DUne warfare

[Scrinlord]

I was wondering, in the original Dune book, was most warfare fought using swords/hand to hand combat, or was it using guns? I am having a debate with my friend, I think that mostly they used hand to hand stuff. I know they have muala pistols and lasguns, but most of the combat used hand to hand combat. He says that he thinks they mostly used lasguns and stuff, even tho they had shields.

Who is right?

[Acriku]

I think your friend has been watching the movie too much ;)

_{That means you're right...}

Don't forget the worms, _{never forget the worms...}

[Dante]

Mostly hand to hand combat. That's why so much importance was placed on "The weirding way."

[Caid Ivik]

Distinguished soldiers, "knights" of their House, like Sardaukar and such elite units were fightning mostly with shield and sword. Shield gave the warrior invulnerability to shooting weapons, exc.lasers, which were used only against larger targets (walls, buildings, armored vehicles, aircraft), but also maybe against light unshielded infantry.

Middle age warfare, where poor soldiers fought for money with bows and noble men with swords or spears is closer to it. Whole duniverse is feudal as well.

[Major_Gilbear]

Distinguished soldiers, "knights" of their House, like Sardaukar and such elite units were fightning mostly with shield and sword.

Middle age warfare, where poor soldiers fought for money with bows and noble men with swords or spears is closer to it. Whole duniverse is feudal as well.

Hmm, that's a point Caid. In Medieval warfare, (long)bows became very important for reasons we all know.

I wonder how come they didn't become popular again in the Duniverse?

Afterall, the bow enabled cheap peasants to overcome powerfull, well equipped and highly trained Knights...

If the best armies relied on HtH (Sarduakar and Fremen), imagine how devasting bows would be - and the speed of the projectiles would probably be slow enough to penetrate a shield, much like a Maulapistol...

Perhaps it just never occured t FH? :O :P

[TMA_1]

well generally it was hand to hand combat. Most of the fighting was done with hand to hand combat, utilizing various archaic weapons.

People seem to forget though that shields were generally never used on arrakis. It was one battlefield where las-guns and darts ravaged people. The only reason why the fremen did so well is because they knew their turf, and they had a religious zealousness. They suprised their enemies by first knowing where they would be, and second hiding out in order to jump their enemy. They werent always successful, especially when the sardaukar would unleash their dreaded suspenser born fighters. That was probably the greatest fear for fremen infantry wise.

Remember that on arrakis, the rules of war changed. It was so different that even primitive weapons were utilized. It is remenescent of World War One. When people found themselves involved in a new kind of warfare, and they had to adapt as they went along, generally though bunkering themselves. like in the case of baron harkonnen pummeling stranded solders with artillery. In my opinion, I see it that the fields of battle on arrakis eerily lacked blood. That cauterized limbs and body parts layed along glass scortched sand from the las-guns. Without protection from shields, it turned into a more "advanced", but in a way more barbaric and animalistic form of battle. not as civilized as it should have been.

[Andrew]

I believe they used conventional missles or mortars that propelled explosives from a far distance in the first dune book.

[Scrinlord]

I dont think they used mortars and missiles much.

I know that Baron Harkonnen used artillary to pound Atreidies soldiers, but that is pretty much it.

And ya, you are right about Arrakkis having different warfare

[Caid Ivik]

Gilbear, you can fire slow maula projectiles, but if shielded nobleman would see it in enough distance, he would evade it. Same was with bows which had a longer range than even more powerful crossbows, but their arrows were too slow. Of course, when there were enough shots, there was no possibility to evade bloody rain. Maybe only with thick full plate...

If there is no shield (yes, worms are everywhere...), noble forces dominate with much more powerful laser weapons. Dart throwers and knives are useless - unless attacker isn't very skilled, like fremen were.

[Tezcatlipoca]

Crossbows have an effective range of about 200m. Longbows have an effective range of about 300m-400m.

