Loroi abilities, and Loroi Judo

[Sanguinius]

The first battle you describe was one of the first in the war, before the trenches stretched across Europe. The cavalry engagement described was a skirmish between scouting parties.

The second battle was part of the last great offensive of the war, when the German lines were broken and Allied forces were actually moving forward. The cavalry undoubtedly did a splendid job exploiting the breach, but the presence of tanks and artillery probably contributed more to the actual breakthrough than anything else.

You site an example of cavalry being used in one of the first battles and used in one of the last battles of WWI as a rebuttal to the notion of cavalry usage during WWI, not as an example of their continuing usage throughtout the War on the Western front as being a sign of their continuing endurance in a dedicated cavalry brigade. This without even looking at other fronts such as the Eastern Front or the Middle East and North Africa where dozens of dedicated cavalry brigades were in usage, interesting. Your "logic" of trying to suggest that because cavalry weren't used to run into no man's land and clear trenches and were used in concentration to penetrate a breach in a defensive line, is your idea of a rebutal to the notion of their usage as a military fighting force is beyond my ability to respond to beyond merely restating your position back to you.

[Fotiadis_110]

You know, with the advent and gradual improvement of antiballistic fabrics 'bullet proof vests' and the like, cavalry could be due for a renaissance in terms of military usage. Small tanks are too expensive to be worthwhile using on the battlefield, while the high mobility of horses in unforgiving terrain combined with resistance and protection from low calibre weaponry could be a major boon.

Just keep them away from the 50 cal machine guns.

(one of the biggest advantages? A horse has less need for range of movement, so unlike humans they wouldn't have large weak points around the shoulders/neck.)

[Absalom]

Using horses (and where appropriate camels) as transportation through rough terrain will likely become a standard part of military doctrine again (though not a major part, since it only makes sense in some terrain), but not where intense fighting is expected. Horses are skittish, and have to be specially familiarized to the sound of gunfire (one of my grandfathers used to do it).

In a gunfight, a horse is not an asset. Being on horseback makes you more vulnerable, due to the fact that you're further from the ground, and therefor have less cover that you can use. Traveling long distances, observing your surroundings, carrying heavy loads, and other such tasks can benefit from horses (want to ambush some light or medium armor? try horse-transported mortars and recoilless-rifles. For heavy armor upgrade to horse-portable missiles), but horses no longer have a meaningful place on the battlefield itself, since they're large targets that can't do much to actively participate in the actual fighting.

[Solemn]

A question:

Did the Loroi have any sort of equivalent to horse cavalry?

Aside from beasts of burden, have the Loroi made significant use of domesticated animals in warfare? Attack dogs, cavalry horses, war elephants, sopwith camels, bear artillery, fire bats, anything of that nature?

[discord]

on a slight tangent, other domesticated animals in warfare, dogs....do not underestimate the use of these guys.

dolphins however never really wanted to work however....

[Trantor]

...dolphins however never really wanted to work however....

That´s because they´re intelligent.

[Arioch]

Did the Loroi have any sort of equivalent to horse cavalry? Aside from beasts of burden, have the Loroi made significant use of domesticated animals in warfare? Attack dogs, cavalry horses, war elephants, sopwith camels, bear artillery, fire bats, anything of that nature?

None of the Loroi sister worlds had a horse equivalent. Deinar's land animals were almost all descended from Soia-Liron livestock, so there are few large land predators (other than the Loroi themselves). There is an elephant-sized herd animal that was sometimes used as a beast of burden, but its temperament and slow speed was not suited to combat. There is a boar-like predator descended from the miros that is sometimes domesticated, but it's not a social animal and there is nothing like the bond between humans and dogs.

Perrein has a wide variety of native animals, but nothing suitable for riding, and the jungle terrain wouldn't favor cavalry tactics even if there were. But the Perrein Loroi did capture and train many different local organisms, some of which were used in combat. Perrein warfare was often unconventional and asymmetrical.

On Taben, the higher life forms were nearly all in the oceans.

[Absalom]

None of the Loroi sister worlds had a horse equivalent. Deinar's land animals were almost all descended from Soia-Liron livestock, so there are few large land predators (other than the Loroi themselves). There is an elephant-sized herd animal that was sometimes used as a beast of burden, but its temperament and slow speed was not suited to combat. There is a boar-like predator descended from the miros that is sometimes domesticated, but it's not a social animal and there is nothing like the bond between humans and dogs.

