 February 22, 2015 - 1:41pm | Sometimes you find the oddest things in the timeline, I openned the book and my eyes fell on this: 81FY Sathar Fleet 1 attacks Madderly's Star. They encounter the new Spacefleet fortress Kdikit. Its resistance is fierce and buys the needed time for reinforcements to arrive. Dramune sends three frigates and a destroyer from its militia while the UPF dispatches two destroyers and two light cruisers from its non-attached ships roster. Right away some things and questions jump out at me: 1. the space fortress at Madderly's STar is new, setting wise that means it was under construction for a time before the war. So during the period between SW1 & SW2 it was a major public work being built and impacting the economy at Madderly's star. This is significant if PCs are travelling through the system and may figure into an adventure if they are a freighter crew bringing parts and materials for the space fortress. 2. Dramune sent what? Dramune doesn't have a system government but rather two separate and sometimes warring governments. Image the negotiation that had to go on for the two governments to work together to do this? Or did Inner Reach simply send the ships and hoped that Outer Reach wouldn't go "fishing in troubled waters?" I might not be a dralasite, vrusk or yazirian but I do play one in Star Frontiers! |
 March 7, 2015 - 1:34pm | Surely that robot army isn't much of a threat unless if can be transported off world? That would also make it vulnerable - i.e. they could all be destroyed in one ship. So can troops on a troop transport. UPF ground defenses are spelled out quite accurately so as to make a direct assault pretty fatal. However, the Malthar is a smuggler, not a warrior...infiltration and subterfuge would be his manner of implementing such an army over a direct assault. He'd find a way to slip those 'bots through the back door. |
 March 7, 2015 - 2:04pm | Well, maybe. He'd need a large amount of robots to make his threat realistic. I can't see how that would worry the UPF unless his target can't really defend itself. |
March 7, 2015 - 5:51pm | Well, maybe. He'd need a large amount of robots to make his threat realistic. I can't see how that would worry the UPF unless his target can't really defend itself.
Taking the order of battle from the 2nd Sathar War into consideration, there's something like 14 or 16 worlds from the AD/KH rules that lack any fleet vessels at all. Meaning no cargo inspections can be made prior to cargo transfer. A captain operating under MalCo charter can easily claim any cargo he wants and it won't be unveiled until the first shuttle begins offloading on the surface. And if that captain chooses to be more subtle he can disassemble those bots and ship them in disguised cargo form to be reassembled later on the surface. |
 March 7, 2015 - 6:15pm | What did I start? Sounds like a great job but where did you say we had to go? |
March 7, 2015 - 6:57pm | Nothing, you merely fueled the fire that further proves how mankind is essentially evil by nature.  |
 March 7, 2015 - 8:07pm | Of course, to be fair given the robotics rules any "robot army" he creates, someone, somewhere has a better than even shot of turning against him  As for said army being a "threat" its a legitimate one actually. How do you actually KNOW that cargo module full of "machine parts" isn't a several companies of powered down combat robots without inspecting them? As noted several Fronitier systems don't have the capability to even do inspections let along interdiction so I could easily see someone in the UFP getting nervous about it... Randy |
March 7, 2015 - 8:10pm | Nothing, you merely fueled the fire that further proves how mankind is essentially evil by nature. "Mankind?" Granted "technically" because its us "humans" that are fueling the discussion but Malthar isn't actually human... Would you be willing to extend that to "organic sentients" in general instead? :) Randy |
 March 7, 2015 - 8:26pm | (Tongue firmly planted in cheek) If you are a pirate this implies greed. Greed implies the desire to want more of something. If you are the leader of a pirate guild, you are a ruthless dicator who got there by showing you are desiring power. What better way to gain power than having a robot control army at your disposal? As long as no one hacks them, they are loyal and will never question your authority. So we can safely say, he not all quite there, is quite ruthless and he's paranoid. This imples he has human traits and is quite evil... |
March 7, 2015 - 8:55pm | (Tongue firmly planted in cheek) If you are a pirate this implies greed. Greed implies the desire to want more of something. If you are the leader of a pirate guild, you are a ruthless dicator who got there by showing you are desiring power. What better way to gain power than having a robot control army at your disposal? As long as no one hacks them, they are loyal and will never question your authority. So we can safely say, he not all quite there, is quite ruthless and he's paranoid. This imples he has human traits and is quite evil...
