I would assume that the casualitys could probably be seen in comparision to the Allies vs Iraq in the gulf conflicts. Technicalogical superority would probably mean that the minbari suffered very low losses on the ground, but probably had a lot of wounded. But in such a situation it inevitable to suffer some casualites, and tactics exist for reducing the technological superiorty of an enemy.
You are mistaking the gulf conflicts (specially the last one) with REAL wars , but they are not , because they were entirely one sided , while the Earth Alliance-Minbari Federation war would be more like a real one . Remember , everyone (specially Mollari during "In the beginninig") says that even with massive technological superiority , the Minbari had a hard time fighting Earthforce . They won almost all the battles . They crushed Earth fleets . They took or destroy colony after colony . But the war lasted almost 3 bloody years , and even 13 years later , the warrior caste was still complaining about the heavy price inflicted by the humans on them , To me , that sounds like a lot of casualties . Certainly not as many as Earthforce , but probably far more that both allied coalitions suffered during their respective gulf conflicts .
One reason to develop good tactics is to improve your chances against a superior enemy (superior in quality , equipment , training ...) . One of the reasons for the continuous successes of the Napoleon´s armies (or WW2 wermacht) is that they had superior tactical abilities on every aspect :
- Austrian , british , or russian cavalrymen were better trained and had better horses and superior equipment , but the French cavalry , albeit of inferior quality on all those areas) had better tactics , and better commanders , so , in almost every cavalry battle , the french were clearly superior .
- Almost all allied infantry knew only one tactic : deploy in line and shoot and / or charge (british infantry included) . In contrast , during the earlier days of the empire (1804-1809) the french fantassins (infantrymen) , some of them veterans of previous campaings , and almost all of them extensively trained on every conceivable maneuver , were capable of perform complex maneuvers and / or changes of formation at the middle of a battle . This gave them a great tactical flexibility , extremely useful during the campaings of 1805-1807 , being also a factor of the "almost defeat" suffered by the allied army under Beresford at the battle of Albuera (as late as 1811) . As those veterans died (mostly during the 1806-07 campaings) and were replaced by inexperienced (and almost untrained) recruits , the quality of the french army decreased , which resulted in systematical defeats at british hands here on the iberian peninsula .
And on , and on , and on...
Space Wise - Even Minbari Fighters are exceptionally hard to shot down at range. The problem Earth had is that its technology was not good enough to actually lock on or target the enemy, meaning they had to get to close range to engage. The battle of the line itself is a brutally one sided affair.
Stealth systems made you difficult of detect al long ranges , but if your opponent has a extensive sensor network (as those found on planetary defence grids , or jumpgates) , your stealth systems are less effective , and remember : most of the battles were fought against a combination of fleets and planetary defence systems , so even if they had a certain degree of superiority , they should have to pay a comparatively heavy price .
The battle of the line was a "brutally one sided" affair , only because the assaulting Minbari fleet was far more larger thant the Earthforce fleet . This was largely because of the terrific casualties suffered by the EA´s fleets by them , but also because during the last days of the war , the Minbari made a hard push towards the Sol system , surpassing several colonies and defending fleets , so not all Earthforce ships were at The Line .
The Minbari woudl probably be sensible enough to engage at long ranges unless ambushed, especially given a Niall has a chance against a Hyperion.
Certainly , they would retain the great advantages that their Stalth systems and superior sensors and maneuver systems gave to them at long range , but I much doubt that a sigle Niall could be a great threat to a heavy cruiser .
Experience is largely irrelivent where the difference of technology so great. Iraq had the world 5th largest army in 1992. For every allied personnel killed in combat, the Iraqi forces suffered something like
Again you are making erroneous conclusions from the wrong conflicts .
During both wars , the average Iraqui trooper was far less trained (and had worse eqipment) that his enemy , not to talk about the comparative qualities of the commanders , or the C4I systems ...
As the allies discovered during both world wars against germany , numbers don´t do too much difference ...