|
|
|
Mordel's Bar & Grill |
|
  |
» |
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Gunslinger Patch
Royal Black Watch Regiment
Major
Joined: 04-Mar-2002 00:00
Posts: 1611
|
 Posted: 02-Apr-2002 01:07 Post subject: Anti-Tank Riflemen |
  |
|
It would be good for shooting small and medium armored targets, but should a man-portable infantry weapon have the same ability to go internal on a 20 ton Locust as it does on a 100 ton Daishi? Armor penetration is not an infinite ability. if the armor is thick enough, it will stop the bullet.
_________________
"Those who beat their guns into plows will plow for those with guns..." -Thomas Jefferson
|
|
| Back to top |
  
|
Vagabond
Mercenary
Mr. Referee
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 5606
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 02-Apr-2002 02:18 Post subject: Anti-Tank Riflemen |
|
|
why i said, the target specific crits. they aim for the heat sink port, or missile launch holes.
_________________
one must work hard to cultivate the mind and body. and one must always cultivate the mind.
//^(^_^)^\\
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Sir Henry
Team Bansai
Senior Tech Specialist
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 4899
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 02-Apr-2002 07:37 Post subject: Anti-Tank Riflemen |
|
|
That would be some shootin'
Sir HEnry
_________________
Sir Henry
A Dragon in the disguise of a bunny, is still a Dragon.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Vampire
Free Worlds League
Lieutenant Colonel
Joined: 05-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 912
Location: Spain
|
| Posted: 02-Apr-2002 15:31 Post subject: Anti-Tank Riflemen |
|
|
Quote:
|
On 2002-03-27 14:28, Cadet wrote:
Seeing as how I love all things Infantry and hate all things not, I was thinking about that other thread where I suggested the anti-tank rifleman.
|
|
Oh, please, get real, Cadet, Antitank rifles were practically useless by the beginning of WWII. And no, the accounts of the Gulf War were snipers with a Barret were able to disable a couple Iraqui armored vehicles with carefully placed shots don't count, it's a well known fact that their side armor is so thin that it can be pierced by a 12.7mm round, that can be said of most APCs, they never were designed to give protection against heavy machine gun fire, just small arms fire and shell fragments.
I'm sorry, but this is .. well *throws arms up* just nonsense. I'm sorry, but tank ('Mech) hunter squads don't fit in the setting.
The way the Battletech universe was conceived, infantry were relegated to little more than siege work and spear carriers. They can't do nothing against armored vehicles. Hell, infantry without antitank weapons is powerless against tanks.
Since the invention of the tank, the ability of infantry to hold its ground against armored vehicles depends on its antitank weapons. Infantry can be a deadly threat to armor with these, from the Panzerfaust and the bazooka to the modern guided missiles, but once they run out of missiles, rifles ain't much use against tanks. Or for that matter, I'm afraid that the infantry task is becoming acting as a spotter for air and artillery strikes.
In the Battletech universe the situation is even worse, because shaped charge munitions have lost much of their effectiveness due to the advances in armor technology, something that is patent even nowadays, compound armor has effectively defeated shaped charges. No longer is a illiterate peasant able to destroy a several million dollars tank with a $300 rocket and some hours of training.
This invulnerability of the 'Mech to the common footsoldiers weapons, in a ironic twist, resembles the Middle Ages again, a recurrent theme in the Battletech universe, the plate armor of a knight was so perfected that was practically impervious to most weapons (notable exceptions like the English longbow aside, of course)
The analogies are left as an exercise for the reader.
The most patent is that the Battlemech engagements are very much like the decisive clash between the opposing armored knights of each side, and the infantry do all the other menial tasks in battle, garrisoning, siege work, ravaging the countryside...etc
_________________
Memento audare semper
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Ares
Clan Jade Falcon
Star Colonel
Joined: 20-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 737
|
| Posted: 02-Apr-2002 15:43 Post subject: Anti-Tank Riflemen |
|
|
And we must all remember that having a suit of plate armor and a squire to help you equip it was a sign of nobility, whereas a division of common peasants trained in the use of longbows could defeat the knights and tip the scale of the battle quite powerfully. The crossbow, so easily usable, was actually considered sinful by the english church after a peasant killed the king of england back during the medieval ages. (forgot the name, but that's irrevelant)
_________________
I have the right to remain silent. Anything I say will undoubtedly incriminate me.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Vampire
Free Worlds League
Lieutenant Colonel
Joined: 05-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 912
Location: Spain
|
| Posted: 02-Apr-2002 16:36 Post subject: Anti-Tank Riflemen |
|
|
Quote:
|
On 2002-04-02 15:43, Ares wrote:
And we must all remember that having a suit of plate armor and a squire to help you equip it was a sign of nobility
|
|
Something similar happened in Battletech in the course of the Succession Wars. Though feudalism was present in the Inner Sphere before the Succesion Wars, it was administrative in nature, I mean, it was adopted in response to the challenge of exercising interstellar government and ruling.
