nBSG : Hand of God, battle analysis

VS debates involving other fictional universes than Star Trek or Star Wars go here, along with technical analysis, detailed discussion, crossover scenario descriptions, and similar related stuffs.
Post Reply
User avatar
Mr. Oragahn
Admiral
Posts: 6865
Joined: Sun Dec 03, 2006 11:58 am
Location: Paradise Mountain

nBSG : Hand of God, battle analysis

Post by Mr. Oragahn » Fri Feb 24, 2017 3:39 pm

I found an interesting geekish article going through the battle of the new Battlestar Galactica's episode Hand of God in which the Colonials attacked a Cylon mining station on some huge asteroid in order to loot the thylium there (a rare fuel that is very energetic).
http://sadgeezer.com/Battlestar-Galacti ... teroid.htm
It's very interesting.

I'll comment on one thing.
Whatever "TOASTER"(It HAD to be a Leoben model-it sure was stupid enough to qualify.) it was, that ran the asteroid base must have had rocks for processors-given this obvious set of circumstances the Cylon High Command set up.
It's possible that all Cylons had received the objective to engage the Galactica –and eventually her rag tag fleet– wherever they'd find her.
Simply put, even a thylium may be sacrificed if they could trade it in favour of a chance at hitting Galactica hard. After all, Galactica spent almost her entire last years being on the run. The Cylons most likely had grown a ravenous will to hunt down the ship and her crew and put them out of their misery.
The odd but priceless appearance of the Galactica couldn't be wasted for the sake of protecting a mining station.
Although, yes, on the long term, strictly sticking to a longer term plan hinging around complete attrition would have worked better.

User avatar
2046
Starship Captain
Posts: 2040
Joined: Sat Sep 02, 2006 9:14 pm
Contact:

Re: nBSG : Hand of God, battle analysis

Post by 2046 » Fri Feb 24, 2017 5:55 pm

Like it. He tries to make it sound all tactically amazeballs for TV and even not bad overall, but it was (delightfully) above average for TV and not totally dumb in reality.

He notes that Thrace is a good pilot with tactical and staff skills, noting the rarity of the combo. The belief that pilots are automatically good ship captains is strangely common in the modern US Navy, though I agree it is a weird idea.

He also says "This is the first series of science fiction since Babylon 5 that has tried to show how supply, time, and distance is more important than sheer weight of numbers in battle."

This struck me on two levels:

1. If your vessels are more limited in supplies, speed, and range, such things become very important *all the time* rather than just at the margins.

Certainly it is always fair to make fun of Voyager writers for not really dealing with the logistical realities of Voyager's predicament, but generally speaking Starfleet ships have been in a better logistical position for any given event.

That is to say, the usual constraint for a Trek event is just warping time to get there, a la "Tin Man" and the buildup to the retaking of DS9. The BSG asteroid battle wouldn't have worked if the Defiant was on the Cylon side, for instance. But tactically the Tom Riker theft of the Defiant and Sisko's assessments are as good . . . the Defiant simply wasn't going to run out of gas.

2. Logistics porn is fun as its own thing, akin to plan/timing porn in heist movies a la Ocean's 11 (which are usually the reverse of logistics porn in many cases, e.g. Fast and Furious heist movies where all sorts of toys that would require long development and fabrication time appear from thin air, screen-wise, as if made by Ewoks).

But, at the same time, for storytelling purposes, I am glad not every Trek battle featured the line "Commander, our fuel runs low" or every phaser running out of ammo or the idea of Romulans burning up their engines to outpace the Enterprise-D. It should be part of the story and part of the continuity but doesn't have to be the story unto itself every time.

Post Reply