Guns Of Icarus Online
Main => World => Topic started by: Lord Dick Tim on April 12, 2013, 04:03:00 am
-
Hello everybody,
I want to start a dialogue about building a basis for the ground forces for the world of GOI. I recently started a story in the galley called "Desert Asp" as a way to get an example out there of where the real killing and dying would take place between the nations that exist in this fictional space.
Now there are some glaring mistakes in the original post, that I want to retrograde later as we refine the idea of what a ground force would comprise and what exactly this conflict is about.
We have a lot of potential latitude to make some wild assumptions. GOI is largely about the air ships, it's likely that cannon that'll be established later as the adventure mode gets closer will be targeted to that sphere and not have much focus on what we create here. With that we have a chance to create a unique story space for enthusiastic writers to provide accounts within a collected identity with unique names, places and historical accounts that will have a common synergy creating a richer, more believable fiction.
So let's start with whatever you want to talk about, let's get crazy into detail, I'm talking down to the amount of bullets in a magazine to the people in charge of conflicts.
Desert Asp
A battalion of troops belonging to a regiment of battalions in the Arashi infantry corp.
First things first, some things I've already said but want some support for or arguments against.
I've described the Asps as a Battalion of a few hundred, I'm thinking the actual number would be closer to 900 not including auxiliary/logistics, for a fully manned fighting unit. A battalion would be comprised of a number of companies, broken down by platoons, then further into squads and fire teams. This is a classic infantry break down and lends itself well to the Arashi identity of being descended from western European stock.
Their commander officer is a Lord Commander, the lord part being more flavor of story and less relevant, but the Commander grade may be appropriate for a Battalion level CO position. The rank however is not realy appropriate for an infantry commander, being traditionally a naval rank. A lieutenant colonel or major might have been a better choice.
Above this would either be a full "vulture" Colonel at the regimental head, or Lt. General. I like the idea of using the national bird to represent the colonel rank insignia not unlike American forces using an Eagle.
The weapon I pulled from the top of my head is a fictional one, a Finnish mk25. Finland is a Nordic country, not western European but has long been known to have amazing marksmen during the ww1 to ww2 era. The weapon could be changed, or could be an Anglean manufactured weapon widely used for its durability and stopping power, not unlike an Ak-47.
The asps wear long coats, possibly thin walled and made of an breathable material that would blend well with the desert. I'd also imagine some kind of head dress would be needed to protect the face, head and neck from the desert sun.
The conflict
I describe this as a Jihad, which can be defined as,
: a crusade for a principle or belief
this believe could be an independent and free Arashi state, pushing foreign invaders out of their traditional and cultural borders.
The use of the word Jihad might not seem appropriate given its current application, not to mention some of the current parallels that could be drawn from the cannon and today's very real conflicts. Yet I stand behind the use of it as a word that best describes the struggle, unless somebody has a better one.
The Belligerent
I portray the guild as superior in number, technology, but not in superior stock. The name of the army, or nick name is Brass Hat, I don't have a reason for this and i am unsure if this is a slur or the actual name of the enemy unit.
I do like the idea of a Carthagian approach to warfar for the Arashi, being comprised of several mixed units with various strengths, and a more Roman effect to the Guild. The guild would have superior numbers and equipment with several allied factions marching along side, but would be weakened by disagreements about points of law, military tactics, or nepotism putting under performing people in important military positions.
The conflict, with the military powers dressed in this way, might have started with several initial merchant victories as their larger armies barreled over a disorganized and unready Arashi state, but would grind to a halt as they entered the deep desert, unprepared for the eventualities of desert warfare or the guerilla nature of Arashi fighting techniques.
This would not translate into clear defeats, as the Merchants would still retain superior numbers and supply, but could be seen as a bungling of the campiegn by leaders at home seeking a quick military victory, resulting in rash and knee jerk decisions that result in severe Merchant loss of life and defeat against inferior forces causing a possible cascade retreat across the front till a new line could be established.
I'm unsure how this conflict would conclude, but a white peace might be fair to say, both sides making no significant terms against the other.
I'm sure chemical warfare would have been in heavy use... And I've rambled on enough for now. I seriously need to organize my thoughts better.
-
Sounds rather organised for the Arashi. From what is known of them, they seem to fit the nomadic pattern or that of a society that has only recently begun to move away from the nomadic lifestyle (but still holds it dear to its heart). I have them inspired by the Arab tribes of the early C20, with or without Ottoman rule. The Arashi ship is certainly inspired by the lines of an Arab dhow.
I picture them as having irregular forces, somewhere along the lines of Bedouin or Mongol light cavalry (ok, I'm thinking of TE Lawrence). If you adapt that into the dragoon role, you've mounted infantry better suited to maintaining pace with aerostats. After all, the aerostat combines the roll of tank/aircraft and inherits the weaknesses of both as well as the strengths. Infantry will be required.
Your ideal opponent is a semi-modern army of a over-ruling force, based on the Ottoman empire.
-
Now if I didn't have anything to go off of, I'd be sharing this opinion. However the video detailing some of the origins of the factions details the Arashi as descending from western Europe I believe.
So I pushed the tacticle consideration to be more like the ottoman janissary, with a more Franco/British influence from the later imperial age.
