Forums of the Megaverse®

Ninjabunny wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:

Lenwen wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:"Decimate" means "reduce by 1/10th."

And win means win.

That it does.

Just making a side note.
Palladium's point is that they'd win, whether or not they used the proper words to describe it.

There is another key word "probably", there are chances for ARCHIE to lose the battle and it only states he could take on one or the other not both (the two are becoming allies again). Also it doesn't state him as the most powerful army either, The CS is stated as the most powerful army on the North America. Also Canon states ARCHIE doesn't have the confidence to think he could win, adding another level of probability to the battle so It's not a 100% ARCHIE 'will' win but he has a chance at winning. This is how I read it, but again I also read that the other threats mentioned also have a chance at defeating the CS, but no granted victory.

Right, but I think it stands to reason that his army of Shemarrians (not to mention other bots, it he wants to pull out all stops, and I assume he would have to in order to try to take on the CS) is likely to be pretty heavily outnumbered.
So with that passage, and the power of Archie's bots, I'd say Archie's minions are definitely contenders for the top soldiers.

Ninjabunny wrote:He is a true under-rated power bloc [edited for spelling] and his 'bots are powerful indeed they are a top contender for sure.

Not numbers-wise, but one-for-one, I'd happily pit Mindwerks' robots against Archie's. They're pretty damned sophisticated as well, and heavily overlooked.

Ninja.

The fact remains the passage clearly states Archie hasa better chance at defeating the coalition then the coalition has at beating him. As refrenced by the probably word in the canon refrence.

Do you not agree ?

Comrade Corsarius wrote:

Ninjabunny wrote:He is a true under-rated power bloc [edited for spelling] and his 'bots are powerful indeed they are a top contender for sure.

Not numbers-wise, but one-for-one, I'd happily pit Mindwerks' robots against Archie's. They're pretty damned sophisticated as well, and heavily overlooked.

It's been a while since I looked over that book.
Care to pitch a case for them?

Gladly.

Apart from my case on... what... page 1 of this thread?

Okay, just the AI robots then:
M1000 panther - seek and destroy unit
advanced sensor suite
Main body MDC 250
Speed max 640kph with 305m altitude
armed 2x head lasers
mini missile launcher
energy rifles/rail guns
6 attacks/melee
+1 init +5 strike/parry +7 dodge
bunch of skills including prowl 80%
7 foot tall.

M1200 lion - assault robot
Main body 350
max speed 352kph, altitude 244m
11 foot high
laer arm
dual ion cannon arm
2 PS 40 arms with laser fingers and are extendable 30.5m
2 small hydraulic arms extendable 4.6m
rail gun
mini missile launchers
energy rifles or hand held rail guns
9 (yes, 9) attacks/melee, +1 init +6 strike +10 parry +6 dodge
a load of skills and advanced sensors

M1400 Tiger -hunter killer
Main body 250
Speed 241kph (land bound)
Head lasers
mini missile launchers
can use hand held weapons but awkwardly because....
extendable hydraulic claw hands/arms that make it look like freddy krueger.
7 attacks/melee, +2 init +6 strike +8 parry +5 dodge
more skills, particularly tracking etc as well as the usual overwhelming amount of optics and sensors.

Piloted robot:
M-1600 Bear
Main Body 580
Speed 96kph (slow these days but impressive when pretty much the only competition was the UAR-1 and Glitter Boy)
Height 7.6m
Grenade launcher tubes
Mini missile launchers
Tri barrel head laser blaster
Multi weapon arm (does 2d4x10+20 per shot on maximum)
laser knuckle blasters
forearm vibro-sword
smoke dispenser
And just for fun, giant sized energy rifle or rail gun.
+1 attack at lvl 1,3,6,10
and a bunch of other bonuses.

Not bad for sourcebook three, which came out LONG before (for example) coalition war campaign.

As i pointed out already Ninja, the canon refrence which i provided does in fact state Archie "probably" would win a war against the coalition.

That means by default that he is favored however slightly it may be... he is the favored in a war time scenario .

But that is your opinion if you so chose to not agree with canon material.

Shinitenshi wrote:

Lenwen wrote:As i pointed out already Ninja, the canon refrence which i provided does in fact state Archie "probably" would win a war against the coalition.

That means by default that he is favored however slightly it may be... he is the favored in a war time scenario .

But that is your opinion if you so chose to not agree with canon material.

Just read this passage and to me it is not favoring anyone. It lists different factions that with the right motivation or opportunity could topple the CS. It even mentions that there may be other forces in the megaverse that could win a war against the CS. So no the book doesn't say that ARCHIE is favored to win against the CS over anyone else.

Agreed. While it is a source, it is a weak one to support your argument with.

Grell wrote:

Shinitenshi wrote:

Lenwen wrote:As i pointed out already Ninja, the canon refrence which i provided does in fact state Archie "probably" would win a war against the coalition.

That means by default that he is favored however slightly it may be... he is the favored in a war time scenario .

But that is your opinion if you so chose to not agree with canon material.

Just read this passage and to me it is not favoring anyone. It lists different factions that with the right motivation or opportunity could topple the CS. It even mentions that there may be other forces in the megaverse that could win a war against the CS. So no the book doesn't say that ARCHIE is favored to win against the CS over anyone else.

