Concepts, Ideas And Random Oddments

Post Reply
User avatar
Booted Vulture
Posts: 965
Joined: Mon May 19, 2008 9:33 pm

Concepts, Ideas And Random Oddments

Post by Booted Vulture »

I thought we needed a thread similar to mad ideas or the concept thread in Comix. A non-canon area where we can put ideas that may or may not be canon or for feedback whether it would fit in the verse. Or just random sections you've written up but won't really fit with your factions. So other people can see and possibly adopt them.


For starters I've got two ideas for possible aliens at the moment, that I'd like input on. Firstly, a race of winged Raptors. The wings wouldn't be there for providing flight but the generate lift to allow faster running and making it easy to scale sharp slopes. To make this evolutionarily viable, i would think that it would need a lot of said slopes. Which means lots of mountains; which in turn would imply a lot of tectonic plates and lots of activity to create said mountains. Thus their world would be plagued by lots of volcanoes and earthquakes. Which would lead to an interesting 'everything you know can change instantly' philosophy.

The second idea is related to Venus. Venus is a very hot planet, covered in nasty and dense sulphuric clouds and is generally not a place life is generally going to develop. On the other hand at sixty kilometres up the temperature and pressure drops to levels we would consider habitable. (~280K/1 bar) I was thinking of a species that evolved in the atmosphere of such a small hot world but I can't think of a justification of how life is going to reach any sort of complexity as a species let alone becoming a sapient civilisations.
Ah Brother! It's been too long!
User avatar
Artemis
Global Mod
Posts: 392
Joined: Thu May 22, 2008 3:31 am
Location: Savannah, Georgia
Contact:

Re: Concepts, Ideas And Random Oddments

Post by Artemis »

I dunno man, that Venus-liked planet giving birth to life is fascinating! Just because so far all the alien races here are low-pressure, oxygen-breathing, carbon-based life, doesn't mean this has to be universal. To quote Spock: "It's life, Jim but not as we know it."

I say run with it! I want to see what you've got, man!

As far as mad ideas, I've been thinking about re-booting the Kingdom of Aeon for this universe as a C-WEB faction, and they would in a way be a result of time travel...still working on that.
"The universe's most essential beauty is its endlessness. There is room and resources enough for all of us. Whether there is room for all of our passions is the question, and the problem that we work tirelessly to find a solution to."

-Qhameio Allir Nlafahn, Commonwealth ambassador, during the signing of the Kriolon Treaty.
Blackwing
Posts: 160
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 1:05 am

Re: Concepts, Ideas And Random Oddments

Post by Blackwing »

The winged raptors would be well adapted to their world, lots of volcanoes means lots of hot air currents, which in turn would mean that they would be able to glide distances too (as well as get up those slopes easier).

Wings aren't terribly useful for running fast, though, which is probably why ground dwelling birds (like emus and ostriches) on earth have gotten rid of them for the most part.

As a side note, the my anal side would like to point out that raptors, the word meaning birds of prey, always have wings.

As for the venus idea: complexity doesn't seem to be the issue. On earth, most lifeforms started out in the sea, because it provides buoyancy and a method for single-celled organisms to spread far and wide and diversify. On a Venus-like planet all that would be required would be for the single-celled organisms to be equipped to stay up that high (and likewise multi-celled organisms would either have to be small enough to stay airborne or require some kind of gas-sack or wings).

The problem, to me, would seem to be nutrition. The best option I could think of is a sort of air-based nitrogen and carbon chain, with single-celled organisms producing a sort of aero-sol cloud of nutrients for higher tier organisms ('airplants' and 'airfungi') to absorb and process. Then you would get floaty-animals living off of them.

Some of the these airnimals would use gas bladders and large membranes to stay buoyant in the air, while others might evolve into creatures very much like earth insects, they would be small enough to live on airplants without weighing them down too much to stay up, but not themselves capable of staying buoyant in the air on their own. Insect-like wings would allow them to hop from airplant to airplant. This would allow them to grow denser than airnimals reliant on their own air buoyancy.
Eventually plants with a gasbladder might be crawling with little pseudo-insects and parasitic airplants and airfungi. Natural selection would see to it that those with gasbladders big enough to stay in the sweet zone with this life on them would win out against gas bladder airplants with gasbladders either too small or too large.

These airplants would be become sort of like great big air-trees. At some point, completely non-buoyant creeper-style plants might evolve and connect multiple air-trees. This would lead to air-tree forest-islands floating in the skies of our semi-Venus planet. On these, 'land'-based life could evolve.

Also there would be semi-self-buoyant animals relying on 'stealing' bits of gas from air-tree in order to stay afloat.

And of course some of them would be like a proverbial locust plague, descending on air-tree islands, eating all they could and then stealing gas from the trees, causing the whole thing to plummet down (or rise up out of the sweet zone if they take less gas than is needed to compensate for the mass they eat). Except of course that some islands will evolve in unison with these 'locusts', relying on them to come every once in a while and eat away the excess matter threatening to send the island plummeting, in exchange for the gas they need to stay up and move on.

These locust plagues or some other 'gas stealing' organism might evolve in unison with the air-trees to carry spores from one group of air-trees to another, thus pollinating them and ensuring genetic diversity.

