How good is battle dress?

[aramis]

You must also consider, however, that the game designers in question were, 1st and foremost, wargame designers.

It is apparent in CT that a lot of things were worded in a wargame-like manner.

The lack of "you can't do ___" in the rules, especially in CT, is not indicative of "you can" but merely "we didn't think that far ahead" and "apply logic."

Logic says you can't turn a BG on in atmosphere. All the rules extant for BG's are in space combat; and in space, it's a non-issue.

 

[sabredog]

So now we have to always ask, "Gee, what was Marc really thinking?" before we play the game? In an RPG that's ridiculous.

Here's what Marc was really thinking: "Traveller is necessarily a framework describing the barest essentials for and infinite universe; obviously rules which could cover every aspect of every possible action would be far larger then these three booklets. A group involved in playing a scenario or campaign can make adventures more elaborate, more detailed, more interesting, with the input of a great deal of imagination.

The greatest burden, of course, falls on the referee, who must create entire worlds and societies through which the players will roam. One very interesting source of assistance for this task is the existing science fiction literature. Virtually anything mentioned in a story or article can be transferred to the Traveller environment....with the imagination being the only limit." LBB 3 (A Final Word)

See, when I started playing this game the ink was hardly dry on the page. So, I had to come up with things using that bit of advice from the designer and have referred to it many times when I've started to worry too much about rules-mongering and grognardiness (and yes, I can be a real pain that way too, having been playing wargames since the early 70's and never having stopped - but the last time I started treating Traveller more like a wargame and less like an RPG my players evaporated for some reason) instead of keeping to the spirit of a science fiction RPG that has "the imagination being the only limit."

So, I reason like this: since Mr. Miller says in the rule book the I can use Sci Fi lit as a source to help my sometimes flagging imagination, then I guess that's ok, even if it might not be "logical" - I say tomato you say tomahto.

As it is the BG is only something to hang a "force field" lantern on. It has no internal logic; it's just another of those "Ancient Wonders" that I guess fall under that catchall in the OTU whenever someone wants to add a nifty goodie without having to provide a realistic answer for it. In that case, my interpretation of the BG is on at least as solid ground as the one you use. In fact, mine is , as Marc said, "more detailed, more interesting, with the input of a great deal of imagination."

 

[rancke]

As it is the BG is only something to hang a "force field" lantern on. It has no internal logic; it's just another of those "Ancient Wonders" that I guess fall under that catchall in the OTU whenever someone wants to add a nifty goodie without having to provide a realistic answer for it. In that case, my interpretation of the BG is on at least as solid ground as the one you use. In fact, mine is , as Marc said, "more detailed, more interesting, with the input of a great deal of imagination."

As I see it, canon isn't about right or wrong, it's about usefulness. Now, if you don't care about self-consistency, there's no need to worry (but then again, there's no need to discuss either). I happen to care and my players happen to care. So if I've already told them that the only force fields anyone has ever heard about are black globes and that if you turn on a black globe where it touches matter, Really, Really, Bad Things happen, and someone writes an adventure about a city on this world that's protected by a black globe, I can't use it, no matter how good an adventure it might otherwise be.


Hans

 

[sabredog]

"Self-consistancy" by definition only applies to the internal logic of the universe you are running or playing in. IMTU it's one way, in the OTU it's another.

If I expanded on the rules the same as all of us have houseruled something to expand or elaborate to our particular tastes then why is that such a big deal?

I guess all the times I said "IMTU" no one read that part?

 

[rancke]

"Self-consistancy" by definition only applies to the internal logic of the universe you are running or playing in. IMTU it's one way, in the OTU it's another.

Yes, and if i want my TU to be self-consistent and still be able to use stuff written by others, two things are necessary: 1) That I don't change stuff around so it's not compatible with what's already been written, and 2) that those others don't write stuff that's not compatible with what's already been written. #1 is my own lookout; #2 isn't.

If I expanded on the rules the same as all of us have houseruled something to expand or elaborate to our particular tastes then why is that such a big deal?

I guess all the times I said "IMTU" no one read that part?

It's not a BIG deal, but you did write about your TU on a board that's dedicated to CT. Presumably Wil's reply (which mentioned CT) was an attempt to get the discussion back on track.


Hans

 

[BlackBat242]

Just a comment.

CT does not stand for "Canon Traveller"... it stands for "Classic Traveller"... less fixed rules, more referee imagination and personal rule-definitions.

 

[aramis]

Just a comment.

CT does not stand for "Canon Traveller"... it stands for "Classic Traveller"... less fixed rules, more referee imagination and personal rule-definitions.

True, but at least through MT, it was considered by the developers as a single universe without regard for ruleset, and MT reuses much of the actual text of CT.. TNE made sufficient changes that either its a different universe, or none of the rulesets say anything about the OTU itself.

