Wire! Wonderful Wire! I like Wire! It's almost as much fun as landmines. Have
no idea how it would affect GEV vehicles, so ignoring them in the rules below.
Am also assuming Grav can fly over them. YMMV. Am also assuming infantry are
carrying wire cutters. Assumes modern wire, you may modify to taste to reflect
monofilament, etc.
Double Apron Barbed Wire Fence: Impassable to infantry, wheeled vehicles. Poor
going to tracked vehicles. When tracked vehicles move through, they create a
breach. Infantry may breach, Engineers may move
1/2 normal distance and breach.
Triple Standard Concertina Wire Fence: Impassable to infantry, wheeled
vehicles. Difficult going for tracked, Tracked vehicles also roll a d6 when
moving through. On a 1, Satan's Slinkie has gotten caught up in their
roadwheels and chopped to bits, immobilizing the tank completely. Cannot be
repaired at the battlefield. Must be hauled back to a depot
where long-suffering mechanics will have to half-way disassemble the
thing and pick little bits of metal out of the tranmission. When tracked
vehicles pass through, breached. Infantry may breach.
Engineers may move 1/2 normal and breach. May be mined/booby trapped,
in which case infantry may not breach, any unit attempting to breach is
attacked as per Dirtside rules. If the first Engineer unit is wiped out,
further breaching efforts by dismounted Engineers may avoid attack by rolling
unit quality vs a 4. I'm assuming the Engineers would use explosives which
will clear the booby traps and the wire all at once.
Tanglefoot: Difficult going to infantry, Engineer may clear as they move
through, Infantry must take an activation to breach.
Concertina Roadblock. 10 coils of Concertina. May be (with great effort)
extended to cover clear terrain, but that's fairly
labor-intensive. Stops all vehicles except Grav. Cold. Try to drive
into it, and you're immobilized permenantly. Breached by 1 element of
Engineers (Dismounted or vehicle). Requires 2 elements/activations of
infantry.
4-Strand Cattlefence: What most people think of when they say "Barbed
Wire." Not a military obstacles. Enough can cause an area to be classed as
Cultivated.
Misc:
Steel Tetrahedrons, Steel Hedgehogs, Concrete Cubes, Tertrahedrons, Dragon's
Teeth. Impassable to all vehicles except grav, normal going for infantry (or
as per terrain). Breach requires 2 actions, 1 from CEV.
Wow....engineers must be super human! But seriously, excellent info but some
items I question:
Wire is not impassable to infantry, first guy jumps and lands on the wire,
next guy runs over, or, if the wire has enough depth, he runs over and takes a
spot a little further ahead. This goes on until a path is
clear (ie - everybody behind you uses you as a door matt ;-). I think
your breaching rules would simulate this good enough.
How do you reason that engineers can move half and breach obstacles? And how
do engineers clear tanglefoot as they go through? Are you guys issued wire
cutters on your boots?
Thanks
> -----Original Message-----
> Wire is not impassable to infantry, first guy jumps and lands on the
Ah-h, Johny in the wire. It's been quite some time since I've used that
particular method. It makes a serious mess out of your utilities and can be
quite painful if the people behind you have heavy packs on...
> You wrote:
Yes, we are. Why do you ask?
Engineers are equipped and trained for breaches, Infantry pogues are not.
Absolutely not. You can say all you like, but what percentage of the
Infantry's training time is spent on breaches? I can tell you
Engineers spend out 50-75% of our time on it.
> Wire is not impassable to infantry, first guy jumps and lands on the
I think >your breaching rules would simulate this good enough.
I'm presuming your infantry have wire cutters. And you'll have
difficulty doing that to a triple standard concertina wire fence _I've_
built, since I do it right.
> How do you reason that engineers can move half and breach obstacles?
We know what we are doing, and besides, we're using Bangalores while the
infantry are stuck with cutters. And that's only wire.