What happened during the wars was the rise of a "sword nobility", as armies and industries disintegrated, soldiers in the frontlines that held onto their vehicles and equipment acquired power, local unit commanders became de facto warlords, and gained recognition of their new status by keeping their allegiance to the former state army structure. Thus the 'Mechwarriors, formerly just members of an army became an hereditary warrior class that passed on their Battlemechs onto their descendants.
Of course, enough of the massive armies of the Successor States survived, along with the state's structures (like police, taxation, bureacracy..) so this process of feudalization was far from complete, though significant enough that the Houses couldn't crush the upstarts nor do without their resources.
If you examine the force composition of the Succesor States armies in the old sourcebooks you'll see that they are more than a collection of loosely united warlords than a unified army. The ruling House is just the largest and best equipped feudal overlord inside the realm, while the marcher lords, dukes, prefects or district commanders are very much the masters on their own houses.
Of course, I'm speaking in broad terms, but the basic idea is that you have a regular army at the core (the "royal" army) and the provincial forces ( sort of the feudal levvies), but the point I was trying to make is that at the individual level, a 'Mechwarrior is either a professional soldier who has been assigned a Battlemech that is the property of the state, or is a warrior that owns his or her own 'Mech and serves the state army in exchange for recognition of his social status, and probably, access to the maintenance and supply resources of the House.
Of course, once its obligations to the state have been fullfilled, the Battlemech owner can do with it as its pleases. The majority of mercenaries belong to this warrior caste, though, yet again in another medieval reminiscence, instead of being attached to a feudal lord, they wander hiring their services, just as the "free lances" did.
Rest of the post snipped, I'll answer later, because I'm in a hurry.
_________________
Memento audare semper
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Vampire
Free Worlds League
Lieutenant Colonel
Joined: 05-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 912
Location: Spain
|
| Posted: 15-Apr-2002 12:12 Post subject: Anti-Tank Riflemen |
|
|
Some historical precisions I wish to make here
Quote:
|
On 2002-04-02 15:43, Ares wrote:
, whereas a division of common peasants trained in the use of longbows could defeat the knights and tip the scale of the battle quite powerfully.
|
|
The English longbow was no common weapon, and neither were "common peasants" the archers that fired them. The longbow recquired intensive training to be effective, and an elaborate conscription system to provide the bodies of archers needed for England campaigns. They were quite close to a standing regular army.
And the longbow, however effective, didn't achieve its victories alone, but in a combined arms fashion working with bodies of dismounted men at arms that gave the killing blow to the disrupted enemy after the rain of arrows.
Quote:
|
The crossbow, so easily usable,
|
|
Not so easily usavle, though in some ways superior to the early firearms, it still recquired training and practice to benefit from its precision advantage.
Firearms were the real equalizer of the battlefield. The longbow was a technology fruit of a set of very specific circunstances, the crossbow had exhausted its development potential, at the end of the Middle Ages, advances in armor plating meant neither had the decisive armor penetration ability they had had in the past.
Quote:
|
was actually considered sinful by the english church after a peasant killed the king of england back during the medieval ages. (forgot the name, but that's irrevelant)
|
|
The development of crossbows with composite construction bows with greater pull and therefore greater penetration made these weapons so deadly, that the Pope issued a decree forbidding its use in war between Christians, it was okay to use them against the infidels.
This happened in the XII century, IIRC, at this time plate armor haven't been developed yet. Chain mail afforded little protection against arrows, because the rings tend to channel the force of impact of the arrow point.
However, this Papal decree was very much ignored, and at the battle of Legnano (1137 IIRC), the Lombardy crossbowmen defeated the Imperial knights of Frederick Barbarossa.
Later advances in plate armor construction reduced the effectiveness of the crossbow, till the next technological leap with the metal crossbow.
And as a footnote, the king that died froma crossbow bolt was Richard the Lionheart when campaigning in Normandy.
_________________
Memento audare semper
|
|
| Back to top |
|
ICER
Clan Hell's Horses
Galaxy Commander
Joined: 04-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 1663
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 17-Apr-2002 14:24 Post subject: Anti-Tank Riflemen |
|
|
So if we take a lesson from history. If build a better mousetrap. They will build a better mouse.