The concept has some credibility if the Arashi loose in the opening phases of a conflict against an organized military force, countering with guerrilla fighting and "desert power" tactics. Organizationally though I imagine they would still retain the old Imperial system of military governance, it's a several thousand year old tradition and well entrenched in Europe.
-
Ahh, so the line of the lore is almost as though the Ottomans continued to rule. Making the Arashi less Arab and more German-backed Ottoman. As this now puts into my head the German senior officer from TMMITFM, I will struggle to take the Arashi seriously.
I must get around to watching some of these videos. A single point of reference for each faction would be useful, one thread for each collating all the snippets.
-
Read your story, watched your designs and got a little nerdgasm about how I really wanted a faction to look. I love the burren dieselpunk setting with the WW1/2 trench warfare against the "Brasshats" (funny name btw). Sadly I find them, as PIckle said, quite different from what I believe the Arashi league to be. As of how I've understood they are very much scavengers living in heterogenious city states. I wouldn't suspect them to be able to form such ranks in such great numbers, or hardly any kind of developed ranks at all, even though the Western European origin.
Bascially they would be the "classic" post-apocalyptic nomads and scavengers.
-
The Desert Asp story was a fun read but I see adventure mode consisting of two types of people: People in flying contraptions and people who have stuff dropped on them by people in flying contraptions. So long as I am part of the former, I could care less about the back stories and motivations of the latter.
-
I actually find the whole ground aspect very intriguing
-
Well :P to you Hamster!
Ok, as for the Arashi formations, this is a fluid concept and the story was just to establish some kind of direction, not necessarily the correct one.
When I think of any force that has to fight both the Mercantile Guild and the Yesha Empire I conjure up the image of a people very accustomed to fighting war on their home front. Their scavenger like cities and militaries might hold on to weapons, design templates for centuries, while also looting enemy equipment and tactics.
This could change wildly from one city to the next, each on adapting tactics or equipment from their corners of the Arashi desert.
-
Ok, taking a look at some historical battles I came across several notable examples of mixed military campiegns using various degrees of technological advancements and fighting ethos welded into a single military force.
It's not pretty.
The most recognizable ancient figure was Hannibal, historians don't agree on every detail but it appeared to be a repeated act that people's with less armor, or perceived inferior technology, would loot enemy dead and use their armor and weapons. Apparently many of his mercenary foot divisions used looted roman armor and weapons. (this is widely debated on precisely what was used for more reasons then I care to go into)
The same occurs in the American Revoluton, capturing British uniforms and changing the colors to blue from red. Using English muskets and cannons, as well as ships for the continental army and navy.
With Arashi I can see this being much the same, during a war, but not likely at the beginning of one. I'd reason that northern Arashi soldiers would have more Yesha equipment and adapted to fighting with it, where eastern cities would naturally appear more like Merchantile armies.
Most of these mixed unit armies usually only pick up victories because the enemy under estimates their resolve and under estimates the amount of enemies they actually have and the commitment of their allies. (when Hannibal crushed the roman legions at cannae almost all southern Italy declared for Carthage)
So maybe at the battalion level, we'd see cohesion, but at a regimental level we would see various different types of units all mashed together, each battalion varying in composition and refinement.
-
I think your breakdown is pretty solid so far, Tim.
I have to cite some examples, so I guess I'll start from my own experience.
Any fighting group, nomadic or static, modern or ancient, advanced or otherwise will have some sort of organization. This is even true of the insurgency in Iraq, and the Taliban in Afghanistan. Hell, it's especially true, I should say. We don't give these types near enough credit. In any cell worth its salt, there will be a leadership element, a financial element, a logistics or procurement element, a ground warfare element and an instruction element. There may be more, but there are rarely less.
These groups are organized in different ways, but the most effective ones appear to adhere in some small way to large-scale military orgnization. There are brigades, battalions, companies, platoons and even fireteams. Are they always so well organized? No, but with good reason. In any unconventional unit, leadership must be decentralized. Groups on the ground need to be capable of carrying out operations with a bare minimum of guidance from higher (We do this too, but we do it a bit better). So, there will be a chain of command that gives broad statements about operations to be carried out in a region, with smaller, more local (and usually embedded) figureheads to carry them out. These figureheads are usually prominent figures already well established in the society, believe it or not. This method works well when it's your homeland that's been invaded.
For an expeditionary group, a group going to other places to conduct operations, there is a bit more control. The model mentioned above would simply not work in the same way. Why would a group of roughneck, cut-throat types know that this would work?
Fight any enemy for long enough and you'll teach him the Art of War. They've likely seen it from the wrong angle, time and time again.
The composition of their units will constantly vary, especially as they continue to vary in modern times, in modern units. A Battalion in the Marine Corps can weigh anywhere from 500 to 1200. Obviously, every attempt is made to inflate that number, but no deployment will be denied due to a lack of men, except for in circumstances of combat ineffectiveness, wherein a unit has most likely just returned from combat (having suffered great losses).
All in all: Organization isn't unavailable to any army with a couple of good engagements under their belt. Far more likely flaws include a lack of decentralized authority, requiring high level management of the slightest action; Lack of initiative instilled during training, causing men to freeze during combat, and leaders to miss opportunities; Heavy handed authority resulting in a massive rise in apathy, or a general will to simply "Get by" without incurring the wrath of leadership...there are many more of these.