Agreed. While it is a source, it is a weak one to support your argument with.

Look at the factions.
The Vampire Kingdoms.
The Xiticix.
The Splugorth Minions (i.e., Atlantis).

These are some of the most powerful factions on the planet, and Archie is mentioned in the same breath.
That means he's a major league player.

Ninja after having just looked up the very word "probably"...

It is an adverb

It means .. certainly , very likely, apperantly ,in all likelihood.

It does in fact not mean "has a chance" but it in fact means exactly what i just said.
Given the words meaning I personally will hold true to the canon refrence and say that yes Archie sone of the few powerblocks that could defeate the coalition. As per that passage.

Equal chance to means 50/50 chance of winning.
"Probably"... means better odds to me, meaning mostly likely 51% to 75% odds of winning.

So Archie does seemed favored to me even its just alittle to a full 3 out of 4 chance.

OK, I'm going to side with Lenwen here (Don't let it go to your head Len. ) and agree that IF ARCHIE could overcome his crippling self doubt and make a concentrated effort to take down the CS war machine, he is very likely to come out the victor.

However, I really do not see this happening at all. ARCHIE is smart enough to know that even if he crushes the CS, it will leave his forces weakened, and the world will now be aware of the existence of his robot legions, if not ARCHIE himself. One of his greatest weapons is that the world is generally unaware of him. Should that change, well... between the Republicans, Atlantis, and the occasional group of interlopers, ARCHIE has enough problems.

I guess ivam 100% completely surprised no one has placed Atlantis as the clear favorite defacto top military troop for troop.

No nation can bring to bere a troop with as much standard mdc and power as the splugorthian kingdom can put forth..

Note that just because he CAN doesn't mean he WILL. There's a difference between 'Would probably win" and "It'd be a cakewalk"

If he won but it devastated his armies and left him vulnerable to others, it wouldn't be too smart to pick that fight.

Archie is in it for the long game. He's slowly building up. Placing his spies, getting recon. Doing little things to advance his agenda. If anything he's doing so better than the CS.

Look at the land 'grabbed' by Archie in the last 10 years and the land gained by the CS. Archie ain't doing that bad.

All said though.. the "minion war" is about to hit Rifts earth.... that might very much change the power structure of NA when it happens. Some might rise and some might descend in power. Just for example.. if FQ and the CS roll up to Calgary and get in a fight with the Demons to prevent them from taking over Rifts earth they might lose millions of troops. Conversely, if Lazlo heads up there to support Larsens Brigade they might. If Archie hears about it and doesn't trust the squishies to do so, HE might roll millions of bots up there to do the job.

Some how I don't see all the groups pitching in equally and singing Combyya when it's alll said and done. So... We'll need to wait for that book to re-assess.

Lenwen, at this point, I think we need to know more about what exactly we're comparing, and what level we're comparing them on.
Are we comparing just basic infantry with standard equipment versus basic infantry with standard equipment?
Or an overall comparison of the various armies overall, considering everything but numbers?
Or what?

Quite simply put KC who is thee deadliest soilder for soilder..

For instance..

I just did a side by side comparison of a kydian powerlord verses the coalition grunt.

There was never a question bout which soilder was by far the better of the two after just gearing them.

The kydian had further weapon range greater mdc protection same roughly damage wise but the kydian had an outstanding plus 33 shots per main weapon over the CS grunt.

Those shots combined with the greater mdc and further reach weapon wise simply makes a batle against the kydian a near suicide mission for the standard CS grunt.

And yes... the Kydian is in fact thee standard troop for atlantis.

Wonder where the Cyberknights come in.

Lenwen wrote:For instance..

I just did a side by side comparison of a kydian powerlord verses the coalition grunt.

There was never a question bout which soilder was by far the better of the two after just gearing them.

The kydian had further weapon range greater mdc protection same roughly damage wise but the kydian had an outstanding plus 33 shots per main weapon over the CS grunt.

Those shots combined with the greater mdc and further reach weapon wise simply makes a batle against the kydian a near suicide mission for the standard CS grunt.

And yes... the Kydian is in fact thee standard troop for atlantis.

I'd say that a Kittani Infantry would be the equivalent of the CS Grunt.
I'm away from my Atlantis books, though, for the next several days, so I can't check on it just now.
But that gives you some time to reassess things, and double-check the books to support your view.

Lenwen wrote:Quite simply put KC who is thee deadliest soilder for soilder..

Right, but which soldier to which soldier?
A CS Grunt versus a Thinman is going to be a LOT closer match than a Thinman versus a Wasp, for example.
Or a Dreadnaught.

frogboy wrote:

glitterboy2098 wrote:except we've been asked "in the world" not "in their region". sure, the CS is the best in north america..but worldwide, they're middle of the pack. the NGR has better training, equipment, and organization, for example.

What you said. The soldiers are literate and as (I read it) encouraged to think freely, unlike CS soldiers. An example of this type of soldier in history would be those who hit the beaches of Normandy on D-Day. There they were getting shot to pieces and by rights should have been chased back into the sea. It was the officers and soldiers ability to think freely and improvise that won that battle, not the admirals and generals sitting on the boats. In my opinion, the CS soldier would not be as accustomed to improvising as soldiers from the NGR or New Navy. They are not as well traveled either. If you think about it the only reason the CS exists at all is because they are protected by KS.

