Supporting Pacification Campaigns

[rancke]

Canon suggests that shipbuilding is restricted to starports, and large ones at that.

No, it doesn't. Canon specifically allows planetary navies to build ships even without a shipyard[*] and doesn't specifiy the size of the shipyards used to qualify for a Class A starport rating. Trillion Credit Squadron muddles the picture a bit by making a class A rating a requirement, but on the other hand it specifically makes it possible to build a starship on a world with 100,000 people. 10,000 people if you just want spaceboats (And yes, I agree that those figures are ridiculous). And, really, if you do have the technology to manufacture the components, why shouldn't you be able to assemble them? How many (wet) shipyards are there on Earth today? The entire Earth? That's a ballpark figure for the number of pre-existing facilities a TL8 high-population world would have that could assemble small spaceships. TL 9+ worlds would have similar yards building grav cargo carriers (At higher TLs, grav vehicles are spacecraft). If the Imperium destroys them (and I agree that it can do that from orbit if it destroys the defenses first), it would still be possible to build secret yards.

Well, perhaps not. After all, if the Imperium destroys every manufacturer of grav vehicles, the world's infrastructure goes down the tubes. Instant tech level regression, not to mention population level reduction. After that, an interdiction seems pretty much superfluous.

[*] "Planetary Navies may procure ships at anywhere within the borders of their subsectors, or may construct the ships locally, using local resources, even if a shipyard is not present." [High Guard (p. 21 in the 1st edition; I don't have my 2nd edition handy)]​

Furthermore, ports capable of shipbuilding are of strategic importance.

In TCS, yes. In mainstream CT, the shipbuilding capacity that gives Class A starport ratings has to be civilian shipbuilding. Military shipbuilding is evidently not involved at all.

This suggests to me that a considerable investment of time, money and resources is required to develop a shipbuilding industry.

Any high-population world with a decent tech level has time, money, and resources. It may not have the incentive to develop such an industry if it has a neighbor with a well-developed insdustry of its own that it can buy from, but that's rather moot for an interdicted world.

If such camouflage were possible, yes, but in the face of the above observation, I'm not convinced it is possible.

Then there's Plan B, offering to pay through the nose for ships built elsewhere.

You can begin to build ships, but as soon as you do, your attempts are discovered and destroyed from orbit.

This is an unsupported assumption. How about an underwater facility, for example? Or deep inside a mountain?

We're in agreement that a lone patrol ship isn't being discussed.

We are? Good.

Depends on the strength of the interdicted world. For a world under pop 5 with effectively no air/space military capability, a single monitor with a flight of fighters might be all that's necessary.

For a world with pop 5, a single patrol ship would be more than enough. But then, with a population of that size, there are any number of 'boots on the ground' solutions that are practical. There might not even be a problem in the first place. Just set up a colony of settlers on the other hemisphere, build a starport there, and ignore the religious nuts on the other continent.

OTOH, a pop 9+ world with the capability to produce or import a significant space navy might need a significantly sized task force to successfully interdict it.

You won't get any argument from me on that score. As I said earlier, the Imperium can interdict any world it wants to. Just not always on the cheap.


Hans

 

[pmbnss]

Recap?

Matt -

Can we (I) get a recap of what you are looking for?

I spent a couple months this summer trying to create "generic" battalions, fully kitted out for use in a Third World War style operational game, but allowing higher techs. One of the most infuriating aspects of doing this is determining just how the battalion should be designed, based upon mission and capabilities, and just how much action they are likely to see (all arbitrary, of course), and based upon the equipment costs from Books 1-4 and Striker.

I can give you a run down of certain types of battalions, and what they can expect in terms of tons and cost per month, but they are heavily dependent on the exact outfitting of the unit. Which is completely arbitrary, of course, because my "generic" will not be the same as your "generic" unit.

And counter-insurgency operations and peacekeeping are likely to be very different depending on the planetary, theater, and local situation, requiring different types of units and what not. And do you detach the combat services personnel from the combat and combat support personnel (I say yes, for sanity).

-Peter

 

[Higgipedia]

Interesting, can you recall where you read that?

I can back the OP (re: biometrics) up with real-world experience. I've deployed to Iraq five times and Afghanistan twice, and every time but my first deployment (the initial invasion of Iraq), I've been involved with human intelligence collection.

Biometrics at our TL are remarkably easy to collect and exploit. There are devices currently available to Law Enforcement and Military which can collect finger prints, retinal scans, and photographs and immediately bounce them off of a biometrics watchlist numbering in the tens of thousands.

Check out the Cogent Fusion.

