Re: [FT] Salvo Missile Range
From: Beth Fulton <beth.fulton@m...>
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2000 15:14:59 +1100
Subject: Re: [FT] Salvo Missile Range
G'day Donald,
>Do you mean that you start onto the table doing 36?
>Or is your table large enough to "run up" your speed?
Both ;)
Cheers
Beth
------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Elizabeth Fulton
c/o CSIRO Division of Marine Research
GPO Box 1538
HOBART
TASMANIA 7001
AUSTRALIA
Phone (03) 6232 5018 International +61 3 6232 5018
Fax 03 6232 5053 International +61 3 6232 5053
email: beth.fulton@marine.csiro.au
From - Wed Dec 13 16:38:48 2000
Return-Path: <owner-gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu>
Received: from scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (scotch.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.51])
by lilac.propagation.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id WAA17794;
Sun, 10 Dec 2000 22:22:03 -0600
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)
by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id
eBB4LaO12626;
Sun, 10 Dec 2000 20:21:36 -0800 (PST)
Received: by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (bulk_mailer v1.12); Sun, 10 Dec
2000 20:21:35 -0800
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) id eBB4LY712605
for gzg-l-outgoing; Sun, 10 Dec 2000 20:21:34 -0800 (PST)
Received: from soda.csua.berkeley.edu
(IDENT:KvT/qgr8+FAe0LPHiBtG+0rgJGxlPnUR@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.52])
by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id
eBB4LWP12600
for <gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>; Sun, 10 Dec 2000 20:21:32
-0800 (PST)
Received: from strait.hba.marine.csiro.au (strait.hba.marine.csiro.au
[140.79.17.2])
by soda.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id
eBB4LQf43408
for <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>; Sun, 10 Dec 2000 20:21:26 -0800
(PST)
(envelope-from beth.fulton@marine.csiro.au)
Received: from fulton.hba.marine.csiro.au (fulton [140.79.21.56])
by strait.hba.marine.csiro.au (8.10.1/8.10.1) with ESMTP id
eBB4Kt111052
for <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>; Mon, 11 Dec 2000 15:20:55 +1100
(EDT)
Message-Id: <4.2.2.20001211151948.00a381c0@pop.hba.marine.csiro.au>
X-Sender: fulton@pop.hba.marine.csiro.au
X-Mailer: QUALCOMM Windows Eudora Pro Version 4.2.2
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2000 15:21:17 +1100
To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
From: Beth Fulton <beth.fulton@marine.csiro.au>
Subject: Re: Uplift FT (was Re: Am I a Republic revisionist?)
In-Reply-To: <3A33BE86.6020607@ice.net>
References: <20001129195105.28051.cpmta@c008.sfo.cp.net>
<3A2C222B.ABB975C8@brewer.to>
<3A2D868C.1B256632@sympatico.ca>
<3.0.5.32.20001205212355.00a17a70@mail.HICom.net>
<004301c05f62$e743fc40$0100a8c0@brodm1.vic.optushome.com.au>
<001e01c06041$aafcaa40$4c468bca@avis>
<3A3017AD.20202@ice.net>
<00e801c062a3$f8c7aa40$97478bca@avis>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"; format=flowed
Sender: owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
Reply-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Delivered-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Status:
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
X-UIDL: 39d245de00000829
G'day guys,
>BTW, anyone else in America find it scary that it
>is a tad cheaper to order GZG stuff from Eureka in
> Aussie-land and pay the shipping then it is to
>order from GeoHex with free shipping?