The cs troops are still troops. they can still think and improvise. They're still human not skelebots ((Which they have too))

They've fought Tolkeen which would have needed alot more improvisation than people might give them credit for. Any engagement with tolkeen forces could yeald any combo from straight out mercenaries to a flight of dragons, a bunch of demons or a group of 10 kinds of mages.

As for 'well traveled' the CS has deployed to the NGR and Europe. the NGR, conversely, only sent some observers and diplomats to the US. The CS stretches from Canada down to lone star. They get around fine.

I know there's alot of CS hate out there (( some justified. Much not)) But the NGR isn't (( currently)) All that much better than the CS, and in many ways not as well. The CS is expanding the NGR are under Seige. They're different in many ways.

yes the literacy rate of the NGR is higher than the CS but as discussed in other threads (( many.... many other threads)) Full illeteraccy in the CS is absurd. They likely have a 5th grade reading level. Enough to get by, if not really what's needed to expand literature to astounding heights of prose.

One thing I personally have seen many many times on the site are te CS fans who either minimize the Coalitions short comings or just try to downplay their advantages of unlimited resources and unlimited soilders all the while attempting to justify thier military campaigs.. while trying to yet justify why no nation / city states ever build alliances to put thier expansionistic ways to a halt..

As someone who has been in real word war theaters and has some ideas how such things would work it just literally stumps me ...

I hve to play the game with a suspension of disbelief i undersand that much , but just how many lvls of suspension of disbelief does 1 need to just make the broken setting of north america a playable setting ?

Lenwen wrote:One thing I personally have seen many many times on the site are te CS fans who either minimize the Coalitions short comings or just try to downplay their advantages of unlimited resources and unlimited soilders all the while attempting to justify thier military campaigs.. while trying to yet justify why no nation / city states ever build alliances to put thier expansionistic ways to a halt..

As someone who has been in real word war theaters and has some ideas how such things would work it just literally stumps me ...

I hve to play the game with a suspension of disbelief i undersand that much , but just how many lvls of suspension of disbelief does 1 need to just make the broken setting of north america a playable setting ?

Well there's sort of two things at work there Lenwen. The first is that you have a pretty wacked out view of the world and when you post on the boards here you rarely backup your views from stuff from the books. (( I'd say never but you did so once in memory. )) Your 'real world experience" in MY (( limited I'll give ya)) Experience is way way WAY off how much of the real world works. Case in point, your view that all the evil little nations will band together to take out the Cs and some how get along and not kill each other, and some how agree to work under one central command, for the purpose of taking out the CS. It just doesn't happen, 'in the real world'.

The second thing is. yeah. There's writers fiat all over the Palladium universe. None doubts it. I've never seen someone say that there's not. There's just disagreements as to how much and where. Does the Cs have alot? Yes. Noone disagrees with you there. Is it as much as you seem to sometimes indicate? I don't think so.

The thing is, we have the game as written and as established. part of that is the CS being as powerful as they are. Do they write much about the average CS Citizen out working the fields and raising livestock to feed the rest of the nation? No. (( it's there if you look though)) but that's not very fun in a role playing sense. They write more about the exciting stuff and the stuff you're likely to run into when adventuring.

frogboy wrote:

Pepsi Jedi wrote:

frogboy wrote:

glitterboy2098 wrote:except we've been asked "in the world" not "in their region". sure, the CS is the best in north america..but worldwide, they're middle of the pack. the NGR has better training, equipment, and organization, for example.

What you said. The soldiers are literate and as (I read it) encouraged to think freely, unlike CS soldiers. An example of this type of soldier in history would be those who hit the beaches of Normandy on D-Day. There they were getting shot to pieces and by rights should have been chased back into the sea. It was the officers and soldiers ability to think freely and improvise that won that battle, not the admirals and generals sitting on the boats. In my opinion, the CS soldier would not be as accustomed to improvising as soldiers from the NGR or New Navy. They are not as well traveled either. If you think about it the only reason the CS exists at all is because they are protected by KS.

The cs troops are still troops. they can still think and improvise. They're still human not skelebots ((Which they have too))

They've fought Tolkeen which would have needed alot more improvisation than people might give them credit for. Any engagement with tolkeen forces could yeald any combo from straight out mercenaries to a flight of dragons, a bunch of demons or a group of 10 kinds of mages.

As for 'well traveled' the CS has deployed to the NGR and Europe. the NGR, conversely, only sent some observers and diplomats to the US. The CS stretches from Canada down to lone star. They get around fine.

I know there's alot of CS hate out there (( some justified. Much not)) But the NGR isn't (( currently)) All that much better than the CS, and in many ways not as well. The CS is expanding the NGR are under Seige. They're different in many ways.

yes the literacy rate of the NGR is higher than the CS but as discussed in other threads (( many.... many other threads)) Full illeteraccy in the CS is absurd. They likely have a 5th grade reading level. Enough to get by, if not really what's needed to expand literature to astounding heights of prose.

