Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Kult Altol
Confederation Navy Research Epsilon Fleet
351
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 19:42:00 -
[1] - Quote
So my stunning wife and my dashing self went to see the new motion picture Star Trek in 3d, and my favorite part was the ship battles. My lovely wife and I got into a discussion about space ships, and I told her I would probably pay to see an hour and a half of space combat. She said I was crazy. The scenario is would you pay 3d movie prices to see a hour long feature of space combat in 3d? An open mind is like a fortress with its gates unbarred and unguarded. A narrow mind is a focused mind.
|
Micheal Dietrich
Kings Gambit Black
1920
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 19:46:00 -
[2] - Quote
3D induced headaches aside, it would depend on the space battle. I'm not as much a fan of the new Star Treks myself. Now if we had the final battle for Galactica in 3D, then hell yeah. Out of Pod is getting In the Pod - Join in game channel IG OOPE |
Kult Altol
Confederation Navy Research Epsilon Fleet
351
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 19:54:00 -
[3] - Quote
Micheal Dietrich wrote:3D induced headaches aside, it would depend on the space battle. I'm not as much a fan of the new Star Treks myself. Now if we had the final battle for Galactica in 3D, then hell yeah.
I was thinking along the lines of an eve space battle with dust battles mixed. I never had a problem with 3d, I think it depends on the movie though. An open mind is like a fortress with its gates unbarred and unguarded. A narrow mind is a focused mind.
|
Zimmy Zeta
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
21379
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 19:56:00 -
[4] - Quote
There is somewhere a video on the internet where some guy took all the Star Wars movies (yes, all three) and made a montage of all the blaster / laser shootings and space battles while removing everything else. Pretty epic, but I couldn't find it anymore. Just think of how bad an average post by me is, and then realize half of them are even worse |
Micheal Dietrich
Kings Gambit Black
1921
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 20:04:00 -
[5] - Quote
Kult Altol wrote:Micheal Dietrich wrote:3D induced headaches aside, it would depend on the space battle. I'm not as much a fan of the new Star Treks myself. Now if we had the final battle for Galactica in 3D, then hell yeah. I was thinking along the lines of an eve space battle with dust battles mixed. I never had a problem with 3d, I think it depends on the movie though.
I think Tron was the worst for me, I kept having to take the glasses off every 20 minutes or so. Out of Pod is getting In the Pod - Join in game channel IG OOPE |
Kirjava
Otella Redevelopment Agency
16714
|
Posted - 2013.06.03 21:30:00 -
[6] - Quote
Battle of Jutland : In space.
Showdown of the British Star Fleet vs the KosmoKriegsMarine.
How much would you pay too see that?
Haruhiists - Overloading Out of Pod discussions since 2007. Cardinal Kirjava - Redeclaring the Crusade in the name of the Goddess since 2012. /S¦¦GùòGÇ+GÇ+GùòS¦¦\ |
Charles Javeroux
INTERSTELLAR CREDIT Interstellar Trade Syndicate
58
|
Posted - 2013.06.04 07:30:00 -
[7] - Quote
Kirjava wrote:Battle of Jutland : In space.
Showdown of the British Star Fleet vs the KosmoKriegsMarine.
How much would you pay too see that?
In fact, they would have to pay me to watch that piece of mastership. Not in dollas or uroz, but in pure gold... |
Alara IonStorm
5067
|
Posted - 2013.06.04 07:56:00 -
[8] - Quote
Kirjava wrote:Battle of Jutland : In space.
Showdown of the British Star Fleet vs the KosmoKriegsMarine.
How much would you pay too see that? That would be a terrible movie battle. Two absolutely massive fleets meet, a few of the poorly defended ships explode then the German fleet retreats with the other scared to follow for fear of space torpedoes. The KosmoKriegsMarine then locks itself in port for the rest of the movie doing nothing until they surrender. Not one of the 44 big Dreadnought Battleships were sunk in that Battle.
