Author Topic: Would Severanti's strategy eventually have worked?  (Read 4377 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline CT27

  • 210
Would Severanti's strategy eventually have worked?
If Admiral Severanti had been given more time to do his strategy for the war in Sol (let's say for some reason there is slightly more support for the war in the GTVA), would it have eventually led to a GTVA win and UEF surrender?

 

Offline Homura

  • 24
Re: Would Severanti's strategy eventually have worked?
Does he appear in The Blade Itself or where else? I dont remember hearing this name. I just read the Wiki page. So he was the Commander of the 13th Battlegroup and attacked Sol after the 14th Battlegroup retreated right? They speak of a flawful tactic of him and before he could do a devestating strike against Jupiter, Steele jumped in and stole his victory. Thats all i know. What was the name of his Flagship? Maybe that will help me remember what his tactics look like in game.

Anyway i dont think a single Battlegroup could manage to make Sol surrender. Maybe with the element of surprise like the 14th Battlegroup but they were in very bad shape right after the fighting against dozends of Shivan Destroyer and even a Sathanans.
I am not up to date with the speculations in this forum but maybe the Vishnans pulled the 14th into the parallel universe for that exact reason (mindblow).

I dont know at what exact point the Federation had the beamjamming technology but without it Sol would be defeatet very fast. I think thats is the reason Sol held so long against the GTVA.
Beamjamming first appears in Aristeia. But i think they had the technology before this mission.

So, no , i dont think Servanti could have beaten the Federation alone even if his tactics were better. One Battlegroup is just not enough.

 

Offline The E

  • He's Ebeneezer Goode
  • Global Moderator
  • 213
  • Nothing personal, just tech support.
    • Skype
    • Steam
    • Twitter
Re: Would Severanti's strategy eventually have worked?
Severanti was the overall Theater Commander for the entire Sol Expeditionary Force. Until he was recalled after Post Meridian, he was the supreme commander of all GTVA forces in Sol; the question isn't "Could Severanti defeat the UEF using only his Battlegroup", but "Would Severanti's strategy have worked eventually".

From my perspective, the answer is unambiguously yes. By the time WiH starts, the UEF is already losing badly; Steele's intervention hastened the fall of Artemis, but that is something that would have happened regardless. Of course, Severanti's careful and deliberate (or plodding, if you ask his detractors) strategy would have taken much longer to get to where Steele is by the end of Tenebra, but ultimately the balance of forces between the UEF and the GTVA is such that the GTVA is much more capable of fighting and winning a war of attrition.
**** every cause that ends in murder and children crying. ― Iain Banks
Join the fun at the HLP IRC channel. Get the latest spam and gossip as long as it's fresh!

 
Re: Would Severanti's strategy eventually have worked?
Severanti was (slowly) winning the conventional war but I'm not convinced he could've held up against **** like the Fedayeen and whatever Shambhala is once they really came into play.
The good Christian should beware of mathematicians, and all those who make empty prophecies. The danger already exists that the mathematicians have made a covenant with the devil to darken the spirit and to confine man in the bonds of Hell.

 

Offline The E

  • He's Ebeneezer Goode
  • Global Moderator
  • 213
  • Nothing personal, just tech support.
    • Skype
    • Steam
    • Twitter
Re: Would Severanti's strategy eventually have worked?
Severanti was (slowly) winning the conventional war but I'm not convinced he could've held up against **** like the Fedayeen and whatever Shambhala is once they really came into play.

I'm not entirely certain that the Fedayeen could turn the war around if they're facing Severanti. At the end of the day, the amount of materiel the GTVA can dump into Sol far outstrips the building/repairing capability the UEF has; the UEF's only option is to make taking Sol so costly that the GTVA is forced into a negotiated settlement sooner rather than later.
**** every cause that ends in murder and children crying. ― Iain Banks
Join the fun at the HLP IRC channel. Get the latest spam and gossip as long as it's fresh!

 
Re: Would Severanti's strategy eventually have worked?
That was maybe not quite as far away as you think. Severanti ****ed up in Post Meridian because he was under mounting pressure from the GTVA to wrap the war up quickly, like Steele promised to.
The good Christian should beware of mathematicians, and all those who make empty prophecies. The danger already exists that the mathematicians have made a covenant with the devil to darken the spirit and to confine man in the bonds of Hell.

