Re: Crossover from GZGPedia List

On Wed, 17 Feb 1999, John M. Atkinson wrote:

> Laserlight wrote:
> 
> > Those who have read this far may also wish to discuss the
effectiveness (or
> > lack) of grav vehicles on microgravity bodies.
> 
> That's not all that would be affected by designing a force to fight
> on/in asteroids.

i have to say that asteroid fighting forces are basically identical to
ship fighting forces - you have big patches of space containing numerous
very small objects, moving at different velocities, with tunnels and
rooms
on the inside. the only difference is that ships move faster, are often
smaller in the Tuffleyverse, generally have better weapons and have more
tunnels etc.

> No GMS teams.  After all, the backblast would be too dangerous,

eh? why is it more dangerous in vacuum / zero g? if it is, you just
program your missiles for asteroid mode, where the motor fires a
millisecond pulse to clear the tube, and then starts up in earnest when
it's well clear of the firer.

ahh, you're thinking of fighting in the tunnels. in which case, yes. in
fact, asteroid fighting basically becomes building fighting.

> very few
> armored vehicles could fit in the corridors,

true. however, they might be useful for surface fighting. plus. you can
use your gms against any starships which happen by ...

> you don't need a 4.8km
> range when a 400m range of a buzzbomb would do.

although the guidance is nice. but then you use gms/p, or say that iavrs
are in fact guided a bit.

> No LAD teams.  

except perhaps on the surface.

> No artillery at all,

you certainly couldn't use artillery in indirect mode in tactical
battles;
you would have minimum ranges on the order of tens of thousands of km.
you
could fire them direct, however. plus, station them on another neary
asteroid, on the facing side, and let fly.

> Seems to me that most of the Alarishi forces would be nothing but
> straight power armor teams, with a handful of Powered Engineer teams
for
> support.

i'd agree with that, in general.

Tom