from the side. Remember that AT-AT's can rapidly move to fire up to 90 degrees from where they were facing mere seconds earlier, and an attack from the side might have also risked striking the shield, which starfighters cannot pass through (or even capital ships) without deactivating it, first.

[Subnormal]

Does this also count from going from behind, it is seens that the speeders do attack from the side why else would they go under and through the At At's legs. But they didn't approach from the flanks they approached straight on, then turned and cave to blasting salvos and screaming " That armor is too strong for blasters."

[BioDroid]

Hmmmm....

Let's see...

RotJ: Okay, so Palpatine goes through this entire ruse in order to trap the Rebels, but let's them get so far as to actually infiltrate the shield bunker? Why? Once the assault team was within the shield's area of effect, old Palpy could have contained them at will. Defenses around the shield bunker? Non-existant. And where the frell was that damned AT-AT during the ground battle (Don't give me any crap about it not being able to maneuver through the forest, with that kind of firepower available, it could have blew through any foliage.) TIE Fighters or any air support? Nope, not there either. The entire ground battle should never have taken place.

ESB: Why use speeders when they had perfectly good X-Wings ready and standing by? X-Wings that according to the EU WERE effective against AT-AT's! Why were only beam weapons used? Why no Concussion missiles or Proton Torpedoes? They could have wiped out the imperial assault with a handful of missiles. (Okay, I'll accept that they may have been in short supply, but even one proton torpedo would have gone a long way towards evening things up. For that matter, though, Why only have a handfull of AT-ATs and one or two AT-ST's attack. With the size of the fleet they had assembled, they could have had a much larger strike force and suffered far fewer casualties, plus it would have played more in line with the Imperial doctrine (Hit it with the biggest hammer possible.)

STFC: Plot hole...The Borg have time travel capability, however they only used it as a last resort while they were sending their obligatory Borg Cube to attack earth. Why use it then? Why not travel back in time in Borg Space, AND THEN attack precontact earth?

I have more, but I'll add those in later.

[Typhonis 1]

ROTJ Not putting a frelling FENCE around the back door,Not burniong the forest back a good klicl or so,not having any fortifications near it,opening the frelling door whenn you cant see the speakers face only his eyes.

[DodoBrd16]

We currently have smart munitions that we can put through air vents or windows.

The Rebels most likely have desk top computers that make our NSA Super Comps look like chalk boards with lights....

And yet their targeting computers couldnt handle hitting a Vent?

A laser guided bomb from our Current day military has a darn good chance of getting in side the vent, why couldnt the Rebels sink it?

B5. Defenses on the moon. In ever single attack on Earth...the enemy always comes out of HS within visual range of the moon. Why not put a whole hell of a lot of missile silos on the dang thing or some VERY high powered beam weapons?

Next Gen.... well the borg thing has already been mentioned....but I feel it needs to be again....One cube didnt work....two certainly would have...why the heck didnt they do what they claim to be able to and adapt your tactics...

Andromeda....She can pull manuvers that the F-22 would be hard pressed to match...yet she cant get out of the way of a plasma cannon shot? See the first episode with Orca Pride. Think its double helix or something...

[Sea Skimmer]

We currently have smart munitions that we can put through air vents or windows.

The Rebels most likely have desk top computers that make our NSA Super Comps look like chalk boards with lights....

And yet their targeting computers couldnt handle hitting a Vent?

A laser guided bomb from our Current day military has a darn good chance of getting in side the vent, why couldnt the Rebels sink it?

No laser guided bomb has a CEP over 2 meters, an even if one did that still only gives you a 50/50 chance of hiting.

Anyway, the Imperials had massive jamers plus distorition generators going, that likely cut down on computre accracy and required the long targeting times.

Also, remember that while making the trench run, you would not have LOS to the target till it was only a couple thousand meters away..

[BioDroid]

Pretty much any SCi-Fi Series. Let's put the bridge/command center in the most vulnerable area possible, even though we almost never get our information from eyeballing the enemy through a window. In Trek, it's always the little bubble on top of the saucer. for the Fed ships, and the protruding neck for the Klingons and Romulans B5, the nice little window in the front of the station (and not to mention almost on the damned nose of the whitestars.) Although the Cruisers in B5 seemed to learn this lesson, until Crusade. In Star Wars, it's the HUGE tower on top of the damned ship.

What's wrong with putting the command center in the middle of the ship, where it will still be able to perfom it's functions perfectly well, not be nearly so vulnerable, and would probably clear the way for a couple more weapons hard-points.

