Marine TOE

[BetterThanLife]

Originally posted by flykiller:
actually it does sound like an 82nd drop. if it were like dropping armor you'd be dropping armor.

ignoring the entire issue of why you'd want to drop onto any amount of resistance anyway, it seems easier on the troops to bring them down in armor away from the defenses then assault on the surface in coordination with orbital support. this would reduce casualties by minimizing troop exposure, reducing friendly fire incidents, and providing maneuvering room and fallback positions, and also result in quicker military action because of better troop coordination, better concentration of fire, and organic ground support involving direct fire, electronic warfare, and screens.

Yes. However, unlike an 82nd drop, there is direct support artillery available. (Not just CAS and preplanned missiles.)

Further, at least IMTU in T20 each soldier is armored like a tank. (AF14-15, depending on TL, Agility 4, medium target size, cameoline (TL14), interesting sensor suite, 320KPH max speed. (I posted my T20 Imperial Marine Battledress on here somewhere.) The only differences between Marine Battledress and a full up tank is size, max speed and individual firepower. (They don't hit as hard as a tank, but they hit pretty hard for infantry.) They are virtually immune to small arms fire and can go almost anywhere a man can go. (249vls) Since they run on batteries, there is very little signature to track the individual marine. Most of their sensors are passive, and this makes them very stealthy.

Last time I checked the 82nd, unlike the Soviets, doesn't drop tanks, they LAPSE them. Which means Tanks don't come in until the LZ is secured.

In general I wouldn't drop them on top of a strongpoint, but it is possible. More like a cross between an airborne assault and an opposed river crossing.

But that method of insertion is for targets on habital planets, with atmospheres. Much of the Imperial Marine Mission is Boarding actions. Combat in closed environment situations is very similar to boarding actions. Which is the Imperial Marine Speciality. Remember the first part of an Imperial Assault on a planet is capture of the high orbitals. (A Boarding action even if the High Orbitals are huge.) Then take and clear LZs. On a world where Armored warfare is likely, that would probably be followed up with an Army Lift Infantry unit, and Armor units. (And the Marines do have a few of those for special occasions, but they, IMTU, are the exception not the rule.) Which is why not all Marines are Battledress qualified. (Though most are.) However if you back up a typical Fleet Marine unit with Marine and Naval Fighters and Naval fire support, you don't generally need lift infantry, armor or artillery units. (They would fall under the nice to have but not essential category.) And the MMMFV is either better than or equal to published tanks.

 

[Fritz_Brown]

Bhoins,
You know how Marines would say MMMFV - by dropping the first 2 Ms and the V, and sounding out what many people mean when they say "MF".

flykiller,
In a drop from orbit (HALO-style) the enemy would (I think) have a very hard time shooting down Marines. A drop right on (immediately next to, really) a target would entail the most surprise, shortest exposure to counterfire, and the quickest results.

 

[Maynard]

FYI, the 101 Vehicles book mentions an unmanned/remote controlled RDA gravshuttle system that holds four Aspin 4 grav APCs or Grav tanks. So, 40 mechanized infantry in battle dress per shuttle. The shuttle attempts to return to it's ship after deploying the vehicles.

In a drop from orbit (HALO-style) the enemy would (I think) have a very hard time shooting down Marines. A drop right on (immediately next to, really) a target would entail the most surprise, shortest exposure to counterfire, and the quickest results.

Yes, individual troops would be best for taking over starports you want left somewhat intact.

 

[flykiller]

In a drop from orbit (HALO-style) the enemy would (I think) have a very hard time shooting down Marines. A drop right on (immediately next to, really) a target would entail the most surprise, shortest exposure to counterfire, and the quickest results.

many scenarios may be imagined, but the quickest result is likely to be the anninilation of the marines (assuming of course equal tech levels, capable resistance, etc). if it's not safe for armored assault boats then it's not safe for a marine drop.

 

[Ranger]

One of the 82nd's missions is airfield seizure. The last two combat jumps made by US airborne troops were both airfield seizure missions (Grenada and Panama). I would imagine that one of the missions of the IM would be downport seizure.

The 82nd doesn't have an Armor Battalion any more, but when they did, they would heavy drop tanks. They would usually plan for only 4 at one time (one platoon), and there was a pretty high failure rate (so count on only 2 or 3 actually surviving the drop).

I think that using drop capsules would be much like an airborne assault, but using assault shuttles or the Empress Grav APC from Striker/MT 101 Vehicles would be much more like an anphib or airmobile operation.

 

[BetterThanLife]

Originally posted by Ranger:
One of the 82nd's missions is airfield seizure. The last two combat jumps made by US airborne troops were both airfield seizure missions (Grenada and Panama). I would imagine that one of the missions of the IM would be downport seizure.

