Prev: RE: bayonettes are too a useful device Next: Some happy news

Re: Stargrunt/Dirtside

From: Los <los@c...>
Date: Wed, 13 May 1998 13:55:22 -0700
Subject: Re: Stargrunt/Dirtside

Thomas Barclay wrote:

> Glover, spake thusly upon matters weighty:
>
> Of course, I'd have to ask, how many infantry per tank? One section
> (probably 2 fireteams)? Or a whole platoon (about 6-10 fireteams
> counting the weapons det)? If you assume a normal tank formation is
> four or five tanks, and pitted that against a platoon, especially if
> they are grav mobile and equipped with gauss saws, megawatt lasers,
> RFACs, etc. with good armour and good EW, then I don't think the
> infantry will find it a walk in the park.
>

The big IF in this situation is the terrain. In the city, in closed
terrain, then the tankers basically have their pants around their
ankles. Out in the open they stand a good chance.

> But I'm not taking the tanker's side here.... (another holy war....)
> I'm just saying like most things it is a matter of balance. Deploying
> infantry without support or armour without support is a force divider
> rather than a force multiplier. Each arm serves a purpose and they
> are meant to be deployed together (or at least in support of each
> other). (Which is what you are saying I think).
>
> Tom.
>
> > Hah, tanks without infantry support is really fat dumb and DEAD.
> >
> > We've played a number of games where a lone tank ends up crippled
> slowly
> > chewed to pieces. Yeah, he can engage two targets, one with main gun
> and
> > the other with coax or other MGs but the infantry just get around
> him.
> > Eventually his mobility goes and then systems then
> > morale.........................................We never needed the
> > satchel charges limpet mines or whatever, the IAVR and GMS rounds
> will
> > work.
> >
> > Owen
> >
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: jatkins6@ix.netcom.com [mailto:jatkins6@ix.netcom.com]
> > Sent: Tuesday, 12 May 1998 21:04
> > To: FTGZG-L@bolton.ac.uk
> > Subject: RE: Stargrunt/Dirtside
> >
> >
> > You wrote:
> >
> > >two APCs, eg NSL TO&E state taht they use one for the troopers and
> one
> > >for the armour suits.
> >
> > That's gotta be hideous if they're attacked.  With the weapons in
> one
> > and the men in another, how do you react to an ambush?
> >
> > >the charge off. Really though the APFC should probably only be
> found
> > on >Tanks and similar AFV not APCs or MICVs?
> >
> > Of course.	I was thinking I'd like to do a scenario where a tank
> w/o
> > infantry support is caught, fat dumb and happy, in a restricted area
>
> > and my opponent learns to speak of satchel charges with fear and
> > trembling.
> >
> > John M. Atkinson
> >
> >
> /************************************************
> Thomas Barclay
> Software Specialist
> Police Communications Systems
> Software Kinetics Ltd.
> 66 Iber Road, Stittsville
> Ontario, Canada, K2S 1E7
> Reception: (613) 831-0888
> PBX: (613) 831-2018
> My Extension: 2036
> Fax: (613) 831-8255
> Software Kinetics' Web Page:
>      http://www.sofkin.ca
> SKL Daemons Softball Web Page:
>      http://fox.nstn.ca/~kaladorn/softhp.htm
> **************************************************/

Prev: RE: bayonettes are too a useful device Next: Some happy news