Communication/Size limits on a Polity

[Ref00000]

the only real issue I see here is scale.

as in 'The Imperium has a thousand systems worth of manpower and resources' not just part of one planet's.
they also have a much more 'long view' perspective than any 'nation state' on a planet can have. decades of waiting is nothing to the Imperium. to a planet's population, cut off by blockade, with it's production/resource base under High-Guard, possibly bombarded to rubble, if they've gotten too 'problematic'?
not nearly the same equation.
if you, as I do, run the 3rdI as "stable, essentially beneficent, generally non-corrupt-but mostly worried about The Space Between The Worlds that make up it's technological, social and resource base" it becomes clear that an individual world, or world-group can surely have a lot of autonomy, and certainly 'enough rope to hang themselves' if they forget their place. The manipulation of mass opinion is a well practiced science to the Imperium. We, trapped here on Terra, today, hardly have a grasp of what twenty years of subtle, competent governance even looks like, let alone what it means to be part of a 'unified Imperium of trusted members'. Which, in essence, is why we play Traveller in the first place. To try and get a feel for that. To think bigger than just our small, damaged World. To feel like we might not be alone.
The average citizen of the Empire is 'happy' and 'better of with it than without it', yes? Sure, there are problems, but I suppose I'm asking a question here. "Is your Imperium 'Evil'? Because mine isn't, and I guess I assume that's one of the 'core values' of the Game and Setting, to me.

 

[Ref00000]

Force multipliers make a big difference, as well as boots.

If your 'boots on the ground' are highly trained, well supported specialists, with a serious TL advantage, the story changes again.
sure 'Imperial Special Forces' are in short supply to garrison every troublesome world, but if you make a -big dent- in any potential resistance, it lasts.
Look at the Brits in Malaysia.
At the onset of the communist uprising, they had very good intel. Essentially, the names of every member of the communist party/cells.
by the end of the conflict, every last one was dead, or imprisoned, with the head of the national police personally gunning down the head of the revolutionary movement.
this sort of response gets results, leaves a very lasting impression on the local scene and is well within the theoretical boundaries of how 'The Imperium as We Know It' can and does operate.
If you've got a really, really good grasp on intel, you can do a heck of a lot more than your opponent.
Then there's the legality of Mercenaries.
Pretty handy to bring in a bunch of outsiders to handle some dirty work, and then use a little deception and psychohistory to make sure the local populace doesn't hate The Iridium Throne, too much.
heck, if the mercs are PCs, it'll probably be easy as Pi to pin some minor war crimes on them, disavow and disband them and bring in a nice bunch of well disciplined Marines to make the Imperium look like the best thing since war reparations.

 

[aramis]

I've often pondered this issue.

I don't like the TCS approach to taking a world. "World surrenders when you appear in its sky with the ability to bombard it, for fear that you will" just doesn't do it for me.

A world is a VERY big thing to bombard, and can be given all sorts of planetary defences. Missile bombardment is futile. However many missile racks you can put in the sky above my world, I can put more Repulsors on the ground in all the places that matter. All other weapons on board are point-attack.

The interlocking defenses in canon are deep meson sites, surface repulsors, and surface meson screens and nuclear dampers.

The Repulsors are NOT unlimited - you have to build them and/or buy them.
They are also not 100% effective. Further, they're surface mount weapons - I can easily target them with lasers. (Yeah, my lasers attenuate something fierce... but I don't need to vaporize them, just knock them out, and given the power of those lasers, 100km isn't an issue. And it will have the benefit of creating a weather disruption, too.)

Then, once your repulsors and dampers are taken out, Game over - won't be anything left if you don't unconditionally surrender, and might not be even if you do. (Depends on if I want to hassle with an occupation, and can get away with a genocide.)

So, practically, only your meson guns really stand much of a chance.

And if you fire them, any fleet without meson guns will withdraw out of range. And those with them will back trace them to knock them out. Hell - Drop a scoutship from 200 diameters at 2G onto it on autopilot. WHACK-A-THUMP. I don't have to shatter the thing, only prevent it from aiming and/or powering up, and breaking it's ceiling loose is certainly a good step towards that.

Oh, and remember: planets can't evade. I'm not going to miss. I might not penetrate, but I won't miss.

If I'm going to take out a major world, 100Td 2G kinetic kill missiles at MCr30 each are cheaper than a BB.