And as for the sentient beings:

You then have a myriad of beings to choose from who might evolve into sentience and each option brings with it an interesting cultural perspective.

Maybe the sentients evolved from the locust plague and they set out into the galaxy to find other worlds to consume as they consume the islands of their homeworld (if in a less literal sense).

Maybe the sentients evolved from 'land-based' animals forced to deal with the consequences whenever their numbers became too large for the island to hold.
If so, how would they go about it?
Would they all move to a bigger island until no bigger island was available?
Would they split up, with part of the group staying on their home island and the other part moving on to one or more other islands?
Would they cultivate their islands, growing them larger and promoting the growing of air-trees to support the weight?
Would they artificially control their population, throwing the old, the sick, the weak, or even simply 'the available' over the edge of their island? Would they do so in the name of religion or would it simply be a practical concern? Would those thrown over the edge be thought of as inferior and therefore be thrown over, or would they be considered heroes, giving themselves up for the good of the island?
Or would they, maybe, seek out another island and tie that to their own, eventually creating huge floating continents held up by millions and millions of air-trees?
Or a combination of some or all of the above?

How would that affect their psychology? Would they do as they did on their homeworld, moving from world to world as their population got too large for their current world, leaving their homeworld behind as 'too small'? Would they live on spaceships instead, building them larger and larger as their population grew?
Would they see the expanse of space as threatening, a far cry from their restricted orderly lives on the islands? Or would they embrace the freedom afforded to them by weightlessness, finally no longer having to worry about 'taking the great plunge' every time some parasite pops a tree?

Plenty of material for a race there, methinks.
So Einstein was wrong when he said "God does not play dice". Consideration of black holes suggests, not only that God does play dice, but that He sometimes confuses us by throwing them where they can't be seen. ~ Stephen Hawking
User avatar
speaker-to-trolls
Posts: 766
Joined: Thu May 22, 2008 12:34 am
Location: The World of Men

Re: Concepts, Ideas And Random Oddments

Post by speaker-to-trolls »

^Not to sound like a brown nose, but that is the way science fiction worldbuilding is meant to be done: Take a concept and extrapolate it from the bottom up. I'd be very interested to see what you can make of these Venusians as well, incidentally. The raptors could be interesting as well, of course, constant volcanism could mean that any succesful civilisation on Raptor Planet would be far less centralised than human civilisation, so as to avoid the issues involved in the capital of ones empire being smothered by lava. Of course the climate would still have to be stable enough to permit them to develope settled civilisation, is there any way in which predictable eruptions could actually be used by a culture to its own benefit?

I have an idea I've been working on, incidentally, and while I'm posting in this thread I guess I should see what the general consensus on it is: We have a planet which is subject to an extremely unpleasant seasonal change about once per 10 years or so, an irradiation caused by drawing closer to the blue giant its primary orbits. The radiation mostly doesn't stick around, but while the planet is in the path of the blue giant it kills most large life forms. Some life forms have, over a long and gradual process, developed a system of reproduction where their own memories are implanted into the next generation, which gestate in secure caves during the ultraviolet season, and in at least one species the accumulation of memories has forced the development of intelligence just to put them in order. So as a result there is a continuity of experience between these things as they are today and their ancestors, though obviously a certain amount of detail is lost over the generations. There are a few consequences here.
For one, they have no concept of the afterlife, they don't really see the point.
For a second, they don't like the idea of living on asteroids or space stations, they're too exposed to radiation and they prefer somewhere where they can all retreat and sporulate when the mood takes them.
And there are some others.

But since serious science is the aim in this incarnation of The Solidarity Wars, is this idea a bit too silly?
"Little monuments may be completed by their first architects, but great ones; true ones leave their copestones to posterity. God keep me from completing anything."
User avatar
Artemis
Global Mod
Posts: 392
Joined: Thu May 22, 2008 3:31 am
Location: Savannah, Georgia
Contact:

Re: Concepts, Ideas And Random Oddments

Post by Artemis »

I don't think it's silly at all - in fact, I think this is a great way to examine the concepts of memory and generational continuity. If you can come up with the way in which these memories are passed on, I think this would be a really fascinating race!
"The universe's most essential beauty is its endlessness. There is room and resources enough for all of us. Whether there is room for all of our passions is the question, and the problem that we work tirelessly to find a solution to."

-Qhameio Allir Nlafahn, Commonwealth ambassador, during the signing of the Kriolon Treaty.
Blackwing
Posts: 160
Joined: Wed Nov 05, 2008 1:05 am

Re: Concepts, Ideas And Random Oddments

Post by Blackwing »

It's not silly as such...

Genetic memory is an iffy suggestion. For one it does not work, for another it happens all the time in nature.

While there is no such thing as genetic memory in the sense that a child organism actually remembers anything the parent did. This is simply impossible to encode into DNA, since DNA is nothing more than a set of 'IF->THEN' instructions for when to use which enzyme in the development of the organism from zygote on. ('IF the temperature is above x degrees, the acidity of the environment is below y and cell 'foo' is producing enzyme 'a' -> THEN produce enzyme 'b' in cell 'bar') This eventually causes stemcells to turn into the correct organs in the right locations and once the organism is out of it's embryonic state they regulate things like which digestive enzyme to produce for certain foods, which catalyst and building block enzymes to produce for a certain hormone if there is a certain percentage of another hormone present and which hormone to produce when a certain area of the brain receives a certain stimulus.

