A Proto-Traveller Conundrum: pre-Mercenary Marines!

[BillDowns]

Uh, the US Constitution does not separate the military budgets. That's Congress, the President and tradition.

In Traveller, Marines are separate from Army, even in LBB4, IIRC. I think it is mentioned up front that even though they are separate, they are similar, and there can be lateral transfers from one to the other.

 

[Dragoner]

Uh, the US Constitution does not separate the military budgets. That's Congress, the President and tradition.

In Traveller, Marines are separate from Army, even in LBB4, IIRC. I think it is mentioned up front that even though they are separate, they are similar, and there can be lateral transfers from one to the other.

Article I Section 8:

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

To provide and maintain a Navy

Those lines have been used to separate the bugdets from the beginning, not to mention it then goes on about a militia. Not that Marines aren't cool, but for a lot of their tradition lies in history not military theory, I believe the Russian Morskaya Pehota, which function like Marines but are called Naval Infantry, their beginnings are in the 18th century as well. As such, the various military theory has changed over time, there isn't a strong case for Marines being an independent branch, which LBB4 makes them without any supporting arms, c'est la vie.

 

[aramis]

Article I Section 8:

To raise and support Armies, but no Appropriation of Money to that Use shall be for a longer Term than two Years;

To provide and maintain a Navy

Those lines have been used to separate the bugdets from the beginning, not to mention it then goes on about a militia.

The issue was one of budgets - the navy was allowed 10 year appropriations. There's no requirement that congress provide separate appropriations, other than combined ones can't exceed 2 years for anyone but the navy.

That the marnes are part of the navy is almost a legal fiction...

And in a sci-fi setting with ground pounders and ship's troops, the Gropos being a separate force from the ship's troops is only sensible, and if those ship's troops are actually combat specialists, well then, them being a separate but subordinated force makes just as much sense...

Distinct uniforms means not mistaking them for someone who can be pulled for various ship-board duties. Separate training means being able to train them for a variety of different things than the ship's crew.

After all, the only things one willing tosses out an airlock untethered while still in working order are a space-marine or a full trash bag.

 

[Dragoner]

The issue was one of budgets

Exactly what I said.

them being a separate but subordinated force makes just as much sense....

By military science? Wrong. Empirical evidence being that the largest amphibious invasion ever (D-Day) was conducted by the US Army and not Marine Corps. Not to mention the problems arising on doctrinal differences in combat on Okinawa, or inefficient duality of procurement, training, etc. . Task oriented, marines are to take a beachhead, an important task, but which by an independent command actually works against that task by lack of inter-service coordination and which would subordinate marines to land forces and not navy. It is impossible to believe the Imperial military is hamstrung by 4000 year old earth history, my guess would be nobody cares or even knows by that time, they would have their own history to draw from.

Edit: Going back to LBB1, it says:

Marines: Members of the armed fighting forces carried aboard starships. Marines
deal with piracy and boarding actions in space, defend the starports and bases
belonging to the navy, and supplement other ground forces such as the army.

Funny that, original Traveller makes them a security force charged with installation defence and such, with only being supplemental to the Army, who would be doing the planetary invasions instead of Marines.

 

[dean]

The biggest amphibious landing ever, D-day, was conducted by US Army forces.

We only think of Marines as amphibs because the historical landings in the Pacific were many in number. And the Army gladly gave the USN/USMC the "priviledge" of being the services responsible for amphibious operations (recall the fairly high casuality rates in the D-day landings) in the restructuring of the roles of the service branches (including the creation of the USAF) following WW2.

 

[tbeard1999]

Here's a link to my conception of how a non-3I marine unit might look:

http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showpost.php?p=168171&postcount=3

An army drop infantry unit -- http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showpost.php?p=168177&postcount=6

The standard airmobile infantry battalion -- http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showthread.php?t=18473
This would be a good organization for a marine unit.

Since my universe lacks grav vehicles, you'll see a plethora of tilt-rotor craft and wheeled/tracked craft. You can replace them with grav vehicles. Or, assume that the CT air raft is too fragile for combat use.

If you're gonna stay with Books 1-3, then the standard combat rifle would be either an automatic rifle or a laser rifle / laser carbine.

 

[Jame]

Here's a link to my conception of how a non-3I marine unit might look:

http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showpost.php?p=168171&postcount=3

An army drop infantry unit -- http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showpost.php?p=168177&postcount=6

The standard airmobile infantry battalion -- http://www.travellerrpg.com/CotI/Discuss/showthread.php?t=18473
This would be a good organization for a marine unit.

Since my universe lacks grav vehicles, you'll see a plethora of tilt-rotor craft and wheeled/tracked craft. You can replace them with grav vehicles. Or, assume that the CT air raft is too fragile for combat use.

If you're gonna stay with Books 1-3, then the standard combat rifle would be either an automatic rifle or a laser rifle / laser carbine.

Not a bad look! And yes, I'd presume that Marines would automatically have autorifles or laser rifles/carbines.

One thing about air/rafts: Books 1-3 ALSO have the G-Carrier, which is a specifically pseudo-military craft with weapons on it. If disarmed, it'd make a good grav-truck.

 

[tbeard1999]

Not a bad look! And yes, I'd presume that Marines would automatically have autorifles or laser rifles/carbines.

One thing about air/rafts: Books 1-3 ALSO have the G-Carrier, which is a specifically pseudo-military craft with weapons on it. If disarmed, it'd make a good grav-truck.