What's scary is when any one in Aussie land contemplates ordering
overseas,
but I guess that's what I get for living in a country where the local
dollar is really worth about 2 brass razoos! ;)
Cheers
Beth
------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
------------------------------------------------------------------------
----
Elizabeth Fulton
c/o CSIRO Division of Marine Research
GPO Box 1538
HOBART
TASMANIA 7001
AUSTRALIA
Phone (03) 6232 5018 International +61 3 6232 5018
Fax 03 6232 5053 International +61 3 6232 5053
email: beth.fulton@marine.csiro.au
From - Wed Dec 13 16:38:47 2000
Return-Path: <owner-gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu>
Received: from scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (scotch.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.51])
by lilac.propagation.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id TAA15571;
Sun, 10 Dec 2000 19:31:01 -0600
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)
by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id
eBB1Tvb10602;
Sun, 10 Dec 2000 17:29:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (bulk_mailer v1.12); Sun, 10 Dec
2000 17:29:56 -0800
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) id eBB1TtR10581
for gzg-l-outgoing; Sun, 10 Dec 2000 17:29:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: from soda.csua.berkeley.edu
(IDENT:mFTss7Id8tceAZGG7thxCp4TisvMV3TL@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.52])
by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id
eBB1TrP10575
for <gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>; Sun, 10 Dec 2000 17:29:53
-0800 (PST)
Received: from smtp1.quixnet.net (psmtp1.array3.laserlink.net
[63.65.123.51] (may be forged))
by soda.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id
eBB1Tqf28734
for <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>; Sun, 10 Dec 2000 17:29:53 -0800
(PST)
(envelope-from laserlight@quixnet.net)
Received: from pavilion (1Cust147.tnt18.princess-anne.va.da.uu.net
[63.31.7.147])
by smtp1.quixnet.net (8.9.3/8.9.3) with SMTP id BAA29827
for <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>; Mon, 11 Dec 2000 01:29:48 GMT
Message-ID: <000d01c0632a$dd50a500$93071f3f@pavilion>
From: "Laserlight" <laserlight@quixnet.net>
To: <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>
References:
<417DEC289A05D4118408000102362E0A34D0F8@host-253.bitheads.com>
Subject: Re: Attachment levels
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 20:28:49 -0800
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
X-Priority: 3
X-MSMail-Priority: Normal
X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook Express 5.00.2615.200
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V5.00.2615.200
Sender: owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
Reply-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Delivered-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Status:
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
X-UIDL: 39d245de00000827
> A thought occurred to me (no doubt those who know me will consider
this
> novel...).
> I've solicited advice from our sometimes-resident engineering guru
(John A).
> That covers off the engineers and assault pioneers. But that leaves
a number
> of other folks to worry about.
Actually, Tom, just "you + John Atkinson" is quite enough for us to
worry about.
From - Wed Dec 13 16:38:48 2000
Return-Path: <owner-gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu>
Received: from scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (scotch.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.51])
by lilac.propagation.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id AAA04384;
Mon, 11 Dec 2000 00:12:20 -0600
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)
by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id
eBB6Bvk14495;
Sun, 10 Dec 2000 22:11:57 -0800 (PST)
Received: by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (bulk_mailer v1.12); Sun, 10 Dec
2000 22:11:55 -0800
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) id eBB6Bsc14474
for gzg-l-outgoing; Sun, 10 Dec 2000 22:11:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: from soda.csua.berkeley.edu
(IDENT:eU494QbhFH+swMxshdkliaQFfMF5lFQG@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.52])
by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id
eBB6BqP14469
for <gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>; Sun, 10 Dec 2000 22:11:52
-0800 (PST)
Received: from dfw-smtpout3.email.verio.net
(dfw-smtpout3.email.verio.net [129.250.36.43])
by soda.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id
eBB6Bpf54971
for <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>; Sun, 10 Dec 2000 22:11:52 -0800
(PST)
(envelope-from mwbrown@veriomail.com)
Received: from [129.250.38.64] (helo=dfw-mmp4.email.verio.net)
by dfw-smtpout3.email.verio.net with esmtp
id 145MBj-0004oP-00
for gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu; Mon, 11 Dec 2000 06:11:51 +0000
Received: from [207.20.233.89] (helo=saber6)
by dfw-mmp4.email.verio.net with smtp
id 145MBd-0003Gj-00
for gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu; Mon, 11 Dec 2000 06:11:46 +0000
Received: by localhost with Microsoft MAPI; Sun, 10 Dec 2000 22:07:41
-0800
Message-ID: <01C062F5.9D649C60.mwbrown@veriomail.com>
From: Michael Brown <mwbrown@veriomail.com>
To: "'gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu'" <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>
Subject: RE: Attachment levels
Date: Sun, 10 Dec 2000 22:06:53 -0800
X-Mailer: Microsoft Internet E-mail/MAPI - 8.0.0.4211
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Sender: owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
Reply-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Delivered-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Status:
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
X-UIDL: 39d245de0000082a
I'll try this on. My comments <MWB> below
Michael Brown
-----Original Message-----
From: Barclay, Tom
Sent: Sunday, December 10, 2000 5:19 PM
To: Gzg Digest (E-mail)
Subject: Attachment levels
A thought occurred to me (no doubt those who know me will consider this
novel...). Despite knowing a fair bit about the levels at which various
combat assets are attached, my knowledge of the levels at which less
in-your-face elements required to support combat are attached at has
made
building larger formations....problematic.