This capability will only increase with technology.

 

[Captain Midnight]

Interesting, can you recall where you read that?

The first place that leaps up from a quick googling is http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/6759588/, which gives some of the non-classified aspects (fingerprinting, photographing, retinal scans, interrogation). I've seen references to more technical methods, which are obviously classified, and I don't have anything definite to contribute there. I will point out that a robust accessible database is a wonderful tool, though.

The difficulty with implimenting this is twofold. Whilst the pacification is under way it is unlikely you will get widespread public co-operation with the scheme. Mind you as I write this it occours to me it may well already be implemented... The second problem is you still have to id the rebels which biometric data cannot help with.

Don't bite off the entire chunk at once. Clear a spot and hold it, and expand the cleared area as fast as is practical. Even if you just start with a medium-sized city, and then start covering its hinterlands, you'll rapidly build up a cleared area. Make sure that you don't spend all your time re-pacifying the same area; it's a familiar drill for anyone who played "Invasion: Earth".

I do want to interject here that I'd like to address a more general case than "Third Imperium, circa Fifth Frontier War era". Many powers will have addressed subjugating a restless population, and there will be differences in each and every case. There won't be a hard-and-fast rule, but cases will have to be determined for each world, depending on local conditions. You may be able to suborn a fairly small nomenklatura, which is much easier than subduing billions of hostile well-armed high-tech inhabitants.

Biometric data is useful primarily for identification, to assist with the "we all look alike to you" problem. It isn't intended to pick out rebels/insurgents/bandits -- it just lets you know who this random person is, and if you've ever seen him before, and in what context. If you encounter "Einar Hairybreeks", who lives in Helsinki and runs a coffeeshop, but he was captured in the Canadian Rockies suspiciously nosing around a supply depot, there's your candidate for a dose of truth drug (or several doses, if he gives up useful information).

(re: enhanced methods of interrogation) Try and screen the entire population through govt "Truth Interviews" and watch the chaos start.

If an armed insurgency doesn't count as "chaos", I'd be curious about what does. It's also an opportunity to demonstrate that an occupying power might indeed be not totally onerous -- "They captured me, and drugged me up, but when I said I had never worked with the rebels, they just gave me an ID card and let me go with an apology for the inconvenience. Maybe they're not going to sell us to the organleggers after all..."

You can get much better results when you can be confident of what you're told from your interrogations. You can establish who is actively opposing you, and what they've done... assuming you can get your hands on a person in order to interrogate him. I guess some tranq rounds might come in handy there.

Something to consider tho' is the relatively easy access to high tech military equipment your rebel planet had before they got invaded. Are you sure the supply air-rafts are secure from TL14 disposable missile launchers on this TL11 planet? Ditto with the neural sensors and whatever the counter is. A classic rebel ploy is to lead the occupiers to make assumptions and lull them into a false sense of security...

This is especially important when you're considering "other than Imperial" solutions. It's one thing if you've got a six-level tech advantage over the locals and there's no reasonable way to expect them to have gotten anything before you came on the scene; however, if you're trying to subjugate some power that has access to comparable equipment, you have a lot more to worry about. What I was getting at here was that some things that are advantages at lower tech levels (e.g., advantageous positions over bottleneck roads) can be completely bypassed at higher tech levels.

Don't always assume there's a counter for everything, either, or that the counter is always effective. I'm not aware of a counter for a neural activity sensor in any of the rulesets I'm familiar with (although I might have missed one), for example. The counter might also be unworkable for other reasons -- for example, can a nuclear damper field be detected, and then localized? Does your city have other defenses?

(Example: "Invaders have threatened to nuke the capital city if it doesn't surrender. Their threat is meaningless because we have our ever-vigilant nuclear damper crews on permanent alert..." "ZAPZAPZAPZAP" "Sir, invader commandos just shot up the dampers and all three backups. The invader admiral has repeated her threat to nuke the capital city, and she gave us five minutes to decide. What do we do?" "Uhhhhhhh.....")

You're always going to have to determine what the desired (and acceptable) end-state is for the invader. Is it "access to certain resources", or "enthusiastic cooperation from the locals", or something in between? What sort of obstacles will they have to overcome? Will they care about "winning hearts and minds"? If so, whose "hearts and minds" will they be trying to influence? If the only thing of any note is the sun-gem mines on South Continent, the opinions of some random fur traders trekking on foot through the wilds of the North Continent probably won't matter much; they might be accommodated if it will win the occupiers brownie points, but if it's too much hassle, then they will probably get told to go get a life.