Battlefield scavenging is likely to occur except for in units with extremely refined discipline and very reliable supply chains. Even then, the chances of lifting equipment from the dead is fairly likely, given the right circumstances.
-
Were fire teams part of the organisation of any organised military force in the early twentieth century? - we are supposed to be closer to WW1, than C21 asymmetrical post-colonial NDYPOMP exercises. There is no Treaty of Versailles in the canon.
-
I certainly hope that they'll be able to whip up some more interesting counter against the guild then just pillaging and random encounters
-
Ill have to do some digging but I believe napoleons army worked in different organizational phases for urban to field fighting.
Most ww1 militaries were organized, at the least, down to the platoon level. That I know from memory, I'll need to study up for a better understanding, there was a lot of doctrine reforms after the great war.
-
The Napoleonic saw the introduction of riflemen as skirmishers, but even into 1914 the wearing of camouflage is considered unsporting, and the targeted shooting of officers is positively ungentlemanly as the rank and file might do absolutely anything without an upper class twit to lead them. I do like the quote, unattributed but always said to be around the time of WW1, "The purpose of cavalry is to lend a touch of class to what would otherwise be a rather vulgar brawl" - infantry was strictly working class cannon fodder.
Much of the reform in the modern military came as a result of the Great War. Without the Treaty of Versailles to rebel against, would the modern German army have been created? - and remember just how fare behind Great Britain lagged in terms of military progress at the outset of WWII. In 1937 the RAF were putting the Gloster Gladiator into service, whilst the Luftwaffe were equipping squadrons with the Bf109.
-
Ooh, that's an interesting twist on the Arashi- I'll defer to you, Tim, but perhaps there could be a caste system in effect, whereby all lower class became infantry and higher ones cavalry, in this case airship crew and pilots. I'd like this distinction, but I don't think it works perfectly- honestly, I think there's too much rag-tag in the Arashi ship design to carry it. Annoyingly, I think a caste system would work the Baronies, as they already have a diverse set of households who hold dominion.
-
Carlson and Merritt A. Edson are believed to have developed the fireteam concept during the US occupation of Nicaragua (1912-1933).
-
Carlson and Merritt A. Edson are believed to have developed the fireteam concept during the US occupation of Nicaragua (1912-1933).
And the rest of the Wiki paragraph points out that Carlson, "brought these ideas back to the US when the country entered World War II." Where they were adopted, rejected and adopted again. So again, much later than the starting point for the canon.
-
Didn't think we were specifically talking about the US.
-
Beyond that, I'm getting the impression that this world is quite a bit further along down the road than just WWI. They've stated that this is a world in which WWI never really stopped, and this is what we're left with, but their writings on the "history" of the world seem to indicate quite a bit of time passing between the flight of the Icarus and current times. If the world we're in presently is one that has been in a state of constant war like we all seem to think, it's not unthinkable that ground warfare has evolved a bit since the Great War.
-
While there's nothing solid stated here, I definitely get a "this happened a long time ago" vibe from it.
http://gunsoficarus.com/world/history/flight-of-the-icarus/
-
This one is a bit more distinct.
http://gunsoficarus.com/world/history/a-compendium-of-dust/
-
So we have a long time of continued war, a chance for reforms to happen, but centered in this idea that Arashi is a loosely organized league of independent states.
Kind of suggests we would have just about everything and the kitchen sink happening at once. Old companies that have traditions dating for hudnreds of years, rebel desert nomads using skirmishes tactics, down to independent cells and loosely organized militias.
So wide perspective, rag tag, closer perspective may still have some cohesion, but it would be highly situational, there would be an ordered sequence of events that led to the construction of any one entity, that would not likely be shared with a neighboring city.
Starting to sound more like a rebel coalition, with all the squabbling and in fighting that comes with it. A strong unifying military arm would be necessary to weld together any kind of meaningfull resistance against a determined foe, unless the desert was truly just that brutal and it's occupants just as wicked.
-
Found a good write up that drives the point home on how traumatic and horrible trench warfare is.
http://i.imgur.com/xFXldwD.png
-
Were fire teams part of the organisation of any organised military force in the early twentieth century? - we are supposed to be closer to WW1, than C21 asymmetrical post-colonial NDYPOMP exercises. There is no Treaty of Versailles in the canon.
To go beyond the wiki references SMDH. Fire teams have been around since the invention of an organized fighting force. Certain nation states did it "bigger" than others as in Roman phalanxes and cavalry charges. Also think about Han dynasty unit tactics, the entire military could break down into small units able to flank and spank on its own. Now as weapons and communication got better unit numbers were lowered to increase effectiveness. Straight line warfare being the exception as a retrogression in battle tactics.
Take the revolutionary war as a prime example, guerrilla warfare with small scale units decimated larger units. These groups may not have been designated "squads" and "fire teams" but the operated in a very similar and supportive manner, most notably during ambushes. One squad lays fire from one direction then another squad from another direction then the squads retreat with certain elements laying cover fire for the retreating elements.
