SD+SB in Middle Earth

[The Duchess of Zeon]

I think that we should just concentrate on building up our strength at first. Let us make allies among the surrounding natives, improve their condition, and ingrain ourselves into the local power structure. We will be pursuing, as Sun-Tzu advises in certain circumstances of being unable to overwhelm the enemy in direct combat, an "agro-military policy".

According to the original scenario this one is based on, our fortification is sited at the mouth of the River Isen. (I checked the Spacebattles version of this post.) Should we go on that assumption? That increases our need for some kind of naval force, and also leads me to worry about just how close to the river we are: It might help with water-power, but blowing up dams upstream might be unhelpful to our long-term prosperity.

On the plus side, this, I think, gives us the perfect location to adopt a long-term strategy, so we can be assured of ourselves. We can operate in these regions with noticeably less hindrance than elsewhere, building up support while Saruman distracts himself to the east. Our goal, I think, would be to improve our own capabilities, as much as possible, while we create within our allies a uniform standard of maximum capability that can be sustained, and allow them to put many troops in the field.

We should, instead of acting against Saruman - It is now my instinct to let him come against us, if he realizes the threat we pose. We will be stronger on the defensive, having aroused in these peoples a realization of the danger they face, and improved their lives and given them a greater prosperity to fight for. They shall be much more eager to fight for their homes.

If Saruman goes against Rohan, he will be defeated - Perhaps worse than historically, as he cannot be unaware of our buildup, and may need to leave troops to guard against our existence. And, bluntly, if he manages to pull off a victory for some reason or another, the Ring-bearer is still just fine, and we can take over his protection, while Saruman has expended his own troops considerably, leaving him vulnerable to us.

(Though any victory for Saruman against Rohan would seem Pyrrhic considering the intervention of the Ents.)

Another possibility, of course, is that if we are untroubled until Saruman's action against Rohan, that we could advance to their relief. This might receive general approbation among our allies and would certainly be well received among those we march forth to relieve.

If Saruman acts first against us, we save Rohan simply by existing. We can annihilate his armies by drawing them against prepared defences and supported by native auxiliaries fighting on their home soil. When we counterattack the support of the Ents would not even be necessary, and depending on the timing we might be joined by Rohan in any siege against our dear friend the "White".

If we have enough auxiliaries for it, I'd use our own force as a sort of "Grand Battery" to provide massed artilley for them, along with skirmishers. If not, we would be the core of any main combat formation.

Once Saruman is dealt with - in such a fashion and when he is clearly evil - We can approach Gondor and conclude terms of an alliance as we deemd suitable. We would then advance with the necessary troops to provide for the relief of Gondor, and once forward supply depots have been established there, start joint planning for an offensive against Mordor.

Certainly this would be a big distraction to Sauron, indeed rather more than it was before to put it mildly, and I do think we shall be providing for the access of the Ring-bearer into the heart of Mordor. OTOH, there was a point when Gondor had access to the Ring. If Fortune allows we may want to advantage of this to place it in safe-keeping; but this would perhaps alienate Rohan and some others of allies from us, depending on how it was done, though not likely Gondor.

What comes next would simply be a main force siege on Mordor, either as distraction or to punch through and destroy the Ring.

Thoughts? Ways to improve it?

A navy would be nice, considering our exposed position to that flank, so as to gain sea dominance. However, it is not the most urgent of things. Perhaps some coastwise sailers could be fitted as bomb ships (armed with heavy mortars)once we gain allies that have them, though, and they could also have recoilless rifles aboard and small arms. Pumps for greek fire would be a nice feature on small galleys for harbour defence, or riverine warfare.

If we're assuming the 40mm and .50cal weapons are just fixed in the base - say, big old WWI-style mountings for the .50cal MGs, or even turrets, and the 40mm grenade launchers are also in turrets cannibalized from vehicles - then we could still perhaps take them out once the base is considered secure enough to do so, and use them for naval equippage, or perhaps even ground support, depending on what is considered more important.





