Hello
I've been toying around with a bizarre idea for FT. This may well have been
done before (I haven't looked through the archive). Ok here goes. A launcher
system that fires out vacuum suited troopers who have jet packs to propel
themselves short distances to enemy ships. Once attached to the out side of
the ship they can act in a similar way to needle beams.
Mad? yes probably.
Ok these are the very draft (or daft!) rules. 6 troopers per marker (same as
fighters) Move in fighter movement phase Movement 4" (no endurance factor) Can
attach to any ship within 2" after ship movement. Can be fired at by PDS as
per normal rules. Once attached, each turn roll damage same as a needle beam
attack on ship.
If only 1-3 troopers left alive then damage caused only on a roll of 6
and no additional damage other than the system damage is suffered.
During PDS fire, only the ship affected can attempt to rid itself of the
troopers. A roll of 6 kills only 1 trooper anything less misses.
Obviously this type of mission is suicide but it could fit within certain
political scenarios (prisoner units, clones bred for this purpose etc.) It
could also fit for alien insect style races with expendable troopers.
Comments encouraged. (no klingon remarks please:)
Isn't this pretty much what a transforming mecha fighter would do? In which
case, make them a type of fighter with a special attack mode, then puts lots
of them in the IJN
Tony
> Jeremey Claridge wrote:
Jeremey Claridge schrieb:
> Hello
... It could also fit for alien insect style
> races with expendable troopers.
Or GW 40K Space Orks
;-)
> > Mad? yes probably.
> Or GW 40K Space Orks
Don't even go there:)
On 1/30/02 6:34 AM, "Jeremey Claridge" <jeremy.claridge@kcl.ac.uk>
wrote:
> Mad? yes probably.
Yes.
> Ok these are the very draft (or daft!) rules.
The unlimited endurance doesn't sit well with me, even if they don't have a
secondary move. They can float around the board forever.
Also, how do you note the shortage of crew for potential future boarding
actions?
> Can attach to any ship within 2" after ship movement.
How are you going to determine what systems can be damaged from the outside of
a vessel?
> At 2:34 PM +0000 1/30/02, Jeremey Claridge wrote:
So marines are so plentiful in your navy that they are willing to be shot out
of tubes like missiles. How many will get to a target? How many will miss and
go floating off like Major Tom?
> On Wed, Jan 30, 2002 at 11:40:26AM -0500, Ryan M Gill wrote:
I can see the ESU doing this. If you come back, your sentence is reduced by
twenty years...
> Jeremy Claridge wrote:
> Hello
Er... Jer? You don't have More Thrust, do you?
"Once you have got your ship into the correct position to be able to launch
a Boarding assault, the Marines may cross between the ships - they are
assumed to do this either in small "assault pods" specially made for such
actions, or in their own Powereed Armour suits if they are euipped with them."
More Thrust p.7, "Boarding Actions".
PSB-wise this sounds very similar to what you're proposing, though the
boarding rules allow you to actually capture enemy ships.
Regards,
> On Wed, Jan 30, 2002 at 11:40:26AM -0500, Ryan M Gill wrote:
But, can they create pds that can traverse enough to just sweep the soldiers
> Oerjan Ohlson wrote:
> Er... Jer? You don't have More Thrust, do you?
Neither do I. But I just went ahead and ordered the other 3 books from GZG.
I'd love to get my hands on those rules in MT not covered in the other books.
Anyone willing to help?
2B^2
> At 2:34 PM +0000 1/30/02, Jeremey Claridge wrote:
Look through the archives--under "boarding torpedo" IIRC. I don't
remember anyone but the Islamic Fed who was all that thrilled with this idea,
though.
G'day,
> Look through the archives--under "boarding torpedo" IIRC. I
Especially if I was in charge of 'em...
> > Look through the archives--under "boarding torpedo" IIRC. I
Beth said:
> Especially if I was in charge of 'em...
