• Welcome to the new COTI server. We've moved the Citizens to a new server. Please let us know in the COTI Website issue forum if you find any problems.

Marine TOE

Originally posted by Uncle Bob:
Striker has a LBB sized vehicle design book which is CT canon. And better than the FF&S rules.
Oh yes, Striker is a beautiful piece of work. It gives solid rules for designing and using every system mentioned in book 4 and goes far beyond it.
It's also an excellent set of stand-alone miniatures rules for small unit sci-fi combat.

Mega-Traveller's COACC is certainly worth a look, too. It has good, solid rules for integrating aircraft into ground combat and has several design sequences for aircraft. Striker has the same design ability, but COACC offers different scales that make aerial combat easier to simulate.

I would recommend both for anyone interested in a military-style campaign.
 
Funny, it seems I made similar comments earlier in this thread about Artillery and Vehicle use in enclosed environments. (Obviously Naval Gunfire comes under the same category.)

I was more curious as to what Vehicle Combat rules Employee was planning on using since he stated he was going to stick to the basic CT books.

The MT rule set has one major difference when it comes to Vehicle/Ground Combat. Combat Armored troops are virtually immune to small arms fire. (Matter of fact most armor in MT stops small arms fire.) Which takes combat from very deadly (Virtually excessively deadly) to armored combatants can ignore each other. (Just like Two Fighters in HG can't hit each other.)
 
Originally posted by Bhoins:
I was more curious as to what Vehicle Combat rules Employee was planning on using since he stated he was going to stick to the basic CT books.
I've just bought Striker but didn't have the chance to read thoroughly through it yet; I will probably use it with certain (JTAS#16?) modifications.

Ofcourse, there is always the possibility of building a LBB1-8 "rule of a thumb" system for you guys who are interested in Proto-Traveller...
 
Originally posted by Bhoins:
OK Silly rules mechanics question time. If you are only using LBB1-3 vehicles and equivalent, how do you fight the vehicles? There are no rules for engaging vehicles, even if you include LBB4-7. (Never saw 8 so don't know if the rules are there.)
Now that I have Striker, I design stuff in it, but I'll probably use a simplified variant system (my own variation on Paul Elliott's task system) for combat resolution.
 
I'm currently thinking about Solar Triumvirate Marine Battalions, Regiments and Planetary Assault Groups (PAGs; one PAG is 3 Marine Regiments, a Drop Battallion and a small fleet, all under the command of a high-ranking Naval officer [admiral?]).

Since the Company HQ is quite large and provides most services usually (i.e. in the Army) provided at Battallion-level, I think that a Marine Batallion will consist of 3 Line Companies, an Armor Company and an artillery (MRL?) battery, all led by a small HQ unit composed of a CO (Lt. Colonel), an XO (Major), a Senior NCO (Sergeant Major), an Intelligence Officer (Second or First Lieutenant), a Communications Officer (Second or First Lieutenant), a Command G-Carrier Driver (Lance Corporal) and a Command G-Carrier Gunner (Corporal). I don't know yet what artillery to give to the Batallion, but the Armor Company would consist of TL12 Light Grav "Tanks"/Gunships (mounting each a Plasma A gun with a coaxial VRF Gauss and a light [40-60mm?] mortar, all controlled by the gunner from the turret's weapon station and a copula-mounted Gauss SAW of my design operated by the commander; crew of 3 - Driver, Gunner and Commander). I'll upload the complete specs once I get home tomorrow and get working on it in Striker.

A Drop Battallion consists of 3 Drop Companies and a Support Group under an HQ consisting of a CO (Lt. Colonel), an XO (Major), a Senior NCO (Sergeant Major), an Intelligence Officer (Second or First Lieutenant), and a Communications Officer (Second or First Lieutenant). The Support Group is composed of Grav Sleds carrying supplies for the drop troops and capable of transporting them; it also includes dropships capable of transporting these Sleds to the surface. The Support Group is deployed once the 3 Drop Companies secure an LZ for it. I'll post it's detailes once I get home and re-read the Striker description of vehicular unit organization.

I'm also thinking about the armament of the G-Carriers; beside the VRF gun, I'm thinking of equipping them with light (1MW?) beam (or maybe pulse?) lasers for point defence.
 
Hmmm... Reading through the Striker weapon tables, Grenade launchers (especially at high TLs) and recoilless rifles seem like good anti-vehicular weapons... Or do I need heaver TAC missiles?
 
It depends on how far out you want to engage the target. All a TAC millile is, is a recoilless rifle that has grown up tech wise and can be guided (or guide itself) to the target. At close range the cost of the flight engine and advanced targeting of a TAC missile is a waste of money, so just use disposible or reloadable GLs to engage targets up to a few hundred meters away (up to TL 12 or so when the PGMP comes along).
 
Originally posted by Employee 2-4601:
So you suggest that the AV teams should use PGMP-12's (the force is mid-late TL12)?
Not at all. I was trying (not very clearly) to point out the relative advantages and disadvantages of different systems.