Also, out of curiousity, here is a website with a far more accurate map of the Middle Earth:

http://people.wiesbaden.netsurf.de/~lal ... /Grid.html

[Balrog]

I would hate to have to siege something on the order of Mordor, and short of sending everyone through the secrete pass Frodo took (which passes uncomfortably close to Minas Morgul) the Black Gates would be a bitch to knock down. And there is the problem of manpower.

[Keevan_Colton]

According to the original scenario this one is based on, our fortification is sited at the mouth of the River Isen. (I checked the Spacebattles version of this post.) Should we go on that assumption? That increases our need for some kind of naval force, and also leads me to worry about just how close to the river we are: It might help with water-power, but blowing up dams upstream might be unhelpful to our long-term prosperity.

http://people.wiesbaden.netsurf.de/~lal ... /Grid.html

I dont know if we would want to set up base there....and I dont really see it as increasing our need for a naval force....in a way it reduces it. Our fixed defenses for the base could easily handle any vessel of the time, meaning we control access from the sea to the river and other than attempting to sail to the undying lands and enlist the help of the 'immortals' there we've no need to go out to sea.....a small force of rafts for moving across the river isnt a massively complex thing to build, though there will be fords and the like.
At the fork in the river might be more intresting (though I cant deny sea water would make our lives very simple in terms of raw materials for our chemical weapons program) from a tactical standpoint, the river would provide an extra layer of defense.
Since there was no place actually set out....I'd say Helm's Deep would be fairly good....(wong v. wormtounge in a debate might be worth the fortress just to see )....while it means we are backed to a wall it is not an oft viseted place, we are more likely to be able to hide what we are doing and the caves provide us with all the secure storage we could hope for. It also places us closer to the places we will need to get to (save for the shire, but there is only one thing we will need from there).

[Typhonis 1]

The pass Frodo took has an Orc base at the end of it and Sheolb the spawn of Ungoliant guarding it...also her children inhabit the western mountains of Mordor

[weemadando]

I would hate to have to siege something on the order of Mordor, and short of sending everyone through the secrete pass Frodo took (which passes uncomfortably close to Minas Morgul) the Black Gates would be a bitch to knock down. And there is the problem of manpower.

A 50cal and mortar emplacement on a hill near the black gate would take care of the issues of Mordor sending out scouting forces.

[Keevan_Colton]

I would hate to have to siege something on the order of Mordor, and short of sending everyone through the secrete pass Frodo took (which passes uncomfortably close to Minas Morgul) the Black Gates would be a bitch to knock down. And there is the problem of manpower.

A 50cal and mortar emplacement on a hill near the black gate would take care of the issues of Mordor sending out scouting forces.

If we use chlorine gas...lob it over the gate with the mortars and make life real nasty for anyone on the far side.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

I would hate to have to siege something on the order of Mordor, and short of sending everyone through the secrete pass Frodo took (which passes uncomfortably close to Minas Morgul) the Black Gates would be a bitch to knock down. And there is the problem of manpower.

All we really need to do is siege the Black Gate, not the entire facility. If our supply lines are secure through Gondor then Sauron himself can't really sustain a force through another exit.

By the point in time I'd be contemplaing that, we'd probably be able to field an army of 30 - 40,000 auxiliaries, of which the infantry at least would be armed 50% with gunpowder weapons, and some supporting artillery for them (in addition to our own). Not counting Rohan and Gondor. Assuming, that is, we concentrated on improving agriculture over weapons production and improvements to the weapons industry in our local area.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

I would hate to have to siege something on the order of Mordor, and short of sending everyone through the secrete pass Frodo took (which passes uncomfortably close to Minas Morgul) the Black Gates would be a bitch to knock down. And there is the problem of manpower.

A 50cal and mortar emplacement on a hill near the black gate would take care of the issues of Mordor sending out scouting forces.