Perrein has a wide variety of native animals, but nothing suitable for riding, and the jungle terrain wouldn't favor cavalry tactics even if there were. But the Perrein Loroi did capture and train many different local organisms, some of which were used in combat. Perrein warfare was often unconventional and asymmetrical.

On Taben, the higher life forms were nearly all in the oceans.

The Loroi will be SO confused when they see everything we've domesticated. "If you domesticated THIS, then why didn't you domesticate that thing with the horn on it's nose?!?"

[saint of m]

None of the Loroi sister worlds had a horse equivalent. Deinar's land animals were almost all descended from Soia-Liron livestock, so there are few large land predators (other than the Loroi themselves). There is an elephant-sized herd animal that was sometimes used as a beast of burden, but its temperament and slow speed was not suited to combat. There is a boar-like predator descended from the miros that is sometimes domesticated, but it's not a social animal and there is nothing like the bond between humans and dogs.

Perrein has a wide variety of native animals, but nothing suitable for riding, and the jungle terrain wouldn't favor cavalry tactics even if there were. But the Perrein Loroi did capture and train many different local organisms, some of which were used in combat. Perrein warfare was often unconventional and asymmetrical.

On Taben, the higher life forms were nearly all in the oceans.

The Loroi will be SO confused when they see everything we've domesticated. "If you domesticated THIS, then why didn't you domesticate that thing with the horn on it's nose?!?"

"You try getting close to it."

Yeah, there hasn't been too much info on war rhinos, but with some sensitive skin, bad eye sight, difficulty getting them to do what you want, and their natural tendency to want to gore, trample into paste then trample again the first thing that's within ten feet.

[Muttley]

A couple of posters seem to think that horses require less supply than motor vehicles. I don't think you appreciate the logistics of horse-powered warfare.

Mounted cavalry requires a great deal of supplies, much more than motorised armour. Horses need to be fed even when unused - they can't be turned off. Cavalry can only survive on grazing if they are constantly on the move, and through grasslands. In any other situation the horses need supplies, and much more both in weight and volume than the soldiers. Don't forget, each cavalryman must have two or three horses, to account for battlefield casualties, disease and accidents.

Horse-drawn transport, plying fixed routes, must be supplied with fodder (by horse-drawn transport and etc.), and is slower and can carry much less load than motor transport. Petrol and diesel have a very high energy density. Motorised transport can carry much heavier loads faster and more reliably. Horses cannot be worked constantly without suffering huge loss rates, so you need a lot more horses in order to rest them between jobs.

In the American Civil War, an artillery horse's prescribed ration was 14 pounds of hay and 12 pounds of grain per day. All of that has to be brought up by horse-drawn transport, which must also be fed. And we haven't considered water at all, yet.

[saint of m]

Horses had their advantages, and disadvantages. You had to train them to fight certain things, and well war is more scary for them then us humans. So it takes a long time. Also, they can't be cheap. A horse alone in today's money is a pricey pet, and it must not have been much different back then.

That all said, WW1 much of the war tech we take granted today we were in the making up as you go phase of using them. My fat lard butt could outrun a WW1 tank, and they were the definition of uncomfortable. Today, I want to be the guy inside the Abrams if I go to war.

[Michael]

Actually the real expenses are insurance and vet bills, so long as you have about an acre a horse and rotate them properly it can be pretty cheap, but then that only really works with the one horse, if you're looking at a livery yard then there are many more animals to be cared for, they all have to be wormed, any shots they need have to be done and like I said the insurance is a killer since it covers every thing from leg injuries to laminates to colic or what have you.

In years gone by (ie: WWI & WWII) the care level for horses was near non-existent, I don't think even the RSPCA existed around that time (their somewhere in the region of 100 years old or something) food, water and veterinary practises were as basic as it could be and still allow the animal to live, and even then it wasn't enough, horses are grazers so they eat almost constantly and have food in their system nearly all the time (even when their asleep). There were many practises that were used back then that would land you straight into jail now days, there are some still used today that many people disagree with, like twitching.