> And how do engineers clear tanglefoot as they go through? Are you
Since a Dirtside II turn is 15 minutes, and foot infantry is moving a mere 200
meters, half that if you're going through Difficult terrain
(as tanglefoot is). That leaves _more_ than ample time to cut
tanglefoot.
> You wrote:
> Ah-h, Johny in the wire. It's been quite some time since I've used
AKA "Body Breach".
that >particular method. It makes a serious mess out of your utilities and can
be >quite painful if the people behind you have heavy packs
on...
Not to mention is ineffective against a properly tied-in triple
standard fence. You're trying to flatten a 2m tall fence that's two meters
wide at the base. It's tied into pickets in a dozen ways, and the coils are
tied together. Not a friggin' prayer.
> You wrote:
> I'll use a cloud bomb loaded with anti-mine nanites which will scour
Interesting idea. I don't know how much nanite technology is assumed
in the Dirtside/Full Thrust background. I mean, we don't have little
armor-eating nanite, or man-eating nanites.
> way of generating a huge 'slightly subsurface' shockwave to set them
Yeah. And while you're burying explosives...
I think I'm being damn generous assuming idiot-proof GPR is going to be
available. I should make you clear mines by hand.
> off. Or I'll use Grav vehicles in High Mode to avoid them.
Grav vehicles in high mode (unless using Traveller grav where high mode is
suborbital...) are still quite vulnerable to SFF.
John spake thusly upon matters weighty:
> >I'll use a cloud bomb loaded with anti-mine nanites which will scour
And yet we have grav tech, when I'd guess we're closer to nanites (we have
some now) than we are to gravitational control (since we still aren't sure its
a theoretical possibility).
> >way of generating a huge 'slightly subsurface' shockwave to set them
Heh. Point taken.
> I think I'm being damn generous assuming idiot-proof GPR is going to
Hmm. You're an engineer. You and I both know, for every step one way, someone
takes a step on the other side. I think the task will still be irritating,
slow, and dangerous, but it won't be impossible.
> Grav vehicles in high mode (unless using Traveller grav where high
SFF?
I know they are vulnerable to things. I'm just suggesting that their are
countermeasures to every measure. And that for every neat trick we can
imagine.... there is another one to counter it.
How about?
Detection of mines using mass densitometers (grav tech?). Detonation of mines
using a vehicular mine sweep that generates a huge EM field that may set off
some types of mines. Cancelling of ground pressure using Grav tech so forcing
mines to detonate with other sensors which can be spoofed. Sweeping of mines
using robots (if not nanites). Having all engineers wear light PA for speed
and strength.
or on the other side
Mobile smartmines that move around? Mines that have limited AI to resist
sweeping...
Mines that utilize SFB 'Captor' tech - have target tracking and
weapons so they are an active hunter rather than a sit and wait Sentry guns (a
la aliens)?
Anyway, there are more ideas out there than you and I can cover, and I'm sure
neither of us can cover an exhaustive ROE or tactical doctrine for the
deployment of such tech. I think this will be a work
in progress - never truly finished - as I suspect continuing changes
will show us new and different things we never thought of.
:) Tom.
/************************************************
I'm going to say quite a bit.
Infantry spend quite a bit of time working on the clearing of wire obstacles
and the setting of them. Maybe you are thinking of American Infantry, if you
are I apologize as I don't know what training they do so I may be arguing
apples and oranges. I agree that we don't train at the same percentage as
engineers but we do train.
Infantry don't carry bangalores nor high explosives. We do carry Rocket
launchers and often have engineer or pioneer dets attached to us. Heck, we
sometimes have big tanks beside us. Oh, ya we even have wire cutters. My point
was that Infantry do work with and against wire so if a wire obstacle was
found they wouldn't just say 'oh no, let's get the engineers' they would work
around it.
Over all I agreed with your post, I just had some points on it. From your
reply maybe I worded it wrong.
[quoted original message omitted]
It is not ineffective, It would cost a lot in men (not to mention the exposure
to fire) but it is doable. Whether by jumping on it pulling on it with chains,
firing a Carl Gustav round (not sure what the Americans use, but I know they
have better) I'd even use some M72 rounds for good measure. My point is that
the nice text book wire obs isn't going to stay pristine for ever and that,
with or without the help of engineers it is passable.