However, that exact same DNA also incorporates instinct (the last two of the above examples), which IS a sort of 'genetic memory', if one that doesn't get passed on from learned by parents as much as it is a sort of pre-programmed 'memory' of how to react to something based on what helped previous generations survive based on their pre-programmed reaction when they experienced it (because the ones that responded with a different behaviour failed to reproduce).

Now humans, for instance, have an inherent instinct for learning language. Language is not a naturally occurring thing... At least not to the extent in which it is used in human interaction.
But a different sentient race might, instead of having an inherent instinct for learning 'language', have an instinct for learning a language.

In that blue star eco-system, if many species employ the 'sporulate' tactic and if all the parents die after the radiation incident, the young will have to rely entirely on instinct in order to thrive in their environment, because there are no parents to teach them any survival skills and nature may not allow them the time to learn on their own (any mistake against a competitor with 'better' instincts is liable to be fatal). In such a case, the development of highly advanced or very simple, but effective, instincts will be greatly encouraged by natural selection.

As such, organisms who are very well programmed to instinctually react to what they encounter will have a great advantage after 'sporulate' season. This comes in three forms:

[*] Those organisms who are powerfully built will best be served by having simple instincts such as a simple check: IF the creature I have just encountered is of the opposite gender and the same species and currently able to engage in sexual reproduction with me -> THEN mate, ELSE attack/eat., with a possible check of IF the creature I have just encountered is my child -> THEN ignore. From that point on evolution only needs to worry about making the animal as powerful as possible and keeping that instinct intact. As long as it is powerful enough to take on other creatures in the environment, it will thrive.

[*] The second method, which is ideal for herd and pack animals, is highly advanced social and interactive instincts. These instincts would include instant recognition of 'hierarchy' without an instinct designed to challenge for leadership.
In other situations where parents are able to teach survival skills, this encourages getting the most powerful member of the pack to become leader and produce more powerful heirs, it also keeps old, weak and unproductive members of the pack from staying leader due to hierarchy. For species whose entire adult population gets wiped out every (few) generations it is just a waste of energy.
These animals would initially base their hierarchy on an arbitrary characteristic. For instance: the size of a crest of the width of stripes on the animals fur. Members would find a mate with the same hierarchy position as them (so the alpha male with the biggest crest will mate with the alpha female with the biggest crest, this ensures that their children will also have a big crest and thus that their children will be leaders). If it turns out that the leaders' 'leadership' instincts are bad, however, the entire pack will instantly fall upon the leaders and all their children, to ensure that the bad leadership instincts get wiped out.
Everyone then moves up one place in the hierarchy and they continue. Eventually, leadership qualities will be stabily high and in the mean time other useful social instincts, such as improved communication instincts and basic survival instincts will also improve. The better their social instincts become, the more they will thrive.

[*] Instinct Type 3 is even more basic than Type 1, but it is well suited to fast reproducing, small (and stupid) animals. These are: IF (food -> THEN eat) AND (opposite gender of same species -> THEN mate), ELSE ignore.. Such animals are not likely to survive long individually, they will be eaten by carnivores a lot (they allow Type 2 carnivores to survive despite competition from Type 1 apex predators), but those who are most successful at eating fast (and lots) and reproducing young, often and in great numbers will be able to pass on their genes en masse. Type 3 animals will mostly be herbivores, carrion eaters and predators preying on other Type 3s.

Now, Type 1 and 3 are very unlikely to evolve any kind of intelligence, but they do encourage Type 2 to become more intelligent. After all, Type 2s need to compete for resources with both of them and while Type 1s pose the most threat to individual Type 2s, Type 3s are the most dangerous AND most useful to Type 2 species survival. While Type 2 herbivores simply may not have the time to get true dedicated long term crop fields up and running for their own generation even if they have the instincts to, Type 2 carni- and omnivores can use left over meat to attract Type 3 carrion eaters and they can (initially) use 'slash and burn' tactics to herd Type 3 herbivores into areas and keep them there.
This will eventually encourage the instinct to use tools (in order to build corrals to keep Type 3 herbivores in the designated areas, traps to capture Type 3 carrion eaters and weapons to fend off or even hunt Type 1 animals attracted to the concentration of food (plant or animal) in an otherwise barren area.

Eventually animals of any Type (but Type 2s, who rely on instinctual innovation to compete) may develop the instinct to burrow or build some type of shelter when the radiation season comes. Initially, only for their young to gestate in but eventually, they will also either hibernate or actively live there during radiation season.

