[Fallout Equestria] Setting discussions

By the way, I'm imagining that Miliozi tanks would be something like the Merkava.  I don't know terribly much about tank design, though.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=BGmxKLQeWu4

Ah, it was WovenTales who had the slaver town idea, prior to this thread's creation.

Can't watch the video right now, and I don't know the specifics of the Merkava, but I'll just remark on something concerning tank design :

Most designs cannot travel long distances on their own treads, as they tend to quickly use them to destruction. I think a figure that's often cited is that an Abrams has very high likelihood of tread damages resulting in a loss of mobility if it tries to travel 600-1000 kilometers on its own treads.

Thus most tanks have to be carried to the battlefield on specially designed trailer trucks, or by train.

An exception to this (probably not the only one, but the most notable at least) is Soviet tanks, which were designed with the philosophy that a tank should be able to move itself to the battlefield through its own power. But on the other hand, most Soviet tanks were "medium" tanks, relative to their weight ; while and Abrams and most modern MBT have the weight of an "heavy" tank - including the Merkava (~63 metric tons).


This little tidbit seems relevant to the design of weapons supposed to operate on a infrastructure devoid wasteland.


Also, question : what proportion of the Miliozi's vehicles are amphibious / able to cross an un-fordable waterway on their own power ?

By the way, you might be interested by having a look at this {link}

Harmony wrote:Can't watch the video right now, and I don't know the specifics of the Merkava, but I'll just remark on something concerning tank design :

Most designs cannot travel long distances on their own treads, as they tend to quickly use them to destruction. I think a figure that's often cited is that an Abrams has very high likelihood of tread damages resulting in a loss of mobility if it tries to travel 600-1000 kilometers on its own treads.

Thus most tanks have to be carried to the battlefield on specially designed trailer trucks, or by train.

An exception to this (probably not the only one, but the most notable at least) is Soviet tanks, which were designed with the philosophy that a tank should be able to move itself to the battlefield through its own power. But on the other hand, most Soviet tanks were "medium" tanks, relative to their weight ; while and Abrams and most modern MBT have the weight of an "heavy" tank - including the Merkava (~63 metric tons).


This little tidbit seems relevant to the design of weapons supposed to operate on a infrastructure devoid wasteland.

Well, the situation probably isn't quite as bad here, due to alchemically-engineered track materials, but that's a possible good point. Merkava tracks are designed for rough terrain, but I'm not sure what their longevity is.

This does, though, make me think better of my idea to have the less-front-line armored vehicles use tires.

Harmony wrote:Also, question : what proportion of the Miliozi's vehicles are amphibious / able to cross an un-fordable waterway on their own power ?

Hm… I'd say most of them, versatility being important. The lighter and less-front-line ones can float and use jets or propellors, the heavier ones, like the tanks, can deep ford.

Harmony wrote:By the way, you might be interested by having a look at this {link}

Hm, rather interesting, yes.

O. Hinds wrote:This does, though, make me think better of my idea to have the less-front-line armored vehicles use tires.

By the way, I suspect it to be one of the reason why the French vehicles (VAB, VBCI, AMX-10, etc...) tend to use wheels, as most of our engagements, historically and to this day are in Africa, a region which level of infrastructure can in most case range (at least where these units are called for intervention) from "severely damaged" to "non-existent".

This in order to keep the advantage of high mobility without incurring the kind of costs and logistical drain that would come from using tracked vehicles.


Also, wheeled vehicles tend to weight less than tracked ones, and this makes it easier to quickly deploy them by air.

O. Hinds wrote:

Harmony wrote:By the way, you might be interested by having a look at this {link}

Hm, rather interesting, yes.

It's the "remotely operated" / "robotic" tank concept I thought might interest you in the context of the Alliance.

Ah, I didn't think of that.  I noticed the electric transmission, though.  Thanks.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merkava

The Merkava is said to have an operational range of 500 kilometers. If we take a conservative assumption (need to maneuver, stop, restart, sudden accelerations, etc...), this mean that the tank might not be able to advance on the offensive for more than 150 kilometers without needing to be refueled. This condition the Miliozi to have whole battalions worth of logistic trucks (for fuel and ammunition) following the armored and mechanized brigades in their advance. And if said logistics got cut off, the shiny tanks might turn into, at best, so many stationary positions.

