NS Military Realism Consultation Thread #4

[The High Tatras]

Hello,

I have a few military realism questions that have nothing to do with my NS country. I am trying to write a story that is set in the Holy Roman Empire during the 30 Years War in the 17th century.

1. What would be a historically accurate ratio of pikemen to arquebusiers/ musketeers during this time? I believe that bayonets had not been invented yet during the period in question.

2. My main character needs a sword to use as his sidearm. I associate rapiers with the 17th century, but I believe they were only used by civilian duelists and not by soldiers. I think that backswords were commonly used by soldiers in the British Isles during the 17th century, but I am not sure if they were used on the continent as well. My first thought was to give my character a Grosse Messer, but I am not sure if they were still used in the 17th century.

3. I think that hand mortars are cool but probably impractical weapons. I want to incorporate a hand mortar being used into a scene in my story, but I am not exactly sure what circumstances they were meant to be used in. Are they meant to be used against people or are they more effective at destroying buildings and fortifications?

[The United Remnants of America]

Anzac biscuits in rations?

Only the super hard ones that can be used to bludgeon the enemy to death in an emergency.

"They just keep coming... And coming, thousands of them, no matter how many we killed, three more took his place. And then they were on us. And it was horrible. They attacked with these delicious-smelling rocks. One good hit against our helmets and the guy beside me was out cold and they were on him, beating him to death with those rocks. And then my brother on my other side, his nose was impacted with one and I can still hear his scream as he fell. Oh Gods, make the screaming stop!" - Report from a survivor of an attack by soldiers from Aqizithiuda.

[The United Remnants of America]

Hello,

I have a few military realism questions that have nothing to do with my NS country. I am trying to write a story that is set in the Holy Roman Empire during the 30 Years War in the 17th century.

1. What would be a historically accurate ratio of pikemen to arquebusiers/ musketeers during this time? I believe that bayonets had not been invented yet during the period in question.

2. My main character needs a sword to use as his sidearm. I associate rapiers with the 17th century, but I believe they were only used by civilian duelists and not by soldiers. I think that backswords were commonly used by soldiers in the British Isles during the 17th century, but I am not sure if they were used on the continent as well. My first thought was to give my character a Grosse Messer, but I am not sure if they were still used in the 17th century.

3. I think that hand mortars are cool but probably impractical weapons. I want to incorporate a hand mortar being used into a scene in my story, but I am not exactly sure what circumstances they were meant to be used in. Are they meant to be used against people or are they more effective at destroying buildings and fortifications?

1. I'd say it was about 100:1 pikemen to "gunners" that's probably innacurrate, though, I'd research it.

2. Longswords are always good. Or shortswords.

3. They were usually used against knots of enemy soldiers. This I know.

[Spirit of Hope]

Hello,

I have a few military realism questions that have nothing to do with my NS country. I am trying to write a story that is set in the Holy Roman Empire during the 30 Years War in the 17th century.

1. What would be a historically accurate ratio of pikemen to arquebusiers/ musketeers during this time? I believe that bayonets had not been invented yet during the period in question.

2. My main character needs a sword to use as his sidearm. I associate rapiers with the 17th century, but I believe they were only used by civilian duelists and not by soldiers. I think that backswords were commonly used by soldiers in the British Isles during the 17th century, but I am not sure if they were used on the continent as well. My first thought was to give my character a Grosse Messer, but I am not sure if they were still used in the 17th century.

3. I think that hand mortars are cool but probably impractical weapons. I want to incorporate a hand mortar being used into a scene in my story, but I am not exactly sure what circumstances they were meant to be used in. Are they meant to be used against people or are they more effective at destroying buildings and fortifications?

1. I'd say it was about 100:1 pikemen to "gunners" that's probably innacurrate, though, I'd research it.

2. Longswords are always good. Or shortswords.

3. They were usually used against knots of enemy soldiers. This I know.

I know the ratio of pikes to gunners was much lower than 100:1. It depended on what army, but I think it ranged from 2:1 to about 1:1. Don't actually have any hard figures on it though.

[The High Tatras]

I think he might have meant to say 10:1.

[Aqizithiuda]

Hello,

I have a few military realism questions that have nothing to do with my NS country. I am trying to write a story that is set in the Holy Roman Empire during the 30 Years War in the 17th century.

1. What would be a historically accurate ratio of pikemen to arquebusiers/ musketeers during this time? I believe that bayonets had not been invented yet during the period in question.