I guess it depends on which version of Books 1-3 constitute "Proto-Traveller".

I'm pretty sure that the 1977 printing did not have G-Carriers (nor speeders, which look very much like the snowspeeders in "The Empire Strikes Back"). Also, in the 1977 printing air-rafts cost $6 MCR, which made them very expensive toys.

By the 1981 printing, the Third Imperium was established and the G-Carrier and Speeder were added. The Air-Raft was reduced in price to Cr600,000.

So I think that you *could* make a case for very limited grav vehicles in Proto-Traveller. Use the 1977 air-raft. At MCr6, it is way too expensive to replace normal ground vehicles. It would be economical enough to replace helicopters and other VTOL aircraft. But it would not replace tracked, wheeled or ground effect vehicles. Nor would it replace high performance jet aircraft.

Heavy grav armored fighting vehicles would be technically possible, but absurdly expensive. If we assume that an air-raft weighs about as much as a smallish car -- say 1 metric ton -- and that costs roughly increase 50% per additional metric ton (i.e., a 3 ton air raft costs 2x Mcr6), then even a medium sized grav tank (say 40 metric tons) would be outrageously expensive -- MCr 117 each. No one could afford many of these (and they would be very non-cost effective).

Depending on materials and engineering tech assumptions, helicopters and tilt-rotor craft might still survive as less costly alternatives to air-rafts. EDIT -- Looks like a UH-60 transport helicopter cost about $5-6m in the mid 1970s. Assuming that (roughly) 1 Cr = $1 US in 1977, then the MCr 6 air-raft is an expensive alternative. It can only carry 4, while the UH-60 can carry 18 (including crew). If my cost estimates are reasonable (i.e., MCr 1.0 per additional passenger) then then grav version of the UH-60 would cost about MCr 20. This is ~4 times the cost of the helicopter, but it would be far more capable. So I could definitely see helicopters continuing as low-cost alternatives to grav vehicles.

 

[Jame]

I generally use the 1981 (or 198whatever) Starter Set, which is as close as I've ever come - mind that my first Traveller book was the TNE book which I got at 13, and didn't get the Starter Set 'til 2003 or 2004. Both of these include G-Carriers.

Even though I would be flexible enough to use the rule of "shift the price down one decimal place every TL for X number of," it's still Mithras's universe.

(But I can't help but remember how the TNE book also has a grav tank... :devil: )

 

[DangerousThing]

Never heard that one before; I'll have to remember that one. Thanks!

Yes in modern day US slang, a zip gun is a homemade weapon.

However, IMTU a zip gun is the standard nickname for a gauss weapon.

There are several thousand years of linguistic change between now and then.

 

[robject]

Geez Mithras, I couldn't see proto-traveller without the PGMP and gauss gun, even if it's not in LBB 1-3 and Supp 4...

 

[Vargas]

I don't have it in front of me but wouldn't Kinunir provide insight into how Marines are organized and equipped at the pre-Book 4 level?

EDIT: Just looked it up; nope, my bad.

 

[aramis]

I don't have it in front of me but wouldn't Kinunir provide insight into how Marines are organized and equipped at the pre-Book 4 level?

EDIT: Just looked it up; nope, my bad.

One could look at the Type C for that... But none of the Adventures really predate Merc.

 

[tbeard1999]

FWIW, I consider Mercenary to be proto-Traveller simply because it has a lot of gear that would exist in any setting -- assault rifles, machineguns, autocannon, mortars and advanced military weapory. Similarly, it has military skills that would also exist in almost any setting.

That said, you can certainly create such weapons using only LBB1-3. And frankly, you might do better than Book 4, since its weaponry tends to break the CT combat system. I'd do this by basing these weapons off existing weapons:

--Assault rifle: Carbine +1; allows for group hits

--Simple ACR -- Automatic Rifle, but weighs significantly less and carries more ammo.

--Complex ACR: Automatic Rifle vs all armor except Cloth and Combat Armor; Automatic Rifle +1 vs Cloth and Combat Armor. If firing HE, Automatic Rifle -1 but does 5D damage

--LMG -- Automatic Rifle +1 at medium, long and very long ranges. More ammo.

--HMG -- Automatic Rifle +2 at medium, long and very long ranges. Much more ammo.

Etc., etc.

 

[Old_Dr_Skull]

Shouldn't proto-Traveller marines be relying on their Cutlasses? That's the one combat skill they all have in common.

 

[Jame]

Shouldn't proto-Traveller marines be relying on their Cutlasses? That's the one combat skill they all have in common.

Technically true ... but do you really see a unit of Marines dropping from orbit equipped with only combat armor and cutlasses?

 

[Old_Dr_Skull]

Technically true ... but do you really see a unit of Marines dropping from orbit equipped with only combat armor and cutlasses?

How awesome would that be!

 

[tbeard1999]

If the marines had Dune-style shields and monomolecular cutlasses it just might work.

 

[Jame]

How awesome would that be!

Eh. I could do without; it doesn't make sense to me.

 

[McPerth]

If the marines had Dune-style shields and monomolecular cutlasses it just might work.

Sure, but that does not exist in Traveller (less so in prototraveller, I guess), where armor is Combat armor or cloth and cutlasses are TL 3 (at least in TTB, I don't own original LBBs). And in this condition, cutlass is more a ceremonial weapon than anything else, I'm afraid.