A note : apparently the claim that the Merkava can carry troops is a "misdirection" => if the space in the back of the tank can indeed be used to transport the crew of another downed tank, it is primarily intended to allow the crew to rest inside the tank during period of inactivities or while the vehicle is being re-supplied ; or to in fact store more ammunitions than what the standard "magazine" allow on its own. basically, what it does is allow the vehicle and its crew to have more endurance while in operation.


By the way, and while we are talking about the Merkava, you might find this interesting => http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Namer

It is an armored personal carrier based on the Merkava frame : turretless, with the weight saved reinvested in even more protection.

Though it would suffer from the same problem as the Merkava : poor range (limiting the ability to effectively go "Blitzkrieg"), and heavy fuel consumption (I don't have any number, but I suspect both the Merkava and the Namer might consume something around 1 and 2 litres of fuel per kilometer).

Edit : but at least the part commonalities between the two vehicles could be a cost saver, though the APC would only serve a niche role (carrying troops to the frontline alongside tanks in an armored offensive). Outside of that niche a lighter wheeled design, with a comparatively reduced fuel consumption, might be more polyvalent.

Just a general statement :

In case it wasn't clear already (as the name could lead people to guess), the "Volunteers", the faction of Pegasi who choose to break away from the Enclave and betray it to help the surfacers fight for their survival, were actually "started" (more like "ignited") by an overwhelmingly large fraction of the Volunteer Corp ; its members disgruntled to the point of mutiny by the attitude the military leadership displayed in Operation Cauterize.

The fact they were mostly civilians explain why they managed to snatch comparatively less military hardware and ships from the Enclave than the Bitters.

Harmony wrote:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Merkava

The Merkava is said to have an operational range of 500 kilometers. If we take a conservative assumption (need to maneuver, stop, restart, sudden accelerations, etc...), this mean that the tank might not be able to advance on the offensive for more than 150 kilometers without needing to be refueled. This condition the Miliozi to have whole battalions worth of logistic trucks (for fuel and ammunition) following the armored and mechanized brigades in their advance. And if said logistics got cut off, the shiny tanks might turn into, at best, so many stationary positions.

Well, the ammunition supply is something that any tank advance would face.  Regarding the fuel supply, though, yes, I was aware of the Merkava's limited range.  The Miliozi's armored tank trucks can mitigate that to some degree, though, and the rear compartment could be configured to hold extra fuel.  Moreover, the Miliozi Merkavalike tanks were designed and built when there was no known foe against which a nonstop and long range blitzkrieg would be needed; the only prospective enemy against which such a thing would be suited was the GPE, except that the tanks neither… Hm.  Actually, maybe special tracks could be used to drive on clouds.  I'm not sure.  Doesn't really matter, though, because a ground-armor blitzkrieg would still not be a very effective strategy against the GPE.  The tanks were intended for defensive operations (in which case they might not even need trucks, being able to drive to a depot from the battlefield) or attacks on smaller and/or technologically inferior foes (in which case the blitzkrieg is either already large and/or fast enough).  Also, it's cheaper for the Alliance to keep a heavy tank fueled than it is for them to build, maintain, and replace a lot of light tanks.

Oh, and the northern edges, all of which correspond with natural boundaries, of the territory that the Miliozi claimed on the peninsular following the fall of the GPE are just past 150 klicks from Masozi.  The southern edges are much less, but they also lack natural boundaries to delimitate them.

Harmony wrote:A note : apparently the claim that the Merkava can carry troops is a "misdirection" => if the space in the back of the tank can indeed be used to transport the crew of another downed tank, it is primarily intended to allow the crew to rest inside the tank during period of inactivities or while the vehicle is being re-supplied ; or to in fact store more ammunitions than what the standard "magazine" allow on its own. basically, what it does is allow the vehicle and its crew to have more endurance while in operation.

Interesting; where did you read that?  In any case, though, I don't see why it couldn't carry troops, and even if it can't, there's no reason why the Miliozi counterpart couldn't.  I'm thinking of that compartment as a multipurpose space that can be configured for a variety of missions.

Harmony wrote:By the way, and while we are talking about the Merkava, you might find this interesting => http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Namer

It is an armored personal carrier based on the Merkava frame : turretless, with the weight saved reinvested in even more protection.

