BetterThanLife
SOC-14 1K
Damn Ranger, you type faster than I do.
Marine TOE
- Thread starter BMonnery
- Start date
That's only an issue if you rotate your units as a whole.
If your armor/lift/support units are permanent and you rotate troops through them on an individual basis, then you maintain a fully trained unit while distributing trained individuals throughout the rest of the organization.
If your armor/lift/support units are permanent and you rotate troops through them on an individual basis, then you maintain a fully trained unit while distributing trained individuals throughout the rest of the organization.
Guys won't an advance tech level try to KISS it.
So ground and grav transport would drive the same way and have a driver's gun mount and the shotgun would control the main weapons with a switch which allows both front seat people to control the weapons. Now a cook stuck into tl 14 bradley may not be able to pop a wheelie and lay covering fire from the ulimate uzi mount as the normal driver and shot gun but he would cause as much destruction. Think of as the Urban warfare rv from Stripes. they cause alot of destruction as they did with little training .
Also it skill/feat problem gives backbone to this.
So ground and grav transport would drive the same way and have a driver's gun mount and the shotgun would control the main weapons with a switch which allows both front seat people to control the weapons. Now a cook stuck into tl 14 bradley may not be able to pop a wheelie and lay covering fire from the ulimate uzi mount as the normal driver and shot gun but he would cause as much destruction. Think of as the Urban warfare rv from Stripes. they cause alot of destruction as they did with little training .
Also it skill/feat problem gives backbone to this.
BetterThanLife
SOC-14 1K
But if you constantly form teams and break them up, they won't be as effective as a unit that is always together. (well virtually always together, of course you will have turnover and people will have to be trained but the unit will essentially always be a mech unit. They will have proceedures in place, SOPs etc. I am not saying that your vehicle crews if kept in a seperate unit wouldn't know how to be vehicle crews, but they won't work as well with their dismount component as a unit that does that full time.
BetterThanLife
SOC-14 1K
You would think that the military at higher tech levels would try to keep things simple, and make things simpler. But that has never been the case.
In the past 100 years (basically from TL5 to a mature TL8) Aircraft have gone from a novelty, through a combat experiment, to the modern multi-role combat fighters they are today.
For example a Sopwith Camel had as sensors the Mk I eyeball. (Two in each craft.
For weapons it carries a 20mm cannon, generally 3 different types of air to air missiles, and a wide variety of choices for air to ground ordinance. It tracks over 20 targets, can designate 10 of them for simultaneous engagement. It has gagues that are very nicely placed in a Heads Up display, with warning buzzers, lock on tones, voices that tell you what to do, and providing warnings, and that is before you include the human components. (The Air Traffic Controller, or whatever they are called aboard an AWACS, The CAG, the Squadron Commander, your wingman and the guy in the back seat all telling you things about what is going on around you. Information overload.
What unit is always together? In Traveller, military personnel change assignments every year. Integrating a certain number of new people into a unit won't have a major affect on unit quality. Considering the amount of active duty a Book 4 character sees, (and the implied casualty rates) units have to deal with replacements on a regular basis.
And I'm not limiting it to dismounts. Everyone rotates. Drivers train up to gunner, dismounts train up to driver, people are promoted, change MOS, transfer. The chargen rules in Book 4 show this as the standard (if somewhat romanticised) pattern.
The unit is always a mech unit, but the driver of APC #3 may have been piloting an air/raft on a destroyer 4 months ago. And it's just as likely that next year, he'll be learning gunnery on a battleship.
BetterThanLife
SOC-14 1K
What unit is always together? In Traveller, military personnel change assignments every year. Integrating a certain number of new people into a unit won't have a major affect on unit quality. Considering the amount of active duty a Book 4 character sees, (and the implied casualty rates) units have to deal with replacements on a regular basis.
And I'm not limiting it to dismounts. Everyone rotates. Drivers train up to gunner, dismounts train up to driver, people are promoted, change MOS, transfer. The chargen rules in Book 4 show this as the standard (if somewhat romanticised) pattern.
The unit is always a mech unit, but the driver of APC #3 may have been piloting an air/raft on a destroyer 4 months ago. And it's just as likely that next year, he'll be learning gunnery on a battleship. </font>[/QUOTE]But the key is that it is always a Mech unit. Not a unit that sometimes has access to IFVs. That, as far as combat effectiveness goes, is the important point.
For example he may be the Driver for APC #3. So that means if the platoon gets hit while mounted from the front that APC #3 goes left and deploys its ground pounders while providing covering fire. APC #1 and #2 assault through and deploy on the other side, #1 going right and #2 going left. APC#4 goes right and deploys its Ground combat unit while providing covering fire. But no matter who the driver is in that situation APC#3 goes left. While the Driver may be new the TC has probably been through this drill before so he tells the Driver where to go. Everyone in the platoon knows that APC#3 is going to go left.