I would start by breaking down what vehicle threat you want each level to deal with independently and equip them accordingly.

For example:

Fire Team - light recon (Jeep or equiv.) at "rifle" range (250m)

Squad - Heavy recon (light armored car) out to rifle range

Platoon (dismounts)- APC or Light Tank out to support weapon's Range (400m)

Platoon (with vehicles) - Main Battle Tank out to 4000m

Now, choose the weapon system that meets those requirements at each level.

So, at the fire team level, small arms are fine. At the squad level, you probaly need a heavy weapon to deal with the threat, but a dsiposable RL or a PGMP (if you have one at the squad level) is fine. At the Platoon level you need some kind of dedicated AT ability (probably a tac missile).

just my thoughts
 
IMTU (Solar Triumvirate Marines):
Fireteam: Gauss Rifles and underbarrel RAM grenades.
Squad: The squad's Grav-APC's VRF gauss gun, disposable ATGL/recoiless rifle (?).
Platoon, Company and Battallion: AV teams (one per Platoon) with heavy anti-armor Tac Missiles.
Regiment: All of the abouve plus a Light Grav Tank Battallion.
Planetary Assault Group: All of the abouve plus space Fighter support.
 
Originally posted by Employee 2-4601:
IMTU (Solar Triumvirate Marines):
Fireteam: Gauss Rifles and underbarrel RAM grenades.
Squad: The squad's Grav-APC's VRF gauss gun, disposable ATGL/recoiless rifle (?).
Platoon, Company and Battallion: AV teams (one per Platoon) with heavy anti-armor Tac Missiles.
Regiment: All of the abouve plus a Light Grav Tank Battallion.
Planetary Assault Group: All of the abouve plus space Fighter support.
Looks workable. I'd use disposable ATGLs at the squad level. RRs are a crew served weapon, and the ammo is heavy. That puts two extra people in your squad and a two man crew are probably only going to be able to carry 10 to 12 rounds max (IIRC, Soviet RPG teams usually only had 6 rounds). The PGMP has 40 shots in its power pack and it has an AP of 20, so it can take out light vehicles (at least from the flank) as well.
 
Originally posted by Ranger:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by Employee 2-4601:
IMTU (Solar Triumvirate Marines):
Fireteam: Gauss Rifles and underbarrel RAM grenades.
Squad: The squad's Grav-APC's VRF gauss gun, disposable ATGL/recoiless rifle (?).
Platoon, Company and Battallion: AV teams (one per Platoon) with heavy anti-armor Tac Missiles.
Regiment: All of the abouve plus a Light Grav Tank Battallion.
Planetary Assault Group: All of the abouve plus space Fighter support.
Looks workable. I'd use disposable ATGLs at the squad level. RRs are a crew served weapon, and the ammo is heavy. That puts two extra people in your squad and a two man crew are probably only going to be able to carry 10 to 12 rounds max (IIRC, Soviet RPG teams usually only had 6 rounds). The PGMP has 40 shots in its power pack and it has an AP of 20, so it can take out light vehicles (at least from the flank) as well. </font>[/QUOTE]Actually in all versions of Traveller I have seen the RAM Grenades have as much pen capability as the Disposable ATGLs. Matter of fact they use the same warhead, in most versions. So the Disposable ATGL is obsolete with the introduction of the RAM Grenade, which virtually every soldier carries. (And RAM Grenades outrange Gauss Rifles slightly so there is no real need for the ATGLs, go to TAC Missiles at Platoon level for your longer range AV capability or put a Tac Launcher on your G-Carrier (Mounted on the side or top of the turret, like the Bradley or BMP?).

I still marvel at the lack of a TL10+ equivalent to the SAW/LMG at the Fireteam level and the lack of a GPMG at the Platoon Level.

Try this in your weapons mix, 1 per fireteam. (TL12) Light TriBarrell, Cost Cr5000, Mass 10Kg, Ammunition 240, Rate of fire, 3/12/30, range (T20 96M, CT Extreme, MT Very Distant) Equipped with a folding Bipod for stability, a single underbarrel RAM grenade Launcher, (Or Shoot Through Ram Adapter depending on how you use RAM grenades IYTU.) and a unique ammunition feed system.

The weapon was designed as a stopgap when the PGMP-12 did not work up to expectations, especially in the suppressive fire role. It is essentially 3 Gauss Rifles welded together. Each weapon has space for two magazines, (For a total of 6 40 round magazines.) The Magazines are set up so that working the pump action slide (similar to a shotgun slide and intentionally sounding just like racking a round on a 12 guage) will eject selected spent magazines and seat the next magazine. Additional full magazines can then be inserted where the recently seated magazines used to be. In theory the weapon can therefore provide almost continous fire, with only a break required to work the slide, with any rifleman in the Fireteam capable of contributing magazines. Experienced gunners usually load one magazine with only 20 rounds, one with 30 and one full magazine, so that only one magazine needs to be changed at a time. Adding all three magazines at once, without an AG can be time consuming.