There may be cases where "armed invasion" is just not going to work to get the invader to his desired end-state. If he's attacking an opponent with strong ideological motivations, and a comparable technological and economic base, and he wants to convince them to become part of his ever-growing empire, well, he's unlikely to be successful (although he can probably smash the local economy, if he can get space superiority). In a case like that, a gentler approach is called for; integrate your economies, and then work behind the scenes for a political solution.

 

[Matt123]

Matt -

Can we (I) get a recap of what you are looking for?

At a planning level, what does it take to occupy a high pop planet? The number of boots on the ground (at 13 per 1000) required for pacifying a high pop planets makes transporting and supplying an occupation force a major effort, if it can be done at all.

By occupy I am refering to the pacification of the planet after overt hostilities have ended.

Utilising or re-establishing the existing Police force will contribute to the 13/1000, RL police forces in stable countries are around 3/1000. Utilising existing military will reduce numbers as well (ignoring for the moment the political distaste there may be for this after a war) and of course the ultimate Imperial goal will be to remove the off world troops leaving only the native troops supporting a freindly tax paying govt.

So, making some broad assumptions 13/1000 might be reduced first by existing Police forces to 10/1000 and then halved again to allow for indiginious troops to 5/1000. On a Pop 8 world (say 500 million) that still leaves 2.5 million off world troops required, pop 9 = 25 million & pop A = 250 million off world troops needed.

Sticking with the pop 8 world needing 2.5 million troops. I've arbitrarily assumed through this thread that a two year build up is acceptable and the source world/s are two jumps away. That means we need around 100,000 troops bought in every month. A further arbitrary assumption is that the transportation is at 1 ton per trooper covering equipment, initial supplies, sleeping area, mess/recreation areas, life support, etc.

There has been suggestion that utilising civilian craft will cover the need. For smaller worlds I'd agree, but on this scale using civilian transport, may well cripple large areas of the interstellar economy. Removing 100,000 ton of merchant shipping capacity for two years plus shouldn't be done lightly. Of course for a pop A world this would need 10million tons of transport capacity. And we haven't considered supplies yet.

Which brings us neatly to the supply question. Which as you say depends very much on the equipment scale in use. Plus the intensity of combat operations expected. In this case (an occupation) combat intensity can be expected to be low (as compared to defeating a standing defence force), a troopers personal load should be sufficient for most scenarios and where its not, support in the form of grav cavalry and Ortillery will not be far away.

Personal weapons, slug throwers/guass weapons with thier ammo requirements or the more expensive laser carbines? (TL8 weapon & the cheapest energy weapon option at 3500Cr per trooper for our 2.5 million troops). Lets eliminate ammo from the supply chain and issue Laser Carbines to our 2.5 million troops, costing 8750MCr. With operational use, but keeping in mind higher tech ruggidisation (ie our TL8 carbines are bought from a TL10-12 manufacturer) spares may equate to 1 per 50 weapons per month, allowing for accidents, etc. 2.5 million carbines at 8kg each /50 equates to 4000 tons of spares costing 175MCr.

Patrol vehicles. Grav is expensive to buy and armoured grav gets even more expensive. A CT G-Carrier is worth 1MCr new. On the plus side tho' there are no fuel requirements. This is vs a CT Wheeled AFV worth 70,000Cr. Picking an arbitray figure for maintenance purposes, say 5% of the value & weight per month of operations to allow for accidents, breakdowns and the occasional Rebel action. For every twenty vehicles in use, the equivalent of another has to be supplied for spares. (Note this number is a wild arsed guess, rounded up.)

Say a vehicle issue at 1 per 30 troops, to allow for rear echelon troops etc, for a 2.5 million force thats 84,000 vehicles. Lets go with the much cheaper wheeled 10tn AFV. It still costs 5880MCr to purchase and at the above numbers (1/20 per month of active operations) needs 42,000 tons of spares bought in, costing 294MCr per month.

Food. Striker indicates 14kg per man per fortnight, thats 30kg per month. For 2.5 million off worlders thats 75,000 tons per month, reduced by whatever can be sourced locally. Say nearly half, leaving 40,000 tons to be imported from off world.

*** To summarise, per month, shipped to a troublesome Pop 8 world we have;

Troop buildup/replacements for combat troops. 100,000 ton
Personal Weapon spares. 4000 ton
Vehicle (wheeled AFV) spares 42,000 ton
Food. 40,000 ton
Sundries. 14,000 ton (makes for a nice round number)

Total shipping needs for a;
pop 8 occupation; 200,000 ton per month.
pop 9 occupation; 2 million ton per month.
pop A occupation; 20 million ton per month.