And the point of an Official Universe (albeit one lost on several different game designers) is that it provides a baseline for materials that don't need adaptation to be used, provided one has stuck with the base tropes of the Official Universe.

In any case, in the OTU, as described by CT, specifically striker, Battle Dress is proof against most near misses by man portable explosive round weapons, and near misses by HE weapons, and direct hits from man-portable small arms. It's that freaking good.

And in the OTU, the little definition of the BG present makes it logically unusable in atmosphere or on-world... it would overload from the kinetic energy of the atmosphere; and when one drains kinetic energy, one also lowers temperature as an inherent property of matter, since heat is actually brownian motion.

 

[sabredog]

In any case, in the OTU, as described by CT, specifically striker, Battle Dress is proof against most near misses by man portable explosive round weapons, and near misses by HE weapons, and direct hits from man-portable small arms. It's that freaking good.

And in the OTU, the little definition of the BG present makes it logically unusable in atmosphere or on-world... it would overload from the kinetic energy of the atmosphere; and when one drains kinetic energy, one also lowers temperature as an inherent property of matter, since heat is actually brownian motion.

Battle Dress in Striker is most definitely not proof against man-portable small arms equal to its TL. For example, the even Tl-14 BD is good for 18 points and the TL-13 PGMP has a PEN of 25 ...an FGMP-14 has a PEN of 34. Either of those is more than sufficient to penetrate the armor and definitely kill the guy inside. It'll keep out things like gauss rifles, but not RAM grenades of even a lower level that the suit is available at.

That's why I adjusted some of the armor values up to make the different levels of suits a little more effective for at least the last TL level of weapons.

Of course that's IMTU.

Maybe since the canon Trav types don't want opinions on running Classic Trav here we should have a Canon Trav section?

 

[aramis]

This IS in the CT section.

And FGMP is not "small arms" any more than a TOW or a 40mm mortar is.

 

[sabredog]

They are personal weapons carried by a single soldier for use at shooting other soldiers. That by definition is a "small arm". They are not listed (nor have they ever been even in Mercenary) under support weapons or crew served weapons and in fact in Mercenary says (page 43 "Infantry Small Arms & Equipment) : "by TL-14 the standard small arm for infantry becomes the PGMP-13"

AT TL-14 it lists the FGMP-14 as being the standard.

Now since these are powerful and have a burst radius...in fact the only thing more powerful being vehicle or crew served Fusion Guns X/Y/Z and so on) these are also mentioned in the support section.

In Striker they are treated and listed the same way, except that they are not listed under support. Just the big crew served jobs.

And yes, this is CT. Not just IMTU. SO stop bringing up MT as a way to support your arguments by way of treating CT as some living document. CT is CT. And as such it allowed explicitly for more than just strict canon.

 

[Dragoner]

Yeah, I have no problem with wether it would be canon or not (even that sounds funny eg it's just a game) personally I just don't want BGG's everywhere muddying up the game. However anybody else wants to do it is fine by me.

Yeah a FGMP really pushes the envelope on what is considered a small arm. LOL!

Though in reality one has to think what is facing the average soldier, small arms do little by the way of casualties and have been since before ww1, (2-3% in ww2 by the USA's estimate IIRC). Right now it is IED's and was mines in Vietnam, by higher tech levels it is hard to think what smart mines will be like, most likely cloaked by stealth technology and the for IED's one only can shudder to think what three daisy chained TDX's would do to a platoon, even in BD.

 

[Whipsnade]

Gents,

Now that we can leave OTU black globes and personal TU variations aside, I'd like to ask you all about one aspect of battledress - or 57th Century infantry combat in general - I believe has needed to be addressed for decades now: drones.

The picture of that nifty wargame collection triggered my memory of the "redheaded stepchild" of the Ogre/GEV family; Battlesuit. (This is a link to the Boardgame Geek page for the game.) Battlesuit focused on man-to-man combat in the Ogre setting. Each counter was one man, there were no tanks, no artillery, no enormous cybernetic killing machines, nothing other than squad of men in battlesuits going at it. I only played it a few times so my memories of it were vague.

I did remember the game's various non-traditional touches, like using points instead of hexes, non-phasing player interruptions, and strongly emphasizing elevation, but the major thing that I really remembered about the game was it's use of drones. There were three types drones that gave the controlling player various benefits like enhancing sensor rolls or weapon attacks. A player often had to choose whether to target opposing infantry or the drones they were using to pester him.

In the last decade or so, military forces around the world have rushed to deploy a variety of drones. Most are UAVs of some type or another in a wide range of sizes and capabilities. Many have been cobbled together from "off the shelf" components too. Given 57th Century power, contragravity, computing, comms, and sensor systems, combat drones in a huge variety of sizes and capabilities should be available.

