Planetary Invasions Revisited
Replies:
- #2575 Re: Planetary Invasions Revisited by Bertil Jonell
I'm compiling the discussions on this topic, which have all been well thought out and interesting so far. Permit me to retract my comments regarding guerilla warfare as insufficiently considered, for the moment, and allow me to make a few clarifications about some of the other implicit assumptions in the narrative I posted: Attacker's Superiority: A numerical and/or 1-2 level technological superiority on the part of the attacker was assumed, since I was more interested in discussing the mechanics of "ground" combat (obviously a bad name for a primarily air/near orbit battle) than I was in investigating fleet combat. Thus the attacker can be beaten by the system's defenders early on, before they ever get to the mainworld, if conditions are right (e.g. the defender has numerical or tech level superiority, the defender concentrates all of his forces instead of guarding all gas giants, whatever.) We don't have to restrict discussion to what happens when the attacker wins the initial space battle, but it won't shed any more light on the invasion phase. Invasion vs. Bombardment: We are all agreed that you would only invade to capture, not to destroy, correct? Some interesting bombardment techniques have been mentioned, but they are also divergent. Planetary Defense Meson Guns: The prospect of espionage seems to me to make concealment difficult (perhaps not impossible), but how does anyone think the Imperium feels about these guns? Would they allow a planetary government to build them as part of a secret program, or would they require the locations to be on file somewhere in case the planet should rebel? (That could make an interesting adventure, by the way, whether to penetrate a regional database to look for data prior to an invasion, or to try to erase the data from a center in enemy hands.) If the defending meson gun network cannot be located and it is extremely capably, the invasion may end at that point. An attacker _might_ be able to make some headway by flooding the planet with 'expendable' craft and staying as mixed as possible with the defenders. Dogfight Phase: I think that this would be the phase of decision, and that it would be quite possible for the defender to win here. I phrased my suggestion the other way, so I could offer an opinion on the 'mop up'. I do think that it would make more sense for the defender to put everything that will fly into the air as early as possible, because I think that the pace of operations will make any imbalance grow rapidly. If we had just seen a European War instead of the Gulf War, I don't see the side with the inferior air force trying to hide it, since it will be eroded piecemeal without being able to shoot back. That erosion may be slow, but it would happen, and the attacker would have the advantage. Thus, even if the defenders are outnumbered, it would probably be better to fight at odds of 1-3 than to save half your forces and fight at odds of 1-6 twice. Mop-Up: Are we agreed that infantry would only be used for 'low intensity' portions of the operations? And that ground forces would be devastatingly outmaneuevered? (Making the TL12-13 tracked tanks in 101 Vehicles a little silly...) Occupation: Ruling a hostile population can only be done as long as that population remains willing to be ruled. If every person on the planet agreed that it would be better to die than to live under Emperor X, then Emperor X made a mistake in invading that planet because it will probably result in a net loss of resources for him. An incorrect assessment of the situation might cause such an invasion to occur anyway. Black Globes: What happens if you turn a black globe on while sitting on a planet's surface? This has been a good discussion so far... Hope you are all having fun. Rob Dean