Best/Worst military forces in Science Fiction

[PeZook]

Furthermore, if a XIX century power can hire a large, readymade army of professional quality...how is that NOT an instant advantage for the money? What, 50 000 extra men would've made no difference to the Austrians at Austerlitz, even if they were armed and equipped exactly like the regular Austrian army?

[Connor MacLeod]

We'd actually need to know a shit-ton more about the setting to make predictions. I mean fuck, I'm thinking of something in context of 'War of the Worlds'. What if the so called Martian invasion was really just alien mercs hired to defeat an enemy menace or something?

It's maybe a bit over the top as an example, but the point is that depending on how things in the univers are set up, a highly advanced ('effective') military force can look like something that is terrifying and otherwise socially or culturally disruptive to the planet they're fighting on.

Otherwise the most plausible thing for any sci fi merc force to do is simply place some sort of starship in orbit or high altitude above the planet and paste the objectives with robotic or precision guided munitions. OR high powered beam weapons or osmething.

[aieeegrunt]

That idea also popped up in David Drake's writing. Interstellar East India companies were restricted to only fighting indigs using indig level technology because of <random unfathomable alien psychology>. A lot of the indigs are either iron age or collapsed to iron age technology, so one enterprising alien dude purchases the Roman survivors of the disasterous battle of Carrhae and runs amok with them.

They have standard Roman gear, but built as well as a spacefaring civ can make them. The real big advantage they have is in medical technology. Anything other than a brain injury is repairable.

[Ahriman238]

Weber did the same thing in the Excaliber Alternative. Ancient spacefaring Federation has a Prime directive preventing the use of advanced technology in their conquest that on paper isn't conquest, so they kidnap hapless alien armies to fight as their proxies and as long as they give them no advanced hardware it's all fine.

[Simon_Jester]

Ahriman, "the Excalibur Alternative" is derived from Drake's "Foreign Legions" story. It's the same setting, just with a wankier conclusion.

What kind of stupid setup is that? If I hire mercenaries from offworld I want that expense to show for something, namely them crushing the opposition on short notice with vastly superior technology. If they're restricted to indigeneous technology, what's the incentive for me to hire them to begin with? Especially as chances are the natives are better at using that technology than the mercenaries.

The exception to this rule comes when the mercenaries benefit from exceptional combat experience, or operate outside the locals' frame of reference (routinely carry out night operations or the like, and are trained to do so effectively even without advanced night vision gear).

Tactics and strategy evolve too.

ahhh but while their wepons could only be the level of indigenous tech, they were allowed to use 100% of the medical and reparitave tech. the way I understood it, was as an example if the US was hiring them to fight the soviets (yes im using a cold war metaphore) they would be limited to projectile weapons but they could be using target seaking supersonic Gyrojet guns while all we could use was simple slug throwers. The advantage is still there, its just more of semantics.

That's damn stupid, and whoever thought that rule up needs to have shit shoved in his ear. The whole point of hiring mercs is to quickly give you advantages that you couldn't get otherwise. If the mercs were being hired to do assassinations and the like I could understand restricting them to using only local tech. It would also be understandable if you wanted the mercs to show your Iron Age civilization how to make, care for and use decent firearms properly, because you are going to most likely have to produce the guns and ammo yourself (if you're wise, at least).

From the sound of it, I suspect the rule was imposed from outside, as a regulation on the mercenaries by a powerful government. The mercenaries probably hate it, and the guys who hire them probably hate it. But the alternative is obviously very destabilizing: mercenaries with incredibly advanced weapons will simply flood any less-than-super-advanced world and conquer it for whoever can provide the money. And they'll be used to establish technocratic dictatorships over the planets they take- rule by monopoly on the advanced weapon technology.

Someone might see this as a bad thing, you know.

(Note that I have no idea if Randall's remembering this right, never heard of the setting)

That idea also popped up in David Drake's writing. Interstellar East India companies were restricted to only fighting indigs using indig level technology because of <random unfathomable alien psychology>. A lot of the indigs are either iron age or collapsed to iron age technology, so one enterprising alien dude purchases the Roman survivors of the disasterous battle of Carrhae and runs amok with them.

They have standard Roman gear, but built as well as a spacefaring civ can make them. The real big advantage they have is in medical technology. Anything other than a brain injury is repairable.

Here, again, the 'unfathomable' psychology makes a certain amount of sense to me.

Having technologically advanced species simply stomp all over spear-armed primitives using their laser guns is very bad for the primitives. It's also bad for the overall galaxy in the long run, because it is (again) destabilizing. It means that any ambitious jackass can conquer themselves an interstellar empire in short order. It means there's a constant nagging pressure for the big hegemonic powers to Do Something about the plight of little guys who are being pushed around. It encourages ambitious nations to solve their problems by force, which is bad if you're a big power that likes its peace of mind.

And normally, you wouldn't gain much benefit by moving Iron Age mercenaries from one planet to another, except under bizarre circumstances (you need a few thousand of them to protect your very lucrative rare-earths mine from the local tribes). Conquering planets or toppling empires would be impractical, because one bunch of Iron Age warriors is probably not much better than another.

The conceit of Drake's Foreign Legions story is that the Romans are uniquely good at this sort of fighting, not just by terrestrial standards but by interstellar standards of their own technology level. And one bunch of guys are cunning enough to exploit this as a loophole in a set of galactic laws- laws that usually make large scale interplanetary conquest impossible and even keeping small facilities without local permission difficult.

[someone_else]

They have standard Roman gear, but built as well as a spacefaring civ can make them.

Does that mean just murderously cheap mass-production? Because that's the only thing you can do without raising the techlevel. They have fucktons of ammo for bows and slings and siege weapons. Big deal.

