Not properly... you're working for a guy in AI. He might not have gotten permission, and quite likely, didn't ask for permission, to outsource.
The Imperial Army
- Thread starter Blue Ghost
- Start date
Not properly... you're working for a guy in AI. He might not have gotten permission, and quite likely, didn't ask for permission, to outsource.
As an independent contractor:
pay - yes, equipment - as needed, instant deniability :devil:, mission intel -Only what they give you or what you can scrounge.
I would call the scenario working with not for, in that do good more jobs, screw-up you better leave this dudes sphere of control ASAP
Reading the writeup on Col Sanchex... He's director of intelligence on a local world under imperial military rule. Any local forces would thus be imperial, even if purely local, or rebel. (The context puts it clear that there is at least a higher command version of army.)
I searched the CT CD for "imperial army" and got only 6 hits...
Signal GK, AM: Zhodani, 5FW, Tarsus, Beltstrike, S6: 76 Patrons
AM:Z can be ignored - it's a CGen reference only.
5FW news entries - "Imperial Army's 1197th Separate Light Infantry"
The Tarsus references are to "Imperial Army surplus" and notes armor can result in being confused for IA personell
The Beltstrike reference is "Served as an Imperial Army Aide on the staff of Admiral..."
S6: 76P is "in the uniform of the Imperial Army."
There are several models to consider:
1) Full-up Imperial Army - one unified structure, no locals
2) Higher Command Only Army - high command unified; operational units not
3) Local Contributions Only Army - Higher commands created ad-hoc.
4) Local Contributions Only Army - higher commands by attachment to Marines
5) Mixed Army - limited standing units, but local units also part of IA
6) No Imperial Army - Just Marines (The Codominion model)
We can rule out case 6 right off with Adv13: Signal GK.
We can partially rule out case 1 by SMC - Huscarles are Army Units, even tho' they're locally raised and funded.
Adv13 rules out 3.
5FW has an apparently standing unit. This rues out 3 and 4.
That leaves 5... but doesn't answer the question of how the mix is proportioned.
Mind you, my read has always been one of modes 2 & 4 - The IA doesn't exist as a single force, just as a system of HQ's staffed by a mixture of local army talent and Marines. The citations don't quite support that, but for prototraveller, it's easily within reach (since anything post 84 gets tossed, and much of the post-81 material gets tossed, too... Still - that leaves S6 and 5FW to contend with - until recently, I never looked at 76P as a source of canon material.)
I searched the CT CD for "imperial army" and got only 6 hits...
Signal GK, AM: Zhodani, 5FW, Tarsus, Beltstrike, S6: 76 Patrons
AM:Z can be ignored - it's a CGen reference only.
5FW news entries - "Imperial Army's 1197th Separate Light Infantry"
The Tarsus references are to "Imperial Army surplus" and notes armor can result in being confused for IA personell
The Beltstrike reference is "Served as an Imperial Army Aide on the staff of Admiral..."
S6: 76P is "in the uniform of the Imperial Army."
There are several models to consider:
1) Full-up Imperial Army - one unified structure, no locals
2) Higher Command Only Army - high command unified; operational units not
3) Local Contributions Only Army - Higher commands created ad-hoc.
4) Local Contributions Only Army - higher commands by attachment to Marines
5) Mixed Army - limited standing units, but local units also part of IA
6) No Imperial Army - Just Marines (The Codominion model)
We can rule out case 6 right off with Adv13: Signal GK.
We can partially rule out case 1 by SMC - Huscarles are Army Units, even tho' they're locally raised and funded.
Adv13 rules out 3.
5FW has an apparently standing unit. This rues out 3 and 4.
That leaves 5... but doesn't answer the question of how the mix is proportioned.
Mind you, my read has always been one of modes 2 & 4 - The IA doesn't exist as a single force, just as a system of HQ's staffed by a mixture of local army talent and Marines. The citations don't quite support that, but for prototraveller, it's easily within reach (since anything post 84 gets tossed, and much of the post-81 material gets tossed, too... Still - that leaves S6 and 5FW to contend with - until recently, I never looked at 76P as a source of canon material.)
Scandia A658969: captive government. Side note: "Military Rule."