Jutland and the Naval Battles of WW1 were a case of blue balls on a Battleship scale. Not once did one Dreadnought sink another. Battle of Tsushima on the other hand is the greatest hands down Battleship on Battleship engagement in history. |
Graygor
1kB Realty 1kB Galactic
37928
|
Posted - 2013.06.04 08:23:00 -
[9] - Quote
Trafalgar 3D "I think you should buy a new Mayan calendar. Mine has muscle cars on it." --áKenneth O'Hara
"I dont think that can happen, you can see Gray has his invuln field on in his portrait." - Commisar Kate |
baltec1
Bat Country
6799
|
Posted - 2013.06.04 08:24:00 -
[10] - Quote
something is wrong with our bloody ships today! |
|
Kirjava
Otella Redevelopment Agency
16768
|
Posted - 2013.06.04 09:15:00 -
[11] - Quote
Alara IonStorm wrote:Kirjava wrote:Battle of Jutland : In space.
Showdown of the British Star Fleet vs the KosmoKriegsMarine.
How much would you pay too see that? That would be a terrible movie battle. Two absolutely massive fleets meet, a few of the poorly defended ships explode then the German fleet retreats with the other scared to follow for fear of space torpedoes. The KosmoKriegsMarine then locks itself in port for the rest of the movie doing nothing until they surrender. Not one of the 44 big Dreadnought Battleships were sunk in that Battle. Jutland and the Naval Battles of WW1 were a case of blue balls on a Battleship scale. Not once did one Dreadnought sink another. Battle of Tsushima on the other hand is the greatest hands down Battleship on Battleship engagement in history. Okay suit yourselves, I like the idea of the movie incorporating the strategic positioning, the drama of the Battelecruiser Captains knowing they are being fielded as Battleships.
Haruhiists - Overloading Out of Pod discussions since 2007. Cardinal Kirjava - Redeclaring the Crusade in the name of the Goddess since 2012. /S¦¦GùòGÇ+GÇ+GùòS¦¦\ |
Alara IonStorm
5067
|
Posted - 2013.06.04 09:31:00 -
[12] - Quote
Kirjava wrote: Okay suit yourselves, I like the idea of the movie incorporating the strategic positioning, the drama of the Battelecruiser Captains knowing they are being fielded as Battleships.
Less Drama then Tsushima. 4 Japanese Battleships take on a fleet of 13 in the penultimate battle that decided a war and shaped naval strategy for the next 30 years. Completely under gunned and going into battle against one of the Great Powers Admiral Toga raised a flag before the engagement that meant the fate of the Empire was at stake and meant it.
Jutland is like Endor without the Death Star and the main massive fleets never really do anything. |
Kimire
Minmatar Ship Construction Services Ushra'Khan
2
|
Posted - 2013.06.04 12:19:00 -
[13] - Quote
I loved the space battles so yeah i probably would. http://www.anook.com/kimire |
Graygor
1kB Realty 1kB Galactic
38337
|
Posted - 2013.06.05 05:21:00 -
[14] - Quote
The Life And Times of Admiral Rodney
This man needs movies made on his career.
Carry on Rodders o7
Spaceship battles arent as cool as sail ship battles. "I think you should buy a new Mayan calendar. Mine has muscle cars on it." --áKenneth O'Hara
"I dont think that can happen, you can see Gray has his invuln field on in his portrait." - Commisar Kate |
Hrothgar Nilsson
Black Guards
326
|
Posted - 2013.06.05 07:31:00 -
[15] - Quote
Alara IonStorm wrote:Jutland and the Naval Battles of WW1 were a case of blue balls on a Battleship scale. Not once did one Dreadnought sink another. Battle of Tsushima on the other hand is the greatest hands down Battleship on Battleship engagement in history. The German fleet staying in port for most of the rest of WWI was blue balls. The Battle of Jutland was most definitely was not.
The fact that no dreadnoughts were sunk wasn't for lack of trying. And the battlecruisers lost were no less a capital ship than the dreadnoughts were. Battlecruisers weren't second-tier, they were in the same tier as dreadnoughts.