Put a platoon of our best scouts and snipers in Minas Morgul with four 81s supporting a battalion of native auxiliaries with gunpowder weapons. Nobody is successfully getting out of that pass.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Naval power is vital to dominating the Middle Earth. Once we have the allies to support such endeavours, a fleet of coastal sailing ships armed with mortars (bomb ships), recoilless rifles, small arms, and perhaps grenade launchers and/or MGs, could easily be created out of the local merchant vessels. Many of the merchantmen would probably sign on for a chance to defeat the pirates, whom they'd loathe.

We would not want to transport the humvees with rafts I think, except early on when our manpower is low. Once we have sufficient manpower I would advocate building bridges whenever possible, and roads for that matter - Just like the Roman Army. Our goal should be to maximize our ability to defend the area that will heed to our interests, and to our best to improve it. As long as we're going somewhere we might as well make the return trip faster.

Naval power on the rivers could support our armies advancing to either bank of the river, and support a crossing attempt of the river (which otherwise would be quite perilous, as our crossing must involve going against a dug-in force on the far side if they have any brains). It would also defend barges providing easy resupply up rivers, which will be much more effectual than land resupply until we establish a good road network, and always better outside of the areas around our base.

Finally, once we clear out the pirates, we can improve coastal trade, which will mean bringing in more revenues to our area, especially as food surpluses for our immediate allies go up and we can start exporting them.

Also, in military terms, we might be able to commit some spoiling raids against the southerners with out fleet when they're sending troops to Mordor, and after we've taken out Saruman, to force them to keep some of their troops at home to defend their port cities. Or perhaps we can even land an expeditionary force to fortify the coastal roads, depending on the terrain conditions there. We'd certainly want to investigate the possibilities, and we'd need to clear the pirates to do so.

A navy would be a vital addition - But, I grant, one that would rely on our having allies, and the manpower luxury, thus, to develop it.

[Balrog]

You're getting a bit ahead of yourself, Duchess

The present task at hand is destroying the One Ring, and anything whose purpose does not contribute to such goal, would be seen IMO as a waste of resources. Eliminating the Corsairs would only help any coastal nations, which the base is rather far away from. Procuring some ships and moving them onto the rivers to provide protection for river crossing is doable. River gunboats would be more then enough to keep the Corsairs on the blue seas and out of the big rivers like the Anduin and Entwash.

And, to me, the plan for besiegeing the Black Gates seems folly. Even with a local force armed with crude gunpowder weapons, Mordor still drastically outnumbers the good guys (Sauron sent 100k troops to the Battle of Pelennor Field, and he didn't even have to empty Mordor for that) and who's to say one of his spies wouldn't capture plans converted to Westron/learn how to make said weapons. I wouldn't put it above an Uruk-hai to operate something as simple as a 14-century handcannon (imagine Oliphants straped with cannons )

I'm still weary of using gas, what with friendly fire and all.

[Balrog]

I would hate to have to siege something on the order of Mordor, and short of sending everyone through the secrete pass Frodo took (which passes uncomfortably close to Minas Morgul) the Black Gates would be a bitch to knock down. And there is the problem of manpower.

A 50cal and mortar emplacement on a hill near the black gate would take care of the issues of Mordor sending out scouting forces.

Weren't all the 50cals permanently locked to base defense?

[Keevan_Colton]

I would hate to have to siege something on the order of Mordor, and short of sending everyone through the secrete pass Frodo took (which passes uncomfortably close to Minas Morgul) the Black Gates would be a bitch to knock down. And there is the problem of manpower.

A 50cal and mortar emplacement on a hill near the black gate would take care of the issues of Mordor sending out scouting forces.

Weren't all the 50cals permanently locked to base defense?

Yes

[Cpt_Frank]

The argument between proponents of the 7.62 mm battle rifle and those favoring the 5.56 mm assault rifle is long-standing and definitely won't get resolved here.

I think it might be best to agree to my initial proposal on standardization: choose two basic types of rifle and go with those for the overwhelming majority of the troops.