The "slower" of the two is going to be the crossbow, since it has a smaller range.

The crossbow then comes out at about 40m/sec-45m/sec. When it lands, assuming it hits on the same height that it started from, will impact at the same velocity. Either way, to deal killing damage, it's still going to have a high velocity, and we can assume a velocity around this range.

Accoding to Frank Herbert in the appendix of <u>DUNE</u>, the shield can be set in a range to deflect all objects moving faster then 6cm/sec-9cm/sec, or 0.06m/sec-0.09m/sec (p.529 of Berkley NewYork June 1984 printing). So the crossbow bolt is going to be traveling faster then 444x the acceptable speed of a shield, given favorable conditions (a slower crossbow bolt, and a low-frequency set shield); nowhere near enough to get through.

As for the maula pistol... accordning to Frank Herbert again in the Appendix of <i>DUNE</i>, a Maula Pistol is "spring loaded gun for firing poison darts; range about forty meters."(p.523)

Which mean's it's exit, and contact velocity is going to be about 20m/sec. Still 220x the speed that a shield will deflect. I.e. a maula dart won't go through a shield.

The weapon you two (Caid Ivik and Major_Gilbear) are probably thinking about, is the "Stunner" which according to Frank Herbert once again in the Appendix of <u>DUNE</u>, is a "slow-pellet projectile weapon throwing a poison- or drug-tipped dart. Effectiveness limited by variations in shield settings and relative motion between target and projectile."(p.530)

We can probably effectivly assume, as has been surmised on other occasions by other's, that the stunner projectile then utilizes a miniturized suspensor-lift device in order to keep it in the air, much like a "Hunter Seeker" needle(p.520). By the quoted account, we also can infer that the projectile travels most probably in a range at just below 0.06m/sec to about 0.09m/sec. So, it getting through and doing damage is determined by both the shield setting, *and* if the target saw it comming. If they did, then they would probably often have time to act, by either dodging it, or by using their shield covered knife/body/limbs to deflect it.

The speed of the projectile, of course doesn't limit it's max flight range (the suspensor's fuel limits would do that, if that is how it is kept in flight), but it DOES limit it's effective range to very close quarters; presumably within melee range.

So, the question is, is the only mentioned ranged weapon that can actually penetrate a shield, worthwhile enough to use in combat? My answer would be no, not on a frequent basis. Its probably high cost, requirement that the target either be unaware or in a position not to move around much, and its very short range (comparably to other long range weapons that a shield would stop) would make it a poor substitute in most situations. It would be too expensive to outfit many people with. It would require that your enemy force is much less skilled and competent then yours (at which point you might as well use cheaper knives). It would put the user at risk of being hurt or killed, as if after they fire on their target, the stunner *misses*, then their target will be in easy range to attack immediately with a melee weapon, while you still are fumbling to holster your stunner and get your own knife(unless your amidexterous as the Sardaukar are suggested to be). Not to mention that the attacker would probably have to make sure that his or her shield is set to the lowest frequency, or off, (and mabe to make sure he or she isn't moving) to make sure that the stunner isn't stopped by his or her own shield.

But the stunner still does have it's uses, as described in the first book. In the hands of a skilled user, it would be as deadly as a knife. We find in the book, that the most frequent users are Sardaukar special forces units (as if normal Sardaukar wouldn't be bad enough). When Hawat was taken prisoner, the suspensor lifted Sardaukar troopers launched a suprise attack on Hawat's already fatigued squad(p.218). By the time Hawat saw the attackers, one (all unshielded mind you) had already launched a stunner at Hawat(also unshielded at the time). He only had time to draw his knife before the stunner hit him, at fairly close range. The other is the death of the first Duncan Idaho(p.225). While fighting a contingent of Sardaukar who were storming the seitch-like research outpost, Duncan was cornered in a narrow arched hall, "two paces deep" in front of the door. By the time the door had closed, with his shield on, he had caught a stunner in the head.

