Mercenary and Military Unit Tactics

[BetterThanLife]

I am starting a thread about military tactics. There have been several discussions about Lift Infantry vs. Light or Grav Belt Infantry. Especially in the OTU. So I figure I should point out a few things and see where we can go from there.

I personally think that Lift Infantry, especially given limited transport space aboard starships becomes obsolete when the grav belt infantry becomes feasible.

 

[BetterThanLife]

I am going to start with a little background. Both with my experience and general current military tactics.

I have a bit of military experience. I have some 11B, light infantry time to go with 9+ years of HUMINT (Human Intelligence) time, during which I had to learn, not just about how we do things but how other forces, including irregular forces, do things. Having seriously studied Soviet Doctrine before The Wall came down, they are the epitome of a Mech force. (Even their Airborne forces are Mech.)

Given that experience I have come to the following conclusions.

1. There is a place for Armor, but there are also places where armor is less than useful.

2. The Infantry's primary mission is, and always has been, to take and hold ground.

3. Infantry primarily fights as a dismounted force. While an IFV has some firepower advantages, its primary purpose is to get the Infantry to the fight. (Or the ground they are going to hold.)

4. Infantry is most vulnerable when it is bunched up.

5. Infantry is bunched up the most within an APC/IFV.

6. An IFV provides additional firepower to, generally, a smaller dismount squad than a light unit has. However this additional firepower rarely equals more than a couple of heavy machineguns and an ATGM (Anti-Tank Guided Missile) launcher.

7. If infantry can keep up with Tanks, without having an APC, then they don't really need the APC. If they can keep up with tanks while carrying
a couple of heavy machineguns and a ATGM, they really don't need an IFV.

8. Infantry that comes under fire, while riding in their IFV dismounts, if it is more than just a random rifle bullet or rolling through an Artillery Barrage. (In all fairness, though dismounted infantry is actually less vulnerable in an Artillery Barrage, provided there is cover, if they are dismounted.)

9. Armor is much more vulnerable to the enemy in close terrain. (Town, City, Forrest, Jungle, Rubble.)

10. In close terrain, like an Urban environment, while there is a use for Tanks, in those environments the Infantry needs to be dismounted, to protect the Tanks.

11. In close terrain, there is little need for an IFV as the infantry is generally dismounted and the IFV is especially vulnerable to enemy fire as it lacks the protection of a Tank.

12. Tanks and other armor vehicles don't work within buildings.

Anything there that is incorrect?

 

[BetterThanLife]

Now to take this into Traveller consider the following. While tech levels vary, and rule sets vary, several things remain constant.

1. Roughly 60%-70% of all main worlds within a sector lack a breathable atmosphere.

2. An additional 10% of main worlds are likely to have other reasons that the population does not live in traditional outdoor buildings and cities. Lack of land, (90%+ Hydrographics for example), lack of sufficient gravity, too much gravity, weather, etc.

3. Many systems have outposts, bases, cities, industrial concerns, etc. that are not on the main world.

4. All Class A Starports, Most Class B Starports and some Class C Starports have some kind of Orbital Facilities, AKA Highport.

5. Due to these circumstances, while there are places where traditional Mech Units may function, they are the exception not the rule.

Am I missing anything here?

 

[BetterThanLife]

Originally posted by atpollard:
GENERAL RESPONSE:
It sounds good, but what about the role of helicopters and attack helicopters in rapid troop movements, raids and urban combat. I was thinking about the US forces in Somalia during 'Black Hawk Down'. As I remember it, one group ended up infantry without air support, the second group ended up as a vehicle convoy, and a third group fled in the surviving helicopters.

Grav vehicles always seemed more like helicopters than APC/AFV 'trucks'.

Using the Soviet Model Helicopters are the equivalent of fast tanks and APC's. In the US model the attack helocopters are used in the additional role of deep strike. In general they lack the ability to actually take and hold ground, though the transported Light Infantry retains that ability.

According to LBB4 at the start of Grav tech, that is exactly the role grav vehicles fulfill, that of the Helicopter. Once the tech improves they also replace the Tank and the APC/IFV.

