Live data from Hacker News

The Siege of Gondor, Part I: Professionals Talk Logistics

acoup.blog

131–140 of 172 posts

Re: The Siege of Gondor, Part I: Professionals Talk Logistics

#131
post #49

The posts on sparta are a joy to read as well https://acoup.blog/2019/08/16/collections-this-isnt-sparta-p...

They are how I discovered the blog. Eye-opening.

Yes, it was a heck of a good dive! The conclusion, extremely briefly, is that Sparta is to be learned from, not emulated. The gist of Sparta is less like a well balanced, yet brutal, place, and more like an extreme version of the Lord's Resistance Army of central Africa, only with more rape and child abuse. If they were around today, we'd 'liberate' them in a heartbeat.

Re: The Siege of Gondor, Part I: Professionals Talk Logistics

#132

"Let’s be clear on this point: ancient and medieval warfare was mostly about sieges." I also learned years ago that when medieval battles actually happened, the goal was to rout the enemy, not actually fight them and kill each other. I find these points illuminating because it reminds me that people back in the day were not primitive idiots. There was a very sensible logic to how they waged war. Ultimately, everyone…

Few people enjoy facing a prickly Alexandrian phalanx. You’d have to more than whip me to run at one.

To my knowledge, much was just shield bashing, posturing, and manoeuvring. It’s very hard to convince a group to close in on an enemy.

Problem is, that would make for a very dull film. Logistics, waiting, posturing, passively starving out a city. No speeches, no charging sword aloft.

The notion that we’re only marginally more intelligent than our ancient predecessors is quite a beautiful one I think.

Re: The Siege of Gondor, Part I: Professionals Talk Logistics

#133
post #122
post #93

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Sid Meier's Colonization has this, to a degree. 1. Gold can only be used to buy from European powers. You can't buy goods or units in America, you have to physically move them there with ships or wagon trains. 2. Civilians and combat units are the same. Any civilian can pick up a musket and become a soldier. 3. Defeated units don't die. They rout and are "demoted": a dragoon loses their horse and becomes a soldier, a…

As a Civ i-iii player, I do not recognize the game you are talking about. edit: oops, reado

Colonization, not Civilization: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sid_Meier%27s_Colonization

Re: The Siege of Gondor, Part I: Professionals Talk Logistics

#134
post #88

Earlier quoted context omitted.

The general consensus about ancient and medieval battles is that the battle itself was not especially dangerous. Most casualties came when one side collapsed and routed---they would be pursued and slaughtered by the victors.

The book “On Killing” does mention this. Killing seems to be a lot easier when done to a fleeing enemy. Something about running away makes one a juicy target.

S.L.A. Marshall was a fraud, and “On Killing” should be read with the knowledge it was written by a fraud.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/S.L.A._Marshall

Some veterans and historians have cast doubt on Marshall's research methods.[15] Professor Roger J. Spiller (Deputy Director of the Combat Studies Institute, US Army Command and General Staff College) argues in his 1988 article, "S. L. A. Marshall and the Ratio of Fire" (RUSI Journal, Winter 1988, pages 63–71), that Marshall had not actually conducted the research upon which he based his ratio-of-fire theory. "The 'systematic collection of data' appears to have been an invention."[16] This revelation has called into question the authenticity of some of Marshall's other books and has lent academic weight to doubts about his integrity that had been raised in military circles even decades earlier.[17]

In his 1989 memoir, About Face, David H. Hackworth described his initial elation at an assignment with a man he idolized, and how that elation turned to disillusion after seeing Marshall's character and methods firsthand. Hackworth described Marshall as a "voyeur warrior", for whom "the truth never got in the way of a good story", and went so far as to say, "Veterans of many of the actions he 'documented' in his books have complained bitterly over the years of his inaccuracy or blatant bias".[18][19]

Re: The Siege of Gondor, Part I: Professionals Talk Logistics

#135

just finished the first post. All I can say is well written and to the point! Logistics is totally underrepresented in history (infrastructure and the like) and especially military history. When it comes to the annoying "relaibility" discussions around WW2 tanks on Youtube I just wished some would explain the basic principle of RAMST, Reliability-Availability-maintainability-Supportability-Testability. Yet, nobody se…

Have you watched many of Nicholas Moran (The_Chiftain)'s videos? He likes to comment on the ergonomics of operating and maintaining tanks. But he also discusses why the USA mainly build medium tanks during ww2, and how and why they were more maintainable than their european contemporaries. (An ocean away from their factories, they had to be)

Sure know his videos! It really shows that he has some operational experience. Something others covering the same subject don't.