Those favoring the 7.62 mm battle rifle should go for a semiautomatic civilian clone of the M14. Automatic fire with a rifle-weight weapon using a good-sized rifle round is just plain a bad idea for all but specialists. What the M14 offers is length, lots of wood, and lots of range and striking power. Against troops whose best ranged weapons are bows, semiautomatic fire should be quite adequate. The M14 with a bayonet is also just what one needs when orcs sneak in for an ambush of a small patrol.

Springfield M1A1 I hope since they're the best.

Those favoring the 5.56 mm assault rifle should go for practically anything that has a receiver compatible with that of the M16. Automatic fire is actually practical with a 5.56 mm assault rifle, and stopping power should be adequate for common orcs and, with short bursts, uruk-hai.

gooood.

Specialists and gun bunnies will naturally insist on taking their favored weapons, taking into account the available ammunition types, so I would expect more than one Lee Enfield L42A1, Mauser Kar 98k, Remmington model 700 or some other suitable bolt action 7.62 mm NATO sniper rifle. Of course, I'd also expect the occasional MP5 or SPAS12.

Those were allowed to be brought along additionally to the standard weapons right?

[The Duchess of Zeon]

Weren't all the 50cals permanently locked to base defense?

Yes

For now I'm going on the assumption that the base defence weaponry consists of turrets cannibalized from combat vehicles and that's why it's locked to base defence - They're in mountings impossibly heavy to be mobile, even on the humvees. However, they could be placed on modified ships if I'm correct. (Otherwise we'd have to assume some kind of magical restriction.)

[The Duchess of Zeon]

You're getting a bit ahead of yourself, Duchess

The present task at hand is destroying the One Ring, and anything whose purpose does not contribute to such goal, would be seen IMO as a waste of resources. Eliminating the Corsairs would only help any coastal nations, which the base is rather far away from. Procuring some ships and moving them onto the rivers to provide protection for river crossing is doable. River gunboats would be more then enough to keep the Corsairs on the blue seas and out of the big rivers like the Anduin and Entwash.

Our goal is to capture Mordor, the way I see it. We can toss the Ring back into the mountain at our leisure once we do that. I mean - Why risk some infiltration scheme or somesuch when you could hold Mordor and chuck the Ring in like that? (More below).

And, to me, the plan for besiegeing the Black Gates seems folly. Even with a local force armed with crude gunpowder weapons,

Not crude - By the time of the siege of Gondor I do think we could have aided our allies in the production of 12,000+ fusils. In fact we might have enough for two full divisions de armee by that point. If we stick to a simple arquebus type, more. The areas around the mouth of the Isen are lightly populated, but, again, our agricultural improvements will allow a considerable concentration of that population into the military when necessary.

Mordor still drastically outnumbers the good guys (Sauron sent 100k troops to the Battle of Pelennor Field, and he didn't even have to empty Mordor for that) and who's to say one of his spies wouldn't capture plans converted to Westron/learn how to make said weapons. I wouldn't put it above an Uruk-hai to operate something as simple as a 14-century handcannon (imagine Oliphants straped with cannons )

Yeah, and Darius III drastically outnumbered Alexander the Great, too - And managed to cut off his line of supply at the battle of Issus no less. It did him very little good. Neither did the tactics of the Mamelukes at the Battle of the Pyramids. The thing is that if we play this right we'll have years to make not only ourselves and anyone we recruit directly into our ranks, but also our auxiliaries, quite disciplined.

Squares of napoleonic infantry, or even pike-and-arquebus blocks, supported by artillery, and highly disciplined, perhaps with some of us serving as NCOs in their ranks, would be exceptionally hard for Sauron's forces to crack. Oliphants will be vulnerable to gas, and to recoilless rifles.

I'm still weary of using gas, what with friendly fire and all.

It just requires planning, range, and percautionary gasmasks among our troops, all of which we have.

