Separate names with a comma.
Discussion in 'Fallout: New Vegas Discussion' started by DoubleRubix, Sep 21, 2011.
Yes. This is what we do. And it's awesome. Though a bit more civility would be awesome.
Which simply means that if a soldier has an armor that can deflect most of what the enemy can throw at him, he can take the calculated risk of exposing him to incoming enemy fire in order to both suppress the oponents with heavy weapons he is wielding and allow other, less well armored troops to advance.
I take quality over quantity any day. If your point can be easily refuted with a single sentence, then I use a single, understandable sentence instead of digressing on matters not related to the subject. As for your claims that I'm trying to find errors with you personally, so far I've only pointed out that you are being self contradicting and fail to actually reply to points I raise. The latter, thankfully, has been rectified for the most part. The former, not so much.
It's also interesting that you start accusing me of using ad hominem arguments when it's you who accused me of being an ignoramus in military matters and stating several times that I raised certain points, when in fact, I did not raise them at all.
Y'know, that's how security works, especially for high profile VIPs, like the President. If anything is out of the ordinary, you bail them out. Even if everything proceeds as planned, you keep them exposed only as long as absolutely necessary. I've mentioned the attempts to show that there is a clear and present danger to the President's life at Hoover Dam and that he and his security detail are taking a calculated risk.
You're really clinging to the "it's a political stunt!" theory. Let's assume, for a while, that it is true.
What, exactly, is Kimball going to gain by doing this? He is certainly not going to sway people that do not like the NCR's presence in the Mojave to support his administration, as his visit is boosting morale and reaffirming his stance that NCR should remain invested in the Mojave. Contrarywise, warhawks that support Kimball's policies do not need such confirmation. Kimball has no political capital to make or gain by visiting Hoover Dam at great personal risk. He is already known for his bravery, as a decorated war hero of the Mojave.
You'd be right if he eg. personally visited the Strip and personally asked to see Mr House or called a meeting between him and leaders of New Vegas communities. This'd give him political capital both among locals (showing that the NCR is treating New Vegas as an equal partner) and at home (if spun correctly, it'd send the message that he is willing to strike an alliance with House to share responsibilities in the Mojave, lessening the strain on NCR resources.
Yet he does not do that. He visits a military installation, meets with soldiers and civilian engineers working under the Army's oversight in an area where he is exposed and at risk. This screams "morale booster" instead "political stunt", which includes points raised above.
So? He was still outside, exposing himself. A stray artillery shot would've killed him. It was, again, a calculated risk. And since you were so kind to outline it, do note the similarities between Hitler's ceremony and Kimball's visit.
You do realize this was a response to your claim that:
b. stages aren't built for morale boosting visits,
Not whether or not a speech is political.
And that they are unpopular wars. Finally you understood my point.
I'm not stating the same thing. You're claiming that Hoover Dam is optional, not a "make or break" situation and making the unwarranted leap of logic that the Mojave is irrelevant to Boneyard inhabitants. Why? Just the fact that in the popular consciousness of an average NCR citizen the Boneyard is, as I state, taxes and graves, doesn't mean it's not relevant to them.
Hoover Dam, again, is power and water, both of which are precious commodities of which there is never enough in the wastes. Lack of electricity is obvious. Lack of water is covered by Chief Hanlon, who explains that years ago, NCR's aggressive consumption of available water has led to the destruction of aquifiers in southern California. Hoover Dam is a nearly limitless supply of unpolluted, drinkable water.
Now, why is it so relevant, practically essential to NCR's interests? As Dr Hildern of OSI West states, with the current population boom in heartland NCR, NCR's scientists project that unless new, efficent sources of food are found, mass famine will occur in the NCR around 2291. Electricity and a stable supply of fresh water are both essential components of modern agriculture. Without Hoover Dam, farms in heartland NCR would not be able to keep up with the food demand and the projected famine would occur much faster and have more devastating results.