(Of course, any system used in combat will spark the creation of counter-systems and a constant ECM/ECCM-like evolutionary spiral will occur.)

Information overload is always a problem, especially in combat. However, battledress, with it's built-in comm and computing capabilities, is ready made to help it's wearer handle the information streaming in from drones and other sensor platforms.

So, what sort of drones would a battledress wearer use? What would be their usual "load out"? How would that "load out" vary by mission? By environment? By tech level?

Hope to read all your ideas soon.


Regards,
Bill

 

[sabredog]

No doubt that artillery is called the queen of the battlefield for a reason, but with increased counter-battery effectiveness, mine detection tech (mine clearing grav drones using line charges or firing gravitic pulses into the ground to detonate them?), and the increased use of ortillery (those spinal meson guns will ruin your day even on the ground, as would a few thousand missiles fired off a dedicated ortillery ship), I think the infantryman's life will be plenty hazardous enough on any scale.

Carry it to the logical conclusion and you go two ways: one way takes it to where war is just so unbelievable destructive that everyone gives up as soon as the Fleet jumps in; or the other way means the conflict is more limited to smaller scale skirmishing and surgical commando ops so as to avoid having to waste the place and lose what you might be fighting for.

In the first case you could argue that there might not even be a reason to bother with BD troops; just use drones and grav tanks supported by the fleet until the other side surrenders, or just start mass driver bombardment and then start over with a new planet.

in the second case the need for infantry is greater than ever before because it will be more of a one-on-one affair. In that situation the personal weapon will be decisive and the heavy support tanks and guns will be relegated to the rear as a reserve to use in case you are lucky enough to bottle up all of the enemy in one place where those kinds of weapons will be effective.

IEDs work now because the enemy runs away or hides behind women and children where they know the opposition can't get at them because of being hamstrung by foolish (though I suppose vaguely morally defensible) rules of engagement. So the enemy knows where to plant the bombs and knows the opposing side can't just annihilate the area in retaliation to stop further bombs.

If you don't have that type of situation to deal with, because of less collateral damage avoiding doctrine or a remote area, and you have the will and ability to use the maximum force available to you then all those worries about TDX mines and IEDs are moot. Just level the place until they either surrender or none are left alive.

In Traveller BD works more because the guys who have it are generally going against lower tech fighters and the armor protects the FGMP-wielding Marines. So the Imperium goes in and takes on the bad guys without having to worry about meson bombardments and all.

Against similarly equipped forces, like the Zhodani, the Imperium has to choose between the annihilation of a world in order to save it, or go in and fight more "conventionally" with BD equipped troops and tanks and all the typical combined arms stuff while the really heavy exotic weapons that might end the find in a matter of hours (or less) have to be held back. The few exceptions to this only prove the rule.

So in the end BD is good, best against lower tech but still beatable by it in some cases (like RAM grenades, autocannons, and VRFGG's), but it's not very useful in individual combat (LOL, with FGMP's, or even a PGMP-13 I guess that could be up to 1/4-1/2 a kilometer!) against equal TL weapons. It does help even the odds a wee bit, though.

I've found that it really works best in the RPG environment, not so much in the wargame situation. But even then it all also depends on the ruleset you use. In Striker an average hit with an FGMP-14 (PEN 34) vs TL-15 BD (AV=18) gets you a roll of 7+16= more than the 12+ needed to kill. A Pgmp-13 would generate 14. AN auto cannon would depend on the caliber and velocity + ammo type. Plus, in Striker explosive and energy weapons (including lasers) are bumped one level of damage so a serious wound = kill, etc. This system is more realistic and well-suited to a wargame, but not as RPG friendly in my experience (though I still prefer it for a lot of crunchy gearheady reasons).

But in CT combat there is a chance, slight though it may be that a soldier in BD could survive a hit from an FGMP-15 even if he's wearing nothing. Unless houseruled otherwise it's just a straight 16D6 damage distributed among his 3 main characteristics. A gauss rifle firing a 10 round burst with three chances to hit (and hit it will) would do 3 packets of 4D6, and that I have found to be a real BD nullifier. Not to mention the autocannon or RAM grenade. That's why this system may not be as realistic as Striker, but it's more RPG friendly.

So the BD question is also highly relative to the rules used and what combat doctrine is used against whom.

 

[sabredog]

Whipsnade:

The drones I have come in a wide variety: one just cruises around on its own until it picks up the signature of infantry and then it fires off a target recognition missile at him. It does this until it is destroyed or runs out of missiles. An anti-vehicle version uses the same technique but a heavier two-warhead missile to hit the deck of the vehicle.

Another type cruises over the battlefield and fires collapsing rounds down onto the decks of vehicles, bunkers, or groups of infantry. No need to worry about radiation hazards with carrying those rounds on a drone!