 

[The Oz]

Something to keep in mind is that politics will play a role in the equipping of troops. Nations that have reasons (real, imagined, or both) to distrust their own people will not give all their troops the mobility of grav belts (lest they use that mobility to launch a coup against the government). Such governments will equip a "Praetorian Legion" or "Guards Air Rifle Division" with the best equipment but the PBI (Poor Bloody Infantry) will have to suffer with equipment that makes them stay together (APCs, crew-served weapons) so their officers can keep an eye on them. Casualties to such troops is not a real concern of such governments.

I agree that grav-belt infantry (I like to call them "Mobile Infantry" in homage to RAH) are the best form of infantry (especially in battledress) since they have all the abilities of dismounted troops (they can dig in, disperse, infiltrate through bad going, etc.) while keeping most of the advantages of mech infantry (speed, load-carrying capacity).

But such troops are expensive. It's not just the equipment. It's the training to use it, to remain proficient with it, and to be able to act without a buddy in the foxhole right next to you. That, I think, is the toughest part. It's well known that troops working in physical contact tend to stay in the fight better (one reason why crew-served weapons are still so widely used) and troops in battledress are going to be isolated inside their armor. I think it will take some pyschological screening (eliminating part of your possible recruits) to find the troopers able to handle the isolation and still carry out the mission.

Perhaps techology can help the troopers feel less isolated. Video/audio links might let a soldier feel his buddies around him, but such links might also make the trooper more detectable to the enemy.

Still, IMTU the Imperial Marines are "Mobile Infantry" with gravbelt-equipped battledress of my own design (from FFS2). They hit hard, move fast, and cost a lot (the basic trooper equipment load comes to over MCr2 apiece.)

 

[SgtHulka]

Originally posted by BetterThanLife:
3. Infantry primarily fights as a dismounted force. While an IFV has some firepower advantages, its primary purpose is to get the Infantry to the fight. (Or the ground they are going to hold.)

I'd disagree somewhat with this one, as it pertains to the traveller universe.

I'm currently playing out a Striker Scenario between a mercenary infantry platoon and a mechanized infantry platoon. The mech grav APC's, at tech level 11, are absolutely chewing up the mercs, who are at tech level 12. The rounds of the hypervelocity autocannon automatically kill anyone they hit, and their autofire bonus assures they will kill an average of two figures per stand they target. Meanwhile, the mechanized leg infantry, armed with Advanced Combat Rifles, would stand little chance against the gauss rifle/fgmp-14 equipped mercs alone.

So, in a mixed-tech environment, the additional firepower provided by armor is very significant.

Now, at Tech level 15, when everyone is wearing battledress with an armor value equivelant to a tank, and everyone's carrying FGMP-15's with a penetration value equivelant to a main tank gun, and everyone's wearing grav belts with a movement equivelant to a fighter jet, then yes, I agree with all your comments.

 

[BetterThanLife]

In most rule sets a Gravbelt Infantry squad costs less than equipping that squad and providing them with the Grav IFV or APC.

If you equip 12 guys with Gravbelts that comes in less than one APC, usually significantly less. (If the body armor is the same whether Lift Infantry or Gravbelt Infantry, then it is only a minor difference between the Lift Infantry Squad and the Grav Belt Squad as you are adding armor to the people that would have been the APC Crew and making them dismounts. (Someone has to carry the heavy weapons.

) In many cases, even with MCr 0.4 Battledress, remember that a typical Grav APC comes in at over MCr5. In CT where the Battledress comes in at that price without a Grav drive and offers little incentive to buy it, adding a Grav belt, and a 12 man squad still comes in at MCr6. (Actually less since you are buying in quantity.) As does the Astrin. And that assumes that the troops in the Astrin are unarmored. Further if you ignore the armor then the grav belts come in at MCr1.2 and a G-Carrier, the cheapest Grav APC in the game, comes in at MCr1. (Plus weapon.)

Having served in Light Infantry, while moving you spread out. So even when walking you don't walk all that close to each other. Your armor's passive sensors work as well if not better to keep you from feeling isolated. You can see the rest of your fireteam, even if you are on point.

In a defensive position you do have two man fighting positions, and there is nothing stopping that from happening here.

As for crew served weapons, the reason they are crew served weapons is normally because one guy can't carry it by themselves.

As for training, remember that military doctrine is to train as you fight. If you train as Light infantry then you fight as light infantry. If you train as mech infantry then you fight as mech infantry and are at a disadvantage in situations where you can't have armor support. In situations where grav belts are of limited use, you are still fighting as light infantry, though moving slower. While the tactics may be slightly different the basic principal will be the same.

