The Federation has completely neglected the field of ground combat in its technological development for some unknown reason. As a result, their ground forces have actually become tactically weaker since their own 20th century! While their 20th century armies used artillery, gas, armored vehicles, infra-red viewfinders, light-amplification goggles, long-range automatic weapons, and grenades, their current armies send men on foot into combat situations with short-range line-of-sight hand weapons, no infrared or light-amplification goggles, zero artillery support, and no armored vehicles.
(Alyeska here) MW is basing this conclusion of false and biased items. I have already proved in several casses where he was out right wrong, or more then one conclussion is posible. One of the biggest items is that armored vehicles, personal armor, and bunkers are of little use when there are weapons capable of destroying them easily, and all are capable of being carried by one person. Again Tricorders are an advantage that federation soldiers have. Another interesting item is that the federation has site to site transporters.
I can't help but laugh. He claims he's "proven" that Federation hand weapons can destroy armoured vehicles and bunkers, but he provided no evidence whatsoever. He claims that tricorders are an "advantage", as if stormtroopers don't have any sensor technology (never mind sensors built into their helmets). He brings up transporters as if they're some sort of stunning revelation, even though I already discussed them at length in my page.
In fact, given the time he spent on this "essay", the fact that he had several helpers, and the fact that he had all the time in the world to criticize my page, it's amazing that he couldn't come up with better criticisms. He focused almost entirely on ground combat, and I didn't put anywhere near as much effort into my ground combat page as my Death Star or hyperdrive discussions.
Click here to return to the main Hate Mail page.