Will not at ALL argue that one :) Downside of a robot army other than hacking though... Watch what you say... Malthar: "Blast It!" Robots do so... Malthar: I lose more messengers that way...grumble, grumble... Next! Randy |
March 7, 2015 - 9:17pm | On the subject of robot deployment methods: Use of reentry pods stacked full of robots on planets where the space radar system doesn't cover the entire planet. You could land an entire army after several trips without them even knowing it. Another way is to use an asteriod base chalked full of robots and assualt craft that can be switched on whenever they are ready to invade. Finally this: http://www.dailymotion.com/video/xzb2du_crusher-joe-movie-part-2-english-dubbed_shortfilms very evil way of deploying robots and a nice adventure seed. |
March 8, 2015 - 3:14am | But it seems to me that in order to subjugate a whole planet you'd need a huge amount of robots. Sometimes SF and some other sci-fi RPGs tend to treat planets more like single countries. A robot army might be able to cause enough trouble to a single country, but not a whole planet IMHO... |
March 8, 2015 - 8:12am |
I'm going off memory here: I believe that the US Armed Forces total .01% of the population combine or 3.76 million people. The number of combat soldiers is small because it takes more people to support just one combat soldier. If we were to expand this to a global army on a planet with 7 billion people the arm forces would only equal 700 million soldiers. Realistically, I see about 1/3 of the armed force or 231 million people are actually involved in combat.
The issue for SF is really a planet with a large enough populations to support an army of 700 million people?
While doing the weapons cards (Still working on it) the maximum damage for a projectile weapon (excluding rocket launchers and recoilless rifles) is 60 points. An armored level 6 robot with 100 hp would take three hits before going down. The average PC would only take two hits before being knocked out. Add to that a base chance of 70% chance to hit, your military or militia is going to take heavy losses before putting down such an invasion.
If our aliens robot invasion forces have mobile factory ships which can rapidly reproduce soldier then things get even more tricky. Because robots are easier to produce than sentient species. And think of this for a moment, it takes two soldiers to rescue a wounded soldier from the battlefield. So the robots really only have to incapacitate soldiers to actually win a battle. Properly placed hits and your army is reduce rather quickly. Subjugation doesn't call for whole sale slaughter just taking out the opposition and reducing their ability to fight to a manageable level.
|
March 8, 2015 - 10:09am | Add further you don't in fact have to take over the planet to get what you want. The main drawback is total exposure once the robots go live which for someone like the Malthar is going to be very off character. Overwhelming hit and runs, attacks on point source objectives and other more "limited" goals would be worrying enough. The fact that he could very well in fact take over an outpost or colony planet would be added incentive to "do something" about the situation for the UFP. (And for added scenerios/worries who's to say he doesn't have a couple hundered of these robots that he smuggled into Port Lorraine or other important cities just waiting for his monthly "don't activate and destroy the city" signals to NOT arrive?) Randy |
March 8, 2015 - 11:16am | I'd say that you probably do indeed have to take over a whole planet to get what you want. Otherwise there are enough people to form an opposition. You'd either have to subjugate everyone or face resistance. That or have the majority support your subjugation of them. |
 March 8, 2015 - 12:08pm | Don't size frontier world armies based on Earth. We are actively fighting over limited space and resources on one world. The frontier societies and governments are resource and real estate rich. We have whole wolrds for governments to run. They do not need armies sized for invasion from the neighboring content but rather sized to deal with invasion after space fleet does their battles. Compare to island nations of Earth, not content nations. I see most land battles between frontier governments or corporations being over specific items or resources that are unique, not conquest of whole worlds. This is where the Sathar threat is unique. The frontier conflicts over world domination are all past events from before the Sathar like the free world rebellion. There were a few fights and then the frontier stabilized because there are so many worlds available for the populations to disperse among thus relieving the stress. This is not to say that you can't have an empire arise, that's fair game for any campaign, the setting in the books just don't present that to give the GM freedom to grow from a simpler cleaner political foundation. -iggy |
March 8, 2015 - 12:10pm | (Tongue firmly planted in cheek) If you are a pirate this implies greed.