Granted that is a simplistic example but the Platoon and Company will have similar SOP. The Unit is trained constantly on these types of situations. Now a Company that routinely trains as a Light Infantry Unit won't have teh same feel for how to deal with a mounted situation. That doesn't mean they can't do it, with rudimentary training, but it does mean they won't react as fast in a similar situation and they may choose to do it in a different manner. For example a unit that is normally Light Infantry would probably decide to ground all the vehicles use them for covering fire then assault through as a light Infantry unit with Armor support. It may get the job done but it may take longer.
Further if you train regularily as a unit with vehicles you get a feel for the capabilities and vulnerabilities of your vehicles. For example a Bradley is listed as Amphibious, but it takes 2 hours to erect the screen and while floating it can be sunk by a few .45 cal pistol rounds. An LAV25 can drive into the river and drive out the other side. To an LAV 25 there is little difference between being in the water and being on dry land. (Part of the primary design parameters.)
Now a unit that isn't used to erecting the screen on a Bradley may decide that it can cross the river with little prep so it isn't prepared to do it. Further unless you train regularily then you will probably take a bit longer to get the screen up than the designed 2 hours.
Oh and just because personnel get transferred about in Character creation doesn't mean the whole unit isn't going somewhere, nor does it mean that the APC driver is something other than an APC driver on the next tour.
BetterThanLife
SOC-14 1K
Ranger, in my T20 Marine Battledress material I have a fire support suit. It is 300Vls (As opposed to 249vls) and has an interchangable weapon pack that is a Tac Launcher, or light MRL or other weapon that fits in the available 50vls space. (It loses a little agility compared to the 249vls suit but that is deemed acceptable to provide the additional firepower.)
The only thing my T20 Fleet Marine units equipped with Battledress are potentially missing are the RPX/RPY and VFR Gauss Guns of an Empress or Astrin. They are stealthier than the APCs and equally armored with virtually equal performance.
The only thing my T20 Fleet Marine units equipped with Battledress are potentially missing are the RPX/RPY and VFR Gauss Guns of an Empress or Astrin. They are stealthier than the APCs and equally armored with virtually equal performance.
What happens when a nuclear missile sub returns to port?
They may not still do this, but during the cold war, they changed crews.
The same thing could be done with marine support units. They're not likely to forget how to operate their vehicles, particularly if some vehicles are part of the ship load-out.
In a full-up war footing you would want all units as close to full TO&E strength as possible. In peacetime a cadre would serve for the heavy units, rotating troops through on a regular basis.
It depends on several factors but the organization described is certainly possible and if AFV's are a standard part of the Marine TO&E in any given universe, possibly likely depending on other factors.
If T20 allows battledress to be armoured as heavily as a tank, great. That's certainly not true of CT, MT, or Striker. In a universe run from those rules, marines need armoured support if they would be expected to face any serious opposition.
It will vary with each individual universe, but if marines fill the role of "fire brigade" (as would be expected) they're going to be equipped to handle a wide variety of situations and pack the full range of support weapons. There are many possible scenarios where ortillery can't be used.
APC's fill other functions, as well; resupply, medevac, and in hostile environments simply a place to wash up.
They may not still do this, but during the cold war, they changed crews.
The same thing could be done with marine support units. They're not likely to forget how to operate their vehicles, particularly if some vehicles are part of the ship load-out.
In a full-up war footing you would want all units as close to full TO&E strength as possible. In peacetime a cadre would serve for the heavy units, rotating troops through on a regular basis.
It depends on several factors but the organization described is certainly possible and if AFV's are a standard part of the Marine TO&E in any given universe, possibly likely depending on other factors.
If T20 allows battledress to be armoured as heavily as a tank, great. That's certainly not true of CT, MT, or Striker. In a universe run from those rules, marines need armoured support if they would be expected to face any serious opposition.
It will vary with each individual universe, but if marines fill the role of "fire brigade" (as would be expected) they're going to be equipped to handle a wide variety of situations and pack the full range of support weapons. There are many possible scenarios where ortillery can't be used.
APC's fill other functions, as well; resupply, medevac, and in hostile environments simply a place to wash up.
The Oz
SOC-14 1K
I find the main use for Marine vehicles is defensive: the vehicles provide area defense against artillery/ortillery and air/grav vehicles. They also carry nuclear damper sets to keep an enemy from just nuking the whole area to get the Marine Infantry.
The offensive function of Marine vehicles is to carry the battlefield meson guns that provide the primary Marine fire support.