Both victims were highly skilled fighters, and were done in by what i've suggested are somewhat ineffective weapons. But both were at major disadvantages. They were fighting against Sardaukar(who although wern't a match for Duncan, were much more so of a match then any other conscript(about 10x as much), and in one case we can assume special forces Sardaukar. Hawat was taken by surpise, without a shield on. Duncan was cornered in a very narrow alcove with no room to dodge. Keep in mind, that he did manage to deflect at least one stunner before being taken.

So long range weapons effective? Not against anyone with a shield currently running, short of that weapon being a stunner (and if they don't have a shield going, better to have a few scattered special units with automatics then with a longbow). Stunner being effective? Only in special circumstances, and wielded by a skillfuly, and/or situationally superior force.

[Scrinlord]

Actually, Crossbows do have a higher velocity than longbows, they are just almost impossible to aim at long ranges, which limits their "effective range."

And as for the stunner and Muala pistol, I always assumed that those were more weapons for assasinations and covert ops as opposed to regular combat. I may be wrong, but that is the impression I got.

Was Duncan actually killed with a stunner? To be honost, I dont remember, but for some reason I thought that he had been nailed in hand to hand combat, with a sword or something. Like I said, I dont remember, I will have to go check.

[Andrew]

I dont think they used mortars and missiles much.

I know that Baron Harkonnen used artillary to pound Atreidies soldiers, but that is pretty much it.

And ya, you are right about Arrakkis having different warfare

Oops, my mistake, I knew they used some primitive weapons, just not which ones.

I am quite sure Duncan was killed by some type of sharp object like a sword or knife. (I think he was hit in head?)

[Duncan_ghola]

he had a pretty bad blow to the back of the head described by the tlieaxu when they were explaining to someone how hard it was to bring him back, he took out alot of imperial sardukar before he himself was killed though was it 11? i cant remember

[Tezcatlipoca]

Actually, Crossbows do have a higher velocity than longbows, they are just almost impossible to aim at long ranges, which limits their "effective range."

Ok, that mearly makes them even LESS effective against a shield.

And as for the stunner and Muala pistol, I always assumed that those were more weapons for assasinations and covert ops as opposed to regular combat. I may be wrong, but that is the impression I got.

Yep. Hence my descriptions of them being used only by trained special operations personal.

Was Duncan actually killed with a stunner? To be honost, I dont remember, but for some reason I thought that he had been nailed in hand to hand combat, with a sword or something. Like I said, I dont remember, I will have to go check.

I had always assumed he was done in by a stunner; originally by the mention of the stunner during the scene in the first book, and by the replecant theme in Lynch's Dune, which showed him killed by a stunner. Furthermore, I falsely made the decision that another swordman of any ordinary standard, or even extraordinary--such as a sardaukar--could truely do in Duncan with a knife. But after checking, there is one singular quote which indicates (although again with some implied deduction) that he was killed by a blade(a sword not a knife though). Page 426 of Heretics of Dune, when Duncan has discovered his old memories, and more specifically, his memories of his many deaths, "He died under a Sardaukar sword. Pain exploaded into a bright glare swallowed by darkness." This death we can probably assume was his first. Although not listed first, (the Leto II deaths are listed first), it is the only one involving a Sardaukar. The sadaukar's existance only existed through a few of his first lives, and given the importance of his first death, I probably is safe to assume that this indeed described his first death. I couldn't find the scene with the Tleilaxu explaining it. It could help to clarify more. If someone knows it's location, post it up.

So if that is really true, then Duncan died to a Sardaukar sword in the head("Paul had one last glimpse of Idaho standing against a swarm of Harkonnen uniforms--his jerking, controlled staggers, the black goat hair with a red blossom of death in it."); but after deflecting at least one stunner bolt ;)

[exatreide]

i thought it was alwas by knife, the emp speaks of how duncun managed to kill 18 sards before being over welmed

[TMA_1]

it says artillary was used.