By coincidence, we discussed that "captive government" issue elsewhere. Among the possibilities is the option that the government is captive to the Imperial government itself. Some of the cited cases included formerly Imperial worlds now under Zhodani rule, Cipango being one example. We discussed the likelihood that the Zhodani government retained control of the local planetary government while gradually grooming the world to fully take its place in Zhodani society.
Now we have Scandia, a captive government under Imperial military rule in a region contested by the Solomani. Seems to bear out that view of "captive". So far, no disagreement, but ... we're conjecturing that the Colonel of Imperial Artillery, a five-term veteran, an intelligence operative coordinating the defection of a Solomani scientist three parsecs away in Solomani space, head of an Imperial Army Intelligence section covering two subsectors, a man with "a position in the Imperial military government on Scandia," may simply be part of a local military force under Imperial command?
With due respect, that is a wee bit of a stretch. In a region rife with Solomani espionage, on a world that is not trusted to control its own government, a local-grown "Imperial" army unit is trusted enough to not only have positions in the captive government but to have its officers heading intelligence operations over two sectors?
Who says Huscarles are Army units? SMC cites them as originating from a Marine unit left by the Fleet Admiral to "reinforce Caranda's [the Baron of Regina's] troops" while she went to whup butt in the interior during the Civil War period. The Baron, later made Duke for his support of the Admiral-cum-Regent, "converted the Imperial Marines under his control to his own personal guard."
In the same article, the Huscarles are described as, "one of the few non-Imperial units ready for action when the [Fourth Frontier] war broke out." The unit was "imperialized", which I presume means placed under Imperial command, for the duration of that war. No indication if it was "Imperialized" under Army or Marine command, but as it's Marines who are being allowed to transfer to the Huscarles for temporary duty, and based on the unit's role and composition (single battalions able to be transported by any naval squadron), I suspect the unit would fall under Marine command.
That same "temporary duty" bit specifies that the Marine in question is being
detached to serve "the 4518th (or other local units)", not "the 4518th (or local units)". No need for such special arrangements or special rules about the transferribility of promotions (and no benefit to payroll) if the Marine was transferring to another unit under Marine command. Ergo, between conflicts the unit reverts to it's previous status as the Duke's personal force.
So, the 4518th is - in peacetime - a local unit under the personal control of the Duke of Regina. It is not an Imperial Army unit, and therefore does not violate the terms of 1 above.
That leaves 1, 2 and 5, unless I missed something.
We have:
1. FFW with mobile Imperial Army units, separate mobile Colonial units, and separate Planetary Army units confined to the planet, along with a FFW mention of an "Imperial Army's 1197th Separate Light Infantry".
2. Multiple isolated mentions of "Imperial Army" through canon.
3. Signal GK, where a planet with a Captive Government is under "Military Rule," and one of the officials of government is a colonel in the Imperial Army.
The preponderance of evidence is clear that there is an entity known as the "Imperial Army." Now, as to structure:
Not much point in locally grown Imperial Army units if you're already drafting Colonials from the locals. You're double-taxing them if you do that. if the locals are funding the cost of equipment, what military logic in funding one mobile group at the higher level, a second mobile group at an inferior level, and then a third local-only group at an inferior level? Conversely, if the Imperium is funding equipment, then what benefit in not following through and asserting full integrated command so the structure can work out the kinks and learn to operate as a whole before war hits.
A "High Command Only" army, with the operational units only integrated at the outbreak of war, leads to problems in command and control since the operational units don't have the opportunity to learn to adapt to the new (to them) command structure - and the command structure doesn't learn the strengths and weaknesses of its operational units - until war has actually broken out.
It may be possible to define the Imperial Army as something other than a "full-up Imperial army" as displayed in FFW, ready and able to go to war at the drop of a hat, to step in and take over a local planetary government like Scandia with professionals who owe their loyalty only to the Emperor, supported by locally-drawn mobile forces on the pattern shown by FFW Colonial units, and without the dysfunctional effects of the ad-hoc alternative structures proposed. However, it might be worthwhile instead to invoke Occam's Razor and declare that the simplest explanation, that the references to an Imperial Army refer to an actual army rather than fragments of one, is best.
