Star Army Tactics

[Postchivalry]

I've been thinking a lot on the aforementioned wiki entry, and made a couple of additions.

However, I think it's best if there's some agreed consensus on what's most important to address. That way ideas can be logically and cleanly organised, and thus doctrines realised.

Another thing that bugs me is that there isn't a clean division between a war deployment and a 'peacetime' deployment in the tactics page.

A possible way to organise this information is by the types of predominant forms of operations undertaken by the Yamatai Star Army. Then we can move onto things like what are the best ways of achieving goals in those different types of missions? And make references to past roleplays as both benchmarks.

Let's get some discussion rolling!

 

[Kim]

That's simply because we haven't HAD peacetime deployment in years ICly or even OOCly with Yamatai.

We haven't discussed tactics on the wiki much as we have just roleplayed these decision on our own. You have to take into account that some of the past missions that have been run for such ships as the YSS Sakura, YSS Asamoya, YSS Plumeria, YSS Miharu, SAINT to name a few run a LOT of covert operations missions. So anything that's happened these is still classified so those examples would not be available for IC use. We tend to use the wiki for IC reference in roleplay so keeping OOC knowledge and IC knowledge separate is kind of important.

I know in several gaming sessions it isn't uncommon to have about 5-6 wiki tabs open for weapon systems, power armor, and ship data to keep everything straight.

We also have to take into consideration that the in game mechanics are not equal to all real life tactics.

ALSO, moved... this is not a question.

 

[Postchivalry]

That's simply because we haven't HAD peacetime deployment in years ICly or even OOCly with Yamatai.

I meant things that aren't necessarily straight-out, ship-to-ship warfare. E.g. there are plenty of ideas about taking on other ships, as well as subverting an enemy population. It made it kind of confusing to read.

We also have to take into consideration that the in game mechanics are not equal to all real life tactics.

I don't understand.

I know in several gaming sessions it isn't uncommon to have about 5-6 wiki tabs open for weapon systems, power armor, and ship data to keep everything straight.

And so your argument is that it's too complex to think up guide lines for using these systems? I'm not trying to be smart here, I'm just trying to understand where you're coming from.

ALSO, moved... this is not a question.

Cheers, didn't know where to post it.

 

[Wes]

Well, there is a list of mission types in the captain's guide.

In the meantime, I will try to organize the "Idea dump."

Thanks for bringing this topic up, I think it's very important that the Star Army has a plan, strategy, and smart tactics its officers can use in an easily-accessible central article.

Nepleslia needs to get on the ball, too, and make its own page, since these guides to tactics and occupations are a key part to training new players to be the next generation of officers.

 

[Postchivalry]

Neat.

There's so much in the SA wiki to pour through!

Maybe it'd be best to organise tactics by mission types? I can get started on it now if that's cool.

 

[MissingNo]

That's simply because we haven't HAD peacetime deployment in years ICly or even OOCly with Yamatai.

I meant things that aren't necessarily straight-out, ship-to-ship warfare. E.g. there are plenty of ideas about taking on other ships, as well as subverting an enemy population. It made it kind of confusing to read.

I've been thinking a lot on the aforementioned wiki entry, and made a couple of additions.

However, I think it's best if there's some agreed consensus on what's most important to address. That way ideas can be logically and cleanly organised, and thus doctrines realised.

Another thing that bugs me is that there isn't a clean division between a war deployment and a 'peacetime' deployment in the tactics page.

A possible way to organise this information is by the types of predominant forms of operations undertaken by the Yamatai Star Army. Then we can move onto things like what are the best ways of achieving goals in those different types of missions? And make references to past roleplays as both benchmarks.

I think it is completely unfair to force the other faction GMs to list out their tactics. First off, it seems to me that none of the factions deal with situations the same way that Yamatai does. This is good, gives variation to the setting. Second, it means that the other factions deal with situations on a case-by-case basis. Third, Postchivalry, why are you trying to create bureaucracy where there doesn't need to be any?

A possible way to organise this information is by the types of predominant forms of operations undertaken by the Yamatai Star Army.

Yamatai is the most powerful state in the setting. This does not make it the best. Just because Yamatai does it doesn't mean that everyone needs to.

We also have to take into consideration that the in game mechanics are not equal to all real life tactics.

I don't understand.

It means that a game doesn't match real life. Having an "agreed consensus on what's most important to address" and "doctrines realised" may be useful IRL, but in a game it's just BS. Bureaucracy that's unneeded. Otherwise, after seven years, don't you think we would have made some by now?

I know in several gaming sessions it isn't uncommon to have about 5-6 wiki tabs open for weapon systems, power armor, and ship data to keep everything straight.

And so your argument is that it's too complex to think up guide lines for using these systems? I'm not trying to be smart here, I'm just trying to understand where you're coming from.