On sea dominance, I want it because our economic production is vital to being able to sustain a larger military. Also, with sea dominance we can more easily establish trading and military ties with all of the coastal States, and thus hopefully bring more of them into our axis. Again, the ability to insert forces up the rivers presents its self, which could otherwise be hampered by the pirates (I do not like the idea of wasting manpower in transporting gunboats overland, which may prove impossible), or the chances of raids against the southern kingdoms. Nevermind the simple opportunity in destroying the pirates themselves.

Finally, it gives us the chance of perhaps using the sea, and rivers, as a method of rapidly transporting forces close to Mordor and thus avoiding long marches should we decide on an offensive.

The destruction of the Ring is our true goal. But that is precisely why I advocate this course. Why should be anything less than 100% sure when we go about it? The main problem with my plan is that maybe we should try and go ahead to get ahold of it sooner, and modify our plans accordingly. The best thing we can do is try to blow it up with thermite, and if that fails, then, having thoroughly secured Mordor, take it in a lockbox on a wagon up to the top of that volcano and toss it in.

More on rifles and TOEs shortly.

[Ren]

It seems to me that the best thing to do would be to situtate the base in the Lonely Mountian. The first advantage that this has is easy defensiblity, with one of the fixed weapons at the entrance and the rest spread out to the fortifications on the mountain itself, the mountain should be nearly impossible to take. The second advantage is Dain and the other dwarves; if you can convince them that you are allies, which should be easy to do provided someone remembers to bring along a copy of LOTR with them, they can supply food, their vast wealth, an army, and there tools and metalworking expertise, in addition they are allies with the men of Dale who if I remember correctly where expert woodworkers. You can set the dwarves and the men to constructing firearms and any other instruments of war you can devise and train them in their use.

You have about ten years until Frodo leaves the Shire so you have plenty of time, but it would probably be best to have a detachment of dwarves head to the shire right away and pick up Frodo, Aragorn, and Gandalf if he's there and if not leave a message telling him to go to the lonely mountain. On the way back stop by Rivendell and start the reforging of Aragorns sword, have the ring rendered unwearable by encasing in metal and pick up Glorfindal and maybe some other elves. Head back over the mountians and return to Lonely mountian picking up Radagast on the way there if at all feasable. Once back at the mountian the ring will be relaltivly safe surround by dwarves who are resistant to the effects of the rings. Have Gollum killed ( by sending Gandalf or Aragorn the the Wood elves hall and asking for it ) This way Sauron will never learn of the Shire or Baggins ( which wouldn't matter anyway since he's not their any more but it never hurts to be to careful.)

You are now in a much better position, you have an allies, food, weaponary, and the ring safely guarded and it will still be another decade or two before Sauron is ready to attack anything. During which time you can build up your forces or even better stage a preemptive assult with the aid of Gondor and the wood elves ( This is where Radagast and Glorfindal come in Radagast to help coordinate the varius armies and Glorfindal to help Gandalf kill the Ringwraithes in case bullets don't work.)

[Coyote]

So far it looks like mortars, blackpowder rifles, and various forms of gas are pretty much set, as is the idea of encasing the Ring in some metal bloc and keeping it under multiple guard.

The Zeppelin idea also seems to be strongly backed as well, for a variety of reasons. The Zepp can also be a PSYOPS weapon, projecting images or having images projected on its side at night (orcs looks up when they hear throaty growl of engines; see angry gods peering down at them --a projection on the Zepp's side-- Orcs lose morale if not break and run). Zepp also makes good display of power, special forces transport, and for arial spraying of gas.

I say we can use the engines from 2 or 4 HumVees to give propulsion to the Zepp (it could be a small airship, it does not have to be a giant aerial battleship) and the remaining chassis of the HumVees can be used as trailer mounts to carry heavy weapons such as either mortars, cannons, or multiple-pack primitive rockets (like a towed BM-21).

Cannon and steam engines for Navy-- coastal-defense force at first, wait 'till we really need it to build up more since Morder is, essentially, a continental land-based power and our first priority. But for river transport, shallow-draft paddleboats would be great (stern-wheelers are fast; side-wheelers are more maneuverable). They were used in the US Civil War to great effect and can be used to transport anything.