If the rule is just "make it look like native stuff" they can play with alloys and composite bows to turn those Romans in a Iron Age breed of Space Marines.

Otherwise the most plausible thing for any sci fi merc force to do is simply place some sort of starship in orbit or high altitude above the planet and paste the objectives with robotic or precision guided munitions. OR high powered beam weapons or osmething.

Usually the "nuke it rom the orbit" is a very easy part. It is the least (if at all) effective strategy if you are looking for conquest or even US-style FREEDOMIZATION though.

Here, again, the 'unfathomable' psychology makes a certain amount of sense to me. ...
Having technologically advanced species simply stomp all over spear-armed primitives using their laser guns is very bad for the primitives. It's also bad for the overall galaxy in the long run, because it is (again) destabilizing.

To do this there must be a Galactic Empire or otherwise BIG player that can enforce this rule.

[Malivotti]

It's me again.

Please bear in mind that I'm going from memory and the last time I read these books was in the mid-90s. So a little background, as I recall most of the fighting takes place on the fringe of the main worlds. All space travel, from ground to orbit, and interstellar, is under the control of a single government department.

This same department also controls all sales of high-tech equipment and technology, unrestricted sales are only allowed to worlds that have a unified government. The only exception to that rule is medical technology. The government department (I want to call them CD but I might be thinking of the Co-Dominion.) doesn't like mercenaries or even warfare in general, believing that negotiation, peaceful compromise, and general good intentions works better than a bunch of hired killers (One of the main characters thinks that Neville Chamberlain is the inspiration for the department.)

The technology limits are set to what the planet that the conflict is happening on can be produced by indigenous manufacture, in the first story since there is NO manufacturing ability on the colony, bow and arrow, pike, and cavalry are the limit, one of the mercenaries even has to defend the choice how their knives were forged. In other stories battles were fought at the tech level of the American Civil War, and pre-WWII levels, all this is off the top of my head.

Just did a quick Google part of the first book is on the Baen Books website, it seems the evil bureaucrats are called the Commerce Department. So if anyone is interested you can take look yourselves.

Regards.

We'd actually need to know a shit-ton more about the setting to make predictions. I mean fuck, I'm thinking of something in context of 'War of the Worlds'. What if the so called Martian invasion was really just alien mercs hired to defeat an enemy menace or something?

It's maybe a bit over the top as an example, but the point is that depending on how things in the univers are set up, a highly advanced ('effective') military force can look like something that is terrifying and otherwise socially or culturally disruptive to the planet they're fighting on.

Otherwise the most plausible thing for any sci fi merc force to do is simply place some sort of starship in orbit or high altitude above the planet and paste the objectives with robotic or precision guided munitions. OR high powered beam weapons or osmething.

[Simon_Jester]

Does that mean just murderously cheap mass-production? Because that's the only thing you can do without raising the techlevel. They have fucktons of ammo for bows and slings and siege weapons. Big deal.

If the rule is just "make it look like native stuff" they can play with alloys and composite bows to turn those Romans in a Iron Age breed of Space Marines.

Somewhere in between those extremes. I'd guess that they're trying to do as much as they can towards option 2 without it being blatantly obvious that they're cheating.

So "why do your guys' swords chop other people's swords and armor like they were lightsabers?" would be a very awkward question to answer. The guys who bought those Romans probably don't want to answer it.

Where we see this kind of system in science fiction, there's usually at least two different interest groups in play. There's the regulators who make the rules, and there's the local governments or private cartels trying to use tricky lawyering to exploit loopholes in those rules.

So what actually happens, the limits of the possible, is defined by the interplay between those. If the regulators have good inspectors, the rules have to be followed and the mercenaries get stuck with primitive weapons. If the regulators are weak and not paying attention, the rules are blatantly violated.

Usually the "nuke it rom the orbit" is a very easy part. It is the least (if at all) effective strategy if you are looking for conquest or even US-style FREEDOMIZATION though.

It depends. If you're a private company whose only interest in the planet is a bunch of rare-earth mines, saying "anyone who threatens our mines will be nuked from orbit" is pretty effective. You don't care if civilization collapses on the rest of the planet after your nuclear bombardment. It might even make your job easier if it did.

If you're a drug cartel, you need viable agricultural land... well, nukes don't work so well anymore, but kinetic impactors still do. Same principle.

To do this there must be a Galactic Empire or otherwise BIG player that can enforce this rule.

That's the point; in settings that revolve around this kind of thing, there IS such a big player.

[Connor MacLeod]

'nuke if from orbit' isn't quite what I was thinking of, although that's certainly an option. Any sufficiently 'advanced' civilization should be able to design some sort of aerial or orbital platform, starship, etc. capable of powerful precision weapons fire. Attach megawatt/gigawatt beam weapons to your platform (consider the range of the modern ABL for example.. its what.. hundreds of miles?)

Or, you design a highly automated, sophisticated, and compact drone that packs weapons/munitions into its frame, designed to go in and kill specific targets localized. This may be used for targets you can't hit from orbit or the air (like underground, bunkers, etc.)

A good example of this is Star Wars. Not only could they achieve the 'orbital bombardment' criteria with blasters (it was done in the Allston novel 'Rebel Stand' where a manually fired SSD's laser cannons could obliterate the vong via orbital bombardment.. and leave the defending forces surrounded by the Vong completely unharmed.) And we know all about their droid tech in its various iterations - it can be both highly compact, intelligent, AND armed. Imagine a few of those remotes Luke fought with in Star Wars armed with some sort of explosive or gun, unleashed on the target...

And yet, they fight with squishy organics. Which isn't the most practical (on so many levels) but it does work fairly well for the Star Wars universe and enviroment. Large scale, practical warfare would actually be counter-productive methinks, and warfare is largely a political tool anyhow, so how effective it is or not is probably a secondary consideration.