The Battle of Tsushima was a one-sided turkey shoot. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTzA_xesrL8 |
Alara IonStorm
5068
|
Posted - 2013.06.05 09:00:00 -
[16] - Quote
Hrothgar Nilsson wrote: The German fleet staying in port for most of the rest of WWI was blue balls. The Battle of Jutland was most definitely was not.
The fact that no dreadnoughts were sunk wasn't for lack of trying. And the battlecruisers lost were no less a capital ship than the dreadnoughts were. Battlecruisers weren't second-tier, they were in the same tier as dreadnoughts.
Absolutely it was blue balls. Those ships sunk represented about 5% of the fleet. The worst 5% for the Battleline. Jutland was big but it was mostly fireworks.
Not really great for a movie. It may have been the biggest but it just wasn't climactic. Again Endor without any of the Death Star or any of the important Battleships being destroyed. By comparison however.
Hrothgar Nilsson wrote: The Battle of Tsushima was a one-sided turkey shoot. Russian numbers, at least in regard to 8 Russian BBs to 4 Japanese, looked good on paper, but they were subpar ships at the end of a 10,000 mile cruise, poorly commanded, with inferior ammunition and guns, and poorly trained sailors.
Which is why the underdogs won. It was a story about a massive fleet from the other side of the world coming to crush a small power and was in turn felled through skill, discipline and superb command. It decided the fate of a war and destroyed the Russian Navy. That is much more exciting story then everyone back to their corner after losing an insignificant amount of ships.
I could see a movie about that. An Empire beleaguered by war. A Massive Warfleet from the other side of the galaxy, coming to crush them. If the Warfleet wins then they lose their ability to support their troops fighting on countless worlds. The stakes could not be higher when elite core of the fleet moves to save their Empire from impending doom with nothing but their superior training to rely on.
A much better more climactic space movie. |
Random McNally
Red Federation RvB - RED Federation
15346
|
Posted - 2013.06.05 17:13:00 -
[17] - Quote
Yea.
but I want to see tactics and maneuvering, not just ships blapping each other until death. Red Fed Grunt.-á Co-Host of the High Drag Podcast. http://highdrag.wordpress.com/ UNBAN SAEDE AND TWO-STEP!!! |
Hrothgar Nilsson
Black Guards
327
|
Posted - 2013.06.05 22:50:00 -
[18] - Quote
I'm not sure how the entire KM sailing out to lure the RN into a decisive confrontation at Jutland in any way constitutes blue balls.
The loss of life at Jutland was among the largest death tolls in a naval battle in modern times, probably third or fourth after Tsushima and Leyte Gulf. More died at Jutland than Midway, Coral Sea, and the Philippine Sea combined.
And again, battlecruisers weren't any less a capital ship than the dreadnoughts, they were in the same tier. To use EVE parlance, they were essentially speed tanking dreadnoughts.
To use EVE parlance again, Tsushima would be the equivalent of a gang with a smaller core of faction battleships with faction ammo, faction/tech 2 modules picking off newbs with more tier 1, tech 1 fitted battleships but which had mismatched guns, bad fits, and practically no support. The faction battleship gang would be accompanied by a large group of support vessels like e-war, stealth bombers, command ships and dictors while the newb group had practically no support.
Who was the "underdog" had more to do with racial ideas of superior Europeans vs. inferior Asians than it had to do with actual ability or the respective strengths. The worn-out Russian fleet at the end of a 10,000 mile journey was in no way in a superior position or more capable than the Japanese fleet which had superior capital ships and an exceedingly strong support fleet operating in what was essentially their home waters.