Applying occam's razor heavily to military structures is the surest way to bad intelligence. It's why the US estimates of soviet troop strength in WW II were off by a factor of 8.... Occams razor said that, given a report of X regiments, but Y guns manufactured, with Y being X/8, and the disbelief factor of those receiving the reports, the observer was wrong about X. So X' was X/2, and reported to HQ... HQ applied the same logic, given that Y was still well under X', and used X", where X"=X'/2... And the US intercepted those numbers, and again halved them...
Military unit organizations are seldom simple, as they mesh politics, economics, and psychotics. (The last usually in higher command and/or government.)
Huscarles are, in 5FW, listed as imperial troops, and it's noted in SMC that marines can be seconded to army units. The army unit shown is the 4518th LIR, a huscarles unit extant in both 5FW and SMC. 5 classes of troops are given: Marines, Huscarles, Mercenaries, Regulars, Colonials; a 6th isn't named, but is the on-world units (shown on map as strengths only).
Note SMC page 41: "lmperial policy allows lmperial marines to transfer to the 4518th (or other local units) for a limited period of time." This establishes clearly that (1) the 4518th is NOT a marine unit, (2) that it is a local unit and (3) other such local units exist as well.
5FW makes the two huscarles units and the several colonial units into regular forces. The Regina Corps, as well as several others, have TL's linked to their homeworlds. There are ALSO homeworld only units (in Regina's case, 15 Corps worth). Porozlo has two field-armies... of 5 FA of colonials (vs 8 of regulars)... it's contributed abut 1/9th of the total imperial movable ground forces (counting by combat factors) 1020 CF of 4057 CF colonials, plus 4820 CF regulars, 40 CF marines, 6 CF huscarles, and 38 CF of mercs. Total 8961 CF... and Porozlo is 1020 of them... 1/8.7
5FW also show colonial units as a mix of named and numbered units... but makes no distinction between marines and huscarles... save by unit symbol. It also lists very few marines - they're 1% of total strength.
Carlo, your analysis is also flawed by a "Only standing is competent" meme.
None of the 4 models besides full-up require part-time soldiers or units.
The No standing IA models still rely upon full time units - just not units owned "by the imperium."
Note that the UK established a worldwide empire on model #2... only standardizing training in the 19th C, and uniforms in the early 20th (even then, dress uniforms for the various regiments are still varied and not quite standard). The only standing units were higher commands; below that point the regiments committed battalions to higher HQ brigades and Corps, but each regiment conducted its own training in-house, had distinct uniforms, often distinct gear, and distinct unit traditions; men enlisted in, and never left, a given local unit. Officers had more mobility, since commissions were from the crown; still, unless seconded to higher commands, officers tended to serve within a single regiment for their whole career.
Military unit organizations are seldom simple, as they mesh politics, economics, and psychotics. (The last usually in higher command and/or government.)
Huscarles are, in 5FW, listed as imperial troops, and it's noted in SMC that marines can be seconded to army units. The army unit shown is the 4518th LIR, a huscarles unit extant in both 5FW and SMC. 5 classes of troops are given: Marines, Huscarles, Mercenaries, Regulars, Colonials; a 6th isn't named, but is the on-world units (shown on map as strengths only).
Note SMC page 41: "lmperial policy allows lmperial marines to transfer to the 4518th (or other local units) for a limited period of time." This establishes clearly that (1) the 4518th is NOT a marine unit, (2) that it is a local unit and (3) other such local units exist as well.
5FW makes the two huscarles units and the several colonial units into regular forces. The Regina Corps, as well as several others, have TL's linked to their homeworlds. There are ALSO homeworld only units (in Regina's case, 15 Corps worth). Porozlo has two field-armies... of 5 FA of colonials (vs 8 of regulars)... it's contributed abut 1/9th of the total imperial movable ground forces (counting by combat factors) 1020 CF of 4057 CF colonials, plus 4820 CF regulars, 40 CF marines, 6 CF huscarles, and 38 CF of mercs. Total 8961 CF... and Porozlo is 1020 of them... 1/8.7
5FW also show colonial units as a mix of named and numbered units... but makes no distinction between marines and huscarles... save by unit symbol. It also lists very few marines - they're 1% of total strength.
Carlo, your analysis is also flawed by a "Only standing is competent" meme.
None of the 4 models besides full-up require part-time soldiers or units.
The No standing IA models still rely upon full time units - just not units owned "by the imperium."
