Leaving APSWs and other crewed weapons, dealing only with 'slugthrowers' and
ignoring melee weapons; it appears there are nine combinations of small arms.
LTAR and SAW LTAR and Rotary SAW LTAR and Gauss SAW AAR and SAW AAR and Rotary
SAW AAR and Gauss SAW Gauss rifle and SAW Gauss rifle and Rotary SAW Gauss
rifle and Gauss SAW
I am thinking of slightly revamping the groups I am collecting and (from low
tech to high tech) going with the following:
PHR - LTAR and SAW - HVC/RFAC - Wheeled/Tracked CFE
NPC - LTAR and Rotary SAW - GMS - GEV (Tracked/Wheeled Planetary
Defense
Forces {PDF} * ) - HMT
N/A - LTAR and Gauss SAW
LIRA/LLAR - AAR and SAW - SLAM - GEV - HMT
IC - AAR and Rotary SAW - DFFG - GEV - HMT
RH - AAR and Gauss SAW - HKP - GEV - HMT
N/A - Gauss rifle and SAW
N/A - Gauss rifle and Rotary SAW
NEA - Gauss Rifle and Gauss SAW - MDC -GEV (and some GRAV) - FGP
* Post High School mandatory 4 years service in the active military or 5 years
in Survey forces males serve a required 2 years in PDF (Females may optionally
serve 2 years) plus additional years PDF service time possible upon
application and rigid selection process.
Gracias,
> Subject: [SG 2] Infantry weapons combinations
and
> ignoring melee weapons; it appears there are nine combinations of
Are you lumping in underslung-grenade launchers with your AAR and Gauss
Rifles here?
In game terms, you might stat out your weapons like this:
LTAR - firepower 2, impact d8
AAR - firepower 2, impact d10
Gauss rifle - firepower 2, impact d12
but if you add an underslung grenade launcher to the rifles, you get an FP1
bonus, so
LTAR/GL - fp 3, imp d8
AAR/GL - fp 3, imp d10
GR/GL - fp 3, imp d12
This is reflected in the basic TO&E's shown in the back of the rulebook.
The NAC forces use an AAR/GL combo, for example, while the FSE have a
Gauss Rifle with no GL.
It means that there are actually 18 combinations of weapons:
> LTAR and SAW
and then
> LTAR/GL and SAW
for a firepower/impact range of fp 2, imp d8 all the way up to fp3,
impd12. This makes a pretty big difference in game terms, particularly
depending on your squad sizes.
If you want a weak force, for example, use six-model squads with the
feeblest weapons (this would be a weak low-tech force), so five models
with
fp2/impD8 rifles and one with a SAW (fp d8/imp d8). If they were
"regular"
quality, your best shot would be: d10 (rifles) + d8 (saw) + d8
(quality).
If you upgrade them to an 8-model squad, then they get to toss a d12,
and that helps...
If you want to balance out low-tech with high-tech while using this wide
spread of weapons, you can do it with squad sizes. So, your lowest tech
force has a squad as described (8 - 10 troops with rifles, one SAW).
Your
highest tech force could have 4 - 6 model squads armed with GR/GL +
G-SAW
(so, FPd10 for rifles, even with just three figures shooting, FPd12 for
G-saw, and their quality die - say a d8 at regular). This second squad
is
throwing the same "weight of dice" with four models as the 10-model
lower
tech squad. The lower-tech squad, however, can lose three riflemen
before
their firepower is affected. The high-tech squad can't lose any. This
makes up for their better impact rating and more flexible force (more smaller
units), and allows you as the GM another tool for balancing scenarios.
In a message dated 12/20/04 6:58:36 PM Pacific Standard Time,
> adrian@stargrunt.ca writes:
> Subject: [SG 2] Infantry weapons combinations
and
> ignoring melee weapons; it appears there are nine combinations of
Are you lumping in underslung-grenade launchers with your AAR and Gauss
Rifles here?
In game terms, you might stat out your weapons like this:
LTAR - firepower 2, impact d8
AAR - firepower 2, impact d10
Gauss rifle - firepower 2, impact d12
but if you add an underslung grenade launcher to the rifles, you get an FP1
bonus, so
LTAR/GL - fp 3, imp d8
AAR/GL - fp 3, imp d10
GR/GL - fp 3, imp d12
This is reflected in the basic TO&E's shown in the back of the rulebook.
The NAC forces use an AAR/GL combo, for example, while the FSE have a
Gauss Rifle with no GL.
