Military tactics for battle dress

[Spinward Flow]

The ban is specifically for nuclear weapons, not for WMD.

Sounds like the prohibition is against "dirty weapons" that poison/pollute the biosphere for extended durations and require expensive cleanup efforts to environments. So "hazardous waste" nuclear effects (which just so happen to be rather energetic, which is what you want in weapons) are tightly controlled and banned.

So called "clean weapons" that rely on controlled nuclear reactions (such as fusion) to generate their effects, but with incredibly short half-lives (such as mesons, particle accelerators and other "energy weapon" style outputs) are permitted, if not outright encouraged, due to the limitations of what amounts to "second hand radiological effects" are going to be so limited that they do not contaminate battlefields after the fighting is finished (so no extensive cleanup required).

So as @McPerth says, the ban is on "indiscriminate 'dirty' nuclear weapons" that produce all kinds of secondary side effects ... as opposed to being a ban on weapons that "vaporize stuff more cleanly" in a mass destruction sort of way. Basically, low(er) tech disintegrators are fine (plasma, fusion, particle, meson, etc.) since they produce limited "collateral damage" and do not "despoil" the battlefield environment in a long(er) term way.

The difference between a "point and click" interface versus throwing a grenade and expecting someone else to come along and clean up after you. A difference between precision strikes and carpet bombing (so to speak) ... or if you prefer, the difference between a rapier and a garbage truck (both can kill you, but the rapier isn't quite as messy about it, or at least the mess is easier to clean up afterwards).

 

[McPerth]

Sounds like the prohibition is against "dirty weapons" that poison/pollute the biosphere for extended durations and require expensive cleanup efforts to environments

May kindly I suggest you to read the thread I posted before? IIRC you were not a user when it was discussed (it was 2011), so I doubt you have read it, and there you'll find many answers to this...

In short, the IRW specifically forbid "use or possession of nuclear weapons, if discovered, and regardless of size and type."
The specific addition of "regardless of size and type." rules out any of them, cloean or dirty (even laser triggered fusion ones, that are relativelly clean).

OTOH, bilogical weapons that can be equally destructive for life (and even spread to other planets) are not so specifically forbidden...

 

[Spinward Flow]

May kindly I suggest you to read the thread I posted before? IIRC you were not a user when it was discussed (it was 2011), so I doubt you have read it

Wait.
Let me get this straight.

You're assigning HOMEWORK READING ... from an assignment discussion that happened over a DECADE AGO (long before I and many others joined this university these forums) ... and you aren't going to provide even a link to the thread you're wanting to reference?



Reminds me of a joke I tell people about asking for (helpful) directions to get to places.

"Go straight. Never mind the road, just go straight. The world is a globe, you'll get there eventually." { look smug }

 

[McPerth]

and you aren't going to provide even a link to the thread you're wanting to reference?

Oh, sorry, the link is in my former post...

As you use to put them on your posts too, I assumed you'd identify it...

See also that what is a nuclear weapon is neither specified... MgT defines fusion weapons as "firing what amounts to a directed nuclear explosion" (see this old thread about this), and ITTR starmerc ships are forbidden of MGs and PAWs with a rating over 7

 

[infojunky]

Let me get this straight.

You're assigning HOMEWORK READING ... from an assignment discussion that happened over a DECADE AGO (long before I and many others joined this university these forums) ... and you aren't going to provide even a link to the thread you're wanting to reference?

Well, YES!

Heck, you should probably familiar with the Hadith of the TML, which this all built on.... The problem is?...



Heh, some of of us are in out 40th year with this.... Geese now I feel old.

 

[kilemall]

Sounds like the prohibition is against "dirty weapons" that poison/pollute the biosphere for extended durations and require expensive cleanup efforts to environments. So "hazardous waste" nuclear effects (which just so happen to be rather energetic, which is what you want in weapons) are tightly controlled and banned.

So called "clean weapons" that rely on controlled nuclear reactions (such as fusion) to generate their effects, but with incredibly short half-lives (such as mesons, particle accelerators and other "energy weapon" style outputs) are permitted, if not outright encouraged, due to the limitations of what amounts to "second hand radiological effects" are going to be so limited that they do not contaminate battlefields after the fighting is finished (so no extensive cleanup required).

So as @McPerth says, the ban is on "indiscriminate 'dirty' nuclear weapons" that produce all kinds of secondary side effects ... as opposed to being a ban on weapons that "vaporize stuff more cleanly" in a mass destruction sort of way. Basically, low(er) tech disintegrators are fine (plasma, fusion, particle, meson, etc.) since they produce limited "collateral damage" and do not "despoil" the battlefield environment in a long(er) term way.

The difference between a "point and click" interface versus throwing a grenade and expecting someone else to come along and clean up after you. A difference between precision strikes and carpet bombing (so to speak) ... or if you prefer, the difference between a rapier and a garbage truck (both can kill you, but the rapier isn't quite as messy about it, or at least the mess is easier to clean up afterwards).

Here is the short version, which is 95% an accurate copy from the original CT sources.

Imperial Rules of War - Traveller

wiki.travellerrpg.com

 

[TamsinP]

Looking at the original references, the first was in Adventure 7: Broadsword and only mentions the prohibition on nuclear weapons.

The slightly later Supplement 11: Library Data (N-Z) adds the following:
"For similar reasons, certain other weapons (chemical and bacteriological agents, and meson accelerators, for example) are strictly controlled, although they are not subject to the same sweeping restrictions placed on nuclear weapons."