Intelligent Type 2s will eventually evolve language instincts, possibly even extremely advanced ones (meaning that they not only learn spoken language very quickly and even understand basic language from birth, but also basic written language) in order to maintain communication among the community when there is no one to teach them. They may recognise from birth that the '~' symbol means 'water (nearby)' and the '/*\' symbol means 'this is a gestation burrow/cave for useful cattle' but '/X\' symbol means 'this is a gestation burrow/cave for dangerous predators'. They may also start taking tamed Type 1 or 3 (or even 2) cattle into the caves where their own young gestate in order to ensure that the next generation has useful cattle right from the start of their lives.

When they inevitable develop true sentience, they may start constructing elaborate underground burrows where they can survive through a few radiation seasons, which will allow them to acquire more abstract concept in their language. But they won't likely evolve any child-rearing instinct, because as soon as they start building underground areas safe from the radiation season with semi-permanent food supplies, other animals will start to have instincts geared towards invading these burrows or making a gestation burrow near them to allow their newly hatched young a very fat bounty once the radiation season ends.
As such, the sentient Type 2s will still need to be ready to abandon their burrows if an invasion happens. Some may involve the instinct to lure the predators away from their eggs (or larval young) by running into the radiation storm outside (thus tempting the more primitively instincted predators to go outside and die too, lured by the abundances of fresh tasty meat they don't need to find and kill first), others may simply lay their eggs in a different place than the adult burrow so that while the adults do still all die when the predators invade, the young survive and can come back after the radiation season to avenge them.

Either way, social instincts will continue to become more intricate until eventually the young of one generations can understand not just the spoken language of their species, but also written accounts left by the previous generation.
As such, the Community can keep a Chronicle detailing the history of the Community as well as know locations of food, water, hazards and even caches of supplies and tools stored to enable the Community to thrive even better than the last Generation.

Even though fathers and mother may never meet their children, they can leave their children written tales of their ancestors, just like their parents did for them.

And eventually they may even start to instinctually imprint the writings of their parents, or of the Community, into their own memories (possibly through dreams). For instance: while they are young if they read the symbol for 'great joy' their pleasure centre will be stimulate to release endorphins.

So when they read of the 'tale of Horgargr':
In the Generation of Two Tribes, the great hunter Horgargr travelled to the land of the Eastern Mountain to court his one true love from another tribe. Horgargr had read the tale of Sugrrragh Two-Legs who had led that tribe in the generation before and he knew that they were strong and honourable and that he would find his true mate among them. And so Horgargr travelled to their burrow and when he arrived there he found that the burrow was empty.
Horgargr seethed with rage at this great injustice and swore vengeance upon whoever had forced the tribe of the Eastern Mountain to abandon their ancestral burrow. Horgargr searched the burrow and found there a shield with emblem of the Rotting Swamp tribe.
Horgargr knew all too well from the saga of Sorgurhagr that the Rotting Swamp tribe were slavers and scum and so he sought a nest of Runnerbeasts and took for himself quickly a young Runnerbeast mare and though she was fiery and untamed, her speed was most excellent and so her rode her to Rotting Swamp where he came to the camp of the slavers. Though Horgargr was but one person, he was young and wielded the sword Fangbeast-Hewer that our tribe has long kept in the sacred shrine and so on his Runnerbeast he charged at them.
Many of them did Horgargr slay and many more still until he encountered loathsome Stabber-of-Backs. And Stabber-of-Backs thrust his spear into the back of Horgargr and so earned his name and Horgargr fell wounded and much pain was his, but he was not defeated.
Up rose Horgargr in righteous frenzy and slew loathsome Stabber-of-Backs with a strong attack and he saw that his victory was true.
Onward, Horgargr charged to the slave pen and open up the door he did with loud creaking. From the hole did many people come, of tribes from near and far and there were those whose language was not as ours and Horgargt they did honour as a hero. And from the Eastern Mountain tribe did former slaves come.
Among them there was a lovely maiden and Horgargr felt love for her as surely as the Light Above is blue as the scales of fat Horncattle.
Woe upon poor Horgargr then for her crest was small and his was large and surely she was below him as he was above her and his mate she could not be!
Joy upon lucky Horgargr for of her tribe her crest was smallest and of the men of her tribe all had larger crest than he and so their union was just and proper!
And so did Horgargr become of the Eastern Mountain tribe and as smallest crest did he become chronicler of the tribe.
This is why to this day we of the Liberators-of-Slaves tribe do honour Horgargr who brought honour to our tribe and send to the Eastern Mountain tribe of our number one male whose crest is not smallest of ours, but smaller than the smallest of theirs to mate with their smallest crest female and be their chronicler and why they do send to us two and eight of the descendants of Hunter-Mount, fiery mare whom Horgargr did ride in victory, that our two and eight largest crests may ride in honourable slaughter of those who would take slaves.


They will dream the tale of Horgargr next time they sleep and instinctually feel every thing the tale says Horgargr felt, see everything the tale says he saw, they will feel rage against slavers and they will respect the Eastern Mountain tribe. Of course, since a lot of them have never seen a Runnerbeast or a sword or the sky for that matter, so their imagination fills in the blanks and each interprets the meaning and details of the story individually.