The CS has one over seas deployment of 30,000 troops, and a limited deployment to South America. The NGR has been out and about with there navy longer. Going by the conflicts written for the CS they would not survive without being protected by the author. It is ridiculous how they are the high tech leaders in the post apocalyptic North America where resources and humans are in short supply, yet they can throw hundreds of thousands of both into combat willy nilly and some how never run out of either even with dog boys they would run out of soldiers and stuff . As for them being illiterate, that seems to change from no ability to read at all to a limited form of literacy using symbols and colors. There limitations seem to change depending on the mood of who ever. As for literacy being important, its not, but a literate soldier is a better soldier. Thats why most military's require the equivalent of a high school diploma. Don't get me wrong, I like the CS, and LOVE playing CS characters Who are good, We just tweak how they work a bit. We gave them a more capable navy, and made them literate, not collage professors but literate. And canonically, they are illiterate except for specialist.

You're down playing 30,000 troops, in a trans ocean crossing in rifts earth with the number of problems that involves, landing and pitching in to help save the NGR... something the NGR has never done.

Yeah the NGR has a Navy.. that they do nothing with. The NGR is there to keep up the siege by the gargolyes and their allies. That siege mentality is alot different than the CS expansionist one. Yes there is alot of writer fiat in the game, but it's nnot just for the CS. it's across the board in every place you look. It pops up as soon as the newest book is written. while it most certainly does appear for the CS it appears for everything else as well. It's part of the palladium 'universe/setting'. If you pick at the thread too much it just unravels.

The literacy thing naggs at me too. And like I said it's been debated in other threads for 100s and 100s of posts. The general consensus is that it's down played by the society as much as possible, while the CS citizens have a 'functional' literacy rate of roughly 4th to 5th grade. Just enough to get by in life. Read signs. Read directions, read paper work for life, but not really the amount you need to call your nation "Literate". Is it a bit off canon? yes, but much like that writer's fiat where the CS has unlimited resources, having a high tech populace with coffee can nuclear power plants and laser pistols just does't match with "How do you spell 'food' duh huh". It's just one of those things. the original concept was clearly thhe nazi book burning and stuff taken to an extreme with out fully thinking it out on down the line as to a nation wide handicap.

Hi pepsi my name is lenwen and i am notorious on these boards for asking for canon sourced refrences, and giving them on return as well in a debated discussion.

What mkes you think multiple alliances have to have a centralized single command for the entire military ?

Even the united states current manifistation of the military does not have a single centralized command and they fluidly work hand in hand . I tbink it is you that does not understand to have alliances defaults automatically to a single military ruling system. Matter of fact the worlds full of military ystems from yhe dame country in which they have different ruling bodies for each military branch.

So i firmly believe an allince does in fact not need a ventralized military ruling counsel

Unless of course your trying to reach fr

Lenwen wrote: Hi pepsi my name is lenwen

Yeah. I got it right this time. lol.

Lenwen wrote: and i am notorious on these boards for asking for canon sourced refrences, and giving them on return as well in a debated discussion.

In my personal experience, not so much. But I'll confess not to reading everything you write. *nods*

Lenwen wrote:
What mkes you think multiple alliances have to have a centralized single command for the entire military ?

Because... it's a military.. and if it's going to take on a foe like the CS you have to have a command structure or you'll trip all over yourselves. Missions will fail because the right hand not knowing what the left is doing.

One branch of your conglomerate might plan a strike for a month just to have it tripped up by anotherbranch doing something close by that causes the bases to go on alert. Ect ad infin.

Lenwen wrote:
Even the united states current manifistation of the military does not have a single centralized command and they fluidly work hand in hand .

................... yes they do.... The President and the Joint Chiefs... *blinks* Of COURSE they do. The President tells the Joint chefs. The joint chiefs work together and the stuff trickles down. Now.. not everything goes all the way up to the executive level but they DO very much have a centralized command.

Lenwen wrote: I tbink it is you that does not understand to have alliances defaults automatically to a single military ruling system. Matter of fact the worlds full of military ystems from yhe dame country in which they have different ruling bodies for each military branch.

What are you talking about?

Lenwen wrote:
So i firmly believe an allince does in fact not need a ventralized military ruling counsel

And again, this shows the difference between your expectation and real militaries. You can't just have different branches of the military running around doing their own thing and not caring what other branches are doing. Well you 'can' but it leads to different branches trying to do the same thing. wasting resources and friendly fire incidents. It's not 'Impossible' just "Stupid".

Lenwen wrote:
Unless of course your trying to reach fr

In a campaign, trying to take down the biggest military in your part of the world... you need structure and yes, a clearly defined chain of command under a central command structure. It's not a couple kids ganging up on the neighborhood bully for a single fight. Logistics alone of a military the size and scope needed to take on the CS would be nightmarish, to not have structure to it... ugg...

Pepsi Jedi wrote:

Lenwen wrote:
Even the united states current manifistation of the military does not have a single centralized command and they fluidly work hand in hand .

................... yes they do.... The President and the Joint Chiefs... *blinks* Of COURSE they do. The President tells the Joint chefs. The joint chiefs work together and the stuff trickles down. Now.. not everything goes all the way up to the executive level but they DO very much have a centralized command.

Yes, the US military has a centralized command structure. However, the Joint Chiefs are not in the operational chain of command.

It's the nine Unified Combatant Commanders which report directly to the SecDef.

frogboy wrote: As for literacy being important, its not, but a literate soldier is a better soldier.

Why?

Thats why most military's require the equivalent of a high school diploma.