Each magazine only feeds one barrell, there is no cross feed, but attempts to have a universal feed have met with huge mass gains or maintenance headaches for the small amount of utility, gained. So a 3 round burst will feed each barrell with one round from each of the three seated magazines.

The weapon provided just the right amount of suppressive fire capability at the Fireteam level and added no major components to the Logistics chain so has since been adopted as standard. In Higher Tech Militaries, where the PGMP-14 has become the standard fireteam support weapon the Tribarrell still usually has its place. (Making a fireteam 2 GaussRifles, 1 PGMP-14 and 1 Tribarrell.)
 
Originally posted by Uncle Bob:
Striker has a LBB sized vehicle design book which is CT canon. And better than the FF&S rules.

And Naval fire support doesn't have to be Ortillery. A fighter or gunship with ship weapons outclasses even Grav tanks.
Don't know how I missed this little Snippet.

Hence the reason IMTU the Marine Tank is actually designed as a Fighter. (The Marine Multi-Mission Fighting Vehicle.)
 
Originally posted by Bhoins:
I still marvel at the lack of a TL10+ equivalent to the SAW/LMG at the Fireteam level and the lack of a GPMG at the Platoon Level.
Look for one of my articles in the upcoming Stellar Reaches for a Gauss SAW...
 
One of the JTAS issues, around #14 or so, had rules for the Assault Rocket Launcher (ARL), which basically bridges the gap from ACR to Gauss Rifle. It fired 10mm rocket ammo, with HE, KEAP, and a few other ammo types.

The trooper version has 4 round burst capability, the SSW version was a bit heavier, used a larger magazine, and had sustained autofire capability (maybe 10 round burst?).

I can recall using it in various mercenary organizations. I was going to convert it to T20 rules anyway, so maybe I'll do that and post it.

And I can also remember figuring out a Gauss SAW. Mine wasn't as complicated as Bhoins' above, I think it was just a bit heavier version, could take a 200 rd drum as well as standard rifle mags, had a bipod, and a bit extra range (don't recall if it had a higher autofire setting, think not). Was basically a M249, based on gauss rifle stats.

As far as the overall topic, I think I used the JTAS organization for Imperial Marine TO&E, the article on the Regina Huscarls.
 
According to MT the ARL is more capable than the gauss rifle in some respects - greater penetration and un-eratta damage - but loses out in other areas - weight, ammo capacity etc.

Didn't we do all the support weapon variants earlier in this thread?

Or is there another.....
 
Actually in all versions of Traveller I have seen the RAM Grenades have as much pen capability as the Disposable ATGLs. Matter of fact they use the same warhead, in most versions. So the Disposable ATGL is obsolete with the introduction of the RAM Grenade, which virtually every soldier carries. (And RAM Grenades outrange Gauss Rifles slightly so there is no real need for the ATGLs, go to TAC Missiles at Platoon level for your longer range AV capability or put a Tac Launcher on your G-Carrier (Mounted on the side or top of the turret, like the Bradley or BMP?).

This has always been one of my issues with the infantry weapons system of Striker/MT. If you can make a 4cm round with a penetration of 36 at TL11, then you should also be able to make 6cm and 8cm rounds for a ATRL with pens of, say 45 and 60 respectivly. But those systems don't exist in the system. The ATRL stops advancing at TL7 even though the tech continues to improve as indicated by the inprovements of the RAM rounds.

I agree with putting the Tac Missiles on the APCs. That would give the Platoon the ability to hold of MBTs long enough for friendly armor or air support to arrive.
 
I just change the way I interpret the CPR round table.

For the HEAP modifier, given in the HEAP modifier table, if it says:

TL - effect
7-8 down three

I count down three for a TL7 round, and six for a TL8 round.
 
Originally posted by Sigg Oddra:
I just change the way I interpret the CPR round table.

For the HEAP modifier, given in the HEAP modifier table, if it says:

TL - effect
7-8 down three

I count down three for a TL7 round, and six for a TL8 round.
Hmmm. I never thought of using the CPR gun table because the pens are so different for the size of rounds for RLs/RRs. But it will work for ATRLs if you don't go by round size, because the pens for the same size rounds are different to start with. I would start with pen rating and adjust from there. A TL7 disposable has a pen of 36. If you start at the 36 line for HEAP and go down 6 lines like the table says you get a pen of 44. Not bad for a hand held disposable AT weapon at TL12. Using your system (down 3 per TL) would give a pen of 53. Either way works for me. It still doesn't get up to the level I was thinking about, but then I was not really taking into account the log 8 nature of armor values.

I'd be happy with a disposable RL with a pen of 44 or 53 though. That would take on pretty much any TL12 APC/IFV from the flank and most light tanks too I imagine.
 
Back
Top