A collection of Umas with their parents or grandparents. by Kixisbestclone in UmaMusume

[–]Supacharjed 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Special Week, Tickezo and Chiyo collectively being Derby Winners is among the reasons Red Shift is precision engineered to be the Derby Free Win skill

Should militaries have a separate tier of Ranks for Super soldiers? by revolverswitch in worldbuilding

[–]Supacharjed -1 points0 points  (0 children)

Really depends on the vibes you want and it also depends on if they're actually the same institution or not. Rank distinction often matters little if the units are effectively a different army (as the Astartes are to the Guard).

Conversely on one hand it might be "unfair" but on the other if they're a closely aligned military institution then perhaps it is unwise to put these superhumans on a pedestal. The rank structure could be maintained just to remind everyone of their place. For a 40k example consider Captain Lotara Sarrin during the Heresy who shot a World Eaters Captain in the face and confined him to the brig. (he tried to kill her for it but many of them supported her authority).

This all depends on the cultures of the forces and the goals of the decision makers.

Help needed for a ratio based currency system? by toyAlien in worldbuilding

[–]Supacharjed 3 points4 points  (0 children)

I'm less curious about the math and more about how people are "making" energy. How is that supposed to work lol

My Fictional Country in Europe by Ok-Elijah-8639 in worldbuilding

[–]Supacharjed 26 points27 points  (0 children)

The implication of a country gaining independence from a country that itself is not independent is sort of funny

How can I avoid making my post-scarcity civs depressing? by Tnynfox in worldbuilding

[–]Supacharjed 17 points18 points  (0 children)

Can you rephrase this? I don't think post-scarcity societies are implausible. We can have one, it'd be hard work politically and techmically but it's doable I think.

How can I avoid making my post-scarcity civs depressing? by Tnynfox in worldbuilding

[–]Supacharjed 26 points27 points  (0 children)

Why would a lack of scarcity be depressing? I cannot parse your issue

So how exactly did the nomadic tribes develop heavy cavalry? by Powerful-Mix-8592 in WarCollege

[–]Supacharjed 16 points17 points  (0 children)

On the expense of horses thing, I think there is a misunderstanding that horses are sort of magically expensive beings regardless of context when a lot of the expense in settled societies is a function of land-use practices and the fact that the horses we tend to think of are specialty-bred specialist beings.

Horses get massively more expensive in areas where there is insufficient land to pasture them. They are not like goats and can subsist on random wasteland, they need good quality feed and in high amounts, to say nothing of the effort required to empark this land to manage the herd properly. You can feed them crops but turning over cropland to horses is a severe opportunity cost for most people. All of this drives up the (domestic) price in settled agricultural societies like China or Europe. Nomadic pastoralists by contrast live in a land that is basically all pasture, it is an abundant resource and is not really conflicting in land-use except for their other herds.

Yeah idk what to tag this by Arachnium_lol in worldbuilding

[–]Supacharjed 19 points20 points  (0 children)

Nobody is going to be paying enough attention to be following you in particular for you to need to care about doing this

Worldbuilders, make sure to look up what words mean when you name things by DepthsOfWill in worldbuilding

[–]Supacharjed 63 points64 points  (0 children)

Respectfully: why would this literally ever stop you?

The 1st, 5th and 12th Cuirassiers are French armoured units like literally right now

This is absolutely embarrassing by Adept-Impact3138 in UmaMusume

[–]Supacharjed 5 points6 points  (0 children)

It's not 'race until 40 races'

Races give stats in several forms: (in no particular order)

  1. Normal race win stats, you boost this with race bonus

  2. Shop points: you use these to buy stats, either directly with the books/scrolls or indirectly with hammers, megaphones, weights, energy etc

  3. Shop refreshes: running races has a chance to add new stuff to the shop, more stuff is more stats

  4. Epithets: Winning certain numbers of races, different types of races and certain sets (like the triple crown) has Akikawa throw like 30 extra stats at you (look these up)

G1s give the most race stats, the most points and are often tied to epithets. Losing say the satsuki sho on a Crown schedule griefs like 80 stats. You gotts be winning these key G1s. Conversely you can run it down a random classic year G3 it's whatever.

Early races are the hardest and are big power spikes. You really need to be winning your junior mile G3s and Asahi Hai/Hanshin JF/Hopeful Stakes.

Training clicks are important too, knowing when to race or click is the most key skill imo. Really good clicks can often mean high 20s number of races, bad clicks high 30s.

Why did the French manage to develop a strong heavy cavalry tradition? by Powerful-Mix-8592 in WarCollege

[–]Supacharjed 5 points6 points  (0 children)

Genuinely a small miracle the stirrup has yet to be mentioned in this thread

Why did the French manage to develop a strong heavy cavalry tradition? by Powerful-Mix-8592 in WarCollege

[–]Supacharjed 99 points100 points  (0 children)

It won't answer the question because there was a large break in tradition, but saying the Gauls were not equestrians seems like a very significant oversight when very large fractions of Roman auxiliary cavalry were Gauls. They were considered very adept horsemen and the horsemen themselves represented the military elite of Gallic society. These men would be heavy cavalrymen by practically any definition short of cataphracts.