And in a society where you could get the equivalent of a high school diploma without reading?

And canonically, they are illiterate except for specialist.

Not true.
There are a number of OCCs that have literacy, and there is no ban on Grunts becoming literate.

Killer Cyborg wrote:

Lenwen wrote:Quite simply put KC who is thee deadliest soilder for soilder..

Right, but which soldier to which soldier?
A CS Grunt versus a Thinman is going to be a LOT closer match than a Thinman versus a Wasp, for example.
Or a Dreadnaught.

Did I ever get an answer to this?

Not to mention that the pres basically takes the advice of military leaders and then chooses his course of action. Pepsi if you think the pres actually comes up with battle plans and military tactics .. you coupd not possibly be more wrong.

He is advised by men who have actual military knowledge. He comes up with nothing.

frogboy wrote:... If you think about it the only reason the CS exists at all is because they are protected by KS...

...Going by the conflicts written for the CS they would not survive without being protected by the author...

Every time you say things like this, you lose all credibility.

Lenwen wrote:Not to mention that the pres basically takes the advice of military leaders and then chooses his course of action. Pepsi if you think the pres actually comes up with battle plans and military tactics .. you coupd not possibly be more wrong.

He is advised by men who have actual military knowledge. He comes up with nothing.

That IS CENTRAL command. The joint chiefs council the Secretary of defense (( as well as the Homeland Security Council and the National Security council) and council the president. It's through them and the Secretary of Defense that the President gets his council and advice. Then the President calls the ball.

When he wants something done he turns to them and goes "I want three options on the table in three hours" and they get it there for him to chose, and advise him as to the pros and cons.

You're saying dozens of small nations can team up with no central command and take on a huge orginised military. You say there's no central command in the US I point out there is. Now you're agreeing there is, in that the President listens to advice of council then chooses the course of action.

How does it get more central than that?

I was pointing out our military i in fact ran by not a central command but by a counsel you attempted to say or imply rater the pres was it.

mightbI also introduce you to a very successful military known word wide as Al quiad. They are a perfect example of a very very good military who has no central command. They are the wave of the future as far as modern military offensives are concerned.

Notice how they are also taking on a world superpower. Without a centralized comand.
So your attempt at hamstringing the idea that a multi powerblock alliance could ever take on the coalition with out a centralized comand is just rubbish.

Ive shown that not only is it possible threw the al-quad ise of a none centralized command but that .. THAT style of a military would more often then not.. successfully take on the coalition and at the very least stop their expansion.

Sorry for the horrendously bad spelling. Using my cell to go back and forth.

Lenwen wrote: I was pointing out our military i in fact ran by not a central command but by a counsel you attempted to say or imply rater the pres was it.

That's still a central command structure. It's not 50 different commanders doing what ever they want with out over-site. It's not a bunch of different small forces working independently.

Lenwen wrote:
mightbI also introduce you to a very successful military known word wide as Al quiad.

I'm going to guess that you mean al-Qaeda.

They're not a military. They're a terrorist organization. Compleatly different thing there. And I'd really like to know your definition of 'Very successful" when you're applying it to them. If you mean "They've carried out some successful terrorists attacks" yes... But sneaking some people onto a plane and flying it into a building isn't a military thing. it's a terrorist thing. It's very -very- different from a Military.

Lenwen wrote:
They are a perfect example of a very very good military who has no central command.

No.... they're not... they're an example of a cell structure terrorist organization.

Lenwen wrote: They are the wave of the future as far as modern military offensives are concerned.

WOW.... are you deluded.... they are no "Wave of the future as far as modern military offensives are concerned" They're simply terrorists, using the same ol stuff as far as terrorists go. Cell structure so when you're captured you can't reveal but a tiny bit to the enemy. It also means that almost no one in the terrorist organization means anything to the organization overall. It's purposefully built so that if you're taken out, it doesn't mean anything.

There's been terrorists organizations for a long long time Lenwen. There very likely will be for a long long time. heck there's even terrorist orginisations in Star Trek.

Doesn't make them viable militarizes.

Lenwen wrote:
Notice how they are also taking on a world superpower. Without a centralized comand.

Define 'Taking on'. If you mean random and (( to be honest)) infrequent terrorists attacks..... then ok. But they certinly aren't invading. They're not claiming territory. They're --terrorists-- not an active military. It'd be quite easy to just send a few seals into any country and blow up a building or two. Doesn't mean we're 'Taking on that country'.

Lenwen wrote: So your attempt at hamstringing the idea that a multi powerblock alliance could ever take on the coalition with out a centralized comand is just rubbish.

No it's FACT. 1) Fact because that's how it's written. 2) Fact by any sort of actual real world logic you'd wish to imply.

Can one of those groups (( or even more)) Carry out some terrorist acts against the CS? Sure.

But you may have noticed, Lenwen.. when they bombed the WTC in 93.... the US didn't fall. When they took down the towers... we still didn't fall. If anything we pulled together stronger. By the logic you're using, the United States should be no more because there's multiple terrorist orginisations that hate us and want to see us fail.

We're still kickin'.

Same as the CS is still kicking even though there's a bunch of baddies out there that hate them.

Lenwen wrote:
Ive shown that not only is it possible threw the al-quad ise of a none centralized command but that .. THAT style of a military would more often then not.. successfully take on the coalition and at the very least stop their expansion.

