Star wars needs more military consultants

[Morticoccus]

I can't recall how many games I've played recently where I was laying down either suppressing fire or controlled,accurate bursts only to have a squadmate or companion cross directly in front of my vector or barrel and then whine about it when they took a round in the back. I mean we learn that on what, day 1 of Basic Training?

 

Actually, that should be what is referred to as "common sense". You don't need to be of a military profession to realize that standing in front of someone that is discharging a firearm is a bad idea.

Edited March 13, 2012 by Morticoccus

[Morticoccus]

Was someone stupid enough to suggest troopers use melee weapons and go up against Force users? Do you even know how Jedi and Sith work? They aren't able to deflect bolts fired at them with the speed of light(It is laser after all) because "über hax0r MLG sk1llz", but because of the Force. They can predict where each hit would land. Ofcourse you need some training in how to wield lightsaber, but anyone going up against Force users in melee combat is more or less dead meat waiting to be sliced up.

 

Unless you are trained to kill Sith or Jedi, which still only means you know how to counter their tactics, not how to survive a face-to-face confrontation with them. Someone actually wrote a very good guide here on how to kill Force-users. Go look for it.

 

Blasters are plasma weapons, they fire energized gas in EM envelopes at nowhere NEAR the speed of light.

 

Actually I would reckon most modern slughtrowers beat them in actual muzzle velocity.

[Temeluchus]

Actually, that should be what is referred to as "common sense". You don't need to be a soldier to realize that standing in front of someone that is discharging a firearm is a bad idea.

 

True, yet we still have terms and phrases for this like "crossing the tube" and "muzzle awareness".

 

The bolded part always bugs me , I know it's used as a generic term, but not everyone in the military is a soldier. I am a Marine for instance, and we don't like being called soldiers.

 

"We stole the eagle from the Air Force, the anchor from the Navy, and the rope from the Army. On the 7th day when God rested we overran his perimeter and stole the globe, and we’ve been running the show ever since. We live like soldiers, talk like sailors, and slap the hell out of both of then at the same time. Fighter by day, lover by night, drunkard by choice, and a United States Marine by an act of God."

[Morticoccus]

True, yet we still have terms and phrases for this like "crossing the tube" and "muzzle awareness".

 

The bolded part always bugs me , I know it's used as a generic term, but not everyone in the military is a soldier. I am a Marine for instance, and we don't like being called soldiers.

 

"We stole the eagle from the Air Force, the anchor from the Navy, and the rope from the Army. On the 7th day when God rested we overran his perimeter and stole the globe, and we’ve been running the show ever since. We live like soldiers, talk like sailors, and slap the hell out of both of then at the same time. Fighter by day, lover by night, drunkard by choice, and a United States Marine by an act of God."

 

I'm also pretty sure that hunters, police officers, certain branches of corporate security and, hell, anyone training in any kind of marksmanship based sport ever made including archery knows this as well.

 

Hence, "common sense".

 

Oh, and this of course applies double to anyone trained in the use of self propelled weapons that has jet backwash, they should also know that standing behind or to the side of (as appropriate for model used) a person discharging this kind of ordnance is a fast way to get your face melted off.

Edited March 13, 2012 by Morticoccus

[Temeluchus]

I'm also pretty sure that hunters, police officers, certain branches of corporate security and, hell, anyone training in any kind of marksmanship based sport ever made including archery knows this as well.

 

Hence, "common sense".

 

What? I agree with you,it's common sense but we still have phrases for not doing these things.

 

If that's directed towards the soldier comment, I think you missed where I was going with it. I wasn't saying it's common sense to only soldiers.

 

I was going off on a rambling tangent, commenting more on the fact that soldier is a generic term tossed around when there are sailors,airmen and Marines out there.

 

I wasn't picking on you or anything,just pointing out a common term for a military person(soldier) that has always bugged me.

Edited March 13, 2012 by Temeluchus

[Morticoccus]

What? I agree with you,it's common sense but we still have phrases for not doing these things.

 

If that's directed towards the soldier comment, I think you missed where I was going with it. I wasn't saying it's common sense to only soldiers.

 

I was going off on a rambling tangent, commenting more on the fact that soldier is a generic term tossed around when there are sailors,airmen and Marines out there.

 

I wasn't picking on you or anything,just pointing out a common term for a military person(soldier) that has always bugged me.

 

Fixed.

 

And it always bugs me to see people standing behind tracer missile spamming mercenaries. =p

[Antipathize]

I know this thread has run its course when we start bickering about terms for different branches' military personnel.

 

Overall some of my questions were answered. I'm a lot less bothered now, knowing that somehow the technology involved actually limits what they can do. I'll think of it like a nuclear standoff, and they have a type of Geneva convention that prohibits things like dropping planets on each other.

[Morticoccus]

I know this thread has run its course when we start bickering about terms for different branches' military personnel.

 

Overall some of my questions were answered. I'm a lot less bothered now, knowing that somehow the technology involved actually limits what they can do. I'll think of it like a nuclear standoff, and they have a type of Geneva convention that prohibits things like dropping planets on each other.

