TL4 vs. TL7 melee weapons

[Rupert]

Originally Posted by Mr Frost

I wouldn't be surprised if a TL7 culture could outfit even 10 times the number of troops in plate than TL4 . Remember , TL 7 polities require only a small fraction of the population {orders of magnitude fewer !} to produce food and thus can afford to place far more people into every other industry ; including full time soldiering .

Actually, the percentage of people that can be supported in full-time soldiering at TL7 vs TL4 isn't as much higher as you'd think - all those people freed up by the improvement in farming have to go into factories to make all the stuff that makes a TL7 society TL7. However, at TL7 one can keep armies in the field for years at a time, rather than having most of your army have to go home in the autumn and spring.

Also, I don't think the really important thing is being able to make fine weapons for the price of good ones, but rather that a fine weapon (say a $600 broadsward, fine because TL7) costs 29% of a status-0 person's average monthly income, while even a cheap sword costs 30% of a Status-0 person's monthy income at TL4. Thus it's actually TL4 cheap swords vs TL7 fine swords.

Everyone in the TL7 army will have fine weapons, and armour that while it might be (well made) munition plate will protect like good plate, and will cover as much of their body as their role will allow. Meanwhile in the TL4 army most people will have cheap weapons, and munition plate that both fits badly and protects poorly, and only covers the minimum.

The TL7 army will eat better, especially when they have to go away from their field bases with their fresh food and full-time cooks (they'll have canned food, rather than just salted and dried food). They'll have vastly better health care, both on and off the battlefield. Even after the TL4 side has copied their load-bearing harness, but in canvas, they'll have better load carrying gear (because canvas and cord isn't as good for making that as synthetics, plastics, and metal clips).

[Mr Frost]

Originally Posted by Rupert

Actually, the percentage of people that can be supported in full-time soldiering at TL7 vs TL4 isn't as much higher as you'd think - all those people freed up by the improvement in farming have to go into factories to make all the stuff that makes a TL7 society TL7. However, at TL7 one can keep armies in the field for years at a time, rather than having most of your army have to go home in the autumn and spring...

You're already half proving My point and not noticing it .
Wars tend to drag on and TL 4 cannot keep it up .
However even in a burst over one season .

No TL 4 society could equip anywhere near as many soldiers to an elite standard .
Even munitions plate is expensive and TL 4 mining {and for that matter , the geology know-how to find the minerals in the first place} is painfully limited compared to TL 7 . Without factoring in the difference in how fast actually making the armour {and spearheads etc} , simply getting the raw materials is night and day for the 2 TLs .

Consider the costs of TL 7 AFVs , Military aircraft , Warships etc .
Outfitting all combat troops with munitions plate or better would be well within reach {with plenty left over} and have a greater tooth to tail ratio too {thus more troops are combat troops} .
TL 4 simply cannot make enough top tier equipment to begin with .

Now consider further that when most polities went to war , they hired large numbers of mercenaries often from far abroad . This is because not many folk could afford the time to train sufficiently to be fit to be professional soldiers and many whom could would instead do other things with their life that didn't involve entering what are basically coordinated murder contests for a living .

A TL 7 society could spare more people as full time soldiers {and part time reserves too} , equip far more of them to a peak standard and still hire mercenaries {whom they could also afford to equip if needed} and that is just the peace time force .
In war modern nations can put truly massive hosts in the field with first rate equipment due to how fast they can make heavy war materiel .
I stand by My claim . No TL 4 polity could field even close to the same combat power even if both are limited to TL 4 equipment unless they possessed some very significant mitigator and if they could not capitalize on said mitigator in a manner sufficiently decisive enough to overrun their TL 7 foe quickly , they would lose almost certainly .

[malloyd]

Originally Posted by Dragondog

If one faction can craft TL4 muscle powered melee weapons and another faction can craft TL7 muscle powered melee weapons. Does that difference even matter (beyond the automatic Fine quality for the latter faction)? And if it does, what difference does it make? Such as increased damage, lowered weight, different material composition, etc.

Your issue here is I think misinterpreting what TLs are. Unpowered hand held melee weapons are basically a mature technology at TL4 - or earlier if you have a version of TL 2 or 3 that happens to be able to melt steel routinely. They don't improve much after that.

What happens to advance weapons technology is a shift to something else. A TL7 society has access to energy resources well beyond those of TL4 - it's one of the defining features of industrial and later technologies. It's conceivable if they haven't needed to fight a war in a long time they might *start* one with a TL4 society with no particular advantages in weaponry, but once there is a demand that forces them to think about it that isn't going to *last*. They are going to find ways to apply those energies to killing people. You can after all kill TL4 melee soldiers well enough by running over them with automobiles if you need to - they can't do much to damage them and certainly can't outrun them. Is an automobile a TL7 melee weapon? In this particular situation, it sort of is.

[Anaraxes]

Originally Posted by malloyd

Is an automobile a TL7 melee weapon?

But of course.

Your comment that "they don't improve much after that" did remind me of Anthony's earlier "allows changes in design that might affect damage". I was wondering what Anthony had in mind. What design changes could you theoretically make to something resembling a TL4 hand-held melee weapon like a sword that would improve it? Not just cheaper or finer steel, but changes in shape, structure, maybe precision manufacturing (for that monomolecular edge, naturally...). You could make them lighter, but that might well be counterproductive, lowering momentum of the hit. Maybe some sort of complicated layered structure, like a composite bow, to tune hardness and flexibility, like in the katana legend. I haven't seen any changes like that, which leans toward the "it's fully mature" view, but I don't really follow the field, and most of the modern sword manufacture seems to be deliberately aimed at recreations, whether relatively faithful replications of museum pieces, or less faithful replications of movie props.

[DanHoward]

Originally Posted by Anthony

Well, that doesn't directly affect damage. It allows changes in design that might affect damage.

Like what?

[Toptomcat]

I suppose you could make a thrusting weapon with a marginally thinner profile and harder tip without as much risk of snapping it off as TL4 metallurgy, which would improve penetration.

[DanHoward]

Originally Posted by Toptomcat

I suppose you could make a thrusting weapon with a marginally thinner profile and harder tip without as much risk of snapping it off as TL4 metallurgy, which would improve penetration.

A thinner profile might increase penetration but reduces the wound channel. The chance of breakage doesn't affect damage, it affects the malfunction rate.

[Toptomcat]

It'd still be better in narrow applications. For instance, as a special-purpose tool to slip through gaps in armor while grappling, like a misericorde.

[Apollonian]

Important question: Is this society actually TL7 in other fields, or is it otherwise TL4, with TL7 weapons (somehow)?

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by DanHoward

A thinner profile might increase penetration but reduces the wound channel. The chance of breakage doesn't affect damage, it affects the malfunction rate.

Yes, but there's a tradeoff between acceptable breakage rate and other traits. In general increasing penetration but reducing the wound channel will be a beneficial tradeoff, unless the wound channel reduction is much larger than the penetration increase.