Sword Worlds
In reply to #7561 Shall Not Perish 15 - Sword Worlds by David Johnson
David Johnson writes: >Now back to the Sword Worlds. Hans Rancke [email removed] writes: > >>Encountering their TL 12 fleet en route. Now what? > >Well, first, remember in my scenario, Sacnoth hasn't been selling any TL 12 >goods to Gram, and since they probably can't get any from the Darrians >or the Imperium (the Zhodani, maybe, I admit, but Sacnoth has similar access) >so the Sacnoth Fleet only encouters a TL 11 Gram Fleet. It seems I haven't explained my idea about the economic cycles well enough. Basically I postulate a series of recessions and booms. Since I postulate that the Sword Worlds have access to TL 15 physics texts from the Imperium, I also assume that a lower-than-15 TL is the result of economic conditions: A TL 12 world can't support the industry needed to build the TL 13 stuff needed to maintain the TL 14 industry needed to build the TL 14 stuff needed to maintain TL 15 industry. Got that? So a recession could (depending on its severity) drop the TL of a world while a boom could raise it. Thus I assume that Gram had TL 12 a few decades ago, which is when they built a lot of their current fleet. (Remember, I also assume that a world can maintain ships and equipment at least two levels above their own TL). So they have the ships and they can, if necessary, maintain it on their own. Furthermore, my thesis is that if Sacnoth wasn't selling TL 12 stuff at competetive prices them Gram would build it on its own - the reason why they aren't doing it now being that Sacnoth is selling it cheaper than they could build it themselves. You see? It all hangs together. The situation you postulate - that Sacnoth has a TL 12 fleet and Gram hasn't - is not possibe under my assumptions. >(I believe this was >the case in the 5FW. Forces from different worlds - Gram and Joyeuse - >reflected the TL of the specific world. Anyone have easy access to those >*Fifth Frontier War* counters who can check for sure?) I hadn't thought about that. Yes, I think you're right. I'll check. That would certainly knock my theory over the head. Except that I just might claim that FFW had made a mistake ;-) Ah, how difficult it is to abandon a well-loved theory... >Before I go further, let me say that I've taken to heart Hans's (and Phil's) >comments that I should focus on the `facts at hand'. And if the Gram ships in FFW really are TL 11 (which I think they are) then that comment is going to return and hit me in the face like a boomerang! ;-) >I'm really trying to >come to an understanding of the situation based upon the facts rather than >my own view of `how it ought to be'. I just see many inconsistencies in >what few facts we have at hand. Well, I'll continue my argument as if FFW didn't exist. For the moment, anyway. Until I get a chance to think about it a bit. >>And the next thing you know Sacnoth is being visited by the combined fleets >>of the rest of the Sword Worlds who are anxious to ensure that you won't >>visit their world next. > >Well, maybe, except that if Sacnoth does it's `front work' some of the >other Sword Worlds will be allied or at least tolerant of it's actions. If >it hits the `leader' of the opposition first the remaining worlds will be >less likely to jump up for their own `chance in the barrel'. Now you're postulating historical facts to support your view. This is no more (and no less) valid than me postulating that Gram is the one that has done its political homework and has the backing of the other Sword Worlds. Either is equally possible in theory. But one of them has things turn out the way GDW says they did and the other one dosen't. IMO one should prefer the one that corresponds most closely to GDWs version. Now, if you could demonstrate that Sacnoth couldn't possibly loose a confrontation with all the other Sword Worlds then you'd have something much more solid. >>Perhaps this gave >>them an Us-and-Them mentality that prevails to this day. > >Are those refugees *Piper's* `original Sword Worlders' or GDW's? :-) Actually, while I've no doubt that GDW's Sword Worlds owe their origin to Piper, they actualy have a lot less in common with Piper's than one might think. >I believe the original GDW Sword Worlders were