[DodoBrd16]

[/quote]
No laser guided bomb has a CEP over 2 meters, an even if one did that still only gives you a 50/50 chance of hiting.

Anyway, the Imperials had massive jamers plus distorition generators going, that likely cut down on computre accracy and required the long targeting times.

Also, remember that while making the trench run, you would not have LOS to the target till it was only a couple thousand meters away..[/quote]

The point was, that our targeting systems would have a decent chance of hitting the vent. The Rebels are using technology that is...what...atleast a thousand years ahead of what we are currently using? Luke shouldnt have had to use the force, the targeting computer should have been able to do it easy.

If a laser would be distorted by those field then use a video targeting system. The Imps obviously were not jamming communications or else the Rebels couldnt have communicated with one another. So fighter to missile transmissions couldnt have been that hard. So just fly it into the vent.

[Master of Ossus]

Pretty much any SCi-Fi Series. Let's put the bridge/command center in the most vulnerable area possible, even though we almost never get our information from eyeballing the enemy through a window. In Trek, it's always the little bubble on top of the saucer. for the Fed ships, and the protruding neck for the Klingons and Romulans B5, the nice little window in the front of the station (and not to mention almost on the damned nose of the whitestars.) Although the Cruisers in B5 seemed to learn this lesson, until Crusade. In Star Wars, it's the HUGE tower on top of the damned ship.

What's wrong with putting the command center in the middle of the ship, where it will still be able to perfom it's functions perfectly well, not be nearly so vulnerable, and would probably clear the way for a couple more weapons hard-points.

In SW, most ships actually have a bridge that is centrally located. On ISD's, the bridge is in the most protected area of the ship, covered easily by most of the ship's weapons. I don't see this as being stupid.

[Master of Ossus]

No laser guided bomb has a CEP over 2 meters, an even if one did that still only gives you a 50/50 chance of hiting.

Anyway, the Imperials had massive jamers plus distorition generators going, that likely cut down on computre accracy and required the long targeting times.

Also, remember that while making the trench run, you would not have LOS to the target till it was only a couple thousand meters away..[/quote]

The point was, that our targeting systems would have a decent chance of hitting the vent. The Rebels are using technology that is...what...atleast a thousand years ahead of what we are currently using? Luke shouldnt have had to use the force, the targeting computer should have been able to do it easy.

If a laser would be distorted by those field then use a video targeting system. The Imps obviously were not jamming communications or else the Rebels couldnt have communicated with one another. So fighter to missile transmissions couldnt have been that hard. So just fly it into the vent.[/quote]

Our targeting systems cannot hit an object that is two meters across consistently. Even in the Gulf War, F117's did not generate that kind of accuracy, and with missiles it is far more difficult. The attack did not require the use of the Force, or Dodonna would never have sent the pilots to knock out the DS. He would have, instead, tried to evacuate what he could from Yavin. SW technology is at least 24,000 years more developed than our own, and possibly as much as 25,000 years older. Also, voice transmissions were garbled over the DS, and course correctional information is considerably more difficult to relay than voice transmissions. I have no idea where you got any of your information, as nearly all of it is incorrect.

[Akm72]

On an associated note when Gold group made their initial attack, Gold Leader announced (according to the script): "The exhaust is marked and locked", soon after entering the trench.
Followed several seconds later by this exchange:
GOLD LEADER: "Switching to targeting computer".
GOLD TWO: "Computer locked. Getting a signal".

Later, when the X-wings make their attack runs, they do not declare anything like that at any point. Instead we have:
RED TEN: "We should be able to see it by now."
<snip>
RED TEN: "There's too much interference"
(though he might be talking about the TIE fighters).
RED LEADER: "I'm in range. Target's coming up;"

and

WEDGE: "My scope shows the tower, but I can't see the exhaust port! Are you sure the computer can hit it?"

This difference is interesting, as it seems to show that the Y-wing's sensors could see the exhaust port while the X-wing's couldn't.
When Red Leader misses (just), it is likly that he was shooting without a proper 'computer lock' on the target. It also shows that the sensors on the X-wings were not completly blind to large sensor targets like the tower, even though they couldn't see the exhaust port or the TIE fighters.
As the X-wing pilots were still using the special targeting scope, it is likly that even without a computer lock, it still provided useful assistance. My guess is that they were aiming at a navigation waypoint, positioned over the exhaust port, rather than at the exhaust port inself.
One would tend to assume that with a proper computer lock, the Y-wings could've hit the exhaust port quite easily, if Vader hadn't taken them from behind!