It's not genetic memory as such, but in a way it's better.
A child with genetic memory of everything their ancestors experienced is impressive, but unless you're Frank frickin' Herbert, it's already been done and likely been done better than you can ('cause ol' Frank coulda written anything and it'd been original whereas you have to avoid sounding like him, else you'll be accused of writing a Dune rip-off).
But a species that experiences stories of ages past as if they were there, even if the story is completely made up, that's something you can spin and twist and turn in any direction you need to make it a good story.

I would suggest a 'non-radiation' period more more than 10 years though, Sentient species should get some livin' time in before they go the way of the microwave dinner.
So Einstein was wrong when he said "God does not play dice". Consideration of black holes suggests, not only that God does play dice, but that He sometimes confuses us by throwing them where they can't be seen. ~ Stephen Hawking
User avatar
Destructionator
Posts: 836
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 4:33 pm
Location: Watertown, New York
Contact:

Re: Concepts, Ideas And Random Oddments

Post by Destructionator »

speaker-to-trolls wrote:For a second, they don't like the idea of living on asteroids or space stations, they're too exposed to radiation and they prefer somewhere where they can all retreat and sporulate when the mood takes them.
It might also be quite the opposite: since anyone not able to deal with radiation is wiped out every other generation, the survivors will necessarily be well protected against it.

They could have a strong instinct to always have a place to hide, probably leading to your conclusion, or they might have self-repairing DNA that can be badly damaged by the radiation but then survive anyway. This ability would be useful in space travel - they wouldn't need to spend so much mass on radiation protection, since they are immune to all but the worst of it anyway.

There are real life bacteria that live in radiation baths, so we know it is possible, at least for simple organisms.
His Certifiable Geniusness, Adam D. Ruppe (My 'verse)
Marle: Lucca! You're amazing!
Lucca: Ain't it the truth! ... Oh, um...I mean...
Marle: Enough with the false modesty! You have a real gift! I would trade my royal ancestry for your genius in a heartbeat!

"I still really hate those pompous assholes who quote themselves in their sigs." -- Me
User avatar
speaker-to-trolls
Posts: 766
Joined: Thu May 22, 2008 12:34 am
Location: The World of Men

Re: Concepts, Ideas And Random Oddments

Post by speaker-to-trolls »

^While that makes a certain amount of sense, I assumed that what was applicable to prokaryotes wasn't applicable to these guys. Besides the whole sporulation and genetic memory gimmick really wouldn't work if they were radiation-hardened :)
Still, their planet would face the blue star for roughly half of each normal year anyway, so it might make sense for them to be more resistant to radiation than most people. Maybe. I still think they'd like a place to burrow to, preferably one which they could reasonably expect would survive while they were spores, there's more that can go catastrophically wrong with a space station than with a planet, at the end of the day.
Blackwing wrote:Many things
A variety of good thoughts there. My original idea was that these things developed their genetic memory to help them to remember important points about their environment, as the radiation season wouldn't appreciably change the landscape. The idea was therefore that they could subconsciously decide, for lack of a better term, to encode particular facts and pass them on; instincts, as you said, but instincts specific to the individual. I remember reading about a mouse which passed on how to solve a problem to its children after being taught to do so itself, but the children of that mouse couldn't pass on the knowledge to their children.

My mind was running along those lines, but with more sophisticated instincts and connections passed on, and in this way individual personalities could be passed on, since even if they all saw the same thing on the cave wall then they'd respond slightly differently to it.
"Little monuments may be completed by their first architects, but great ones; true ones leave their copestones to posterity. God keep me from completing anything."
User avatar
Heretic
Posts: 1750
Joined: Wed May 21, 2008 4:45 pm
Location: IN AMERICA

Re: Concepts, Ideas And Random Oddments

Post by Heretic »

Again, being persistant, but why don't we do an RP? It would be a good way to flesh out alien races and individuals from different polities out. Also, we could have the players be polities fighting against a godlike alien race, or something. Just a musing.
Computers are like Old Testament gods; lots of rules and no mercy.
-Joseph Campbell
User avatar
Destructionator
Posts: 836
Joined: Tue May 20, 2008 4:33 pm
Location: Watertown, New York
Contact:

Re: Concepts, Ideas And Random Oddments

Post by Destructionator »

I'd be for an RP. I'm also working on a couple stories for myself to set the stage (showing me entering the galactic stage), but RP would be good stuff.
His Certifiable Geniusness, Adam D. Ruppe (My 'verse)
Marle: Lucca! You're amazing!
Lucca: Ain't it the truth! ... Oh, um...I mean...
Marle: Enough with the false modesty! You have a real gift! I would trade my royal ancestry for your genius in a heartbeat!

"I still really hate those pompous assholes who quote themselves in their sigs." -- Me
User avatar
Heretic
Posts: 1750
Joined: Wed May 21, 2008 4:45 pm
Location: IN AMERICA

Re: Concepts, Ideas And Random Oddments

Post by Heretic »

I am using combined questions from http://www.military-sf.com/. I hope to use it to organize my polity's militaries. It goes like this (directly ripping off from site):

MISSION: What is the military unit or organization's primary mission? (Clerks won't be assigned to combat patrols and the Army won't be tasked with patrolling the ocean trade routes). Does it have a secondary (or peacetime) mission? (in some countries military units act as police, in the US the Constitution forbids that).