The engagement was an extremely decisive victory for the Japanese, but a one-sided turkey shoot and rout isn't what most people have in mind when they imagine an epic battle where two sides meet, a suspenseful hard fought battle ensues that seems it could go either way at many points before one side ekes out victory in the face of adversity. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTzA_xesrL8 |
Alara IonStorm
5068
|
Posted - 2013.06.06 08:14:00 -
[19] - Quote
Hrothgar Nilsson wrote:I'm not sure how the decision of the KM high command to sail out to lure the RN into a hoped-for decisive confrontation at Jutland in any way constitutes blue balls. Blue balls, as the term is used in the context of EVE, means staying docked and avoiding confrontation. The action at Jutland was both sides throwing all their chips down, and that both fleets sailed away mostly intact doesn't change that.
The loss of life at Jutland was also among the largest death tolls in a naval battle in modern times, probably third or fourth after Tsushima and Leyte Gulf. More died at Jutland than Midway, Coral Sea, and the Philippine Sea combined.
And again, battlecruisers weren't any less a capital ship than the dreadnoughts, they were in the same tier. To use EVE parlance, they were essentially speed tanking dreadnoughts. Still missing the point. So what if the death toll was high or Battlecruisers were big. None of the real line Capital ships built for the Battleline were destroyed. Less then 5% of the ships were destroyed.
That is not climatic for a Battle at all. Not like Midway, the Coral Sea or the Philippine Sea. Just boring with no Dreadnoughts sinking. It is such a joke especially compared to the Trafalgar of the East.
Besides numbers Jutland had nothing and the number of ships can be upscaled to whatever it needs to be making Jutland moot.
Hrothgar Nilsson wrote: To use EVE parlance again, Tsushima would be the equivalent of a gang with a smaller core of faction battleships with faction ammo, faction/tech 2 modules picking off newbs with more tier 1, tech 1 fitted battleships but which had mismatched guns, bad fits, and practically no support. The faction battleship gang would be accompanied by a large group of support vessels like e-war, stealth bombers, command ships and dictors while the newb group had practically no support.
Completely wrong. You hugely overstate the value of the Japanese Battleships. Those Russian Battleships had the Armor and they had the Guns to be effective it was the Japanese skill that won it.
Hrothgar Nilsson wrote: Who was the "underdog" had more to do with racial ideas of superior Europeans vs. inferior Asians than it had to do with actual ability or the respective strengths. The worn-out Russian fleet at the end of a 10,000 mile journey was in no way in a superior position or more capable than the Japanese fleet which had superior capital ships and an exceedingly strong support fleet operating in what was essentially their home waters.
Le sigh. 1. The racial angle is better for a movie. Humanity proving itself against the aliens. 2. Yes it was. They had twice as many Battleships of almost the same quality. The problems with those ships had everything to do with Russian mismanagement which is another good thing for s movie.
Hrothgar Nilsson wrote: The engagement was an extremely decisive victory for the Japanese, but a one-sided turkey shoot and rout isn't what most people have in mind when they imagine an epic battle where two sides meet, a suspenseful hard fought battle ensues that seems it could go either way at many points before one side ekes out victory in the face of adversity.
So not Jutland. The battle where none of the important ships were blown up. 95% of the fleets returned home and both sides declared victory.
The suspense comes in the long war leading up to the battle, the hits the enemy does make, the people on the few hundred ships that the Aliens destroy. Bigger space fleet more looses per capita to work with. The awesome comes from humanity kicking ass and taking names independence day style, blowing those alien bastards out of the sky.
Tsushima = 10 times more awesome then boring old no dreadnoughts sink blue balls Jutland. |
Hrothgar Nilsson
Black Guards
327
|
Posted - 2013.06.06 20:41:00 -
[20] - Quote
You have missed the point because applying your understanding of battlecruisers and where they fit in a hierarchy is as they exist in EVE Online, a fictional video game, with obviously no understanding to the reality and actuality of what these ships WERE in the earlier 20th century.
They were capital ships. They were real line capital ships. They were real line capital ships equal in their 'capitalness' to dreadnoughts. They occupied the same top tier and were in no way junior to or second fiddle to the dreadnought.
