Steve Jackson Games - Site Navigation
Home General Info Follow Us Search Illuminator Store Forums What's New Other Games Ogre GURPS Munchkin Our Games: Home

Go Back   Steve Jackson Games Forums > Roleplaying > GURPS

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old 06-24-2011, 11:23 AM   #31
Ulzgoroth
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Default Re: [Mass Combat] PLAUSIBLE army diversity in settings

Quote:
Originally Posted by vicky_molokh View Post
I didn't say that. Bases do exist. But the faction/race has most of its logistics force made of air logistics units too.

Plus, they don't wage wars of aggression, and there have been very few wars of retaliation. So as levies they mostly stick to local landing or refueling, or, as mercs, expect the faction hiring them to give access to their own bases or carriers.
And they have no interest at all in control of sea lanes? Land-based aircraft can't effectively secure your freedom of the seas.
__________________
I don't know any 3e, so there is no chance that I am talking about 3e rules by accident.
Ulzgoroth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2011, 11:42 AM   #32
vicky_molokh
GURPS FAQ Keeper
 
vicky_molokh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Kyïv, Ukraine
Default Re: [Mass Combat] PLAUSIBLE army diversity in settings

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth View Post
And they have no interest at all in control of sea lanes? Land-based aircraft can't effectively secure your freedom of the seas.
No, but a superior aerospace force + a regular navy is another matter.
__________________
Vicky 'Molokh', GURPS FAQ and uFAQ Keeper
vicky_molokh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2011, 12:13 PM   #33
Ulzgoroth
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Default Re: [Mass Combat] PLAUSIBLE army diversity in settings

Quote:
Originally Posted by vicky_molokh View Post
No, but a superior aerospace force + a regular navy is another matter.
Only if a 'regular navy' is well supplied with carriers, and you count naval aviation as not contributing to the power of the navy.

According to Wikipedia, only 9 countries on Earth currently have aircraft carriers at all, and most don't have more than one in current commission.
__________________
I don't know any 3e, so there is no chance that I am talking about 3e rules by accident.
Ulzgoroth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2011, 12:21 PM   #34
vicky_molokh
GURPS FAQ Keeper
 
vicky_molokh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Kyïv, Ukraine
Default Re: [Mass Combat] PLAUSIBLE army diversity in settings

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth View Post
Only if a 'regular navy' is well supplied with carriers, and you count naval aviation as not contributing to the power of the navy.

According to Wikipedia, only 9 countries on Earth currently have aircraft carriers at all, and most don't have more than one in current commission.
'Regular navy' as in 'at the setting TL, without deviations from average troop or equipment quality as compared to other navies'.

That being said, I'm not sure maintaining many oceanic paths under control is a priority for a faction that has primarily air-based both in terms of combat and logistics vehicles. Island-based aircraft should suffice to safeguard the naval paths between the islands, the local fishing operations etc.
__________________
Vicky 'Molokh', GURPS FAQ and uFAQ Keeper
vicky_molokh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2011, 12:33 PM   #35
Ulzgoroth
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Default Re: [Mass Combat] PLAUSIBLE army diversity in settings

Quote:
Originally Posted by vicky_molokh View Post
'Regular navy' as in 'at the setting TL, without deviations from average troop or equipment quality as compared to other navies'.
Sure, but if that means that they have a bunch of CBGs, I definitely don't know that.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vicky_molokh View Post
That being said, I'm not sure maintaining many oceanic paths under control is a priority for a faction that has primarily air-based both in terms of combat and logistics vehicles. Island-based aircraft should suffice to safeguard the naval paths between the islands, the local fishing operations etc.
Do they do all their civilian bulk cargo transport by air-freight?

It's probably not impossible for their rivals to conduct naval-based interdiction of airlanes, for that matter. I'd be inclined to invest in some submarines with SAMs.
__________________
I don't know any 3e, so there is no chance that I am talking about 3e rules by accident.
Ulzgoroth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2011, 12:41 PM   #36
vicky_molokh
GURPS FAQ Keeper
 
vicky_molokh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Kyïv, Ukraine
Default Re: [Mass Combat] PLAUSIBLE army diversity in settings

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth View Post
Sure, but if that means that they have a bunch of CBGs, I definitely don't know that.
CBGs?

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth View Post
Do they do all their civilian bulk cargo transport by air-freight?
A large extent. Not all islands even have a clear delivery path between the shore and the central lands.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth View Post
It's probably not impossible for their rivals to conduct naval-based interdiction of airlanes, for that matter. I'd be inclined to invest in some submarines with SAMs.
Doesn't that basically require already having achieved regional dominance in the first place?
__________________
Vicky 'Molokh', GURPS FAQ and uFAQ Keeper
vicky_molokh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2011, 12:47 PM   #37
Ulzgoroth
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Default Re: [Mass Combat] PLAUSIBLE army diversity in settings

Quote:
Originally Posted by vicky_molokh View Post
CBGs?
Carrier Battle Groups
Quote:
Originally Posted by vicky_molokh View Post
A large extent. Not all islands even have a clear delivery path between the shore and the central lands.
Is this a contra-grav setting? You said TL10^, but didn't specify that I noticed.