She means that she has the technical pages open, for detail. She knows how to use them, it's making sure she remembers the details of what they are correctly.

My two cents on the whole thing boils down to this:

You can have a tactical guide. But the only thing that achieves are the following:

1) It exposes your tactics to the enemy, or to players of another faction who may use OOC knowledge ICly. As Kim mentioned, we try to keep them separate. If they get a hold of your tactical guide, then you're screwed unless you deviate from that.
2) Players are going to deviate from a guide anyway, so why have it.
3) Wes' comment about a guide being needed for training the future officers is groundless. While a guide could be used IRL, it isn't practical for teaching tactics for RP. Training is not simply done by handing someone a guide and saying "have fun!" You can also teach them directly. It's called "mentoring" and, as long as we have senior roleplayers around, there will be people available to teach the next generation of officers.
4) It cuts down on creativity. Not all situations are going to be exactly the same (and if they are then the GMs aren't doing their job well : p ). If you have a guide with exactly what to do with what equipment at what time, then that's going to be a monster of an article. And if it isn't and is just a vague "do this and this and this, see these articles for more information", then that's just going to add to all of those tabs that Kim and other players have open. Getting down to it, multiple tabs or a very good memory are going to be necessary with or without this guide you're asking for. Having a guide, tactical or not, is just one more tab to have open during a JP or SP session.

If it becomes a necessity that we have a guide then it should be offline, a text file that is distributed among the players of a faction, and not be a binding list of what to do in a situation but a list of "hey, this worked, it might help you too" ideas.

 

[Wes]

I disagree with MissingNo so completely that it angered me to even read his last post.

1) It exposes your tactics to the enemy, or to players of another faction who may use OOC knowledge ICly. As Kim mentioned, we try to keep them separate. If they get a hold of your tactical guide, then you're screwed unless you deviate from that.

It's a guideline, not a rulebook, and if someone uses OOC information ICly, that's a separate issue not related to this article - If we went by your logic, we should keep our ships and culture articles hidden too so they wouldn't be used against us. It just doesn't make sense. If it exists on Star Army, it should be wikified. Yamatai has tactical norms and ideas, and so I'm finally getting around to wikifying them as well as adding new content. It's a forum for sharing concepts.

Players are going to deviate from a guide anyway, so why have it.

Most players aren't tactical geniuses, but if we have a page full of ideas, it can help inspire them. Again, the idea is to take the best ideas from various players throughout the Star Army so admirals and captains can continually refine and expand their "playbook" over time as a group. It's not required to follow the guide.

3) Wes' comment about a guide being needed for training the future officers is groundless. While a guide could be used IRL, it isn't practical for teaching tactics for RP. Training is not simply done by handing someone a guide and saying "have fun!" You can also teach them directly. It's called "mentoring" and, as long as we have senior roleplayers around, there will be people available to teach the next generation of officers.

The first statement is completely untrue. Reference materials are one of the main ways new players familiarize themselves with the site, and often new players have asked for something like this page before. While I agree mentoring is best, it doesn't work alone and it works best in conjunction with standard reference material. Plus, a wiki article will still be around even when there's no GMs online to help.

4) It cuts down on creativity. Not all situations are going to be exactly the same (and if they are then the GMs aren't doing their job well : p ). If you have a guide with exactly what to do with what equipment at what time, then that's going to be a monster of an article. And if it isn't and is just a vague "do this and this and this, see these articles for more information", then that's just going to add to all of those tabs that Kim and other players have open. Getting down to it, multiple tabs or a very good memory are going to be necessary with or without this guide you're asking for. Having a guide, tactical or not, is just one more tab to have open during a JP or SP session.

This guide INSPIRES creativity. It doesn't limit players. As a Star Army Admiral/Captain you might not always know what is best to do next--the tactics guide is a wealth of ideas to consider and be inspired by, and anyone can add to it.

In conclusion, the guide is like writing a living book for all SAoY members to share instead of just relying on individuals passing down anecdotes by mouth and hoping everything gets passed on to the next generation.

 

[Revolver]

Really, it seems like the idea is more to just flesh out in new players heads how each faction functions in war situations. If it's one thing that SARP really lacks it's how it presents the factions, races and other setting information to new players. It's generally hard to find, or non-existent.

The way I read and understand, this is the intent and it's not supposed to be some master plan book for each side, but a way for people who are not so PA Tactically minded to find out what does and does not work in terms of fighting in future wars. As a secondary purpose, it would help when NPCing certain factions (Especially purely antagonistic ones, like the SMX) during small fights where contacting another GM is unnecessary and/or unavailable.

Finally, it adds much needed flavor into the game.

 

[Wes]

I agree with Revolver - it also is a great window into the military culture.