2. My main character needs a sword to use as his sidearm. I associate rapiers with the 17th century, but I believe they were only used by civilian duelists and not by soldiers. I think that backswords were commonly used by soldiers in the British Isles during the 17th century, but I am not sure if they were used on the continent as well. My first thought was to give my character a Grosse Messer, but I am not sure if they were still used in the 17th century.

3. I think that hand mortars are cool but probably impractical weapons. I want to incorporate a hand mortar being used into a scene in my story, but I am not exactly sure what circumstances they were meant to be used in. Are they meant to be used against people or are they more effective at destroying buildings and fortifications?

1) Link

2) Use a cutlass or dussack.

3) Mostly against people I believe, although there were incendiary grenades for use against buildings.

[Ulfr-Reich]

Folks, I'm considering having a late WWI Armored car (very german-vibe) hybridized with a WWI Renault's track system/vibe/structure (just scaled up), and then promptly given a quad-linked early remote controlled variation upon the mounting rigs of Ulfr-Reich's GMPG (a rather terrifying 13.2x94mm Ljøkmaalr firing device) for the Ulfranes Haer's first true and readily fielded "Armored Vehicle".


Opinions?

[Immoren]

Anzac biscuits in rations?

Only the super hard ones that can be used to bludgeon the enemy to death in an emergency.

My soldiers use loaf of dwarfish travel bread for that.

[Vitaphone Racing]

This is a cool thread.

[Lubyak]

Hello,

I have a few military realism questions that have nothing to do with my NS country. I am trying to write a story that is set in the Holy Roman Empire during the 30 Years War in the 17th century.

1. What would be a historically accurate ratio of pikemen to arquebusiers/ musketeers during this time? I believe that bayonets had not been invented yet during the period in question.

2. My main character needs a sword to use as his sidearm. I associate rapiers with the 17th century, but I believe they were only used by civilian duelists and not by soldiers. I think that backswords were commonly used by soldiers in the British Isles during the 17th century, but I am not sure if they were used on the continent as well. My first thought was to give my character a Grosse Messer, but I am not sure if they were still used in the 17th century.

3. I think that hand mortars are cool but probably impractical weapons. I want to incorporate a hand mortar being used into a scene in my story, but I am not exactly sure what circumstances they were meant to be used in. Are they meant to be used against people or are they more effective at destroying buildings and fortifications?

Bayonets start being distributed in the late 17th century, and are common place by the War of Spanish Succession. However, the ratio of 'pike to shot' changes both between armies, and throughout history. In early formations (think Pavia), yes you might have 4 or 5 pikemen for every musketeer, as you go later, you'll start getting 2:1 and even 1:1 ratios(Breitenfeld and Nordlingen) as guns become more and more the weapon of offence. In the late 18th century, if you're going a Carolean route, you'd have it be reversed, with 4-5 musketeers per pikemen by the early 18th century. It also depends on the type of formation you use....a Spanish/Imperial tercio is going to have proportionally more pikemen than a Swedish brigade or a Dutch formation. However, overall, somewhere between 4 and 1 pikemen per musketeer would be relatively realistic for the 30 Years War era. Though be sure to keep in mind what you'd be doing for formation as that'll have a major impact.

As for swords, rapiers had been developed by then, but were mostly dress swords. They'd be carried by officers, but they're still meant for ceremonial duels, not fighting. For actual combat, a cavalryman would likely have a broadsword. Zweihanders and the other large great swords would no longer be used. But yes....for general combat use, a broadsword would probably be a perfectly acceptable option. If the character is a pikeman, he might well have something like the catgutter or the Gross Messer. It all depends on where this character acquired his kit.

As for the hand mortar, iirc early hand grenades were meant for use both in battle and in storming breaches. The targets would still be personnell, as the charge in an early hand grenade is not going to be enough for demolition work. I'm guessing the purpose of such a weapon is to allow more infantryman to be used as 'grenadiers' as the need for the biggest and strongest men to be grenadiers would no longer be as paramount when they have mechanical assistance. However, do note that hand grenades as a whole fell out of favour in the early 18th century and grenadiers became jsut assault troops. They'd be a bit beyond the 30 Years War I think...perhaps the wars of the late 17th century (Great Turkish, Grand Alliance etc.) would be where they;d see their most use.