The 82nd doesn't have an Armor Battalion any more, but when they did, they would heavy drop tanks. They would usually plan for only 4 at one time (one platoon), and there was a pretty high failure rate (so count on only 2 or 3 actually surviving the drop).

I think that using drop capsules would be much like an airborne assault, but using assault shuttles or the Empress Grav APC from Striker/MT 101 Vehicles would be much more like an anphib or airmobile operation.

Yes and no. Of course it depends on which version of Battledress you are using. The T20 version of Battledress, (especially my Marine Battledress) is effectively a vehicle. So you are dropping small tanks or assaulting an objective in armored vehicles. Just because they are coming from above doesn't diminish the fact that most Traveller vehicles can and do attack from above. In my Marine Battledress, which includes a Grav Drive, there is very little difference from Marines landing in one spot and moving on the objective from the LZ to landing right on top of the objective. Against a heavily fortified high tech objective, you would take losses both ways and tere are equal arguments for both approaches. (Better chance of surprise dropping on the objective, better chance of getting on the ground by dropping away from the objective.)

And didn't the 82nd make a Mass Combat Drop during Desert Storm? Securing important road junctions and cutting of routes of retreat for the Iraqi Army. I also seem to recall a Combat Drop during Iraqi Freedom in the North in support of the Kurds, since we had no other way in there.

 

[BetterThanLife]

Originally posted by Fritz88:
Bhoins,
You know how Marines would say MMMFV - by dropping the first 2 Ms and the V, and sounding out what many people mean when they say "MF".

flykiller,
In a drop from orbit (HALO-style) the enemy would (I think) have a very hard time shooting down Marines. A drop right on (immediately next to, really) a target would entail the most surprise, shortest exposure to counterfire, and the quickest results.

Yeah well, it makes for a good story line, and usually gets a smile since the primary vehicle is still a Humm-Vee.

(Give me a break it took me a month to come up with that Acronym and make it work.

)

 

[Maynard]

What approach is taken depends on the mission. Not every Marine is automatically trained in battledress or grav belt ops, so it's obviously a special missions type op, not a mass invasion tactic, i.e. securing an area, forward observer, fast assault raid, etc., not a large unit tactic, which implies there's more coming in behind you, like APC's, even if for ambulance or supply. Any mission that requires a large assault by grav belt will mostly be preludes to long term occupation, or a strike to destroy something , but even then there will be craft standing by to extract them. Long term ops with just combat dress and grav belts aren't viable, given the endurance times of the equipment.

They'll be either resupplied or extracted if that's the case, otherwise they'll need the life support and shelter of the APC's to remain viable as a force. If not, then why bother with a drop, when you can just incinerate everything from orbit and go on your merry way.

The Imperial Army has some of it's own Naval capability, as well, troop ships and the like. The game itself is heavily slanted towards the Imperial Navy and ship warfare, the Imperial Army isn't much detailed in any version of Traveller, which is a shame, since the Army will do most of the fighting and holding territory; the MArines are too small a force, nor can they survive long term planetside, logistically, most of the time.

Maybe somebody can develop a sourcebook and scenarios for the Ground Forces and detail them out more? It's one area all the rules sets and supplements are weak in, with the exception of Mercenary Book 4, so there's plenty of open ground there. There aren't even mention of major Army bases in the sector guides.

Besides, just like the U.S. Marines haven't had a mission in since the Navy did away with sails on their ships, the Imperial Marines have little to do except guard those ships ...

 

[mike wightman]

Originally posted by Maynard:
What approach is taken depends on the mission. Not every Marine is automatically trained in battledress

They are in GURPS Traveller

or grav belt ops, so it's obviously a special missions type op, not a mass invasion tactic, i.e. securing an area, forward observer, fast assault raid, etc., not a large unit tactic, which implies there's more coming in behind you, like APC's, even if for ambulance or supply. Any mission that requires a large assault by grav belt will mostly be preludes to long term occupation, or a strike to destroy something , but even then there will be craft standing by to extract them. Long term ops with just combat dress and grav belts aren't viable, given the endurance times of the equipment.

They'll be either resupplied or extracted if that's the case, otherwise they'll need the life support and shelter of the APC's to remain viable as a force. If not, then why bother with a drop, when you can just incinerate everything from orbit and go on your merry way.

The Imperial Army has some of it's own Naval capability, as well, troop ships and the like. The game itself is heavily slanted towards the Imperial Navy and ship warfare, the Imperial Army isn't much detailed in any version of Traveller, which is a shame, since the Army will do most of the fighting and holding territory; the MArines are too small a force, nor can they survive long term planetside, logistically, most of the time.