merely fleeing the >Interstellar Wars rather than their own specific defeat. I believe, however, that the GDW SW ancestors did, like Piper's SW ancestors, flee a lost civil war. >I admit, if these `cycles' exist it explains a lot, but I just don't see >what causes them, nor understand why the same thing hasn't happened in the >Imperium or the Darrian Confederation. Remember that my theory ties TLs tightly to the economy. I know it hasn't worked that way on Earth today, but it's the only explanation that I can see why nearly all worlds aren't TL 15. So relegate the TLs to the back- ground for a moment and think about the world economies today. We've got economic boom/recession cycles. Why shouldn't the Sword Worlds? As to why it dosen't happen in the Imperium and the Darrian Confederation: 1) Maybe it does. Why is only 4 Imperial worlds in the Spinward Marches TL 15? 2) Maybe they have a better control of the economy than the Sword Worlds. The Imperium, at least, has enough size to dampen local problems. >Okay, but I don't believe this situation is analogous in terms of the TL >disparities (I'll get to that in a bit). In a `Latin' scenario with no US >I see several different blocs centered about the `stronger' nations like >Mexico, Argentina, Brazil, and Colombia (which will see much more stability >when the US drug market disappears). This is quite similar to Sword >Worlds history. If one world rises to dominance (possibly with Zhodani >aid) I suspect it will stay there. So far no problem. This is just what the Sword world history says happened. >In a feudal technocracy, it ought to be the highest tech world. So this seems to be the assumption that dosen't fit. Examine it. Change it to fit. Specifically the part of the assumption that has the individual Sword Worlds tied together in an 'emperor-level' feudal technocracy. Try to imagine the tecnocracies stopping at the planetary level. >BTW, if Gram does maintain its position with Zhodani aid *and* the Sword >Worlders have this `us vs. them' mentality it seems much more likely to >me that a combined fleet is going to show up at Gram, especially in light >of the anti-Zhodani sentiment in the Confederation. How deep is that anti-Zhodani sentiment? You assume they think of Zhodani as a 50ties redneck thought of russians. Perhaps it's a 20th Century Yankee/Southerner dislike. >>How significant is an advantage of 12 over 11 and 10? >>a TL 12 fleet is twice as efficient, ton for ton, as a TL 11 and >>six times as efficient as TL 10. > >Another measure would be the TL mods used in *5FW*. I don't remember the >details (and my copy is 250 mi. away in Fort Worth) but I seem to >remember just a few battalions of TL 15 Imperial troops being able to >hold off several TL 10-11 corps of Sword Worlders. Well, Steve's figures was about ships and not troops, but even so, there's a ot of difference between a 12-11 disparity and a 15-10. In fact, Steve claims that a TL 15 fleet has a 500-1 advantage over a TL 11 fleet and can defeat any number of foes of lower TLs. > Sword Worlds Subsector Data c1120 (from *MTJ* #3) > Tizon (+6) 0922 B386887-A M Ri 323 Sw K2VI M3D > Narsil (+6) 0927 B574A55-A M Hi In 224 Sw M0II M6D > Anduril (+7) 1026 B985855-B M Ri 222 Sw F2V > Gram (+8) 1223 A895957-B M Hi In Cp 603 Sw F2D M2D > Sacnoth (+7) 1325 B775956-C M Hi In 301 Sw* F9V M8D > Sting (+5) 1525 B645896-A M 302 Sw* M0V > >These are all the pop 8+ Sword Worlds. Gram, at twice the population >of Sacnoth, ought to be able to fight the higher tech Sacnoth to a standstill. >Anduril, at one-tenth the population of Sacnoth, could choose the `winner' >in such a conflict. If, that is, wars were decided by mathematical formulae. Let's not get that simplistic. Lots of instances in history where the apparently certain loser didn't. I would have been satisfied if Gram wasn't too far behind. That they are equal given a TL 11 fleet and clearly superior given a TL 12 fleet just helps. Narsil, at a ten-to-one advantage over Sacnoth, suffers >a twelve-to-one technological disadvantage. Seems a Sacnoth-Anduril alliance >should be able to topple those `Zho-puppets' on Gram. Since Gram is the >capital that suggests a Gram-Anduril alliance (or Zhodani aid). Gram certainly needs allies given that the Zhodani