I've made the wire obstacle you are talking about an it ain't unstoppable. You
should join the infantry see what you can do without fancy explosives.
[quoted original message omitted]
Ok here is something I read about recently, biologic mine detectors! It seems
they can insert flouresence genes into bacteria that have a taste for the
chemicals used in bombs. You spray the ground with a solution of bacteria and
let it set for a while. In a couple of hours come back with a black light and
the areas of high flouresence will be where there are buried explosives (read
mines.) They are still working on this now but it looks good. I suspect that
nanites are going to be a little crude in the future.
Tom Hughes
On Mon, 4 May 1998 14:28:16 -0500 Thomas Barclay
> <Thomas.Barclay@sofkin.ca> writes:
> I know they are vulnerable to things. I'm just suggesting that their
> You wrote:
It >seems they can insert flouresence genes into bacteria that have a taste
>for the chemicals used in bombs. You spray the ground with a solution of
>bacteria and let it set for a while. In a couple of hours come back with >a
black light and the areas of high flouresence will be where there are >buried
explosives (read mines.) They are still working on this now but it >looks
good. I suspect that nanites are going to be a little crude in the >future.
If you have to wait a few hours, then it's great for rear-area
demining, but not for combat. Remember, two hours is 8 Dirtside turns.
> You wrote:
> It is not ineffective, It would cost a lot in men (not to mention the
Have you ever done it yourself? I'm saying that if the coils are secured to
the pickets and eachother properly, throwing a 200lb weight on them shouldn't
make a usable gap.
on >it with chains, firing a Carl Gustav round (not sure what the
Don't pull on it with chains. It's not worth the time. There are these
inventions called pickets, that get pounded into the ground. You secure the
wire to these 'pickets' and they don't go anywhere unless you blow them up.
Americans >use, but I know they have better) I'd even use some M72 rounds for
good >measure. My point is that the nice text book wire obs
You'd be surprised. I wish we had a Carl Gustav. It's the AT4 and the Dragon,
nothing in between. And the AT4 (aka M136, IIRC. No one calls
it that) is basically a one-shot Carl Gustav. Feh.
isn't going to >stay pristine for ever and that, with or without the help of
engineers >it is passable.
OK, how would you rewrite the breaching wire rules?
> I've made the wire obstacle you are talking about an it ain't
I can't be an infantryman, I passed the ASVAB[1][2]. Seriously, while it's not
unstoppable, it will delay you for a couple of minutes, which is all it's
designed to do. Which is all my rules let it do, unless I'm mistaken.
> You wrote:
> Infantry don't carry bangalores nor high explosives. We do carry
Which slows the hell out of breaching ops. I should know, I've done it both
ways.
Rocket >launchers and often have engineer or pioneer dets attached to
I'm not sure that a shoulder-fired ATRL is a real reliable way of
clearing wire.
And if you have a team or squad of engineer (and pioneer, I am not planning to
differentiate in my rules) then you use their enhanced breaching ability to
breach. Simplicity itself.
us. Heck, >we sometimes have big tanks beside us. Oh, ya we even have
My rules do permit tanks to roll through wire--although Satan's Slinkie
can fsck up a tank quick if it gets into it's roadwheels and gets caught.
wire >cutters. My point was that Infantry do work with and against wire so if
>a wire obstacle was found they wouldn't just say 'oh no, let's get the
>engineers' they would work around it.
OK, my thinking was that first, as an Engineer who's worked with infantry, I
know I've spent a lot more time on breaching ops than they
have. Second, we're carrying all the neat boom-boom stuff to do
breaches more rapidly with. Third, I wanted to encourage players to have a
reason to buy engineers and preserve them for their special abilities rather
than treat them as just plain ol' Infantrymen. The basic wire obstacle doesn't
take much to breach with infantry. Wait
until I get my mine/booby trap rules up for the poor infantry to try to
deal with.
