What if the Empire invaded modern day earth (a MUCH MUCH more balanced one)

300,000 stormtroopers
1,000,000 random conscripts with no combat experience and no armor
1000 AT-STs
50 AT-ATs
100,000 support units
1000 AA guns
200 tie fighters
1 imperial star destroyer, NO SHIELDS and no orbital bombardment
4 frigates, NO SHIELDS, and no orbital bombardment
Tarkin as commander

They have a complete map of the Earth

They have moderate level of intel about enemy armies, same amount as modern day countries generally know about each other

They get dropped off in South America and cannot be airlifted back up to the ships

They have supplies to last them across half of the diameter of the Earth one time.

The Earth is somehow excepting them and morale is somehow not an issue.

The Earth has a high level of intel about the Empire, as much as they do from reading Star Wars books/watching the movies

PLEASE SAY if this is a spite, and I will make the neccessary adjustments.

I really miss the good old one on one threads.

well you decreased the number of stormtroopers and at-at's. You did give them some ties and AA, but having an SD and frigates with no shielding or orbital stike makes them pretty much useless. But the 1,000,000 constrips could overwhelm and provide a distraction. overall i would say its more balaced

1,000,000 random conscripts with no combat experience and no armor

Why is Russia involved in this conflict?

1 imperial star destroyer, NO SHIELDS and no orbital bombardment

What's the point?

4 frigates, NO SHIELDS, and no orbital bombardment

What's the point?

They get dropped off in South America and cannot be airlifted back up to the ships

Thus they cannot effectively move but must work their way around the globe from South America with no transports.

They have supplies to last them across half of the diameter of the Earth one time.

Which means nothing because they can't effectively move around by way of air support or sea support, and they are sitting ducks for area bombardment since you've neutered their navy.

The Earth is somehow excepting them and morale is somehow not an issue.

So evaluating Earth based on not having real life morale problems is a bit like arguing full-potential Anakin Skywalker. Next you'll be saying every single nation on earth goes into full armament mode. Real life warfare is determined mostly by breaking the will of the opponent. If you remove this element, then you've skewed the battle even more.

The Earth has a high level of intel about the Empire, as much as they do from reading Star Wars books/watching the movies

Earth has more intel? How come? No morale problems, a planet's worth of resources, and full intel? Skewed much?

Originally posted by Janus Marius
Why is Russia involved in this conflict?

What's the point?

What's the point?

Thus they cannot effectively move but must work their way around the globe from South America with no transports.

Which means nothing because they can't effectively move around by way of air support or sea support, and they are sitting ducks for area bombardment since you've neutered their navy.

So evaluating Earth based on not having real life morale problems is a bit like arguing full-potential Anakin Skywalker. Next you'll be saying every single nation on earth goes into full armament mode. Real life warfare is determined mostly by breaking the will of the opponent. If you remove this element, then you've skewed the battle even more.

Earth has more intel? How come? No morale problems, a planet's worth of resources, and full intel? Skewed much?

You forgot that he took away Vader. 🙄

Yeah, removing Vader really just screwed this match. If there's no choaking, there's no victory.

Originally posted by Janus Marius
Why is Russia involved in this conflict?

What's the point?

What's the point?

Thus they cannot effectively move but must work their way around the globe from South America with no transports.

Which means nothing because they can't effectively move around by way of air support or sea support, and they are sitting ducks for area bombardment since you've neutered their navy.

So evaluating Earth based on not having real life morale problems is a bit like arguing full-potential Anakin Skywalker. Next you'll be saying every single nation on earth goes into full armament mode. Real life warfare is determined mostly by breaking the will of the opponent. If you remove this element, then you've skewed the battle even more.

Earth has more intel? How come? No morale problems, a planet's worth of resources, and full intel? Skewed much?

Hey, it's not as good as +1 million stormtroopers, but it's better than nothing. Or do you want me to take them away?

My bad, by orbital bombardment I meant no heavy turbolasers or anything SUPER powerful; just light turboblasters and anti fighter systems.

OK then, they get 10000 transports with a speed of 80 mph

They have AA and tie fighters, plus they can capture ships and gain supplies via raiding. How about this: they managed to capture 1000 transport ships.

The Empire isn't subject to morale in this fight either, and besides we can't just have all of Earth surrendering instantly now, can we? That would be a boring thread.

Fine: they have moderate level intel, same as Empire has about us, OK?

So adding this, who wins?

Notice how I give into your demands and make adjustments? If you (like Lucien did) ignore my additions in your next post or any after, then we can consider them nullifyed.

Originally posted by Hewhoknowsall
If you (like Lucien did) ignore my additions in your next post or any after, then we can consider them nullifyed.

Stop mentioning the Canadian.

He will start to feel important and we can't have that.

Hey, it's not as good as +1 million stormtroopers, but it's better than nothing. Or do you want me to take them away?

It's just kind of silly to put random unskilled fodder in there and expect us to evaluate them in a global ground war.

My bad, by orbital bombardment I meant no heavy turbolasers or anything SUPER powerful; just light turboblasters and anti fighter systems.