GT Ground Forces has all the details on the Imperial Army you could need - well almost

Maybe somebody can develop a sourcebook and scenarios for the Ground Forces and detail them out more? It's one area all the rules sets and supplements are weak in, with the exception of Mercenary Book 4, so there's plenty of open ground there. There aren't even mention of major Army bases in the sector guides.

GT Ground Forces and GT Star Mercs would cover most of this. Add the two merc adventures from QLI and you should have enough to get started.

 

[Anthony]

Originally posted by Fritz88:
flykiller,
In a drop from orbit (HALO-style) the enemy would (I think) have a very hard time shooting down Marines.

There is no situation in which marines are harder to shoot down than missiles with equivalent armor. Since Marines generally can't afford to impact the ground at five kilometers per second, Marines are generally much easier to shoot down than missiles. Considering what point defense can do to missiles in space combat, a combat drop into an area with zone defense is probably suicide.

What this means is that you have to drop outside of any major defensive perimeters, and come cross-country to hit the hardpoints.

 

[Blue Ghost]

It would likely depend on the design of the drop capsule. Is it armored? Is there an inner and outer casing? What is its profile like? How it enter tha atmosphere; AOA and so forth.

 

[BetterThanLife]

Originally posted by Maynard:
What approach is taken depends on the mission. Not every Marine is automatically trained in battledress or grav belt ops, so it's obviously a special missions type op, not a mass invasion tactic, i.e. securing an area, forward observer, fast assault raid, etc., not a large unit tactic, which implies there's more coming in behind you, like APC's, even if for ambulance or supply. Any mission that requires a large assault by grav belt will mostly be preludes to long term occupation, or a strike to destroy something , but even then there will be craft standing by to extract them. Long term ops with just combat dress and grav belts aren't viable, given the endurance times of the equipment.

Actually it depends on which version of Traveller you are dealing with. In CT and MT, virtually all marines are trained in how to wear Battledress. (It requires either the Vacsuit or the Battledress skill.) In T20 it is an optional Feat but easy to add. In MT and T20 virtually all Marines are trained in the use of Grav Belts. (Grav vehicle-0 skill in MT and Vessel(Grav Vehicle) are world feats/skills for high tech worlds which is a requirement for becoming a Marine.

Endurance of gravbelts is generally a month, rechargable from any fusion plant. My T20 Marine Battledress is only 48 hours endurance but it can be recharged from any convient power source and without a small stateroom isn't supposed to be operated for more than 12 hours anyway.

There is no endurance limitation in CT/MT Battledress.

From what I understand in GT they are required to be trained in Battledress.

I did however state that this is how Fleet Marines in My Traveller Universe were equipped and organized. Your Traveller Universe may vary.

They'll be either resupplied or extracted if that's the case, otherwise they'll need the life support and shelter of the APC's to remain viable as a force. If not, then why bother with a drop, when you can just incinerate everything from orbit and go on your merry way.

What good is an APC in a Boarding action? What good is an APC on a typical Orbital facility, Underwater Arcology, cave and tunnel complex, enclosed city, hive, etc.? Armored vehicles that don't fit down corridors are useless in most typical Marine Operations. And if you look at any Traveller Setting you will find that less than half the worlds in the OTU are actually nice Earth Like atmospheres where people live outside under an open sky.

Now IMTU there are actually Four Branches in the Imperial Marines. Fleet Branch, Ground Branch, Flight Branch and Commando Branch.

Fleet Branch is the typical Marines encountered throughout MTU. They are the ships troops, the Starport Security Detail, Embassy Guards, Boarding Parties, etc. These are the Marines you are most likely to encounter. They are the ones I described in this thread as how they are organized and equipped.

Flight Branch are the Marines trained to operate and/or Maintain the Marines' large number of small craft, from the MMMFV to the Assault Pinnaces. These Marines may, or may not be trained in Battledress. (Though every Marine is an Infantryman first, many are trained.)

Ground Branch are Marines that are long term deployed to garrison planets that the Imperium doesn't want the Imperial Army to Garrison. IMTU and I believe it is implied in the OTU, if not outright stated, the Imperial Army is raised on individual planets and called up to serve as Ground Forces in times of war to fight in other places. There is no Imperial wide standard for the Army. So it may be, for political reasons, that some planets are garrisoned by the Imperial Marines. In these cases a Unit is formed specifically for the task. Some of the troops are transferred in from Fleet Marines and others are trained/recruited specifically for the task. So some of these Marine Units, depending on the environment and/or the mission, may not be trained in Battledress. They may also, though less likely, be equipped at less than Max Imperial Tech Level.

The fourth Branch is the smallest Branch. The Marine Commandos. They are generally all trained in Battledress as well as possesing various intelligence and covert operations skills. Generally recruited from the Fleet Marines, though some Flight Branch and Ground Forces Marines are also recruited, they are the best of the best of the best. They strike by Stealth, with massive firepower and disappear. The Commando Branch also includes the traditional, highly lethal and highly stealthy and highly specialized Marine Snipers. (One Shot, One Hit, One Kill.)

