I mean troop numbers in total the total count of committable troops. And the corridors aboard an Imperial Star Destroyer are a bit wider than any earth vessel - as we see from all the shots in ESB. There would be at least a hundred men committed to each breech - we are not talking about one hallway - but all of the access points to each breeched area. In this case, he has struck at the gun decks, each wide chasms where the guns and the battery officers are located. There would be countless corridors leading from them to the innards of the ship, magazines, et al.
So my point on the ship combat is correct Omnae? They cannot simply restart and say HEY
Lemme read that part first before I give my opinion. I mean, from what I am reading here, a ship was greatly damaged and then "poof" ended up being miraculously healed.
That doesn't sound right.
But I need to confirm if that's what is happening.
I am pretty light headed tho at the moment so I am not doing any heavy reading.
NOTE: Just addressing the 'coming back to life' thing, since I havent' read the rest and am in a hurry.
Telan - using no strategy beyond charging - seemed to think that I had lost half my fleet in battle to the lose (for him) of only two cruisers. This seemed ridiculous to me, but I didn't want to argue with him since he was annoyed after the whole 'boarding torpedo' thing, so instead of trying to argue with him about it, I simply reasoned that his commanders must have 'misunderstood' the battlefield.
Honestly now, my ships are just as good as his, and I've been using strategy while he's just been charging ahead. The battle has barely begun and all of a sudden I'm down half a fleet? Most unusual. So instead I reasoned the only way this could be logical was that the Imperial fleet simply thought we were dead, and we played along to get into a better situation. I wanted to save us an argument.
Basically Dolash deploys his ships into three equally in strength battlegroups, one main in the middile and a flanking group to either side. Telan, on the other hand, deploys his ships into a Delta formation, the Astrus in the middle, Reigns flanking, and support ships flanking the Reigns, with fighters and gunboats deployed mostly near the three destroyers in flight sized formations and picket screens. The Coalition ships charge, slowly at first, then picking up speed when the Imperials fire their ranging shots, thus throwing off the Imperial's aim. Then, the three groups charge headlong into the Imperial formation, and both sides fire massive broadsides at each other, the Coalition taking the worst of the damage by far due to their weak armament compared to the Imperial's strong armament, shield power being about equal for both sides. But for what the Coalition loses in manpower, it makes up for in tatics, having disrupted and thrown out of line the Imperial formation, the Coalition's own lines remaining intact. The GC ships dive down, re-group, then come back up and into the Imperial formation once again, more point blank broadsides ensue, but this time, boarding torpedoes are fired, and the three largest Imperial ships are boarded by hundreds of enemy shock troops. Casualties up to this time would have evened the odds between the Coalition and the Imperials, number-wise.
Now, about the main issue here, the boarding torpedoes would be able to penetrate and lock on, and drill into the target, and deploy the troops, but basic Imperial security systems, ship borne defenders, and starfighters and maybe even other capital ships would inflict great casaulties on the soldiers and pods before the shockers could get well into the ships anywhere. Starfighters could blast the pods with concussion missiles while they are in the drilling process, without doing much harm to the ship it's self, and so on.
Now, to Dolash's post, yes, utter bullshit, the first part, anyways. Dolash never mentioned the ship's powering down, and the Imperials would have noticed the difference between ship's being destroyed and ship's faking death. While the casualties suffered by the Coalition, in my estimation, would not have been as heavy as mentioned, having those many ships brought back, and having those few ships destroyed, yes, way too light for the GC. In my estimation, appropriate damage would be one Claymore Battleship heavily damaged, ideally, the central battlegroup one, with the other two battleships moderatly damaged. By heavily damaged, i mean, not quite done for, but in such a bad shape that if it is engaged again, it stands a very good chance of destruction. By moderatly damaged, shields breached and hull damaged, vitals lightly damaged. Of the remaining vessels, two Longswords destroyed, in the central group, four more moderatly-heavily damaged, in the flanking groups, which would suffer more missile damage. Even if GC ships are faster now, they are still not faster than the speed of a concussion missile or proton torpedo. In essence we have a fleet of Kaloth Battlecruisers armed with heavy weapons. Finally, in terms of the gunboats, I predict 25% casualties. Most of the heavy Imperial ship's weaponry will be engaged with the larger ships, and they do not carry much in the way that could seriously combat assault gunboats. Most of the damage inflicted would come from other Imperial assault gunships and starfighters. The Kris Fighters, again, about 25% casualties. As for the Imperials, two crusiers destroyed as mentioned due to the Coalition heavier weapons, the destroyers, lighty-to-moderatly damage, occasional shield breaks with hull damage due to the heavy weapons, same with the other heavy cruisers, but Imperial fighter formations decimated by the GC support ships and lighter weaponry noted on the larger capital ships. 50% casualties for both gunboats and starfighters. That is all I have to say.