I've solicited advice from our sometimes-resident engineering guru (John
A).
That covers off the engineers and assault pioneers. But that leaves a
number
of other folks to worry about. I'd be glad to hear from anyone who had
some
insight into current (or conjectural) doctrine (and hopefully some idea
how
many are attached at each organizational level - Company, B'n,
higher...).
It would be even more interesting to contrast thoughts about these
attachments across the national boundaries spanned by this list - I'm
sure
all armies do not do this stuff exactly the same way.
Here's where things get fuzzy, and here are some of my guesses:
Snipers: Attached at b'n level, probably 3 or 4 teams, parcelled down to
Companies as required or engaging in other operations.
<MWB Depending on the mission and training of the unit anywhere from 2
teams
per company to 12 teams for the Division>
Mechanics: B'n motor pool. I'm not sure how many you need to support a
modern mechanized formation. I assume they aren't attached at company
level,
and that infantry help maintain their MICVs. I include electronics and
weapons techs in this group too.
<MWB A modern US Battalion has @ 25 mechanics and techs. These ARE
attached to
the companies in some cases (team of 3-5 in their own vehicle).
Additionally
there is a Maintenance Company at Brigade which detaches teams to the
Battalions>
Clerks: 1 for a company, with CHQ. BHQ - several?
<MWB @ 3-5 for a company, 15 to 25 for a battalion>
Logistics: ????? I know there must be a bunch of these. I include
tranport,
Company Stores and the like here. Must be a few with at Company level
and
more up at B'n, but I couldn't begin to guess how many.
<MWB A battalion support platoon (US) has @ 15 trucks with crew say 30
troops.
Again there is a Transport company at brigade>
FAO/FAC: Dedicated observer/controller teams. I assume these would be
attached at B'n level formally, but attached down to companies or
platoons
even as required. Probably 1 for every battery at B'n level?
<MWB Fos could be with each Infantry Platoon, usually 1 team per company
for
Mech and Armored forces (in their own vehicle).>
EW/Comms : Possibly 1 man per platoon, possibly a couple of teams with
CHQ.
Definitely some formation attached at B'n level.
<MWB There is a signal platoon at battalion (3-5 teams and C2)>
Air Def: GMS/P-Air with infantry platoons. Company might have GMS/L-Air
or
even GMS/H-Air if well equipped. Definitely the B'n would have some
GMS/H-Air. But how many? And what about ZADs or ADS?
<MWB Now consolidated at Brigade (ADA Bty)>
Medical: I assume a medic team (2 men) per Pltn. Perhaps a Company Aide
Station with an extra medic and a couple of orderlies. Then a B'n aide
station with a doctor, a medic, and some more orderlies. Then at Brigade
or
Division, you have a full MASH unit.
<MWB Pretty close, though speed of care is the primary issue>
Special Forces: If not a dedicated SF unit, these are probably attached
at
Divisional level (at a guess) and temporarily attached down to
battalions,
companies, or even platoons as required by mission. Often operate
independently. They don't like to rely too heavily on normal crunchies
who
might let them down.
<MWB Corps or Theater assets, Usually not seen below Division>
Intel: Definitely some at divisional level. At B'n level? Probably not
at
company level. And in this, I subsume enemy intel, weather
(meteorology),
sigint/elint , etc.
<MWB Small staff cell at battalion, with EW platoons or companies at
brigade
and higher>
Arty: Well, I assume mortars for Pltn and Company Levels. I assume light
to
medium tube guns for B'n (how many batteries would one expect)? I assume
heavy guns for Div and MRLS systems, although they may temporarily be
attached lower (to companies or b'ns for particular operations).
<MWB Weapons platoon at Company, Mortar platoon (BTY) at Battalion.
Current US
has a battalion + at brgiade>
Other trades: Undoubtedly, I've missed some. Press Officers, PR
Officers,
dentists, and other esoteric trades. I assume most of these don't appear
as
low as the B'n level and so I'm unlikely to have a concern with
modelling
them.
<MWB 1s and 2s below Division, scenario specific (Victory conditions?)>
Plus any I've missed.