There is no "uncrackable base" - just ones that are too expensive to bother with. And for those, well, I don't have to kill you... I just need to cripple your infrastructure and your people will kill each other. Strontium 90, sporified diseases, and other airburstable WMDs make the repulsors and dampers not an issue.

 

[Ref00000]

well put, Aramis.
my point about blockades, time and expenses plus force multipliers, broken down tactically.
the Imperium doesn't worry about your little resistance movement. because when it comes down to it? they can, in fact bomb you into the stone age, wait a couple decades and recolonize the world...

 

[rancke]

I don't like the TCS approach to taking a world. "World surrenders when you appear in its sky with the ability to bombard it, for fear that you will" just doesn't do it for me.

That rule is a simplification of "reality" that allows wargamers who play TCS to ignore the existence of armies. It is not supposed to provide a realistic simulation of interstellar warfare but rather to provide a good game.

The description of the 5th Frontier War makes it clear that "in reality" planetary sieges can take months or years and very much involves ground forces.


Hans

 

[rancke]

And if you fire them, any fleet without meson guns will withdraw out of range. And those with them will back trace them to knock them out.

I thought one of the big points about deep meson sites was that they can't be traced.


Hans

 

[aramis]

I thought one of the big points about deep meson sites was that they can't be traced.


Hans

They can if you have a meson screen - the meson screen causes them to decay prematurely, according to TNE. This gives you a directional flash. Get 2 bearings, and you've got a fix.

 

[Vladika]

They can if you have a meson screen - the meson screen causes them to decay prematurely, according to TNE. This gives you a directional flash. Get 2 bearings, and you've got a fix.

If you toss out those ever-so-inconvenient rules.

 

[Ref00000]

If you toss out those ever-so-inconvenient rules.

why is triangulation tossing out rules?
it's basic geometry counter fire.
how is observing a deep site's fire and extrapolating a fix in any way rulesbreaking?

 

[Vladika]

why is triangulation tossing out rules?
it's basic geometry counter fire.
how is observing a deep site's fire and extrapolating a fix in any way rulesbreaking?

Triangulation is "Real Universe" the Traveller canon, and rules, say deep mason sites can't be found. One of them is Striker, rule 76, "the site itself is effectively impossible to locate." Thus go by the rule or toss it out.

 

[atpollard]

While triangulation works in theory, that sure seems like a lot of precision for measuring a flash.

Imagine a hummvee driving down the road getting shot by a sniper. You want to determine the range to the sniper by measuring the bearing of the 'ping' as his bullets bounce off your vehicle armor.

Sounds theoretically possible, but a darn formidable task to me.
Hardly a trivial targeting solution to me.

(Although I admit no expertise either professional or hobby in this area.)

 

[aramis]

Since we know canonically that worlds with deep meson sites CAN be taken, we know that there has to be a way to perform counterbattery fire against them. Obviously, it will usually be meson fire - the alternative is extreme high energy impacts or unconventional forces (especially native saboteurs).

Keeping in mind that a factor N is a 220m diameter target sphere (Striker) rendered to rubble (or finer), a that means a roughly ±0.2km targeting solution for a single shot. We also have reason to believe they can't fire through the bulk of the planet itself (Traveller Mesons are weakly, not non, interactive particles).

We also know that the beams are able to be tightly collimated - the effective range is the full diameter - and that's about 1/2 LS (TNE BL/BR)... so around 0.3 Arc Sec

So... this means I should be able to use a less tightly colimated beam closer (and canon implies strongly I can - see striker) and fracture probably about a 0.5km diameter to structurally unsafe. If I can get minute of accuracy level reverse angle, I've a sight line acurate enough for finding it with a two ship system. (Well, three, really, since canonically, a deep site meson gun usually mission kills the target).

 

[Piper]

Imagine a hummvee driving down the road getting shot by a sniper. You want to determine the range to the sniper by measuring the bearing of the 'ping' as his bullets bounce off your vehicle armor.

http://bbn.com/products_and_services/boomerang/

 

[aramis]

While triangulation works in theory, that sure seems like a lot of precision for measuring a flash.

Imagine a hummvee driving down the road getting shot by a sniper. You want to determine the range to the sniper by measuring the bearing of the 'ping' as his bullets bounce off your vehicle armor.

Sounds theoretically possible, but a darn formidable task to me.
Hardly a trivial targeting solution to me.