This is, actually, quite wrong. The Coalition has equally powerful weapons, and would probably have even more to bring to bear then the Empire since they fired but missed. If anything, the Empire would have come out worse in this charge.
We didn't seem to suffer any actual structural damage in the first broadside, so I don't think there were any casualties. The Imperial formation didn't break, my formation simply ended up in a good position where he had less guns to bring to bear and we had a clear shot at the heart of his ships.
The enemy starfighters, corvettes, and so forth were mostly tied up with my fighters and corvettes, not to mention the whole grounds of my argument was that we were close enough range that there wouldn't be time to destroy them before they hit. With enough impact, there would be little need to drill as they could just open up into the ship, and the internal ship defences might be formidible but they only bolster Imperial forces already on the ship, they don't seem to provide any special power to destroy my forces in advance.
I've explained this already - Telan's statement that half my fleet should be dead came off as ridiculous, as he hadn't actually done anything yet to inflict much in the way of casualties. So, to compensate, I just said his officers must have made mistakes. To be direct, with the exception of the Claymore caught by an Astrus shot I don't think the Empire has done anything to knock out my larger ships, the Claymores and the Longswords.
Under the new roleplaying rules, fleet battles are to be a test of skill of writing and cunning tactics - both of which I have employed. Telan, I believe, has not exhibited any tactics beyond a slugging strategy, something which the nimble Coalition ships are meant to be effective against. Thus, I would say that I should be winning this fight right now. Let's forget the nit-picking about just how many of his or my fighters would have been destroyed, the key point is that through my tactical choices, I think his fleet would have suffered more damage, not mine.
On Boarding...
Quick boarding note - I agreed with Omnae's philosophy of small units of ten or so men moving down narrow corridors. The unit of Azguards pushed through one section of the overall perimeter defence onboard the ship, which must be scattered all about the place, and certainly wouldn't be crammed by the hundreds into every little way in or out of a section. I have somewhere between one hundred to two hundred soldiers boarding the Star Destroyer, but I'm guessing the fighting would be done by small units, grenades, ambushes, and the like. We're not running rampant through the ship, a unit just broke out.
Oh, and I'm assuming the crew didn't evacuate instantly - there was surely some guys isolated here and there, regular crew caught behind enemy lines, some guy who tripped before the blast-door closed - you know, that sort of thing.
We're getting a little nit-picky (as am I, unfortunately) on issues like how many men you could fit in a corridor or how fast the point-defence guns would have to be to shoot down enemy boarding craft. The important thing about the success or failure of a battle shouldn't be these nit-picky things, they should be tactics, and the ability of the writer to implement these tactics. If you want to inflict casualties on me, okay, then do something to out-wit me! Do something I'm not prepared for or have no good defence against! You can't just expect to say 'we are fighting' and have your discipline or weapons win the fight for you.
You fired the Astrus turret whilst my forces were regrouping, making good use of your abilities by saving it for a time when my forces were unable to make a good defence against it - so that Battlecruiser is out of comission. The rest of my Battlecruisers and Frigates, however, have done nothing but exchanged brief broadsides with your ships, during which we usually ended up doing one quick and hard-hitting volley before flying away. There is no reason for them to be dead since your tactics have done nothing to kill them. Some of my fighters and perhaps a few Enforcers? Yes, I imagine we lost a number of them dogfighting with your ships, although I have reason to believe my forces would be doing better because my forces are being lead by named characters in those struggles wheras you haven't even defined just what kind of fighters you're using - thus giving me the upper hand, not through tactics but through writing.
If you want to beat me, then don't get hung up on technical details and don't just try and force casualty figures on me - outwit me! Outmaneauver me! Out fight me! That'll make a real story.
You confuse me. Pick two of three options for your ships: Strong Defense Strong Offense Speed
In your R&D, you stated Strong Defense and Speed, in exchange for Strong Offense. Telan, in his R&Ds, has stated Strong Offense and Strong Defense, sacrificing speed. Now you suddenly come out with that your ships have all three. Now, putting aside the all powerful particle cannons, your heavy ships are armed with a bare token array of light turbolasers and ion cannons, as described in your R&D. Your armament is light, but still packs a powerful punch in the particle cannons. Also to be noted that you describe your weaponry as being slow in firing. The Imperial ships, even if they missed with their heavy guns, still had large numbers of powerful weaponry to bring to bear, bearing in mind that the ships's speed is slow. Damage would still be devastating to the Coalition.