The offensive function of Marine vehicles is to carry the battlefield meson guns that provide the primary Marine fire support.
A note on Imperial Marine flight crew.
Fighters exist, and there are pure space fighters and Aerospace fighters.
Both the Imperial Navy & the Imperial Marines have fighters and fighter pilots.
My rule of thumb is that IN fighters handle things from high orbit up.
IM fighters handle things from high orbit down.
That isn't a hard and fast rule, but it's the way things generally work.
The Navy has pure space only fighters, as well as aerospace fighters.
The Imperial Marines *only* have aerospace fighters.
If an Imperial military fighter is doing ground support missions, odds are that it is the Imperial Marines.
If you are sneaking through an asteroid belt, and find a couple of fighters on your six, odds are it's the Imperial Navy.
Fighters exist, and there are pure space fighters and Aerospace fighters.
Both the Imperial Navy & the Imperial Marines have fighters and fighter pilots.
My rule of thumb is that IN fighters handle things from high orbit up.
IM fighters handle things from high orbit down.
That isn't a hard and fast rule, but it's the way things generally work.
The Navy has pure space only fighters, as well as aerospace fighters.
The Imperial Marines *only* have aerospace fighters.
If an Imperial military fighter is doing ground support missions, odds are that it is the Imperial Marines.
If you are sneaking through an asteroid belt, and find a couple of fighters on your six, odds are it's the Imperial Navy.
Fritz_Brown
Super Moderator
Bhoins, you could also have units rotate from Light to Heavy, Lift to Fleet, etc. from one trip out to the next. You can functionally build your TO&E so that the unit trains for its general mission (fleet riders doing boarding actions, this time) each time they prep for a "cruise". Of course, now, all of your Marines have to be BD-trained.........
BetterThanLife
SOC-14 1K
Actually IMTU the primary reason I have Ground Forces Marine Branch is so that not all people serving in the Marines have Battledress. When forming a new unit Ground Forces MArines draws experienced NCOs from Fleet Marine Branch. THis forms the backbone of a Ground Forces Mission. Generally Ground Forces Marines are assigned to a specific world that unit may be there for, literally centuries, generally in situations where Army forces can't be used, usually for political reasons. IMTU Army units belong to the planets that they were raised on, and while they may be mobilized to serve the Imperium off world their primary loyality is to their planet. Fleet Marine Branch (The largest of the 4 branches.) are 80+% Battledress trained. (MMMFV crews are the only fleet marines that are not required to be Battledress qualified.) Marine Commando Branch (the smallest of the 4 branches.) is 100% Battledress qualified. Ground Forces Marines, overall would be somewhere around 50% Battledress qualified. Marine Support Branch somewhere around 25% BD qualified.
Again this is just my thoughts on the subject. There are reasons to have vehicles, but you can always ground a Nuclear Damper in a Cutter Module or something similar.
Fritz_Brown
Super Moderator
But, remember, all Marines are Riflemen, first. At least that's what Marine aviators keep telling me. That should mean a good portion of your MMMFV pilots would be BD qual'ed. Of course, IMTU....
BetterThanLife
SOC-14 1K
But, remember, all Marines are Riflemen, first. At least that's what Marine aviators keep telling me. That should mean a good portion of your MMMFV pilots would be BD qual'ed. Of course, IMTU....
The way I have the MMMFV units organized there are , as I recall, 3 ground crew members for each MMMFV (Which has a flight crew of 2.) While the Pilots and Rear Seaters my be BD qualified not all the mechanics and other associated REMFs will be BD qualified. Further personnel wise, the MMMFV squadrons are much less manpower intensive than an equivalent Infantry Unit. In my Fleet Marine TO&E a Fleet Marine Infantry Company is 150 Marines. A Armor Company (Actually called a Fighter Squadron.) is 10 MMMFVs and 50 Marines. Roughly 25% of the Fleet Marine TO&E is Armor units.
So the 80+% is rough estimate.
Now I understand why our views on this don't mesh well. Your Battledress is more like a small Mech rather than augmented body armor. In that case, I would organize them like vehicle units rather than infantry. Base units of 4 and build it up in a "square" organization. Four marines to a platoon, four platoons (16 marines) to a company, four companies (64 marines) to a battalion. You could make one platoon per company a support platoon and one company per battalion a support battalion.Originally posted by Bhoins:
Ranger, in my T20 Marine Battledress material I have a fire support suit. It is 300Vls (As opposed to 249vls) and has an interchangable weapon pack that is a Tac Launcher, or light MRL or other weapon that fits in the available 50vls space. (It loses a little agility compared to the 249vls suit but that is deemed acceptable to provide the additional firepower.)
