NATO and GAR task forces meet somewhere in the Central Europe and engage in combat. By OP fiat, area is desolate so neither side will be getting reinforcements; they will however be getting as much spare parts and ammunition as needed, but destroyed vehicles will not be replaced. No strategic weapons or orbital bombardment is allowed.
Forces:
NATO
120.000 infantry
2.000 Leopard II
700 A-10
300 Dassault Rafale
400 Saab Gripen
GAR
120.000 infantry
2.000 AT-TE
700 LAAT/i
300 Delta-7
400 Eta-2
Who will win?
NATO vs GAR
-
sonofccn
- Starship Captain
- Posts: 1657
- Joined: Mon Aug 28, 2006 4:23 pm
- Location: Sol system, Earth,USA
Re: NATO vs GAR
Likely NATO unless the Clones pull some hereto unseen tactical brilliance. Other than their fighters having a higher ceiling, being space capable and all, and being able to ferry troops on the LAATs they're likely outclassed in almost every field.
-
Mr. Oragahn
- Admiral
- Posts: 6865
- Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
- Location: Paradise Mountain
Re: NATO vs GAR
Wouldn't infinite ammo be in favour of NATO considering the amount of rounds per clip?
Now, Leos aren't exactly the best resuppliers imho. LAATs on the other hand, as troop transports, are ought to be capable to provide all that's need to infantry.
That and they're fast and versatile.
But first of all, let's take a look at air superiority.
Delta-7s are very fast, as starfighters, and seeing the firepower they can tank, nothing short of a powerful missile would get through. Thing is, air-to-air missiles don't have to be that powerful considering their targets are fragile. But Jedi fighters are not. They lack chaff, which is a shame, and they'll still have to deal with the momentum that hits them squarely when a missiles strikes (there's no reason for them not to).
Their maneuverability allows them to move around like helicopters (just look at how those ships land and take off).
These fighters will be very troublesome. Their operationnal range is infinitely superior to that of Rafales.
The ETA-2s are upgraded fighters with two massive forward cannons not dissimilar to what's found on snowspeeders. However they don't possess shields so despite a capacity to impressive linear accelerations, they'll get mowed down by missiles.
Eventually, this may leave NATO forces with remnants of Rafales and Saabs to eventually take care of the Delta-7s.
If the Delta-7s can't be destroyed, their firepower and shields will allow them to take on the rest of NATO forces on the ground effortlessly.
LAATs are fragile and not very maneuverable, but they allow for fast troop transport and they carry a large array of weapons, although their weapons are rather only good against grounded and sluggish targets.
A-10 don't bother with carrying troops and their missile loadout is more than enough to take care of ground targets. It's also more resistant than a LAAT. A A-10 might take an anti-air missile and remain potentially flyable back to base in a terrible shape. LAATs in comparison just go down, although they have little to fear from infantry fire. A-10s are buitl to protect pilots from such fire, but certain fragile sections still remain exposed and much vulnerable to stray bullets. A loadout of Sidewinders would be most suited as it would add masively in favour of aerial domination. The tank piercing 30mm vulcan gun could probably take care of LAAT and ETAs, although the later are so agile that they'd generally get the upper hand in dogfights. So missiles against ETAs, assuming NATO forces quickly assess the agility of those crafts, and leave the LAATs to sidewinders and vulcan guns.
Therefore NATO can probably collect a large amount of its initial airborne forces to oppose the remaining Delta-7s, although it's not enough to know if they'd carry enough firepower to challenge the Jedi fighters.
On the ground, I'd however largely give the upper hand to the Leopards, despite the variety of ammunition AT-TEs might carry. Tanks are very agile and can fire on the move, which is a bane to AT-Te and their bolts that still move slowly and not always hit.
On the infantry levels, clonetroopers would be at the very least incapacitated by bullets, if not outright lethaly injured. Their armour has been conceived in a context of massive use of thermal energy weapons, not momentum ones.
Likewise, NATO troops have no good protection against blasters.
However, as usual, blasters are of inferior accuracy and despite some fast rate rounds, can't provide the kind of barrage of fire expected from NATO rifles.
GAR troopers may however lay down sustained suppresive fire by virtue of having access to power clips which might provide more endurance to their weapons.
The advantage is minimal though.
Now, Leos aren't exactly the best resuppliers imho. LAATs on the other hand, as troop transports, are ought to be capable to provide all that's need to infantry.
That and they're fast and versatile.
But first of all, let's take a look at air superiority.