Also if you want the "official" version of current squad based tactics and their evolution check out some marine handbooks. Maybe even the French Foreign Legion handbooks. Never got ahold of S.A.S. handbooks myself but I'm sure they would have interesting sources for their development. Think how the Russians fought the Germans. etc. etc. While not always called "fireteams" the idea has been around since Bows and Arrows.
Wiki referencing never has the full information and half the time the information there is plain wrong.
As for trench warfare in this world I don't see that working at all. Trench warfare worked because bombs couldn't find the trenches reliably. Now think about a slower moving balloon craft manually dropping munitions on a trench in the earth. Bad day for anyone in a trench. Slit trenches are a different story and could provide plenty of cover from dumb munitions, but the trench warfare everyone thinks about would be like digging your own mass grave with the kinds of weapons in this world.
As for the whole story idea. You sir, are damn good.
-
Wiki referencing works just fine, so long as you check the sources on the bottom of the page. Check your facts and you're fine.
-
By the way, fireteams have NOT been around since the invention of an organized fighting force. The fireteam concept is pretty specific, and not many units throughout history have used them. The concept refers not only to the size of a unit, but also its composition, tactics, decentralization of leadership and training.
-
Sorry. No. If you want to get into exact specifics we can argue that a Marine 4 man fireteam isn't really a fireteam but the Army Ranger 7 man squad is. You can geek out on the specifics all you want but to the concept has been around since ranged weaponry.
Ok I'll concede this point. Don't call them fireteams, call them disorganized groupings of 3-5 men who work within a larger military force. ::)
-
You're missing the point. The fireteam's size isn't what the fireteam concept is about.
-
The fireteam is a small unit with decentralized leadership under the command of a non-commissioned officer or senior non-rate built around the firepower of a squad automatic weapon. At the time of it's inception, squads were organized around a single SAW. Under this organization, each fireteam consisting of four men would carry a SAW, allowing each unit to suppress and move. Key points here: Decentralized leadership, smaller and more mobile force, NCO in charge until he gets killed, and a squad automatic weapon.
Let's have a look at your previous examples and see if they fit this description.
The Phalanx: The Phalanx is a formation, not an element. Its size varied, depending on the number of men available. This would be like saying a wedge is a fireteam. A platoon can assume wedge. A company, even. Hell, if we wanted to, we could get the whole damn battalion out here to jump in a wedge right quick. It seems a bit stupid, but it could be done.
Han Dynasty: The smallest unit organization during the time of the Han Dynasty was a platoon. A platoon is not decentralized leadership, it's not a small unit, it's definitely not the most mobile element. That's not even considering the fact that the element wasn't capable of levying mobile suppressing fires, and definitely didn't engage in fire-and-maneuver, or fire-and-movement tactics. They didn't have non-commissioned officers, and in fact, they had two sides to their army. Non-professional (conscripts) and Professional (volunteer). Professional is about as close as they get. No NCO, no decentralized leadership, this isn't a fireteam.
The Revolutionary War did feature guerrilla warfare style tactics, but they did not feature professional military men organized into small teams, lead by an NCO. Not fireteams, just pockets of fighters. I mean damn, the French had to show us what the bayonet was for.
How did the Russians fight the Germans? According to their organization, in squads. Squad size of the day was 8 men, and I'm talking in particular about the SMG platoons, because this is about as close as we get. 3 squads to a platoon. No NCO leadership over those squads. Furthermore, the fireteam is a breakdown of the rifle squad, so this example is further disqualified.
What I'm telling you -is- the "official" version, as I'm a Marine infantryman of 8 years.
Your main arguments so far have been that a platoon is a fireteam, a squad is a fireteam, a formation is a fireteam, and more recently that the Army Rangers have a 7 man fireteam. The reality is that a platoon is a platoon, a squad is a squad, a formation isn't an element, and the Army uses the same 4-man set up as us in their fireteams. On occasion, we'll form what we call a fireteam reinforced, where stragglers from a hit element will form up on an existing fireteam. Only then would you see something on the level of a seven man team. Ther's a definition for these things, there's a reason for the definition. These specifics become kinda important when they're your job.
Finally, I'm not sure what's up with the snide "geek out" remark, or the neat little eye rolling smiley figure over there. We can disagree on something without acting like kids.
-
Have there been specialized elements in history that behaved like a fire team without using the traditional leadership model?
I can't think of anything really, and searching for it is rather non specific.
-
Given the creation of the team around a single weapon system of extreme importance, my initial reaction is "no", unless we start considering ancient siege weapons, but those would be more of a gun or tube section. As you know, the whole thing is built around that SAW. Giving a team the firepower of a squad with the mobility of half and the initiative of an internal leader.
-
As for most of those examples I am showing an evolution of fighting forces, and trying to give a diverse perspective to show what could have developed from different cultures. Also giving the OP different reference points to look at for his idea about the infantry. Also Han Dynasty warriors could operate in 20 man groups very easily and for the technology and fighting styles of the day that is beyond impressive.
Like I said I concede the point about the exact term "fireteam." Marine's always came up with every tactical idea ever I get it, I really do, you can keep the term "fireteam." The idea of splitting squads into smaller groups to allow for covering fire, advancement, and split leadership is not a new idea; once again I know it wasn't called a "fireteam."