HOW DOES IT MAKE WAR?: Are tactics based on attrition warfare, Maneuver Warfare or Revolutionary Warfare. This would have a powerful effect on how the units are organized, trained and equipped.

WHAT ARE THE TRADITIONS and HISTORY: Some military organizations are big on this, like the United States Marine Corp and French Foreign Legion, others aren't like the US Army. All militaries do have their history buffs but not all teach it to every member. Many people Marines and non-Marines can identify the Marine Corps motto "Semper Fi". It is rare to find a person who knows the Army motto.

MOTTO: What is the unit's motto (not the military branch's)? What does it mean?

SONG: Does the unit have a song (official or unofficial?).

WHAT KIND OF SOCIETY DOES THE MILITARY BELONG TO: This can affect a great many things. Dictatorships often prefer to have stupid troops that will follow orders regardless. 'Stupid' troops may, in actuality, be very intelligent but conditioned to follow orders explicitly. Democracies often have intelligent, capable troops. Of course there are always exceptions.

DOES THE SOCIETY SUPPORT OR HINDER THE MILITARY: How does the homeland think of the military. Are they viewed as war mongers, valiant defenders, oppressors or just normal people working a job.

WHAT KIND OF RECRUITS DOES THE MILITARY GET: Do most of the recruits come from rural areas, big cities, ghettos, the upper crust of society or the lower crust of society. Of course all militaries usually recruit from all walks of life but sometimes certain units will end up with a larger number of one type of recruit than another. For instance in my Marine Corps combat unit a large majority of the Marines were white, about twenty four out of thirty, Army units would usually have a much higher proportion of blacks. This doesn't necessarily reflect abilities or racism but probably more the views and perceptions of the recruits.

The kind of recruit can have a major influence in training and treatment of recruits. Soviet recruits were from a hardier background, military service was mandatory, and training would sometimes involve physical abuse so Soviet soldiers were usually pretty rugged. The US Military would like to recruit bright, intelligent warriors but society is not generally very rugged and tough. To lure quality volunteers, the military cannot be too brutal and so the troops are not what they could be except in some elite units.

WHAT IS BOOT CAMP LIKE: Boot camp is the core of all militaries. To one extent or another Basic Training is designed to 'brainwash' recruits and teach them how to be good Marines, soldiers, sailors, or airmen. It must indoctrinate them into the military society and it must be able to take people from all walks of life and help them adjust to Military Life. Sometimes boot camp is easy going and laid back (like the Air Force) and sometimes it is harsh, brutal and demanding (like the Marines or French Foreign Legion). Basic Training shapes a new service member in many ways.

In the Marines there is often friendly rivalry between those Marines that went to Parris Island and San Diego. When Marines meet, that is frequently one of the first questions they ask each other. In the Army it is usually more of a question on where the soldier served, if at all.

Powerful friendships are forged as young recruits grow to be mature adults. Boot camp gives all service men and women a common background.

BUDGET: The National Budget and how it is spent often has a great impact on a military. Is the military able to afford the latest and greatest weapons? Is training high quality because of high quality facilities? Do the troops have to spend their own money to keep their unit operational?

Frequently in the Marines, when a Battalion ran out of money, it would be forced to stay in Garrison and since the troops couldn't remain idle, there were plenty of inspections. Inspections would keep the troops busy and saved the unit money. Many would argue the merits but ask any NCO or enlisted person and they would tell you how it does not contribute to combat readiness like field training.

Special Operations Units often have good budgets and can afford the training and equipment needed to be elite, but this is not always the case.

Currently the US is more interested in spending money on high tech toys than troops and many fine individuals are becoming disillusioned with military service. New hotels are built for officers while the troops live in ancient barracks is not good for morale. Fighter pilots who must spend long hours flying a boring, monotonous patrol instead of training lose their combat readiness and career interest.

Training takes money, missions take money and when missions are a priority then training is frequently found lacking. A great nation may spend a lot of money on 'defense' but that doesn't mean the troops are well trained, well led and well equipped.

RANK STRUCTURE: How is the military ranks structure organized from Private to High General? How do officers, Staff NCO's, NCO's and enlisted all relate to each other? Are Officers 'God' figures, are they 'Father' figures, tyrants ect, to the lower ranks. Is honesty and candor expected or is everyone supposed to be a yes man/woman? Are Privates able to tactfully voice their opinions to seniors or are they expected to shut up and follow orders without comment? What does it take to be an officer? Family background (like nobility), training, or money?

LOGISTICS BASE: How does the military rely on logistics? Where does logistical support reside? For example the Marines have well equipped supply ships, the Army relies more on the Air Force to fly their logistics around. It might be noted here that because ships can carry heavier equipment than planes the Marine Corps is often able to provide a heavier force more quickly to distant areas. The Army can usually respond faster with a lighter force. The Navy relies on ships, of course, to supply their fleets and the Air Force relies on the Army to secure areas for their Airbases.

A space fleet would most likely use starships as a logistics base but the type of ship should be considered. Is the ship a massive warehouse or a smaller courier or maybe it has a nano-machine factory. Are a unit's starships capable of carrying armored and aircraft units or are they just infantry transports. Does the ship use shuttles to land supplies or does the ship itself land in a secured area? What about medical logistics, mail, food supplies, armories, fuel, replacements and so on? Are military transports large or small?