The confusion may be arising because you are claiming two inherently contradictive things:
1. Graham was just throwing people at the problem without any organization whatsoever.
2. The Legion became disorganized after their commanding officers were killed and the chain of command broke down.
Basically, you can't even decide on whether or not a chain of command existed in the Legion or not. Then you ramble on, claiming that I'm confused as to the events of the battle of Hoover Dam, despite the fact that I made no statement, at any time, about the events of the battle. I simply pointed out your self contradiction.[/quote]
Again, see above where the inconsistency in your thinking is. If Graham's command was as chaotic and disorganized as you make it out to be, there'd be no need to pick off officers, as the more organized NCR units would have no problems routing the equivalent of a mob. However, since NCR needed to take out the commanding officers to disorganize the attack, that means that Graham maintained a chain of command and there was an overarching strategy, even if it was to take the Mojave with brute force.
Graham may not be the greatest commander ever, but he is no fool. He conquered Arizona for Caesar, which is quite an impressive feat.
How about you point out where is my logic flawed or my comparisons poorly researched? You still haven't conclusively proven why power armor should be used like a tank.
I only do that when I tire of restating rather obvious points. Like the difference between figurative and literal language.
You do realize the inherent irony of you accusing me of cherry picking, when if fact it was you that cherry picked the word "tank" out of my argument and decided to build half of your reply around it? Ignoring the actual point that I raised?
Not true? Infantry can walk around, over or under a car. Hell, infantry can hotwire a car and use it. Infantry can enter a building and use it as a strong point. Infantry can easily fight in cities, forests, bogs. Infantry can scale and defeat obstacles better than any tank. And with the proper equipment you mention, it can survive in NBC conditions.
I'm surprised that you're oblivious to the fact that power armor is that very specialized equipment you refer to. Or the fact that you can't mount a 120mm cannon on a suit of power armor, like you would on a tank.
You do realize that power armor is that specialized equipment you're referring to, right?
And where did I state that tanks don't exist in the Fallout timeline, hmm?
See? It's pointless arguing with you, when you declare yourself to be an expert on all things military.
Do I have to relink that Wikipedia article again and state for the nth time that the term tank is used figuratively?
Enclave soldiers are posted to Navarro for training, so that they get used to fighting in the wastes. The size of the base isn't a determining factor for the presence of drill sergeants and troops in training.
Second, if you check the map (both real-life physical maps and the in-game world map), Navarro is surrounded by hills and mountains. You'd have a point if it lay in the middle of the desert or flat terrain. But since it's not, then the chances of a random wastelander detecting it while dodging all the numerous Enclave patrols around are slim to none.
Yes, there is. Your point?
This is surprising, as given your background, you should have no problem flattening me and forming a coherent, logical explanation as to why power armor would be used like tanks would, why a handful of details on a Sierra power armor are compromising in long range engagements and why I'm wrong overall.
I have a healthy respect for the military, but I'm surprised that I have to point out the obvious, several times over.
And most of the Sierra power armor is of a subdued, matte colour.
Same for the details on the Sierra power armor, which are only visible in clear conditions.
Here. Ranges as per the previous post.
How about you counter the argument about engagement distances and visibility of Sierra power armor details? You've conventiently ignored that. If you are a 30 year old person that worked his entire life in or with the military and come from a military background, then surely you can form a convincing, coherent argument, why would a handful of details the size of (at best) the palm of a human hand, that are not visible at a range of 100 meters, significantly expose Colonel Royez on the battlefield.
I never brought up any point relating to that?
I can. But so far, I'm not convinced. You, on the other hand, stated outright that you cannot be convinced:
I'm sorry, all you've been doing is trying to nitpick and stick to literal and figurative language as your defense. That's about as strawman as one can get.
The arguments you've given are full of contradiction with broken comparisons.
Kimball's speech was politically fueled because he picked a spot that was symbolic of the war, not a place where he could help boost the morale of the troops by giving a more personal talk or being supportive. he didn't stop to talk to any of the troops, as actual commanders do in order to boost morale.
Daniel Morgan, a general during the US Revolutionary War, was known to walk around camp and speak with -every- soldier in his command individually, and thus his soldiers often became some of the best motivated soldiers in the Army.