Actually, the infantrymen I have met (a few, not a huge sample), usually have
the attitude, that if a particular obstacle looks dangerous, or even
inconvenient, they would be more than happy to let the engineers take care of
it. This is NOT a slam, just a representation of natural human laziness and
self-preservation.
Which makes me question the true origins of engineers;)
Anyway, the phrase that seemed to fit best: "There's never enough engineers to
go around, and they keep trying to blow themselves up."
As far as the Carl Gustav is concerned, there are a few foreign weapon systems
I think that the US should have bought. That's one of 'em.
Um, realizing that there is a problem with the measure/countermeasure
argument
- it can go on ad infinitum. How about just mines and mine-clearing
equipment, of several grades of effectiveness? (Basic, Enhanced, Superior?)
However, don't stop the ideas - they are neat.
Another DS2 argument I want to start. I postulate that high-power,
reliable
battlefield DEWs (Directed Energy Weapons - laser, particle beam, etc)
will render the vast majority of close support aircraft obsolete and dead,
very quickly. Why? 1) If you can see it, you can hit it. In fact, it's pretty
much the same operation. I'm not saying that lasers can't miss, but it's
easier to paint a
plane/copter/whatever with a targeting laser than it is to put
steel/tungsten/DU/BCSD on target.
2) Conventional aircraft, both fixed and rotary wing, have real weight
problems. Armor does not help this. And ablative is probably not real
aerodynamic.
3) Anti-laser aerosols, while effective against targeting lasers, simply
cannot stop a laser poweful enough to kill a plane/copter/APC. But
here, I could also as easily say that it can, due to tech changes. DS2 'smoke'
is
presumed to block/hinder nearly all sensors, not just Mk1 Eyeball.
I have some rules to simulate this, esssentially
enhancements/alterations of
the ADS/Air Defense rules, that expand these systems greatly, and
provide (I believe) a better representation of future battlefield AD
environments.
Watch out for Powergun AAA. 'Nuf said.
John spake thusly upon matters weighty:
> If you have to wait a few hours, then it's great for rear-area
Ah yes, but given 300 years, can we not imagine fast acting biologic agents?
(Counter point, would I then spray the ground with a mist of explosive
chemical to make it real hard to tell where my mines are, or seed the area
with a counter biologic agent....)
Here's another one: We have grav tech. Why not put a 'grav flail' on the front
of a mine clearing tank or hover platform that extends a distance in front of
the vehicle (to protect the vehicle) and generates a very heavy gravitational
field such that any mine it passes over would think it was being run over by
an ogre, and would hence go off. Mine clearing using new technology.....
Tom.
/************************************************
> NVDoyle wrote:
Another would have been the 17lb gun in WW2..
> Noah V. Doyle
[quoted original message omitted]
> Um, realizing that there is a problem with the measure/countermeasure
These are not {OFFICIAL} rules suggestions - just some thoughts for
discussion....
Agreed that this is an interesting discussion, and detailed
mine/antimine
rules could form a good scenario basis, but I also agree that some simple and
abstract rules for resolving these operations in the course of a game would
probabaly be best for most purposes. As suggested above, how about rating both
mine and mineclearing systems as Basic, Enhanced or Superior tech, and make a
mineclearing operation a simple opposed roll between the mine tech and the
clearing tech? Success by the clearer means X metres of minefield is now safe,
success by the mines means they've missed some
(!)
and critical success by the mines means the engineers get blown
up.......
> You wrote:
> - it can go on ad infinitum. How about just mines and mine-clearing
I intend to incorporate various suggestions when I finally get the time (I'm
currently also painting my Kra'Vak fleet, enrolled in a correspondance course,
working, etc, etc, etc) to get the mine rules finished.
> These are not {OFFICIAL} rules suggestions - just some thoughts for
Bingo--I asked who was interested in seeing some house rules I worked
up, and the vote (1-0) was in favor of tossing 'em out on the list. If
they ever become official/semi-official/inspire someone to write
(semi-)official rules, fine. If they don't, I couldn't care less
either. I enjoyed putting them together, and I find the discussion that ensues
interesting, so it's worth my time to do so.