_________________
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Vampire
Free Worlds League
Lieutenant Colonel
Joined: 05-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 912
Location: Spain
|
| Posted: 28-Apr-2002 10:41 Post subject: Anti-Tank Riflemen |
|
|
It just goes on and on, looks like the wheel has turned full circle again
From the Strategypage.com
April 25, 2002; More information comes out (as more US troops come home) about American military operations in Afghanistan. The training of US troops was adequate, and their equipment (especially the new protective vests) excellent...The new protective vests use metal plates that add protection from rifle bullets. In the past, the vests only protected you from shell fragments and
some bullets (those fired from far away or ricochets). Some troops didn't notice they had been hit until after a battle, when they noted a bruise on their chest (and a dent in their protective vest plates). The latest model helmets are also bullet proof, and several dented helmets came back from the battle to prove it.
Looks like we will have to revive all those archaic military terms for body armor pieces, plackart, bevor, sallet, tassets...and so on.
_________________
Memento audare semper
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Rarich
Federated Suns
Leftenant General
Joined: 05-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 991
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 02-May-2002 06:09 Post subject: Anti-Tank Riflemen |
|
|
I liked the Called shot rule in Mechwarrior. If enough of the players got together and hit with their called shots, the mechwarrior in the cockpit would die. We decided that the bullets wou7ld not cause "injury" rolls until the armor eas gone.
Using this rule an elite infantry unit using called shots could do the "anti armor rifleman" job you have proposed. The platoon would just have to cooperate like elementals with their group fire. A rifle platoon does 14 points right, if the called shot works the mechwarrior is as good as dead. Only an elite platoon could do called shots, tracking experience for the platoons and keeping them healthy would become important too. As it is now, they are just there for a distraction.
On the Longbowmen and Crossbowmen mentioned. It still took time to train them to shoot straight and to build up muscle strength to pull the bows! I have tried to pull a replica longbow, I am not a weakilng either, and it was hard. I took several shots and was feeling several new muscle groups that I did not know about. I trained both SCA and Kendo, so my arm strength and upper body strength is pretty good. My back is what got me.
_________________
Duct tape is like the force. It has a light side & a dark side, and strings also lie under it all.
Life is a sexually transmitted terminal disease.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Nightmare
Lyran Alliance
Kommandant-General
Joined: 03-May-2002 00:00
Posts: 2214
|
| Posted: 03-May-2002 06:00 Post subject: Anti-Tank Riflemen |
|
|
Nope, a rifle platoon does 7 points.
And that is 28 men blasting away on
full auto, probably expending a whole
magazine each. At a maximum range of 3
BT hexes or 90 meters  They are most
certainly trying to hit the same spot.
BTW, the .50 BMG isn`t THAT effective
against real armor. The newest (1990s)
rounds I know of, the SLAP, only goes
through 34mm @500 meters. Feeble. Not
compared to the armor of APCs, but...
AT riflemen? Not bloody likely. IIRC the FedSuns FM had AP shells for Autocannons.
They`re not very likely to get through,
and that´s at half normal shots/ton!
I think you got a chance to cause a critical
hit, but reduced for the AC size. The AC/2
needed a 12, I think. Why should a rifle-
sized weapon be capable of getting through?
Oh yes, crossbows and longbows. I have
opinions on those too! The main strength
of the crossbow wasn`t it`s power. It was
the fact that
a) you could train somewhat competent
crossbowmen in a few weeks/days of training
b) the material didn`t have to be the best,
and the arrows can be really simple
Compare that to longbows, that
a) were used by specialists, people who had
trained for years in their use
b) need to be built of highest-quality materials, and use high-quality arrows
_________________
A tree fall in the forest, and no one is around, and it hits a mime. Does anyone care?
|
|
| Back to top |
|
Rarich
Federated Suns
Leftenant General
Joined: 05-Feb-2002 00:00
Posts: 991
Location: United States
|
| Posted: 03-May-2002 23:47 Post subject: Anti-Tank Riflemen |
|
|
I am talking a platoon armed with the new Thunderstroke type Gauss rifles, or the heaviest gyroslug rifles.
By definition in Mechwarrior they do 1 point of damage per shot per weapon. An assault rifle does not come close to this. So a platoon of 28, missing half the time would do 14 points. (the half missing is for people looking the other way and such)I figured that an elite unit would hit what they are aiming at pretty well, but that 28 points was way excessive.
_________________
Duct tape is like the force. It has a light side & a dark side, and strings also lie under it all.
Life is a sexually transmitted terminal disease.
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
| |
» |
All times are GMT-04:00 |
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
You cannot attach files in this forum
You can download files in this forum
|
|
|
|
|
|