FWIW Outer Reach is not a pirate world, it's a criminal world. Piracy is but one of the many facets of that gem. |
March 8, 2015 - 1:26pm | KRingway: If you go for total pacification, you might as well start loobing nukes because you can't get rid of everybody that doesn't like you. Trust me when I say that I have given interstellar war an aweful lot of thought. You want to change the government and prevent the military from hindering you in the future. You start messing with the population and they begin to see you ill light, then you have a major problem. The simplest way to take over a world would be using a PR campaign and telling the people that you're the good guys coming to get you out from under the present system of government. The less people you kill, both civilian and military adds the this PR campaign and people start saying, "These guys aren't so bad after all." Minor changes in the way a people are governed can go a long way. The end result is you've changed the government and the people believe their lives have improved for the best. There will always be those die hards scream. "The old way was better!" Warfare isn't always about guns and bullets. You have to win over the hearts and minds of the people as well. Do this, then the rebels won't have a pool of people to draw from and the rebellion dies out. Rebel also face the same problems, kill to many civilians and the become terrrorist and they loss support. Take out the enemy without killing civilian and the could be seen as heros. If the military reacts to these attacks with a heavy hand, they will then be seen as the enemy. Both parties play this game, to ensure their hold on the population. Loss the support of the people, you lose a world. |
March 8, 2015 - 4:35pm | But that only works if the whole planet shares one culture, political system and parties, etc. I don't think planets would be as homogenous as that - it's more of a hangover from various sci-fi tropes (i.e. Star Trek) to have the 'one planet, one culture' theme. |
March 8, 2015 - 5:14pm | SF worlds are far from fully populated. The books state that away from the cities they are still wild and unexplored. So the limited number of cities have a stronger representation in the culture of each world. -iggy |
March 8, 2015 - 5:26pm | I'd say that you probably do indeed have to take over a whole planet to get what you want. Otherwise there are enough people to form an opposition. You'd either have to subjugate everyone or face resistance. That or have the majority support your subjugation of them. Not really and again it greatly depends on "what-you-want" :) (Recall that according to game the Sathar have/will do this at least twice to the Froniter) If you can take down a majority of the main "resistance" points (government forces and infrastructue mostly) the population is pretty vulnerable to exploitation at least for a limited time. In context, you can pretty much do what you want for at least a little while before the opposition can get organized and ready. IF you're fast enough and smart you will already have a "regime-change" kit in readyness to ease things along and IF (and who doesn't think the big-M would NOT be slick enough :) ) you do something like "repulse" the "invaders" with your already groomed and readied "resistance" forces you pretty much have a nice puppet government (and planet) handed to you on a platter. But if you're looking for a quick strike and maxium extracted value without regard to long-term damage or fall-out you can pretty much smash and grab quite a bit of loot with a robot army and surprise on your side. I would note however this kind of thing is EXACTLY what the UPF was formed to prevent and the downside is that once this is done you have NOWHERE to hide in the Frontier because the UPF WILL come after you with eveything they have. But that only works if the whole planet shares one culture, political system and parties, etc. I don't think planets would be as homogenous as that - it's more of a hangover from various sci-fi tropes (i.e. Star Trek) to have the 'one planet, one culture' theme. As noted the game pretty much states that even the "high population" planets are not fully explored or exploited and short of a "home-world" planet or one of the main planets of the UPF just about every other planet is vulnerable to something like this. Again though the main thrust here is "what-do-you-want" and how willing are you to do what needs to be done to get it. Randy |
March 8, 2015 - 5:51pm | Don't size frontier world armies based on Earth. We are actively fighting over limited space and resources on one world. The frontier societies and governments are resource and real estate rich. We have whole wolrds for governments to run. They do not need armies sized for invasion from the neighboring content but rather sized to deal with invasion after space fleet does their battles. Compare to island nations of Earth, not content nations. And according to the game the Frontier/UPF didn't even HAVE an 'army' before SWII, (which I don't buy really as even a "milita" by planetary standards is going to be pretty much a standing military just without interplanetary/interstellar carrying capacity most likely) just milita's and police forces. According to the game they pretty much "got-along" with little conflict and would seem to have been incapable of stopping an "invasion" if Spacefleet and planetary defenses couldn't. I see most land battles between frontier governments or corporations being over specific items or resources that are unique, not conquest of whole worlds. This is where the Sathar threat is unique. The frontier conflicts over world domination are all past events from before the Sathar like the free world rebellion. There were a few fights and then the frontier stabilized because there are so many worlds available for the populations to disperse among thus relieving the stress. This is not to say that you can't have an empire arise, that's fair game for any campaign, the setting in the books just don't present that to give the GM freedom to grow from a simpler cleaner political foundation. Pretty much as I see it. The UPF doesn't interfer with local conflict and planetary governments and corporations would fight "point-objective" battles for specific locations containing resources or other points of interest rather than for world domination. The latter just isn't as "efficent" and costs too much both in terms of power projection and resources. As I understand it even the conflict on Laco's World is pretty much medium or small units raiding back and forth for specific locations rather than all out war. The Sathar on the other hand have both the will and means to wage planetary war for domination or destruction though they seem to prefer the latter. (And in fact do it the "hard way" for no apparent reason :) ) A robot army would be an extension of the same mentality as is 'normal' on the Frontier, overwhelming force on a point-objective to sieze a specifica goal or target. The fact that it could be capable of something on the order of "taking-out" a planets government and associated infrastructure would be something that would be realized by the UPF only later since it's not "normally" a consideration. It would be a VERY bad move by the Malthar and probably very, very unlikely but his ambition would seem to be NOT as limited as one would hope may very well be why the UPF takes interest. Randy |