IMTU the Kinunir Class was actually an experimental ship designed to deploy Marine Commandoes. It was slightly flawed, in that it lacked sufficeint ground support firepower and the Pinnace was of a non-standard design. It was replaced in service by the Audey Murphy Class, which learned the lessons of the Kinunir. (Hence the reason for a Black Globe Generator on such a small ship and the non-standard Marine Organization. (Each Squad was led by an officer.))

Prior to the Kinunir the smallest Marine Commando size deployed aboard a ship was a Company. (In a Q-Ship the size of a mid range Destroyer, about 5000 tons.)

The Imperial Army has some of it's own Naval capability, as well, troop ships and the like. The game itself is heavily slanted towards the Imperial Navy and ship warfare, the Imperial Army isn't much detailed in any version of Traveller, which is a shame, since the Army will do most of the fighting and holding territory; the MArines are too small a force, nor can they survive long term planetside, logistically, most of the time.

Maybe somebody can develop a sourcebook and scenarios for the Ground Forces and detail them out more? It's one area all the rules sets and supplements are weak in, with the exception of Mercenary Book 4, so there's plenty of open ground there. There aren't even mention of major Army bases in the sector guides.

Besides, just like the U.S. Marines haven't had a mission in since the Navy did away with sails on their ships, the Imperial Marines have little to do except guard those ships ...

Well the reason there is no comprehensive discussion of the Army is that the Army is locally raised, hence the varying Tech Levels. It would also differ in organization depending on several factors on the Army Units' World of Origin. The Reason for no Army bases on the Imperium Maps is for the same reason. They aren't an Imperium Wide Coherent Force.

As for them having their own ships, that would depend on YTUs version of what a Colonial Navy is. And that discussion has been going on for some time over in Fleet. Fleet Structures & Funding and The The Reserve, Reserves, and Reservists of the IN.

As has already been pointed out GT covers it. But otherwise a comprehensive guide to these things would be treading very serious and heated ground.

Every Referee, who has ever GMed Traveller has a very definite idea on how the Marines work. (Golden Age EA has TL12 Marines, for example, IMTU all but Ground Forces Marines are equipped to Tl14 or 15 (Depending on timeframe).) Look how much dissent this discussion on how Marines are organized, based on Organization IMTU is.

I won't even begin to get into OTU Marines. Though I believe my organization to be based on logic and assumptions and implications that are easily drawn from LBB4, MT and T20, doesn't mean I am right for the OTU.

And each World has its own ideas on how to raise an Army. There are approximately 400 worlds per sector, all with varying Tech Levels, requirements and traditions. While there may be some simularities, especially on two worlds with equal Tech Levels and Atmospheric Composition, similar hydrographics, population and size, those two worlds are just as likely to have developed quite different organizations and traditions over time.

A book detailing all but the broadest generalizations of Army Organization, would have to cover a sizeable fraction of 8000+ worlds for the Imperium or 200-400 worlds for a single sector.

 

[BetterThanLife]

Originally posted by Anthony:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Fritz88:
flykiller,
In a drop from orbit (HALO-style) the enemy would (I think) have a very hard time shooting down Marines.

There is no situation in which marines are harder to shoot down than missiles with equivalent armor. Since Marines generally can't afford to impact the ground at five kilometers per second, Marines are generally much easier to shoot down than missiles. Considering what point defense can do to missiles in space combat, a combat drop into an area with zone defense is probably suicide.

What this means is that you have to drop outside of any major defensive perimeters, and come cross-country to hit the hardpoints. </font>[/QUOTE]Actually Marines are a whole lot stealthier than a missile. Seed the drop with multiple decoys for each Marine, dump a load of Chaff, and barrage jammers into the mix, include missiles coming in through the drop (Much safer than laser/fusion fire for the Marines) and include Meson attacks on the target during the drop. And consider that for most of the drop they will be at terminal velocity (It isn't until they get close to the ground that they will fire the retros and fire up their grav generators.) they may not be as vulnerable as you imagine. Remember even if they get hit they are fairly well protected by armor, both the capsule and the Battledress.

I am not saying you won't lose Marines in the assault. But you may lose a similar number or more in an overland attack against awake defenders. (Since you dropped them someplace else the forces guarding the target have time to get organized and awake before the Marines arrive.)

Most defensive positions have multiple layers. Counter Recon Positions several hundred meters out along the most likely avenues of approach. OPs and LPs. Etc. You have to get past all of that before you can assault the objective. When you can, because of the nature of the equipment, precisely drop, by stealth, an entire unit on your objective it may cause less casualties to do so. Of course each drop will be different and there will obviously be cases for either or both options to be used. It will generally depend on the Tactical situation.