As to the topic of the post one of the big reasons for splitting a squad is to allow half the squad to advance while the other half is laying fire, and this tactic can apply to the biggest nastiest infantry advance you can think of. BUT 3-5 people seems to be the lowest number that the tactic works for. @ Charon I did my time in service and had to sit through hours of lectures and sweat through endless hours of drills, maybe I got a different instructor but he made sure to show us examples of what worked historically, what didn't, and why.
As for the Russians, I'm sure those 8 man squads never broke in half to attack from 2 flanks, wait yes they did. You are correct though they weren't called "fireteams." And you know what I bet in a GoI style infantry group they wouldn't have an exact Fire team structured A, B, C. But that's how it would naturally sort itself. The only thing missing from a natural fireteam compared to a marine fireteam is a SAW. The squad leader wouldn't put an idiot in charge of half his sqaud he would put the guy he trusts to lead the squad if anything happens to him in charge.
As for geeking out, you're getting so into the minutiae of the topic and not understanding the over arcing concept as it applies to the topic at hand. Deductive reasoning not rigid it must conform to this to be this. I know that's not how infantry is programmed but hey we aren't talking about American Marines in this forum.
The infantry in this world has been fighting for decades with firearms. They would have figured out effective means to fight. Maybe they don't have a special weapon like a SAW to form around, maybe they do. Would it really change infantry organization to the point where a 7-12 man squad is the smallest possible formation just because the don't have a SAW? NO. Blocking out, as I said before, the complete idiocy of straight line combat. Decades of war would have cured them of straight line combat.
Maybe they wouldn't have developed a special designation such as "fireteams" but the splitting of a squad naturally happens to maximize its effectiveness.
-
So we are looking at smaller squads more due to the massive casualties airships would cause to larger groups.
-
You assume a lot there, Ofiach. "Infantry's not programmed that way". Ha.
A squad splitting in half and advancing is not as effective as utilizing fireteams for fire and movement or fire and maneuver.
8 man squads splitting in half don't achieve the goal of the fireteam. The fact that you're not aware of that is interesting. You then state that the only thing missing is a SAW (squad automatic weapon), when every last one of these soldiers is running around with an SMG, capable of providing better fire superiority than the SAWs of the day in the terrain they were fighting in. The squad does not have multiple smaller groups lead by an NCO. It was a squad, not a fireteam.
-
Let's get back on track gents, I'd hate to lock my own thread because I lost control of its direction. Though I appreciate the debate and Ives learned from it, it is taking on a mean edge.
-
@Ofiach
I think that you're missing the main point here on the topic of fireteams and that is: Words mean things. "Fireteam" refers to a very specific organization and tactic. Just because a squad splits in two doesn't make them two fireteams. Just because one guy in a group of four has a SAW doesn't make them a fireteam.
It's important to note that "SAW" doesn't just refer to the M249.
I don't think that anyone is saying that, after decades of combat, these people haven't figured out how to mobilize as fireteams. They certainly didn't start out in them, though, and your examples are irrelevant to that discussion.
As for the actual topic of the thread, I've got a few ideas that I want to formulate better before I post them. Perhaps after work.
-
Hey, you got it, Tim. No hard feelings on this end.
On the airship side of things, I think you'd definitely see smaller elements progressing against these things, because they've got a pretty permanent enfilade advantage going for them. It's always going to be easy to hit the ground troops, so long as you can see them, and they're not in cover. Depending on the prevalent weapons types you're going to see a difference in dispersion from 15 meters to however many it takes to escape that kill/cas radius and still maintain those connecting files.
What really bites is that the ground guys can't just crouch and take it until the thing goes away due to fuel constraints. Even our choppers have a semi-limited time on station, although they can start a rotation to assist in TICs. Not sure what kind of fuel these airships take, I've heard diesel, but something tells me they could stick around for a good minute if they were so inclined.
-
Even in my original post on this topic I said it probably wouldn't have been termed a "fireteam."
I was pointing out how human military groups even when their smallest group is 100 men strong have the natural tendency to fragment even more to get things done.
All this because I used the term "fireteam" loosely in a discussion of a fictional military group is a bit insane.
Also I'm just going to point out different organizations use different squad and fireteam tactics. SEAL's, S.A.S., Rangers, and VBSS to name the few groups I have worked with.
@ Lord Dick Tim that's the basic gist of what I'm trying to say, these guys are veterans of decades of war. They have grown up knowing they would be at war and because of this have developed tactics that will minimize casualties. It isn't too much of a leap in reasoning to say they would have come up with a "fireteam"like concept to maximize effectiveness and limit casualties.
I also think that this military would have different weapons for different jobs, maybe your average new recruit is only issued the finnish mk25 or maybe even a single shot only weapon so he didn't waste ammunition. Maybe the proven veterans are given better weapons and gear. That's just something for you to think about and get the brain juices flowing. Or maybe they only have the one weapon because that's all they can produce.
-
Message removed per original posters request.
-
Children please...
