page 83

[manticore7]

whenever someone is losing a bet its always because someone else is "cheating". I guess lame excuses are one of those universal things. next to swedish meatballs.

[Suttrjac]

Ah this reminded me of one of my favorite passages (abridged of course)


Men are born for games, nothing else. Every child knows that play is nobler than work. He knows too that the worth or merit of a game is not inherent in the game itself but rather in the value of that which is put at hazard. Games of chance require a wager to have meaning at all. Games of sport involve the skill and strength of the opponents and the humiliation of defeat and the pride of victory are in themselves sufficient stake because they adhere in the worth of the principles and define them.


I reckon whatever they've waged is ultimately secondary to the wage of their possible deaths which considering their conditions is quite possible and to which they're undoubtedly aware of, such things often being made out of spite.

[CptWinters]

As to the issue of command procedure, page 84 should clear this up somewhat, but we can expect that these are veteran commanders who have done this many times before, and have standing orders and regular procedures for such an engagement; Stillstorm only needs to tell them what is different for this particular engagement. The fact that they are making bets on the outcome is meant to convey how ordinary such engagements are for them.

Makes sense. I of all people should have understood that, but thanks for explaining.

[NOMAD]

As to the issue of command procedure, page 84 should clear this up somewhat, but we can expect that these are veteran commanders who have done this many times before, and have standing orders and regular procedures for such an engagement; Stillstorm only needs to tell them what is different for this particular engagement. The fact that they are making bets on the outcome is meant to convey how ordinary such engagements are for them.

why do i never see the obvious answers . . .

thx dex and theunforsanken for the replies, I didn't think about the velocities involved ( still thinking in classic naval terms Ie water)

I'm looking forward to how this battle is going to end . . . still got a bad feeling their another Umiak fleet near by.

[osmium]

Arioch already stated as much, but I'll rephrase and add a little on because I'm not sure we've covered this in the forum V2.

Combat in outsider is sort of interesting. In order to actually close you need a difference in velocity, but at the distances and accelerations in question the resulting velocity takes both quite some time to achieve and quite some time to undo. As a result unless there are positions that one needs to defend or limitations on where one needs to go (read jump out of the system after just jumping in) both sides need to decide to engage for there to be combat as either side can independently decide to not engage and can usually accomplish that task. Note that this is slightly less true for the Loroi as they can outrun the Umiak (although the Umiak have more staying power due to more efficient engines).
The result is that combat tends to be a number of jousts where there is a velocity differential that causes one fleet to pass by the other. This differential is canceled out by one or both parties (depending of course on any specific limitations on movement and noting the Loroi have more ability to maintain or disengage from combat) and either combat ensues for another joust or they disengage. At some point it may happen that the fleets are within firing range and are at similar velocities, at which time obviously combat would change significantly as there would be no "breaks" like jousting would provide and disengaging or escaping would be more difficult, especially for the fleet with less acceleration (read Umiak)

-O

[GeoModder]

As you point out, the Umiak force has built up substantial momentum that will carry them well past the Loroi formation and would take some 15 minutes or so to cancel out. The Umiak commander can choose to brake for another pass, or continue accelerating away from the Loroi to disengage. In either case, the Loroi cruisers will want to "pursue" them for a short distance to extend the amount of time that the Umiak are in pulse cannon range, even they can't "catch" them; these are just free shots for the Loroi to which the Umiak can't respond. In the case that the Umiak are braking to renew the engagement (as the Loroi expect them to do), the pursuit can indeed catch them.

As to the issue of command procedure, page 84 should clear this up somewhat, but we can expect that these are veteran commanders who have done this many times before, and have standing orders and regular procedures for such an engagement; Stillstorm only needs to tell them what is different for this particular engagement. The fact that they are making bets on the outcome is meant to convey how ordinary such engagements are for them.