No you haven't. Because al-Qaeda HASN"T WON. You haven't shown in any way, shape, fashion or form anything LIKE what you're claiming. You've just went "al-Qaeda!!" (( Which you may be enlightened runs on the "centralization of decision and decentralization of execution." philosophy. They do have centralized command... they just have a cell structure to keep the other terrorists from giving them up when they are caught. Why? Because they're small and would be irradiated. Our president has his daily schedule put on tv for the world to see. Why? because he's not living in the shadows scared that the world would kill him at the drop of a hat, or that most of his own people would give him up if caught.

al-Qaeda isn't even close to winning.

They're a terrorist organization. Nothing more. They haven't stopped the US. They haven't even slown us down. We're still the biggest kid on the block. You've just thrown them up there because they popped into your head. They didn't 'Take on and win" against the US. They had a few Suicide troops take over a couple of planes. A trick that worked once.... and did it hurt? yeah.. did it stop us? No. We pulled together and have largely taken out the idiots.

You may not have heard.. but Bin Laden is at the bottom of the sea with some holes in his head after hiding out for years in a dinky drab building.

You haven't shown a winning team... You've only pointed out that cockroaches are hard to get rid of. They hide well and they can bite, but the big guy with the shoe will win when he catches them.

There's always going to be dissonants Lenwen. Some of them militant... but they're not taking on other militaries and winning. They can't.

The notion that Al-Qaeda represents anything successful is utterly asinine. It is structured as it is not out of revolutionary tactical thought, but out of necessity. Lack of resources, manpower (and dependable manpower at that), support, fighting doctrine or respect for any of the Laws of Armed Conflict necessitate the cell structure. The reason they fight like they do is because they've completely devalued human life.

Nothing in what constitues a terror cell or network, either by tactics or structure can remotely be defined as successful. And classifying them as a military just demonstrates a complete lack of understanding as to what a military actually is.

If it's worth anything, Lenwen, I pretty much consider you as somebody with a heavy emotional anti-coalition bias, whose views of the Coalition's power are not based on anything in the books.
You seem to have quite a large emotional chip on your shoulder about them, but little rational basis.

Although that could be its own thread.

The fact of the matter gentlemen . They have multiple attacks upon a world power on oir own soil,which has only happened once before .

Like it or not many tho not all of their people do in fact go threw a military style training. Thats fact. Just because you guys do hate them des not mean they are less of a military power because you said so. Thier training and willingness to obey military orders shows that much.

Lenwen wrote: The fact of the matter gentlemen . They have multiple attacks upon a world power on oir own soil,which has only happened once before .

They've had two attacks on our soil. That doesn't make them a better military or a successful one. They are a terrorist organization. Nothing more. If you took every person in al-Qaeda, and multiplied them by ten... our Coast guard could take them out in open battle. Easily.

You're confusing using a nations freedom and the freedom's of it's people to carry out terrorist attacks with "military might" They are nothing remotely the same. To imply so is to show ignorance on a drastic and dramatic scale of the topic at hand.

Lenwen wrote:
Like it or not many tho not all of their people do in fact go threw a military style training.

A few boot camps out in the mountains of BFE in the middle east doesn't even measure up to the crappiest training our reserves have. They go though thick indoctrination as to the zealous and religious fanaticism. But again, if you took every member in al-Qaeda and multiplied them by ten. The weakest elements of our military could take them out in a fight. I'd say one Division or Brigade could easily take them out in a fight. They're not dangerous because they're trained or equipped.

They're dangerous due to the freedoms we have in our country for our own people, that they, the terrorists, use to hide behind till they can jump out of the shadows and strike.. once every ten years or so.

Lenwen wrote: Thats fact. Just because you guys do hate them des not mean they are less of a military power because you said so.

No... their utter lack of numbers means they're not a military power.
Their lack of arms means they're not a military power. A few AK47s and RPGs don't make you a millitary. There's gangs in LA that have that.
Their lack of country means they're not a military power.
Their lack of transport or any sort of military vechiles what so ever means theyre not a military power.
They've won no wars.
They've waged no wars.
They've only conducted a relitivly small number of terrorist attacks.

They're nothing more than a gang of religious thugs that are willing to blow themselves up to kill innocent people. That doesn't make them a military power either.

you should do some serious research. Just how many people do you think are IN al-Qaeda? look it up. The numbers might surprise you. Chances are there's more people in your town. Probably many times as many people in your town than is in al-Qaeda.

Lenwen wrote:
Thier training and willingness to obey military orders shows that much.

[/quote]

No.. that just means they're stupid. My 11 year old can find directions to make a suicide bomb on the internet in 20 minutes. (( If it took that long)). They don't act as a MILITARY, they don't follow "MILITARY ORDERS"

They strap on bombs and blow them selvves up.. or in one isolated incident, they snuck onto planes and flew them into buildings. Was 9-11 bad? Of course it was. Was it some ultra awesome plot of a military? no.

It was a couple of Zealots pulling a dirty trick against unarmed civilians. The BIGGEST act of your so called awesome military, was a terrorist attack on civilians. They didn't even take over military planes. Some guys overcoming flight attendants and a couple of pilots doesn't make them commandos.