 

Offline -Norbert-

  • 211
Re: Would Severanti's strategy eventually have worked?
Ironically Steele might be more vulnerable to the Fedayeen than Severanti.

Steele takes risks and that gives teh Fedayeen chances to hurt him. Severanti on the other hand played it save, which left fewer chinks in his "armour" for the Fedayeen to capitalize on.


Whether Severanti could have won to me really depends on what exactly the secret project is. If the completion of the project will make the UEF somehow win, then Severanti would have lost, because he was giving them too much time.

 
Re: Would Severanti's strategy eventually have worked?
In Act 2 the UEF makes two big strategic gambits: the attack on the Carthage, and the attempt to open negotiations with the Vasudans. Steele is able, through uniquely :steele: methods, to turn both of these into devastating reverses. Could Severanti have similarly stopped them? Had both succeeded I think a UEF victory would have been reasonably back on the cards.
The good Christian should beware of mathematicians, and all those who make empty prophecies. The danger already exists that the mathematicians have made a covenant with the devil to darken the spirit and to confine man in the bonds of Hell.

 

Offline The E

  • He's Ebeneezer Goode
  • Global Moderator
  • 213
  • Nothing personal, just tech support.
    • Skype
    • Steam
    • Twitter
Re: Would Severanti's strategy eventually have worked?
That was maybe not quite as far away as you think. Severanti ****ed up in Post Meridian because he was under mounting pressure from the GTVA to wrap the war up quickly, like Steele promised to.

Yes, but the entire starting point for this discussion is "what if Severanti had more time". That he didn't is a matter of record, but what if he had?

In Act 2 the UEF makes two big strategic gambits: the attack on the Carthage, and the attempt to open negotiations with the Vasudans. Steele is able, through uniquely :steele: methods, to turn both of these into devastating reverses. Could Severanti have similarly stopped them? Had both succeeded I think a UEF victory would have been reasonably back on the cards.

The attack on the Carthage is very much predicated on the situation Steele has set up beforehand. By creating the impression that his force was understrength and slightly overextended, he gave the UEF an opening to be sucked into overextending itself; I do not believe that Severanti would set up his forces in a similar way. For him, the loss of a major capital ship is something to be avoided at all costs, and setting one of his subordinate Admirals up for a failure like that is not something he would do, in my estimation.

There's a world of difference between Severanti's overall strategy and Steele's, basically. The only reason Severanti was removed from command, after all, was that he started blundering when he had to switch strategies at a moment's notice due to (partially real, partially imaginary) pressure due to Steele's presence in the Theater. I assume that, together with the orders dispatching the 15th BG to Sol, Severanti received a firmly worded letter to bring the war to an end now or else; If that hadn't been the case, if Severanti had felt that the chain of command was firmly behind him, he would have proceeded with his slow, steady approach and won the war by grinding down the UEF fleets.
« Last Edit: March 30, 2017, 09:43:40 am by The E »
**** every cause that ends in murder and children crying. ― Iain Banks
Join the fun at the HLP IRC channel. Get the latest spam and gossip as long as it's fresh!

 
Re: Would Severanti's strategy eventually have worked?
Quote from: Noemi Laporte
[W]hy are we still here? Why are we the tip of the spear, the ones making a difference, while the White Guard shuttle Elders about and the Fedayeen do...whatever it is the Fedayeen do, if they even exist? How did a bunch of Second and Third Fleet rooks spit in the face of the greatest war machine in human space and live to brag about it?

In the big picture I think it's because the Wargods aren't special at all. We are the Federation unleashed. We are what ordinary Ubuntu citizens can become, given a mission and the means to achieve it. What happened here in Sol didn't breed a race of pampered weaklings - it made a generation of smart, tough, versatile men and women. If our leaders ever took to the taste of blood, we could be a nightmare.

The biggest difficulty facing the UEF was never a lack of warships or competent officers. Even as early as the first FV it's confirmed that Calder's 3JRF held back Severanti's superior numbers for 18 months, with little to no support from Mars or Earth. Netraba's artillery puts an abrupt end to the Blitz within half an hour of it starting; that it was so successful is speaks more of the BBlue than anything. The Wargods had the Agincourt within minutes of their insertion; all it took was a location and a commander willing to use it. (While their success against the Carthage' escorts is debatable, Calder, Al-da'wa, and Bei Sr. all confirm that losing the Agincourt hurt Steele badly; I can't believe that was part of his plan.) When the Feds get their act together, they get results. The fatal flaw in Severanti's plan was assuming Byrne's doctrine would hold. Netraba and Calder's actions, even as early as Darkest Hour but certainly by the start of Act 2, say otherwise. (Would they have broken away without Steele in command? Yes. Resentment towards Byrne's defensive posture was brewing even in early Act 1, while Severanti was still theatre commander.)