It means that there are actually 18 combinations of weapons:
> LTAR and SAW
and then
> LTAR/GL and SAW
for a firepower/impact range of fp 2, imp d8 all the way up to fp3,
impd12. This makes a pretty big difference in game terms, particularly
depending on your squad sizes.
If you want a weak force, for example, use six-model squads with the
feeblest weapons (this would be a weak low-tech force), so five models
with
fp2/impD8 rifles and one with a SAW (fp d8/imp d8). If they were
"regular"
quality, your best shot would be: d10 (rifles) + d8 (saw) + d8
(quality).
If you upgrade them to an 8-model squad, then they get to toss a d12,
and that helps...
If you want to balance out low-tech with high-tech while using this
wide spread of weapons, you can do it with squad sizes. So, your lowest tech
force has a squad as described (8 - 10 troops with rifles, one SAW).
Your
highest tech force could have 4 - 6 model squads armed with GR/GL +
G-SAW
(so, FPd10 for rifles, even with just three figures shooting, FPd12 for
G-saw, and their quality die - say a d8 at regular). This second squad
is
throwing the same "weight of dice" with four models as the 10-model
lower
tech squad. The lower-tech squad, however, can lose three riflemen
before
their firepower is affected. The high-tech squad can't lose any. This
makes up for their better impact rating and more flexible force (more smaller
units), and allows you as the GM another tool for balancing scenarios.
-Adrian
Actually I was leaving out GLs for now as a simplifying starting point since
some the squads have none, some or all of the riflemen equipped with
GLs...
Gracias,
On Mon, 20 Dec 2004 17:40:57 -0500, Adrian Johnson <adrian@stargrunt.ca>
wrote:
> It means that there are actually 18 combinations of weapons:
Actually more than that if you take into the current modern practice
of equipping between 1 and 3 soldiers (often NCOs/Team Leaders) with
grenade launchers.
The reason you want NCOs with them is to allow them to mark targets, which
justifies the extra point of impact just as much as if they were chucking HE
downrange.
Its nice to know that sexism (mandatory male service but optional female
service) remains constant for an enlightened species.
Even Jon T indicated that in the future, equal rights means that females have
the duty to be atomized along with the males.
I do like the Isreali government model, if your a citizen, you must serve,
regardless of gender.
> Warbeads@aol.com wrote:
* Post High School mandatory 4 years service in the active military or 5 years
in Survey forces males serve a required 2 years in PDF (Females may optionally
serve 2 years) plus additional years PDF service time possible upon
application and rigid selection process.
In NPC - Initially every one of sound mind/body serves 4 (armed forces)
or 5
years (Survey - they choose you during induction and you accept or go
to military) but the males are required to serve in PDF post active service.
Israeli military does (or did last time I needed to know) keep women out of
combat units per se. They (among other things) train combat specialty troops
but don't work in front line units in combat roles. Unless that has
changed of course. I was told that the women made it harder for broken Arab
forces to surrender (to a woman) and that the women seemed to '...take less
prisoners...' in combat.
Not that I am an expert in Middle East - Pacific is my work focus,
especially parts of South East Asia.
Gracias,
Glenn/warbeads
In a message dated 12/21/04 11:10:45 AM Pacific Standard Time,
> tom_westbrook@yahoo.com writes:
Its nice to know that sexism (mandatory male service but optional female
service) remains constant for an enlightened species.
Even Jon T indicated that in the future, equal rights means that females
have the duty to be atomized along with the males.
I do like the Isreali government model, if your a citizen, you must serve,
regardless of gender.
> Warbeads@aol.com wrote:
* Post High School mandatory 4 years service in the active military or 5 years
in Survey forces males serve a required 2 years in PDF (Females may optionally
serve 2 years) plus additional years PDF service time possible upon
application and rigid selection process.
In a message dated 12/21/04 11:10:45 AM Pacific Standard Time,
> tom_westbrook@yahoo.com writes:
Its nice to know that sexism (mandatory male service but optional female
service) remains constant for an enlightened species.
I figure the NPC are a variant in the Tuffleyverse (which my games inhabit the
dregs of that universe).
The PHR forbids 'women' to serve in the military -- "to valuable as
child bearing members of society" argument thing. A very Patriarchal
environment. "Different roles but Equal value" is the expression used.
The local IC military discourages women to volunteer as 'ground pounder'
warriors (Air Force, Space forces okay, naval forces if you insist). Lots of
debate in the IC about that but generally if you insist you can serve in the
military. It's a legal right but one a lot of women don't choose to use. Shows
who the smarter gender is perhaps.