help is covert enough to be just a rumour. Perhaps Gram buys Zhodani ships at a discount. No feudal technocrat could be very upset at a peer taking advantage of a good deal, surely? >> - even if the other worlds don't buy TL 12 ships elsewhere. > >Where? I doubt the Imperium or the Darrians would sell to the Sword Worlds. >The Zhodani, maybe, but what advantage do *they* have in fostering instability >in the Confederation? A stable Sword Worlds on the border of the Imperium >would have been in the interest of the Zhodani! Perhaps the anti-Zhodani sentiment was strong on Sacnoth but weak on Gram 300 years ago. Nowadays they _do_ have a politically stable Confederation. Gram has been in charge for three centuries. >I'm wasn't thinking sabotage - I was thinking war-time embargo. Tough to >wage a military campaign if you're buying your ammo-vehicles-medkits- >transport ships-*et al* from your adversary. How long does it take to go on a war-time production scedule? Always remember that Gram knows perfectly well how to make these things. They just can't make them as cheaply. That's the central point of my theory: THE MOMENT SACNOTH STOPS SELLING TL 12 STUFF SOME OTHER SWORD WORLD STARTS MAKING AND SELLING IT. >>But perhaps he buys them from the >>Imperium instead. After all, they are propably playing the US to the Sword >>Worlds' Latin America. > >I doubt it. At the risk of beating a dead horse, if allied Mexican- >Brazilian-Argentine troops had recently occupied San Diego and San Antonio >you can bet there would be *a lot* of support in the US for much more than >just `fostering instability' in Latin America. What time in history are you talking about? Just after the 3rd FW where the Imperium occupied 12 of the Sword Worlds? Or after the 5th where they set up a puppet government of half the Confederation? The Imperium _did_ a lot more just after these incursions. They just didn't keep it up for centuries - which I consider perfectly politically plausible. After the heat dies down a later government relaxes the more stringent measures. >>I don't see how that follows at all. The only times the Sword Worlds >>invade the Imperium is with promise of Zhodani help. You can't make >>many assumptions based on how people behave when they think they have >>a powerful ally. > >I'm not sure I understand your point. Regardless of why the Sword Worlds >have attacked the Imperium there are clearly reasons why the Imperium >hasn't `dealt' with the Sword Worlds long ago. But they did. The occupied half of them after the 3rd FW. Later they decided that keeping up the occupation wasn't worth the bother. The 4th FW was settled by negotiation, not Imperial conquest, so they didn't get a chance there. After the 5th FW they cut them in half and tried with a puppet government. >I doubt the Zhodani would >have gone to war over an Imperial invasion of the Sword Worlds 1) Why? 2) What if the Imperium wasn't as sure as you are? >so there >must be some reason the Sword Worlds themselves were able to deter such >action. Remember, on paper the Zodani _ought_ to have been able to kick the Imperial ass. Nowadays we know that the reason why they didn't commit enough forces to do this was that they didn't want to take over Deneb. They've been static for 2 millenia (I have a private theory that they have some massive internal troubles, but that's by the way). In essense, the Zhodani have been playing a very cynical game with their Vargr and Sword World allies, using them as cannon fodder. They never intended to win those wars (this, much more than their thought police/doctors makes the Zhodani bastards in my books). But neither the Imperium nor the Sword Worlds knew that. The Imperium were frightened enough of the Zhodani potential to refrain from taking drastic advantage of any of their victories; the Sword Worlds were impressed enough to get suckered into yet another Outworld Coalition. >>On the contrary, if the Imperium has been doing that it explains why the >>Sword Worlds are PO'd enough to keep on joining an alliance that has struck >>out again and again. > >Again, this seems contradictory to me. Any Imperial meddling in the Sword >Worlds has caused the *opposite* result - Sword Worlds incursions - The Sword World incursions were a result of the Zhodani alliance, and had nothing to do with their strength relative to the Imperium. >so >why hasn't the Imperium sent ". . . the [Imperial] Marines to that little >[subsector spinward of Glisten] and *stopped* that problem!"