And paranoid governments, you don't see Infantry performing Coups, you see Senior officers doing that, generally rolling tanks in the streets.

 

[BetterThanLife]

Originally posted by SgtHulka:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by BetterThanLife:
3. Infantry primarily fights as a dismounted force. While an IFV has some firepower advantages, its primary purpose is to get the Infantry to the fight. (Or the ground they are going to hold.)

I'd disagree somewhat with this one, as it pertains to the traveller universe.

I'm currently playing out a Striker Scenario between a mercenary infantry platoon and a mechanized infantry platoon. The mech grav APC's, at tech level 11, are absolutely chewing up the mercs, who are at tech level 12. The rounds of the hypervelocity autocannon automatically kill anyone they hit, and their autofire bonus assures they will kill an average of two figures per stand they target. Meanwhile, the mechanized leg infantry, armed with Advanced Combat Rifles, would stand little chance against the gauss rifle/fgmp-14 equipped mercs alone.

So, in a mixed-tech environment, the additional firepower provided by armor is very significant.

Now, at Tech level 15, when everyone is wearing battledress with an armor value equivelant to a tank, and everyone's carrying FGMP-15's with a penetration value equivelant to a main tank gun, and everyone's wearing grav belts with a movement equivelant to a fighter jet, then yes, I agree with all your comments. </font>[/QUOTE]Your infantry is bunched up. Besides you said the mech force was TL-11 and the Non Mech force was TL-12. So the Gauss Rifles and PGMP-12's should be with the dismount force. The ACR's should be in the Mech force. If you are down a Tech Level then you are in trouble anyway. PGMP-12s and/or RAM Grenades should be sufficient to take out a TL-11 APC. (And you should be carrying at least one ATGM equivalent per platoon.)

Further the Grav Belt infantry isn't possible below TL12 anyway, becoming, IMHO, more standard at TL13. Besides I never said don't give your Troops Armor support. They should still have tank equivalents. I just said the Infantry doesn't need the IFV once Grav belts become practical. (And that autocanon isn't going to do squat to an MBT.

)

 

[SgtHulka]

Originally posted by BetterThanLife:
Your infantry is bunched up. Besides you said the mech force was TL-11 and the Non Mech force was TL-12. So the Gauss Rifles and PGMP-12's should be with the dismount force. The ACR's should be in the Mech force. If you are down a Tech Level then you are in trouble anyway. PGMP-12s and/or RAM Grenades should be sufficient to take out a TL-11 APC. (And you should be carrying at least one ATGM equivalent per platoon.)

Infantry is most definitely not bunched up. They are dispersed as much as possible, even to a potentially unrealistic extent. If they were bunched up the autocannon would be targeting 15 per round. The maximum dispersal you can achieve in Striker is 4-man stands, unless everyone in the unit is high initiative. The mechanized infantry have four APC's which means four autocannon. Each autocannon can target a seperate 4-man fire team. The autofire rules for Striker indicate that for every two you throw higher than your required throw you hit an additional target. The autocannon require a 4+ to hit out to something like 2.5 kilometers. On average they've been hitting two targets per stand they've targeted. Their penetration is 20 versus the combat armor defense factor of 10, which results in an automatic KIA for every hit.

Note that even if this were in an urban environment, thermal imaging would allow the targeting of troops inside buildings or behind rubble. And the armor piercing nature of the autocannon would easily penetrate. Now, in this particular scenario I'm not sure the APC's have thermal imaging, but I'm just mentioning this as a sort of aside.

Back to the scenario at hand...every time a stand takes this many casualties, it is likely pinned down or forced back, which means it can't return fire. Additionally, the tech level 12 troops are armed wih gauss rifles and fire-through rifle grenades. Only the rifle grenades have a chance of hurting the APC...though I'll need to check on whether it's possible they can target the APC's deck guns which, since they're not in a turret, they only have an armor factor of 10,and could, with a lucky shot, be damaged by a gauss rifle penetration of 6. In any case, despite being equipped with both map boxes and battle computers, it takes 2 turns to pass the orders to load up the rifle grenades and engage the APC's instead of the leg infantry, and then another turn to do the actual re-loading. That's three turns of fire from four APC autocannon.