Mmm. If I were the Umiak commander (and utilizing the typical Umiak naval doctrine in respect to losses) I would have ordered the heavies and medium vessels with energy weapons to flip over and start decelerating "in block" the moment they charged through the Loroi line. It would keep them longer in range of the the Loroi, which should still be in the minority in number of vessels. It should also keep the Loroi on their toes because they can't point their bows too long to the receding Umiak force of fear of coming in range of the Umiak heavy weapons, so the pursuing vessels would need to turn back to the Bellarmine location the sooner.

Momentum definitely is tricky stuff in combat.

[Arioch]

I would have ordered the heavies and medium vessels with energy weapons to flip over and start decelerating "in block" the moment they charged through the Loroi line. It would keep them longer in range of the the Loroi, which should still be in the minority in number of vessels.

Yes, this would also be standard procedure.

[GeoModder]

Guess that makes me a mediocre tactician.

[TrashMan]

Even among very loose and liberal humans, such actions by CAPTAINS in the middle of a battle would be unheard of.

maybe, me I think such banter is a great way to easy some of the tension and like icekatze said the worste of the battle seems to have passed.

Hard work needs harder humour.

This is something I might expect from lower-ranking personnel.
Things are less formal in the lower ranks.

Captains have a certain profesional level of conduct they should mantain. It just seems...wrong.

[CptWinters]

Remember that this is a warrior culture, and that these captains have been serving together in high-stress environments for a long time. A certain amount of informality is probably to be expected.

[Arioch]

Guess that makes me a mediocre tactician.

Does it? I don't think being an exceptional tactican has anything to do with inventing maneuvers that no one has thought of before. The Napoleons and Nelsons of history were successful not because they had trick tactics, but because they had a solid grasp of tactical fundamentals, they had a good sense of what the enemy was trying to do and how to counter it and avoid being surprised, and above all, they were aggressive and kept the initiative. One of the foundations of being aggressive is the confidence in the superiority of your own forces; when you've trained an elite corps and you have confidence that they can beat an opposing force nose to nose with even odds, then it's much easier to take risks.

Napoleon's standard battle plan was very simple; he'd throw his elite infantry directly at the enemy's center, and rely on them to do enough damage so that the enemy would have to commit his reserves to hold the line, and thus become potentially vulnerable to flanking maneuvers or other line penetrations. This tactic only works if you know your troops are superior to the enemy's. Similarly, Nelson abandoned the traditional battle line at Trafalgar and had his ships just charge the enemy line head-on, because he knew his ships and crews were superior, and that they could survive the initial broadsides of the French and Spanish line and then chew them to bits at close range. And once he did this, the individual British ships were totally out of his control; he was relying totally on the abilities of his captains and their crews.

[Karst45]

A certain amount of informality is probably to be expected.

that and their mental ability make them really close to each other. closer at least than someone you just talk to from time to time.

[dex drako]

This is something I might expect from lower-ranking personnel.
Things are less formal in the lower ranks.

Captains have a certain profesional level of conduct they should mantain. It just seems...wrong.

that's to be expected from a human point of view.

but to act with a " profesional level of conduct" takes tact and the ablity to hold in one emotion, two things Loroi do not have. remember page 62 the loroi wear their hearts on their sleeves and so hold nothing back.

looking at it from that point of view it makes sense.

[osmium]

Off Arioch

Remember that the Loroi repair their ships and that a given Loroi fleet is more likely to have seen combat than an Umiak fleet (as so many Umiak fleets are destroyed, or at the very least so many Umiak fleets suffer significant losses). Add this to the fact that Umiak are assigned to ships like parts and that they are individually considered dispensable and it's not hard to see that the Loroi are more like a small well trained force and the Umiak are more like hordes of disposable troops...

-O

[fredgiblet]

the Loroi are more like a small well trained force and the Umiak are more like hordes of disposable troops...

Russians vs. Germans in WW2.

[GeoModder]

Guess that makes me a mediocre tactician.