(Although I admit no expertise either professional or hobby in this area.)

That bullet doesn't light up where it hits, and doesn't normally have partial penetration.

Now, if it hits the left side flap and the right side flap, you can EASILY get the reverse angle...

The meson screen, according to TNE, causes premature decay. This WILL light up one side of the screen. Further, some will still penetrate. Further still, the screen needs to be a good bit of a stand off distance.

If the burst is bracketing your ship, or is inline but long, you've got it down to a probably 30° cone or less - the brightest spot 500m off the hull is in line with the meson gun.

If it's a near miss - well, the brightest spot will be a cresent shape, perpendicular to the line to the meson gun.

If it misses short, well, follow the line from you, the center of the burst.

 

[Ref00000]

Triangulation is "Real Universe" the Traveller canon, and rules, say deep mason sites can't be found. One of them is Striker, rule 76, "the site itself is effectively impossible to locate." Thus go by the rule or toss it out.

effectively impossible just means extremely difficult.
the flash on screen method is a guide to approximate location.
rooting out the site, which, by definition is very likely somewhere near where the flash-triangulation indicates means, in game terms you have an adventure seed.
you have a key point of defense, an isolated, underground fortified site crewed by your enemies elite fanatics and specialists. defended as a last stand live-or-die as a culture.
{you may even choose to have the players be the crew of the meson site}
this sure sounds like an old school RPG scenario to me.
it's practically a high tech dungeon crawl.

 

[Amber Chancer]

Since we know canonically that worlds with deep meson sites CAN be taken, we know that there has to be a way to perform counterbattery fire against them.

This does not follow.

What there has to be is a way to get your boots onto the ground despite them ... albeit, perhaps, at a certain cost in materiel.

My solution is the "jump troops" ... the space equivalent of the paratroop.

Equipped with vacc suits and grav belts, you dump them in their thousands from an air lock at the outer limits of the planetary atmosphere, and they descend on some remote place where they can establish a secure perimeter and commence ground operations.

Sure, some of the transport ships bringing them in are going to be lost (but you send them in a vast armada of small ships, hopefully swamping the defenders' ability to target and hit everything); and you have a continuing problem of resupply until the planetary defences have been suppressed.

Kinda makes for an exciting game, with lots of different aspects to it, doesn't it?

 

[Amber Chancer]

The interlocking defenses in canon are deep meson sites, surface repulsors, and surface meson screens and nuclear dampers.

The Repulsors are NOT unlimited - you have to build them and/or buy them.
They are also not 100% effective. Further, they're surface mount weapons - I can easily target them with lasers. (Yeah, my lasers attenuate something fierce... but I don't need to vaporize them, just knock them out, and given the power of those lasers, 100km isn't an issue. And it will have the benefit of creating a weather disruption, too.)

Then, once your repulsors and dampers are taken out, Game over - won't be anything left if you don't unconditionally surrender, and might not be even if you do. (Depends on if I want to hassle with an occupation, and can get away with a genocide.)

So, practically, only your meson guns really stand much of a chance.

And if you fire them, any fleet without meson guns will withdraw out of range. And those with them will back trace them to knock them out. Hell - Drop a scoutship from 200 diameters at 2G onto it on autopilot. WHACK-A-THUMP. I don't have to shatter the thing, only prevent it from aiming and/or powering up, and breaking it's ceiling loose is certainly a good step towards that.

Oh, and remember: planets can't evade. I'm not going to miss. I might not penetrate, but I won't miss.

If I'm going to take out a major world, 100Td 2G kinetic kill missiles at MCr30 each are cheaper than a BB.

There is no "uncrackable base" - just ones that are too expensive to bother with. And for those, well, I don't have to kill you... I just need to cripple your infrastructure and your people will kill each other. Strontium 90, sporified diseases, and other airburstable WMDs make the repulsors and dampers not an issue.

This is an image of space war that I just don't buy, I'm afraid.

Why is anyone ever trying to "take out" a world?

Space Invaders never defined WHY these space craft wanted to invade our world; it has been simply taken as read, ever since HG Wells' War of the Worlds that this is what space aliens do. But WHY do they want to do it?

Gene Rodenberry had it right, in insisting that all of his aliens needed a motive for acting as they did. It may not be a motive that made sense to the 20th century human mindset; but it had to be a motive that was capable of articulation nonetheless. And once it had been articulated, the aliens had to act in harmony with their motives. Sound stuff.

