Prev: Re: DSII for the 2020s Next: Re: Just what will we see on the GZGVerse battlefield?

Re: [sg2 ds2] Re: OrBat SG2

From: "Laserlight" <laserlight@q...>
Date: Wed, 1 Dec 1999 10:39:32 -0500
Subject: Re: [sg2 ds2] Re: OrBat SG2

>
>> It seems to me that it would be worthwhile having 2 or 3 rifle
>> platoons and a single platoon of PA.  Is this not done because
>> of maintenance reasons or does it just not give the correct
>> feel since nobody seems to do this?
>
>i think the islamic fed forces do this (for their elites), but i
can't
>provide a url, i'm afraid.

www.angelfire.com/va/basileus/index.html and follow the links to the
IF Revolutionary Guard.  Or
www.angelfire.com/va/laserlight/index.html ->Full Thrust (top bar) ->
Federation Ground Forces  (side bar) will get you there

>it might also be a case of fitting roles; PA are usually used in the
>vanguard, leading assaults, being the first onto planets, etc. thus,
PA
>units are operationally more mobile, being shipped about from place
to
>place to do short, sharp jobs rather than staying on one front for
weeks
>or months. thus, attaching PA at company level would hamstring them.
>again, since elite units tend to move around more, using this OOB for
them
>should work.

I hadn't noticed this when John A wrote it up but I agree, PA for most
armies should be a company attached as needed, or separate battalion
for orbital assault.  There are exceptions (Alarish springs to mind,
since we have an underpopulation problem, and no habitable planets,
it's cheaper to armor up fewer troops than to pay more salaries and
put everyone into a hostile environment combat suit anyway).

Prev: Re: DSII for the 2020s Next: Re: Just what will we see on the GZGVerse battlefield?