Note that the UK established a worldwide empire on model #2... only standardizing training in the 19th C, and uniforms in the early 20th (even then, dress uniforms for the various regiments are still varied and not quite standard). The only standing units were higher commands; below that point the regiments committed battalions to higher HQ brigades and Corps, but each regiment conducted its own training in-house, had distinct uniforms, often distinct gear, and distinct unit traditions; men enlisted in, and never left, a given local unit. Officers had more mobility, since commissions were from the crown; still, unless seconded to higher commands, officers tended to serve within a single regiment for their whole career.
I guess my problem with the "no standing Imperial Army" option is that it not only flies in the various references in the various iterations of the rules, (save GT), but it also flies in the face of common sense. All nations have some kind of armed force, and an empire as big as the Sylean Federation sure has one (and not just in the "locals comprise regular army units" kind of way either).
Several nations today have no standing army. Some are small - a couple of polynesian states completely lack ground forces - and others have combined services without distinct army services.
Every nation has some military capability save Sealand and one other such unrecognized micronation, tho' at least one recognized microstate has only police (and it has less land area than many US counties).
Note that one of the biggest field deployers of troops at the moment is the UN - which has no standing military at all, but has troops seconded from member nations. Seems to work OK for many uses... the ad hoc commands created unify the constituent units OK...
The 3I as described in some of the fluff has this large force of Marines - TD15 has more Imp marines on Earth than are represented in the entire 5FW boardgame, or even Invasion Earth! (Heck, The Marines in Invasion: Earth are only 2 divisions... Colonials are 11 Corps and regulars 5.5 field armies. Very different mix than the Marches of 5FW, where it's 7.1 Field Armies colonial, 9.6 FA regulars, and 2 divisions marines. IE is 105 years and 200 Pc difference... )
IMTU notes in the spoiler.
Spoiler:
In looking at the countermixes, in light of evidence I'd missed, I see the situation is more akin to the US Civil War - tho' not completely - only 10% of the USCW US Army was regulars. The rest were USV, not USAR; colonials, not regulars. (In fact, the regulars were even less a percentage of the combats - about 7%.) The 3I in the 5FW was about 42% colonial forces - almost half were local troops of various kinds. And not even 1% of the combat forces were the much trumped up Imperial Marines.
(It's worth noting that the US Marines are not, at present, primarily ships troops - tho some serve in that role - but primarily a rapid response ground force that seconds about 1/3 of its strength to ships troop duty. Likewise, right up into WWII, the USN had its own Naval Infantry... as well as Marines... and the Army had its own (limited) intrinsic ocean transport capabilities.)
Likewise, we do not see the marine armor or artillery that the character generation provides for (and some of the fluff implies exists).
Last edited:
DangerousThing
SOC-13
Common sense. Do you really think that will fly in this sort OS argument?
I agree with you, but most people think the Marines are this force.
Me, I think the Marines are there for protection of starships, and are the ones that are first down on the planet as an extension of the navy. However, there needs to be a large force following the Marines to take the rest of the planet and to hold the planet once it's been taken.
I think that the largest job of the Imperial Army is in holding planets, and I think that it needs to be a standing army that owes its allegiance and paycheck to the Imperium rather than any local source.
There is still room for a local militia that might be seconded to the army when necessary.
I also feel that a large part of the Imperial army is trained to hold and police hostile areas without making them more hostile.
LeperColony
Traveller Card Game Dev Team
The thing is, there are enough references and inferences to a regular standing IA army that any attempt to explain them away seem rather forced. Whether the IA also includes local levies (and that appears to be the case) doesn't mean there isn't also a regular army. After all, the US has the Army and the Army reserves and the National Guard.
For people who prefer a regionally based and locally raised IA, that is certainly their TU prerogative. But it seems fairly clear to me that there is some sort of standing, regular, Imperial Army in the OTU.
EDIT: Also, I went through my copy of RCVG and there are simply far too many IA references to list individually. These are specific IA references, that look back to previous 3I doctrine and deployment. Additionally, on page 47 there is a list of units in the Regency Army that claims direct descent from IA units, and gives the names of those units. Regarding the Huscarls, it says specifically on page 47 that "the unit had not been part of the Imperial Army..."
For people who prefer a regionally based and locally raised IA, that is certainly their TU prerogative. But it seems fairly clear to me that there is some sort of standing, regular, Imperial Army in the OTU.