Ands yes, NBC suits and masks are standard issue for US ground forces (Army, Marines) but we could rig oil-soaked WW 1 style masks for the general population. We actually would not really need the suits, and could use them for extreme cold weather gear.

We'll be bringing these people up to a tech level of mixed Napoleonic, US Civil War and WW 1 levels of technology. Later arcaheologists will shit themselves. Napoleonic rifle platoons with gas masks deploying from paddleboats and Zeppelins.... oy vey.

[The Duchess of Zeon]

At least in the original spacebattles post the base was fixed at the mouth of the Isen; I don't think we should expect the kindness of choosing its location even in this scenario.

Anyway, here's my proposed TO&E:

2 Squads of seven men each = Section.
4 Sections = Platoon.
3 Platoons = Company.
+ 32 = 200 per company.

My idea would be to organize the base as two such companies, initially being understrength. Our goal, then, would be to recruit from the surrounding territory those individuals who appear to be intelligent and able to adapt to our technology, willing to fight for our cause, and have reason to accept the benefits of working with us, and the risks.

In this way, our goal would be to reach those two full strength companies, and the necessary support weapons. Everything else would be done via auxiliaries cultivated through alliances, or nominal coalition government over areas that might declare for us.

What we would need, then, is-as follows:

1. Enough weapons for some growth.
2. Commonality among infantry weapons.
3. Some support weapons.
4. Carbines/Pistols for potential cavalry and for officers (This isn't going to be a battlefield where enemy snipers will be picking off officers due to which weapons they use - Sabres are fine too).

I'd have each person bring a weapon. We're going to have 200 + 75 + SDM + SBM. We need to figure out how many military people SD.net and SB have, which will determine our need for growth.

We'll need about 325-330 rifles to develop the full infantry firepower of both companies. These should all be M-14s, in my opinion. Therefore, each person should as their basic weapon an M-14.

Then, as follows: Military personnel should bring a SAW as a support weapon, and so we have something that uses 5.56mm ammo, since we'll have that. These will provide effective and good support. Ideally we will want at least fourty-eight SAWs, or one per each potential squad. If we don't have that many military personnel, however, I will gladly accept 24 or more, which would give us one per potential section.

Officers and those who have some skill at riding should also carry as their second weapon either a carbine or a pistol. The pistols should be in 9mm or .40cal; the carbines should be 7.62mm NATO, though a 5.56mm NATO carbine or even submachine gun would be acceptable if it could be reasonably used by said officer, or from horseback, in close-in defensive situations.

Those with sniper ratings in their respective militaries, or who have placed in distance civilian shooting competition, should instead bring a 7.62mm NATO-firing sniper rifle of their choice. I think we're definitely going to have to go with accepting one SAW per section, but that's probably enough.

Everyone else - IE, those civilians who don't have any skill at riding a horse or have not placed in a shooting competition - should bring either bring a second M-14, so we have additional rifles for anyone we recruit directly into our forces, or a 7.62mm firing carbine (the number of those being small, perhaps four dozen at the very most).

Ideally we should each have a knife

In this fashion we will be able to field two infantry companies to at least full strength, a platoon of dragoons - perhaps even overstrength - our appropriate service and artillery forces: the later, however, will have to make do with .40cal breachloaders like the ones Patrick proposed earlier, which can be a weapon issued as gifts or to extremely loyal auxiliaries who don't mind the dependency, as well. Sort of an "artillery carbine".

The final numbers for the Spacebattles and SD.net military personnel will firm up my estimates here.

Comments?

[The Duchess of Zeon]

The Zeppelin idea also seems to be strongly backed as well, for a variety of reasons. The Zepp can also be a PSYOPS weapon, projecting images or having images projected on its side at night (orcs looks up when they hear throaty growl of engines; see angry gods peering down at them --a projection on the Zepp's side-- Orcs lose morale if not break and run). Zepp also makes good display of power, special forces transport, and for arial spraying of gas.