Pepsi Jedi wrote:

Lenwen wrote: The fact of the matter gentlemen . They have multiple attacks upon a world power on oir own soil,which has only happened once before .

They've had two attacks on our soil. That doesn't make them a better military or a successful one. They are a terrorist organization. Nothing more. If you took every person in al-Qaeda, and multiplied them by ten... our Coast guard could take them out in open battle. Easily.

You're confusing using a nations freedom and the freedom's of it's people to carry out terrorist attacks with "military might" They are nothing remotely the same. To imply so is to show ignorance on a drastic and dramatic scale of the topic at hand.

Lenwen wrote:
Like it or not many tho not all of their people do in fact go threw a military style training.

A few boot camps out in the mountains of BFE in the middle east doesn't even measure up to the crappiest training our reserves have. They go though thick indoctrination as to the zealous and religious fanaticism. But again, if you took every member in al-Qaeda and multiplied them by ten. The weakest elements of our military could take them out in a fight. I'd say one Division or Brigade could easily take them out in a fight. They're not dangerous because they're trained or equipped.

They're dangerous due to the freedoms we have in our country for our own people, that they, the terrorists, use to hide behind till they can jump out of the shadows and strike.. once every ten years or so.

Lenwen wrote: Thats fact. Just because you guys do hate them des not mean they are less of a military power because you said so.

No... their utter lack of numbers means they're not a military power.
Their lack of arms means they're not a military power. A few AK47s and RPGs don't make you a millitary. There's gangs in LA that have that.
Their lack of country means they're not a military power.
Their lack of transport or any sort of military vechiles what so ever means theyre not a military power.
They've won no wars.
They've waged no wars.
They've only conducted a relitivly small number of terrorist attacks.

They're nothing more than a gang of religious thugs that are willing to blow themselves up to kill innocent people. That doesn't make them a military power either.

you should do some serious research. Just how many people do you think are IN al-Qaeda? look it up. The numbers might surprise you. Chances are there's more people in your town. Probably many times as many people in your town than is in al-Qaeda.

Lenwen wrote:
Thier training and willingness to obey military orders shows that much.

No.. that just means they're stupid. My 11 year old can find directions to make a suicide bomb on the internet in 20 minutes. (( If it took that long)). They don't act as a MILITARY, they don't follow "MILITARY ORDERS"

They strap on bombs and blow them selvves up.. or in one isolated incident, they snuck onto planes and flew them into buildings. Was 9-11 bad? Of course it was. Was it some ultra awesome plot of a military? no.

It was a couple of Zealots pulling a dirty trick against unarmed civilians. The BIGGEST act of your so called awesome military, was a terrorist attack on civilians. They didn't even take over military planes. Some guys overcoming flight attendants and a couple of pilots doesn't make them commandos.

Thank you, Pepsi. You've expressed the same ideas I had, but stated it in a MUCH nicer way than I would.

frogboy wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:

frogboy wrote:... If you think about it the only reason the CS exists at all is because they are protected by KS...

...Going by the conflicts written for the CS they would not survive without being protected by the author...

Every time you say things like this, you lose all credibility.

Not really. The first time I read about them There situation was described as dire. A rebuilt society of human supremest with scarce resources, in post apocalyptic world struggling to survive against threats from every direction. Yet, they have the resources to build hundreds of thousands of skeletons, create thousands of mutant animals in and ship them north over hundreds of miles north through very hostile territory to not one, but two war fronts, not to mention the Xitictix, and the Pecos Empire or the Devils gate and general peace keeping duties in the burbs let alone shipping 30,000 troops over seas which is supposed to be impossible. So yeah, the CS is protected by Keven, so what ? His book, his story. I said as I saw it and whether or not you find it credible just does not matter to anyone but you .

I have to agree, it should be pretty evident to anyone reading the books that only author fiat keeps the CS going and winning like it does.

frogboy wrote:

Nightmask wrote:

frogboy wrote:Not really. The first time I read about them There situation was described as dire. A rebuilt society of human supremest with scarce resources, in post apocalyptic world struggling to survive against threats from every direction. Yet, they have the resources to build hundreds of thousands of skeletons, create thousands of mutant animals in and ship them north over hundreds of miles north through very hostile territory to not one, but two war fronts, not to mention the Xitictix, and the Pecos Empire or the Devils gate and general peace keeping duties in the burbs let alone shipping 30,000 troops over seas which is supposed to be impossible. So yeah, the CS is protected by Keven, so what ? His book, his story. I said as I saw it and whether or not you find it credible just does not matter to anyone but you .

I have to agree, it should be pretty evident to anyone reading the books that only author fiat keeps the CS going and winning like it does.

Don't get me wrong, I love the CS, we just did not plat them as written. We left them in a steady war with Tolkeen, FQ was still to be played out but in our version of the world they were dealing with the Xiticix. Aside from all that, it would be hard to say who has the most deadly soldier.

Not saying anything about how you feel about the CS, just agreeing that it's just author fiat that keeps them winning and producing at levels they just shouldn't be able to do. But that's often the case with evil empires, unlike a novel an RPG will almost always keep an evil empire going, it's the good empires you see falling time and again (same with good gods vs evil gods).

frogboy wrote:

Killer Cyborg wrote:

frogboy wrote: As for literacy being important, its not, but a literate soldier is a better soldier.