Though it would suffer from the same problem as the Merkava : poor range (limiting the ability to effectively go "Blitzkrieg"), and heavy fuel consumption (I don't have any number, but I suspect both the Merkava and the Namer might consume something around 1 and 2 litres of fuel per kilometer).

Edit : but at least the part commonalities between the two vehicles could be a cost saver, though the APC would only serve a niche role (carrying troops to the frontline alongside tanks in an armored offensive). Outside of that niche a lighter wheeled design, with a comparatively reduced fuel consumption, might be more polyvalent.

Aye, I saw that, and it looks like we had more or less the same thoughts on it.

O. Hinds wrote:

Harmony wrote:A note : apparently the claim that the Merkava can carry troops is a "misdirection" => if the space in the back of the tank can indeed be used to transport the crew of another downed tank, it is primarily intended to allow the crew to rest inside the tank during period of inactivities or while the vehicle is being re-supplied ; or to in fact store more ammunitions than what the standard "magazine" allow on its own. basically, what it does is allow the vehicle and its crew to have more endurance while in operation.

Interesting; where did you read that?  In any case, though, I don't see why it couldn't carry troops, and even if it can't, there's no reason why the Miliozi counterpart couldn't.  I'm thinking of that compartment as a multipurpose space that can be configured for a variety of missions.

French version of the wikipedia article on the Merkava, I haven't checked to see if it is on the English version as well. As to know why it would be hard to carry the quoted number of 8 troops with their gear, look back at the video you linked and watch the size of the compartment. The 3 or 4 people of a downed friendly tank is believable ; the double of that number of geared soldiers... not so much.

At least that's my uninformed opinion.

Harmony Ltd. wrote:

O. Hinds wrote:

Harmony wrote:A note : apparently the claim that the Merkava can carry troops is a "misdirection" => if the space in the back of the tank can indeed be used to transport the crew of another downed tank, it is primarily intended to allow the crew to rest inside the tank during period of inactivities or while the vehicle is being re-supplied ; or to in fact store more ammunitions than what the standard "magazine" allow on its own. basically, what it does is allow the vehicle and its crew to have more endurance while in operation.

Interesting; where did you read that?  In any case, though, I don't see why it couldn't carry troops, and even if it can't, there's no reason why the Miliozi counterpart couldn't.  I'm thinking of that compartment as a multipurpose space that can be configured for a variety of missions.

French version of the wikipedia article on the Merkava, I haven't checked to see if it is on the English version as well. As to know why it would be hard to carry the quoted number of 8 troops with their gear, look back at the video you linked and watch the size of the compartment. The 3 or 4 people of a downed friendly tank is believable ; the double of that number of geared soldiers... not so much.

At least that's my uninformed opinion.

Huh. The English version of the page clearly says, several times, that it can carry infantry (though I didn't look to see the exact number). As for the video, didn't we only actually see one corner of the compartment? I may be misremembering that. And the existence of the tankbulance variant, even though it sacrifices some ammunition capacity, would suggest that there's a useful amount of space back there. Of course, I'm not quite sure how this translates to equinoids, but the Miliozi tanks are just like and clearly based on Merkavas (I think), not exact copies of the design.

By the way, bit of thought: the Redoubt and the Elusive were both quietly purporting to provide the same service and thus were competing for roughly the same resources.  I sort of have the idea that the Redoubt got (though, of course, not the actual presence of; if the ponies who bet on and boarded the Elusive had known what happened, I expect that they'd have been rather smug) mostly aristocrats, old money, high society, etc. (and their servants) while the Elusive got more of the new money crowd, ponies who had money but weren't quite the right sort, you know (and their servants).  The Elusive was actually, by those few who got both offers, considered second-best; pretty much its only advantage over the advertised Redoubt was mobility.  That Elusive was, pre-safeguard-breaking, meant to cater to this demographic of passengers is likely a large part of the reason why he's a state capitalist rather than some other brand of totalitarian.

Fluttershy.

She probably lived at least long enough to see the end of the Bitter War (I choose to take from the 10-year Epilogue that Flutters lived at least that long). But how much longer ?

Would she still be around 30 years after the day of Sunshine and Rainbows ?

Harmony Ltd. wrote:Fluttershy.