The ships, mainly the claymores, would have suffered a degree of structural damage doing a wide degree turn at maximum speed, mainly the joints holding the three sections together would be heavily strained.
Ok, I didn't say so much as the pods being hit while in transit, but the pods being taken out while drilling into the ship and dis-gorging their troops. Imperial Assault Gunboats are in position among the capital ships for such a duty as this, and could spare a few moments to fire ion cannons or missile at the pods. But a large number of troops would still make it safely into the ships yes.
Your forgetting about all the other Heavy Turbolasers that come equipped on the Imperial capital ships. While the GC's ships superior speed does mean that the time they would endur under the Imperial guns is small, the fact that your ships dove straight into point blank broadside range of the three largest Imperial battleships twice, means that the gunners would have easily landed three massive salvoes on each ship, of about say twelve fired, and thanks to their weak armour, any shots that made it through the shields would have caused heavy damage. On the first pass, hardly any shots would have gotten through, the second pass, this is where the heavy damage would have occured.
Yes, to a degree, the new rules are focused more on writing and tatics, and sheer firepower will not win the day anymore. And Telan, while he may not have deployed his capital ships in anything less than a delta formation, now a line ahead one, did give careful and precise instructions and deployments to his fighter and gunboat squadrons, which you simply dismissed by calling them out of line. And by your own view, ignoring the shortcomings of your own ships, reserructing them from the dead, you probably think you are.
And yes, I have enjoyed the storyline. You have come a long way Dolash, keep up the good work.
We have strong guns and fast ships. Our armour and shields are normal (and thus, inferior in a galaxy where everyone is upgrading) but Pulse Shielding is a tactical abilitiy that grants what amounts to a one-use saving grace.
Since this is space, there is no way speedy turning would cause us strain. Not to mention they're designed to do this sort of thing, so I doubt there would be any serious damage from it doing what it was meant to do.
The proccess of drilling and disgorging would probably take little to any time at all considering they're being fired as if from cannons right into the armour straight on. Any loss of torpedoes would be neglidgble to the overall battle - maybe one or two out of the dozens fired. The Gunboats were likely mostly preoccupied fighting, not to mention these boarding torpedoes have not been seen before making their presence rather surprising.
The second pass - and this is IMPORTANT - was one where we were in a position where he COULDN'T hope to inflict much damage. That was the whole point. We were at a very odd angle. To top it off, we used our one blast of pulse shielding to get away unscathed.
Finally, although he has deployed himself meticulously, Telan hasn't done anything effective with his deployments as of yet - he simply positions himself in a formation and begins to fire. As our ships are more maneauverable, a static formation is an easier enemy as we simply move to their weaker point - which has been my strategy up until now, getting above the Delta or behind the line.
Fighter squadrons: picket positions By definition, the fighters have been deployed in predtermined positions around each of their carrier ships. They would then indidivudally have a short range in which to operate, firing at the fighters nearby, missiles, torpedoes, et al - when they reached the limit of said range, they would immediately return to the defensive sphere in which they operate and seek out another target. They would not simply wander off without explicit instructions.
These would be the fighters that would direct their fire against the torpedoes, fire supplimented by defensive banks. The reason for deploying only one squadron per vessel is to increasr the number of fireable guns and lessen the number of friendly fire accidents, though they are unavoidable.
My deplyment has been explained, and the ships I am using are not greatly manueverable, focusing on force and power instead. They have massive weapon emplacements and strong armor and shields but are ridiculously slow - a trait shared by all fighting vessels of the day.
I am tad enebriated as personal matters have led me to drinking. But I am trying to manage my reply - I apologizse for the typess.
Moving on - my ships are firing at anything and everything that comes in their path, often firing by batteries - 4-12 guns per volley per target. They would be effective against enemy capital ships especially at close range. A wave of fire is going to hit you matter how fast you maneuver.
Oh... I don't want to speculate, but if personal matters have led you to drinking, I'd be okay with putting this thread on hold if you want - if more important issues have come up, I mean. If it's nothing too serious, then sure we can continue and all that, but if it is serious then I'm just saying we can take a break if need be.