But if we could get you aboard, and get you to replace their gunnery
G'day,
> But if we could get you aboard, and get you to replace their gunnery
Is this a mission I get to choose to accept OR reject?;P
> On Thu, 31 Jan 2002 12:09:58 +1100 Beth.Fulton@csiro.au writes:
Well, my first thought was "Duh, no." Then I thought about how many critcical
officers and CPO's I'd loose trying to get you into the pod and decided to
just fire the pods as "solid impact pellets" and *lie* to
Supreme HQ... Or put the commissar in the pod - the crew would like
that..
Gracias,
> The unlimited endurance doesn't sit well with me, even if they don't
Well there could always be a limit to their time in open space but it starts
to get messy keeping track of endurance factors every turn.
> Also, how do you note the shortage of crew for potential future
I was think more of troopers launched in this way are not part of the ships
crew in anyway. Not exactly a detachment of marines more a set of troopers
held in launchers for just this type of mission.
> How are you going to determine what systems can be damaged from the
For simplicity I was just going to use the same as the needle beam. But
essentially it would have to be a system with some part of it needing an
opening in the hull or protruding from it.
Jeremey
> So marines are so plentiful in your navy that they are willing to be
No well trained Marines would not be wasted in this way. Which is why I
suggested that if your background has either the ethical backdrop to say use
prisoners on these missions as a way to redeem themselves (e.g. The Dirty
Dozen) or you have specially bred clones for just these missions or it fits
within an expendable class of insectoid alien races.
Jeremey
> Er... Jer? You don't have More Thrust, do you?
This was an alternative to the normal boarding actions. In some ways it is
there to exploit a limit to the defending ships design.
A boarding action would be met by a defending force. So the attackers would
need to be able to match that force. But land a handful of troops onto the
exterior of the ships hull and the defenders cannot bring their full weight of
defences to bear. They would have to suit up and go hunting across the
exterior of the ship.
Jeremey
Toot,
"an expendable class of insectoid alien races"
Poetry.
deets
[quoted original message omitted]
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2002 at 10:14:52AM -0000, Germy & Fizl wrote:
> For simplicity I was just going to use the same as the needle beam. But
Well, this is pretty much what inspired that particular aspect of the
multimode fighter design I posted earlier.
I still don't find this a plausible human tech. If you called them Sa'Vasku
Boarding Pods, on the other hand...
Dang send button. Fingers got a way from me again!
Been lurking for a bit but Jeremy's reference to ""an expendable class of
insectoid alien races" brought me to the surface!
Nothing like an ECoIAR to get the blood flowing a'mornings!
Well done.
Regards,
> Toot,
I thought every alien race had an expendable class:)
Jeremey
[quoted original message omitted]
G'day,
> Not exactly a detachment of marines more a set of
And John was complaining about sitting inside a grav tank for too
long....
;)
> On Friday, February 01, 2002 11:35 AM, Beth.Fulton@csiro.au wrote:
> Beth - who thinks its very speciesest to believe that insects will
This from a Dalek player...
G'day,
> Well, my first thought was "Duh, no." Then I thought about how many
Are you suggesting I'd make a bit of a fuss hey? You'd probably be right
;)
Pipe down, children. I want both of you to read Asprin's "Bug Wars" and write
a book report for homework.
> "Robertson, Brendan" wrote:
G'day
> This from a Dalek player...
Daleks think every OTHER species is expendable;P
On Friday, February 01, 2002 11:43 AM, Edward Lipsett
> [SMTP:translation@intercomltd.com] wrote:
"I came, I saw, I squished." ;-)
G'day,
> Pipe down, children.
OK I'm gonna look like a right pillock (I'm not as well read as Derek when it
comes to fiction) but.... who's book on what? (OK I can probably guess at the
subject matter from the title....)
Yeah, but between "saw" and "squished" the buggie main character went into
hibernation, IIRC, for a while, and at the end of the book went into
hibernation for like decades or centuries in preparation for meeting bunch of
upstart mammals from somewhere out in the boonies. Talk about keeping reserves
on ice, sheesh.