This thread is about how infantry in the GOI world have developed squad (okay "small group" to avoid confusion with whatever the proper military definition is) based combat tactics utilizing evasion and movement over brute force of numbers- which I think is rather probable considering the inefficient nature of what would equate to WWI trench warfare especially in our near-apocalyptic scenario where resources, manpower included, would grow increasingly scarce- I don't think minute squabbles over textbook definitions of squad vs. fireteam, or our service records/ lack thereof are relevant.
-
Thank you churrosaur, well said.
Now what about temporary defenses? Would viet con tunneling be a good option as well?
-
There's a great book on this subject, actually, called "Phantom Soldier: The Enemy's Answer to U.S. Firepower". It explores the difference displayed in our sort of warfare, and the style of warfare of a nation that lacks our technological advances or brute force.
The likelihood of a group to utilize tunnel systems in particular has a bit to do with who they're fighting, and certainly what terrain we're looking at. Viewing this through a Sun Tzu lens, we attack when we're strong, and defend when we're weak. Tunnel systems are one hell of an asset, but you'll need time to dig them, a good location for them (which should indicate that the fight is taking place on the digger's turf) and a reason that this is better than just erecting defenses on the surface.
I think we can definitely count on entrenchment ability for temporary defenses, false trenches or fighting positions, possibly even fake or abandoned lookout posts, if these guys are on the defense. I doubt we'll be seeing much in the way of wire or hedgehogs.
-
Right on, now this is the direction I wanted to go in! Thanks Charon, ok new thoughts broiling.
Now what about a diesel punk solution, like a tunnel digger machine that made it comsiderably easier to avoid detection?
It would likely be to comical to suggest it could go for dozens of miles, but I could see it being used to build bases, erect defense and what not. It would be like ant mounds, you'd know where a base was because of all the darker dirt exposed to the surface.
-
The tunnel digger solution is pretty sound, I think, but now this is a bit of a game changer. Seems to me that this machine would be one nasty bastard to haul around if it were out of fuel (tank treads would probably be necessary, and the kinds of rocks that get stuck between those treads are insane) so they'd need to keep it stocked on fuel instead of using it for digging...that is, until they get it to a spot they intend to set up at.
Where might they set up at? My thoughts are they'd set that sucker up at another source of fuel. A downed airship with undetonated reserves. They arrive on sight, clear the sucker out, set up an underground tunnel system for rest and refit, and set up on any weapon systems that weren't destroyed, ready to ambush the next airship that comes by, and begin the process anew. This way, they have a base of operations and a steady place to scrap that ship while they sit.
-
In sand dune like desert you can dig small man sized trenches in the sand then cover them with a tarp then put sand back over the top. This provides a well camouflaged observation point. You could adapt the idea to hide a squad or two for ambushes. Say the enemy has to come near this dune to hit their target so you have a few guys there to hit them in the back.
I have a question for you, is this a Sahara like desert with shifting sand dunes and Oases or more of an Arizona desert with clay a few feet down? That would effect what a digging machine would be capable of and how fast.
You say these guys are fighting a more guerrilla style fight so I would assume if they saw a large enemy force coming straight at them they would pack up and move or maybe leave behind mines and a skeleton fighting force to draw the enemy in. Evade and counter over sitting still and trading blows with a better equipped and angry enemy. As an example lets say an entire company is coming straight in at the Asps position. They are already desert dwellers so they can move out quicker while leaving their camp(I would assume tents or something similar) behind with a small group of armed men to make it look like the camp is still populated. Then that small group would put up a fight while retreating, drawing the enemy into the camp that is boobytrapped and landmined. Used with the small groups hidden in surrounding dunes taking a military position could become a complete nightmare for the guild while the Asps are risking a handful of men and tents.
Also would the Asps have any airships of their own in this conflict or would those airships be so outgunned that they would have to stay away from the fight. I really do like the idea of using a downed airship as a sort temporary HQ.
-
"In sand dune like desert you can dig small man sized trenches in the sand then cover them with a tarp then put sand back over the top."
This'll do against most air-observation, really solid for that. You just have to be extra vigilant with hydration, because those tarps will create a sort of microwave effect for whomever is in them. A Marine in 29 palms was separated from his unit and tried this with a tarp to keep the sun off of him, and it had the kind of effect putting a rabbit in a greenhouse would. He was mostly bones and decomp fluid when they finally got to him.
The trapped encampment is a definite for these guys, I think. With all that modern insurgents can do with mortar shells, they'll have several caches of IEDs to set up when they find a lumberjack. Nasty.
-
Oh god I hadnt even considered the idea of rapid retreating and trapping downed enemy positions.
This is a complete game changer in my brain, it fits more in line with the Arashi are scrap collectors mentality several other players have reasoned.
Ok, just with some of the ideas as they stand I think I need to do a new opener for Desert Asp next to the original, to get a fresh comparison of some of the many changes that have come up.
-
Another thought I had was dune destabilization. Big clunky armored vehicles are traveling through sand dunes so you induce a sandslide to bog these down. It can take hours to dig one out at worst and destroy the inner workings at best. Probably just an intelligent use of explosives.
Also to expand on the sand over tarp idea go back to looney tunes. Big armored vehicle is driving over a hole that is covered by a tarp, sand, and some sticks, now the Guild is spending yet another few hours digging their vehicle out. This goes well with the idea of bogging the guild down and making it extremely costly for them to fight. This forces the guild to have to check for booby traps in the sand everywhere they go, severely limiting their ability to move.
