• Last Seen: 7 yrs ago
  • Joined: 9 yrs ago
  • Posts: 342 (0.10 / day)
  • VMs: 0
  • Username history
    1. Zugzwang 9 yrs ago

Status

User has no status, yet

Bio

User has no bio, yet

Most Recent Posts

SHE WAS OUTCASTED BECAUSE SHE HAD SEVERAL DICKS


I want to get off Mr. Bone's Wild Ride.
A tease for what might come from my parts of the Continent. Because free reign, and an excuse for bizarre world building, is essentially my fetish.

images.alphacoders.com/217/217481.jpg

A city torn from time, stooped in fulminant solitude. Its promises ring true. They shall bind forever, and ever.

i.imgur.com/uKSzKYC.jpg

But the Lord is in his holy temple; let all the earth keep silence before him. I beseech you brethren, by the mercies of god, that ye present your body, a living sacrifice. Holy, acceptable, which is thy reasonable service.

img05.deviantart.net/f483/i/2014/013/c..

The deep-woods are the enemy to travellers, not anything within. Her roots contain whispers from the birth of the world, and her bosom nests children of all kinds, their cradles forever temporary.

i.imgur.com/QHXmXlz.png

The true joy of adventure is the journey, not the destination. She would have hers last forever; the destination is fit for nothing but scorn. Scorn, and disgust, and infinite fear.
I too am excited. Is there still room for me to join? I can promise little but the wild and wonderful.
I'd be happy with most of these, if you're still looking for people.
In --- 9 yrs ago Forum: Casual Roleplay
EDIT: Whoops, just realized I wouldn't be able to play an adult. Ignore this post.
So, General Staffs. Being a General is hard. Armies are big and hungry and very rarely happy. Over time, armies have gotten bigger and require more provisions better campaign organization. Add onto that the changing tactical and operational situations through time. Armies require better orders on the field of battle since giving orders is much more possible in 1800 than in 1100, and proper coordination is the second most important part of wining modern (by which I mean starting in about 1500) battles, right after troop discipline.

Armies before 1805 were commanded always by individuals. Unfortunately, unlike the medieval period, only a genius could command to an effective level alone, and yet genius was expected. Men like Fredrick the Great or Napoleon were geniuses. Quartermasters, men who organized logistics were always present, and Fredrick the Great wrote that the only person a General should share his plans with is his quartermaster. However, even without worrying about logistics, Generals had a huge amount of work to do that only an overachieving genius could accomplish. As such, men like Napoleon and Gustavus Adolphus stood astride other commanders like colossi, and defeated most of Europe in their respective days.

Napoleon is really the man who germinated the idea of the general staff, and of modern military command in general, even though he didn't need one. See, the Prussians after Fredrick the Great were considered the best soldiers in the world. They had some right to boast, but at a place called Jena, they were utterly obliterated by Napoleon, and right afterward the French Emperor waltz through Berlin the undisputed master of military matters at the time. See, the Prussians were not commanded well, they did not fight creatively or in the new fashions that Napoleon proved so incredibly effective. The details of Napoleonic combat could fill a book, and frequently do, and thus will not be detailed here. All that one needs to know is that in 1805 the King realized that something needed to be done.

Prussia may not have had any great genius to oppose Napoleon, but they did have some truly great military thinkers. Scharnhorst and Gneisenau were the two main architects, with some other less important individuals and a young man named Carl von Clausewitz, whose importance is hard to overstate in the years following this. Anyways: these great military thinkers gathered and had the king's blessing to make a new system of command, and to revitalize the armies of Prussia. And this they did.

The first general staff, the result of this conclave, was something rather simple, but innovative. If one man could not lead an army, why not get a bunch of them? Also, since armies around the world, including in Prussia were led by nobility, why not attach a career solider to this leader? These nobles were not lazy or fools, usually, and they took their study of military matters seriously, but their ability rarely could compare to someone who had been educated in military theory their whole life, and had served in real actions.

So, in 1814, the general staff was made law by the King. There would be an attached staff officer to each commander at every strategic level, and this staff officer had the right and expectation to protest bad orders and suggest good ones. Leaders were expected to listen, since as a nuclear option staff officers could protest to their commander’s commander’s staff officer. This could go all the way up to the King and the Chief of General Staff. General Staff officers thus assumed much of the leadership of armies, and had not only capable officers above and below them, but they had their own groups that would help them plan every detail of newly-complex operations.

Soldiers trained to enter the staff were not only the best of the best, but since they were all trained from the same orthodoxy, most looked at situations the same way, or could assume what their fellows would think about situations, radically boosting cooperation in an age without radio. The general staff system created new, well-trained geniuses and provided them a support network and independence, while still maintaining traditional positions for nobility. The system worked like an absolute dream, and in 1815 August von Gneisenau and Gerhard von Blucher kicked Napoleon off the continent once and for all.