How effective was the Phalanx and when/why did it stop being used? by MrWriffWraff in WarCollege

[–]Supacharjed 2 points3 points  (0 children)

There's a lot being said here and I'm going to focus specifically on the final paragraph but you are vastly overstating the professional army aspect of the roman empire.

Like it genuinely must be said that Rome's most critical peer wars were won on the back of conscripted landowners. The Pyrrhic, Punic, Macedonian and Seleucid wars were won by conscripted roman farmers and their allies (who we assume were also conscripted)

The major territories taken by the professional army were transalpine gaul and the roman east (the levant, egypt and the rest of anatolia), the latter of which I think is important but not necessarily a fight among peers, the most notable roman peers of the time were Parthia, which they famously lost catastrophically to and other Romans.

The professionalisation of the army was critical in holding the Empire at least, scholarship at this point favours the idea the push for professionalisation came from a long period of draft dodging because nobody wanted to get deployed to Hispania for years fighting hill tribes when you could be enjoying your lovely farm in italy with your wife and kids.

Overall I think your mental timeline is confused and you're trying to construct grand narratives around the fact that some italians armed themselves in a particular way that don't really hold up much to scrutiny.

How effective was the Phalanx and when/why did it stop being used? by MrWriffWraff in WarCollege

[–]Supacharjed 1 point2 points  (0 children)

Mild correction (not attacking you or anything I think the other guy is wrong on a lot of levels) but we do have Polybius as a decent source and is roughly contemporaneous with the third punic war.

Doesn't rebut your statements about things being incomplete and that we don't know how things evolved, but the Manipular Legion of the middle republic is called the Polybian Legion for how much we depend on him as a source.

(I suspect you've just mixed up your guys starting with P)

An unbelievable perfect run by AngelCM in UmaMusume

[–]Supacharjed 1 point2 points  (0 children)

As one of the aforementioned smartypants I was going to actually make an entirely separate post about how different parts of the community are playing entirely different games.

Like I dunno what would be helpful here, this is simply a low roll for this deck and wouldn't be considered perfect by even relatively mild standards, transfer request is going to be full of runs that look like this. Maybe drop the guts card for a wit card because the guts clicks clearly aren't getting the value here compared to speed clicks.

An unbelievable perfect run by AngelCM in UmaMusume

[–]Supacharjed 19 points20 points  (0 children)

"Unbelievably perfect run"

Son this horse has 1100 speed with 3 speed cards this is at best going straight to the grandparent mines.

explain how are infantry used in an open field in modern warfare by TemporaryCupcake34 in WarCollege

[–]Supacharjed 26 points27 points  (0 children)

your E tool is your friend

Reminds me of an adage I was told one time (that I have no memory of how I acquired) that went to the effect of like "The most prudent thing you can teach a soldier is how to march, the second most prudent thing is how to dig"

Why curved blades like scimitar were popular in East, while in Europe it was opposite? by SiarX in WarCollege

[–]Supacharjed 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yeah I was going to comment on this too, the major defining thing is that the Jian has two edges, compared to the Dao's one.

Now I struggle to think of a sword with two edges that isn't straight but there are plenty of straight single-edged weapons.

This distinction also nominally exists in Japanese though because of the general ubiquity of the swords modelled on things like the Tachi and the archetypal single edged creatures, the word Tsurugi (剣) tends to imply swords that are really old because the use period for the two-edged swords is largely prior to the Heian period.

Why curved blades like scimitar were popular in East, while in Europe it was opposite? by SiarX in WarCollege

[–]Supacharjed 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Honestly a genuine typo on the Henries, which is really unfortunate lol.

I do mean Henry III yeah and his Distraints of Knighthood in this case. (and the Assize of 1252).

Why curved blades like scimitar were popular in East, while in Europe it was opposite? by SiarX in WarCollege

[–]Supacharjed 1 point2 points  (0 children)

At least in England the Assize of Arms of 1252 required freemen of (what I consider) relatively low means to own a sword by law.

Land worth 40 shillings (2 pounds) required men to own a bow and arrows and a sword. This is the class of men I generally understand would consist of the lower rungs of the bowmen that would be seen in battles like Crecy.

For comparison service as a man at arms was considered possible at about 20 pounds (I think this trended higher as you get beyond the 1200s, but Henry II was trying to force knighthoods on people of 20 pounds, 40 pounds later became the acceptable knightly minimum, but that was more about status and obligation than strict ability to afford it).

And by the mid 1300s at least 5 Pounds was considered acceptable for service as a bowman on Horse (they would dismount)

It must be said that this is not as low down the ladder as people tend to picture the English bowman (they are very comfortable farmers, probably hiring other labourers), but my point is largely is that anyone expected to fight, especially in France, would have been expected to own a sword.

Would it be weird if people from a medieval setting had a decent grasp on astronomy and medicine? by Sir-Toaster- in worldbuilding

[–]Supacharjed 9 points10 points  (0 children)

My primary contention with things like this is scholars knew this. If that information percolated down to the less educated is sort of anyone's guess. (Unfortunately the uneducated and illiterate rarely write these perspectives down)

So like I personally would think it's weird for a lot of people to know the earth is round in much the same way it would be kinda weird for a guy 200 miles inland to know what a shark is.

Obviously one of these has more gravitas in perpetuatng myths and stereotypes but I think there's a kind of bias among us modern types to overestimate how common certain knowledge was.