Presidents now would at least shake a few hands and say "keep up the good work" as he moved through a crowd of soldiers, even he couldn't say so to everyone on the way out. He doesn't even stop to talk with the men in charge - notably Moore and Oliver are nowhere to be found even close to the speech area.
Instead, Kimball is just in and out. His visit calls attention back to Hoover Dam as opposed to whatever might be plaguing his administration back home, rather than to the troops for whom he is supposedly there for.
It's a statement made, not for the military, but for the families of the military, for the people who don't like the NCR's presence, as well as dissuading anyone who originally agreed with the War and now find it to be far too taxing on them to continue to support. To placate his constituency when they hear that he went over to the front for about five minutes before disappearing back to the Core Region. People need to be reminded of who they should support, which is exactly what Kimball is doing.
It's been a few years since Kimball's election or re-election, and even he needs to remind people that he's the guy responsible. And if he's going to remain in power, he needs to make sure he's the guy with the popular vote.
It's been a couple years since the First Battle of Hoover Dam, and he's calling attention back to the front line to reiterate the need for the War. He's making this calculated risk of visiting the Dam as a grand gesture for the people who already support him, and need a reaffirmation that this war for a Dam so far from home is the right way to spend their thinning resources.
People don't have to like it, they just have to agree that the war is still worth the taxes and the deaths to continue being there, and that Kimball is trying to make sure the NCR knows that his way of fighting this war is the right way.
That's why it's called politics. That's why it's a political stunt. He's making a grand gesture for the rest of the NCR to see he's not forgotten about the war, the people sacrificing their lives, or why they are fighting.
It's a stunt because he believes the benefit of publicity and support generated by an appearance at Hoover Dam greatly outweighs the danger of being in the line of fire.
Your Hitler argument is that he exposed himself to danger. I didn't say he didn't, I said that he didn't go very far out of his way to be out of his safety net. A stray artillery shot could have killed him, a stray artillery shot could have also collapsed the Chancellory on top of his bunker, trapping him inside. Again, he decided to stay to the bitter end, still trying to rally his people to victory from the relative safety of his bunker.
You continue to argue with my points on Graham, when I'm telling you in plain, simple language, that yes, Graham's strategy was just to mob the defenses of Hoover Dam. They sent the newer soldiers first, and then started throwing on more soldiers in after them when they got held up. What you're ignoring from my argument is that it was actually working until Hanlon ordered officers to be picked off to prevent any change of tactics or a signal to halt forward advancement. The result is that the legion, being a mob without leadership, kept charging forward, heading into Boulder City.
Moving on to Power armor, and why it's an idiotic idea to paint it bright colors, whether you see it at a distance or not.
Power armor troops are a hybrid of both infantry and tank, sharing many of the capabilities of both, as well as mixing their weaknesses.
Power armor provides excellent protection and enhanced strength like a tank, enabling an individual to field heavy weapons where needed.
Power armor allows you to act like infantry, which means you're going to -think- like infantry. Using cover, enter buildings and use it as a strong point, hot wire cars, walk around or over or under a car. But again, the figurative comparison is that they are "walking tanks," with an added emphasis on "walking.'
Fallout's Power armor can't run up to 40 mph by themselves, traversing rocky or craggy terrain, they can't fly by themselves, since they're less mobile on foot. They require a vehicle, such as a vertibird or other personnel carrier, to make them rapidly mobile.
They're less mobile than infantry because of weight and size. While the armor helps carry itself, the terrain is not guaranteed to support it. Crawling up a hill of sand, rubble, or dirt is much more difficult if one is carrying a large amount of weight, regardless of how strong he is.
This is especially true and relevant in a combat situation - infantry march with loads of up to 85 pounds, but in a combat situation, the extra weight is thrown off to allow the infantryman more mobility. The power armor trooper is already carrying a great amount of weight, and much of it cannot be taken off for combat.