 

They wouldn't need a planet, just a big rock...

[Antipathize]

http://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hyperbole

[GymQuirk]

 

Gym "Yes, I linked to TV Tropes...How many Dark Side Points is that worth?" Quirk

 

I'm giving you the full 10k. I've been stuck on that site reading forever now. Thank you. -.-

 

Muahahahahahahaha!!!

 

For bonus points, have you gotten to the SWTOR page yet?

[GoggleBoi]

Aside from the "it is a SF game, do not expect real-world elements in it"

 

 

But... but... that is precisely what Science-fiction is! Granted, Star Wars is not true science-fiction, but science-fiction, by definition, is rooted in real world scientific, economical, political, social, and cultural theory, with a few minor changes - or 'advances' - extrapolated and played out. If it has no basis in the real world, it is not science-fiction.

 

L. Ron Hubbard had a fantastic definition of it in the beginning of Battlefield Earth, and you can read it here, if you care to:

http://www.lronhubbard.org/science-fiction.html

 

 

 

On the topic at hand, yes it bothers me, on occasion. I write, myself, and try to always write with the real-world in mind. Again, because this, as I see it and define it, is science-fiction. Science, with elements of fiction, to tell a story. But Star Wars, much as I love the universe to death, is not science-fiction. It is fantasy. So I cut it a bit of slack. Besides, I think the tactics in a universe with the limitations - or lack there-of - of Star Wars would be wholly unrecognisable. Gunpowder revolutionized warfare, as someone pointed out with WWI. Imagine starships in orbit. Weapons that fire rounds at the speed of light. Shields. Mini-nukes. Power-armour. Nano-materials. Cryo-weapons. Any one of a dozen 'technologies' that are common place in Star Wars would alter warfare in our world in entirely unpredictable ways.

[Raeln]

Fixed.

 

And it always bugs me to see people standing behind tracer missile spamming mercenaries. =p

 

Ok, so let's turn friendly fire off and let you get your face melted off every time latency says you are too close to that BH firing a tracer missile.

 

As far as that goes, yeah - let my mortar volley injure group members. My Hall of Bolts should riddle all my buddies with holes.

 

At the same time, you better not stand in between an inquisitor and his target or you're going to get a shocking experience. Same with a Jedi Consular - I'm sure that Disturbance is going to feel real good hitting your back.

 

I'm all for you to have realism but a game is a game and no friendly fire will wreck group play. There would be no more raiding, period. I remember having a LOS spell in EQ1 on mages. Quite irritating for other players to unintentionally block it. They didn't even take damage from it, it was just nullified. For raiding to survive in an environment with no friendly fire, each boss would probably have to lose 90% of the movement mechanics they require. Imagine Bonethrasher with no friendly fire. Wow. Might as well remove all AoE abilities too.

 

Some common sense things just have to be suspended for a video game. MMORPGs are among the worst offenders because of their online group play.

[Captain_Zone]

As my BH is a Tracer spamming merc, I just have to say Deal With It.

 

But seriously, this whole thread goes back to the OT where they had NO military consultants whatsoever (except for maybe a close order drill instructor for the formation scenes).

 

Star Wars doesn't go off the same military doctrine as we do... or any real military doctrine for that matter. "Commander" is an ubiquitous "rank" that can be anyone from a Sergeant up to an Admiral or General, depending on the context. There is no repercussion for fraternization in either the Repub or the Imp military between officers and enlisted, as far as I can tell. Having served myself, I have to say that when dealing with Star Wars' version of the military, it's best to just turn that part of our brains off and enjoy the ride. Just my point of view here. Also, I have to add that combat wise, the closest we see to real soldiers are the Imperial Agents and Smugglers. Taking cover and using long range attacks, that is. lol

Edited March 14, 2012 by Captain_Zone

[SweetNausea]

The republic cinematic comes to mind, where the troopers fire a volley of shots from ambush and then get into Melee with a significant number of force users that specialise in that.

 

I noticed that too, but figured it kind of made sense. I think they were trying to portray the Republic troopers as a sort of desperate, last ditch guerrilla force, surrounded and out numbered. In that sort of scenario the dominant military force, the Empire, would have either artillery support or air support. Probably both.

 

I always kind of figured that they figured the only way to survive that was getting close enough to the Imperial forces to nullify the air/artillery advantage. If they sat up on the hill, they'd probably just get hammered while the Imperials turtled up.

 

There's also the school of thought that says the Imperials would close to melee range anyways, so they may as well have charged on their own terms while they were still co-ordinated and had the advantage of shock on their side.

 

Also, suspension of disbelief

 

Also also, you probably shouldn't watch the CGI clone wars series. The clones are so awful at fighting a war I couldn't stand it. "Hard cover? What's that? I'll just stand in the open! OH NO I'M DEAD."

[Mirdthestrill]

As someone who served in the military, it aggravates me when I see cinematics/star wars films that use tactics the world hasn't used since the bow and arrow became obselete. The republic cinematic comes to mind, where the troopers fire a volley of shots from ambush and then get into Melee with a significant number of force users that specialise in that.

 

I mean they don't even need consultants, just common sense. Anyone else bugged by this and/or have specific examples?

