How to kill a GEV tank

In Hammers Slammers they had those fragmentation charges all around the hull
which would intercept
a buzz-bomb and any close problem infantry

That and the tribarrel on the cupola used to get rid of most of the infantry
problems.

There were several unsupported panzer attacks without full infantry support
IIRC.

These systems exist in DS2.

> You wrote:

> There were several unsupported panzer attacks

Note that Hammer's Slammers was written based on Drake's experiences in
Vietnam, specifically the invasion of Cambodia. He was going through
some rather poor-quality infantry--second-line and inexperienced PAVN
troops.  And they do have 'combat car' (Read: ACAV, M-113s with
multiple machine guns) support on most occasions.

> These systems exist in DS2.

APFCs are a difficult to use if you've got infantry of your own--I
don't permit them to be active if there is even one friendly platoon of
infantry anywhere on the board.

> There were several unsupported panzer attacks

> Vietnam, specifically the invasion of Cambodia. He was going through

> infantry anywhere on the board.
Really? That seems a bit harsh. I would think that IFF chips would tend to
make the use of APFCs a bit safer than that. Personally, I let them work
unless there is a unit of friendlys between the tank and

the unit firing at it.

It's a slow day at work, as you have all no doubt guessed. In fact, I am
sitting here reading Drake's "Caught in the Crossfire", speaking of the
Slammers. Did GZG ever release the Dirtside scale AA guns? The one's that were
first released as 25mm resin, with a hover chassis? I want some.

> You wrote:

> Really? That seems a bit harsh. I would think that IFF chips
Personally, >I let them work unless there is a unit of friendlys between the
tank and >the unit firing at it.

How do you tell the difference between a friendly infantryman and a hostile?
IFF chips in his helmet? I don't trust 'em to work right.

> You wrote:

Subcutaneous chips, implanted in the soldier's chest or arm. These

would replace dogtags, having all of the relevant information, as well as
serving an IFF function. As for recognizing your own, the chip would

coded for say, signal "A". Anything that does NOT have that signal is a

foe (or a missile) and triggers the APFC belt. I can see the exact frequency
of this signal being something that you do NOT want the enemy to have, and I
can see it being changed on a weekly (or whatever) basis.

And yes, I can see some poor bastard getting shredded because he didn't get
his code updated.

John spake thusly upon matters weighty:

> > Really? That seems a bit harsh. I would think that IFF chips

To which I reply: You expect your charges to work right, don't you John? You
expect your rifle (when you carry one) to work. Why not IFF? Especially given
300 added years, I see no reason why this won't be in the 'been around so long
its rock solid' category.

Mind you, OTOH, I can see EW chits being used to screw up IFF systems thus
resulting in unfortunate friendly casualties.

Tom.
/************************************************
Thomas Barclay Software Specialist Police Communications Systems Software
Kinetics Ltd. 66 Iber Road, Stittsville Ontario, Canada, K2S 1E7
Reception: (613) 831-0888
PBX: (613) 831-2018
My Extension: 2036
Fax: (613) 831-8255
Software Kinetics' Web Page:
     http://www.sofkin.ca
SKL Daemons Softball Web Page:
     http://fox.nstn.ca/~kaladorn/softhp.htm
**************************************************/

> On Thu, 25 Jun 1998, John Atkinson wrote:

> >There were several unsupported panzer attacks

Still, Hammer's supertanks DO have a problem with infantry with buzzbombs
and satchel charges -- quite a few are killed this way in the stories.
Actually, I'd bet *more* are killed by PBIs than large AT weapons or other
tanks... (partly because I don't recall a single story where
Slammers face enemy armor of equal caliber with similar crew quality --
though the other merc company in The Warrior comes close).

What they DON'T have a problem with is bigger, longer range guided missiles
(GMS).

RE:IFF

I remember reading a short story (maybe in the Beserker series) where a ship
was about to be boarded. The crew grabbed their weapons and rmor and a little
bot came around and sprayed everyone with some invisible film that the IFF in
the weapons would use to keep from shooting friendlies. After each boarding
attempt the bot came around again and sprayed a different coumpund to avoid
the enemy mimicing their codes. Thought it was neat.

> You wrote:

> To which I reply: You expect your charges to work right, don't you

Because whether my rifle or my charges work is dependant on my skill.
I'm confident that I can rig demo 100% of the time.  Dual-prime,
dual-initiated demolitions won't fail if you do it right (assuming your
fuzes aren't cut by enemy fire). Rifles won't jam if you clean them properly.
But IFF is electronics, which is something I can't control and can't fix if it
goes wrong. Can't fix in the field under any
conditions--you need a REMF with fancy equipment to fix a microchip.
What happens if my helmet stops a slug? It shatters, I've got a headache, and
my IFF chip is gone. What happens if I loose the helmet? Hell, more often than
not I'd want to leave it home anyway. Boonie caps beat that monster any day.

> John Atkinson wrote:

> You wrote:

Well lets see if you are magically transported 300 years into the future does
that mean you will automatically know how to maintain, clean and repair a
gauss rifle or a laser rifle? Probably not. But if you are born raised and
trained 300 years in teh future you very well may know how. Or maybe it'll be
modular components etc. Why not just replace the microchip like a battery?

Heard the same hokey arguments about muskets back when I was a long bowman
around 1066....

In a message dated 98-06-25 11:59:09 EDT, you write:

<< There were several unsupported panzer attacks without full infantry support
IIRC.
> [quoted text omitted]
And they worked just fine against poorly motivated troops. However, when the
opposition was not willing to run at the first sight of a tank, Germans got
mauled. The 4th PzDiv took a real licking on Sept. 1 when it tried to assault
a Polish cav brigade in a forest (lost 40 tanks) and again later on in the
campaign when its commander thought it could take Warsaw on the march (lost 40
more tanks). After the Polish campaign all Panzer divisions got a new TO&E
with fewer tanks and more infantry. Germans, by the way, had a working
equivalent of APFC belt (called Verteidigungswaffe, or something like that)
during WW2, but it did not obviate the need for having infantry support.

> At 17:02 25/06/98 -0400, you wrote:

        Some slave-making ants confuse the defending forces by spraying
"propaganda substances", preventing the defenders from recognizing each other.
The defenders duly attack each other, and the raiders continue with their work
(carrying off brood to replenish their slave stock).

Rob