HBOHBO Forum
glyphstrip  
Halo.bungie.org
glyphstrip
Frequently Asked Forum Questions
 Search the HBO News Archives

Any All Exact 
Search the Halo Updates DBs

BWU Halo Halo2 
Search Older Posts on This Forum:
Posts on Current Forum | Archived Posts

View Thread Reply Return to Index Set Prefs Previous Next
Re: CF 1-22-16
By:Quirel
Date: 2/1/16 6:32 pm
In Response To: Re: CF 1-22-16 (Grizzlei)

: Oh, sure, blame the computer. LIAR!

Threatening to install Windows 10 seems to have terrified it into compliance.

: All of that speaks volumes in my eyes about what these ships are capable of.
: The 5km-long CAS is seriously undermined when her ship's company is
: minimally crewed. The fighting ability of a CRS can be amplified
: considerably by the pairing of a remarkable captain and the exploitation
: of environmental or situational factors. While the logistical impairments
: Shadow of Intent faced are an important variable to consider, as is the
: battle damaged incurred at the Ark, I don't think we can necessarily
: discredit the likes of a CRS or FFG on those reasons alone.

It's like saying that a modern aircraft carrier is seriously undermined when they are insufficiently crewed, or when they run short on JP-8. If that happens, it's not going to perform anywhere near its typical combat efficiency. It's not so much a drawback as it's an expected requirement.

Environmental and situational factors are effective precisely because they're rare and unexpected to the party on the receiving end. If they weren't, crews would know how to mitigate or avoid the factors. That's why Cole's Last Stand couldn't change the tides of war. He took out hundreds of Covenant warships, but it wasn't a strategy that could be repeated. Therefore, "Vulnerable to newborn stars" is not a key weakness of Covenant ship designs.

: I don't see why you couldn't. Sure, the whole reason of a CAS existing is to
: embark and deploy air and fleet landing forces, but as a multi-role ship
: there's a lot more to her. We know that CAS is a competent warfighter in
: her own right alongside her CCS or CPV escorts. That's worth noting that a
: CAS, regardless of her battle damage, couldn't have dispatched a patrol
: vessel like a CRS from three planets away.

... you do realize how... what?

What definition of 'dispatch' did you mean? Because if you meant "blow it out of the metaphorical water", I can't see any ship in the UNSC or Covenant arsenal performing such a feat. There is no weapon possessed by either side with an effective range beyond several light-minutes.

: I thought the reimagined Battlestar Galactica did a fairly good job of
: depicting ships defending themselves from fighters, bombers, etc.
: Galactica and Pegasus both dished out three weapons systems in defense of
: their ship. Heavy artillery engaged at long ranges, point defense guns
: dispatched both Raiders and anti-ship missiles at knife-fighting range,
: and the air group provided CAP and intercept capability.

: Battlestar Galactica seems to be an exception in science fiction depicting
: carefully-crafted opposing fleets with their own doctrine and
: capabilities. As with everything else in that series BSG just so happens
: to be set in space. I'm sure you could easily apply these stories to a
: Second World War or contemporary setting.

I'm only familiar with the original series, which was very strike craft-centric. I don't even think a warship ever fired upon another in that series.

The trope that visual sci-fi media follows is that space is an ocean, and space navies operate just like their waterbound ancestors. Early Star Trek was wooden ships and iron men in space, partly because Roddenberry was inspired by the voyage of the HMS Beagle and Ferdinand Magellan's voyage, but also because fighter craft would have cut into the model budget. Star Wars wasn't so much inspired by footage of WWII aircraft operations as it was George Lucas splicing together a film reel from The Dam Busters and 663 Squadron and telling the animators that this is what they are going to film. Battlestar Galactica... I think it was inspired by post-Korean War operations. The surface ships never come into contact with each other, and all the combat is between a small number of fighters and bombers.

All three of them make the same assumptions about how ships move in space.

: Unfortunately Halo hasn't truly centered naval engagements in great detail in
: a visual medium.

No, but the few naval engagements we have seen have been disappointing. The battle in the Fall of Reach Animated Series was just awful.

: In the games it only ever exists to provide scope to the
: greater setting. The differences between Humans, Sangheili, and
: Forerunners, among others, in this environment can sometimes seem quite
: unique. We just don't get writers, artists, etc. who understand that. Greg
: Bear offered an often mindblowing depiction of Forerunner tactics during
: their war against the Flood. Nylund and Staten provided that with battles
: during prior to, during, and following the Human-Covenant War.

Kind of like Mass Effect. The Codex can talk about light-lag and engagement ranges to the writer's content, but the visual effects artists aren't going to deliver anything more ambitious than reheated Star Wars scenes.


Messages In This Thread

CF 1-22-16GrimBrother One1/22/16 5:07 pm
     HHHHNNNNNNNNNNGGGGGGGGG *NM*Mixmasterchief1/22/16 5:11 pm
     davidfuchs, Grizzlei, Archilen, scarab & QuirelMacGyver101/22/16 5:22 pm
           Yepdavidfuchs1/22/16 5:56 pm
                 Re: YepGrizzlei1/22/16 6:03 pm
                       Re: YepQuirel1/23/16 3:01 am
                             Re: Yepdavidfuchs1/23/16 8:45 am
                                   Re: YepQuirel1/24/16 4:05 am
                                         Re: Yepdavidfuchs1/24/16 11:48 am
                             Yep YepGrizzlei1/23/16 1:40 pm
     YAYAYAYAYAYAYAAY!Grizzlei1/22/16 6:01 pm
     Re: *NM*zofinda1/22/16 6:20 pm
     Re: CF 1-22-16ChrisTheeCrappy1/22/16 6:31 pm
     Re: CF 1-22-16Quirel1/24/16 4:35 am
           Re: CF 1-22-16scarab1/24/16 7:26 am
                 Re: CF 1-22-16General Vagueness1/24/16 11:27 pm
                       Re: CF 1-22-16Archilen1/25/16 12:35 am
           Re: CF 1-22-16General Vagueness1/25/16 12:01 am
                 Re: CF 1-22-16Quirel1/26/16 3:53 pm
                       Re: CF 1-22-16General Vagueness1/26/16 11:59 pm
                             Re: CF 1-22-16General Vagueness1/27/16 12:00 am
                             Re: CF 1-22-16Quirel1/27/16 4:58 am
                       Re: CF 1-22-16Grizzlei1/27/16 12:10 am
                             Re: CF 1-22-16Quirel1/27/16 3:03 am
                                   Re: CF 1-22-16Grizzlei1/27/16 10:04 am
                                         Re: CF 1-22-16Quirel2/1/16 4:29 am
                                               Re: CF 1-22-16Grizzlei2/1/16 11:43 am
                                                     Re: CF 1-22-16Quirel2/1/16 6:32 pm
                                                           Re: CF 1-22-16Grizzlei2/1/16 8:03 pm
                                               Re: CF 1-22-16General Vagueness2/1/16 8:49 pm
     Re: CF 1-22-16General Vagueness1/24/16 11:13 pm
     Re: CF 1-22-16General Vagueness1/25/16 7:46 pm

Sign up to post.

You will only be able to post to the forum if you first create a user profile.
If, however, you already have a user profile, please follow the "Set Preferences" link on the main index page and enter your user name to log in to post.