 

[BetterThanLife]

Originally posted by Blue Ghost:
It would likely depend on the design of the drop capsule. Is it armored? Is there an inner and outer casing? What is its profile like? How it enter tha atmosphere; AOA and so forth.

If you use the Heinlein Model (Which is the inspiration for this.) It has an inner and outer casing. The inner one is armored, the outer one is ablative and the fragements are designed to be chaff. Both are made of the best Stealth material that technology can provide. Add Meson strikes on Point Defense positions, and consider that if they drop 5 decoys per Marine, some of the decoys being full of various types of jammers, you will be hardpressed to pick out and engage the real Marines. If the Marines have a Tech advantage, which they normally do, then the jamming and stealth can be even more effective.

Even if you kill the Capsule the Marine, can generally, still land.

 

[Anthony]

Originally posted by Bhoins:
Actually Marines are a whole lot stealthier than a missile.

There are no systems you can put on a drop capsule that you cannot put on a missile, and there are plenty of systems you can put on a missile that you cannot put on a drop capsule (due to the limitations of wanting to get the occupant to the ground alive). Therefore, at a bare minimum missiles are as good at getting through a defensive envelope as marines (just equip the missile just like a drop pod, if that's really best), and more likely they're much better.

 

[BetterThanLife]

Originally posted by Anthony:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Bhoins:
Actually Marines are a whole lot stealthier than a missile.

There are no systems you can put on a drop capsule that you cannot put on a missile, and there are plenty of systems you can put on a missile that you cannot put on a drop capsule (due to the limitations of wanting to get the occupant to the ground alive). Therefore, at a bare minimum missiles are as good at getting through a defensive envelope as marines (just equip the missile just like a drop pod, if that's really best), and more likely they're much better. </font>[/QUOTE]The other difference is that Missiles tend to burn engines all the way in. Now freefall ordinance is a different matter. (Thor Shots being a case in point.) I would say that Freefall ordinance would be the most difficult to intercept, Marines in drop pods second and missiles a poor third.

Remember though this is but one aspect of one potential Marine Missions. Obviously it wouldn't work this way for boarding operations (both enemy ships and high orbitals), objectives in Asteroid belts, airless rockballs, and assaulting underwater arcologies.

 

[Ranger]

Originally posted by Bhoins:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Ranger:
One of the 82nd's missions is airfield seizure. The last two combat jumps made by US airborne troops were both airfield seizure missions (Grenada and Panama). I would imagine that one of the missions of the IM would be downport seizure.

The 82nd doesn't have an Armor Battalion any more, but when they did, they would heavy drop tanks. They would usually plan for only 4 at one time (one platoon), and there was a pretty high failure rate (so count on only 2 or 3 actually surviving the drop).

I think that using drop capsules would be much like an airborne assault, but using assault shuttles or the Empress Grav APC from Striker/MT 101 Vehicles would be much more like an anphib or airmobile operation.

Yes and no. Of course it depends on which version of Battledress you are using. The T20 version of Battledress, (especially my Marine Battledress) is effectively a vehicle. So you are dropping small tanks or assaulting an objective in armored vehicles. Just because they are coming from above doesn't diminish the fact that most Traveller vehicles can and do attack from above. In my Marine Battledress, which includes a Grav Drive, there is very little difference from Marines landing in one spot and moving on the objective from the LZ to landing right on top of the objective. Against a heavily fortified high tech objective, you would take losses both ways and tere are equal arguments for both approaches. (Better chance of surprise dropping on the objective, better chance of getting on the ground by dropping away from the objective.)

And didn't the 82nd make a Mass Combat Drop during Desert Storm? Securing important road junctions and cutting of routes of retreat for the Iraqi Army. I also seem to recall a Combat Drop during Iraqi Freedom in the North in support of the Kurds, since we had no other way in there. </font>[/QUOTE]There are a couple of issues with dropping troops rather than carrying them. The first is surprise and the signature of your force going in. To drop a battalion task force of the 82nd takes about 7 C141s and a regimental/brigade drop runs around 20 C141s (give or take depending on if you take all the brigade support elements) not counting the heavy drop for vehicles. By comparison, you would need at least 50 UH60s to air assault one battalion. The only unit that has enough lift to do a Brigade sized air assault is the 101st. Every other unit has to shuttle their units in by dropping one wave off then going back and picking up the next lift. So, an air drop has a much smaller operational signature and you can deliver the entire unit at once (usually 10 minutes if you have to do 2 passes, less if the drop zone is big enough to empty the birds in one pass).