The same is true for NBC conditions. World War I, troops fighting on the lines had to live with the reality of chemical gas attacks. They were issued gas masks, which they didn't always wear.
The same is true for modern infantry. They only put on specialized equipment if the situation warrants it. They'll leave it aside if it comes to that case.
By nature of the power armor, one does not have to keep it in mind because it's already integrated into the suit. Just by going into a tank, they're also running inside a sealed environment.
That's unlike the power armor of the fiction you've referenced, like Starship Troopers - the power armor used by the Mobile Infantry have rockets and jump jets that allow them quick movement around the battlefield, thereby getting around the need for vehicles or traversing rough terrain.
Like I said, Fallout's power armored troops share this problem with infantry, limited by each single trooper's personal ability to cross rugged terrain.
And you don't need 120mm cannons on power armor, they have heavy weapons such as fielded shoulder-mounted missile launchers, rocket launchers, and especially man-portable nuclear weapons.
Your argument is that power armor troopers would willingly put themselves in the line of fire as a "common tactic." Again, our evidence lies with the Enclave and the Brotherhood of Steel, as people who put their faith in power armor over common sense or tactics, as well as the above statements that power armored troopers are infantry as well.
If power armored troopers are to behave like infantry, they must also think like infantry as well. That means a desire for self-preservation included, using cover, using better tactics than simply running straight up the middle, including flanking maneuvers and taking and sending fire.
Suppressive fire preys on natural instinct. If the target is not smart or fast enough to move out of the way, they are likely to become disabled or dead. And if the target is behind cover, they are not returning fire.
It works in reverse, too. When people are shot at, the natural instinct is to get out of the way. The only times in history when man has ever been trained to overcome their natural survival instinct and stand still has been massed formation combat, like the Redcoats (again, a great reason why modern combat units don't wear bright colors), or the Phalanx, or the historical Roman Legion.
With Redcoats, British soldiers who wore bright red on the battlefield and didn't budge when fired upon. Lots of them died, but killed many in return fire, leading to insane numbers of casualties.
Furthermore, officers were being sniped because they stood out even more among their easily visible troops. Daniel Morgan and his sharpshooters used cover to avoid being detected and simply picked off officers because they were easy to single out (and this was long before the modern rifle was even conceived). Officers simply wore a different black hat from the rest of the troops.
But then again, none of those are examples of a modern army.
You used the Mujahadeen as an example, a group with notable sniper abilities. Meaning they have good eyes and can pick out targets at a distance, and have weapons that can do damage.
As the clown picture illustrated, bright colors just make targets easier to pick out. It's psychology. Neutral colors like the matte grey or camouflage green do not draw the human eye to them.
Psychological tests have shown that the eye moves to red and evokes a reaction that ambiguous shapes of that color are more dominant.
Royez's armor starts with a gunmetal grey, with a nice splash of neon green that remains pretty clear at 25 meters, and the splash of red on the guys knees that's actually quite clear at even 50-75 meters, according to your pictures. Even when blurred, the red is rather noticeable.
Normal troops would be able to pick him out against the more subdued matte colors much more easily, even if they have to be closer to do so. Let alone by snipers with skilled eyes or scopes.
But your argument relies on him being able to be seen in order for power armor to be effective as a 'decoy' for infantry, but you're now pushing pictures to illustrate that he can't be seen because he's hard to see at a distance. Which is your stance? Because that is more than contradictory.
A modern army understands how the best way to survive is not to get hit. That means not making yourself a target, through camouflage, cover, and maneuverability, regardless of armor. That means not painting your uniform bright colors.
Not making yourself a target increases your chances of fulfilling your mission, which is the most important part of modern military.
Unnecessary danger goes against human nature of self perservation, singling yourself out as a target. There is still a human being wearing power armor, and suppressing survival instincts is impossible, even with all the military training you flaunt as being able to do otherwise. The concept is reactionary, harkening back to pre-modern military, not a modern fighting force with enhanced tactics and an understanding of the battlefield or any notion towards compassion between soldiers.