If you accept these numbers as ball park ok, how do you achieve shipping them?

I spent a couple months this summer trying to create "generic" battalions, fully kitted out for use in a Third World War style operational game, but allowing higher techs. One of the most infuriating aspects of doing this is determining just how the battalion should be designed, based upon mission and capabilities, and just how much action they are likely to see (all arbitrary, of course), and based upon the equipment costs from Books 1-4 and Striker.

I am using rather a broad brush, looking for the big numbers that will pose big problems. But I did the same exercise with Striker many years ago (lots of fun), but it was a while ago. I'd be interesting in your take on an occupation Battalion and a Police battalion formed into Divisions with an armoured cavalry battalion as the Divisional reserve. How would you organise & equip such a force on a tight budget (the budget is always tight...).

And counter-insurgency operations and peacekeeping are likely to be very different depending on the planetary, theater, and local situation, requiring different types of units and what not. And do you detach the combat services personnel from the combat and combat support personnel (I say yes, for sanity).

High pop world, assume most of the population is in heavily urbanised areas. Also assume Divisions will be allocated areas according to population numbers, not area. If the Rebels are hiding in the hills, you have succeeded in seperating them from the population. Big tick. But there is no point in the occupiers holding the hills, if the rebels are still hiding in the population. Make the populated areas safe first, give the Rebels somewhere to run to (very Sun Tzu...), then clear their last hiding places.

 

[Matt123]

I can back the OP (re: biometrics) up with real-world experience. I've deployed to Iraq five times and Afghanistan twice, and every time but my first deployment (the initial invasion of Iraq), I've been involved with human intelligence collection.

Biometrics at our TL are remarkably easy to collect and exploit. There are devices currently available to Law Enforcement and Military which can collect finger prints, retinal scans, and photographs and immediately bounce them off of a biometrics watchlist numbering in the tens of thousands.

Check out the Cogent Fusion.

This capability will only increase with technology.

Biometric data is useful primarily for identification, to assist with the "we all look alike to you" problem. It isn't intended to pick out rebels/insurgents/bandits -- it just lets you know who this random person is, and if you've ever seen him before, and in what context. If you encounter "Einar Hairybreeks", who lives in Helsinki and runs a coffeeshop, but he was captured in the Canadian Rockies suspiciously nosing around a supply depot, there's your candidate for a dose of truth drug (or several doses, if he gives up useful information).

Ta for that, and both your insights into this. The capability shouldn't surprise me, but by inclination I'm resistant to accepting widespread use of such tools. Having said that I'm sitting in safe little ol' NZ. Nothing much happens here. Long may that last...

The "we all look alike to you" analogy, tho' crude is apt. And of course by "if you have seen him before", you really mean "if we have seen him before" given that its part of a long term organisational intel collection effort.

Interesting stuff. ta.

 

[Matt123]

I do want to interject here that I'd like to address a more general case than "Third Imperium, circa Fifth Frontier War era". Many powers will have addressed subjugating a restless population, and there will be differences in each and every case. There won't be a hard-and-fast rule, but cases will have to be determined for each world, depending on local conditions. You may be able to suborn a fairly small nomenklatura, which is much easier than subduing billions of hostile well-armed high-tech inhabitants.

Its a given that pop 7 or less is not really a problem, hense the interest in pop 8+. Highly desirable worlds and you don't really want a beligerant, independent high pop world within your Empires borders.

Every world occupation will be differant in the details. Take a step back tho' and every world occupation is the same.
- you need an occupying force
- you need a method for establishing what it consists of and roughly how large it needs to be
- you need a means of getting it there
- you need to supply it in place

The guy in charge on the ground deals in the local detail and uses that detail to determine how the forces are deployed, the rules of engagement, interactions with the population, protection of important infrastructure & cultural assets, etc, etc. But I'm not really looking at that, interesting tho' some of the earlier discussion was.

If an armed insurgency doesn't count as "chaos", I'd be curious about what does.

Whilst not minimising the impact on immediate observers, armed insurgency consists of pin-prick attacks. As opposed to overt warfare which applies consistent violent force to dominate an area. Insurgency creates localised chaos, quickly dealt with and the bulk of the population only read about it in the papers/vid screens. Another day in Ireland, Somalia, Chechnya, etc.

If the population however reads about a new government/offworlder policy and rises up en-mass to oppose it, thats chaos and also the provocation the Rebels are looking for to rally support. For example the British tea tax, resulting in the Boston Tea Party and the consolodation of popular support behind indepence.

Don't always assume there's a counter for everything, either, or that the counter is always effective.