On the opposite side of the ledger is organizational integrity on the objective. Airborne units loose their organizational integrity when they are loaded onto the aircraft. If you keep a company together on the same aircraft for a drop (which you can do with C141s) they end up distributed along the entire length of the drop zone, so you usually break down the companies and even the platoons so they each exit their specific aircraft at about the same point and all end up on the drop zone within a couple of hundred meters of each other. Bottom line, you end up with troopers scattered all over the drop zone and units totally intermingled, and that takes a while to sort out on the ground. By contrast, airmobile units land together and can fight as a unit from the moment they get on the ground.

If you are using drop capsules you will probably end up with the same scatter problem with, as the ECM measures you're using to protect them on the way down are probably going to interfere with their ability to stay in formation on the way down.

As to the recent airborne operations, the Desert Storm one was an early option considered by the pentagon and rejected. Instead that mission was done by the 101st as an airmobile operation. In Iraq, the drop in the north was technically a combat drop airfield seizure, but the airfield was already held by the Kurds, so it was mostly a propaganda stunt since they could have just had the Kurds secure the airfield and air landed if they had wanted to. The airfield was then used as an operational base for SF units working with the Kurds in the north. The big airborne operation that was planned never happened. One brigade from the 82nd was prepared to do a combat jump onto the airport in Baghdad, to be followed up by units from the 101st, which would use the airfield as a base to launch an airmobile assault on the city. That plan was overcome by events and the 3d ID ended up just driving up to the airport when the Republican Guard collapsed in front of them south of the city.

So, that brings us back to the question of why the focus on airfield for airborne operations. Airborne doctrine focuses on the airborne troops seizing a site that can be used to fly in more troops. Originally that called for two separate phases, the first to drop in and seize a piece of ground, and the second to either build a temporary airfield on the drop zone or to use the drop zone as a base to attack and seize an airfield. In the 80s the Army decided that they should just combine the two phases and do the initial airborne assault on an airfield. Once the airfield is secure and the follow-on troops arrive, the paratroopers provide security for the airfield and serve as a tactical reserve for the main mission the follow-on troops are engaged in.

So, I imagine drop capsule troops being used in the same way. They are dropped in to seize a lodgment, preferably a downport, that can then be used to transfer a large amount of troops and equipment planet side. Those follow on forces are then used to achieve your main military objective with the lodgement used as the main logistics base to support the operation.

 

[Maynard]

{In a drop from orbit (HALO-style) the enemy would (I think) have a very hard time shooting down Marines. A drop right on (immediately next to, really) a target would entail the most surprise, shortest exposure to counterfire, and the quickest results.

It would seem so, until you factor in the much higher ROF's of heavy weapons, which can be as high as 40 up to 160 in some weapons, coupled with advances fire controls, along with advanced burst area weapons as AA.

quote:

Originally posted by Maynard:
What approach is taken depends on the mission. Not every Marine is automatically trained in battledress

They are in GURPS Traveller

I just have the GURPS Traveller first book, the one with conversions and Library stuff, so the only templates I have to go by are those.

It doesn't list a regular Marine, just 'Special Ops' Marine enlisted and officer, and while Vacc suit is a primary skill, Battlesuit is a secondary choice, and also Vacc suit is a MA skill while Battlesuit is PA, so Battledress is a specialty even in Gurps. Some functions are similar between the two, but Battlesuit is still special training.

GT Ground Forces has all the details on the Imperial Army you could need - well almost
quote:

Maybe somebody can develop a sourcebook and scenarios for the Ground Forces and detail them out more? It's one area all the rules sets and supplements are weak in, with the exception of Mercenary Book 4, so there's plenty of open ground there. There aren't even mention of major Army bases in the sector guides.

GT Ground Forces and GT Star Mercs would cover most of this. Add the two merc adventures from QLI and you should have enough to get started.

Thanks for the info. I haven't hit a game store in years, and would like to thumb through those. Do they still use the generic GURPS mass combat rules, or do they develop a little more granularity and flavor into them for Traveller?

I like large ops. It gives me an excuse to use all those SPI wargame counters and maps, as well as my old Squad Leader stuff.

There is no situation in which marines are harder to shoot down than missiles with equivalent armor. Since Marines generally can't afford to impact the ground at five kilometers per second, Marines are generally much easier to shoot down than missiles. Considering what point defense can do to missiles in space combat, a combat drop into an area with zone defense is probably suicide.

What this means is that you have to drop outside of any major defensive perimeters, and come cross-country to hit the hardpoints.

I would agree with that; look at the ROF's of even the smaller heavy Energy field weapons, and imagine what a single 50 to a 100 ton emplacement with the advanced targeting and fire control can do to even a huge air assault of troopers, Battledress is kind of puny against those.


Battledress doesn't give any better protection than regular combat armor at the same tech level, or even over several tech levels; it's still 18 at all levels up to 15, and tech 14 combat armor is the same.