SUPPORTING ARMS: What kind of supporting arms does the military have? Do they rely on missiles and fighter craft (like the Navy) or artillery and mortars. Does the military have its own air force or must it rely on another branch (like the army in most cases)? Does it have cruise missile capability? Nuclear warhead capability? Orbital bombardment capability? How available is the supporting arms? For instance every infantry regiment in the Marines could have it's own artillery battalion.

ARMOR: Is the military heavily mechanized? Does it have large numbers of tanks and/or armored personnel carriers or is a lighter force. This factor is usually influenced by the perceived threat of the enemy. The US Army in Europe was heavily mechanized because the Soviets were, the 82nd Airborne was not heavily mechanized because they were airdropped. Parachutes don't help heavy tanks very much.

MORALE: What is the morale of the military? This can be effected by a great many things and can greatly effect combat effectiveness. The Iraqi Republican Guard for instance usually has a high morale because they are the military 'favorite' and receive the best. For these reason's they are Iraq's best. Regular troops are often conscripts and more interested in going home than fighting. If the morale is high the unit will fight more effectively and aggressively, if morale is low it will prefer defensive battles and be more likely to surrender if they are threatened with destruction.

UNIT STRENGTH LEVELS: This can have a powerful effect on military units. Tactical doctrine usually assumes that a unit is at full strength or close to it. When a unit is under strength it is often forced to operate outside of doctrine and adapt. For instance, if a Platoon Leader is trained how to deploy three squads in battle for maximum effectiveness and security and then he has to make do with only two, then all his training has to be modified.

The Soviets in Afghanistan and Chenchenya had this problem on occasion. Units thrown together for an operation were frequently disorganized and this severely hampered combat operations because a lot of strangers were working with each other and trying to fit into an unfamiliar battle plan.

HOW DOES THE MILITARY INTERACT WITH SOCIETY? This is often influenced by how the people view the military and the military's missions. For instance if the people feel oppressed they will shun the military and prefer to avoid contact. Troops will frequently be kept on base to avoid incidents with locals and this can have a damaging effect on the troops morale. Or troops may be used like police and might take out their anger and frustration on the people thereby increasing hostility.

In Brazil, troops are often used in a civic role to help promote patriotism in distant areas. Brazilian troops are very patriotic and try to do things to gain local support, like building churches or schools. In some cases armies have been used to help harvest crops.

LOYALTY: How loyal is the military and its units. Do coup attempts happen? Are the troops conscripts and unwilling to be there in the first place? Is morale low, making the troops resent their leaders and more willing to mutiny or desert? Are the troops well fed, well treated and loyal? Is racism a problem?

RELIGION: How does religion affect the Military? Does it stop to pray five times a day, or are only certain religions allowed to join? Do religious factions within the military clash? Do troops put more faith in their God(s) than they should? For instance, the US (and most professional militaries) spend precious time calibrating and calculating angles and trajectories for their cannon so they can hit what they want to. At least one Middle East country throws their cannon off their trucks, aims it in the general direction of the enemy and says "If Allah wills us to hit, we will hit." Suffice to say they are not in the least accurate.

MEN AND WOMEN: How do men and women fit into the military. Are they all professionals who are treated equally? Are there separate male and female units? Are women held to the same standards men are? Are the barracks little more than whore houses? Are women allowed into combat? How does this affect combat effectiveness? How do women deal with pregnancy and 'that time of month' while they are in the front lines? Is the equipment a trooper is expected to carry too heavy for a woman or does powered armor make this irrelevant?

LIVING STANDARDS: What are the living standards like? Cleanly or slovenly. Living standards can have a major effect on morale. Dictators frequently insure the troops have high living standards because it keeps them loyal, although this is not always the case. Sometimes troops have very low living standards but they are kept in check by officers (who have high standards) and secret police (who are fanatics or have high standards also). Pay also has to do with living standards and the loyalty of troops. Poorly paid conscripts who live in tents are usually little more than cattle and considered cannon fodder. Elite troops that keep a dictator in power (like the Iraqi Republican Guard) are usually well paid, have a high standard of living and receive the best. After all, it is the guy with the gun that rules. Anybody who wants to argue might go ask Saddam Hussein or Adolph Hitler.

SERVICE: How do people serve in the military? Are they conscripts (required to do one or more years), are they convicts or other 'rejects' forced into military service, are they volunteers, is it a family tradition, or are they draftees (randomly selected conscripts).

Conscripts are usually not as motivated or dedicated as volunteers, they view it as more of a bad chore that has to be done so they can continue with their life. In a conscript military the professionals are usually of the rank NCO and up. Regular soldiers are not always taught the finer points of military operations and are usually expected to blindly follow the orders of the higher ranking NCO's and Officers.

Family Tradition usually provides a very high caliber of trooper. Trained almost since birth someone who is following the family tradition usually has an advantage over others. One excellent example is the British Ghurka units. The Ghurka's are some of the finest fighters in the world. Their units often have several generations in the same command and virtually everyone is following the family tradition of service to Great Britain.

