NS Military Worldbuilding Thread No. 12

[Atheris]

The "does x make someone a better soldier?" questions are getting genuinely annoying. These are all factors that have no bearing on someone's ability to accurately fire a rifle, react to enemy fire, and to suppress, close with and destroy the enemy.

Does wearing camo underwear make someone a better soldier?

Does wearing three hats at once, one with unique particle effects, make someone a better Soldier?

[Almadaria]

The "does x make someone a better soldier?" questions are getting genuinely annoying. These are all factors that have no bearing on someone's ability to accurately fire a rifle, react to enemy fire, and to suppress, close with and destroy the enemy.

Does wearing camo underwear make someone a better soldier?

Well, depends what race he is apparently lmao

[Gallia-]

Does wearing camo underwear make someone a better soldier?

Well, depends what race he is apparently lmao

Yes? The bell curve is like height. Just like you can be too tall or too short, you can also be too stupid. Much like height, we also know the answer to the question. (:

[The Akasha Colony]

Why not ? Like i recalled that there is an airbase in Europe where the fighters taking off from it have to immediately take 90 Deg turn to avoid breaching airspace of neighboring nation.

Why wouldn't they just take off in the other direction?

Because takeoff and landing directions are normally determined by wind patterns?

[Champagne Socialist Sharifistan]

Do they?

The "does x make someone a better soldier?" questions are getting genuinely annoying. These are all factors that have no bearing on someone's ability to accurately fire a rifle, react to enemy fire, and to suppress, close with and destroy the enemy.

Endurance and strength are still important in the infantry.

[Dayganistan]

The "does x make someone a better soldier?" questions are getting genuinely annoying. These are all factors that have no bearing on someone's ability to accurately fire a rifle, react to enemy fire, and to suppress, close with and destroy the enemy.

Endurance and strength are still important in the infantry.

Which are things that can be trained and developed. Besides, most infantry are riding in trucks or some other sort of personnel carrier these days so it's not like they're consistently having to ruck 100 pounds of gear for 30 miles every day.

[Gallia-]

Maybe if they didn't have trucks they'd still be winning wars IDK just a thought.

[Dayganistan]

Maybe if they didn't have trucks they'd still be winning wars IDK just a thought.

I don't give my infantry trucks outside of their attached logistics personnel. Unless this is just a glorified armoured truck.

[Gallia-]

It has four wheels and a motor, so yes, it is indeed a "truck".

[Crookfur]

It has four wheels and a motor, so yes, it is indeed a "truck".

Nah thats a family hatchback

[Gallia-]

I'm just shilling for motorized sidecars and walking bipedal micro mecha honestly.

OTOH that might mean Reliant Robins are acceptable mechanization. :think:

[Purpelia]

Reliant Robin staff car. Y/N?

[Crookfur]

Does a man raised in mountainous areas and accustomed to mountaineering from a young age make a better infantryman (Private to Lance-Corporal)?

if you must keep playing this game then honestly no. Such an individual's skills, experience and enhanced physicality are likely wasted in the junior ranks unless he makes it to cpl and becomes a PT instructor and/or joins/leads the regiments recreational climbing club.

If he has also learnt decent map reading and land nav skills then his background would probably help more as a junior officer.

[Crookfur]

I'm just shilling for motorized sidecars and walking bipedal micro mecha honestly.

OTOH that might mean Reliant Robins are acceptable mechanization. :think:

reliant robins are not acceptable anything.

[Austria-Bohemia-Hungary]

I'm just shilling for motorized sidecars and walking bipedal micro mecha honestly.

OTOH that might mean Reliant Robins are acceptable mechanization. :think:

reliant robins are not acceptable anything.

You just havent tried hard enough.

[Immoren]

It has four wheels and a motor, so yes, it is indeed a "truck".

I don't know why my mind was blown when I first time saw jeep defined as "truck" in English language context.

[Gallia-]

Sedans are now trucks too.

[Purpelia]

reliant robins are not acceptable anything.

You just havent tried hard enough.

Reliant robin is the British Aerogavin than?

[Gallia-]

It's the British Geo Metro.

[Purpelia]

Just imagine it. It's the third world war. The bombs have dropped. And in the skies of Britain american Aerogavins are preparing to launch an invasion of the Soviet Union escorted by rocket assisted VTOL Reliant Robin fighters.

[Spirit of Hope]

I just realized I hadn't posted here yet.

Here's the Navy, here's the Air Force. Please let me know what I've messed up.