Strangely enough, very few emulated the Germans. The British did to a small extent, but it was not until the Wars of German Unification that people started emulating. When the elder von Moltke and his staff obliterated the Austrians, the Austrians learned their lessons. But the Austrians were small fry. The real shock came when the North German Confederation absolutely humiliated the French, who were superior in many areas of technology and were though the best soldiers in the world, and defeated them utterly within two weeks of war being declared. Then the French and British learned their lessons.

General staffs changed over time. The German version was the first, but France and Britain both had their own takes on the matter, both versions more centralized but not headed absolutely by a supreme commander like Germany. The merits of these systems would be tested in World War 1, when each would change, and once again Germany would set the standard for dynamic modern leadership with its Third General Staff.
@Jbcool

Thanks for the compliment, and I might. I just took my final for a class all about insurgency, and so I would probably be able to write something at least moderately well understood, but the thing is, I just don't want to think about insurgency anymore. Maybe one day, once I recover from the strong dicking I got from that final.
This spot will be devoted to a discussion on logistics, which is such a huge topic (many throughout history have said it is the only topic a general need concern himself with in detail) that I cannot start writing it until after my exam.

Also, I'm removing a talk about World War 1 from the list, unless there are massive objections. The information on it is too prolific for me to feel vindicated writing it. Google is your friend here, and will give you acceptable results. If anyone wants some good stuff to listen to, Dan Carlin just finished his six-part podcast series on the Great War, fucking check it out. 10/10 great series.

EDIT: Observe how the Zugzwang in his native habitat contradicts himself absolutely, by saying he will not write about World War 1 then posting an essay about World War 1.
A quick history then about grenades, since I don't want to study anymore. Grenades have been around for a long time. Their predecessors were used by the post-Rome Byzantines, and the first major use of gunpowder grenades was in the 11th century by the Chinese, since the Chinese had gunpowder centuries before Europe or the Middle East. The first documentation we have of white people using grenades was in the late 15th century.

Jump ahead to Louis XIV, a straight up baller who should be read about by everyone. He made the grenadier a proper unit of the military, and chose the biggest (so they could throw the very heavy grenades), bravest (because getting close enough to throw a grenade is spooky) and meanest (because after the grenade throw melee combat followed) members of the infantry. Grenadiers threw grenades from well in front of musket range, and the grenades of the 17th-early 18th century were very heavy cricket balls, thrown like shot puts.

The grenade fell out of fashion in the 18th century. With the focus on discipline and order so crucial to line tactics, a shock weapon was less effective, and since armies were restructuring to allow for linear combat on a thinner, wider and more effective scale, getting in close long enough to throw heavy grenades was becoming less and less viable. Also remember that cannon really came into their own under Gustavus Adolphus (sorry Jan Zizka, you were way ahead of your time) in the 30 years war, and by the 18th century tactics and technology had caught up and advanced: canister shot did the same thing as grenades but better, safer and more reliably.

Horse grenadiers lasted slightly longer, but even they abandoned the grenade as tactics shifted away from it. Grenadiers were still an important part of infantry makeup. One company in the Napoleonic wars in (I think) every nation's battalion was Grenadiers, who were still the most veteran soldiers of the unit (size mattered less now that grenades were not being thrown, but the requirements were still there in part).

The Napoleoninc wars had no grenades being thrown institutionally, and they did not appear throughout the 19th century as firearms became orders of magnitude better. This really changed in the Russo-Japanese war, where grenades made their debut once again. Infantry tactics had moved away from mass blocks, and artillery no longer was at the fore to rake with canister (it was in the back, being more effective with fancy shells, but that is not important to this discussion). Infantry were dug into fortified positions or moving between pieces of cover, and grenades had become MUCH lighter as much better explosives than gunpowder became readily available to national armies. Russians and Japanese threw grenades at each other in increasing numbers through the war, and set a precedent for World War 1.

World War 1 made grenades a mandatory part of infantry doctrine, and while for a time individual soldiers were designated as specialist grenadiers, the military minds realized that grenades were so useful in modern warfare that just about every infantryman should carry them. There are still specialized grenadiers, using more esoteric explosives or carrying a grenade launcher, but just about every developed nation gives just about every infantryman grenades nowadays.
I'm sure my legions of followers are sad at the lack of updates. My spookiest exam (ironically for the only military history course I am taking this semester) is on Monday night. After I take it, Posts are on the way.
© 2007-2024
BBCode Cheatsheet