There is always a counter, we just don't know what it is yet. Warfare through the ages has seen tech advances followed by counters followed by counters to the counters... Game theory is all about working out what the other guys move will be and working out counters to his actions.

Your example of course is valid (& entertaining). I don't recall seeing a counter for a neural activity sensor mentioned anywhere, but to quote someone else (on TML I think) "Absence of evidence is not evidence of absence." In a universe where Psionic sheilds are present and assuming neural sensors pick up radiated energy, there will be a counter.

There may be cases where "armed invasion" is just not going to work to get the invader to his desired end-state. If he's attacking an opponent with strong ideological motivations, and a comparable technological and economic base, and he wants to convince them to become part of his ever-growing empire, well, he's unlikely to be successful (although he can probably smash the local economy, if he can get space superiority). In a case like that, a gentler approach is called for; integrate your economies, and then work behind the scenes for a political solution.

Yes, we were discussing this earlier in relation to religious worlds. In all cases, I suspect diplomacy is the first choice. Interdiction, invasion and occupation are much more expensive ways of getting your way.

Stepping away from just considering strong ideologies tho', is it possible that occupation just won't work for pop 8+ planets...

 

[pmbnss]

Trillion Credit Occupation

*** To summarise, per month, shipped to a troublesome Pop 8 world we have;

Troop buildup/replacements for combat troops. 100,000 ton
Personal Weapon spares. 4000 ton
Vehicle (wheeled AFV) spares 42,000 ton
Food. 40,000 ton
Sundries. 14,000 ton (makes for a nice round number)

Total shipping needs for a;
pop 8 occupation; 200,000 ton per month.
pop 9 occupation; 2 million ton per month.
pop A occupation; 20 million ton per month.

If you accept these numbers as ball park ok, how do you achieve shipping them?

Hi Matt!

To make it even easier, it appears that 100,000 troops + general supply equipment requires 200,000 tons, or the same as double occupancy in a normal stateroom. :^)

And also, at 13/1000 for 500 Million pop planet, I get 6.5 million troops needed, rather than 2.5 million. So, I'll go with the larger number. This is 275,000 (rounded) troops per month.

A 5,000 ton streamlined armed J-2 troop transport [1] can carry 1400 troops in relative cramped comfort, and land them where needed. Assuming that we can time things right, that is 6-7 5K transports arriving each day – about as much as moderate sized Cruise ship port area. Chances are that you'll have multiple theatres of operations around the planet – hold or cold – and this provides some added flexibility.

Total needed each month: 200 transports
Total cost of MCr 348,724 to purchase the 200-tranport fleet. ( MCr 21.767+ MCr 2,176.67 + 199x MCr1,741.336)
Annual Maintenance (10%): MCr 34,872.4

There are probably more efficient ways to do this with a fleet of J0 large shuttles at the destination, and huge bulk J2 transports, but this is a ball park. Nice thing is that that this size vessel can hold 3 generic 452-trooper infantry battalions with (a little) room to spare.

More interesting still:
6.5 million troopers x

Trooper Cost (MCr0.025; x 2 years, assuming half conscript, half volunteer): MCr 0.050
TL 15 Laser Rifle (Discounted 60%): MCr 0.0014
Combat Armor + LI/IR/Radio: MCr 0.0123
1/30 of a GCarrier x 1.05 (spare parts): MCr 0.035
Spares for Rifle + Armor (1/50): MCr 0.0003

Cost per Trooper: MCr 0.099 x 6.5 Million = MCr 643,500.
Total cost of MCr 348,724 to purchase the 200-tranport fleet. ( MCr 21.767+ MCr 2,176.67 + 199x MCr1,741.336)
Annual Maintenance (10%): MCr 34,872.4

Troops: MCr 643,500
Ships: MCr 348,724
Ship Maint: MCr 69,745
Total: MCr 1,061,969

Multiply this number by 10 for Pop 9 worlds, by 100 for Pop A worlds. Considering that you probably spent just as much (if not many times more) to subdue the planet, it is probably reasonable to guestimate that you need 1-2 pop levels above the defeated to reasonably pacify a world. It would certainly be cheaper with AFVs/ATVs and weaker armor.

Also, once the planet was better secured, much of the freight could be subcontracted out to civilian contractors for transhipment from the source world to orbit, reducing the cost further. Assuming 50% of all shipments were contracted, that would be MCr 13,000 compared to MCr 174,362 for 100 5Kton Transports. Even with hazard area price gouging, and the generous gifts to the Admiral's brother's civilian contracting company, you could still shave off a significant portion of the transport costs.