But the training a war horse had in that time would have taken only a few years, it can be done alongside backing a horse, teaching it how wear a saddle and to carry a rider, as its mostly getting them used to loud noises, sudden flashes and things like that although its best to wait until after they've been trained to carry a rider, training them to attack is relatively easy as well, but that sort of thing goes beyond my expertise.

[discord]

muttley: never said horses did not need food(fuel) just that fore mentioned fuel is available in the wild and not an industrial product, horses CAN graze, combustion engines can not, it is not effective in any shape or form but ineffective transport is better then no transport.

[saint of m]

But where to graze? With mustard gas, machine guns, trenches, tanks, bombs, chlorine gas, rats, piles of dead, spent cartridges, other poisonous gas, amputated limbs and what not...where would they graze near the battlefield?

[Michael]

But where to graze? With mustard gas, machine guns, trenches, tanks, bombs, chlorine gas, rats, piles of dead, spent cartridges, other poisonous gas, amputated limbs and what not...where would they graze near the battlefield?

Most would be kept far from the front lines and if they were any where near them they'd mostly they'd be well behind the front trenches, towards the rear and brought up when needed.

Of course there would still be some up at the front and you're completely right that all of those thing would not do them any good, not that it made any difference, they would eventually be desensitised to it, same as the soldiers or they'd go bat shit crazy, same as the soldiers, or they'd be broken, go through what was left of their life and eventually drop down dead, same as the soldiers.

[Fotiadis_110]

Regardings tameable animals?

Zebra are close relatives to horses, yet we haven't ever bothered with large scale domestication.
The reason? They really are NASTY animals, they aren't friendly and good natured like modern horses.

As for rhinos? they would be unimpressed with their relatively low speed, but they will look at Indian elephants, and wonder why we didn't domesticate the African variety

[fredgiblet]

I suspect that pre-domestication horses probably weren't very pleasant either.

[Arioch]

Granted that our domesticated animals have been changed a lot through breeding over the millennia, but I think it's nearly impossible to domesticate a large-bodied wild animal in the first place if it doesn't already have the appropriate temperament. You can't breed an animal if you can't make it reproduce in captivity; elephants are still not fully domesticated, because they can't be bred in captivity, and calves still have to be stolen out of the wild.

That's one of the points made in Guns, Germs and Steel: that while Europe and the Middle East had lots of suitable domesticatable organisms - sheep, goats, pigs, cattle, oxen, horses, wheat, barley, etc.... Africa had very few - water buffalo, sorghum... and not much more; and that this was one of several factors that led to Africa being behind other parts of the world in the development of their civilization. The unsuitability of Zebras as domestic animals can be judged by the fact that they were never successfully domesticated; you can be sure it wasn't for lack of trying. The early Africans were every bit as clever and capable as their Eurasian counterparts.

[ed_montague]

Granted that our domesticated animals have been changed a lot through breeding over the millennia, but I think it's nearly impossible to domesticate a large-bodied wild animal in the first place if it doesn't already have the appropriate temperament. You can't breed an animal if you can't make it reproduce in captivity; elephants are still not fully domesticated, because they can't be bred in captivity, and calves still have to be stolen out of the wild.

That's one of the points made in Guns, Germs and Steel: that while Europe and the Middle East had lots of suitable domesticatable organisms - sheep, goats, pigs, cattle, oxen, horses, wheat, barley, etc.... Africa had very few - water buffalo, sorghum... and not much more; and that this was one of several factors that led to Africa being behind other parts of the world in the development of their civilization. The unsuitability of Zebras as domestic animals can be judged by the fact that they were never successfully domesticated; you can be sure it wasn't for lack of trying. The early Africans were every bit as clever and capable as their Eurasian counterparts.

squeeeee someone else who read that book

To be slightly more specific, sub-Saharan Africa really fell behind for want of a horse (ucwatIdidthar)--North Africa did fine, especially along the Mediterranean and along the Nile, where the climate was similar enough to the rest of Eurasia to allow domesticated animals and foodstuffs to spread easily. Egypt remained a regional power until the Persians came along and stomped them, and let's face it--the Persians stomped everyone.

[Michael]

I suspect that pre-domestication horses probably weren't very pleasant either.

You're quite right, wild horses in the New Forest are very dangerous, My half sister went with her cousin and he got kicked by one, as serious as it was (broken ribs) it was