> "Robertson, Brendan" wrote:
> From: Beth.Fulton@csiro.au
Give me a better definition of Speciesist.......
The main character and all his buddies are star-conquering bugs. No
people appear at all. See
http://www.amazon.com/exec/obidos/ASIN/0312107617/qid=1012524944/sr=1-1/
ref=sr_1_0_1/102-9469057-4768134
Great book, and on the shelf right next to Starship Troopers quite
intentionally.
P.S. Do pillocks some in right- and left-handed variations?
In the States we normally just take two before going to bed and call the
doctor in the morning.
> Beth.Fulton@csiro.au wrote:
> Edward Lipsett Wrote:
> The main character and all his buddies are star-conquering bugs. No
Sounds like a good book. If you have room on the shelf, add Armor by John
Steakly right next to it.
2B^2
G'day,
> The main character and all his buddies are star-conquering bugs. No
Cool!
> P.S. Do pillocks some in right- and left-handed variations?
In this house, yep;)
No, sorry... that's on a different shelf. Racial bias, I guess (bugs just
don't seemto get along too well with people.)
> Brian Bilderback wrote:
So a left-handed pillock in OZ is called a "northpaw," right?
> Beth.Fulton@csiro.au wrote:
> Edward Lipsett wrote:
> No, sorry... that's on a different shelf. Racial bias, I guess (bugs
'Ssok, as long as you have it.
2B^2
G'day again,
> So a left-handed pillock in OZ is called a "northpaw," right?
Well Derek is from Queensland, so makes sense;)
100% concurrence. Armor is an excellent book. Steakly intentionally
wrote entire "action scenes" in run-on sentences that do a great job of
conveying the "feel" of the chaos the main character was dealing with.
Very good story.
--Flak
> On Thu, 2002-01-31 at 20:04, Brian Bilderback wrote:
[quoted original message omitted]
> On Fri, 1 Feb 2002 11:42:39 +1100 Beth.Fulton@csiro.au writes:
One word - yes.
> On Fri, 1 Feb 2002 11:43:37 +1100 Beth.Fulton@csiro.au writes:
*Another* thing the Daleks have backwards...
Gracias,
On Fri, 1 Feb 2002 11:39:53 +1100 "Robertson, Brendan"
> <Brendan.Robertson@dva.gov.au> writes:
Expend all the Daleks you want. The more the merrier.
Gracias,
> On Fri, 1 Feb 2002 11:35:07 +1100 Beth.Fulton@csiro.au writes:
<snip>
> Beth - who thinks its very speciesest to believe that insects will
"Speciesest"? LOL!!!
Why not? We have Peasants?!
Gracias,
On Thu, 31 Jan 2002 16:54:19 -0800 "Brian Bilderback"
> <bbilderback@hotmail.com> writes:
The Azuriach Empire from A. Mark Ratner's Space Marines world.
Non-humans (includes Galactic People's Republic personnel) are animals
you execute not defeat.
Spelling is optional.
Gracias,
> >Beth - who thinks its very speciesest to believe that insects will
Well maybe i shouldn't have singled out Insects. After all a quick look at
tactics for WW1 highlights a different species example of expendable.
But this is sci-fi so you could even move away from expendable troopers
to genetically engineered creatures (e.g. alien) and send them across.
The idea of this was to explore the idea of what a ship would need to do to
protect itself from an attack from the out side of the hull compared to a
boarding action.
Given the respose I'll word my e-mails with a bit more care next time :)
ahhhh, GLEN!
the azuriach imperium are the space nazis. the GPR are the space commies.
you are thinking about the RANAAN HORDE.
All wonderful neighbors in the friendly skies... I mean space... of United.
> On Fri, 1 Feb 2002 11:26:04 -0600 (CST) DAWGFACE47@webtv.net writes:
G'day Rob,
> Let's hear it for the Naked Mole-Rat Empire!
Ugh! There's a thought I didn't need;)