Also note that the 13 boots per 1000 is almost exactly 1/4 of the Battalion strength of worlds per Fifth Frontier War.

[1] Mission Accomplished Class Troop Transport (J2 TL-15)

E1222C4-050000-45005-0 MCr 2,176.670 5KTons
Bat Bear 4 46 2 Crew 26
Bat 4 46 2 TL 15
Cargo: 131.0 Fuel: 1,100.0 EP: 100.0 Agility: 1 Scty: 5
Fuel Scoops and Onboard Fuel Purification
Back-ups: 1xModel/3Fib Computer
Architects Fee: MCr21.767 Cost in Quantity: MCr 1,741.336
Notes:
Has 700 staterooms for 1,400 double occupancy quartering. Two empty 100-ton bays serve for large item storage and recovering equipment or other cargo. Weaponry intended for local defense if needed.

 

[rancke]

I had to break off this post halfway in order to keep an appointment yesterday. Hence the delay.

Wow. Seriously. Wow.

Yes, seriously. If you're going to present canonical statements as incontestable truths, it would be nice if those statements a) existed and b) wasn't contradicted by other, equally canonical, statements.

And, just for the record, I don't gratuiously challenge statements that I believe to be well-supported. Only those that I believe are not well founded. And I'm not only willing, but eager, to be corrected if I'm wrong.

So yes, seriously.

I can refer to canon explanations of how the 3I started and why. I can refer to canons focus on Merchants as one of the key careers.

And I can refer to canon descriptions about the volume of traffic. I've been on the other side of that debate with, among others, Robert (Robject). The evidence for number of starships bobbing along in the OTU amounts to very low numbers. Even the trade fleets described in TTA are minuscule compared to on-planet traffic on Earth today. Personally, I believe that that's because the available evidence only covers a fraction of the ships there are (basically the parts that impact on player characters), but I can't prove it by CT sources. For that, I have to turn to GT:Far Trader (Which is based on a model that Wil claims is flawed). And even the figures from FT only account for a small fraction of planetary production.

I can look up numerous canon books and get quotes just from the introductions. This one from Book 0, pg 8 "Introduction to Traveller", the very first sentence.

"Traveller is a science-fiction role-playing game set in the distant future, when humanity has made the leap to the stars and interstellar travel is as common as international travel is today."

Of course you could try arguing that was written in 1981 and international travel was not very common back then. Or perhaps that the presence of international travel does not mean there was any corresponding trade shipments.

Or I could point out that interstellar travel costs a much bigger fraction of an average income than international travel cost back in 1981, so we have a canon conflict right there. But I'd rather not. I like the idea of more interstellar travel and am always advocating making it cheaper.

(Thanks for that quote, BTW. I wonder if I can use it to persuade TPTB to reduce the canonical life-support costs and allow double passenger occupancy?)

But I can point out that trade that is highly significant to a small group of people (such as a planetary upper class) can still be an insignificant drop in the bucket for the economy of an entire high-population world.

And why pick an extreme as an example.

Because evidence that apply to an extreme doesn't prove much about the norm. So I was arguing that when it comes to the norm, interstellar trade probably doesn't affect a planetary-scale economy significantly.

And how do you know someone is prepared to pay that much for a squadron of Destroyers? Where is your hard evidence and examples of widespread Destroyer importing by interdicted worlds.

I'm not trying to prove that it happens. I am saying that if a government lacks the wherewithal to defend itself, it will be willing to go to great lengths to rectify that. I guess I consider that a truism. So unless you want to argue that a government in such a position wouldn't really care, you're trying to prove that it can't possibly happen. Because if it can happen and the government wants it to happen, it will happen, won't it?

And the risk is the loss of your starship. I note the example above involves using someone elses starship (the Destroyers). Can you think of any 80tn cargos that will pay 20MCr for the delivery service ??? If you can, I'll consider risking my clapped out 20MCr Free Trader to deliver that.

Radioactives has a base price of MCr1, so your cargo is worth MCr80 to begin with. Let's ignore the resale DM of +6 on industrial worlds (since the interdicted world may not be one). Let's just postulate that with no other source of supply, the the resale value is doubled (which I think is a very conservative guesstimate). That's a profit of MCr80 on top of the profit you would have made with a legitimate sale. 80T of cybernectics parts would have a base price of MCr20. Machine tools, MCr60, computer parts, MCr12, special alloys MCr16. Generic pharmaceuticals would only be worth MCr8, but assuming that is 1000 doses of generic medical drug (Cr100 per dose) per dT, a dT of anagathics would have a somewhat higher base cost (Cr20,000 per dose = MCr20 per dT = MCr1600[*] for the 80T load you were talking about).