She probably lived at least long enough to see the end of the Bitter War (I choose to take from the 10-year Epilogue that Flutters lived at least that long). But how much longer ?

Would she still be around 30 years after the day of Sunshine and Rainbows ?

...Interesting question.

If there existed a longevity treatment that was available, I could see the NCR or the Followers offering it to her - if only maybe for propaganda purpose or out of a sense of duty, respectively ?

But even if such a treatment existed... I am not sure Fluttershy would want to have her life artificially extended.

And, well : such a treatment would have to exist and be available to the NCR or the Followers.

Harmony Ltd. wrote:If there existed a longevity treatment that was available, I could see the NCR or the Followers offering it to her - if only maybe for propaganda purpose or out of a sense of duty, respectively ?

But even if such a treatment existed... I am not sure Fluttershy would want to have her life artificially extended.

And, well : such a treatment would have to exist and be available to the NCR or the Followers.

There's cyberization; we know that they have that. But, yeah, I don't see Fluttershy accepting it.

As an aside, if she died, this beg the question of the circumstances of said death, what kind of ceremony and honors she got offered, and Velvet Remedy's reaction to seeing her die after the efforts she put in saving her.

The last point would most probably depend on the relationship Velvet and Fluttershy entertained.

I think the idea was that by the time the bombs fell the Mane 6 were already around 50-60 years old or something like that ?

Harmony Ltd. wrote:I think the idea was that by the time the bombs fell the Mane 6 were already around 50-60 years old or something like that ?

Aye.

Harmony Ltd. wrote:But even if such a treatment existed... I am not sure Fluttershy would want to have her life artificially extended.

"I have already lived too long. Seen things no one should have to see. Done things no one should have done.

I am a relic of a past long gone.

My time will come, a fact I accept and welcome ; and so should you Velvet."

"If anyone deserve to be sparred from death, it is certainly not me. Not after what I have done."

"You want to allow me to live forever ? Why me ? Why not everyone else ?

Do you intend to keep me as a living relic, one that you will put in a museum ?"

Though I wonder if Fluttershy would be that assertive.

I believe yes : after all this time, what she lived, her time as a Ministry Mare and all the intrigues she got involved in, I think she would have become strong enough to stand for herself on this subject at least.


Now, depending on the ending of PH, what would be interesting would be Fluttershy and Whisper being re-united...

I think it's time we started fleshing out the Northern Territories (Fancee, Trottingham, St. Paulomino, Stoskhast).

So, so far I think we can already say that the whole region is subjected to a rainy climate, less rainy than Hoofington's, but still pretty humid.

There may be some marsh around the lake southeast of Fancee if like I imagine it the lake itself is just a depression in the ground no more than 50 meters deep. (idea : the reason why it is a lake may be that the whole place got flooded after a dam was built in a strategic location on the course of the Trotson River ?).

The Isle of Trottingham is the most exposed to the storm prone climate of the northern sea.

St. Paulomino and Stockhast are networked by the navigable river between them both, and to the Canterlot Ruins / Glyphmark as well if the river stay navigable up to it.

What you've said sounds good so far.

Note that that's Equestria's largest lake, too (PH specifies that the Hoofington River flows from the second largest).  This is said in the Wasteland Survival Guide, though, so it's quite possible that the lake from which the Hoofington River flows was the largest prior to a dam's construction.  I'm not sure how plausible it is that such a large and relatively shallow lake could be created by a dam, but, if so, one has to wonder what happened to anyone living in the now-submerged area.

Hm... I'd imagine the people in this area being potentially valuable to the NCR for their skill at building/operating ships and boats.  Given how damp the place is, the islands, and the great lake, it seems likely that they'd be more maritime-inclined than most of the Wasteland.  Of course, for the time being and foreseeable future, this is also the area where the NCR would most need maritime capability.

We'd also probably see some pirates operating in the north, in the inland waterways and such.  It might be interesting to have a gradient, though, from "Fiends" raiders with boats to "Great Khans" postapocalyptic pony vikings.

Re "what happened to the people whose houses got submerged ?" :

Three words : "Three Gorges Dam"

Harmony Ltd. wrote:Re "what happened to the people whose houses got submerged ?" :

Three words : "Three Gorges Dam"

I was thinking of that too.