I've never seen a TO&E for the Saeed Khalifate anywhere - certainly not
in the SG rulebook.
The pics on stargrunt.ca are of the platoon I painted up, but I used Owen
Glover's Islamic Federation TO&E (modified a tiny bit, I think). You can see
Owen's TO&E here:
http://www.stargrunt.ca/toe/sg2_toe_if/sg2_if_main.htm
and in particular, I built a "line platoon":
-----------------------
3 x Line Platoons (1 Officer, 29 Other Ranks each)
HQ Squad (1 Officer, 3 ORs)
A four-man team, including the Platoon Commander, Platoon Sergeant,
Comms
Operator and a sniper. The sniper is not specially trained - just a
better shot than average and equipped with a sniper rifle. (Take a look at the
Marksmen rules - Ed.) The other members are armed with standard ARs.
2 x Assault Squads (8 ORs each) Each Assault Squad includes the Squad Leader,
SAW Gunner, and six troopers.
Two members of the squad are armed with SMG/Auto-Shotgun, and the five
remaining are armed with the standard issue AR.
2 x Weapons Squads (5 ORs each)
Each Weapons Squad includes the Squad Leader and two 2-man GMS/P teams.
Squad members are armed with the standard AR.
On Fri, 4 Jun 2004 02:05:31 -0700 (PDT) John Atkinson
> <johnmatkinson@yahoo.com> writes:
I design some of these units in Dirtside 2 for various 'nationalities' but
since no one has used them as designed (I've never run them) in any of my
games... I would suspect usually by the time the position is assaulted
(advance multiple times, half advance, dismount and half assault move
infantry) the situation is pretty clearly hopeless for the defenders (the
attackers usually lose enough vehicles in closing to be so under strength that
it fails before dismounting.) If you can advance under fire enough times to
arrive intact you probably have other advantages making the defense untenable.
Gracias,
> --- warbeads@juno.com wrote:
> I design some of these units in Dirtside 2 for
Are they posted? I can at least evaluate by eyeball and maybe run some test
scenarios.
> clearly hopeless for the
Not really. Using artillery wisely (there is no god but Smoke...) and terrain
to your advantage may work against a hasty defense.
But that's not tweaking out your stuff primarily for close combat. I do that
in DSII with my armor. Medium and Heavy tanks (size 3 and 4) are outfitted on
a 1/3-2/3 ratio of DFFG and mass driver (or HKP in
second-line units). I find that if I fix the enemy
force with my mass driver units and inflict initial casualties while the DFFG
platoons maneuver for flanks and to get in close, the effects can be
devestating.
G'day,
> But that's not tweaking out your stuff primarily for
I do something similar with one of the forces I run, except I use HEL and
DFFG.
Cheers
> --- Beth.Fulton@csiro.au wrote:
> I do something similar with one of the forces I run,
I never got warm and fuzzy about HELs. Just not enough power to suit me. MDC
and HKP, if they hit, are almost always going to kill a vehicle of the same
armor rating as the weapon and usually one higher. HELs just don't seem
reliable enough. And with class 4 and 5 MDCs the range is long enough that you
rarely will have a line of sight past medium range anyway.
I'm sure OO could do the statistics to prove my gut feelings on the subject
are wrong, of course.
G'day,
> I never got warm and fuzzy about HELs. Just not
We play the odd game with high ranges on one side or rolling plains so you can
get the odd occasion where having a HEL helps, but on the whole you're right
about range. I didn't choose HELs for power or range actually. I use WWI tank
models and couldn't justify calling the little side guns on those MDC or HKP
as that sounds like it needs a "sodding big gun" to represent whereas I
thought I could get away with it for a HEL;)
Have fun
On Fri, 4 Jun 2004 08:45:25 -0700 (PDT) John Atkinson
> <johnmatkinson@yahoo.com> writes:
The DS 2 and SG 2 (25 and 15 mm version) (DRAFTs are only slightly out of
date) spreadsheets are on the yahoo 6mmScienceFiction list file but I am not
sure the Assault organization is on that. In fact, I can almost 100%
say it isn't. I could post it here (but not right now - I am fixing
dinner) for perusal.
Gracias,
> On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 09:04:30 +1000 <Beth.Fulton@csiro.au> writes:
<snip>
> It doesn't need to be as widely divergent as Arctic and Saharan (two
Thank you.
<snip>
> How well equipped and how diversely equipped they will need to be will
I heartily ascribe to that model being as common (or more so) as the one power
planet model. If nothing else it allows drop troops from the same planet (how
many minor powers have lots of assets (as in multiple planets simultaneously)
for space to ground assault?)
> Well, I don't like the odds of a size 5 going down due to evil chits.
Of course this assumes you get to shape your force for that foe. When you get
a force already designed and several possible foes (as in Cotu where only the
LLAR and NPC don't seem to be at each other's throats but all other groups are
possible to find in opposition to any other group on planet) the changes you
can make are significantly small.
> Of course, the fact that they require different countermeasures than
I have yet to set down the definitive organization for the "Great Bear State"
force when technoly is mixed at Company and Battalion level. Since, IIRC, the
name has been taken already I need to come up with a
variant - The Grizzly Bear Confederation maybe... Or Golden Bear
State.... or ???
Gracias,
On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 15:41:36 -0700 (PDT) John Atkinson
> <johnmatkinson@yahoo.com> writes:
<snip>
> NEA mostly 1/2 or 5 (PA transporters with MDC/5. )
MDC/5 = 15 sub-total = 15
PA FT = 8 sub-total = 23 'base' model
Variant A (most common)
PDS/Basic= 2 Total = 25
Variant B LAD = 2 Total = 25
Actually a size 6 might be better because onto the 'base' 23 cap points you
could add:
PDS/SUP sub-total = 27
APFC sub-total =28
LAD total= 30 (or a GMS/L if you wanted to be
really quirky.)
Gracias,
> --- warbeads@juno.com wrote:
> Actually a size 6 might be better because onto the
And along came a direct-fire size 3 weapon and blew it
to hell on a good chit draw.
I once did a scenario with a supertank escorted by maybe a half dozen other
vehicles against an ad hoc
militia force which was formed around an anti-tank
company (3 platoons of 6 tank destroyers each). It was bloody and the militia
lost about half their vehicles, but the Bolo bit it. Ever since I've been
unimpressed by really big vehicles.
On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 10:08:25 -0400 (EDT) John K Lerchey
> <lerchey@andrew.cmu.edu> writes:
<SNIP>
> Size 2
<SNIP>
> Um... I thought the max number of weapons was limited to the size of
Class/Size 2 = 10 capacity points. SomeWeapon_Size_3 = 9 capacity
points
one weapon per vehicle, multiple vehicles carry multiple weapons at 1 per
vehicle.
So there would be one "hammer" (9 capacity) and one capacity for 'other'
weapon (APSW or APFC IIRC)
Sorry if that was unclear.
Gracias,
Oh. Sorry. My bad on the unclarity.
I thought you were saying it had 3 weapons, not a size 3 weapon.
:D
J
John K. Lerchey Computer and Network Security Coordinator Computing Services
Carnegie Mellon University
> On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 warbeads@juno.com wrote:
> On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 10:08:25 -0400 (EDT) John K Lerchey