> Agreed that this is an interesting discussion, and detailed
Probably will do mines in two ways.
1)Simple and workable rules that don't take an Engineer's sick, twisted mind
to enjoy
2)Detailed rules for the pedants like me who like 5-series manuals.
Yes I have jumped on wire and yes I've walked over someone on top of wire. Not
the nicest thing, makes hell out of a uniform. Yes I have worked with pickets,
a lot of pickets. In fact I hope to never see a picket again.
John, don't get me wrong I liked your rules. The pioneer (engineer) training I
did was some of the funnest I ever did. It was only the move and clear option
given to engineers that I found fault in. I would think along the lines of
giving engineers greater ability to clear stuff over standard infantry.
Probably around double. My reason being that it takes time to place a charge
and to fire it off I'd guess about the same amount of time it would take to
attempt a brute force solution. But I would think that the bangalore would
have a better chance and clear a better whole.
Speaking of pickets, have you ever done this: it is a sort of improvised
bangalore.
1. Take a 6 foot picket (for those who don't know, it is a straight steel pole
bent 90 degrees along its length, so if you were to look along its length it
looks like an 'L') 2. Fill the picket with C4 3. Attach a det cord
When detonated it works about the same as a bangalore. We tried it with the
explosive facing up and with the metal facing up, I can't remember what worked
better.
> -----Original Message-----
> You wrote:
> Now it should be borne in mind that these obstacles don't just
> constructions can be VERY deep and if put together properly the human
11-row Concertina Roadblocks. Let's lay a squad of infantry,
end-to-end. . .
And I just don't believe anyone who's in normal physical shape is going to
foul up a concertina fence on their own.
And pray I havn't mined the approaches.
Gustav >will not do much either. In the explosion much of the wire and pickets
>just get pushed around and you end up with even a worse mess to try to >get
through.
I did concede that a DFFG of sufficient size (say 3+) should be able to
breach a simple wire obstacle.
> Now if someone could come up with a way to factor in Intel and
PsyOps. Opposed roll for unit quality, higher roll convinces looser's troops
to either desert or surrender. Roll d6. On three or less, they stick their
bayonets in the ground and go home, on a four or more, they surrender. Kinda
makes for a boring game...
11 roll road block, :-) What is on either side of these rolls, sheer
cliffs. John, your making me howl, its like a 'I can do this' and 'well, in
that case I can do this' battle. It will never end.
If you won't admit that engineers aren't the only ones who can clear an
obstacle please let me know!
Thanks (keep up the posts though)
> -----Original Message-----
> You wrote:
> 11 roll road block, :-) What is on either side of these rolls, sheer
> You wrote:
move >and clear option given to engineers that I found fault in. I would
>think along the lines of giving engineers greater ability to clear stuff
>over standard infantry. Probably around double. My
Ah. I shall rethink that one. Perhaps allow infantry to breach a foot lane,
taking another activation to improve it to a vehicle lane, but an engineer
unit automatically clears a vehicle lane?
> Speaking of pickets, have you ever done this: it is a sort of
Yup! What we usually do is duct-tape two pickets together with C-4
packed in. We used 13 packages (1.25 lbs ea) of C-4. Cool, but a bit
unwieldy to hump for a couple klicks. It also has a tendency to make a
bit of a crater if you over-do it. More than 13 packages is overkill.
What you say sounds good. Maybe a little SGish. We never taped them together.
We did a side by side comparison of a picket with a bangalore and found the
bangalore to be better. What amazed me the most was how the wire still hung
around. Not enough to stop someone but enough to to channel troops into single
file.
> -----Original Message-----
> Yeah, should be able to blast a breach with a DFFG or artillery. If
Also, if the wire is of a superconducting material, it will conduct any heat
applied against it along its entrire mass. If it has enough mass, it may still
survive.