March 8, 2015 - 5:58pm | Take a moment and reflect on history. Different poltical idealogies and cultures came together to stop Hilter because they decide it was worth it. Yes I know some may have used personal and political motivation to join the cause but joined anyway. The same could be said of people who are being invaded by aliens or killer robots from outer space. Introducing a threat from outside the planet may show the world we are only one spieces and we need to act in a cohesive manner from that point on. Yes it's a bit Trekish but I can see it happening. Back to my original discussion: The key to conquest is showing the 99% of the population that the change has not impacted their daily lives and will not harm them in the future. Taking out the political idealogy real doesn't concern the average person, it all about food, shelter and quality of life. If the invaders allow the majority of the population these thing then there will be little or no resistance to the change in government. Major disruptions in daily life such as bombing and slaughtering innocences tend to harden a population against the invaders. Hatred is a strong emotion and takes time to counter in war torn areas of this planet. You could imigine the resentment an alien race would stir up if they commited war crimes on the scale Hilter during WWII. Oppressing the population in this manner only breeds more soldiers for the invaders to fight. Fear is another fact which must be consider. If it your world verse mine there is a fifty fifty chance I might win and you could lose, so it might be worth going to war for. However if it your empire against my planet then i'd have to throw up the white flag in a heartbeat because of the numbers you might throw against me, not to mention the resources at your disposal. Survival usually outweighs poltical idealogy and a person's willingness to fight. Fear also can deter the enemy from attacking. We see this now even with the invention of "smart bombs". Governments are so fearful of colateral damage we tend to hold off firing at targets in densely populated areas out of fear we may injury civilians. Robotic armies don't have fear and they would do what was necessary to win a war. Without fear an enemy has no controls, so would it be worth the misery such an army can bring down on your planet or are you willing to fight them no matter the cost? |
March 8, 2015 - 7:02pm | Robotic armies won't have "fear" but those that program them and use them might :) Think for a moment how BADLY those robots are going to be pushing all the WRONG buttons in the above scenerios. No fear but also little "discretion" between a combat target and a kid with a gun and since the kids now a "target" the mother and father who try and protect him and on, and on. That's another problem with robotic weapons sans a "sentient-in-the-loop" control system. Those robots are going to do EXCACTLY what you "tell" (program) them to do no matter the consequences to your carefully laid plans. Frankly while I can and do "see" justification for the UFP to have had a hand in taking down the Malthar due to his robot army and possible intentions I very much see scenerio's where they are going to be dealing with the "fall-out" from that action for a while afterward. Since Dramune Run occurs before SWII I have to wonder if the "reason" Outer Reach was willing to send ships to aid Inner Reach forces was part of that aftermath. Maybe the OR "powers-that-be" are trying to kiss up to the UPF to show exactly how much UNLIKE the Malthar they are for that very reason :) Randy |
March 9, 2015 - 8:19pm | Malthar's robot army is not about having an army its about having body guards he can trust, which is a very important consideration to crime lords like the Malthar. Any shipping of his robot army off to be destroyed would be viewed as a serious threat to his safety. The robots are an expression of his paranoia not a true army. I might not be a dralasite, vrusk or yazirian but I do play one in Star Frontiers! |
March 11, 2015 - 1:09pm | Malthar's robot army is not about having an army its about having body guards he can trust, which is a very important consideration to crime lords like the Malthar. Any shipping of his robot army off to be destroyed would be viewed as a serious threat to his safety. The robots are an expression of his paranoia not a true army.
Partially true. If bodyguarding was the sole mission he'd have security robots instead of combat robots (for starters, a security robot can peak at 6th level with better chances to hit versus the combat robot's max level of 4). Remember the Malthar committed a large detachment of "bodyguards" to storm the Gullwind. Combat robots suggest offense, security robots suggest defense. |
 March 11, 2015 - 5:07pm | Perhaps there is something "special" that made the bots a bigger threat than they where? What if Malthar was doing business with Mechanoids and the UPF got wind of that and got paranoid too.. "Never fire a laser at a mirror." |
March 11, 2015 - 6:27pm | Mechanoid based self-programing combat robots? I can see NO possible downside to this scenerio... Randy |
March 22, 2015 - 1:43pm | I think the psychology is vallid even if the malthar is stocking extremely offensive weapons. He is paranoid and goes in for what he percieves as the best weapon system. It not unusual for paranoid types to acquire overkill in the name of personal defense "just in case". I might not be a dralasite, vrusk or yazirian but I do play one in Star Frontiers! |
 March 22, 2015 - 8:14pm | I propose one minor change to the Zeb timeline:
 |
March 22, 2015 - 9:58pm | "See-through apparel becomes fashionable almost immediately."  "Never fire a laser at a mirror." |