Delta-7s are very fast, as starfighters, and seeing the firepower they can tank, nothing short of a powerful missile would get through. Thing is, air-to-air missiles don't have to be that powerful considering their targets are fragile. But Jedi fighters are not. They lack chaff, which is a shame, and they'll still have to deal with the momentum that hits them squarely when a missiles strikes (there's no reason for them not to).
Their maneuverability allows them to move around like helicopters (just look at how those ships land and take off).
These fighters will be very troublesome. Their operationnal range is infinitely superior to that of Rafales.
The ETA-2s are upgraded fighters with two massive forward cannons not dissimilar to what's found on snowspeeders. However they don't possess shields so despite a capacity to impressive linear accelerations, they'll get mowed down by missiles.
Eventually, this may leave NATO forces with remnants of Rafales and Saabs to eventually take care of the Delta-7s.
If the Delta-7s can't be destroyed, their firepower and shields will allow them to take on the rest of NATO forces on the ground effortlessly.
LAATs are fragile and not very maneuverable, but they allow for fast troop transport and they carry a large array of weapons, although their weapons are rather only good against grounded and sluggish targets.
A-10 don't bother with carrying troops and their missile loadout is more than enough to take care of ground targets. It's also more resistant than a LAAT. A A-10 might take an anti-air missile and remain potentially flyable back to base in a terrible shape. LAATs in comparison just go down, although they have little to fear from infantry fire. A-10s are buitl to protect pilots from such fire, but certain fragile sections still remain exposed and much vulnerable to stray bullets. A loadout of Sidewinders would be most suited as it would add masively in favour of aerial domination. The tank piercing 30mm vulcan gun could probably take care of LAAT and ETAs, although the later are so agile that they'd generally get the upper hand in dogfights. So missiles against ETAs, assuming NATO forces quickly assess the agility of those crafts, and leave the LAATs to sidewinders and vulcan guns.
Therefore NATO can probably collect a large amount of its initial airborne forces to oppose the remaining Delta-7s, although it's not enough to know if they'd carry enough firepower to challenge the Jedi fighters.
On the ground, I'd however largely give the upper hand to the Leopards, despite the variety of ammunition AT-TEs might carry. Tanks are very agile and can fire on the move, which is a bane to AT-Te and their bolts that still move slowly and not always hit.
On the infantry levels, clonetroopers would be at the very least incapacitated by bullets, if not outright lethaly injured. Their armour has been conceived in a context of massive use of thermal energy weapons, not momentum ones.
Likewise, NATO troops have no good protection against blasters.
However, as usual, blasters are of inferior accuracy and despite some fast rate rounds, can't provide the kind of barrage of fire expected from NATO rifles.
GAR troopers may however lay down sustained suppresive fire by virtue of having access to power clips which might provide more endurance to their weapons.
The advantage is minimal though.
-
Picard
- Starship Captain
- Posts: 1433
- Joined: Mon Aug 31, 2015 8:28 pm
Re: NATO vs GAR
They get as much ammunition as needed but ammo supplies per vehicle are still limited.Mr. Oragahn wrote:Wouldn't infinite ammo be in favour of NATO considering the amount of rounds per clip?
BVR missiles tend to have large (for AAM standards) warheads since they are comparably sluggish and inaccurate, so they need it to have any chance of damaging the target.Delta-7s are very fast, as starfighters, and seeing the firepower they can tank, nothing short of a powerful missile would get through. Thing is, air-to-air missiles don't have to be that powerful considering their targets are fragile. But Jedi fighters are not. They lack chaff, which is a shame, and they'll still have to deal with the momentum that hits them squarely when a missiles strikes (there's no reason for them not to).
Possibly cannons too, neither GIAT-30 or BK-27 are exactly water guns. Especially former.The ETA-2s are upgraded fighters with two massive forward cannons not dissimilar to what's found on snowspeeders. However they don't possess shields so despite a capacity to impressive linear accelerations, they'll get mowed down by missiles.
LAATs are kinda Mi-24-equivalents. Which means that they are armored, can carry troops and have heavy firepower, but are vulnerable to MANPADS and fighters.LAATs are fragile and not very maneuverable, but they allow for fast troop transport and they carry a large array of weapons, although their weapons are rather only good against grounded and sluggish targets.
Is cannon on back of the AT-TE a projectile weapon?On the ground, I'd however largely give the upper hand to the Leopards, despite the variety of ammunition AT-TEs might carry. Tanks are very agile and can fire on the move, which is a bane to AT-Te and their bolts that still move slowly and not always hit.