Also, slow pellet guns were not too effective. They have to be shot at the right angle, and takes a lot of timing. Also the projectiles still arent guarinteed taht they will penetrate the shield. The shield could be set to certain frequencies that would inhibit the pellets.

Also, it was the fremen that used missles. Paul taught the fremen how to use the "primitive" weaponry, and it was damn effective. The new mini is extremely piss poor in it's weaponry expression. None of the weapons fit the discription in my opinion. Still though missles werent used by other houses. Only atomics, and those were actually rockets in space, most definitely held by a satillite bays in space.

No need to be wordy guys, it is simple, on arrakis the weapons of war had to change, and the long distance weapons became usable again. Even though there was much use of the las-gun, there was still fear of pseudo-shields and the like used to lure worms and to maybe cause the famous subatomic explosions made by the circuit of shield and laser. the fremen couldnt really be pegged stratagy wise.

Tezcatlipoca, it was done by knife, the stunner was shown on david lynch's dune, but remember he was first not where he was in the book, he was at the palace in the movie. second he turned on his shield and there isnt a mention of that in the book, so it was most definitely not a stunner.

[Duncan_ghola]

he did have his shield on in the book didnt he? werent the darts stuck in the shield? as described by paul?

[TMA_1]

you could be right, but I just dont remember that, I am sure he wasent killed by a stunner though.

[Duncan_ghola]

i think thats why the darts didnt kill him, a sword would fit the scene if he had his shield on

[TMA_1]

true true

[Tezcatlipoca]

Also, slow pellet guns were not too effective. They have to be shot at the right angle, and takes a lot of timing. Also the projectiles still arent guarinteed taht they will penetrate the shield. The shield could be set to certain frequencies that would inhibit the pellets.

Yep; as stated before.

Tezcatlipoca, it was done by knife, the stunner was shown on david lynch's dune, but remember he was first not where he was in the book, he was at the palace in the movie.

Did you even read the post, or are you just making sure I know what I said? I realize it had some syntax errors since I didn't reread it very carefully, but I thought it was pretty clear. I realize that it wasn't done by a stunner, although the cannon evidence i've presented has suggested it was a Sword, not a knife. I realize the stunner was shown in Lynch's Dune, as also said.

second he turned on his shield and there isnt a mention of that in the book, so it was most definitely not a stunner.

he did have his shield on in the book didnt he? werent the darts stuck in the shield? as described by paul?

There WAS mention of him turning on his shield in the book... In the same passage i indicated before, (page225) "With his mother beside him, Paul leaped for the door, seeing Idaho blocking the passage, his blood-putted eyes there visible through a shield blur, claw hands beyond him, arcs of steel chopping futilely at the shield. There was the orange fire-mouth of a stunner repelled by the shield." No mention of darts stuck IN the shield, but mention of stunners hitting, and being "repelled" by the shield.

[Duncan_ghola]

man i cant remember much but i knew his shield was on and the darts didnt get to him

[Scrinlord]

If I remember right, wouldnt it be impossible for something to be stuck IN a shield? How would that happen?

Wernt they in a Freman Sietch when he was killed? This would mean that he would have no reason NOT to turn on a shield, as a worm cannot eat the sietch, and the worms are really the only things stopping people from using shields.

And another question dealing with warfare in the Dune universe, if not exactly on the planet arrakis: How were Ornithopters shot down in wars? You could not use projectiles all of the time, because they could have shields. and you couldnt use lasguns for the psuedo-atomic reaction. And you really cant very well stab and orni with a sword in mid flight. How were orni's shot down?

[exatreide]

They wernt :)

And it dosnt matter if you turn on a sheild in the sand or in a sietch. Worms will go mad, They will atack the sietch, the rock face anything. and might cause cave ins or whatever

[Duncan_ghola]

yes it is impossible for something to get stuck in a sheild