EDIT: Also, I went through my copy of RCVG and there are simply far too many IA references to list individually. These are specific IA references, that look back to previous 3I doctrine and deployment. Additionally, on page 47 there is a list of units in the Regency Army that claims direct descent from IA units, and gives the names of those units. Regarding the Huscarls, it says specifically on page 47 that "the unit had not been part of the Imperial Army..."
Last edited:
Is interesting: I thought I was applying Occam's Razor to a game. We can debate whether it's actually Occam's Razor being applied in the U.S. estimate example - a "disbelief factor" influencing a decision about two conflicting but otherwise equally valid items of data sounds to me more like bias - but that's not the question at hand.
Agreed, though I think it works against your proposition, not for it. I'm trying to imagine the aggressive growth of a Third Imperium under an emperor who holds as much power as was later shown by Lucan, without an Imperial Army whose first loyalty was to the Emperor. I keep running into the same problems the Americans had during the Revolution - forces raised by a given state tend to have their first loyalty to that state. The Revolution-era Americans raised a Continental Army so they could have an army that answered to the Continental Congress and fought for the nation as a whole instead of being loyal to and beholden to one of the several states.
Yup. SMC does state they were Imperialized in time of war. Note the color coding: red image on white background, same color code as Imperial marines - not the black on red of the Imperial Army nor the white on red of Colonial army units.
I can't find anything that calls the 4518th an army unit - not in SMC nor in FFW. I can't actually find the word "army" in the SMC article at all, and in FFW the 4518th is very clearly given the same color scheme as a marine unit, not an army unit - not even a colonial army unit, as I'd have expected for a troop under personal command of a sector duke. FFW is very careful to call everything "troop" units, army, marines, mercs and all.
I believe we'd agreed on that. The 4518th is - in peacetime - a local unit under the personal control of the Duke of Regina.
Agreed, though I'm not certain how that supports or refutes.
If you're implying a logical fallacy, that's not one I've heard before. I'd be pleased of a little elaboration.
This is the Regimental system, as opposed to the Continental system. Much to be said for it, from what I understand - and much to be said against it, but that's a matter for folk who know a lot more about military affairs than me and likely not relevant to the game anyway. Problem I do see is that there's no evidence for it in the game except with respect to the Colonial troops.
At any event, I don't see that use of the Regimental system implies the Brits do not have an army, or has an army that only exists from the neck up until someone declares war.
FFW again:
"In response to queries concerning Major Lorimer’s claims, Rear Admiral Lord Santanocheev, CINCNINT/RS (Commander-in-Chief, Naval Intelligence, Regina Subsector) today held a press conference during which he claimed that
Naval Intelligence was convinced that there was neither Zhodani nor Ine Givar involvement in the Efate disturbances. 'What we have on Efate is a local, very minor situation. We’re handling it with local forces and few mercenary contingents. If it were serious, we could commit army or marine
assets. We have some very potent assets in this subsector, but we haven’t felt the need to commit them. This is not a serious situation,' he reported."
As you've pointed out, there are references in canon to an Imperial Army, certainly enough to state without doubt that an entity with the name "Imperial Army" exists in canon. Beyond that, it's a Rorshach - and with due respect I believe you're seeing in the evidence what you wish to see.
Is it possible to draw an Imperial Army on the Regimental system? Certainly. It's even the most likely model, given the time lag and expense of transport between systems. However, the possibility that the 37th Imperial Tank Army might be 95% Menorbite (what else is there for a Menorbite teen to aspire to?) with a smattering of recruits from the recruiting offices on Yres and Boughene and its primary training facilities on Menorb, does not translate to the possibility that the 37th Imperial Tank Army or its constituent battalions are not part of a unified command structure.
I'd totally forgotten about the US Naval infantry. A long lost "branch" of the navy that you rarely hear about, but I've personally read about. They were used primarily as a "we got nothing else" set of soldiers to take beach heads, board ships, and the like. In other words, marines without marine uniforms. Or, simply put, soldiers, like all service men. They typically wore their navy jumpers into combat, making them big bright targets compared to marines or army soldiers who normally did the job.
Boy, a new can of worms (does anybody sell cans of worms for fishing anymore? ... just curious). So, I think this could be construed as another point for the Imperial Army being more than just marines plus local units; because the Imperial Navy doesn't want to send heir own servicemen into hostile fire fights where marines would serve better.
