• Welcome to the new COTI server. We've moved the Citizens to a new server. Please let us know in the COTI Website issue forum if you find any problems.
  • We, the systems administration staff, apologize for this unexpected outage of the boards. We have resolved the root cause of the problem and there should be no further disruptions.

Ship's Crew Numbers

As I recall, under Soviet conscription, you served two years in the army, and three in their navy, since sailors needed to learn more technical skills.

In the Red Army, junior officers took over a lot of the administrative tasks that in the West would have been done by non commissioned officers, since the turnover was two years for each annual intake, and the recruits earmarked for leadership roles really didn't have the time to learn their jobs.
Its important to remember that Soviet junior-most NCOs were a mix 1st termer top-of-basic-class and 2nd term (of 2 years) volunteers. So raw that, while classed as NCOs, they were largely not tasked as NCOs.
 
But if we're talking the Imperial Navy this is an elite not a conscript force (yes there is a draft option in chargen but there is no way I can see that actually working when total naval sophontpower is a tiny fraction of the population it defends)

For a start the minimum term is four years whereas mass conscript militaries and navies generally let people go at two or three years when they had only just learned how to their jobs well.

Also money is no problem for an empire with trillions of taxpaying sophonts - they can pay ratings well enough that you don't need accelerated promotion through NCO ranks to retain people.

In addition the cash benefits table tells us that there can't actually be anything like the distinction between officer and enlisted salaries we see in RW militaries (OK you get extra benefit rolls for officer rank and a +1 at the highest ranks but nobody gets more than three cash benefit rolls and everyone gets the same pension based on length of service irrespective of rank.

Now in the past I treated such radical departures from how our world works as problems to be fixed by house rules but now I find it more interesting to instead rationalise how these things might actually make sense.

IMTU the third imperium is hardly egalitarian but between the extremes of wealth and poverty there is rather less inequality in incomes than you'd expect - a naval lieutenant is not paid multiples of a petty officers salary, a senior manager is not paid many times the salary of a junior clerk or a janitor.

I also see social relationships as more Star Trek than Warhammer 40K - there is no unbridgeable social gulf between officers and enlisted or between workers and managers constantly reinforced by snobbery, ritual and privilege - they just have different functions.

Sure nobles exist but their functions are well defined and there are not enough of them to monopolise positions of authority in the way that some Terran aristocracies once did.

This is to my mind a legacy of the First Imperium - the Vilani all had their place in great corporations which ensured all citizens had worthwhile work to do and generous pensions and avoided the enormous inequalities and mass unemployment that automation and capitalism had created on Terra - however this very stability and security proved their downfall when billions of Terran techno-barbarians reduced to penury were suddenly released from the Solar system to conquer and loot.

But when the Interstellar Wars ended the Second Imperium retained many key features of the Vilani social system because there were thousands of Vilani for every Terran and the Vilani way worked.

Anyway to adapt Greg Stafford YIMV - Your Imperium May Vary.
 
The enlistment requirements were obvious, in the far flung future.

You can witness this even today, as our militaries are expected to handle increasingly sophisticated machinery.

Though the basic rule still applies: infantry holds ground.
 
The enlistment requirements were obvious, in the far flung future.

You can witness this even today, as our militaries are expected to handle increasingly sophisticated machinery.

Though the basic rule still applies: infantry holds ground.

Basic Rule 2: amateurs talk strategy and tactics, professionals talk logistics.
 
How much does it cost to equip even a regular TL-14 Imperial army infantryman?

You are not going to entrust that 100 KCr of combat armour and gauss weapons - not to mention the many MCr vehicles they travel and fight in - to some half-wit conscript.

And that as well as the exponential increase in lethality at higher TLs is the key factor we miss by thinking in terms of C20 warfare.
 
One current staple are artillery shells.

There seems to be considerable difference in production costs across the globe.

Attrition doesn't just apply to battlefield losses, but also the financial means to maintain a military in the field.
 
One current staple are artillery shells.

There seems to be considerable difference in production costs across the globe.

Attrition doesn't just apply to battlefield losses, but also the financial means to maintain a military in the field.

As all the warring powers discovered in 1915.
 
One current staple are artillery shells.

There seems to be considerable difference in production costs across the globe.

Attrition doesn't just apply to battlefield losses, but also the financial means to maintain a military in the field.
I would say that’s a core component of Striker especially with the focus of mixing sustainable local arms vs imported high tech edge multipliers and the economics of tickets.
 
There's always the option to pass all, or part, of the operating costs to the contractor.

Success only tends to be something that the mercenary company expects to accomplish in short order, and in relative financial terms, cheaply.
 
Back
Top