The only thing my T20 Fleet Marine units equipped with Battledress are potentially missing are the RPX/RPY and VFR Gauss Guns of an Empress or Astrin. They are stealthier than the APCs and equally armored with virtually equal performance.
I'm coming at this from the CT/MT perspective where Battledress tops out at Armor Value (AV) 18, and the Trepedia/Astrin are AV 40 and the Empress is AV 60 (and that is on a logorithmic base 8 system, so armor value doubles for every 8 points you add). A VRF Gause Gun has a pen value of 21, so pretty much any vehicle above TL12 can take on Battledress infantry very effectively, and it (pretty much) takes a vehicle to kill another vehicle. That makes vehicles very valuable.
BetterThanLife
SOC-14 1K
Now I understand why our views on this don't mesh well. Your Battledress is more like a small Mech rather than augmented body armor. In that case, I would organize them like vehicle units rather than infantry. Base units of 4 and build it up in a "square" organization. Four marines to a platoon, four platoons (16 marines) to a company, four companies (64 marines) to a battalion. You could make one platoon per company a support platoon and one company per battalion a support battalion.</font>[/QUOTE]That is the latest version of Battledress. Personally I like the concept, it gives you a reason to wear Battledress instead of Combat Armor. Coincidentally Battledress costs much less in T20. And it allows you to have Marines be like David Webers, Royal Manticoran Marines in Battle Armor or Robert Heinlein's Starship Troopers. Since it is going to take multiple Marines to take out an Armored Vehicle and since my Organization is based on the available Transport and Unit sizes within the transport, I'll stick to the organization I outlined already.Originally posted by Ranger:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Bhoins:
Ranger, in my T20 Marine Battledress material I have a fire support suit. It is 300Vls (As opposed to 249vls) and has an interchangable weapon pack that is a Tac Launcher, or light MRL or other weapon that fits in the available 50vls space. (It loses a little agility compared to the 249vls suit but that is deemed acceptable to provide the additional firepower.)
The only thing my T20 Fleet Marine units equipped with Battledress are potentially missing are the RPX/RPY and VFR Gauss Guns of an Empress or Astrin. They are stealthier than the APCs and equally armored with virtually equal performance.
From a CT perspective, without Striker, there are no vehicle combat rules. There are rules for Vehicle weapons shooting at troops but not the other way around. Now if you use MT, and since I never found Striker but from what you are saying the MT rules are based on Striker.) it is a different story.
In CT a good marksman can render anyone incapicated regardless of armor with one shot. Armor is pretty much useless. And combat goes to the guy that shoots first, generally regardless of armor.
In MT, Combat Armor/Battledress is virtually immune to small arms fire. And there is little difference between Combat Armor and Battledress. (In MT you lose the Endurance rule.)
Now combat against vehicles assumes actually having space to maneuver vehicles. Again looking at the worlds of the Imperium, a very small percentage of them actually allow living on the surface of the planet. Most are very condusive to underground habitation, Arcologies, etc. And since vehicles are pretty much useless in such an environment, (Think MOUT with ceilings and not much bigger roads than an alley.) And the Primary MArine Mission still deals with within a Downport, on the Highport, boarding actions, etc. The actual percentages of outdoors Ground Combat is small. SO while they would be more vulnerable to vehicle fire in CT/MT they are much less likely to actually have to deal with vehicle fire than you might think. (And in those cases when they need the Ground Vehicles there is an entire branch of "Ground Forces Marines" or the Army to handle the situation once the Fleet Marines secure the LZs.
Besides a planet that lives on the surface, in the traditional sense, is more likely to be suceptible to Space bombardment than one that is in Arcologies. (You aren't dealing with as much collateral damage and you can pick out your targets on the surface.)
So in that case Marines in Battledress equipped with Grav Belts are still going to be highly effective, fast moving and maneuverable.
Ranger, based on earlier comments that you have made I believe that you have actually served in a Light Force. Am I correct? If so how long ago?
Have you seen what JSOWS is likely to do to an Armor formation in the open? The days of Mass Armor formations are in their last days at this TL.
BetterThanLife
SOC-14 1K
OK. I know my opinion that Marines as a light force are unpopular among the vocal people on here. Keeping in mind that a Type-T has 8 Marines, a Kinnunir has 35, an AHL 150, an Astrin has a crew of 3 and 8 passengers, an Empress has a crew of 3 and 8 passengers (At least the version in 101 vehicles does.). What is the Organization that allows for vehicles, given those numbers?
far-trader
SOC-14 10K
The Astrin or what have you is there for getting groceries
The other voices may be more of the big ship universe so they need to fill the ship's troops ranks and such. While in the small ship universes, like the Type T and Kinunir, a squad or so is all the Imperium needs to keep a planet in line