If it is, their airforce probably could have unlimited endurance with airborne carriers. If it isn't, I'm wondering how this can be economically viable.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vicky_molokh View Post
Doesn't that basically require already having achieved regional dominance in the first place?
I don't see why. It's commerce raiding made slightly more inconvenient because the commerce you're trying to raid is relatively fast-moving.
__________________
I don't know any 3e, so there is no chance that I am talking about 3e rules by accident.
Ulzgoroth is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2011, 01:00 PM   #38
vicky_molokh
GURPS FAQ Keeper
 
vicky_molokh's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Kyïv, Ukraine
Default Re: [Mass Combat] PLAUSIBLE army diversity in settings

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth View Post
Is this a contra-grav setting? You said TL10^, but didn't specify that I noticed.
Yes, though the Khæn favour Hyperdynamic VTOL Ornithopters (they aren't as good at hovering statically, but they can take off from and land pretty much anywhere, and are pretty economical).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth View Post
If it is, their airforce probably could have unlimited endurance with airborne carriers. If it isn't, I'm wondering how this can be economically viable.
Why isn't it? Sure, by MC rules, air logistics are about 2x as expensive (IDHMBWM). But transports don't need unlimited endurance - they just need enough endurance to perform their job plus a bit extra. On the plus side, they can deliver stuff fast. Also, they can deliver stuff to places where a navy or land logistics force can't (or can barely) reach. I guess it just puts them into a niche.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth View Post
I don't see why. It's commerce raiding made slightly more inconvenient because the commerce you're trying to raid is relatively fast-moving.
I still don't get it: you're saying that an 'average' enemy navy would be enough to seriously try to threaten the Khæn's local naval commerce, which is protected by both the local 'average' navy and a local 'superior' airforce? While having a stretched logistics trail?
__________________
Vicky 'Molokh', GURPS FAQ and uFAQ Keeper
vicky_molokh is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2011, 01:11 PM   #39
Icelander
 
Icelander's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Iceland*
Default Re: [Mass Combat] PLAUSIBLE army diversity in settings

Quote:
Originally Posted by vicky_molokh View Post
Why isn't it? Sure, by MC rules, air logistics are about 2x as expensive (IDHMBWM). But transports don't need unlimited endurance - they just need enough endurance to perform their job plus a bit extra. On the plus side, they can deliver stuff fast. Also, they can deliver stuff to places where a navy or land logistics force can't (or can barely) reach. I guess it just puts them into a niche.
I think that the problem is that by weight, aerial transport is much more than twice as expensive as water transport. Closer to an order of magnitude, all told.

At least when you're dealing in bulk, which you will be, when it comes to fuel and ordnance.
__________________
Za uspiekh nashevo beznadiozhnovo diela!
Icelander is offline   Reply With Quote
Old 06-24-2011, 01:18 PM   #40
Ulzgoroth
 
Join Date: Jul 2008
Default Re: [Mass Combat] PLAUSIBLE army diversity in settings

Quote:
Originally Posted by vicky_molokh View Post
Why isn't it? Sure, by MC rules, air logistics are about 2x as expensive (IDHMBWM). But transports don't need unlimited endurance - they just need enough endurance to perform their job plus a bit extra. On the plus side, they can deliver stuff fast. Also, they can deliver stuff to places where a navy or land logistics force can't (or can barely) reach. I guess it just puts them into a niche.
The issue isn't the military logistics...air logistics might not be feasible for truly massive campaigns, but if you aren't doing something like Operation Overlord I wouldn't worry that much. It will be unreasonably expensive but you can potentially absorb that cost.

However, there has been no point in recent history, possibly in history at all where civilian trade didn't make heavy use of water transport as the cheapest of all bulk transport methods. (I have no clue why Mass Combat sea logistics cost more than land logistics.) Contragrav might be able to upset that, though.

"Unable to import or export heavy goods at reasonable prices" is not an economic niche I can believe.
Quote:
Originally Posted by vicky_molokh View Post
I still don't get it: you're saying that an 'average' enemy navy would be enough to seriously try to threaten the Khæn's local naval commerce, which is protected by both the local 'average' navy and a local 'superior' airforce? While having a stretched logistics trail?
Well, I thought you said they didn't have naval commerce to speak of, I was aiming for their air commerce instead.

Do they not engage in long distance trade? As a nation in a TL9+ world? That's very hard to credit. If your Khæn have no commerce outside easy air patrol range of their land bases that might protect them from raiding, but it's unbelievable.

Also, naval forces don't so much require a 'logistics trail' as such. They can have one, but they also have internal range and stores to allow them to cruise for long distances and timeframes. A modern SSN (nuclear submarine) can circumnavigate the globe without surfacing, never mind resupplying. Operating far from logistics limits how much they can do before withdrawing for resupply, but when each SAM brings down an airliner or cargo plane and a handful of shells or a torpedo destroys a surface freighter that limit is more than enough to be intolerable.
__________________
I don't know any 3e, so there is no chance that I am talking about 3e rules by accident.
Ulzgoroth is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Tags
mass combat, worldbuilding


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Fnords are Off
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -6. The time now is 06:34 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.9
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.