[*] There's one problem there, though. Getting MCr3200 worth of merchandize off an interdicted world is probably not doable. You'd need to carry away a cargo that is worth the payment. Even gems are only worth MCr1 per dT (at least, the gems PC traders are offered for purchase are; I find it difficult to believe that you couldn't pack more value in gems into 14 cubic meters if you were a bit selective -- maybe the gems on the trade table are industrial?).​

But the stake is only one of the factors involved. The actual risk is just as important. If the risk of getting caught is 99%, even a MCr1600 payoff wouldn't tempt. If the risk is 1%, there are people who'd risk the gamble on a payoff of a megacredit or two. But back at that stage of the argument, you were talking about a single patrol ship being enough to enforce an interdict. Enter a 5000T transport with 20 turrets and a switched-off transponder. Even without such sordid possibilities as the 12-man crew getting bribed to look the other way, a patrol ship with 4 turrets is going to think twice about interfering with a ship that can destroy it. And that's not even considering the presence of a couple of anonymous "route protectors".

You are not describing your typical multi-millionaire. Your typical business owner with a multi-megacredit asset.

At that level it boils down to weighing the potential gain against the risk. And the potential gains are going to be humongous.

Your typical Captain used to taking responsibility for the lives of his/her passengers & crew.

A blockade runner would be manned by a captain and crew who are willing to run the risk for a bigger-than-usual salary and a big bonus. And if the potential profits run into mulitple megacredits (and they do), there is money enough to offer substantial salaries and bonusses.

Well, if you are prepared to pay a price that reflects that I am about to risk my home, my business, my credit rating, my legal status, my life, my freedom and my chosen way of life as a Starfarer. Well sure. The cost is 20MCr per 80 tons delivered. 50% up front, 50% on delivery.

Well, as I showed you above, there are plenty of cargoes that would repay that cost provided the risk of interception is low enough. It's only if the Imperium has imposed a serious blockade that conditions are unlikely to be favorable.

Happy to answer but you will need to explain the question a bit more.

You were arguing that the world's government wouldn't dare shoot at an Imperial patrol ship for fear of annoying the Imperium. My point was that to get interdicted they would have had to annoy the Imperium a lot already. Refraining from shooting at a ship that violated their national sovereignty for fear of the consequences would be straining a a gnat after swallowing a camel.

The sector fleet is tied up at a dozen subsector capitals and a score of bases, being kept ready to react if the Big Neighbor attacks. And sending it off is going to cut into the sector duke's funds.

And your canon references are? FFW demonstrates that penny packets are be defeated in detail in a major war where your opponent concentrates their forces. Mind you most strategists can tell you that.

Every set of UWPs shows the existence of several naval bases per subsector. Naval bases tend to have defenses assigned to them. Those would be furnished by the numbered fleets stationed in the respective subsector.

And I quite agree on the problem of parcelling out your ships in penny packets. Sometimes you have no choice, but it's still something a canny strategist hates. That's precisely why I argued that the sector duke might want his ships at home, defending his capital and being ready to respond to a Zhodani invasion rather than tied up blockading a world several jumps away.

Lol, I never suggested you FINISH with a Patrol Cruiser. You START with a Patrol Cruiser.

And this particular bit of our discussion comes full circle. That would be a remarkably silly thing to do in the face of a defiant system navy, and if you've reached the point of inposing a blockade, the world must already have displayed defiance in spades.

In many cases one can be optimistic that differences will be resolved to the 3I's satisfaction well before it becomes neccesary to crush the system defences. Why shift in the fleet when its not needed.

While you're still only threatening to impose a blockade, you may yet have grounds for optimism. When you reach the point of actually imposing one, you're way beynd that. That's true even if the loss of interstellar trade is "only" as serious as I think it is. If it's as serious as you think it is, it would be intolerable.

(Continued next post)


Hans

 

[rancke]

(Continued from previous post)

Ahh, the perils of relying on canon...

There's no point of discussing anything if we don't rely on canon. The self-consistent parts of canon, anyway. The inconsistent parts is a different matter.

I can comment on Striker which indicates 30% of a worlds military budget is paid to the 3I. There are lots of reasons why this number shouldn't be taken as hard data, however as an indicator it is still valid.

I agree. The figures for Imperial defense budgets are rather low for an empire surrounded by four major powers (and one minor) that, while smaller than the Imperium, still have GEPs (Gross Empire Product ) on the same order of magnitude. But I've accepted them for the purpose of these sort of discussions, precisely because they're canonical and not utterly ridiculous.