I say we can use the engines from 2 or 4 HumVees to give propulsion to the Zepp (it could be a small airship, it does not have to be a giant aerial battleship) and the remaining chassis of the HumVees can be used as trailer mounts to carry heavy weapons such as either mortars, cannons, or multiple-pack primitive rockets (like a towed BM-21).

I just shudder at the idea of reducing our humvee force, which adds greatly to our mobility. We could be using those for things like towing 160mm mortars for firing gas shells (I like that caliber as being the largest, to compensate for the use of questionable quality blackpowder propellant all the way through - Though we would, yes, need a baseplate. But I'd go with 160mm for gas, and heavy artillery, and then maybe a mix of 81mm and 61mm for light mortars, or just one or the other. I'll listen to Patrick on recoilless rifles).

Cannon and steam engines for Navy-- coastal-defense force at first, wait 'till we really need it to build up more since Morder is, essentially, a continental land-based power and our first priority. But for river transport, shallow-draft paddleboats would be great (stern-wheelers are fast; side-wheelers are more maneuverable). They were used in the US Civil War to great effect and can be used to transport anything.

I still think my arguments for sea dominance hold up. It could be accomplished very cheaply! We don't need steam engines at all. We can use galleys on the rivers, and we can fit existing merchant ships with mortars - remove their upper decking and brace the mortars directly to the same beams that the cargo would rest on. Then drop the shells in from the upper deck. It would be, of course, a fixed mounting, but you wouldn't need to be cutting holes in anything structural, like you would for cannons, and so you could do it.

Combined with recoilless rifles on the upper deck, perhaps some MGs and grenade launchers on the larger ones, and of course the small arms, they'd be very effective against shore targets and could defend themselves against any medieval ship. Though the mortars themselves would have little use against another naval target, if they did hit, especially with an incendiary shell, that ship would be gone. (though I do admit that the ME seems more advanced in shipwrighting than the real middle ages were.)

We'll be bringing these people up to a tech level of mixed Napoleonic, US Civil War and WW 1 levels of technology. Later arcaheologists will shit themselves. Napoleonic rifle platoons with gas masks deploying from paddleboats and Zeppelins.... oy vey.

I'll settle for civil war support base for ourselves and a mix of 17th and late-18th centuries for our auxiliaries (Especially the agriculture - Though there you might see some 19th century... Well, okay, you're basically right! *g*). Combined with proper discipline, patience, and careful diplomacy, we can be nearly certain of the outcome.

[Coyote]

I dunno 'bout building up an uber-Navy on the cheap. It won't be a matter of slapping some cannon on a deck; our 17th century warships were made from the keep up to be gun boats and their structures ar built around that fact. Firing a cannon broadsides puts a lot of stress on a hull. Early experments with powerful mortars in the US Civil War had the mortars blasting down through the unimproved decks....

Cannon-equipped ships must be designed and built for that purpose; the modification of existing hulls will probably put so much stress fracturing on the primitive hulls that we'd develp leaks that couldn't be patched or pumped quickly enough to make the ship a truly viable seagoing vessel.

Any comments from the engineering crowd on this?

Swivel mount guns or "Marines" with fusils would be good enough in many cases, anyway...

[The Duchess of Zeon]

I dunno 'bout building up an uber-Navy on the cheap. It won't be a matter of slapping some cannon on a deck; our 17th century warships were made from the keep up to be gun boats and their structures ar built around that fact. Firing a cannon broadsides puts a lot of stress on a hull. Early experments with powerful mortars in the US Civil War had the mortars blasting down through the unimproved decks....

Cannon-equipped ships must be designed and built for that purpose; the modification of existing hulls will probably put so much stress fracturing on the primitive hulls that we'd develp leaks that couldn't be patched or pumped quickly enough to make the ship a truly viable seagoing vessel.

Any comments from the engineering crowd on this?

Oh, it depends on what kind of hull they use. If they're still clinker-building then it's hopeless, but if we find some nice carracks, we might actually be able to put some mortars on board, or even genuine cannon.