And Byrne isn't an idiot. I'm convinced that his Shambhala, whatever it is, would lead to a UEF victory (in some real, but possibly non-military, sense), if executed successfully. Leaving aside 2 and 3 Fleet autonomy for the moment, if Byrne and Severanti had exchanged slow, cautious strikes long enough, he'd have had time to implement Shambhala and do... whatever it is Shambhala does.

Third, the Fedayeen. I agree with the analysis that they're less effective against Severanti than Steele, but the fact remains that they could open up a deadly second front from positions Severanti thought safe. If Severanti leaves enough assets to guard against a Fedayeen strike at his rear positions, then those assets aren't fighting the UEF regulars... and the Fedayeen are the Fedayeen. They've got CASSANDRA. Given enough time to construct an accurate psych profile and run their simulations, they will find a weakness. And Severanti would give them time. In chess, there's the concept of sharp play: if every move is dramatic, you'll cut your opponent or yourself. A player accustomed to a sharp playstyle can force their opponent to match it; if they're unaccustomed, that unfamiliarity buys the sharp player protection from their own risks. This is what Steele did to Byrne. Leaving Severanti in charge would be to give him to the Fedayeen, and they would enact their own sharpness.

 
Re: Would Severanti's strategy eventually have worked?
I might also add with Admiral Steele at the end of the third act jumping the gun on the Fedayeen's CASSANDRA clock and with it stated that his plans were "Hyper" calibrated, I'm wondering what Steele had to give up in order to do so. Did Steele miscalculate? Did he finally make a big mistake by scrapping his plans? Now with these questions, I don't think military defeat for the UEF, in part or in whole is any longer set in stone even if the UEF falls as a political and economic entity.

 
Re: Would Severanti's strategy eventually have worked?
Which heightens the stakes and increases tension.

 

Offline Snarks

  • 27
Re: Would Severanti's strategy eventually have worked?
I would say Severanti was definitely winning the war on the front but was losing the war on the homefront. Attacking Sol was already an unpopular opinion among half of the GTVA population. The longer the war dragged on, the less popular support it would have. When put into this perspective (and assuming the GTVA has something similar to representatives in our own modern republics), then you can see why certain politicians might start feeling pressure to end the war sooner rather than later. The perception of a long drawn out war makes people unhappy, as it seems like lives and money are being tossed to achieve nothing. Ironically, Steele's strategy might have cost both more lives and materials (not even counting damage to the infrastructure in Sol that was supposed to be captured and used for the GTVA to begin with) because it would make the war seem more decisive and short, despite mounting casualties.

Steele knew his forces would be overextended following the Blitz. But he used this to his advantage by luring the Federation into an offensive, leading to the destruction of the Wargods which included many of the Federation's best units. Severanti would have never allowed his forces to be vulnerable enough to a counter attack.

To put this into a more abstract perspective: Severanti was maximizing damage to the Federation while minimizing losses. Steele was maximizing the progression to victory.  Steele's understanding of war extends past a military understanding; he understands the war in a political perspective. This is the key defining characteristic of Steele. Whereas Severanti may be as capable a general as Robert E. Lee (and keeping in mind that his chief opponent Calder is explicitly referred to as a military strategist on par with Erich von Manstein), Steele would be more in line with generals like Napoleon or Alexander, with a bit of Ulysses S. Grant tossed in.

 

Offline -Norbert-

  • 211
Re: Would Severanti's strategy eventually have worked?
Sure the wargods did some real damage, but think about what it was the motivated the wargods.

In the very first mission we learn that Steele is merciless and gave orders to destroy any and all ships that don't surrender, including clearly civilian vessels. Then because of the pressure of being replaced by Steele, Severanti bombarded Luna.

Those are the reasons why the wargods fought so fiercly. And both those things are unlikely to have happened under Severanti's full control.