Does it? I don't think being an exceptional tactican has anything to do with inventing maneuvers that no one has thought of before. The Napoleons and Nelsons of history were successful not because they had trick tactics, but because they had a solid grasp of tactical fundamentals, they had a good sense of what the enemy was trying to do and how to counter it and avoid being surprised, and above all, they were aggressive and kept the initiative. One of the foundations of being aggressive is the confidence in the superiority of your own forces; when you've trained an elite corps and you have confidence that they can beat an opposing force nose to nose with even odds, then it's much easier to take risks.

I used the " " smilie for a reason. It was more of a ironic response.
In any case, I'm trying to anticipate what the Tempest will do in respect to those retreating Umiak. I keep thinking of Stillstorms line: "This attack is NOT the full enemy force."

[Trantor]

Guess that makes me a mediocre tactician.

Does it? I don't think being an exceptional tactican has anything to do with inventing maneuvers that no one has thought of before.

man Blitzkrieg. WW2. Fast tanks vs. Maginot-line.

[CptWinters]

"Going around" is not exactly a new invention.

[NOMAD]

Arioch already stated as much, but I'll rephrase and add a little on because I'm not sure we've covered this in the forum V2.

Combat in outsider is sort of interesting. In order to actually close you need a difference in velocity, but at the distances and accelerations in question the resulting velocity takes both quite some time to achieve and quite some time to undo. As a result unless there are positions that one needs to defend or limitations on where one needs to go (read jump out of the system after just jumping in) both sides need to decide to engage for there to be combat as either side can independently decide to not engage and can usually accomplish that task. Note that this is slightly less true for the Loroi as they can outrun the Umiak (although the Umiak have more staying power due to more efficient engines).
The result is that combat tends to be a number of jousts where there is a velocity differential that causes one fleet to pass by the other. This differential is canceled out by one or both parties (depending of course on any specific limitations on movement and noting the Loroi have more ability to maintain or disengage from combat) and either combat ensues for another joust or they disengage. At some point it may happen that the fleets are within firing range and are at similar velocities, at which time obviously combat would change significantly as there would be no "breaks" like jousting would provide and disengaging or escaping would be more difficult, especially for the fleet with less acceleration (read Umiak)

-O

Thxs osmium, forgot about that ( I'm horrible with physics)

Guess that makes me a mediocre tactician.

Does it? I don't think being an exceptional tactican has anything to do with inventing maneuvers that no one has thought of before. The Napoleons and Nelsons of history were successful not because they had trick tactics, but because they had a solid grasp of tactical fundamentals, they had a good sense of what the enemy was trying to do and how to counter it and avoid being surprised, and above all, they were aggressive and kept the initiative. One of the foundations of being aggressive is the confidence in the superiority of your own forces; when you've trained an elite corps and you have confidence that they can beat an opposing force nose to nose with even odds, then it's much easier to take risks.

Napoleon's standard battle plan was very simple; he'd throw his elite infantry directly at the enemy's center, and rely on them to do enough damage so that the enemy would have to commit his reserves to hold the line, and thus become potentially vulnerable to flanking maneuvers or other line penetrations. This tactic only works if you know your troops are superior to the enemy's. Similarly, Nelson abandoned the traditional battle line at Trafalgar and had his ships just charge the enemy line head-on, because he knew his ships and crews were superior, and that they could survive the initial broadsides of the French and Spanish line and then chew them to bits at close range. And once he did this, the individual British ships were totally out of his control; he was relying totally on the abilities of his captains and their crews.

Ah yes the basics, I'm a civil so didn't take the courses ( My knowledge is limited to FPS play and Starcraft/homeworld)

as for the current battle, is jousting is the model ( given the physics) this reminds me of a heavy armour knights ( Umiak armour and short range weapons) vs a long pole/ archers (Loroi Long ranged weapons, little armour).

[Trantor]

"Going around" is not exactly a new invention.

"... has anything to do with inventing maneuvers that no one has thought of before."
Well, the french military was pretty surprised.
And it wasn´t "just" going around, they used a combination of new tactics and new gadgets like shaped charges. The germans invented them in 1935, and they busted the maginot-bunkers like eggshell.