[Immoren]

On more serious note.
I currently have towed 122mm and 155mm guns for infantry and Jaeger brigades. 122mm and 155mm gun equipped tracked spgs for armoured brigades artillery. Corps artillery brigades have 155mm wheeled spgs. This way right or swap places for towed guns and wheeled spgs?

[Samozaryadnyastan]

"What's that? My proposal to ban chemical weapons on NS failed? RESUBMIT"
There's also the fact that the same author spent two days raging over Fris pulling his nuclear anti-proliferation bill after reaching quorum for incorrect category, then failing to understand why preventing nations from transferring nuclear technology didn't amount to a ban (thus Global Disarmament), and why it didn't meet the criteria for the 'spending increases' of International Security.

Seriously, quit the WA. It's cooler on the dark side.

I'm only in the WA so that my region has someone in control of it.

If, by whatever miracle, either this Chemical Weapons Convention or his Anti-proliferation Nuclear Accords (which I maintain is a fundamental assault on the NAPA treaty) come to pass, I'll just continue to give zero fucks.
If someone wants to war me over it, I can tell them to fuck off, though someone'll probably go and "Condemn" me.

On more serious note.
I currently have towed 122mm and 155mm guns for infantry and Jaeger brigades. 122mm and 155mm gun equipped tracked spgs for armoured brigades artillery. Corps artillery brigades have 155mm wheeled spgs. This way right or swap places for towed guns and wheeled spgs?

Makes plenty of sense for armoured units to have the SP stuff, so it can keep up with the rest of the formation.

[Consolidate Nations Alliance]

So, basically I am thinking I might need a new tank to fill the slot of tank destroyer in my armoured and infantry support battalion. Right now I have several modified K-2 Black Panthers acting as tank destroyers, but I'm wondering if that's viable, or if I should find something else to use as a tank destroyer, or just scrap that concept all together.

I know I posted up my entire military in the last one, but I'll just do my army this time, and separate them into their battalions. Any tips/suggestions about my army in general will be good.

Sword Battalion (Main Battle Tanks)
30 x K-2 Black Panther MBTs

Shield Battalion (Armoured and infantry support division)
30 x K-2-TD Black Panther Tak Destroyers
430 x Bushmaster M113 APCs (130 in reserves and 50 re-purposed to be converted into Command, Control and Communication (CCC) APCs)
840 x Bushmaster PMVs
30 x Coyote TSVs

Archer Battalion (Artillery and anti-air division)
110 x L118/L119 105 mm Hamel Guns
120 x M2A2 105 mm Howitzer
35 x M198 155 mm Howitzer
35 x M777A2 155 mm Howitzer
35 x RBS-70 surface to air missile systems


Note: I have no troop numbers as I'm note sure how much of my 59,631 total personnel would go to each squad and how much would be left for riflemen/foot soldiers

[Elan Valleys]

So, basically I am thinking I might need a new tank to fill the slot of tank destroyer in my armoured and infantry support battalion. Right now I have several modified K-2 Black Panthers acting as tank destroyers, but I'm wondering if that's viable, or if I should find something else to use as a tank destroyer, or just scrap that concept all together.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combat_Veh ... 29#Striker

[Consolidate Nations Alliance]

So, basically I am thinking I might need a new tank to fill the slot of tank destroyer in my armoured and infantry support battalion. Right now I have several modified K-2 Black Panthers acting as tank destroyers, but I'm wondering if that's viable, or if I should find something else to use as a tank destroyer, or just scrap that concept all together.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combat_Veh ... 29#Striker

Hm...so you suggest the FV102 Striker? Hm...I thought those where just APCs and stuff. Although they seem to be more long range, not that there's a problem with that. The reason I chose to make a modified version of my MBTs was so they could be right beside each other and stuff. But I'll take those into consideration.

[The United Remnants of America]

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Combat_Veh ... 29#Striker

Hm...so you suggest the FV102 Striker? Hm...I thought those where just APCs and stuff. Although they seem to be more long range, not that there's a problem with that. The reason I chose to make a modified version of my MBTs was so they could be right beside each other and stuff. But I'll take those into consideration.

Actually, if you wanna go for a long-range kill, you know, being able to kill tanks without being fired back at and risking anything, use a M-3 Bradley with a TOW set-up. Those can fire out to about... oh, 1,000 meters past what most modern tanks can do. At least what the Abrams can do, which has the better fire-control and targeting systems out of modern tanks.