That makes sense. I don't see how we can effectively argue the durability of the ships without shields though.

OK then, they get 10000 transports with a speed of 80 mph

What kind of transports? Do they have shields? Do they have weapons? Why are they only able to move so slowly?

They have AA and tie fighters, plus they can capture ships and gain supplies via raiding. How about this: they managed to capture 1000 transport ships.

What kinds of ships? Random seaboats? Frigates of Ecuador? How will they have the training to use them? What tactical advantage does this offer?

The Empire isn't subject to morale in this fight either, and besides we can't just have all of Earth surrendering instantly now, can we? That would be a boring thread.

This is where you fail again. You assume that morale crumbles immediately. Where is the historical predecent for this assumption?

Fine: they have moderate level intel, same as Empire has about us, OK?

Are you trying to appease me, or are you trying to make a fair thread? I suspect the former. Don't appease me. Make a fair thread. If you can't do that, try to gather up information before posting a match up. Your vague numbers and poorly thought out ideas here indicate that you haven't given this any deep thought.

Don't sling shit against the wall to see what sticks. Do some research.

Notice how I give into your demands and makes adjustments? If you (like Lucien did) ignore my additions in your next post or any after, then we can consider them nullifyed.

What is this supposed to mean? So if I don't accept your additions as "fair" or "balancing", you'll just take them away? How stupid is that?

Grow up, please.

Originally posted by Janus Marius
It's just kind of silly to put random unskilled fodder in there and expect us to evaluate them in a global ground war.

That makes sense. I don't see how we can effectively argue the durability of the ships without shields though.

What kind of transports? Do they have shields? Do they have weapons? Why are they only able to move so slowly?

What kinds of ships? Random seaboats? Frigates of Ecuador? How will they have the training to use them? What tactical advantage does this offer?

This is where you fail again. You [b]assume that morale crumbles immediately. Where is the historical predecent for this assumption?

Are you trying to appease me, or are you trying to make a fair thread? I suspect the former. Don't appease me. Make a fair thread. If you can't do that, try to gather up information before posting a match up. Your vague numbers and poorly thought out ideas here indicate that you haven't given this any deep thought.

Don't sling shit against the wall to see what sticks. Do some research.

What is this supposed to mean? So if I don't accept your additions as "fair" or "balancing", you'll just take them away? How stupid is that?

Grow up, please. [/B]

Do you want them or not?

Based on the armor that they have.

They have no shields but are well armored enough to take several missiles. And these are land transports. They are armed with a light blaster cannon.

They have spent time and have gotten used to the ships. They are about the size of a destroyer and have similar armor to a destroyer as well. Tactical advantages? Strategically you could get the Imperials across the sea/launch amphibious assaults, tactically...I dunno.

I guess that you have a point. OK then, morale is allowed, but please don't say "oh the countries will all surrender" because (as you say here) they won't.

I have thought it out; I have the feeling that even if this were a perfect match up you'd still whine and complain.

No, I meant that if I say that they have 100 tie fighters and then later you say "oh it's not fair that they don't have tie fighters!" then that shows that you ignored my additions.

Do you want them or not?

Since when is this thread about appeasing me? I'm not here to dictate the thread. I could easily just make one for myself. What I am here to do is to make sure that this kind of thread is balanced, and not just "OMFG they win, moar numberz lol". You're trying to evaluate entire armies across a global conflict, and all you want to do is dumb it down to numbers.

Based on the armor that they have.

My point was that people have to now evaluate the durability of said armor against conventional weapons. A large part of Imperial Navy defenses are in their incredible shields.

They have no shields but are well armored enough to take several missiles. And these are land transports. They are armed with a light blaster cannon.

What kind? Do you have a specific type of land transport? What are its advantages? What are its disavantages? Did you even put any thought into that?

Evaluating armed forces is a LOT more than just sheer numbers.

They have spent time and have gotten used to the ships. They are about the size of a destroyer and have similar armor to a destroyer as well. Tactical advantages? Strategically you could get the Imperials across the sea/launch amphibious assaults, tactically...I dunno

So the Imps just found time to grab and learn to use all those boats? And what ports are they using? How do they refuel them? How much of their forces is dedicated to securing key ports? Are they just randomly using boats with okay proficiency just so you can dodge the bullet of this being skewed?

I guess that you have a point. OK then, morale is allowed, but please don't say "oh the countries will all surrender" because (as you say here) they won't.

I haven't argued that. Not all things are absolutes. There's so many variables here that I would say you could never make a conclusive, final answer, only speculate on each sides' strengths and weaknesses. No, the world won't cave in within hours of fighting the Imps, but then again, they won't likely be able to maintain constant fighting in some areas. South America is highly destablized politically, and covered with tropics and mountains. This would make both offense and defense very slow.

I have thought it out; I have the feeling that even if this were a perfect match up you'd still whine and complain.

No, that's not true. I'm simply pointing out instances where you've glossed over important details, or rendered them unimportant just for the sake of slinging out another large scale war which is dumbed down to tech advantage and numerical advantage.