Oh Charon I believe that microwave effect comes more from the use of plastic and not from how the shelter is built, I picture the Asps using animal hides or cloth and not plastic. At least that's how I see them, maybe I'm wrong.
-
I hate to diminish the discussion with a short post, but the loose coalition and desert warfare environment really reminds me of the Fremen from Dune.
-
I have a question for you, is this a Sahara like desert with shifting sand dunes and Oases or more of an Arizona desert with clay a few feet down? That would effect what a digging machine would be capable of and how fast.
I can answer that, since I'm interested in seeing where this goes. The Dunes, in the Burren, is more like the Sahara (you've all seen it), whereas the Arashi Desert is rockier and more resembles deserts of the American southwest.
ETA: I should also clear up a misconception that might be coloring things a bit: while there's not much love lost between the League and the Guild, they're not bitter blood enemies at full-scale war, although there are certainly conflicts in their history (and the present day). I think in one of the Kickstarter videos Eric said the Dunes war was between these factions, but he misspoke. The war in Battle on the Dunes is between the cities of Nalm and Sylka (from Guns 1), which are both independent.
-
Thanks for the clearing up Jess, that helps a ton. I was thinking this might have initially been a full scale war effort, but turned into a unpopular war that diminished to a conflict that petered into nothing but saber rattling because of the vastness of the wastelands and the unpreparedness of Guild forces to fight an insurgency.
I'm of the opinion the Guild had several motives at play, thinking that the loose Arashi would fold in front of sufficient force, cities surrendering to their armies after sacking one or two of them like classic European conflicts.
-
Ahhh that makes thing's a little different in their tactics I suppose.
If the desert they like in has more animal life the Asps are probably trappers and hunters naturally. Think about that going into a fight against a better equipped but undisciplined army. I don't know if anyone has seen a Raccoon trap(the non humane kind) but I could see the Asps modifying those to use against enemy infantry. basically the trap is a little drum that is anchored to a tree with a ring of spikes facing toward the bottom and inward. The Raccoon reaches in for the bait then cant pull its hand back out because of the spikes, apparently they're too dumb to let go of the bait and slip the hand back out. modify the trap a little spring load the spikes and put a thin layer over the top then bury it an inch down. Then make the enemy chase you right into an area where you have these buried right below the surface and you've just caused heavy casualties to the enemy force. They have to tend the wounded and now these wounded cant walk because either their feet and/or calves are shredded.
There's another trap that I learned when hunting Javelinas. Basically you dig a foot deep 2 foot wide trench, when the boar is going full speed it will most likely hit the trench and break its legs making the kill easier. Once again adapt it a little bit and get the enemy (seeing as how you described them I believe they would break ranks pretty regularly) to come charging through a wash or some scrub. They now have to deal with sprained and broken ankles, knee injuries, and maybe even broken legs.
After a while they would stop chasing the Asps every time they ambushed so the Asps could hit and run with impunity.
Those rocky type deserts offer plenty of poisonous plants and animals that could be used to incapacitate or kill enemy troops. Anything to wear the enemy down and send him home. HQ's and observation points would also be easier to establish because rock outcroppings are everywhere and usually offer great protection from the heat and cold.
Also the fast retreating and boobytrapping of military camps would still be a viable tactic. Deserts can seem flat but there are always washes and small rises that a native force could use to hide their movements from the enemy.
Just some ideas there, I know the raccoon traps are particularly brutal but hey in a you kill me or I kill you type situation why not fall back on tried and true trapping methods.
Another great use for your digging machine is undermining roads. Guile over brute force.
-
Hmn... similarly, if the asps are too primitive/resource poor to construct airships on the same level or amount as, say, the guild, (the vibe I seemed to be getting- correct me) they would need some kind of cost-effective solution to negate the tactical advantage they'd offer- like insurgents utilizing a relatively cheap RPG to suppress a million-dollar tank.
Makes me think of the ewoks busting ATSTs with logs in Return of the Jedi.
-
There was a concept charon and I went back and forth on about using downed ships as ambush locations, along with natural cliffs or even city ruins.
In many instances the ships would have to pass close to these points making their crew prime targets for small arms fire. So ya, your general idea Churrosaur is correct, cheap yet versatile weapons used to maximize the advantage against a superior foe.
So far I've written a two new openings for Desert Asp, having to pare them down and correct some errors. Ones a city scape idea, the other in the desert itself. I'm liking the desert one more, the city scape one is very "Enemy at the Gates".
-
Made the second post for desert asp, using a completely different set of ideas and combat discipline. I'm not overall pleased with the piece as a story, but it gets the idea across of the kind of insurgency I'm thinking the Arashi would have.
-
Explosive devices hidden in the sand. Sand makes one hell of a mess when it's used as shrapnel. Salt an oasis along the incoming path? Booby-trapped bottlenecks, perhaps boulders, explosives, steam devices? Night raids centered around damaging rations and water only. Cripple their resources for travel, and they will slowly starve. Something to the tune of puncturing water supplies. Greatest weapon in the desert is the desert.
