Ground Adasta

[Ulysses]

Hi @Aberforth
Can I clarify a couple of things?
1) are there any gates in the wall?
2) what sort of scale is the diamond?
3) is the city coextensive with the length of the wall, or does it spill over/hide behind?

Or are you happy for me to define these things?

Edit: also, how big is an AT-SW platoon?

 

[Aberforth]

1) Up to you. There are none defined on the Ziost write-up, but I don't mind if you want to add one that leads to and from the city for the purpose of this thread.

2) Again, it is not explicitly stated anywhere, but I envisioned each segment of the wall (between turrets) as being approximatively 200 meters long (considering we only have 500 units each to cover the whole battle ground). Does it seem fair to you?

3) New Adastra is directly adjacent to the Great Citadel (there is very little to no distance between the city and the outer wall).

4) Info about the AT-SW can be found here: basically one AT-SW + 4 crew.

 

[Ulysses]

Thanks, sounds sensible
Q3 was more about how wide the city is (ie 200m?)

 

[Aberforth]

Oh. I'll leave that up to you.

 

[Aberforth]

@Ulysses What are "JO Tanks"? They are not listed anywhere on the Jedi NPCs list.

 

[Ulysses]

http://www.thestarwarsrp.com/forum/index.php?threads/jedi-technology.64222/

Penultimate entry
@Valen Pelora assures me they're legit

 

[Valen Pelora]

@Aberforth they are the siege unit granted after Rothana was claimed as a resource planet.

 

[Ulysses]

Hi @Aberforth
Can I clarify what the setup is on the walls? I read the first post as placing them either side of the wall - i.e. on the ground, inside and out - but this post seems to place them on the wall, either side of the turret. In which case, presumably, the AT-SW's on the other side of the turret are shielded by it?

 

[Aberforth]

On top of the wall, one team on each side of the turret.

___________X_|___TURRET___|
___________X_|___TURRET___|_X_______________
___________X_|___TURRET___|
___________X_|___TURRET___|
___________X_|___TURRET___|
___________X_|___TURRET___|
_____________________________________________

 

[Ulysses]

And there's a 90° bend in the wall at this stage? So you'd only see one defensive team at a time, unless you were coming from one of the cardinal compass points?

Your post describes the readiness of your troops, but does not deal with the fact that my armour has engaged yours at the extremity of their respective ranges.

 

[Aberforth]

In essence yes, but don't forget that the model is replicated for each of the turrets.

You didn't write that your troops had engaged mine. You wrote what they would do: "The lumbering walkers would advance to engage the Imperial ones stood under the turrets nearest the sea, supported by the ion cannons of the tanks." There is no indication in your post that my troops are even in sight of yours, let alone in range.

 

[Ulysses]

Sorry, I used the would so as not to prejudice anything you might have had planned to intercept me
I can have them actually engage in the next post if you prefer

 

[Aberforth]

Please do. Be as precise as possible when detailing attack (positioning, angle, etc.).

 

[Aberforth]

@Ulysses I am going to have to ask you to be a lot more precise.

What is firing what? At what angle? Which turret(s) are you attacking? How far away are your troops from the turret, from the wall and from the city?

 

[Ulysses]

I'm slightly hampered by not knowing what the ranges of a turbo laser/ion cannon/concussion missile are

Shall we call them all 400m for simplicity?

 

[Aberforth]

Ok. I'll use the same distance for my own Heavy Armour.

 

[Ulysses]

In which case, the lead member of each team is about 390 meters from the seaward turret, and so about 500 meters from the landward one.

I have assumed that the sea is a straight line parallel to the relevant edge and the city is a right angle whose apex is the fort. Therefore the closest edge will be just inside 400 m away.
So far everything is symmetrical both sides.

 

[Ulysses]

Hi @Aberforth
Some points from your post that I'm not sure I accept.

1. If your troops are on the perimeter of the city, only a very few will be at the point of closest approach.
2. If the AT-SWs are hidden in the city, surely they are not able to fire immediately
3. If my teams are within extreme range of the seeward turrets, they are out of range of the landward ones

My troops have been advancing through open ground, so I'm not sure that the firing reveals my position. You set up an impressive killing zone in your OP and so my strategy has been caution rather than subterfuge. I apologise if there has been any confusion with that from not knowing relevant ranges etc.

I was also surprised that your SWs were so fragile.

Thanks

 

[Aberforth]

No offence, but it seems like a lot of our difficulties with this thread stem from the fact that you fail to provide sufficient precisions in your IC posts: you overlook a lot of details that are crucial in tactical battles. Last round, before you launched your missiles, I made a point to ask you to be precise, yet I had to inquire OOC for elements that ought to have been in the post in the first place (position, angle, what you were attacking, with what, etc.).

Now, you seem to have a very clear picture of what the battle scene looks like which you fail to provide me with IC. Here is how I imagine the grounds:

Now to address the concerns you have raised:

1. While that statement is accurate, I fail to see how it is an issue. My infantry troops will have to run about 400 meters before reaching yours. However you look at it, at most some might have to run 500 meters from the outer perimeter of the city which again is not a concern as they have yet to reach you: it should take them about three minutes to do so.

2. I have spent a post insisting that my artillery was ready to fire and another positioning them to the city's limit before actually firing. It seems more than reasonable to me. They wouldn't have to move that far. Hiding doesn't mean they are behind a building; they can simply be dissimulated in plain sight (e.i.: in an alley).

3. Actually, you insisted that your troops where about 390 meters away from the "seaward turrets". As the wall is 200 meters long and your troops are moving along the cliff (which means there is an angle of approximatively 90 degrees between the wall and your position from the turret), the landward turrets are about 440 meters from your AT-STs which put them in range from my missiles.

4. That's a matter of opinions: there are dozens of ways you could have attacked the fortress. I didn't want to meta and just fire at your position because I knew OOC where you would be attacking.

5. You fired two missiles (of still unknown composition) and five ion cannons at each of the AT-SWs. While the two missiles aiming for their legs might not have been enough to destroy them, a concentrated jet of ionized particles would have more than likely caused a critical engine failure and rendered them useless.

 

[Valen Pelora]

Hey Guys!

I'm breaking my cardinal rule, again, because this is a Main Faction Battle. I think this has been reiterated numerous times by staff members and in the tacticals that have taken place. A certain level of specificity is needed but the focus should be on the tactics. Similarly classified units should be considered similar in strength.

Angle of fire, specific types of missiles, and super specific details shouldn't be the focus. The actual tactical movements should be the focus.