HMS Lion (battlecruiser) vs. HMS Orion (first "super-dreadnought"), both laid down 1910:
- displacement: 26,000 tons vs. 22,000 tons
- length: 700 feet vs. 581 feet
- main armament: eight 13.5: vs. ten 13.5"
- engines: 70,000 hp vs 27,000 hp
- crew: 1100 vs. 750
You obviously have absolutely no damned idea what you're talking about.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTzA_xesrL8 |
|
Alara IonStorm
5069
|
Posted - 2013.06.06 21:00:00 -
[21] - Quote
Hrothgar Nilsson wrote:You have missed the point because you're applying your understanding of battlecruisers and where they fit in a hierarchy is as they exist in EVE Online, a fictional video game, with obviously no understanding to the reality and actuality of what these ships WERE in the earlier 20th century. They were capital ships. They were real line capital ships. They were real line capital ships equal in their 'capitalness' to dreadnoughts. They occupied the same top tier and were in no way junior to or second fiddle to the dreadnought. HMS Lion (battlecruiser) vs. HMS Orion (first "super-dreadnought"), both laid down 1910:
- displacement: 26,000 tons vs. 22,000 tons
- length: 700 feet vs. 581 feet
- main armament: eight 13.5: vs. ten 13.5"
- engines: 70,000 hp vs 27,000 hp
- crew: 1100 vs. 750
You obviously have absolutely no damned idea what you're talking about. Heh, I made you mad. That is sooo cute. /fake grumpy voice: "No damned idea!" Golden.
You are wrong by the way, they were not line Capital ships. They were just Capital ships, Capital ships that failed because they were put in a battle line which was a massive mistake just like it was for the Hood later. The biggest complaint levied against their construction was that they were so big and well armed Admirals would not realize how vulnerable they were and put them in a Battleship duel at which point they would explode. Which is what happened... twice.
Again, none of the ships designed to fight that battle went down so boring movie. Show me some Space Battleships exploding. Space Tsushima for the win, complete lack of blueballs. |
Hrothgar Nilsson
Black Guards
327
|
Posted - 2013.06.06 22:24:00 -
[22] - Quote
They were line ships - the battlecruisers were intended for use as such in both the RN and KM official naval tactics of the time and used as such. Did the RN BCs serve well in that function? No, in retrospect it was apparent that it was a mistake. Perhaps if the RN had kept the compartment doors shut not exposing the entirety of their 22" flash-happy cordite to catastrophic explosion, it may have been different, but it was what it was.
But none of them were lost were lost in "duels" with "battleships" - all battlecruisers lost at Jutland were lost to other battlecruisers. And the KM BCs were effective whereas the RN BCs were not - their use was a tactical success for the KM and a failure for the RN.
And again, battlecruisers were no less a capital ship than a dreadnought. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTzA_xesrL8 |
Alara IonStorm
5069
|
Posted - 2013.06.06 22:50:00 -
[23] - Quote
Hrothgar Nilsson wrote:They were line ships - the battlecruisers were intended for use as such in both the RN and KM official naval tactics of the time and used as such. Did the RN BCs serve well in that function? No, in retrospect it was apparent that it was a mistake. Perhaps if the RN had kept the compartment doors shut not exposing the entirety of their 22" flash-happy cordite to catastrophic explosion, it may have been different, but it was what it was. No they were not line ships their primary function was to hunt Armored Cruisers, they were shoehorned into being on the line by German and Royal tactics. It was specifically not what they were designed for and they did terribly at it.
Hrothgar Nilsson wrote: But none of them were lost were lost in "duels" with "battleships" - all battlecruisers lost at Jutland were lost to other battlecruisers. And the KM BCs were effective whereas the RN BCs were not - their use was a tactical success for the KM and a failure for the RN.
Hood was not lost in a duel with a Battleship? At Jutland I misread who fired on them, point is, not built for the Battle line at all. Dreadnoughts were.
Hrothgar Nilsson wrote: And again, battlecruisers were no less a capital ship than a dreadnought.