I started a Nepleslian equivalent page:
https://wiki.stararmy.com/doku.php?id=ne ... ry_tactics

 

[Scot]

If we are talking Factions here, I would like to point out that a small guide indicated what each faction specializes at would be most helpful, as that is not implied and takes some digging to find out.

Like what are the differences between Yamatai and Nep military? They seem similar, with one employing on foot military more than the PA heavy Yamatai. Can Mindies engage in ground combat or is that Daisy Specific?

In fact for tactics, be best to have:
1) A routine for an encounter, who says what when enemies are spotted, and what actions are taken immediately (like raise shields for instance). Or when entering enemy territory, what would be protocol for invasion?

2) A routine for operations, what is used for what, stuff that counter stuff. Outline the "rock paper scissors" of do's and dont's of combat, like employing PA's to an anti PA cruiser. (Naturally this is up to RP'ers to an extent as they are the heroes that do the impossible)

3) Change the template, make sections more specific. In combat there is "Routine war plans" then we have your actual generals planning "Overall Strategy" of a group of units, then you have "Unit Tactics."

Commanding a Battalion and the overall strategy as placement of units is what is strategy, think like Risk, or Advance Wars. Namely broad advantages of capturing terrain or towns, logistics and supply. This does not deal with specific events, but with events that may change the combat line.

Unit Tactics is the most common for first time roleplayers, and it's similar to Stratego, or Final Fantasy Tactics. Basically dealing with units specifically to gain small advantages, compared to Strategy gaining Broad advantages. Such as the action within capturing a town, a space station, 10 miles of terrain, or the fight within a ship.

Such as Battle of the Buldge, you see a map with all the units, and the Germain Tanks bursting though the line. Is strategy. Now the units fighting the tanks which causes the line to buckle, mono o mono is Tactics, and is where most of the RP'ers are at.

Maybe sometime later I'll make a wiki example or something.

 

[Postchivalry]

Missingno,

You seem to take a strawman argument to a lot of what I said. I'm all for constructive criticism, but you seem a bit unfair.

For example, I never suggested that Yamatai is the best. Actually I'm pretty confused why you brought that up.

As Revolver and Wes say, it's supposed to help rather than hinder. A guide line is completely right.

I think I should have put a caveat on my first post: talk of tactics shouldn't be walled up in jargon but written in plain English. It's not supposed to be bureaucratic or useless fluff, but encourage people to embrace the setting as painlessly and easily as possible. Inclusive of myself.

Can we hug and make up now?

EDIT:

Wes - I'll put a backburner on my structure edit to the Star Army tactics page for now, and follow your lead on your Nepleslian page.

Scot - That's pretty cool.

 

[MissingNo]

Normally, I wouldn't even answer that, but I need to say this:

I posted when I was already mad, and am still mad right now. It wasn't you that caused the anger, but you did feed it.

That's not all, but it's best if I stop there.

P.S.
Read this post, but don't answer it. Continue with your discussion as if it weren't there, anything more will derail the topic. If you must reply, direct it to this thread.

Move along, people.

 

[Wes]

I updated the page a little, mainly in its layout.
https://wiki.stararmy.com/doku.php?id=stararmy:tactics

 

[Scot]

I'm back with my own layout, excuse me for being a sucker for having implied details and organization. This is a bare bones template some of which I tried to give examples also. In this fashion you can pick what you need out of the outline, rather than having to read everything to find what your looking for. Though somewhere may be need to add what equipment is most commonly used, as well as the setup of the army (like how many armours make a "wing" typically).

I also added some of Wes's design into the template a bit.

https://wiki.stararmy.com/doku.php?id=us ... mple_thing

 

[Kim]

I know in several gaming sessions it isn't uncommon to have about 5-6 wiki tabs open for weapon systems, power armor, and ship data to keep everything straight.

And so your argument is that it's too complex to think up guide lines for using these systems? I'm not trying to be smart here, I'm just trying to understand where you're coming from.

Sorry, I've been out of town for the past few days so I hadn't gotten a chance to clarify.

It's not a matter of things being too complex already, it's just seems to me that yes, it would be another tab open to reference from. I love background detail but I think after a while some things just get way too complex for regular game play. For additional reference, I don't have an issue with a tactics guide or guidelines provided it's written in layman's terms so everyone can understand it. (A point which was already brought up- =) )

There are no mandatory guidelines for this stuff. But I think if we did some sort of qualification course like we did for "Nekovalkyrja Studies/History" it might help people remember or help people get some IC training with some sort of substance. The course was pretty much we were given articles on Nekos and then given specific questions to quiz us on various important information about them. We had to score 85% on each of the quizzes to pass the course.

I actually thought it was rather fun to do and it let people learn something about the background of the universe (in a time when we didn't have the wiki). Completing the course gave us the ability to have all of our characters use the skill... somehow.