How Intense is the training? There is more to training than meets the eye. Do the troops have realistic training. One realistic training episode a year is not good enough. Are the troops desensitized to violence by having blood squirt out of their targets, do they have man-like targets or are they just paper targets. In combat, the troops with the most realistic training will usually be more willing to fire. In World War 2 for instance, troops were excellent marksmen against paper targets. In battle only 15-20 percent actually fired at the enemy, others were unwilling to kill their fellow man. In World War 2 the Japanese used Chinese prisoners as targets for bayonet practice to help desensitize them. Japanese troops became known as some of the cruelest, most blood thirsty killers. Previously they had been the most chivalrous and honorable.

How Experienced is the Military: Has it been blooded by numerous wars? Are the ranks full of veterans or is everyone 'green'. Are there only a few veterans? Veterans who have seen the horror of battle serve as a role model and heroes for those that haven't. Frequently those Veterans know what works and what doesn't and have learned a large number of tricks and techniques. Non-veterans may know a lot but the fact is, practice and reality is better than theory.

How violent are the troops: Do the troops come from a society oppressed by fear where life is cheap? Do they come from peaceful societies where life is treasured? A person from the bloody ghettos is more likely to 'snuff' a sentry than somebody who grew up in a Christian private school.

Today US society 'enables' its children to kill by desensitizing them at the movies, in games and in cartoons. What this equates to is that a soldier is more willing to kill and/or commit atrocities in war. This is not the only factor that effects killing and atrocities.

What is the standard tour of duty: This can have a large effect on the professionalism and capability of the military. An army full of one year enlistees is not going to be the most competent, two years is a little better. By the time a recruit has learned what he is doing and is becoming comfortable with it his tour of duty is over. There is quite a bit to learn in the military. In the Marines for instance I underwent about six months of training (Boot camp, Marine Combat Training and School of Infantry). When I got to the Fleet I thought I knew everything there was to know. I learned that I had only knew enough to keep up with the more experienced members.



---
This is for more specific units, or the goals of the forces during a certain operation:

How are the combatants perceived by locals? Do the locals see them as invaders or saviors, what do they do about it?

How is the conflict perceived by people in the homeland? Are they against it like during the Vietnam war, or for it like in Desert Storm.

What is the National Will? What is the war about? Why are two or more sides fighting? If the conflict is perceived negatively by the people at home then why is the war still going on?

What is the Endurance and Fortitude of the combatants? How strongly is the clash of wills and desire to win? Guerrillas are often willing to fight for ten to twenty years, or more to free their homeland (or establish their government/religion). National armies are usually interested in ending the fight more quickly, goals and missions are usually more defined. Had the liberation of Kuwait turned sour and casualties began to mount the National Will would probably have turned against the war. As it was, the Iraqi's will faded first.

What is the availability of Military Intelligence?
How much do the combatants know about each other? The availability of information on the enemy can quickly turn the tide of a war.

What are the unit strength levels? Are all the units at full strength? Have casualties crippled units? How has this affected tactics and offensive/defensive operations.

Are combat units able to get Rest & Recuperation? Are the troops starting to burn out or are they able to be rotated back to a rear echelon area to recover their mental sanity?

How is National Policy affecting the war? This can turn a possible victor into a battlefield cripple. National Policy might prohibit returning fire with artillery, or mortars so civilian won't be endangered. Certain areas (which the enemy is hiding out in) might be off limits for any number of reasons. In Vietnam, National Policy was notorious for protecting the enemy. Sometimes when they were in plain view.

Where are the logistical supplies coming from? A neighboring nation, an orbiting starship? Hidden caches? Ammunition (with a few futuristic exceptions) is not unlimited and combat units will need more. Iraq was getting supplies from Jordan. In Afghanistan the Mujadeen were mostly supplied by looting the bodies of the dead. It varies but there must be a source.

What are the Offensive/Defensive goals? Does the military have a target to attack? Why and what is the plan?

How are casualties evacuated and where do they go? This is very important for the morale of the troops.

What method are the combatants using to wage war? Attrition warfare like the European Theatre in World War One and Two. Maneuver Warfare, like Gordon R. Dickinson's The Dorsai? or Revolutionary Warfare like Afghanistan and Vietnam?

How do recruits replace combat losses? This is a tricky one. By assigning them to a unit while that unit is conducting a mission is perhaps the worst method. The United States used it frequently during Vietnam. The best method is to pull the unit back for a period of time to rest, recuperate and train. During training recruits are integrated into the unit. This allows the unit to establish Standard Operating Procedures that everyone knows. It dramatically increases the professionalism of the unit.

Are there Allies and what are they like? Does the enemy have allies? How do the allies affect the battle. In Vietnam the United States had the South Vietnamese (or vice versa), there were also the Canadians, the Koreans, the British and many others. In Afghanistan the Soviets had local allies. In Desert Storm, Egypt, Syria, Yemen, Saudi, British, French troops and others fought beside the Americans. Are allied troops superior or inferior to other troops?
Computers are like Old Testament gods; lots of rules and no mercy.
-Joseph Campbell
Post Reply