The regimental system, at the 18th C timeframe, literally meant that the regiments were each separate, but usually very similar, services. (Tho' a look at the Royal Horse Artillery vs the any Highland Infantry pushes the definition of 'similar' pretty hard)
Each colonial unit and huscarles unit might be seen as a separate local service. They all might use the same tables, but still be separate services, the same way the Police service is presented, and the Corsair service. And we know that there are multiple navies and merchant lines, but they all use the same tables.
That's the relevance.
In a standing Higher Commands regimental system, the ultimate goal of social climbers is to be promoted out of the regiment to said higher commands - but the local units involved are long-term stably assigned to potential use. Perhaps doubled up - one or the other is deployable at a given time...
In the ad hoc higher command version, the personell are requested by some outside agency, assigned to the task, and after the task (or their appointment duration), return to their home units (or retire). (Republican Rome used this form, with the Legion being the base unit. The Senate appointed the theater commanders - usually from their own number.)
In the Ad Hoc Attachment mode, they get grafted into some other force's extant structure. US Naval Infantry and USMC troops often used this in the early 20th C... with each other. Likewise, Marine Air Groups assigned to CVLs...
All the listed modes have been used historically.
Ummm, no - what was not relevant was the debate over whether the continental or regimental system was superior as a basis for recruiting and building your force. That's a modern debate, and we moderns are certainly not faced with the same challenges a hypothetical star-spanning empire limited by jump speed would need to deal with. As I said later, some form of the regimental system was the most likely basis for recruiting and building Imperial Army forces, given the distances and travel times involved. Where we differ is that business about whether the Army is a unified command or some sort of ad hoc structure. Sorry if I created confusion.
I read last month that, due to the Marine deployments, the USN CNO is looking at reinstating the USNI...
old links:
http://www.strategypage.com/htmw/htamph/articles/20060920.aspx
http://www.realpolice.net/forums/archive/t-42864.html
And a current one:
http://www.public.navy.mil/necc/hq/... fact sheets/01_NECC_FactSheet - April 10.pdf
And the USMC looking at a return to a NI role:
http://defensetech.org/2010/07/06/n...concept-says-naval-infantry-must-shed-weight/
The issue of Marines as Separate Force and Marines as Naval Infantry has been in flux... but for large chunks of the USMC's existence, the Naval Infantry were a larger, less elite force doing shoreside tasks.
Enoki
SOC-14 1K
I would still argue that based on everything here and in print, along with a deep understanding of military history, that the likelyhood is that an Imperial army consists of:
* A full time component under the nominal control of the Emperor. This component is (or should be) fully trained to the highest standards and is fitted with tech level 14 + equipment.
* A part time component that may be a fully standing army locally under the control of some local noble. This component can vary in training and equipment according to local conditions. Loyality to the noble probably outweighs combat capacity.
* A part time component that consists of locally raised volunteers and draftees under a local noble who is acting (and paid by) the emperor to raise those troops. Their training and equipment will vary with what's availalbe as well as what can be afforded.
On the whole they will resemble 19th century and prior armies on Earth. That is, many of the locally raised troops will be suitable only for local defense, anti-partisan duties, or as occupation forces. Their ability in the field as assault troops or even as 'front line' defensive units is questionable.
* A full time component under the nominal control of the Emperor. This component is (or should be) fully trained to the highest standards and is fitted with tech level 14 + equipment.
* A part time component that may be a fully standing army locally under the control of some local noble. This component can vary in training and equipment according to local conditions. Loyality to the noble probably outweighs combat capacity.
* A part time component that consists of locally raised volunteers and draftees under a local noble who is acting (and paid by) the emperor to raise those troops. Their training and equipment will vary with what's availalbe as well as what can be afforded.
On the whole they will resemble 19th century and prior armies on Earth. That is, many of the locally raised troops will be suitable only for local defense, anti-partisan duties, or as occupation forces. Their ability in the field as assault troops or even as 'front line' defensive units is questionable.
Naval infantry = ship's troops, no? If I understand the literature, the idea was to give some infantry training to some of the ship's sailors so they could be used when needed: come ashore and quell the riot, hit the beaches and silence the shore batteries, boarding and resisting boarders and so forth. Leads me to think on how I'd equip such a force; I note the articles mention the men being trained in and equipped with light artillery.
