Traveller, The Rise of Empire: A Naval Design, Procurement and Command Quest

I'll share what I assume is the oligarch perspective, since these guys have an interesting conundrum facing them:

On one hand, the current laws allow all weapons, and they'd likely want to retain that. In part, because that leaves them open to produce more weapons, in part because there are polities like Garda-Villis who are more advanced and thus we would need every advantage we can get if we were to fight them. On the other hand, very soon civilian ships are going to be ubiquitous and oligarchs don't want their investments destroyed by a stray vessel with a nuke.

In the political sense there's an additional problem in that to the oligarchs this rules of war convention defangs Home more than it defangs Cassalon or Xyri. This leads to a more even powerbase within the neighboring systems, which is bad for the oligarchs who would want fuller control. However, they would want to have moral high ground because that would make the administration and integration of the neighboring systems easier. But, there's no moral high ground to be had because of the failure to prevent S'taxu burn.

Where does that leave the oligarchs? Ideally, they'd want to lean on our official doctrine, which is 'Peace Though Strength'. Alas, that's impossible. Our ship-building capabilities won't match those of our southern neighbors. To compound the issue, the HSWS is in itself problematic, in that the conventional buildup of HSWS leaves them with more power to dictate Home's policies. What's the alternative? Private armies with clandestine weapons research? Expensive, and not easy to hide. Mercenaries? Tempting, but unpredictable.

No easy choices for our ruling class.
 
Last edited:
If it's restricted to the Warzone and they can make sure the threat is removed after the resolution of the conflict. Then it would be okay. Otherwise. That's definitely a no.
The last person to die of unexploded ordinance from WWI will not be born yet for centuries.

Perhaps we could require some technical solution be in place for detection and/or neutralization. Maybe something like passive RFID chips that will respond to a signal encrypted it the right key? But I don't trust "trust me bro, we can clean it up after the war" if enough explosives get planted.
 
[X] OPLAN: The Last Line To Ever Hold
Regarding chemical, radiological, and biological threats:
-[X] Inhalants, contact and injected chemicals and poisons during conventional war.
Regarding excessive and indiscriminate weapons:
-[X] Melee weaponry that functions via the delivery of a detachable or internally delivered explosive.
-[X] Melee weaponry that functions via the usage of a 'chain' or motorised cutting teeth.
-[X] Projectile weaponry that relies on small calibre explosives such as specific ammunition for personal rifles and sidearms.
-[X] Weaponry that is intended to or in addition to their primary function may cause harm through heating, cooling or flame.
-[X] Weaponry that is intended to or in addition to their primary function may cause harm through radiological or nuclear effects.
-[X] Weaponry that is designed to reduce or eliminate the presence of a breathable atmosphere on or around a target.
-[X] Write-in: weapons that are designed to intentionally induce permanent sensory disability of any kind are strictly prohibited, as are any bomblet, cluster munition, mine, or other scatterable area denial or multi-target munition designed or found to be inimical to explosive disposal, designed or found to be able to explicitly target civilian or military emergency response, or designed or found to be inimical to normal civilian life, such as disguised or delayed explosives meant to be retrieved by civilians only to then detonate as a "terror" weapon.
-[X] Write-in: the use of explosive and incendiary ammunition against non-organic, non-sapient targets such as vehicles, materiel, and other durable targets is permitted-but these weapons must be designed and exported in a manner that prevents to best ability any unlawful use.
Regarding terracide, ecocide and solarcide:
[X] Write-in: the deployment of conventional or CBRN weapons in such quantities and capabilities to enable terracide, ecocide, or solarcide shall be prohibited. Furthermore, the research and deployment of excessive and indiscriminate weapons technologies such as relativistic kill vehicles, geoengineering weapons, "sun-killer" systems of any type or classification, or any other weapon explicitly designed or capable of terracide, ecocide, or solarcide shall be strictly prohibited for military or para-military use by any state or non-state actor.

FLASH MESSAGE-OFFICIAL MILITARY TRAFFIC-ENCRYPTED
Source: Home Net-Relay, HSWS Central Command Base.
To: Bloch, R, Military Intelligence Corps Permanent Liaison, Multispectrum Warfare Office-EYES ONLY.
From: Novohal, L. , Maj., Multispectrum Warfare Office, Humanitarian Security Working Group-Home Primary Command Council.


Ravenna Col. Bloch STOP Get this to Madrigal in Procurement and Meers in PCC for approval or at least tabling before the council at the next session STOP Tell them whatever you have to STOP If we don't close this door now some rat bastard will have private blood-drinkers loaded with WMDs RKKVs and Goddess knows what else STOP I still think about that night on Armist MESSAGE TERMINATES
 
[X] Plan Geneva Part 2
-[X] Inhalants, contact and injected chemicals and poisons during conventional war.
-[X] Weaponry that is intended to or in addition to their primary function may cause harm through radiological or nuclear effects.
-[X] Weaponry that is likely to cause ongoing harm or collateral damage through unexploded ordnance including bomblets and mine dispensers.
-[X] Weaponry that is designed to reduce or eliminate the presence of a breathable atmosphere on or around a target.
-[X] The use of such weapons in sufficient quantities to cause planetcide.
 