What are you talking about? You keep saying that like I said it which is really odd because I never did, but you keep implying that I said that they weren't Capital Ships at some point. You even linked it somehow to EVE not considering them Capital Ships which was weird.
I said they were not built to be on the Battle line which they were not. Dreadnoughts were. None of which sunk, therefor bad movie. |
Hrothgar Nilsson
Black Guards
327
|
Posted - 2013.06.06 23:49:00 -
[24] - Quote
Their primary function was whatever the official doctrine of the RN and KM said they were, and the RN and KM doctrine was for them to join the line during major engagements such as what happened at Jutland.
If you'd read Beatty's memo on the issue, for example, among four other purposes designated for RN battlecruisers, joining the line was one of them. Just because the doctrine designates a certain purpose for them doesn't exclude other purposes and uses. One of the intended purposes for a dreadnought was to bombard coastal defense batteries, that didn't exclude it from other uses.
There was no HMS Hood at Jutland, no ship existed by that name in 1916. A mothballed HMS Hood was scuttled to block a harbor in England in 1914, and the other was launched in 1920 and sunk in 1941 during WWII. Rear Admiral Hood commanded the 3rd BCS. No battlecruisers were lost to dreadnoughts at Jutland, only other battlecruisers. A KM pre-dreadnought was lost to an RN submarine.
The problem with not having battlecruisers in a battle involving dreadnoughts in 1916 is that the side who brought them would be able to dictate the terms of engagement at will with regards to battlecruisers vis-a-vis dreadnoughts, because they were faster and more maneuverable while packing the same basic punch as a dreadnought. For one side to not have them there could very well effectively ended up suiciding their dreadnought fleet. BCs were necessary to counter the other side's BCs (which is what happened), lest you have 6 or 8 BCs leisurely sniping off dreadnoughts one-by-one until you run out of dreadnoughts.
The primary gist of your posts has come across as minimizing the loss of the battlecruisers, as if it were some minor ship like a cruiser or a destroyer or somehow a lesser ship than the dreadnoughts were. Which they weren't.
As far as Tsushima goes - I imagine it would be 1h 45m covering the period of the week where Japanese scouts relayed the exact position of the Russian fleet back to their fleet, and the last 15 minutes would be a badly outfitted, poorly commanded Russian fleet at the end of a 10,000 mile journey blindly sailing into a trap. Not exactly suspenseful or filled with any surprises. Except for the Russians. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTzA_xesrL8 |
Alara IonStorm
5069
|
Posted - 2013.06.07 00:21:00 -
[25] - Quote
Hrothgar Nilsson wrote:Stuff Fact is that Dreadnoughts were the primary ships of the Battle line and Battlecruiser were the supporting heavy scouts. None of the main Dreadnoughts went down. Out of the Capital ships that did go down it was 4 out of 58. That is not space movie material compared to a decisive.
The Hood was lost to the Bismarck and that wasn't at Jutland.
Hrothgar Nilsson wrote: As far as Tsushima goes - I imagine it would be 1h 45m covering the period of the week where Japanese scouts relayed the exact position of the Russian fleet back to their fleet, and the last 15 minutes would be a badly outfitted, poorly commanded Russian fleet at the end of a 10,000 mile journey blindly sailing into a trap. Not exactly suspenseful or filled with any surprises. Except for the Russians.
Why would you imagine that.
Instead imagine 1:45 minutes of a viscous space war where humanity is holding the line against the invaders when in the last 30 minutes a 2000 Battleship Armada arrives. Humanities scout ships watch as it moves slowly towards earth then with their small outnumbered fleet of skilled sailors engage it in final battle and to their surprise score an amazing against all odds victory against their arrogant enemy that underestimated them saving earth and humanities fledgeling empire.