Battledress is only economically justifiable in combo with the two man-portable heavy energy weapons as part of an integral system, as is heavily implied by the rules, both of which develop antigrav compensators at the next tech level after intro for the weapons, making battledress as a requirement obsolete. The combat armor equipped regular now has the same protection and firepower as the BD trooper, allowing for the equipping of roughly 3 regulars for the cost of 1 BD trooper, if you include the grav belt for all, up to a 6 to 1 advantage just on the armor alone. Even some of the lower tech 12-13 artillery mounted on grav tanks can chew up BD troopers.


The BD's only remaining advantage after tech 15 is the doubled strength and endurance, which is great for field engineers, but not economically sane or revelant to fire fights anymore, unless you can pull a Monty Python deal and get the enemy to drop their weapons and wrestle you. LOL

Actually it depends on which version of Traveller you are dealing with. In CT and MT, virtually all marines are trained in how to wear Battledress. (It requires either the Vacsuit or the Battledress skill.) In T20 it is an optional Feat but easy to add. In MT and T20 virtually all Marines are trained in the use of Grav Belts. (Grav vehicle-0 skill in MT and Vessel(Grav Vehicle) are world feats/skills for high tech worlds which is a requirement for becoming a Marine.

Endurance of gravbelts is generally a month, rechargable from any fusion plant. My T20 Marine Battledress is only 48 hours endurance but it can be recharged from any convient power source and without a small stateroom isn't supposed to be operated for more than 12 hours anyway. There is no endurance limitation in CT/MT Battledress.

According to my set of MT rules, the life support for vacc suits doesn't exceed 48 hours, at tech-14. Grav belts at tech-15 have up to 4 hours at 300kg thrust. No mention anywhere of any longer endurance than a regular vacc suit in the CT and MT I have.

I didn't see anywhere where grav vehicle-0 skill includes grav belt, but it doesn't exclude it, either. In any case, jump troops are a seperate unit and specialty, according to the Rebellion or Referee's companion, I forget which, so I kind of doubt the Imperium is going to forgo grav belt-0 or more likely grav belt-1 as a qualification. I can strap on a parachute, jump out the door, and pull the ring as an 'unskilled OK' task; that doesn't make me air assault qualified.

I have CT and MT, and neither have anything that gives BD automatically to all Marines. In CT, unless it's some reference deeper in the LBB's I haven't run across, it isn't on the list of rolled up skills at all, until Mercenary, and vacc suit-1 is the minimum requirement in CT Mercenary, which even then doesn't allow you to use the weapon systems BD was designed to be used with without serious risk to life and limb.

While BD includes vacc suit, vacc suit is not a totally upwardly compatible skill. BD requires special training in both CT and MT.


In MT BD skill requires a roll of 7 on D6 to get, so it's rare even in the Marines and Commando both.

It's true Marines have more shots at getting it than regular Army, but given that the numbers of troops the Army is going to have over Marines, it becomes clear the Army is going to field far more jump troops and/or BD troops than The Marines, statistically, given the much smaller size of the Marines, in game terms. The BD system is more like the squad level Pigman, a heavy weapon specialist, with larger groups being special forces type commando and combat engineering units, going by economic and common sense trooper deployment.

You do have Joe Fugate as an ally, though; his assault on Khishan has 'several divisions of Imperial Marines in BD, supported by an armored cavary battalion' landing on Desmas Down Port in the KnightFall adventure book, though in the text there's a reference to them wearing both combat armor and BD, which leads me to mean there is 'battle dress' the generic term, which includes all military personal armor, and Battle Dress, the specific integrated weapons system.

Desmas is a bare 0 Atmos rock, and most live underground, and xenophobic; Lucan wants the tech level, though, so he seizes the Down Port and attempts to seal off the city with surgical bombardments, isolating them and getting them to surrender. Think along the lines of the Tunnel Rats in Viet Nam ... only the in the adventure they are going to use cheap robot drone scouts to do most of the seeking.

What good is an APC in a Boarding action? What good is an APC on a typical Orbital facility, Underwater Arcology, cave and tunnel complex, enclosed city, hive, etc.? Armored vehicles that don't fit down corridors are useless in most typical Marine Operations. And if you look at any Traveller Setting you will find that less than half the worlds in the OTU are actually nice Earth Like atmospheres where people live outside under an open sky.

I believe I agreed that it depends on the mission what combo of forces are deployed. I can find special cases for nearly everything; they don't prove a rule, though. The Army is going to be called in to control the ground and orbital air space, as per the Rebellion and COACC books, in most instances. The Marines will be used in limited actions, like Naval ops, or beachhead establishment, barring the availibility of Army units.

If you look at the Spinward Marches map, you'll see that the vast majority of the Hi Pop worlds are not Atmosphere 0 astroid belts or bare rocks, either.