They are all relatively cheap and plentiful. And they are usually under command authority and control unless released to do their thing or they lose the datalink with the controller - then then run on automatic. IFF pingers in the friendly suits and vehicles protect them (usually) from the drones on auto.

And I remember Battlesuit! I actually liked it better than Ogre, but not as much as G.E.V. - but I personally prefer the whole battlesuit trooper fighting in the radioactive wasteland of the space opera battlefield more than the reality of drone vs. drone vs. man thing it will probably really be like. Although RIVETS was fun, too.

 

[sabredog]

Oh, one really useful drone is the medical one that zips out to pickup the wounded trooper whose battlesuit emergency pinger is on after he was hurt so badly the suit's onboard medical systems sedated him after emergency treatment. The heavily armored drone is extremely fast and has a lot of countermeasures to protect it in its duties. Far more protection than the cheap hunter-killer drones do, but the ambulance drone's job is considered more important.

 

[sabredog]

And this is the TL-10 Jitterbug I came up with back in the day.

It's 65,000 CR., and weighs 300kg. Standard gear is televisual link, 5PWR Target Acquisition Radar, Thermal Imaging, and Image Enhancement. Various recording gear can be added though the total payload can't be more than 15kg.

The radio onboard for control has a 200km range, and power is rechargeable. Range is 4 hours.

Amazing how much it looks like what we use today for something done in the early 80's.

 

[aramis]

The only "standard trooper" drone IMTU is the sensor popup. It's not even routine issue, for reasons of imperial paranoia about autonomous units. Troopers trained on it can use it; It's about 2L, grav lift, 2 hours battery, a radio-comm, and a PEMS, with an onboard ai xxx11x, Sensor Ops 1, Robot Ops 0, Walker 0. Dumb as a dog. On purpose. Called a "PUP-__" with __ being the TL. PUP= Pop Up Passive. When not in use, the pup docks in a recharge cradle on the BD pack. Speciflc level of autonomy is by TL. A wire or fiber guidance spool option is available.

The AASP, Autonomous Active Sensor Platform is a bit smarter (xxx22x) and a bit larger. About 3L, it can use the same cradle and has similar capabilities, plus has an AEMS.

Body recovery units are available but not standard.

Generally, combat robots are seen as "Zhodani Perfidy" and considered by most to be just a hair less dangerous than Psionics. Only hardened black ops units have any real combat capability.

No recovery drones, either; if the suit isn't intact enough to walk on its own (see TD articles, and World Builder's Handbook) odds are good the guy inside is already past repair. A docked PUP can walk the suit, if a remote op can't.

In general, IMTU, the military does not have the "leave no man behind" mentality that current western forces do. The imperium figured out long ago, if you have to bug, the dead, dying, and slow have to be left to the enemy's mercy; on the other hand, the Imperium gleefully trades for captured troops, and maintains POW facilities in orbit. (Inflatable 1000Td Cylinders, using flexible solar power, and LS with no internal mounts. Food is ration bars, and water. The day/night cycle is maintained, and the cylinders are short and wide, for spin to about 0.1G.)

 

[sabredog]

If the guy in the suit is dead - dead then the pinger won't go off...but if he is so much as warm....and you can get your suit breached (or just have concussion damage) and not necessarily be roasted inside, then the on board medical system will at the very least inject Metabrake (a low berth drug) to preserve him for triage.

If he can't be saved, then the spare parts might be useful for the other guys who can be. It's not just a leave no man behind thing (although that is pretty important, too, no one but a slave will fight and win knowing his superiors consider him not worth saving - if only to bury him); it's also "leave nothing to waste when it could save others".

 

[BlackBat242]

It seems to me, that what Whipsnade was asking about is something like this:

Remote Piloted Reconnaissance Unit. This device is also known as the Spy-Eye. It is a sphere, about 50 cm (20") in diameter, whose surface is studded with lenses, microphones, and other detection devices.

>lots of more details I didn't type out"<

powered by a grav unit.
max speed 200 km/h, 60km/h NOE.
max flying time 5 hours.
max range for UHF radio commo 30 km.
maser commo for line-of-sight
TL 12+
25 kg
75kcr

etc.

I'm sure that with the computer/program advances we are seeing IRL, that an autonomous operation mode would be available standard on these units.

 

[sabredog]

Oh, well...yeah, that looks about right.

I just figured the infantry would be tied into the same net the arty and ship ortillery guys would be hooked into...combined with any small satellites released when they arrived in-system. Then anyone on the net has access to the info he'd need for calling in fire, finding bad guys, and what-not.

Except for lower tech levels when that sort of datanet isn't available the drones I have are either the rescue ones or search n' destroy types to act as force multipliers in conjunction with the tanks and infantry. Area denial type stuff to help secure your flanks.