The biggest problem of Ubuntu isn't that they can't get anything done, but that they are at their core a peaceful society that abhors killing. It took some atrocities to shake then out of their believes and bring out their killer instinct. Without the atrocities, it's quite possible the majority of the UEF would never have fought to their full potential. And just the Jovians alone might be able to hold the GTVA off for a long while, but they would have crumbled eventually.

While I don't remember reading the names of any fallen station, the material made it quite clear to me that it was standard policy to make sure the stations couldn't be used by the GTVA, which in turn very strongly suggests that Artemis was not the first station to fall, just the first one where the UEF failed to evacuate and self destruct it in time and thus the GTVA managed to take it intact and gain control over the local gate network.

That in turn means that Severanti did take terretory for the GTVA, just slower and with far less flash than Steele did... but also probably with less losses and a lot less moral ambiguity... for whatever that last bit is worth in the face of the continued existence of the two species.

 

Offline niffiwan

  • 211
  • Eluder Class
Re: Would Severanti's strategy eventually have worked?
just the first one where the UEF failed to evacuate and self destruct it in time, killing all civilians onboard, and thus the GTVA managed to take it intact and gain control over the local gate network.

FTFY; the standing orders from UEF command ran counter to Ubuntu principles, possibly leading the captain of the Nelson (can't recall his name) to essentially commit suicide rather than carry out his orders & compromise his principles.
Creating a fs2_open.log | Red Alert Bug = Hex Edit | MediaVPs 2014: Bigger HUD gauges | 32bit libs for 64bit Ubuntu
----
Linux OBS Packages: FSO 3.7.0 | FSO BP Build | wxLauncher (?) | PCS2 (?) | wxVPView (?)
Debian Packages (testing/unstable): Freespace2 | wxLauncher
----
m|m: I think I'm suffering from Stockholm syndrome. Bmpman is starting to make sense and it's actually written reasonably well...

 
Re: Would Severanti's strategy eventually have worked?
Yeah about that, I was wondering why non of the military powers developed essentially spacesuits for indoor use in case of hull breach during battle and why it was (assuming for the moment they did) not standard protocol in the event of imminent hull breach (like self destruct) to have all of the station civilian population to stop boarding the escape ships and suit-up, head to armored sections and await subsequent rescue after the end of the engagement.

But, that's just me trying to grapple with what seems to me make no sense for a variety of reasons.

 

Offline General Battuta

  • Poe's Law In Action
  • 214
  • i wonder when my postcount will exceed my iq
Re: Would Severanti's strategy eventually have worked?
Man, this is a great thread!

Yeah about that, I was wondering why non of the military powers developed essentially spacesuits for indoor use in case of hull breach during battle and why it was (assuming for the moment they did) not standard protocol in the event of imminent hull breach (like self destruct) to have all of the station civilian population to stop boarding the escape ships and suit-up, head to armored sections and await subsequent rescue after the end of the engagement.

But, that's just me trying to grapple with what seems to me make no sense for a variety of reasons.

Warships are implied to have the crew suited or at least in sealed environments during combat. But I don't understand how shoving all the civilians into disaster suits would help with the GTVA taking over the station's strategic capabilities.

 
Re: Would Severanti's strategy eventually have worked?
You can then eliminate the whole morale question behind say enacting scorched earth policies at say the Jovian blitz. Now it would be a question of if the suit works and if it doesn't, sue the company for if the rate of mortality is beyond what they were commissioned to design into each suit. Also, the suit would not be the only part of the surviving an earth-shattering kaboom. I envision heading off to the armored sections, call them lifepods if you want, to maximize options.

So in short, stuff the civvies into amored suits and blow the station. There by minimizing civilian loss and maximizing options for strategic flexibility in the area of denying ease of foothold establishment.
« Last Edit: March 31, 2017, 05:23:54 am by Federal Spacefarer »

 
Re: Would Severanti's strategy eventually have worked?
Also minimize the politicians chances of getting onto your back after ordering and following through with it.

 

Offline The E

  • He's Ebeneezer Goode
  • Global Moderator
  • 213
  • Nothing personal, just tech support.
    • Skype
    • Steam
    • Twitter
Re: Would Severanti's strategy eventually have worked?
You do know that you can edit your posts, right? There's no reason to double post like you are doing right now :)

**** every cause that ends in murder and children crying. ― Iain Banks
Join the fun at the HLP IRC channel. Get the latest spam and gossip as long as it's fresh!