-
(http://th08.deviantart.net/fs70/PRE/i/2010/240/c/0/dune___ride_the_sandworm_by_leywad-d1z1vt4.jpg)
Arashi...
Honestly though, if you were to take anything from the picture, that cape. I see every infantryman carrying a cape for camouflage and shelter. If you could hide on sand dunes as well as use it for shelter in the night, you're pretty much set.
Also, the Arashi are supposed to be some of the most technologically advanced. I wouldn't put it ahead of them to be carrying tesla weaponry, ground-mounded Hwatcha, etc, though probably as a squad. Imagine the way cannons would be used, but somehow tesla. We talked a bit about IEDs. I'm also thinking traps buried in the sand, tripwires, barbed wire, maybe even electric fences. I also get the feeling that if anybody would get that ship on Dunes working again it would be these guys.
I feel like each soldier would carry some rudimentary tools for salvaging old scraps, seeing as that's how Arashi make their money and food.
-
What about deployment? I feel the Arashi infantry would be more guerrilla fighters like discussed, so I would assume they have a sturdy yet easily collapsible tunnel system should they feel the need to cover their tracks.
-
We kinda discussed the tunnel bit a little earlier in the thread. We think they would have mobile drills that are only used between firm positions, most likely the wreckage of downed airships. The mobile drills will utilize their fuel only to move between downed ships, and refuel for drilling on-site, utilizing whatever remaining fuel might have survived on the airship. Create a tunnel system around the wreckage for shelter from the harsh sun, and for moving between dug-in fighting positions, and use any workable weaponry on the airship to ambush other ships in the area.
-
Ahh, interesting concept.
-
Tesla-type weaponry and electric fences require the discovery of alternating current, which is sort of a world-changing advent. Aside from the Shai-Hulud bit, I do see them as Fremen-types (with regards to the picture posted above).
-
The spice must flow *Cough, sputter*
Anyways, I thought I'd bring up the possibility of decentralized aerostat docks if it hasn't already been discussed.
-
Tesla-type weaponry and electric fences require the discovery of alternating current, which is sort of a world-changing advent. Aside from the Shai-Hulud bit, I do see them as Fremen-types (with regards to the picture posted above).
There were tesla cannons in GOI-Not-Online. They must somehow exist.
-
Tesla-type weaponry and electric fences require the discovery of alternating current, which is sort of a world-changing advent. Aside from the Shai-Hulud bit, I do see them as Fremen-types (with regards to the picture posted above).
There were tesla cannons in GOI-Not-Online. They must somehow exist.
Sometimes we need to suspend the established cannon of an earlier iteration when we discover that some of those original ideas don't work or fit into the current mold. When I'm making up my wild speculations I don't consider this at all, and just make wild speculations. But I also don't get my hopes up that any of the stuff that may have even been declared as being "in game" will ever actually appear there.
-
ive always imagined the arashi's main advantage was living in a place that nobody else coudl live. this leads to a number of advantages: first and foremost beign that every single arashi person is tough as a coffin nail, capable of surviving intense hardship and even bare survival requiring high levels of training and discipline from a young age. an arashi tribe might wander the desert scavenging ships destroyed by sand storms, salvaging the goods meant for foreign markets. because the land they live in is so arid and doesnt support much in the way of food, they are necessarily few in number. because of their harsh conditions, they can hold their own easily, as any who show any kind of weakness do not survive long. generations of such harsh conditions and have created a culture of zero tolerance for weakness, and the commensurate lack thereof. because of this, any regular arashi (as if a 'regular' person could survive in the arashi desert) could be the match of any trained soldier: death and violence are their mothers milk. trained arashi soldiers are near indestructable as the discipline, hardiness, and precision required for survival to adulthood in the desert make them fearsome combatants.
yeshan patrols might wander into the desert to be shot down by an arashi rocket ambushes hidden under sand colored blankets, thrown off in perfect unison. yeshans might then lead an incursion into the desert in force to punish such a brazen attack, and find nothing, the arashi having trained their whole lives for every possible contingency: they have dispersed and hidden in the dunes, nowhere to be found. This sort of ambush tactic coupled with the fact that surviving in the desert for any other nation would require huge supply chains, the sort that could not be protected easily from fast moving small raids by arashi airships and ambushes.
the arashi shouldnt be considered an army, they simply dont have the resources, but small groups of arashi warriors are enough to attack soft targets and blend back into the desert before reinforcements arrive.
not all of the arashi live in scattered bands; some live in cities. Nalm we know from 'Lusse's Travels' was captured by these nomadic people and they inhabit it still. its not hard to imagine that while the baromies, angleans and yeshans are all difficult neighbors to have on your doorstep, as we can see that is the case on the map. nevertheless the arashi have held it 'For generations' indicating that the feirce arashi have flourished there; food now not being such a limitation, as there is an oasis in Nalm, allowing rudimentary, at the very least, agriculture to allow for a denser population. the resiliency and zero tolerance for weakness, now a cultural staple from the desert wandering days would still serve them very well as now that they are in a static position, everyone who has grudges against the arashi now knows where to find them, presumably this would keep the razor sharp edge to the population, as constant war, or the threat of war, weeds out weakness.
thats how i imagine teh arashi anyway, feel free to let me know if you have different ideas, and why! clear skies everyone!