From: John Atkinson <johnmatkinson@y...>
Date: Fri, 7 Feb 2003 16:45:17 -0800 (PST)
Subject: My Life Story, Philosophy of Design, Colonization Patterns, and other trivia, was Re: DS: Walkers
--- Brian Bilderback <greywanderer987@yahoo.com> wrote: > > My favorite was a personal design--50 tons, 1 That's one of the highest compliments I've had in a long time. There was a Mk 2 that added a pair of MGs and a 1/2 ton of ammo. :) > > There's a fine line to walk here. I enjoy Nah... it's upbringing. I grew up on the old US Army FMs on the Soviet Army. Most interesting books in the house. My Dad gave me an old map-and-chit SPI game called Mechwar '77. Each marker was a platoon. I'd play solitaire games by putting together a Russian attack (MRR, typically) and running the attack by the book. I'd run a US BN and try to stop it. Eventually got pretty decent. I started this when I was 8-9(?). Spend 16 years on anything and you get good. RL Army experience... just is the difference between classroom theory and practical exercises. I just get to do my PEs down at the Stargrunt level and below. :) > take a walker. Fighting on the Olympic peninsula of Maybe--although I still like Grav. > possible variation on the theme. Tomb and I had a Unless... My perception of GZGverse is that you have relatively small professional armies. A division or at most a Corps will defend a planet. Maybe a regiment. Therefor they need to be versatile and operate all over the planet. What good is the 14th Mechanized Mountain Batallion (Combat Walker) if the plan is to secure an area the size and terrain variety of Europe with a brigade? Armies are going to have to focus on high-payoff targets, and most of 'em aren't in crap terrain that these walkers are theoretically good at. Even if they are, what good does it do to hold onto your absurdium mines in the mountains of Ratholeistan if I have secured all the food-producing areas? Now, the argument might be for securing urban areas. My thoughts on the urbanization of space: 1)Most colonies, having unlimited space and limited heavy construction assets, will build out rather than up. 2-3 story buildings at most, not 10-20. 2)Large urban areas depend on good food distribution networks, which won't really be practical until colonies mature somewhat. Obviously some have. 3)Given the limited nature of ground combat (imposed by shipping requirements) no one has the assets to take a defended city. That's resource intensive--a militia brigade could tie up a division or more for weeks. 4)Urban areas will represent difficult-to-replace transportation hubs, probably the main spaceports, and what limited heavy manufacturing assets exist on-planet. As such they are going to be practically irreplacable and High Command will NOT take lightly the sack of a city--and any attack on a defended city will resemble a medieval sack in devastation if not intent. This is simillar to the discussions I've had re: orbital bombardment. In short, I consider it likely that colonies fall into a few categories: 1)Too heavily developed to take easily, and hence rarely the targets of offensives (ie, Neu Salzburg, Nova Moskva, New Avalon, New Constantinople). 2)Valuable prizes fought over in a style of warfare reminiscent of medieval condotta--very careful not to damage the prize, fairly civilized rules of warfare. 3)Crappy dirtballs inhabited by the unwanted of Earth, fought over in dirty little wars like Epsilon Ceti. As such, mass high-tech armies just aren't in the picture, which rules out the need for specialized formations with complex gear only good for a handful of places and times.