Cutlass for the Marines

[sabredog]

I'm not sure the remaining reasons are enough to break my SOD. Those who know more about what these weapons are actually like to use may well disagree.

Since when did you ever fire a laser rifle or FGMP? I'm talking about the game rules, not real life. Slug throwers are classed as damaging different machinery than energy weapons in AHL. And different machinery behaves differently when damaged by either.

 

[sabredog]

1)
4) The accel rifle is specifically designed for zero-G work. Zero-g combat is very likely to involve opponents wearing at least vacc suits, which are pretty tough in Traveller - armor rating 5. With a maximum Striker penetration of 3 - same as a rifle - it is therefore underpowered for its job. However, if the weapon is intended to provide an offensive capability without penetrating bulkheads, then its design makes more sense.

Don't forget that the wound level for an explosive round or energy weapon is bumped up a level in Striker. That Serious Wound becomes death. That puts the zero-G weapons in an entirely different class of lethality as long as the use at least HE rounds. In addition to which the suit is now breached and creates all sorts of other problems.

HEAP would put structures at risk though it would allow for a more likely lethal result and punch through heavier armor. And at the ranges these weapons will likely be used at in either Striker or CT they are rarely going to miss the target.

 

[Patron Zero]

Seems it should be a practical consideration to only discharge weapons that are intended for 'soft-targets' in any pressurized compartments, simply to prevent damage to vital components or breach a ship's hull.

 

[Carlobrand]

Seems it should be a practical consideration to only discharge weapons that are intended for 'soft-targets' in any pressurized compartments, simply to prevent damage to vital components or breach a ship's hull.

A CT ship's hull, if you accept the Striker convention, is armor factor 40. It will withstand anything up to and including an FGMP. The MT ship's hull is specifically described as being factor 40.

The soft target problem in warfare is that the soft target is equipped with a hard shell: combat armor or battledress of an armor factor of up to 18 for Zho, Solomani, or Imperial boarders. The defending warship must be prepared to repel boarders wearing such armor; surrendering the ship to preserve the equipment seems counterproductive. In that instance, neither a cutlass nor a bayonet are of much use. The problem for civilian ships is a bit easier - unless the pirate gets his hands on combat armor.

 

[Ulsyus]

Note that the controls are armored equivalent to cloth, and the heavy machinery equivalent to battle dress. Note also that the sole consequence of a machinery hit is an explosion and potential injury to persons in the vicinity of the explosion. In the Bard Endeavour scenarios, there is no impact on the players' ability to satisfy the scenario requirements (including seizing the bridge to take control of the ship and repairing and starting the jump drives) despite the Solomani player operating under a tight deadline to seize the ship before it falls into a gas giant. It is therefore reasonable to conclude that while specific machinery may be vulnerable, the ship itself contains enough redundancy to continue operation despite loss of specific bits of equipment to stray fire in a firefight.

It would appear then that damage to bulkheads is not an issue and that damage to controls and machinery in the course of a firefight, while dangerous to those nearby, will not affect the ship's ability to maneuver or jump, or at least not an affect that can't be quickly repaired or routed around.

The bulkheads have never been the issue. It's the other partitions that are vulnerable to fire, as well as mechanics, power and controls. It might be assessed that penetrating heavy machinery like a PP is pretty hard, but the are controls and wiring and other such that will be vulnerable.

 

[Carlobrand]

Don't forget that the wound level for an explosive round or energy weapon is bumped up a level in Striker. ... That puts the zero-G weapons in an entirely different class of lethality as long as the use at least HE rounds. ...

Very true, although you still have to penetrate. A "no effect" roll remains no effect. There is no HE round for the Striker accel rifle, but there may be other larger caliber accel rifles out there among the supplements. The 9mm ACR has an explosive round with a base penetration of 3, and the snub HE has a penetration of 1. Means a foe in cloth armor or a vacc suit faces a 1 in 36 chance of death from a snub and a 14 in 36 chance of a serious wound, and 21 in 36 shots will fail to do injury. A foe in TL12 combat armor or better cannot be hurt by a snubbie, and the ACR HE won't hurt someone in TL14 combat armor.

Nasty thought: a double-barrel snubbie, set to fire both barrels simultaneously. Your 21 in 36 chance of avoiding injury drops to a bit over 1 in 3.