[X] Plan Core Focus
-[X] Inhalants, contact and injected chemicals and poisons during conventional war.
-[X] Weaponry that is likely to cause ongoing harm or collateral damage through unexploded ordnance including bomblets and mine dispensers.
-[X] The use of such weapons in sufficient quantities to cause planetcide.

My issues with Geneva Part 2:

-[ ] Weaponry that is intended to or in addition to their primary function may cause harm through radiological or nuclear effects.

This would prohibit our particle beam weapons, and it's not clear to me that acute high intensity radiation exposure is actually worse than all the other ways to die in a war in space such that it needs to be prohibited, so long as there aren't fallout concerns, which we have previously covered well enough.

-[ ] Weaponry that is designed to reduce or eliminate the presence of a breathable atmosphere on or around a target.

This could be argued to include any weapon designed to operate in vacuum and suitable for targeting either manned spacecraft or vacuum suited infantry. If it's interpreted conservatively to just include things like thermobaric weapons for bunker clearing, then again, it's not clear to me that this is a worse way to die than having the bunker collapsed on you or just getting shot.
 
Last edited:
I don't think folks exactly understand-we aren't "spreading ourselves thin" here because this is a multinational treaty! We as the HSWS and Home generally are one part of a whole. Both Xyri and Cassalon have had major crises that make their being signatories to this agreement very probable.
 
[X] OPLAN: The Last Line To Ever Hold

Gonna be honest, while I dislike the continuing hazard of cluster munitions...they are far too much of a force multipler for me to be willing to just toss them entirely. It's exactly the sort of thing a marine landing team facing off against multiple times their number of opponents needs to be able to call in.
 
I don't think folks exactly understand-we aren't "spreading ourselves thin" here because this is a multinational treaty! We as the HSWS and Home generally are one part of a whole. Both Xyri and Cassalon have had major crises that make their being signatories to this agreement very probable.
My concern with your plan is more one of not being convinced that most prohibited things are actually meaningfully worse alternatives to a gut shot with a conventional bullet or running out of air trapped in a compartment in a wrecked ship or any of the other things that are pretty unavoidable as options in war without it ceasing to be war.


[X] OPLAN: The Last Line To Ever Hold

Gonna be honest, while I dislike the continuing hazard of cluster munitions...they are far too much of a force multipler for me to be willing to just toss them entirely. It's exactly the sort of thing a marine landing team facing off against multiple times their number of opponents needs to be able to call in.
I would be prepared to consider permitting them under some circumstances, with a requirement that submunitions meet some standard of reliability and that technical solutions be in place to assist in clearing unexploded ordinance post-conflict. A blanket ban is unnecessary if we can make them pose no more continuing hazard than other explosive weapons. Just, that's a pretty important "if".
 
[X] Plan Core Focus

Any of the other plans seems likely to cripple any usage of energy weapons, mainly via:
Weaponry that is intended to or in addition to their primary function may cause harm through heating, cooling or flame.
Also known as "every laser weapon ever invented", and
Weaponry that is intended to or in addition to their primary function may cause harm through radiological or nuclear effects.
Also known as "every particle beam ever invented (including the main guns on All Of Our Ships)"
 
I suspect that particle beam and laser weapons are not actually eliminated by this.
Laser weapons - maybe you can make some kind of argument that this only covers things that set themselves on fire (napalm, thermite, etc) so vaporizing things with the heat from a laser doesn't count. Doesn't fit the raw text, but you could probably push it, especially if you restrict it to our point defense lasers rather than handing Joe Infantryman a laser gun and watching him set the town on fire with it.
But Particle beams - just go re-read the wargames in chapter 6-8. A particle beam is a radiation gun, it has the "radiation" tag in the weapon index, it dealt most of its damage by irradiating crew to the point we immediately unlocked an "add more radiation shielding" project. If we, the HSWS, vote to ban radiological weapons we vote to ban the backbone of our space armaments.
 
Last edited:
.. I'm also, probably, OK with that. Edit: To clarify, I only scan read back threadmarks, but tbh, I'm not going to be upset if we have to redo our particle beam weaponry or change it. It'd work better if a treaty had at least a token issue for us as well.
 
What about chemical weapons in peacetime? Might get caught by some kind of "no crimes against life" policy but as coyote wrote there's all sorts of Actions Other Than War that people can use heavy weapons in. Forcibly restricting it to non-lethal weapons might work but we've seen people use "less-lethal" gases in otherwise conventional battles.

Plus the whole "we didn't legally declare it as a war therefore we can do what we want" thing.
 
Back
Top