Uhm, really, those mortars during the civil war were huge - even a 160mm doesn't quite compare to them. Though I grant the problem may well exist.

Swivel mount guns or "Marines" with fusils would be good enough in many cases, anyway...

True, and the recoilless rifles can be used regardless.

[Cpt_Frank]

Cannon-equipped ships must be designed and built for that purpose; the modification of existing hulls will probably put so much stress fracturing on the primitive hulls that we'd develp leaks that couldn't be patched or pumped quickly enough to make the ship a truly viable seagoing vessel.

Any comments from the engineering crowd on this?

I've been thinking, we might be able to build composite hulls for them.

We'll need about 325-330 rifles to develop the full infantry firepower of both companies. These should all be M-14s, in my opinion. Therefore, each person should as their basic weapon an M-14.

I say our soldiers should be able to choose between M-16 and M-14.
We'd still have enough standardisation in this case.

As for light and medium machine guns, MG-3. Simple, easy to maintain, 1500 rounds per minute.

btw dou you think I should bring my Charleville musket along so that we have a pattern if we want to pruduce flintlocks?

[The Duchess of Zeon]

I meant to say that everyone should have two knives, but that officers, those capable of riding, and perhaps NCOs, should have the option of a sabre.

Bringing along that flintlock could well be worth one less M-14, depending on if pertinent materials in the library included such plans. Probably not, so a model would be very good. We'll be dealing with a lot of illiterate but intelligent craftsmen who could work much better off an example, too.

I just don't like putting the weak hitting power of a 5.56mm battle rifle up against armour and some of the potentially big creatures we might be facing.

The basic idea would be to form the two companies as understrength first, and then as we get our production lines going for our mortars, recoilless rifles, chemical weaponry, and etc, and we recruit those who could actually be trained and serve in our ranks proper, we expand to include our artillery units and to bring those two companies up to full strength.

Depending on how many personnel we start with and how many we can gain in this fashion, we might also have an independent sniper unit in addition to cavalry and artillery, from the two infantry companies.

[Coyote]

Clearly, the M-16, M-14 and Kalashnikov families have their adherents, and each for very good reasons. I am a big fan of both 5.56 NATO and 7.62x39 COMBLOC for different reasons and for that I would take both my weapons in these styles. Durability, punching power... velocity, light carry... we will probably end up with those who are experienced using AKs and M-16s to their taste, and the less experienced using the M-14 as a standard.

People who bring other weapons will just have to be happy with whatever ammo they can schlep with them, and when it is gone it's gone, and perhaps the weapons canbe modified into either blackpowder, crossbow, or some sort of magical focus weapon of a type possible in ME....

Unusual weapons had better serve a good purpose, otherwise they're a waste. Perhaps modern crossbows or compound bows could be broght, that makes sense; bringing machineguns means training a crew, not just one gunner (the military types will have their hands full with training, plans, etc). They also consume a great amount of ammo. I suppose the HumVees are getting there by us driving them there, through a portal a la-Stargate, in which case we can load them down with machinegun ammo, special ammos, books, TVs, VCR/DVDs etc... Including my training videos for the French Foreign Legion's jungle school in the Guyanas, the Riverine Warfare tactics of Vietnm, and the Chechen Field Ambush techniques...

[Vympel]

I just don't like putting the weak hitting power of a 5.56mm battle rifle up against armour and some of the potentially big creatures we might be facing.

A modern 5.56x45mm M995 ball round can penetrate 6mm of RHA steel. We're talking pathetic medieval armor here- they might as well fight naked.

As for big creatures, they're still soft flesh- spray them till they die



The whole 7.62 versus 5.56 debate has been over since he 1960s. There's not a single first rate military anywhere in the world that uses 7.62 NATO as the standard rifle round, for good reason. There's nothing wrong with 5.56. It is actually more lethal than 7.62, we can carry more ammunition for it, and we can fire the weapons easier.