 

[Carlobrand]

The bulkheads have never been the issue. It's the other partitions that are vulnerable to fire, as well as mechanics, power and controls. It might be assessed that penetrating heavy machinery like a PP is pretty hard, but the are controls and wiring and other such that will be vulnerable.

As I said, I don't expect to see mission-critical controls and wiring on a partition. Controls and wiring on the surface of a PP or other major machinery are another issue, but AHL makes it clear that this kind of damage isn't going to stop someone from using the ship. First priority seems to be to win; if you don't win, the damage to the ship is not something you're in a position to worry about any more. Afterward, the damage control parties can deal with the collateral damage, and it's probably a good deal less than what they'd face from a missile penetration or other anti-ship weapon. Leastways, it didn't seem to put a crimp in the Solomani plans. Perhaps they've learned a few tricks about quickly repairing or replacing damaged control panels over the centuries.

 

[aramis]

A CT ship's hull, if you accept the Striker convention, is armor factor 40. It will withstand anything up to and including an FGMP. The MT ship's hull is specifically described as being factor 40.

The soft target problem in warfare is that the soft target is equipped with a hard shell: combat armor or battledress of an armor factor of up to 18 for Zho, Solomani, or Imperial boarders. The defending warship must be prepared to repel boarders wearing such armor; surrendering the ship to preserve the equipment seems counterproductive. In that instance, neither a cutlass nor a bayonet are of much use. The problem for civilian ships is a bit easier - unless the pirate gets his hands on combat armor.

On a 12, an HE pen of 30, a KEAP pen of 32, or any other type of pen 33 does damage to a ship's surface features. Any pen of 36+ does internals.
That Pen 30 is a hypervelocity HE shell of 14cm and TL13+...
TL 11+ HEAT 4cm RAM-grenade rounds are Pen 36
FGMP 14 and 15 are pen 34 "other"...

Note that MT rescales the damage mechanic, as well - Anything pen 4+ is a danger to the hull. Not MUCH of a danger, but a danger none-the-less.

 

[Carlobrand]

On a 12, an HE pen of 30, a KEAP pen of 32, or any other type of pen 33 does damage to a ship's surface features. Any pen of 36+ does internals.
That Pen 30 is a hypervelocity HE shell of 14cm and TL13+...
TL 11+ HEAT 4cm RAM-grenade rounds are Pen 36
FGMP 14 and 15 are pen 34 "other"...

Note that MT rescales the damage mechanic, as well - Anything pen 4+ is a danger to the hull. Not MUCH of a danger, but a danger none-the-less.

Whup, no, any penetration of 34+ does internals - needs to roll a 12 at 34 to hit a minor penetration on a 40 hull. So an FGMP 14/15 or a TL11+ HEAT RAM does indeed have a slight change of triggering a slow loss of pressure, assuming the compartment is under pressure.

As for MT - I'm still waiting for them to fix the bit where I can take down a tank with a company of riflemen.

 

[selunatic2397]

This is all fascinating, but...what about cutlasses?

 

[aramis]

This is all fascinating, but...what about cutlasses?

In MT, they're just low enough to not be able to do hull hits...

 

[Carlobrand]

In MT, they're just low enough to not be able to do hull hits...

Oh, come now. It's easy to hit a hull with a cutlass. It just does damage to the cutlass.

 

[Ulsyus]

As I said, I don't expect to see mission-critical controls and wiring on a partition. Controls and wiring on the surface of a PP or other major machinery are another issue, but AHL makes it clear that this kind of damage isn't going to stop someone from using the ship. First priority seems to be to win; if you don't win, the damage to the ship is not something you're in a position to worry about any more. Afterward, the damage control parties can deal with the collateral damage, and it's probably a good deal less than what they'd face from a missile penetration or other anti-ship weapon. Leastways, it didn't seem to put a crimp in the Solomani plans. Perhaps they've learned a few tricks about quickly repairing or replacing damaged control panels over the centuries.

They may not be in all the partitions, but they wouldn't be too hard to get to would they? Are these elements all squirreled away on a sub nowadays where it's hard for a damage control party to get to them?

But you're right about the collateral damage. Let the tech geeks worry about fixing the damage all the Blades do when they take the vessel. Damn the torpedoes, full steam ahead!

 

[Carlobrand]

... Let the tech geeks worry about fixing the damage all the Blades do when they take the vessel. Damn the torpedoes, full steam ahead!

I agree. Doesn't do to let good men die just so the repair crews have less work.