[Gallia-]

imagine having 11 carriers and 80 subs and 1 carriers and 800 subs

the ussr was a navy from the future

[West Kronisia]

So, I wish to construct an army befitting my small-ish nation, somewhere between 15-20 average size divisions. My country is somewhat hilly, with a few small mountains. What would you guys recommend i construct said army out of - I.E. Would it be a bad idea to have a few tank divisions, or would it be a better idea to invest in mountaineer divisions? Or how else would you lay out such an army in terms of mechanized infantry (if at all), Armour, etc?

I also intend for this army to be a mostly defensive force, but within reason capable of striking out into neighbouring territories if the situation requires it. Furthermore; Is this too small an army? My nation is of around 20-30 million people, am I thinking too small scale, or am I even over-scaling? I'm not a huge expert on the structuring of an army.

(I may have other questions down the line depending on answers any of you wonderfully helpful human beings could give me)

[Spirit of Hope]

So, I wish to construct an army befitting my small-ish nation, somewhere between 15-20 average size divisions. My country is somewhat hilly, with a few small mountains. What would you guys recommend i construct said army out of - I.E. Would it be a bad idea to have a few tank divisions, or would it be a better idea to invest in mountaineer divisions? Or how else would you lay out such an army in terms of mechanized infantry (if at all), Armour, etc?

I also intend for this army to be a mostly defensive force, but within reason capable of striking out into neighbouring territories if the situation requires it. Furthermore; Is this too small an army? My nation is of around 20-30 million people, am I thinking too small scale, or am I even over-scaling? I'm not a huge expert on the structuring of an army.

(I may have other questions down the line depending on answers any of you wonderfully helpful human beings could give me)

15-20 divisions for a population of 20-30 million is actually rather large. The US with 300 million has 16ish active divisions, including things like the USMC and independent units, the UK with 60 million people has around a division or two if it put everything together. Now this is after the rather major reduction in the size of armed forces given the end of the cold war.

As to composition, nothing you have said would indicate a reason to not have a largly mechanized force,though that is going to depend on a number of factors.

The biggest question is who do you see your armed forces fighting and where, and then building your military around that. Defending against a larger mechanized force on flat terrain is going to be very different from invading through mountains against a smaller force. Some things will hold true in both, tanks and trucks are always good, but other things will change, maybe you don't need sophisticated air defense.

[West Kronisia]

snip

15-20 divisions for a population of 20-30 million is actually rather large. The US with 300 million has 16ish active divisions, including things like the USMC and independent units, the UK with 60 million people has around a division or two if it put everything together. Now this is after the rather major reduction in the size of armed forces given the end of the cold war.

As to composition, nothing you have said would indicate a reason to not have a largly mechanized force,though that is going to depend on a number of factors.

The biggest question is who do you see your armed forces fighting and where, and then building your military around that. Defending against a larger mechanized force on flat terrain is going to be very different from invading through mountains against a smaller force. Some things will hold true in both, tanks and trucks are always good, but other things will change, maybe you don't need sophisticated air defense.

A tad more background on my part would have probably cleared the first bit up a bit better; My nation is a split-off from a slightly larger nation, who wish for us to re-enter the fold; Therefore a larger standing army is necessary to the nation's survival. That being said, I don't know if i'm still aiming way high division number wise even in that case.

The intended environment of combat is largely similar to my own nation (being the other half of said environment), though most critically, my defensive positions would most likely be centred around the aforementioned hilly/mountainous terrain that runs across the border zone. The mountains are a (relatively) small distance into my nation's borders, placing them firmly in our hands for positioning defensively, but also allowing for offensive actions to be less likely to get bogged down in that chokepoint, provided the border holds, obviously.

The air war would be approximately 20-30 planes from both sides, so air defense would need to be considered, but also not a huge priority - Would it be worth just sticking mostly to man-portable equipment, or would we be better off ordering a couple Shilkas? Would it also be wise to invest in a few attack helicopters, in terms of providing fire support to forces crossing said border?

In terms of general enemy size, the military would be of a comparable size, possibly with a slight tech advantage (I.E. we'd be equipped with slightly older equipment like BMP-2's and T-64s, whereas they'd be more in the BMP-3, T-72 sort of tech level). So not entirely outgunned, but requiring some good tactics to outdo the enemy?

(I predict that this war would be fairly back and forth for a while, on the border, with our strong defensive positions able to stave off their better tech, and then their higher tech doing the same if we were on the offensive).

Am I being too unrealistic, or?