What I am missing is an detailed view on that aspect from true, modern day experts. But for that you would need more than one person to cover it in a meaningful way.

Re: The Siege of Gondor, Part I: Professionals Talk Logistics

#136

Operations is the level of analysis between tactics (how do I fight when I get there?) and strategy (why am I fighting at all?). The USMC calls that "campaigning". See MCDP 1-2 [1]. Campaigning is about which battles to fight and where. Strategy includes economic and diplomatic issues, but campaigning is purely military. Military history can be divided into two parts - before machine guns, and after machine guns. Bef…

> Military history can be divided into two parts - before machine guns, and after machine guns. Before machine guns, bunching up was good tactics. After machine guns, it was terrible tactics. Too much of WWI was about learning that the hard way. Terribly good point! I want to refute you, but I'm not really coming up with much. Automatic rifles are just devastating. How did you come to this conclusion?

> but I'm not really coming up with much.

War elephants are a slight exception - the best tactic against them seems to have been spreading out and killing the driver with arrows or javalins - but it's less that bunching up was bad tactics and more that it wasn't enough; phalanxes could repel elephants fairly well, they just weren't good at actually taking them out of the fight.

Re: The Siege of Gondor, Part I: Professionals Talk Logistics

#137
post #31

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I've always been a bit disappointed in the weapons available far into the future. I tried watching one series and the opening scene involved good guys shooting at bad guys and hiding behind boulders and such. It just looked so much like the conflict sequence in High Noon. I couldn't watch further. And they still suffered from the "good guy bullets" vs. "bad guy bullets" phenomenon. A good guy can run unscathed (or wi…

> Do Phasors ever miss? They miss, and they miss a lot. Firefights in Star Trek look mostly like firefights everywhere else - beams and bolts flying through the air, and every now and then someone gets hit. One interesting aspect is that TNG-era phasers used by protagonists don't even look like practical weapons. I read somewhere that this was intentional design decision - Starfleet was supposed to be about peace and…

I have always explained it away in my head that the hand held phasers have some kind of feedback loop you learn while practicing. I.e. they have some kind of guiding or balancing mechanism, but it's not automatic, which is why you have all these training sessions on holodeck with Riker or whomever.

Re: The Siege of Gondor, Part I: Professionals Talk Logistics

#138

Orc supply logistics is eased somewhat by the ability of the Orc armies to eat the defeated and if required, each other. In the latter case the strong orcs eat the weak, preserving the elite and veteran parts of the army. There is a strong hierarchy within the various Orc subtypes, and an argument could be made that the Orc army marches as its own supply.

I don't think the book mentions any green, fertile farmland in Mordor, nor do the movies show any. So even if the Orc-eats-Orc or Orc-eats-Man "supply" might work for a short campaign, the biomass must come from somewhere, initially.

Book explicitly mentions slave farms in the East.

But yes, cannibalism and human forage is not sustainable, but might stretch a 10 day supply to 15.

Re: The Siege of Gondor, Part I: Professionals Talk Logistics

#139
post #125
post #47

Whether I agree or disagree with them, I find this kind of analyses of fictional battles very fun to read. And this particular blog seems to be full of fascinating articles (I recommend the one about how a "medieval/fantasy" battlefield ought too look like after a battle -- spoiler: most depictions are inspired by the aftermath of WWI battles; battlefields after medieval battles would look pretty much unspoiled). A f…

Be sure to check the ones about Paganism/Polytheism! The mind-blowing thing about paganism is that unlike the 3 major religions of today, it didn't start with a holy book (orthodoxy), but with rituals. It's like a caricature of scientific method. We did so and so, and the harvest was good. Therefore, the ritual works. There is little point in learning who exactly the gods are or what they think. The important thing i…

Ann Leckie's fantasy novel The Raven Tower is set in a world where such pagan gods are real, and dives right into a description of how human tribes will spend generations training them to respond favorably.

Re: The Siege of Gondor, Part I: Professionals Talk Logistics

#140
post #44

Earlier quoted context omitted.

But to be blunt: who was Lord Curzon?

Some British official. Probably best known as a namesake for the current eastern border of Poland (known as Curzon's line), of which he wasn't an architect or proponent.

In popular culture "Curzon" is probably most familiar to StarTrek:DS9 fans as Curzon Dax, the predecessor of the Jadzia Dax. https://memory-alpha.fandom.com/wiki/Curzon_Dax

(The character - a diplomat - was very clearly inspired by Lord Curzon.)

Post reply on HN