The largest, most specialized forces are going to be concentrated on the frontiers, anyway, like the Marches and Solomani Rim, for example, so even if most armies are going to be world defense locally raised, there is still an official Imperial Army of considerable size, with UN-like auxillaries serving as attached units to the Imperial Amry, just as COACC says, and will be of mixed tech levels to provide a much wider scope and cost efficiency than the Marines can provide. The Marines are still going to be Naval Ops oriented rather than mass invasion and occupation forces, and BD types are a further specialization, and rare, as it should be.

The general makeup of the worlds in the AO of any particular unit will also be a major determinant in how and what mix of tech level, equipment, and MOS's are weighted.


I did an admittedly hurried and incomplete scan of the Imperium's Spinward Marches Pop 9 and Pop A worlds, and I find there are two Tech level baselines re high Pop worlds, around tech 12-13, and tech 8-9, especillay in the Hi In classes, with an edge Pop wise towards the low tech levels, so a diverse spread of military tech levels is highly cost effective; but such granularity is effective for the Army, as the Marines aren't effective for long term occupation or mass invasions as a primary function, while the Army is large enough to encompass all Marine missions.


The COACC Advisory Group in the OTU coordinates locals with Imperial Army units and strategic needs, so there is indeed a 'sector wide' chain of command for ground and orbital forces all through the Imperium; it's just not as emphasized, as the Naval and space oriented stuff is the main slant of Traveller, not D-Day invasions, though some of us integrate wargames with RPG characters according to our own universes. I paricularly like using SPI's NATO board game as an background for Tweilight 2000 campaigns, for instance. It adds a level of interest that varies enough between campaigns to keep the game evolving and fresh.

Even the OTU is not, and never has been, internally consistent, hence the continuing arguments over 'canon', and the rules additions and revisions that make up the string of Travellers' evolution from 1978's LBB's, supplements, etc., up to MT and the Rebellion just add more and more depth as it rolls along. MT cites CT enough to justify that it is more of a clarification and added detail for CT than supplanting it entirely.

As has already been pointed out GT covers it. But otherwise a comprehensive guide to these things would be treading very serious and heated ground.

LOL .... what could happen? Houses being burned down? Dogs poisoned? The FBI brought in? ;>)

A lot of it has already been covered by the 'canon', in various places and references; mass unit combats, unit designations, equipment, MOS's, ad nauseam.

 

[Piper]

Originally posted by Maynard:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />{In a drop from orbit (HALO-style) the enemy would (I think) have a very hard time shooting down Marines. A drop right on (immediately next to, really) a target would entail the most surprise, shortest exposure to counterfire, and the quickest results.

It would seem so, until you factor in the much higher ROF's of heavy weapons, which can be as high as 40 up to 160 in some weapons, coupled with advances fire controls, along with advanced burst area weapons as AA. </font>[/QUOTE]There are ways to even the odds for the jump troops even against high ROF weapons. Pre-insertion bombardment (if heavy enough) could neutralize many of the fixed weapons at the target site. Either a Thor shot as Bhoins suggested or normal gunnery if you want to preserve high-value real estate. Forward observers could direct fire during the jump itself as targets revealed themselves by firing.
For each actual jump capsule deployed you could release a decoy capsule which could separate into a number of decoys, each having the same signature as a real capsule. Additional capsules containing drone missiles could also be deployed. These would target any weapon that revealed itself by firing.

For arguments sake, let's use a 400 man battalion drop: 400 troops, 400 decoys each separating into 8 sections and 400 drone missiles. That's 4000 targets over the drop zone. Any point defense system that unmasks is immediately targeted by drone missiles or orbital laser gunnery directed by observers either in orbit or with the drop itself. Close support fighter strikes can add additional firepower assuming that they can operate at all. The average life expectancy of your trooper has just gone way up.

Battle dress would be crucial for jump troops, not because of the armor as much as for the endurance and load-carrying capacity. They're going to need to move fast and far and carry all of their own resupply until the area is secure enough for small craft to operate, although I suppose some supplies could be dropped by follow on cargo capsules.

To pull it off you would have to have complete orbital superiority, fairly light planetary defenses relative to the size of the attacking force and good target intelligence. You'd also have to have some political reason why taking all those trooper casualties is better than blasting the planet down to bedrock.

 

[Maynard]

Well, if you have overwhelming superority, you have overwhelming superiority; not much to discuss there, but it's pretty boring in game terms if you make BD armored troops God like Immortals, just because they showed up. BD is hideously expensive in CT and MT, relatively dirt cheap in GURPS, but still it isn't the overwhelming advantage it's continually cracked up to be. I'll take my regular Army in plain old combat armor, given equal budgets, and I'll chew up the BD's in short order, with at least a 3-1 advantage in manpower and firepower.