Why would you choose none of the main Dreadnoughts are destroyed and everyone back to their own planet over that? It is such a more awesome story then 4 out of 58. Such a more awesome story. I can not stress my disbelief that you are still hanging on to Jutland. So many more better battles to choose from even if you do have something against Tsushima. |
Hrothgar Nilsson
Black Guards
327
|
Posted - 2013.06.07 00:35:00 -
[26] - Quote
Yes, they were the primary line ships but that doesn't minimize BCs in any way, shape or form. The BCs were equally capital ships, and the side without them can kiss a great deal of their dreadnoughts goodbye. The fact that the RN had battlecruisers at Jutland prevented the Germans from sinking RN dreadnoughts.
I'm not sure what you're describing in your space battle, but it's not parallel to Tsushima. 4 excellent battleships with a great support fleet squaring off against 8 sub-par battleships with little support. The Japanese fleet wasn't outnumbered in anything but battleships - the Japanese had a 3-1 overall in ships deployed. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTzA_xesrL8 |
Alara IonStorm
5069
|
Posted - 2013.06.07 00:59:00 -
[27] - Quote
Hrothgar Nilsson wrote: I'm not sure what you're describing in your space battle, but it's not parallel to Tsushima. 4 excellent battleships with a great support fleet squaring off against 8 sub-par battleships with little support. The Japanese fleet wasn't outnumbered in anything but battleships - the Japanese had a 3-1 overall in ships deployed.
First off it is a space battle, of course the number will be up sized to whatever you would expect from a space empire.
Those Japanese ships that "outnumbered them" were smaller ships to start with. It was 8 Battleships and 3 small Battlships with 10" guns and you underestimate the quality of the Russian fleet. Those were not wooden ships they were facing they were Battleships.
It plain out makes a better story, it does not matter about the quality of the enemy fleet, that part won't get screen time. Humanity kicking ass will.
But fine if you say Jutland then go ahead. Talking about Jutland and by transfer of property this thread bores me to no end now. |
Hrothgar Nilsson
Black Guards
327
|
Posted - 2013.06.07 01:23:00 -
[28] - Quote
Those "small battleships" were mobile coastal defense batteries on floating platforms that had no reason being at sea. The Russians were worse off for them being there. Their presence essentially dictated that the Russians sail through the Strait of Tsushima, whereas without them they fleet have the freedom to go around Japan through the North Pacific to reach Vladivostok. That and those "small battleships" were utterly useless in a sea battle.
I'm not sure if the Russians were wholly expecting an engagement en route bringing them along, but then again these are the same people who built a 400 mile straight railway between St. Petersburg and Moscow because that's how Tsar drew it on the map.
If you're really this unaware of the deficiencies of the Russian fleet, and the advantages of the Japanese fleet, you should read a book or something. Just because you see 8 battleships against 4 on two lines of text on Wikipedia doesn't mean there's enormously more to it than that.
The Japanese David vs. Goliath narrative on the battle may seem romantic and exciting and all, but doesn't stack up against the reality that the Japanese were not outmatched and had a pretty decisive advantage.
I'd rather see Das Boot in space.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTzA_xesrL8 |
Alara IonStorm
5069
|
Posted - 2013.06.07 01:32:00 -
[29] - Quote
Hrothgar Nilsson wrote: If you're really this unaware of the deficiencies of the Russian fleet, and the advantages of the Japanese fleet,
I am very aware of the deficiencies and advantages of the Russian fleet at Tsushima. The battle could have gone either way but the Japanese had a plan, they had skilled crew, a lot of luck and better quality.
That makes for a good story. The best part is of course the story of the coal which would fit well into the movie. It is a shame you can not see how cool the battle was. |
Hrothgar Nilsson
Black Guards
327
|
Posted - 2013.06.07 02:19:00 -
[30] - Quote
Well, that's where we can agree to disagree. I don't think the Russian fleet had a snowball's chance in hell at that location with those circumstances. Maybe if it were the Japanese fleet that had sailed into the Baltic and the battle were fought 20 miles off Kronstadt I'd have a different opinion. http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZTzA_xesrL8 |
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |