Ideas and Development--Story NES

[Symphony D.]

1. No nukes indeed.
2. I doubt that there would be tanks - the Empire's quest for global supremacy is unlikely to bog down in trench warfare, the world just doesn't fit for it, and so there will be no need for tanks.

1. I might note that for killing a lot of people in a localized area in a very short amount of time, for little cost, there is no more effective weapon than a nuke. It's also a terribly effective terror weapon in that after a few uses, nobody will every stand to you again. If only you possess it, all the better. Plus, such a thing is often a result of the typical "Why do it? Because we can" human mentality. That said, nukes are much more a question of if you can build them, not if you want to, technologically speaking...
2. Tanks are a natural enough concept to arise without trench warfare, given modernized war out of the trenches is infinitely more deadly than in them, given the terrible casualties inflicted when both sides actually managed to become mobile. You get a box that moves with a naval turret on top to go places ships can't. They were called "land battleships" for a reason, and this idea would come easily enough to an advanced naval culture, in my opinion.

 

[das]

Or just lines of watchtowers. Much easier.

That's just not the same. If your civilizations can build various wonders, they can also build the mother of all Great Walls.

Land tech will have to catch up--there are plenty of competing powers on the mainland.

Well, in the western parts I suppose. The Empire will probably catch up to that later, though I doubt it will really by using much of cavalry.

But the far north will at least be partially colonized. Character reasons.

Half-frozen outpost to where a disgraced general has been "deployed" - or rather, exiled - by his enemies at court and reminiscences his life in the intervals of warding off hordes of barbarians armed with old pistols and ice-breakers?

2. I disagree. World War one is big enough, and in the right time period, to require tanks. It's not a hard concept.

Who really needs tanks? Tanks are just too bulky and tactically-specialized (the early ones, ofcourse, but they won't get to the later ones). To exist, tanks demand the existance of a PRIMARY land front, but I doubt that the Empire will open any such fronts where it could bog down, and if it does, it will simply Dunkirk out of there, or launch a secondary amphibious operation to outflank the enemies and break out anyway.

There probably will be very good APVs though.

3. Of course... but I could see a future for rail transported artillery.

Mostly with the Empire's enemies.

I prefer the dharmic religions, because of the aformentioned assimilatory ability.

Romans also had a more-then-decent assimilatory ability, combined with the imperialistic and militaristic culture.

Hey mebbe I could play a group of pirates.

Btw, nice idea. In such a naval world, modern-day sea piracy will be far more developed than in OTL. Sure, there is the risk of the Imperial fleet, but what is piracy without risks? Furthermore, the Imperials can't be EVERYWHERE at the same time! And ofcourse the Empire's enemies, both internal and external, will inevitably resort to privateering.

 

[das]

1. I might note that for killing a lot of people in a localized area in a very short amount of time, for little cost, there is no more effective weapon than a nuke. It's also a terribly effective terror weapon in that after a few uses, nobody will every stand to you again. If only you possess it, all the better. Plus, such a thing is often a result of the typical "Why do it? Because we can" human mentality. That said, nukes are much more a question of if you can build them, not if you want to, technologically speaking...
2. Tanks are a natural enough concept to arise without trench warfare, given modernized war out of the trenches is infinitely more deadly than in them, given the terrible casualties inflicted when both sides actually managed to become mobile. You get a box that moves with a naval turret on top to go places ships can't. They were called "land battleships" for a reason, and this idea would come easily enough to an advanced naval culture, in my opinion.

1. True, but is it worth the effort in this case?
2. The deadliness doesn't really matter for our purposes - it is the lack of emphasis on long warfare on the land. Plus a tank with a NAVAL cannon will have to be rather huge and slow, whereas on the land, the Empire's natural goal is mobility. Although I admit that they might develop some sort of tanks anyway by a different approach; I suspect that they would invent a tankette first, and then get the idea of making a bigger, strong one, and with tracks.

 

[Symphony D.]

Naval guns do not only come in 16" varieties, das. The idea though, that you put wheels or treads on something like a Monitor-lookalike, and send it about the country, is imminently simplistic and obvious. Also, this map does have quite a lot of land despite its Naval bias, and the barbarians and lesser peon states of the northern continent are likely to be quite inland. The idea, to me at least, seems virtually unavoidable in the course of dealing with such peoples.

Regarding nukes, empires with vast resources tend to squander them on equally vast and often useless projects or ones with mere fringe benefits. Hardly unusual behavior to run off persuing some superweapon and spending untold amounts of money. I mean, if North Korea or Iran are capable of doing it... admittedly they have some data from others, but still.

 

[Kozmos]

Everyone is talking nuclear but what about biological and chemical weapons development? Chemical weapons should be quite handy when shelling someone on the coast far away in the safety of your own boat.

Just how far do we go into naval development? AEGIS cruisers, or maybe even stealth ships? (but expensive in terms of cost)

 

[das]

Also, this map does have quite a lot of land despite its Naval bias, and the barbarians and lesser peon states of the northern continent are likely to be quite inland. The idea, to me at least, seems virtually unavoidable in the course of dealing with such peoples.

Technology isn't as linear as that. Though it could emerge in the Western Mainland, or on the southeastern continent, if not in the Empire as one of the "rapid warfare" weapons.

Regarding nukes, empires with vast resources tend to squander them on equally vast and often useless projects or ones with mere fringe benefits. Hardly unusual behavior to run off persuing some superweapon and spending untold amounts of money. I mean, if North Korea or Iran are capable of doing it... admittedly they have some data from others, but still.

Well, not sure. The Empire's resources are vast, but supporting the war effort all over the world isn't very easy when it drags on and on (which is one of the main reasons the Empire is in crisis). Nuclear weapons also require tons of theoretical research, and that partially depends on luck as well.

 

[Symphony D.]

Chemical weapons are hard to deliver and easily defeated after their initial introduction. Biological weapons are likewise hard to deliver and just as apt to kill you as the enemy. Of the two, only chemicals are useful as weapons, and then generally only against unprepared (civilian or primitive military) targets.

And hey, if you can't send troops everywhere to kill people, a terror weapon that can wipe out whole cities in a single blow is mighty effective at cowing your enemies into subservience without having to dedicate massive efforts of manpower, allowing you to focus better. Sort of like the Death Star of its day, since this is basically the Empire of its time. Then again, as we have both commented, it does rely on some rare chance.

Also, I really do see the tank as an inevitable outcome of modern war. You put a gun on a mobile vehicle and use it as fire support for infantry. Whether it's a "Tank", an Armored Car, or even a simple Tachanka, the idea's the same, and eventually, it will become rather obvious that it will need some sort of armor protection to protect the operator. If it's hauled around, the method of disabling it (killing the hauler) will necessitate it eventually become self-propelled. Eventually they will start fighting one another, if both forces adopt them, leading to bigger guns. This will require more armor, leading to a requirement for more power...

As soon as the first step is taken (fire support vehicle) the evolution is virtually inevitable unless the operators are stupid, or are never given cause to upgrade the basic contraption. Much the same as how the "Infantry Tank," "Cruiser Tank," and "Cavalry Tank" of early WWII all died away to become the proto-MBT by war's end: there is no other truly viable route of development, or at least none as good. So unless this empire never sees fit to build something capable of providing fire support, or it does but its enemies never field an equivilent, a tank, or something essentially like it, strikes me as impossible not to come about.

It's utility will be rather more limited, however, specialized versions could become just as prevalent and versatile; say, amphibious versions to establish beachheads and fire support in cities and coastlines.

 

[Kozmos]

I would hardly call VX inefficient...if deployed with the element of suprise it would kill scores of people....military or civilian. The Empire just needs a chemical toxin that acts fast, before the enemy can apply the countermeasures.

Biological weapons could still be useful because of the whole sheetload of islands there is on the map.

 

[Symphony D.]

VX is hard to disperse on a target area, and a gas mask and chem warfare suit take care of it pretty handily. Same with Sarin and all the rest. I did have to go through an NBC Warfare briefing at Basic, and still have the Airman's Manual laying around. After the weapons initial introduction, enemies will start looking for ways to counter it. Considering some Canadians managed to miraculously realize peeing on rags was enough to prevent Chlorine Gas from killing them, gasmasks could be developed in fairly short order - not hard to make. Plus chemical weapons are highly dependent on weather conditions. Not to mention indiscriminantly slaughtering the population makes conquering a given area useless as you then have to import people, they won't be happy about it, etc.

And, biological warfare is, quite simply, nasty. It just isn't something you want to engage in except as a last resort, because it will come back to bite you in the rear, literally and figuratively, unless you're willing to just park a blockade off the island, and even then, it'll still linger there for quite some time, making the place useless if you do conquer it. All it takes is one screw up, and you're just as screwed by the weapon as the enemy.

Good weapons of extermination. Very poor weapons of conquest. Nukes aren't much better, but their punch and psychological impact is far greater, making them somewhat more useful here and there.

 

[Kozmos]

I wasnt reffering to the first ever use of chemical weapons, but the use of VX.

VX isnt really that hard to disperse with an aerial chemical bomb, being odourless and tasteless it would be difficult for the enemy to detect and it takes time to put on your NBC suit. It is highly persistent in the enviroment due to its high viscosity and low volatility which makes it a good area denial weapon.
VX vapour is also heavier then air so it sinks to low-lying areas and creates a greater exposure hazard there. A special form has also been developed that is so adhesive that it is virtually impossible to remove from the surface that it is in contact with. This could make it useful for neutralizing ports or airbases.

But I guess you know all that, being in the Airforce and all. (Or is the Army?)

 

[silver 2039]

I say we have 1984 Floating Fortresses. That would be somehting a massive hegomonic Empire would waste its money one.

 

[das]

Huge fortresses - floating or otherwise - are a must.

EDIT: So, we have a mixture of Rome and Britain, with elements of USA and Japan towards the end. Very promising...

 

[Swissempire]

I think that chemical weapons are a must. we can look at Italy's deployment of them in Africa in like the 20's and 30's. Island get uppity, send airplane from Aircraft Carrier, who sprays the island with a chemical like a petcide, presto, you've got subjects

 

[North King]

Half-frozen outpost to where a disgraced general has been "deployed" - or rather, exiled - by his enemies at court and reminiscences his life in the intervals of warding off hordes of barbarians armed with old pistols and ice-breakers?

No, someone much more mundane,yet more interesting than that.

Who really needs tanks? Tanks are just too bulky and tactically-specialized (the early ones, ofcourse, but they won't get to the later ones). To exist, tanks demand the existance of a PRIMARY land front, but I doubt that the Empire will open any such fronts where it could bog down, and if it does, it will simply Dunkirk out of there, or launch a secondary amphibious operation to outflank the enemies and break out anyway.

I disagree; I'm with Symphony--tanks really just are the sensible end. They're armored, protecting your troops from harm, they have big guns, killing enemy troops, and they can move on their own--the three requirements for any army.

Romans also had a more-then-decent assimilatory ability, combined with the imperialistic and militaristic culture.

Dharmic religions are cooler.

Btw, nice idea. In such a naval world, modern-day sea piracy will be far more developed than in OTL. Sure, there is the risk of the Imperial fleet, but what is piracy without risks? Furthermore, the Imperials can't be EVERYWHERE at the same time! And ofcourse the Empire's enemies, both internal and external, will inevitably resort to privateering.

CURSES! That was one of my character ideas. Well, I'm doing it anyway; there's enough room for more than one pirate.

Floating fortresses would no doubt be utilized by the Empire, even though aircraft carriers are infinitely more useful.

And like I said before, Chemical weapons are highly useful at exterminating primitive natives.

 

[Symphony D.]

VX isnt really that hard to disperse with an aerial chemical bomb, being odourless and tasteless it would be difficult for the enemy to detect and it takes time to put on your NBC suit. It is highly persistent in the enviroment due to its high viscosity and low volatility which makes it a good area denial weapon.
VX vapour is also heavier then air so it sinks to low-lying areas and creates a greater exposure hazard there. A special form has also been developed that is so adhesive that it is virtually impossible to remove from the surface that it is in contact with. This could make it useful for neutralizing ports or airbases.

But I guess you know all that, being in the Airforce and all. (Or is the Army?)

It disperses in rather tiny droplets, yes. They're hard to see, yes. It's quite deadly, yes. But if you have on a gas mask, and an NBC suit, it doesn't really do jack, other than force you stay in the suit, and gee whiz, that's so terrible when the enemy is utilizing chemical weapons. In short, again: only useful against an unprepared enemy, or for denying equipment.

VX is also rather quite advanced as are its delivery systems (because they're difficult to make), and the viscous version you describe even more so. It is not something that would appear in a 1940s analog, at all. So, you have a weapon that, by the time you get to it, everyone will be well aware of, and its first incarnations will mostly be an inconvenience and require equipment cleanup for forces you're fighting, maybe kill a few of them before they get their chem suits on. Ho hum. Ineffective against a serious opponent except as a distraction. Good for killing civies, but that's about all. I've always personally thought that OTL, B / C weapons were pretty much worthless because as soon as you start tossing out WMDs the other bastard will just reply with the "N" part of NBC. They're poor man's nukes for people who can't afford legitimate nuclear programs.

I also don't think they have Airmen in the Army , though, for various reasons, I am no longer a civil servant.

Long story made short: if this empire is off exterminating random peon barbarians who attack with sharp sticks, sure. If they're fighting roughly the equivilent of themselves but smaller, not so much.

 

[silver 2039]

It disperses in rather tiny droplets, yes. They're hard to see, yes. It's quite deadly, yes. But if you have on a gas mask, and an NBC suit, it doesn't really do jack, other than force you stay in the suit, and gee whiz, that's so terrible when the enemy is utilizing chemical weapons. In short, again: only useful against an unprepared enemy, or for denying equipment.

NBC suits are a great impendiment on the battlefield. They impede vision, and manuverabality and make it diffcult to move and react. Frankly their an irritation and no army will have them on for long periods of time.

 

[Kozmos]

It disperses in rather tiny droplets, yes. They're hard to see, yes. It's quite deadly, yes. But if you have on a gas mask, and an NBC suit, it doesn't really do jack, other than force you stay in the suit, and gee whiz, that's so terrible when the enemy is utilizing chemical weapons. In short, again: only useful against an unprepared enemy, or for denying equipment.

VX is also rather quite advanced as are its delivery systems (because they're difficult to make), and the viscous version you describe even more so. It is not something that would appear in a 1940s analog, at all. So, you have a weapon that, by the time you get to it, everyone will be well aware of, and its first incarnations will mostly be an inconvenience and require equipment cleanup for forces you're fighting, maybe kill a few of them before they get their chem suits on. Ho hum. Ineffective against a serious opponent except as a distraction. Good for killing civies, but that's about all. I've always personally thought that OTL, B / C weapons were pretty much worthless because as soon as you start tossing out WMDs the other bastard will just reply with the "N" part of NBC. They're poor man's nukes for people who can't afford legitimate nuclear programs.

I also don't think they have Airmen in the Army , though, for various reasons, I am no longer a civil servant.

Long story made short: if this empire is off exterminating random peon barbarians who attack with sharp sticks, sure. If they're fighting roughly the equivilent of themselves but smaller, not so much.

But you cant put on the suit fast enough if you cant see it coming. Anyway it doesnt require clean up since it degrades within two weeks.

 

[Swissempire]

I forsee giant floating fortresses in the EMpty Ocean

 

[Israelite9191]

OK, now that I've been gone far too long, to give some input.

1. I would imagine religion in the empire, and most of the Gulf world, to have evolved out of a lunar cult. The societies of the area are very navaly based, and thus would have very quickly turned their attention to the night, as opposed to day-time, sky. I would imagine that religion in the empire would be similar to Japanese shinto with less of a nature focus. Basically, a celestial cult (in this case lunar) at the center with a high ability to integrate other religions, a slight focus to sea deities (mopre emphasized in the empire), and just a dash of emporer worship (less so in the empire than Japan).

2. Similarly, I would see a matrilineal/matriarchal society. With the men all out at sea and a lunar religion (lunar=monthly, monthly=women, basic concept of primative religion) women would come to dominate society. Perhaps instead of an emporer as seen in our world their would be an empress in this world.

3. I would also surmise that the calendar would be lunar, especially with sea navigation as a focus of the society. I will post a version here in a couple minutes.

4. As for the northern most regions of the main continent I would imagine an Inuit-Tlingit hybrid with a bit of Viking and Finn. Basically, their entire society has developed as an adaption to living in the arctic (Inuit). I include Tlingit since their would likely be an influx of settled culture into the region resulting in more commercial, settled communities that could eventually evolve into cities. Viking because they would pirate the neighboring culturess and Finn becuase of the closeness of the forest. The society would likely remain independent because of a need to develop military technology to defend against the Empire.

 

[das]

Dharmic religions are cooler.

Not imperialistic enough, though.

no army will have them on for long periods of time.

Poison gas is a pretty good motivation, though.

I do agree that they are damn irritating.

1. I would imagine religion in the empire, and most of the Gulf world, to have evolved out of a lunar cult. The societies of the area are very navaly based, and thus would have very quickly turned their attention to the night, as opposed to day-time, sky. I would imagine that religion in the empire would be similar to Japanese shinto with less of a nature focus. Basically, a celestial cult (in this case lunar) at the center with a high ability to integrate other religions, a slight focus to sea deities (mopre emphasized in the empire), and just a dash of emporer worship (less so in the empire than Japan).


2. Similarly, I would see a matrilineal/matriarchal society. With the men all out at sea and a lunar religion (lunar=monthly, monthly=women, basic concept of primative religion) women would come to dominate society. Perhaps instead of an emporer as seen in our world their would be an empress in this world.

Luna Invictus! Although, that's rather unlikely. Matriarchial societies, even seafaring ones, aren't exactly commonplace. Although, perhaps they could have something like the Shalmari in LINES II?

3. I would also surmise that the calendar would be lunar, especially with sea navigation as a focus of the society. I will post a version here in a couple minutes.

Yes, that would be appreciated.

4. As for the northern most regions of the main continent I would imagine an Inuit-Tlingit hybrid with a bit of Viking and Finn. Basically, their entire society has developed as an adaption to living in the arctic (Inuit). I include Tlingit since their would likely be an influx of settled culture into the region resulting in more commercial, settled communities that could eventually evolve into cities. Viking because they would pirate the neighboring culturess and Finn becuase of the closeness of the forest. The society would likely remain independent because of a need to develop military technology to defend against the Empire.

Its rather unlikely that they would form large cities; on the rest, I agree, though the real reason for their survival would be Imperial preoccupation elsewhere and the fact that its not really cost-efficient to advance beyond the coast (that the Imperials will occupy to prevent piracy).