War isn't that simple.

No, I meant that if I say that they have 100 tie fighters and then later you say "oh it's not fair that they don't have tie fighters!" then that shows that you ignored my additions

When have I done so? And why even then would you just pull the reinforcements back? To further imbalance the thread because one person didn't include them?

Originally posted by Janus Marius
Since when is this thread about appeasing me? I'm not here to dictate the thread. I could easily just make one for myself. What I am here to do is to make sure that this kind of thread is balanced, and not just "OMFG they win, moar numberz lol". You're trying to evaluate entire armies across a global conflict, and all you want to do is dumb it down to numbers.

My point was that people have to now evaluate the durability of said armor against conventional weapons. A large part of Imperial Navy defenses are in their incredible shields.

What kind? Do you have a specific type of land transport? What are its advantages? What are its disavantages? Did you even put any thought into that?

Evaluating armed forces is a LOT more than just sheer numbers.

So the Imps just found time to grab and learn to use all those boats? And what ports are they using? How do they refuel them? How much of their forces is dedicated to securing key ports? Are they just randomly using boats with okay proficiency just so you can dodge the bullet of this being skewed?

I haven't argued that. Not all things are absolutes. There's so many variables here that I would say you could never make a conclusive, final answer, only speculate on each sides' strengths and weaknesses. No, the world won't cave in within hours of fighting the Imps, but then again, they won't likely be able to maintain constant fighting in some areas. South America is highly destablized politically, and covered with tropics and mountains. This would make both offense and defense very slow.

No, that's not true. I'm simply pointing out instances where you've glossed over important details, or rendered them unimportant just for the sake of slinging out another large scale war which is dumbed down to tech advantage and numerical advantage.

War isn't that simple.

When have I done so? And why even then would you just pull the reinforcements back? To further imbalance the thread because one person didn't include them?

It's not. I'm just wondering why you don't want them/if you don't want them.

IDK

I am well aware of that. They are jeep like structured land transports (obviously they can't hold everyone). They can travel on most types of terrain. They have a light blaster cannon. They ride on wheels.

How much force they commit to securing ports depends on how smart Tarkin is.

I agree, I'm just saying not to say that.

I know that war isn't that simple. I did give you details on how their troops are. How good Tarkin is is debatable. I gave you supplies. I gave you starting position. What else do you want?

I never said you did. I said IF you did, just like how Lucien annoyingly does.

It's not. I'm just wondering why you don't want them/if you don't want them.

I'm arguing that the utility of a million unsubstantiated newbies only makes the thread more complex than it needs to be.

I am well aware of that. They are jeep like structured land transports (obviously they can't hold everyone). They can travel on most types of terrain. They have a light blaster cannon. They ride on wheels.

So the Imps are mobilizing their forces on jeeps in South America?

How much force they commit to securing ports depends on how smart Tarkin is.

How do we measure Tarkin's proficiency in ground/jeep/seaboat captain when he is strictly speaking an admiral first. His position as Grand Moff indicates that he is a governor of a sector, but he must rely on generals and admirals beneath him to achieve his goals.

You're putting him in an unusual situation and expecting us to judge him in that situation with no precedent.

I know that war isn't that simple. I did give you details on how their troops are. How good Tarkin is is debatable. I gave you supplies. I gave you starting position. What else do you want?

I'd like for you to admit that these large scale war threads are a hotbed of uncertainty because we can't evaluate all variables accurately and there's no clear-cut winner if you cannot do that. Even making this thread, you didn't understand all the variables you would be required to provide in order for this thread to be adequately judged. If the intention is just to make an opinion thread, you can make a simple poll and cut out the details.

For ANY vs thread that isn't a spite you can't 100% dictate the winner. I'm just asking you who, with the info that I gave you, would win at this point in the thread?

Tarkin, for the record, is regarded as a tactical genius by both the official website and Complete Star Wars Encyclopedia.

Originally posted by bane's heart
well you decreased the number of stormtroopers and at-at's. You did give them some ties and AA, but having an SD and frigates with no shielding or orbital stike makes them pretty much useless. But the 1,000,000 constrips could overwhelm and provide a distraction. overall i would say its more balaced

that was the point..

Originally posted by Hewhoknowsall
It's not. I'm just wondering why you don't want them/if you don't want them.

IDK

I am well aware of that. They are jeep like structured land transports (obviously they can't hold everyone). They can travel on most types of terrain. They have a light blaster cannon. They ride on wheels.

How much force they commit to securing ports depends on how smart Tarkin is.

I agree, I'm just saying not to say that.

I know that war isn't that simple. I did give you details on how their troops are. How good Tarkin is is debatable. I gave you supplies. I gave you starting position. What else do you want?

I never said you did. I said IF you did, just like how Lucien annoyingly does.

w/e guys lets just debate/talk about who wins.(imps/earth) Not about who wins. (as in u guys)

Cuz we all I know that I`m Win.

lol. only u? not anyone else?.. well since ur God i guess u win.