Re: [GZG] FTverse colinies

Enzo de Ianni wrote:
>
> And now, why I think that is relevant to the "colonies" issue:
> Such an "asymmetrical" campaign could be waged in simpler ways if the 
> invaded population is relatively large.
> So, what do you think? What's your opinion?
> (A) Are we looking to a universe "Star Trek"-like, in which any group 
> of 3-400 guys can claim a whole planet (couldn't they be happy with a 
> continent? Or, even, Belgium? :)
> or (B) Do you think colonization would rapidly involve larger numbers?
>   

I think it will depend on both population size and settlement pattern. 
The greater population you want to control, the more troops you need. 
Also the more concentrated a population the fewer troops you'll need 
compared to a same size population that is far more dispersed. Even if 
colonial populations are quite large, how they are spread out will make 
a big difference to an occupiers deployment.

> If (A), then elite units on relatively small transports have a role! 
> But we could, then, be confronted by a ""Honor Harrington" scenario, 
> in which you never hear about army forces and rarely about marines: a 
> cruiser reaches high orbit (or a small squadron fights a battle and 
> win local aerospace superiority) and, on the farspeaker, menaces to 
> nuke the settlement; one of those "cattle transport" follow closely 
> and people queue fast with little baggage to be transported to the 
> nearest friendly planet (or prisoner camp)... or, a different enemy 
> could simply slaughter the lot...
>   
If you nuke the population from orbit then you are probably nuking the 
thing you're after.
> That would depend, also, on the reason why the colony was there in 
> the first place: resources, strategical importance, whatever...
>   

Also environment. On hostile worlds were people are depended on 
particular infastructure (power station, atmosphere processors etc) then

by controlling those few structures you effectively, if not completely, 
compel the population to do as you want. Dare I say the John rasied this

point when refuting the US vs Canada example.
> That could bring a kind of ritualized, limited warfare in which 
> powers exchange planets and population with very little bloodshed... 
> until an alien, oblivious to the rules, hits the human sphere and 
> start a real massacre against the human forces, organized and 
> deployed for a different kind of war.
>   
I could really only see that happening where a majority of occupied 
worlds are depended on some sort special infrastructure for survival, a 
domed city if you like, where attacking that infrastructure might be 
considered "unlawful". If terraforming is relatively easy then such 
limitations are unlikely. The environment will be either robust enough 
to take what you can throw at it or can be repaired afterward.
> :)
> But skilled ones become popular, they tell me :)
>
>
>   
Is that a boast? ;-)

Tony.

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu
http://vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l