I claim dibs on authoring the Trav supplement on Naval Infantry.
But yeah, it was essentially train some sailors as GIs, then send them ashore. Different from marines in that they were usually no larger than a company at best, were THE ship's crew, and were essentially light infantry; guns, ammo, and if really well equipped, some army fatigues and a helmet to look the part.
I may create a char gen table tonight. It's been years (a few decades) since I read about them. Like aramis said, they were larger than the army (essentially nearly every ship had a few cross trained sailors who could serve as makeshift soldiers), but weren't like the marines nor army in terms of equipment, training and overall use.
Yeah, like carlo said, if there was some kind of trouble on shore, and a ship was in port, and, if requested, of if there was no other option, then you muster whoever's off duty (and qualified), give them a gun and assemble on deck to prepare to march.
If the Imperium had such men, then I picture a standard starman who's equipped with a mid grade (armored) vacc suit, or a bare bones combat armor, and a high powered ACR or LASER weapon of somekind. Maybe one in a dozen packs a support weapon or a high energy deal.
Local system or planetary navies probably are less well equipped.
But yeah, it was essentially train some sailors as GIs, then send them ashore. Different from marines in that they were usually no larger than a company at best, were THE ship's crew, and were essentially light infantry; guns, ammo, and if really well equipped, some army fatigues and a helmet to look the part.
I may create a char gen table tonight. It's been years (a few decades) since I read about them. Like aramis said, they were larger than the army (essentially nearly every ship had a few cross trained sailors who could serve as makeshift soldiers), but weren't like the marines nor army in terms of equipment, training and overall use.
Yeah, like carlo said, if there was some kind of trouble on shore, and a ship was in port, and, if requested, of if there was no other option, then you muster whoever's off duty (and qualified), give them a gun and assemble on deck to prepare to march.
If the Imperium had such men, then I picture a standard starman who's equipped with a mid grade (armored) vacc suit, or a bare bones combat armor, and a high powered ACR or LASER weapon of somekind. Maybe one in a dozen packs a support weapon or a high energy deal.
Local system or planetary navies probably are less well equipped.
far-trader
SOC-14 10K
Heh, I'm ahead of the curve... or is that stuck in the past? I've long had Imperial Navy infantry in MTU 
Separate from Marines (IMPs in MTU - Imperial Marine... something? ...it was long ago
) and Army (IA of course). Standard gear is Laser Carbines and Combat Armour (where most, but not all, Marines are heavier weapons and armour). Ship's Security, Shore Police, Damage Control and such is their game when not thrown into battle. In HG they come under the "Service" crew section. The IN infantry also provide attached forward observers for ortillery support to deployed Marines. They are generated just like regular IN personnel, anyone with the right skills set (Laser Carbine and VaccSuit required, Fwd Obs optional) may be considered assigned.
Separate from Marines (IMPs in MTU - Imperial Marine... something? ...it was long ago
) and Army (IA of course). Standard gear is Laser Carbines and Combat Armour (where most, but not all, Marines are heavier weapons and armour). Ship's Security, Shore Police, Damage Control and such is their game when not thrown into battle. In HG they come under the "Service" crew section. The IN infantry also provide attached forward observers for ortillery support to deployed Marines. They are generated just like regular IN personnel, anyone with the right skills set (Laser Carbine and VaccSuit required, Fwd Obs optional) may be considered assigned.
Yeah, that was it. They were also used to reinforce marine detachments. I mean, in the "olden days" sailors were warriors. The crew did the actual fighting. That is the guys rowing and manning the rigging (before slave rowers) grabbed sword and shield (later cutlass, pistol and musket) and slugged it out with the opposition.
This tradition has always been around for every navy afloat. It's part of basic training; get your body in shape, learn to shoot, then learn to do whatever your specialty is.
Far-Trader is of course, as an administrator no less, ahead of everyone else. Me, I always pictured the marines as the soldier for a ship in the 3I. Maybe some of the officers, maybe a few NCOs, maybe a few crewmen if needed, would pack a weapon for ship board security when the marines were away. But the marines seemed to be doing all of the policing and hard combat, or so I got the impression from reading the LBBs.
Hmm... I'm going to start another thread. This is too good to pass up.