 

[Condottiere]

Mass destruction indicates potential effect, and I'd be more worried about viruses, computer and biological.

 

[Kakistocrat]

Even a walking person (at an approximate speed of 5–6 m/s) would be out of the radius in those 30″, let alone a grav belt equipped soldier or a grav vehicle…

A speed of 5–6 m ⁄ s = 18.0–21.6 km ⁄ h ≈ 11.2–13.4 mi ⁄ h; I’d describe a person who was moving at that speed as running rather than walking.

 

[kilemall]

Looking at the original references, the first was in Adventure 7: Broadsword and only mentions the prohibition on nuclear weapons.

The slightly later Supplement 11: Library Data (N-Z) adds the following:
"For similar reasons, certain other weapons (chemical and bacteriological agents, and meson accelerators, for example) are strictly controlled, although they are not subject to the same sweeping restrictions placed on nuclear weapons."

The wiki I think doesn’t attribute the correct full text which reads almost verbatim. What I don’t remember is if it’s in LBB4 or CT Striker.

 

[Commander Truestar]

The wiki I think doesn’t attribute the correct full text which reads almost verbatim. What I don’t remember is if it’s in LBB4 or CT Striker.

I am trying to remember "where", but I seem to recall the LBB's had a "Clean War Vs Dirty War" paragraph-sized discussion.
In that, it made it clear bad things would be coming from the Imperium if you lit nukes inappropriately.

I'd have to sit on it for a few days before I started digging for the specific source item

 

[Ekofisk]

What I don’t remember is if it’s in LBB4 or CT Striker.

The version in Striker (which predates Adventure 7) is somewhat lengthier but doesn't vary in the salient points. LBB4 has a generalized statement without specific prohibitions.

 

[Ekofisk]

A speed of 5–6 m ⁄ s = 18.0–21.6 km ⁄ h ≈ 11.2–13.4 mi ⁄ h; I’d describe a person who was moving at that speed as running rather than walking.

Advance warning: forgive me if this comes across as pedantic but some people have never played Striker and may not understand the turn sequencing. A 30-second turn is divided into a number of phases. These are designed to regulate actions and prevent some of the complications that can occur in simultaneous move wargames. The first player moves any/all units. The second player then conducts fire, including adjusting indirect fire. "Walking out" of an impact area can only happen if the observer can not see the new impact area. There is no range limit to corrections.

 

[Kakistocrat]

Advance warning: forgive me if this comes across as pedantic but some people have never played Striker and may not understand the turn sequencing.

There’s no need to seek forgiveness, particularly since I’ve never played Striker.

A 30-second turn is divided into a number of phases. These are designed to regulate actions and prevent some of the complications that can occur in simultaneous move wargames. The first player moves any/all units. The second player then conducts fire, including adjusting indirect fire. “Walking out” of an impact area can only happen if the observer can not see the new impact area. There is no range limit to corrections.

In Striker, is any ground movement without vehicles described as “walking”? My comment above was only intended to address the description of such non-vehicular ground movement at a speed of 5–6 m ⁄ s as “walking”. (I view walking as having a speed of around 1.35 m ⁄ s, and jogging as having a speed of around 2.7 m ⁄ s; if walking has its own speed definition in Striker, I didn’t know about it.)

 

[Ekofisk]

There are three foot movement rates in Striker: 2.5cm, 5cm, and 10cm per turn where 1mm = 1meter (10cm =100M)
2.5 cm is evading, 5cm is walking and 10cm is running.

 

[Ekofisk]

I am trying to remember "where", but I seem to recall the LBB's had a "Clean War Vs Dirty War" paragraph-sized discussion.

There's a Good War/Bad War Library entry in Adventure 7. Could that be what you're remembering? "Good" being small-scale actions within the Imperium and "Bad" being large-scale actions against outside forces.

 

[kilemall]

The version in Striker (which predates Adventure 7) is somewhat lengthier but doesn't vary in the salient points. LBB4 has a generalized statement without specific prohibitions.

We should probably get the IRW entry flagged for those two references.

 

[McPerth]

A speed of 5–6 m ⁄ s = 18.0–21.6 km ⁄ h ≈ 11.2–13.4 mi ⁄ h; I’d describe a person who was moving at that speed as running rather than walking.

And youd be right...

The walking speed is 5-6 km/h, not m/s as I stated. My fault.

A 30-second turn is divided into a number of phases. These are designed to regulate actions and prevent some of the complications that can occur in simultaneous move wargames. The first player moves any/all units. The second player then conducts fire, including adjusting indirect fire.

And sure it's as good a representation as it can be, at least if you intend to keep it playable, but any sequential game has realism issues on it, as in real life things happen simultaneously, not sequentially...

 

[Kakistocrat]

There are three foot movement rates in Striker: 2.5 cm, 5 cm, and 10 cm per turn, where 1 mm = 1 meter (10 cm = 100 m)
2.5 cm is evading, 5 cm is walking and 10 cm is running.

And you’d be right…

The walking speed is 5–6 km/h, not m/s as I stated. My fault.

Thank you both for clarifying the matter! The 5 cm walking scale equates to 50 m ⁄ 30 s = 6 km ⁄ h ≈ 3.73 mi ⁄ h, which would be a brisk walking pace.

I’ll resume my lurking in this thread.