The question becomes one of why I should believe your implied position that an Empire of many, many tax paying, hi-pop worlds cannot if desired, totally crush the system defences of one High Pop world within its own borders.

The question becomes how you interpret the explicit statement "The Imperium can do it. It just can't do it on the cheap." to imply that the Imperium can't do it.

As I say, I thought the question was rhetorical or at least not a serious one!

It was, but the point I was trying to make by posing it was serious enough. You were arguing that rationally a single world wouldn't dare anger the Imperium by shooting at an Imperial patrol ship. I was implying that that was a... was not a sound argument.

Depends on your choice of rules poison and whether you think 8 units is a practicle sub-unit for a Battleship or Dreadnought formation, I don't.

I might ask you why you were allowed to pick and chose between canonical statements when I wasn't, but I don't mind you doing it if that means I can too. However, in this particular case I don't think there is a CT reference about 4-ship squadrons to pick. There are some listed in Shattered Ships of the Fighting Imperium, but they could be representative of squadrons that had been pared down after several years of internectine warfare. Because that other MT reference, Rebellion Sourcebook strongly implies that squadrons average much closer to 8 than to 4 (Average of 62.5 ships for average of 9 squadrons). As does the Striker tax figures.

The reference for the 8 ships per BatRon comes from Fighting Ships, a document so flawed that IMHO it is nothing but Imperial propaganda and mis-information. It most certainly is not an authoritative essay on the structure and capability of the Imperial Navy.

Well, trot out your references to 4-ship squadrons and we'll have a look at how plausible they are.

Lol, its you trying to convince me that its worth giving up my nice safe merchant role for the life of a borderline criminal, risking my retirement asset, a premature death or the long term hospitality of the Imperial Navy in return for...

Sure you will get some willing to try for the peanuts being offered. But you avoid explaining how those few will maintain trade volumes after the declaration of Interdiction by a single Imperial Patrol Cruiser.

I still don't understand where you get the "peanuts" from. A world with a billion people and a pre-stellar tech level has a GWP of around 5 trillion credits. A society under dire threat can maintain a peacetime military spending of 10% of GWP (More in the short term under wartime conditions). That allows a military budget of 500 BCr, of which 60% would go to the navy. Assuming the Imperium has just smashed the system navy, the governent now have 300 billion unspent credits in its budget and a desperate desire for getting a new navy.

As for civilian luxury trade, assuming the world used to buy goods to the tune of 1% of its GWP, it now has 50 bilion credits (per year) available for buying smuggled goods.


Hans

 

[Murph]

Years ago, I developed several classes of starship for the Imperial Navy to use for peace keeping/occupation/assault combat forces.
1) 60,000 ton Regimental transport with light orbital bombardment capabilities, and could transport a Regiment of 6,500 troops with orbital assault drop capabilities for a battalion, and small craft (assault transports of 100 tons) to land a battalion at a time.
2) 1,000,000 ton Divisional Transport capable of transporting a full 25,000 man division plus attachments. With the small craft to land two battalions at a time, plus some attachments- generally assigned as a squadron of 8 per subsector fleet.
3) 500,000 ton assault cargo ship capable of supporting the divisional transport.
4) 35,000 ton battalion assault transport capable of dropping a Marine assault battalion (1,200 men) and providing ortillery support.
5) 1.5 million ton cargo support ship

All were jump 4 and 2 g acceleration. Jump 4 to keep up with the fleet for the most part. None were armored, other than light screens, and lightly armed for the most part. I cannot find the plans we made for them, but they were there. Each subsector could transport a light Army of 8 divisions at a time as needed. Plus the regimental transports with I allocated at the rate of two squadrons (16 ships) per subsector, 3 squadrons of transports (24 ships usually seconded to the Colonial service, or in use assisting in other ways), and one squadron of the Battalion assault cruisers (8 ships), and two squadrons of the biggies per sector (16 ships).

 

[jshiggin]

My other observation was that Hammers Slammers have little to offer a campaign where formation based armed resistance has all but stopped, with what remains being mostly Platoon and Company level infantry actions.

Light Infantry Mercs, Special Forces and Intelligence units tho' would be very usefull.

Then think Christian Johnny instead of Alois Hamner.

 

[PDXWiz]

Extreme pacification method: park a planet-cracker in Earth orbit, and threaten to reduce the Moon to a ring.

I recall in some SF AU, the Russians nuked the Moon in such a way as to freak out other nations and make the Chinese surrender in the Soviet-Chinese Cold War. Left a giant scar on the surface. I wish I could recall where I read it from.

Gordon Long