<MWB Can't think of any right now, though I'm sure something will come
of this>
All feedback welcome. :)
------------------------------------------
Thomas R. S. Barclay
Voice: (613) 722-3232 ext 349
e-mail: tomb@bitheads.com
Now, now my good man, this is no time for making enemies.
Voltaire (1694-1778), on his death bed in response to a priest asking
that
he renounce Satan.
------------------------------------------
From - Wed Dec 13 16:38:49 2000
Return-Path: <owner-gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu>
Received: from scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (scotch.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.51])
by lilac.propagation.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id GAA10177;
Mon, 11 Dec 2000 06:41:09 -0600
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)
by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id
eBBCesx19821;
Mon, 11 Dec 2000 04:40:54 -0800 (PST)
Received: by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (bulk_mailer v1.12); Mon, 11 Dec
2000 04:40:39 -0800
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) id eBBCecK19791
for gzg-l-outgoing; Mon, 11 Dec 2000 04:40:38 -0800 (PST)
Received: from soda.csua.berkeley.edu
(IDENT:8//fcQJxhsX4jLL07eLOOAYT8Zf/RLO8@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.52])
by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id
eBBCeaP19784
for <gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>; Mon, 11 Dec 2000 04:40:36
-0800 (PST)
Received: from exchange01.dscc.dla.mil (exchange01.dscc.dla.mil
[131.74.160.11])
by soda.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id
eBBCeZf86089
for <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>; Mon, 11 Dec 2000 04:40:36 -0800
(PST)
(envelope-from Brian_Bell@dscc.dla.mil)
Received: by exchange01.dscc.dla.mil with Internet Mail Service
(5.5.2653.19)
id <W6J8NP64>; Mon, 11 Dec 2000 07:40:23 -0500
Message-ID:
<9DB05BB477A8D111AF3F00805F5730100D1006E2@exchange01.dscc.dla.mil>
From: "Bell, Brian K (Contractor)" <Brian_Bell@dscc.dla.mil>
To: "'gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu'" <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>
Subject: RE: DS2 question
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2000 07:40:20 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain
Sender: owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
Reply-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Delivered-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Status:
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
X-UIDL: 39d245de0000082c
No. I would say 100% more potent and effective than those who don't
arrive because they are stuck on the transport.
;-)
-----
Brian Bell
bkb@beol.net
-----
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Barclay, Tom [SMTP:tomb@bitheads.com]
> Sent: Sunday, December 10, 2000 6:45 PM
> To: Gzg Digest (E-mail)
> Subject: DS2 question
>
> Interface drop capability costs 50%. (IIRC)
>
> Does anyone actually think that a bunch of vehicles arriving via
interface
> drop (lets say even an uncontested one, let alone one where losses
might
> be
> incurred) are 50% more potent? I suppose (to some extent) this would
> depend
> on your scenario. But if they are assaulting set points on the map,
does
> this "drop from the sky" offer them a 50% greater effectiveness? I
have my
> doubts. I think one would much rather have 50% more conventional
forces.
>
[snip]
> ------------------------------------------
> Thomas R. S. Barclay
> ------------------------------------------
>
From - Wed Dec 13 16:38:49 2000
Return-Path: <owner-gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu>
Received: from scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (scotch.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.51])
by lilac.propagation.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id HAA19071;
Mon, 11 Dec 2000 07:21:19 -0600
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)
by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id
eBBDLA120423;
Mon, 11 Dec 2000 05:21:10 -0800 (PST)
Received: by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (bulk_mailer v1.12); Mon, 11 Dec
2000 05:21:08 -0800
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) id eBBDL7o20402
for gzg-l-outgoing; Mon, 11 Dec 2000 05:21:07 -0800 (PST)
Received: from soda.csua.berkeley.edu
(IDENT:bJs3ZkljEO7eSvitq1PwLYH39xY2NUT0@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.52])
by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id
eBBDL5P20397
for <gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>; Mon, 11 Dec 2000 05:21:05
-0800 (PST)
Received: from exchange01.dscc.dla.mil (exchange01.dscc.dla.mil
[131.74.160.11])
by soda.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id
eBBDL4f88387
for <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>; Mon, 11 Dec 2000 05:21:05 -0800
(PST)
(envelope-from Brian_Bell@dscc.dla.mil)
Received: by exchange01.dscc.dla.mil with Internet Mail Service
(5.5.2653.19)
id <W6J8NQDF>; Mon, 11 Dec 2000 08:20:58 -0500
Message-ID:
<9DB05BB477A8D111AF3F00805F5730100D1006E3@exchange01.dscc.dla.mil>
From: "Bell, Brian K (Contractor)" <Brian_Bell@dscc.dla.mil>
To: "'gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu'" <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>
Subject: RE: DS2 question [weapons x-over]
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2000 08:20:56 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2653.19)
Content-Type: text/plain
Sender: owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
Reply-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Delivered-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Status:
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
X-UIDL: 39d245de0000082d
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Barclay, Tom [SMTP:tomb@bitheads.com]
> Sent: Sunday, December 10, 2000 6:45 PM
> To: Gzg Digest (E-mail)
> Subject: DS2 question
>
[snip]
> Also, oversized vehicles.... why doesn't PDS work for them? Do I not
> recall
> Ogres having PDS? Bolos?