If you want the heavy armor and firepower. Go for a M1A2 Abrams or a prototypal T2000 Black Eagle. That's my say.

... Abrams are better though, IMO.

[The United Remnants of America]

Completely unrelated quesiton. I was recently told that it's highly frowned upon on the trading forums if a nation sells real-world stylized items. Like if a nation had a storefront with SCAR rifles, SAWS, etc and had F-15s, Bradleys and Abrams etc, for sell or a really close equivalent of said items. Is this a fact.

[Consolidate Nations Alliance]

Actually, if you wanna go for a long-range kill, you know, being able to kill tanks without being fired back at and risking anything, use a M-3 Bradley with a TOW set-up. Those can fire out to about... oh, 1,000 meters past what most modern tanks can do. At least what the Abrams can do, which has the better fire-control and targeting systems out of modern tanks.

If you want the heavy armor and firepower. Go for a M1A2 Abrams or a prototypal T2000 Black Eagle. That's my say.

... Abrams are better though, IMO.

So the Bradley or Striker (since I said I'd take them all into consideration) for longer range, and the M1 Abrams (I was avoiding using it since every nation on NS seems to use that, or the...T-80 I believe the Russian equivalent is, hence the fact I chose the K2), or the T2000 Black Eagle (abandoned, and denied, by the Russians, but that shouldn't stop me from claiming my non-Earth/real world nation has it), for close range (both are MBTs, so my next statement is a assumtion based off this).

So, really, the role of dedicated tank destroyer like we saw in, say, WW2 is gone and replaced with the MBT?

As for the unrelated question, I don't know. I guess if it depends who you heard that from.

[Purpelia]

Completely unrelated quesiton. I was recently told that it's highly frowned upon on the trading forums if a nation sells real-world stylized items. Like if a nation had a storefront with SCAR rifles, SAWS, etc and had F-15s, Bradleys and Abrams etc, for sell or a really close equivalent of said items. Is this a fact.

Yes. As a rule on NS anyone can manufacture anything that exists IRL. All modern tech is basically open source to us. So if you were to sell F-15s and SCARs you would in essence be conning people into buying stuff they already can get for free.

[European Prussia]

Updated

[Purpelia]

So, really, the role of dedicated tank destroyer like we saw in, say, WW2 is gone and replaced with the MBT?

Yes and no. Dedicated tank destroyers do exist but they are no longer armed with guns or intended to fight tanks head on. This is a modern day tank destroyer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:NM142_x_3.jpg

[Samozaryadnyastan]

Completely unrelated quesiton. I was recently told that it's highly frowned upon on the trading forums if a nation sells real-world stylized items. Like if a nation had a storefront with SCAR rifles, SAWS, etc and had F-15s, Bradleys and Abrams etc, for sell or a really close equivalent of said items. Is this a fact.

Yes. As a rule on NS anyone can manufacture anything that exists IRL. All modern tech is basically open source to us. So if you were to sell F-15s and SCARs you would in essence be conning people into buying stuff they already can get for free.

There's nothing actually wrong about either process - the "anyone can manufacture whatever" is more a 'rule' put there so that storefront owners can't completely con new nations into thinking they MUST BUY everything they claim to own.

Whether or not a nation wishes to roleplay buying RL equipment from an NS supplier or just say "and I build X Y Z" is completely irrelevant to the overall experience.

I myself use both Russia Continuation as an excuse to stock up on whatever mad Russian thing I hear of, and take advantage of a twenty year time skip in my region to claim the use of various systems that I only recently heard of.

[Consolidate Nations Alliance]

So, really, the role of dedicated tank destroyer like we saw in, say, WW2 is gone and replaced with the MBT?

Yes and no. Dedicated tank destroyers do exist but they are no longer armed with guns or intended to fight tanks head on. This is a modern day tank destroyer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:NM142_x_3.jpg

As, so basically the Bradley or Stryker outfitted with TOW/other anti-tank missiles? Fair enough. Thank you for that

[Purpelia]

Yes and no. Dedicated tank destroyers do exist but they are no longer armed with guns or intended to fight tanks head on. This is a modern day tank destroyer.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:NM142_x_3.jpg

As, so basically the Bradley or Stryker outfitted with TOW/other anti-tank missiles? Fair enough. Thank you for that

Honestly I'd use a M113.

[Samozaryadnyastan]

Bradley's already fitted with TOW or at least provision, and I'm pretty sure Stryker has provision already.