I don't even understand what functionality the neon segments of the scorched power armor provide. What's the red part? An underlying jumpsuit or mesh? Ended up replacing those areas with parts of CaBaL's standard power armor retexture.
That's definitive better looking. Any download link? :>
Sorry for the wait, here's a link. Didn't upload to the Nexus because its more or less a patchwork affair. Not that it's worse than vanilla. Really truly, what's the green and red meant to be?
That looks really better than this inane.. thing from original, frosty_theaussie. Now only thing which still looks a bit retarded is that bears head on the shoulder. ;>
I still truly don't see the gripe with the Bear's head. Bears are the NCR's signature icon, and it's quite obviously a trophy head.
It's not the bear per se, it just looks ugly, like a cheap job on the modelers/artist side.
It's basically the colors of the NCR flag.
In an interview with Chris Avellone, he said "The armor was something one of the staff members saw, and we thought it would be the coolest thing to put in one of the last add-on for Vegas."
It has been written twice already in this thread, no need to repeat it again, eh?
I know, i did it because your post looked like you don't know about that,
Where was it written? And where did a staff member "saw it?" That sounds a bit weird.
That doesn't explain why there's an absence of any texture to the colour though. It's like a mspaint hackjob.
Does anyone know what mod the armour is based on? I'm curious to see how the modder did with it.
Ummm so is anyone gonna talk about the armor anymore? From the game?
Exactly! Love the debate though.
The Complaint's about the color on the Power Armor are needless somewhat when the developers thought about it for about 5 seconds before throwing it in the game. At least Power Armor with boobs haven't popped up in Vanilla Fallout that much I am thankful for.
I am sure they did not debate the color theory and tactical usefulness of the officers armor much,but I may be wrong, although
I do understand the importance of the subject ,and I take it just as seriously though,so whatever....
It (Scorched Armor) actually shares common themes from the Asher Pitt Power Armor from Fallout 3. The Scorched Armor does have the NCR colors and symbols on it,so I can see "why" the officer decided to paint it up to show patriotism.
When I first saw it I thought it may have been some Chinese prototype because of the red color, but I know they never made any.
The Power Armor/Tank comparison in regards to terrain is slightly off I think. The argument was made that Power armor troops can't go over rough terrain, but I don't see how that is the case. The armor boosts the strength output enough to walk up steep terrain, although mountains would cause a problem, but those cause problems for tanks in real life.
BTW I go Elite Riot Armor or Remnants Armor end game although Gecko backed armor was neat.
By the nature of being vehicles, tanks are designed to scale a variety of terrain, in order to maintain high mobility on the battlefield. Meaning, if combat is found on one side of a map, the tank, in most cases, will be able to drive over to where it is needed under it's own power with relative speed, crossing over or through rugged or uneven ground, areas of light-to-moderate vegetation, up and down slopes - conditions which actually hinder those who cross on foot.
Power armor troops are limited to foot speed by themselves. This can be rectified by the use of vehicles, notably Vertibirds which can deploy power armor troops just about anywhere a Vertibird is capable of landing on.
The additional strength provided by power armor is counterbalanced by bulk around the wearer's natural range of motion, reducing speed and making them a little less maneuverable than less-armored infantry (reflected in game by an agility loss). And then, crossing difficult terrain slows them down even more as they have to watch their footing, find handholds, etc.
Mountains are a problem for anything that simply can't fly over them. Vertibirds simply go over them, etc.
I do agree on the part where the armor is similar to Ashurs' power armor/tribal power armor with the head on the shoulder and the silly paint job. Go Steelers.
The problem with the colors, however, is that patriotism does not equate to military procedure or battlefield pragmatism. Serving in the military is a proud tradition, and many soldiers love their country and are true patriots. However, this does not mean that they will paint themselves as a target so they get themselves killed or risk injury to others around them.
I agree with you. I didn't understand that you were referring to the speed and whatnot. Good deal.
Just noticed there was no mention of the Sierra Madre reinforced armour. No plusses to crits or skills or anything but the armour is DT 18 and the helmet is 5 making it a pretty tasty package for light armour.