Re: Planetary invasion ramblings (longish)

On 15 Jun 98 at 7:47, Jeff Lyon wrote:

> >Surely habitable planets are the *one* thing that *is* important 
> >enough to leave warships around. Perhaps SDBs and not FTL ships, 
> >but well worth the investment.
> 
> True, but they are much better utilized patrolling nearby space or
> engaging enemy space forces and reinforcement convoys than they are
> parked in orbit for months on end serving as glorified recon sats
> and orbital fire support platforms.  Sure, there may be a few left
> behind and your point about SDBs is a good one (though less so with
> the advent of the FB, I suspect) but no one could afford to leave
> their whole invasion fleet "parked" waiting for the chance to
> bombard a few partisans.  And when they move on, the invader's
> biggest advantage becomes less pronounced.
> 
> Jeff
> 

Well, actually, I was thinking of them protecting the planet from 
counter invasion, rather than (but partly in addition to) 
discouraging partisans.
Whoever you took the planet from is going to want it back, and the 
one sure place their invasion fleet is going to turn up is the planet 
that they want to recover.
This ties in with something that occured to me about FT campaigns. It 
can be mighty difficult to meet the enemy fleet if communication is 
only as fast as FTL ships, and you both jump to where you think you 
ought to, or where you think they are going... or.. etc. 
etc.

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Richard Slattery	     richard@mgkc.demon.co.uk
Today's public figures can no longer write their own speeches or books,
and there is some evidence that they can't read them
either. 
     Gore Vidal
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~