Each squad (squad, not stand) has one FGMP-14. In the last turn of battle (I'm on turn four or five right now) the Vargr FGMP-14 gunner smoked one of the APC's. It was the first shot the mercs got off. The other two stands with FGMP-14's are currently suppressed as a result of failing morale.

I think you've misunderstood what I was describing for the forces...

Mercenary Unit: Tech Level 12 (mostly) with three total Tech Level 14 FGMP's. Straight Infantry, no armor. 27-man dismounted infantry platoon mostly armed with gauss rifles and fire-through rifle grenades. Combat Armor, except for the fusion gunners who are in battledress.

Sword Worlds Gram Mechanized Infantry Platoon: Tech Level 11. Each squad consists of a grav APC (3 crew members) and a four-man team of leg infantry. Three squads in the platoon. Platoon leader is a Command APC. That's four APC's and 12 dismounted infantry. 24 total manpower when factoring in the crew members.

It's the APC unit that is "down" on tech level by one. Perhaps the mercenaries should be equipped with tac missiles. However, that's a complicated sequence of events...once again, pass the order to set up the tac missile, spend the time setting them up, and then firing them. The APC's during this whole time are under a mere "fire" command and can just keep unloading with those deadly autocannon. By the time the tac missiles are away the APC's have killed or routed the infantry.

The mercenary troop commander has called in the Broadsword's Cutter for close ground support. But that is a loooong way off from arriving.

So the Fusion Gunners are really the unit's only hope. I have to check the rules to see if the Vargr Fusion Gunner can fire again in the enemy fire phase...I think he can since he's wearing battledress. If I'm right he has an excellent chance of smoking a second APC, reducing the Gram Mechanized Infantry unit to 2 autocannons before they can fire again. At that point the mercenaries have a good chance of rallying and turning the battle around. But they've already lost 9 of 27 men KIA.

This is a completely canon combat, by the way, taken directly from Adventure 7: Broadsword. It is the "Ambush" mission from that adventure.

I'm learning as I go, and it's entirely possible that I've mis-applied or mis-understood rules here and there. However, it's pretty clear to me that whatever the outcome the Gram Mechanized Infantry have fought the mercenaries to an absolute standstill despite being lower-tech. What is equally clear is that without their APC's they would have been completely out-matched.

 

[BetterThanLife]

I misunderstood the point of who was armed at what TL. I do understand that in the Striker rules with your 4 man base you are limited in dispersal. (That is a rule issue.) In the real world, against that kind of fire an infantry unit would spread out so that one burst can't catch more than one person. This does show that Light Infantry without Armor support is at a disadvantage. Also if you are going to field light infantry you need to have the correct weapons mix to deal with armor.

For example I tend to run with one energy weapon per fireteam. Plus a weapons squad with multiple energy weapons, per platoon. Each fireteam should also have a suppressive fire weapon, which high Tech Traveller is lacking. (There is no Gauss SAW, though there should be.) Even without a TAC launcher you should have enough RAM Grenades to at least make the APC's take cover. (Though in most rule sets a RAM grenade can damage an APC, this isn't true of all rule sets.)

One other point, unless the Broadsword is on the other side of the planet, it should be able to provide fire support from where it is. (There are 4 missile batteries on it, if you don't have LOS for the Lasers.) Even HE anti-ship missiles should be more than enough for knocking out APC's. (Though they won't do as well against dismounted infantry.)

 

[Golan2072]

Originally posted by BetterThanLife:
1. Roughly 60%-70% of all main worlds within a sector lack a breathable atmosphere.

This actually seems to me like a good reason to have an APC around - personal life support only lasts for a few hours, and being in a sealed suit for a prolonged time is uncomfortable, so having a pressurised vehicle you could ride on would probably be preferrable. Sure, you could do that with small craft, but grav vehicles are cheaper.

In other words, IMHO troops would fight dismounted but have a "battlefield taxi" (G-Carrier) nearby to carry them over long distances and to return to between missions.

And how long do the airtanks of a battledress last?

Originally posted by The Oz:
But such troops are expensive. It's not just the equipment. It's the training to use it, to remain proficient with it, and to be able to act without a buddy in the foxhole right next to you. That, I think, is the toughest part. It's well known that troops working in physical contact tend to stay in the fight better (one reason why crew-served weapons are still so widely used) and troops in battledress are going to be isolated inside their armor. I think it will take some pyschological screening (eliminating part of your possible recruits) to find the troopers able to handle the isolation and still carry out the mission.

