Maximilian Wilson wrote: >On 1/19/06, Ken Koester <kkoester at email.ers.usda.gov> wrote: > > >>Less than relevant. It takes quite a while to train a mob to be an >>army, no matter what you equip them with. >> >> > >There's still a quantitative difference, probably nearly a qualitative >difference. It appears to take a *long* time to train a good sorcerer, >whereas you can make a decent soldier in less than a year. More to the >point, if e.g. motion-sensor guns a la /Aliens/ were found to be >useful, I could quickly deploy them in large numbers. It most >certainly is a relevant factor. > > > You can get a greenie in less than a year, but he won't know how to move in combat, what is dangerous and what is not, how to keep himself alive and healthy in the field, how not to kill his comrades & a host of other things. And such a soldier would be more equivalent to the average Dragon, anyhow. If you want to compare to an army of sorcerors, then factor in the 20 or so years of education necessary to become the average high tech whiz. As for rapid deployment, check the German armaments production figures for, say, '39-41. It is instructive how long it took them to deploy things in the middle of a war. Heck, compare with how long it has taken the US to deploy Strykers, armored Hummers & trucks, & effective body armor for the troops in Iraq. >I think Howard made a good point about conquering vs. invading. >Logistics are way outside my area of expertise, while you appear to >know something about the subject, so to an extent I'm willing to >defer. > Doesn't really matter; your armies aren't fighting in a vacuum. They have a range. They have needs. High tech armies need enormous amounts of things, just to stay in one place, much less move around. And when they do move around, all that stuff has to move with them. I cut off the flow of juice to your electronics, it just becomes a box somewhat less protective than the equivalent mass of iron. Heck, it takes 3 or 4 or 5--maybe 10-- of your high tech guys totin' beans, just to get one guy to blast out with a directed energy weapon. Invading, defending, conquering--doesn't much matter; unless you suddenly repeal the law of inertia or tap into a *concentrated* energy-everywhere source, you've got an enormous tail to take care of, even if all you do is repel an invader. Even if you repel one at your border--borders are not the factor, distance from railhead/port is. A Dragaeran army has little of that to contend with. Your best counter isn't high tech at all, but to burn all the fields in its path. >I know little about military equipment except that RPGs >seem to have a reputation for being robust and simple to operate, but >perhaps RPG rounds are closer to bazooka rounds than to regular >grenades. > > > They are bazooka (well, panzerfaust) descendents, definitely. They're meant to tackle armor & to a lesser extent, structures. They aren't the best antipersonnel weapons. Snarkhunter