Ce sujet est fermé
Saphra Deden wrote...
No. If you know anything about turian military doctrine (you clearly don't) you know that it isn't based on mobility. Instead they, like all the other races, station full garrisons to protect their holdings. Humanity doesn't. The human military only places light defense but has fleets waiting only a few relays away. Thus it is very fluid and despite having smaller numbers can reach a lot more targets.
The turian military will be slower to move.
Have any acual sources to back this up, or are you just pulling ideas out of the air. Since when have the Turians done nothing but sit on their holdings? The Turians may not be big on risky plans, but they aren't just going to sit on their asses and do nothing. They went on the offensive in the First Contact War, they went on the offensive in the Krogan Rebellions. How can you claim the Turains won't go on the offensive when their is no evidence that they won't?
Sure, the majority of the Turian fleet is based at home, but so is the Alliance fleet at Arcturus. The only reason the Alliance can respond quickly is that they have less ground to cover. Unless the Alliance plans to use that mobility for a quick offensive, it's a useless point as the Turians will have the time needed to mobilize their fleet.
Saphra Deden wrote...
Humans have large forces to call upon. We're already a match for the turians despite our smaller military. In an allout war the human military will expand considerably, and quickly. The turians are never far from peak capacity, so they don't have as much room to grow.
Alliance strike teams hitting them behind their lines will slow them down even more.
The Turian Military doesn't have room to grow because their entire populace is ready to serve. The Turian military, as it stands, is larger than the Alliance Military, and the Turians have their entire, trained populace to call up into service if need be. The Alliance would need a massive recruiting drive, if not full conscription to match the Turian force, and even then they would need to devote time and resources to train and equip that force.
And again, Alliance strike teams won't get behind their lines. Stealth frigates are cannot move at FTL speeds, or travel through a relay without giving away their position. They'd need to weave their way to the heart of Turian space to strike behind Turian lines.
Saphra Deden wrote...
No, they are also good for deployment. If you can watch unseen you can also deposite some troops unseen or drop a nuke or whatever you need to do. It is unfounded to say that stealth frigates can do recon and nothing else. Did you even play the games?
Do you think the Ilos or Virmire missions were just recon? What about all the other missions? The reason Shepard can go anywhere and do anything is because the Normandy can get in and out anywhere. Hell, Shepard can stroll right into geth space.
Human commandoes will be running rampant all over turian space (at least once we have enough stealth frigates. To keep themselves safe the turians will need to keep more forces than usual patrolling their own territory behind the front-lines. That's less forces they can throw at us and that keeps us with the advantage while we build up more and more.
Yes, I played the games, and I saw stealth frigates having a minimal impact. At Virmire the Normandy had to drop the mako in to eliminate AA towers to allow the Normandy to safely land without being shot down. In ME2 the only time the Normandy was faced with enemy ships, it came under attack. The Normandy can not "get in and out anywhere". It cannot travel through a relay or move at FTL speeds without giving away it's position. Stealth Frigates are not going to be dropping commandos (also deviating from Alliance defence forces I might add) all across Turian space as their mobility will be severly limited as they can't move beyond FTL without giving away their position. Besides, as I said before, the Alliance has two of these ships. How long will it take to produce more? Are they going to committ the resources to produce more? Rear Admiral Mikhailovich seemed to think the Normandy was a waste of resources, do other high ranking officials in the Alliance Military feel the same?
I should also point out that the Turians won't need to keep more forces patrolling their own territory as that territory already has an able defense force. Arm the local, militarily trained populace and you have a capable defence force ready to go.
Saphra Deden wrote...
The thing you have to understand is; the sun is setting on the turian empire. This is very apparent if you play a Renegade but it isn't really any different if you play Paragon. The sun will just set slower that way. The turians are weakening as humanity gets more powerful and as they get weaker they'll lose allies to humanity. The Hierarchy may even fracture apart.
Now the OP said not to include politics in this, and I'm not, but I'm just trying to convey the fact that the turian empire isn't as formidable as it seems. (though it IS still formidable)
Completely irrelevant as you have provided no evidence to back up these statments beyond "It's apparent!"