In many ways, they would be similar to combat pilots - each alone within his high-tech, ultra-expensive machine (but seeing his team around him in his passive sensors), each being very highly trained, and each with alot of prestige.

Originally posted by BetterThanLife:
As for training, remember that military doctrine is to train as you fight. If you train as Light infantry then you fight as light infantry. If you train as mech infantry then you fight as mech infantry and are at a disadvantage in situations where you can't have armor support.

An important ting to remember here is that this applies to commanding officers as well - let a light-infantry-trained CO command a combined mechanized unit (or combined tanks/light-infantry unit) and he'll have problems with effectively utilizing the tanks. Cross-training is an important thing for higher-ranking officers to go through - a commander should be well-acquainted with the forces he commands. This was one of the military problems (and I won't go here for the political side of things as they are unrelated to our discussion here) arising in the Israel-Lebanon war last summer - many higher-up ranking officers were given command of units they didn't exactly know how to utilize (especially tanks when the CO was from a light infantry origin, ending with tanks turning into easy prey for ATGLs; and the Joint Chief of Staff was a combat pilot without much hands-on knowledge of ground warfare, messing the ground operation ever further).

Originally posted by BetterThanLife:
And paranoid governments, you don't see Infantry performing Coups, you see Senior officers doing that, generally rolling tanks in the streets.

Remember that what many governments fear is not only a coup (from above) but also a revolt (from below). And, in the case of a popular uprising, if the rank-and-file troops (especially infantry and armor crews) turn against you, you're usually screwed.

 

[Ranger]

SgtHulka,

Your situation is exposing one of the weak points in the Striker equipment list that we discussed on the board a couple of years ago. There is a total lack of disposable ATRLs past TL 7 or so. A TL 12 infantry unit should have some kick butt light AT at their disposal. In most western light infantry units it is pretty standard to have at least every other trooper cary a LAW/AT 4. A TL 12 disposable anti-tank grenade should be light, cheap, and devistating to a TL 11 APC. Also, you shouldn't have to order troops to use their most effective weapons system against their most threatenting target. Well trained troops will do that automatically.

 

[Golan2072]

Originally posted by BetterThanLife:
(There is no Gauss SAW, though there should be.)

I've made one for both CT and Striker (and Andrew Boulton has posted T4 stats for a similar weapons in the same thread); it is available here.

 

[SgtHulka]

Originally posted by Ranger:
SgtHulka,

Your situation is exposing one of the weak points in the Striker equipment list that we discussed on the board a couple of years ago. There is a total lack of disposable ATRLs past TL 7 or so. A TL 12 infantry unit should have some kick butt light AT at their disposal.

I think the Striker assumption is the fire-through grenades fill that role. I'd have to check the stats, but I believe they're pretty good at armor penetration at tech level 11+. The trouble is the re-load action while you're under fire, but the same would be true of switching to ATRLs, and the grenades have the advantage of not having to reload after you fire them -- you can just return to your regularly scheduled programming.

Originally posted by Ranger:
Also, you shouldn't have to order troops to use their most effective weapons system against their most threatenting target. Well trained troops will do that automatically.

That may well be the case. It's a rules interpretation problem, since the "giving order" aspect of the rules are really poorly defined. I was purposefully taking a sort of hardline approach to the rule. Maybe too much so.

 

[travlar]

Other than possible life-support problems, as long as they have some armor support, grav-belt infantry should do. Also, I think that LBB1 says that battledress extra equipment as part of it but doesn't say what that equipment is, so maybe a grav-belt could be automatic.

 

[BetterThanLife]

Originally posted by Employee 2-4601:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by BetterThanLife:
1. Roughly 60%-70% of all main worlds within a sector lack a breathable atmosphere.

This actually seems to me like a good reason to have an APC around - personal life support only lasts for a few hours, and being in a sealed suit for a prolonged time is uncomfortable, so having a pressurised vehicle you could ride on would probably be preferrable. Sure, you could do that with small craft, but grav vehicles are cheaper.</font>[/QUOTE]Grav vehicles may be cheaper than small craft, but you generally have to deliver the vehicles to the surface as well. And if you are going to go with multi-role craft instead of limited use craft then you also save space aboard your interstellar transport. (Where space is at a premium.) As an example, from "The Traveller Campaign," to transport the 4518 Lift Regiment it takes 7457 tons to move the equipment, and 5656 tons to move the troops. Drop the APCs and you are saving over 2000 tons of cargo space. G-Carriers, take the same amount of time to get to and from orbit as an air/raft, one hour per size number of the world.