? They have. They just took them home again after a while. >Okay, this seems the only reasonable solution. The Zhodani are supporting >Gram in its leadership of the Confederation. Through this support, and >*despite* the generally anti-Zhodani sentiments in the Sword Worlds, How general are those sentiments? Or rather, how violent? Is it a general 'kill-the-zhos' hate (your choice?), a somewhat widespread 'all psionics/ zhos needs bashing' resentment (my own choice), or an occasional 'zhos stink' dislike? >Gram >is able to maintain its leadership in spite of the greater technological >accomlishments of Sacnoth. Not technological accomplishment (What's the accomplishment in buying an Imperial physics textbook?). Temporary economic advantage. >In addition to it's support of Gram, the >Consulate has made it clear to the Imperium that it will not tolerate >direct action against the Confederation. Quite possible. >In a sense, the Sword Worlds have been nothing more than a Zhodani client >state. In a sense, yes. >To continue to tromp on my Latin >American analogy, it's as if the Soviets had supported a Cuban-Mexican- >Brazilian-Argentine-*et al* confederation that overran Florida, Texas, >and California every few decades (and Lanth and Glisten are more like >Yuma, Del Rio, and Key West). It's shaky, but I can understand it. Make that overran every two centuries and you're nearer the mark. This is actually quite important. If the Sword Worlds really bothered the Imperium every other decade then I agree with you that the Imperium would do something about them. But they don't. And, disregarding the 4th FW, the Imperium has taken quite decisive action whenever the Sword Worlds have ovestepped the line. >Maybe the `anti-Zhodani sentiment' in the Sword Worlds was just Imperial >propaganda? (More likely, it was another poorly-considered `rationali- >zation' by the original developers used to explain why psionics weren't >rampant in the non-Imperial Sword Worlds.) Very propably. Or perhaps it's a "Real Men don't need psionics!" thing. >Given this, one would expect some major changes in this relationship now >that the Virus has severed Deneb's connection with the Imperium and there >has been some *rapproachement* with the Zhodani. The Zhodani no longer >get as much value from supporting Gram. Scanoth rises triumphant!?! :-) Depends on the economic developements. >>There's no reason why a king should welcome a feudal pattern just because >>their own power is based on it. And, in fact, we KNOW they don't. If they >>did the Sword Worlds would be an empire instead of a confederation. > >Well, I guess I still haven't explained my view of what a feudal technocracy >is. The Sword Worlds leaders may be called `kings' but they're more like >`CEOs' - they are at the top of a huge, conglomerate, capitalist, economic >power structure. They don't have an `empire' just like the `barons' of >the Japanese `keiritsu' don't. They have a cooperative arrangement - a >Confederation. OK. So you think the Confederation is one huge Feudal Technocracy, right? I think it is a confederation of (mostly) feudal technocracies. On what do you base your assumption that it must be the one and can't be the other? (Note that my argument is that if both are possible then we should choose the assumption that fits the facts best. Only if one is inevetable or the other impossible should we choose in despite of the known facts). I won't dispute that if you have a lot of feudal technocracies on the planetary then a further feudal level is a distinct possibility. All I'm saying is that it's not inevetable, that a planetary king could just as well think of himself as a real king and treat the other kings as such. Hans Rancke University of Copenhagen [email removed] - ------------ "A subsector official pompously states that the subsector armed forces have four Kinunir class ships in service, each with enough troop strength to put down any military operations that threathen the peace of the Imperium." ---Adventure 1, The Kinunir