>
[Bri] The Ogre univers is devoid of aircraft, because they were too easy
to
knock down with nukes (an Ogre's main and secondary weapons). Bolos
had "infinate repeators" that fired in
anit-aircraft/anti-missile/anti-infantry/
anti-light vehicle modes.
> If I'm building a destroyer (I have a mini I want
> to use), it definitely is bigger than size 7. It is probably 5 or 6
> centimeters long, suggesting a much larger vehicle. It would (I guess)
be
> equipped with two gun turrets (HKPs/5s?) and two batteries (one facing
> each
> flank) of either MRLS equivalent or HAR equivalent guided ordinance.
But
> when I read the oversize vehicle can't have any secondary dice, I
thought
> hasn't anyone ever heard of Phalanx? or Goalkeeper? or some of the new
> laser
> CIWS for ships? <I realize oversize vehicles rules were for
supertanks,
> but
> even there this point would be valid). Considering you can't armour
past 7
> and that you can't deploy guns bigger than class 5 (so I take it that
> Class
> 5's in FT are actually HEL/5? *wink*),
>
[Bri] Now this is a bit tricker. DS2 allows a frigate to do a strike
from
a frigate using its beam weapons from orbit. The standard frigate in FT2
carried a 'C' Beam (FT Class-1) and a 'B' Beam (FT Class-2). This strike
was 4" diameter and drew 3 chits as for an artillery strike (chit
validity
was
Yellow/Red for all target types). Furthermore, the area it hit was
deemed impassible for the remainder of the game due to radiation. I
would
suggest that this is actually larger than Class-5 HEL (less chits but
greater chit validity).
> wouldn't allowing the supertank or
> large ship or whatever to use CIWS/PDS to thwart the swarms of GMS it
will
> attract be quite reasonable?
>
> ------------------------------------------
> Thomas R. S. Barclay
> -----End Original Message-------------------------------------
>
My comments above marked by [Bri]
I dislike the oversize vehicle rules, myself.
Under them no wet-navy ship could be built (over the size of a cutter).
Prehaps in a DS2 supplement, this could be rewritten so as not to
disadvantage large vehicles as much (i.e. allow PDS for each module,
have a "Boom" chit effect only the module it hit, allow stealth, but
each
module would have to have it, etc.).
Also missing are air-to-air combat rules. Without these air assets can
be over powerful.