 

[salochin999]

What makes most sense to me would be a Vilani officer's tradition related to dueling so both a navy and marines officer thing - mostly ceremonial.

#

However taking it at face value and thinking about how it might have come about then you'd think it must be related to boarding actions, low-g or shipboard action in some way.

But when?

If you think about it terms of TL then marine boarding actions would have been taking place from TL 8 onwards.

So if you think in terms of both armor changing over time and the ability of the ships to withstand internal damage changing over time then the type of weapons used in boarding actions would probably have changed over that time as well.

So maybe in the early years of the space marines boarding weapons were cutlass and revolver for example and the tradition stuck even though armor improved?

I can buy that as an idea but don't really think it makes sense for two of your limited number of CT skills unless the standard boarding weapons were upgraded over time to match armor. I think it makes more sense to think in terms of TL and time and take the listed skills to mean:

cutlass-1 = standard marine boarding weapon for a particular TL
revolver-1 = standard marine officer's boarding weapon for a particular TL

with the big difference between specifically marine shipboard weapons and standard weaponry being they need to be optimized for: short range, no/low gravity, no/low atmosphere etc.

 

[rancke]

Just as a matter of curiosity: Are there any marine or naval infantry forces on Earth today that train with cutlasses?


Hans

 

[Reban]

Just as a matter of curiosity: Are there any marine or naval infantry forces on Earth today that train with cutlasses?


Hans

Off the top of my head I can't think of any, but I'm open to correction.


Just from a completely different direction, when I think of the Marine Cutlass I am reminded of the historical fact of the British Police Cutlass during the Victorian Era.

Victorian "Peelers" were issued with cutlasses and practiced cutlass drill. However they were not generally carried but a supply was kept on hand in each police station in case of public disturbances.

The Metropolitan Police made an order as early as 1832 that "the Police Constable is to be given to understand distinctly that the sword is put into his hand merely as a defensive weapon in case his life should be in danger". The order goes on to state that if he drew it without very good reason he would be dismissed.

In the Traveller Universe Marines are also used in police actions and as security, so my take is rather than being a weapon of choice for boarding actions it is a weapon issued to Marines on security details and Marines engaged in riot control or public order duties.

In the security role it may be as much a badge of duty as a weapon (doesn't an Officer of the Deck in many navies wear a sword when on duty at the gangway in port?). In the riot role its a nasty weapon compared to a baton but perhaps Marines can be trained to use the flat of th blade as a bludgeoning weapon.

Just a completely alternate view to add to the debate

 

[salochin999]

Just as a matter of curiosity: Are there any marine or naval infantry forces on Earth today that train with cutlasses?


Hans

I think it only works - even in game SoD terms - if you assume that at some point in the Traveller past ships were too fragile to risk a high velocity rifle round and even a revolver was too risky to be allowed to any but the officers.

So you'd need a plausible situation where a single bullet could cause some kind of catastrophic result.

It's quite hard to imagine ships that fragile and boarding actions though.

On the other hand there is also the shipboard security role. Fragile early colony ships with lots of stir crazy people and marine security but no guns?

That's maybe a bit more plausible - tying in with the Victorian cop angle.

http://www.cerberus.com.au/cutlass_drill.jpg

 

[aramis]

Just as a matter of curiosity: Are there any marine or naval infantry forces on Earth today that train with cutlasses?


Hans

As an exhibition/dress uniform sidearm: US Naval Academy. Technically, all the USN and USMC ROTC programs, as well. Technically, not cutlasses; the NCO's dress sidearm is still a cutlass in both services, but almost never purchased nor issued.

As a practical arm: Instructions for training in cutlass were still in the USN LPM in the mid-1980's. Said document was used by the USN and USMC. It was no longer required, but the instructions were still in the regs.

 

[Ulsyus]

So maybe in the early years of the space marines boarding weapons were cutlass and revolver for example and the tradition stuck even though armor improved?

I like your idea of the Vilani tradition, but right now we have body armour that withstands blows from bladed weapons and handguns, so improving armour isn't likely to change the equations significantly.

Just as a matter of curiosity: Are there any marine or naval infantry forces on Earth today that train with cutlasses?

Hans

Not with a cutlass, but the bayonet is still in use. Royal Marines I believe (British, Belgian, Dutch). I'm not sure about the US Marine Corps or Russian Naval Infantry.