Why?

Thats why most military's require the equivalent of a high school diploma.

And in a society where you could get the equivalent of a high school diploma without reading?

And canonically, they are illiterate except for specialist.

Not true.
There are a number of OCCs that have literacy, and there is no ban on Grunts becoming literate.

Why ? because when they find paper with things written on it they know it may be worth more then toilet paper for starters.

So?

It is impossible to get the equivalent of a high school diploma without knowing how to read in any world except for one that exist in fantasy.

Only because in our current society, the transfer of knowledge is based on the written word.
But as technology grows, that's less and less necessary.
Instead of writing letters to family, we can send voicemail.
Instead of reading a book, we can listen to the audiobook.
If for some reason we WANTED to, we could easily design a high school that would provide all the required education, minus literacy.

on average literacy is NOT encouraged among the common soldiers.

True.
But then, I don't see any reason why it would be necessary, or even significantly useful.
Not in the setting of Rifts Earth, anyway.

frogboy wrote:The first time I read about them There situation was described as dire. A rebuilt society of human supremest with scarce resources, in post apocalyptic world struggling to survive against threats from every direction.

Where did you read the part about "scarce resources?"

Yet, they have the resources to build hundreds of thousands of skeletons, create thousands of mutant animals in and ship them north over hundreds of miles north through very hostile territory to not one, but two war fronts, not to mention the Xitictix, and the Pecos Empire or the Devils gate and general peace keeping duties in the burbs let alone shipping 30,000 troops over seas which is supposed to be impossible.

Too much of a jumble there for those objections to be coherent.
Yes, they have a lot of resources. As far as I know, that doesn't conflict with anything.
Yes, they can travel hundreds of miles and transports soldiers to different fronts. What about it?
Why is shipping troops overseas supposed to be impossible?

If you want to make a case, make a case.

frogboy wrote:Read the main book and you will see the part about scarce resources.

I've read the main book, and I did not see that part.
Feel free to find it, and to provide the exact page and quote.

As for making a case, what you think does not matter enough to go to all that trouble. Get your main book or RUE and read. The case is made in there.

It's not just what I think- it's what people who have read and understand the books think.
When you say stuff like "the CS only survives because Kevin wants them to," it's a clear demonstration that you have not read and fully understood the material.
If you don't care to argue about it with me, that's fine- I'm just letting you know how things work.
It's a lot like saying "CS Grunts generally get along well with mages," or "Erin Tarn is actually a huge fan of the Coalition," or "The Boxing skill doesn't provide an additional attack," or some similar evidence that you don't know the material.
You can say "read the book, it's in there!" all you want, but people will generally just shake their heads and wander off.

frogboy wrote:From your point of view, and that's fine.

Doesn't really answer any of the questions I've raised.

Not seeing where anyone can rightly claim that the CS is all that when even with the upgrade in the War Campaign book they're far more about posturing and doing their best to fight curb stomp battles where a high level of skill and training on the part of their troops isn't necessary. Free Quebec has a far better claim to that than the CS does. Unless the CS got a rewrite I haven't seen in some newer book they're only average as things go and certainly not possessed of the best army or even third best around and only have their big wins because they're written to have won even when they simply shouldn't have and producing more than they ought to be able to. Which as I already noted is what you expect of an evil empire, the writers always give them a godly blessing to continue even when they ought to fail. You can hardly keep writing books if all your evil empires are written as falling and good taking hold and a second even greater Platinum Age has begun.

Ninjabunny wrote:People seem to be forgeting that the CS isn't evil,

um.. actually the coalition is the evil empire. KS himself has flat outstated as much in CWC ...

They are the villains people love to hate, i know i do. Or something similar to that. Was KS himself talking about the coalition.

frogboy wrote:As for magic, and Erin Tarn there is zero ambiguity there as far as the CS go's.

This is what I'm saying: there is zero ambiguity as to whether the CS has any kind of problem getting resources.

Nightmask wrote:Not seeing where anyone can rightly claim that the CS is all that when even with the upgrade in the War Campaign book they're far more about posturing and doing their best to fight curb stomp battles where a high level of skill and training on the part of their troops isn't necessary. Free Quebec has a far better claim to that than the CS does. Unless the CS got a rewrite I haven't seen in some newer book they're only average as things go and certainly not possessed of the best army or even third best around and only have their big wins because they're written to have won even when they simply shouldn't have and producing more than they ought to be able to. Which as I already noted is what you expect of an evil empire, the writers always give them a godly blessing to continue even when they ought to fail. You can hardly keep writing books if all your evil empires are written as falling and good taking hold and a second even greater Platinum Age has begun.

Support your claims or quit wasting time.
You want to claim that the CS is far more about posturing then combat, that's fine- back up the claim.
You want to claim that their troops aren't highly trained or skilled? Back it up.
You want to claim that they win due to writer's fiat rather than their in-game stats? Back it up.

Lenwen wrote:

Ninjabunny wrote:People seem to be forgeting that the CS isn't evil,

um.. actually the coalition is the evil empire. KS himself has flat outstated as much in CWC ...

They are the villains people love to hate, i know i do. Or something similar to that. Was KS himself talking about the coalition.

It's splitting hairs.
The CS is evil.
The citizens of the CS are not necessarily evil, and are even generally Good or Selfish.