 

I don't know...it's a different world, with intracacies we're not aware of. For example, what if a certain type of turbolaser had a power draw that made any other weapons unfirable while it was powering up? Just that sort of thing. If you want truly bad tactics, look to Avatar.

 

"Hey! We've got giant, six-legged horses that can navigate almost any kind of terrain, our weapons are perfectly suited to an ambush, our enemy has machine guns. Let's engage them IN THE MIDDLE OF A BIG FIELD!"

 

Sure shows how they almost lost.

[Yeltrah]

That's pretty much what "Hope" was, a last ditch effort. Heck we only saw ONE of the several guerrilla battles that happened on Alderaan at that time.

 

From my perspective the attacks on alderaan looked to be a coordinated attack, as they fire (rediculously strong) flares signaling the approaching republic fleet.

[Yeltrah]

You're correct,watching a prone IA would be boring.

 

I usually don't let Hollywood military tactics in movies and games bother me though. All though as a USMC who served 12 years I did wonder why enemies are standing around in groups of three or 4,shooting the breeze,with little to no combat situational awareness.

 

The one thing that really does bother me in movies and games is the fact that they have no muzzle awarness, or awarness when it comes to firing positions and the like.

 

I can't recall how many games I've played recently where I was laying down either suppressing fire or controlled,accurate bursts only to have a squadmate or companion cross directly in front of my vector or barrel and then whine about it when they took a round in the back. I mean we learn that on what, day 1 of Basic Training?

 

Just once I'd like to see plausible tactics used in a game though, set up a friggin kill box, use choke points,fire and movement, force concentration or dispersal, heck take the high ground and patrol it, etc.

 

The thing that does make me laugh is the Hollywood treatment of SpecOps, who according to Tinseltown must all be 6'5" and 250 pounds of shredded,vein bulging muscle. In reality most SpecOps guys while in prime physical condition are built for agility and stamina not sheer brute strength and thus are slighter and lithe.

 

Full spectrum warrior, while not a fps, I felt did a pretty good job of depicting basic fire and maneuver tactics. Also, the movie act of valor did a very good job of depicting real spec ops guys, since you know, the actors were SEALs

[owenthorn]

didn't know the girl scouts trained in tactics...

[Captain_Zone]

Full spectrum warrior, while not a fps, I felt did a pretty good job of depicting basic fire and maneuver tactics. Also, the movie act of valor did a very good job of depicting real spec ops guys, since you know, the actors were SEALs

 

Full Spectrum Warrior did a great job, as it's the commercial version of a simulation used in the US Army's Personal Leadership Development Course (PLDC). At least that was my understanding from what I was told. Back when I was in, we didn't have videogames as training tools. lol

[westraz]

I been in and out of this post, even did a post in here that I stall think I am right about! but I think maybe the op maybe on too something, but for all the wrong ways! it could help SW if it had more military consultants yes it could... but he's points about lazer swords is so far off... it stall has to be Star Wars, that mean basters and lightsaberes! even if it don't make cents <ya I know wrong cents

 

but as I said even form a military point of view what weaponry is some one who can move 10 times faster and is 10 times stronger then us?.... I give you a hint is not a gun

[Temeluchus]

Full spectrum warrior, while not a fps, I felt did a pretty good job of depicting basic fire and maneuver tactics. Also, the movie act of valor did a very good job of depicting real spec ops guys, since you know, the actors were SEALs

 

Didn't say nothing out there was accurate, my comments were based on the majority of stuff out there. Act of Valor was a good movie, it also proves the point I was making, those guys aren't all 6'5" and loaded down with muscle and BFGs.

[Guildrum]

I been in and out of this post, even did a post in here that I stall think I am right about! but I think maybe the op maybe on too something, but for all the wrong ways! it could help SW if it had more military consultants yes it could... but he's points about lazer swords is so far off... it stall has to be Star Wars, that mean basters and lightsaberes! even if it don't make cents <ya I know wrong cents

 

but as I said even form a military point of view what weaponry is some one who can move 10 times faster and is 10 times stronger then us?.... I give you a hint is not a gun

 

The answer is suppression fire with an assault cannon. For good measure, attach a shotgun on top of the assault cannon in case the Jedi/Sith gets close up.

[Captain_Zone]

The answer is suppression fire with an assault cannon. For good measure, attach a shotgun on top of the assault cannon in case the Jedi/Sith gets close up.

 

Assault Cannon has a short range shotgun style attack. Plasma Cannon, I do believe.

[GavinPatterson]

this truly bugs me - at one point the world believed that guerrilla warfare was obsolete - but what do you know? at one point we thought it was a great idea to stand side by side and watch as each side shoots each other.

At one point we believe heavy Armour was better and that stones were better than arrows...some though beehives were even better.

MY POINT is that tactics have to change and adapt the the mission at hand. resources apply a level of limit just as man power does.

[GusVIII]

From what I remember in Kotor, melee combat became necessary after personal energy shields made more difficult for conventional blasters to kill targets. A personal shield can't deflect a vibroblade or lightsaber like it can a common plasma shot.