---
Brian Bell
bkb@beol.net
http://www.ftsr.org
---
From - Wed Dec 13 16:38:50 2000
Return-Path: <owner-gzg-l@scotch.csua.berkeley.edu>
Received: from scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (scotch.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.51])
by lilac.propagation.net (8.8.5/8.8.5) with ESMTP id IAA05535;
Mon, 11 Dec 2000 08:57:58 -0600
Received: from localhost (daemon@localhost)
by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with SMTP id
eBBEveD22053;
Mon, 11 Dec 2000 06:57:40 -0800 (PST)
Received: by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (bulk_mailer v1.12); Mon, 11 Dec
2000 06:57:38 -0800
Received: (from majordom@localhost)
by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) id eBBEvb522032
for gzg-l-outgoing; Mon, 11 Dec 2000 06:57:37 -0800 (PST)
Received: from soda.csua.berkeley.edu
(IDENT:W8PtuhruqZOnrw1b4uAc4CgVvqs9CL3p@soda.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
[128.32.43.52])
by scotch.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.0) with ESMTP id
eBBEvaP22027
for <gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>; Mon, 11 Dec 2000 06:57:36
-0800 (PST)
Received: from exsrv.bitheads.com (mail.bitheads.com [64.26.142.194])
by soda.csua.berkeley.edu (8.11.0/8.11.1) with ESMTP id
eBBEvZf96686
for <GZG-L@csua.berkeley.edu>; Mon, 11 Dec 2000 06:57:35 -0800
(PST)
(envelope-from tomb@bitheads.com)
Received: by host-253.bitheads.com with Internet Mail Service
(5.5.2448.0)
id <YM7VRBMJ>; Mon, 11 Dec 2000 09:57:30 -0500
Message-ID:
<417DEC289A05D4118408000102362E0A34D104@host-253.bitheads.com>
From: "Barclay, Tom" <tomb@bitheads.com>
To: "Gzg Digest (E-mail)" <GZG-L@csua.berkeley.edu>
Subject: Attachment levels [DS2]
Date: Mon, 11 Dec 2000 09:57:29 -0500
MIME-Version: 1.0
X-Mailer: Internet Mail Service (5.5.2448.0)
Content-Type: text/plain;
charset="iso-8859-1"
Sender: owner-gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
Reply-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Delivered-To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Status:
X-Mozilla-Status: 0000
X-Mozilla-Status2: 00000000
X-UIDL: 39d245de0000082e
Mike brown replied to my original post, chock full of good info.
My further comments marked with [Tomb].
First, one overridding question: Mike's answers were based (I think) on
modern doctrine, which is what I asked for. Let us project that the
forces
fighting in the Tuffleyverse will often tend to be smaller (due to
transport
requirements) in total size and more self-reliant, so they may not have
higher-level formations to draw on. This suggests attachment of some
higher
level assets at lower level (even if in small qty) does it not? Because
a
capability usually present at brigade or corps level may still be
required
by a b'n sized force if the nearest brigade HQ is light-years out.
Perhaps this suggests some positions are multi-role (ie the doctors do
dentistry too in these cases). This might be a requirement given that
supporting men and machines in vast numbers is problematic. Thoughts?
------------------------
EW/Comms : Possibly 1 man per platoon, possibly a couple of teams with
CHQ.
Definitely some formation attached at B'n level.
<MWB There is a signal platoon at battalion (3-5 teams and C2)>
[Tomb] C2? Must be an intel guy of some flavour? How big would these
teams
be? 2 man?
Air Def: GMS/P-Air with infantry platoons. Company might have GMS/L-Air
or
even GMS/H-Air if well equipped. Definitely the B'n would have some
GMS/H-Air. But how many? And what about ZADs or ADS?
<MWB Now consolidated at Brigade (ADA Bty)>
[Tomb] Really? I take it you are referring to ZAD, ADS, TAD? I still
assume
you have Stinger systems actually deployed to the platoons or companies.
I'd
have thought heavy air-def would be a key part of US policy. (Given the
hammering they give everyone ELSE with their air assets).
Special Forces: If not a dedicated SF unit, these are probably attached
at
Divisional level (at a guess) and temporarily attached down to
battalions,
companies, or even platoons as required by mission. Often operate
independently. They don't like to rely too heavily on normal crunchies
who
might let them down.
<MWB Corps or Theater assets, Usually not seen below Division>
[Tomb] I hadn't realized they were attached so high. I suppose they are
a
very small elite in reality. How many SF personnel are likely to be
operating in a theatre or corps? Would there be a company of them in a
theatre? Or a battalion? or a platoon?
Intel: Definitely some at divisional level. At B'n level? Probably not
at
company level. And in this, I subsume enemy intel, weather
(meteorology),
sigint/elint , etc.
<MWB Small staff cell at battalion, with EW platoons or companies at
brigade
and higher>
[Tomb] Small is roughly how many at B'n?
Arty: Well, I assume mortars for Pltn and Company Levels. I assume light
to
medium tube guns for B'n (how many batteries would one expect)? I assume
heavy guns for Div and MRLS systems, although they may temporarily be
attached lower (to companies or b'ns for particular operations).
<MWB Weapons platoon at Company, Mortar platoon (BTY) at Battalion.
Current
US
has a battalion + at brgiade>
[Tomb] How many tubes in the Co Wpns Pltn and the Btn Mortars?
<MWB Can't think of any right now, though I'm sure something will come
of
this>
[Tomb] This is gzg-l. :)