Now come to space war.

Why are they fighting one another?

What are they hoping to achieve?

How does bombing a whole planet back to the stone age assist in any of these scenarios?

Or, put it another way ... how many conflicts have been fought by the US, Britain, France, the Soviet Union, China since they each acquired nuclear capability?

How many times has any of them decided that the best military solution was to use their nukes to bomb their enemy into the stone age?

I'll give you a clue ... you can count them on the thumbs of one foot.

Indeed, you can count on the thumbs of one foot the number of times that a nuke has even been deployed after 1945.

Why?

Because the effects of the nukes simply do not fit with any of the objectives of the warring nations.

Same applies with world, does it not.

You may want to conquer and colonise - in which case you don't want to turn them into a radioactive waste land.

You may want to deny it to the enemy as a useful base - in which case you want to defeat the local interstellar (not planetary) forces, and then maintain a blockade.

But bombing into submission?

The Germans tried to bomb London into submission. It didn't work.

The Italians tried to bomb Malta into submission. It didn't work.

The British and Americans tried to bomb Berlin into submission. It didn't work.

I detect a theme emerging here ...

Yes, Japan surrendered in face of the threat of further nuclear bombing (not knowing that there WERE no more nuclear bombs, at that point in time ... ah, the problems of faulty intelligence!) but in large measure that was because (a) they had no effective means of countering, and (b) America's objective was to stop Japan being hostile to America and its allies, not to conquer and occupy, so it didn't matter to the Americans if they created a radioactive wasteland, and (c) in any event, nobody really understood what a radioactive wasteland was, back then.

Special case.

Neither, I am afraid, do I buy this idea of targeting the repulsors with your lasers from a range too great to be vulnerable to planetary counter-fire. How do you know, at that range, which structures on the planet surface contain the Repulsors, and which do not?

"Wet" naval history is full of examples of encounters between ships sailing close to shore, and shore-based batteries. It is very rare for the ships to suppress the batteries, unless there was a huge initial firepower disparity, even though the batteries are fixed and the ships can target them easily. The benefits of a more stable firing platform, and defensive military engineering, have always ensured that the fixed fortifications are something which a warship needs to fear.

I do not see "vacuum" naval encounters as departing from this pattern. And I repeat ... a world is a very big target, yes; but it can soak up one heck of a lot of damage, even by contrast with a 1,000,000 ton spaceship; and identifying the bits you want to target is a problem of needle-in-haystack proportions UNLESS your objective is simply to bomb it into the stone age.

 

[mike wightman]

Triangulation is "Real Universe" the Traveller canon, and rules, say deep mason sites can't be found. One of them is Striker, rule 76, "the site itself is effectively impossible to locate." Thus go by the rule or toss it out.

The site is, the sensors that are used to target are a much easier find.

Destroy the sensor locations (forget about comms stations they are going to be buried meson comms as well) and your meson guns are now blind.

Invasion:Earth makes no mention of underground meson sites. Either the capital of the Solomani didn't bother with them (odd since they invented the meson gun in the first place) or they have been destroyed/rendered ineffective by the time of the final siege.

 

[mike wightman]

While triangulation works in theory, that sure seems like a lot of precision for measuring a flash.

Imagine a hummvee driving down the road getting shot by a sniper. You want to determine the range to the sniper by measuring the bearing of the 'ping' as his bullets bounce off your vehicle armor.

Sounds theoretically possible, but a darn formidable task to me.
Hardly a trivial targeting solution to me.

(Although I admit no expertise either professional or hobby in this area.)

Very difficult indeed.

But no more difficult than plotting a route through an extra dimensional space from one n-body gravitational reference frame to another.

Those room sized computers must be useful for something after all.

 

[aramis]

Very difficult indeed.

But no more difficult than plotting a route through an extra dimensional space from one n-body gravitational reference frame to another.

Those room sized computers must be useful for something after all.

Considering there's a 10kg, about 15L system that can backtrace small arms fire already... it's not in use because of costs, not because of lack of capability.

A less accurate but still useful version (consisting of 4-8 omni mics) can be done without the extensive surface mounts of the current system (and in fact is what the prototypes were - the tech was demo'd in 1996, and still isn't in widespread military use, but is in use by some police agencies.