In other words, IMHO troops would fight dismounted but have a "battlefield taxi" (G-Carrier) nearby to carry them over long distances and to return to between missions.

And how long do the airtanks of a battledress last?

Depends on the ruleset, as does life support in a Grav vehicle.

</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by The Oz:
But such troops are expensive. It's not just the equipment. It's the training to use it, to remain proficient with it, and to be able to act without a buddy in the foxhole right next to you. That, I think, is the toughest part. It's well known that troops working in physical contact tend to stay in the fight better (one reason why crew-served weapons are still so widely used) and troops in battledress are going to be isolated inside their armor. I think it will take some pyschological screening (eliminating part of your possible recruits) to find the troopers able to handle the isolation and still carry out the mission.

In many ways, they would be similar to combat pilots - each alone within his high-tech, ultra-expensive machine (but seeing his team around him in his passive sensors), each being very highly trained, and each with alot of prestige.

Originally posted by BetterThanLife:
As for training, remember that military doctrine is to train as you fight. If you train as Light infantry then you fight as light infantry. If you train as mech infantry then you fight as mech infantry and are at a disadvantage in situations where you can't have armor support.

An important ting to remember here is that this applies to commanding officers as well - let a light-infantry-trained CO command a combined mechanized unit (or combined tanks/light-infantry unit) and he'll have problems with effectively utilizing the tanks. Cross-training is an important thing for higher-ranking officers to go through - a commander should be well-acquainted with the forces he commands. This was one of the military problems (and I won't go here for the political side of things as they are unrelated to our discussion here) arising in the Israel-Lebanon war last summer - many higher-up ranking officers were given command of units they didn't exactly know how to utilize (especially tanks when the CO was from a light infantry origin, ending with tanks turning into easy prey for ATGLs; and the Joint Chief of Staff was a combat pilot without much hands-on knowledge of ground warfare, messing the ground operation ever further).</font>[/QUOTE]The big thing to remember here is that Mech Troops are not going to do well indoors. They aren't equipped for it and aren't as well trained for it. They instinctively expect to lean on the IFVs for fire support.

 

[Ranger]

I think the Striker assumption is the fire-through grenades fill that role. I'd have to check the stats, but I believe they're pretty good at armor penetration at tech level 11+. The trouble is the re-load action while you're under fire, but the same would be true of switching to ATRLs, and the grenades have the advantage of not having to reload after you fire them -- you can just return to your regularly scheduled programming.

I think you're right. The disposable and reusable ATGL/RL goes away once the RAM Grenade appears as I recall. But I don't think that the Striker solution is what most armies would chose. The only way I can see that really happening though is if you have some portion of the force carrying the grenades loaded as their "Battle Carry."

Maybe that is the solution. Just have one team member in every fire team have a grenade loaded as the organic anti-armor trooper at the start of every mission. That eliminates the reloading problem at least. That way any fire team that isn't suppressed should get at least one shot off at an armored threat.

 

[BetterThanLife]

Originally posted by Kaale Dasar:
Other than possible life-support problems, as long as they have some armor support, grav-belt infantry should do. Also, I think that LBB1 says that battledress extra equipment as part of it but doesn't say what that equipment is, so maybe a grav-belt could be automatic.

We have gone through that discussion on here previously. The basic vanilla Battledress does not include a Grav Drive. Though there are variations that do, but these cost more.

 

[BetterThanLife]

Originally posted by Employee 2-4601:
</font><blockquote>quote:</font><hr />Originally posted by BetterThanLife:
(There is no Gauss SAW, though there should be.)

I've made one for both CT and Striker (and Andrew Boulton has posted T4 stats for a similar weapons in the same thread); it is available here. </font>[/QUOTE]I have done stats for a TL12+ T20 Squad Automatic Weapon But canon sources lack this basic infantry weapon.

 

[BetterThanLife]

I figured the RAM grenade did well in the light Anti-Armor role as well eliminating the need for a LAW type weapon. It does depend on ruleset. For example it takes a RAM grenade in MT to penetrate Combat Armor and it won't penetrate most armored vehicles.