Saphra Deden wrote...
Well we have what, six dreadnaughts and five carriers or so? Plus more one the way. So let's say for this war we have 8 of each. The turians have how many, 30 something? Let's say 36.
They have more than us, but dreadnoughts on their own aren't enough. Some of their capital ships will be kept back on the defensive. How many though? Let's be conservative and say six.
That means it is going to be 30 vs 16. Just about 2 vs 1. However that's not a very big advantage. Capital ships are expensive and very, very costly to loose. After all it was the loss of the biggest capital ship in the galaxy that knocked out the asari when they lost the Destiny Ascension.
So I don't think that the turians will have enough of a numbers advantage to just steam-roll us. They might initially be able to push forward and take some territory, but the more territory they take the less we have to defend and the faster our fleets will be to respond to each new hot-spot.
Once the turian advance halts it will never start again.
I would call a 2 to 1 advantage in ship to ship combat a fairly good advantage. We can't only take Capital Ships into this equation, however. It's going to be the cruisers that make up the bulk of ship to ship combat. Hard to say who has the advantage here, but I'd imagine it's the Turians given that they are referred to as having the largest military fleet. I suppose it's technically correct to say that the Alliance will be able to respond faster by losing territory, but they'll probably be losing ships when fighting to defend that territory, so it's kind of a moot point.
Saphra Deden wrote...
We have just enough of our own (16 all total with more on the way) to hold them at bay. Carriers are basically mobile military bases and fighters are a weakness of big targets like dreadnoughts.
At this point our stealth frigates really go to town cutting supply lines and hitting the turians on the home front. Remember: turians don't have much use for human garden worlds because of the chirality of their amino acids. So they'll have to ship in their own food in many cases.
Their massive armies will be tied up groundside while their fleet just barely keeps pace with ours. Once they lose orbital superiority their armies are at our mercy.
Fair enough I suppose in saying that Carriers will be a deciding factor, but I still feel that the Alliance will struggle to defend their carriers facing a larger military force. I hadn't thought of the Turians needing to ship in their own food, so good point there I suppose, but in a militay conflict both militaries are usually shipping in food to supply their forces. The Alliance may need to do the same unless they are willing to committ men to food production on the worlds they are fighting over.
Saphra Deden wrote...
Are you blind? What did I say? Did I say it had no turian features? No, I didn't. THE LAYOUT OF THE SHIP IS TURIAN[/u]. Beyond that nothing is ever said to be a turian design.
Ask yourself, why would the turians invent such a ship? It is humans who are innovators, not turians. It is human military doctrine that calls for recon and light forces infiltrating enemy lines to cut their supply routes.
Turians are all about heavy fire power and overwhelming force. So which doctrine better suits the Normandy?
A.) Light forces that can strike fast, rely on high technology and VI support, and hit behind enemy lines
B.) Heavy forces that strike hard with immense force
I wouldn't. It is the Alliance's biggest strategic advantage and they wouldn't sell it to the turians just for PR. Frankly, with ME2 we know the only reason the turians were brought in on the project at all was so the Alliance could spy on them.
It was a cheap political stunt with a dash of espionage.
I'm not saying that the Turians have a need for such a ship, but it's idiotic to claim that the Turians know nothing about a ship they helped design. Of course the Alliance is operating it, but it was a joint project sponsored by the goddamn Council. Just because the Turians aren't using stealth frigates, doesn't mean they're oblivious to how they operate. The explaination of the Normandy construction in ME1 [i]was that it was a giant PR operation.
Saphra Deden wrote...
Humans have the advantage there. Again, stealth frigates. If the other races want to sit there we can too, but we can attack them with special forces while we do it. Sooner or later they'll be motivated to go on the offensive. My money is on the turians because that is their military philosophy. They aren't going to neutralize this grave threat by sitting there and playing defensive.
Again with the stealth frigates! They aren't some magical be-all and end-all. The Alliance has just two and would need to use them very carefully if they are going to have any impact. They can't just dance around the galaxy, dropping squads off across Turian space, they're going to need to tread lightly to avoid detection.
Retour en haut