Local RH recruiters doesn't care what "color underwear" you wear -- if
you can fight you're in. If not, you'll be shot in the field for cowardice in
the face of the enemy.
NEA officially accepts distaff volunteers but if they pass training they are
assigned to all female units and they normally never seem to see combat
...
unless their facility is attacked. Then they fight to survive as all soldiers
do.
LIRA/LLAR doesn't usually send enlisted female military members to the
forces stuck... assigned, of course... to this back water world in my
campaign. Female officers are rarely assigned but have to 'watch their back'
due to
not all males in the LIRA/LLAR think a woman should be in the military
in a combat functionality.
Even Jon T indicated that in the future, equal rights means that females
have the duty to be atomized along with the males.
So Jon has said ALL nations draft females? I would think that would vary by
group.
Laserlight, so I can know for my IF mercs in the IC service -- does the
IF take female soldiers? I'll include them if the IF sends them.
I do like the Isreali government model, if your a citizen, you must serve,
regardless of gender.
I have no problem with that as a generality but I do have a problem with that
as a 'covers all' absolute.
In the NPC you can be a civilian leader if female much, much easier then being
a female combat officer. Nothing prevents it officially and if you are really
gifted you can raise to the highest ranks in the NPC but it's unlikely you'll
be considered a prime candidate for marriage by a majority of NPC
males. A version of "The second most important group are the warriors, the
most important group are the mothers of warriors..."
Gracias,
On Tue, 21 Dec 2004 18:33:08 EST, Warbeads@aol.com <Warbeads@aol.com> wrote:
> Laserlight, so I can know for my IF mercs in the IC service -- does
It would take a total sea change in Islamic culture for there to be females in
any meaningful role other than farm labor and childbearing.
Islamic views regarding women are worse than European views on women ca. 600
AD.
And they havn't changed, nor can they change as they are explicitly stated in
the Quran.
Perhaps in the more enlightened emirates women might be permitted to get
driver's licenses, but only if they have a male relative give permission.
> > Laserlight, so I can know for my IF mercs in the IC service --
Yes, if you want them to. It may not be 100% realistic, but we're just talking
about lead. I believe Egypt actually had some female infantry in the 1950's or
60's, although I don't know that they ever
got deployed. Muammar Khadafi has (or had) an all-female bodyguard
although I think they may have been infidels, originally East Germans or such.
Hi,
> On Wed, Dec 22, 2004 at 05:41:55AM -0500, John Atkinson wrote:
I've personally known a number of women in the medical profession, hailing
from Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon and Syria. Mostly dentists, oddly. Don't quote
me, but I'm fairly certain these countries comprise at least a part of
"Islamic Culture" :-)
As well, I believe Turkey and Malaysia both have female soldiers---there
may be others, I don't know.
In any event, the concept of a monolithic and unchanging Islamic culture is
clearly deeply flawed in most respects.
> Islamic views regarding women are worse than European views on women
Respectfully, I fail to see how one could possibly have a worse view of
women than that of sixth-century Europe.
> And they havn't changed, nor can they change as they are explicitly
This view of Muslims blindly adhering to every letter of the Quran is rather
overplayed. It is certainly true of the Wahabbists, and other reactionary
fundamentalists, and these factions have certainly gotten much more vocal
recently (to put it mildly). But it would be foolish to compare the Islam of
the Ottomans, say, to that of the "modern" reactionaries. Islam has always
been subject to a great deal of interpretation---how else to explain the
differences between the Wahabbist and the Sufi?
Cheers,
M.
> I've personally known a number of women in the medical profession,
If I were going by GZG canon, I'd say IF is probably pretty
reactionary--there "was recently" a revolution by radicals against the
secularized House of Sa'ud. But a) it's been 40 years or so from then till
"now"; b) the official government policy may not be strictly adhered to in
every amirate on every planet--particularly those which have more
contact with FSE influence; and most importantly c)it's your lead, you do what
you want with it.
> As well, I believe Turkey and Malaysia both have female
In the GZGverse, Malaysia wouldn't count as part of the Islamic Federation
(it's in the Indonesian Confederation); Turkey may or may not be part of the
FSE.
> Islamic views regarding women are worse than European views on women
600 AD.
> Respectfully, I fail to see how one could possibly have a worse view of
Assumes that Europe was monolithic, which it wasn't, but given a choice
between modern Taliban or Saudi Arabia vs, say, 6th C Ireland, I'd pick
Ireland in a heartbeat. As you say, Lebanon or Morocco or such would be rather
different.
> On Wednesday 22 December 2004 17:45, laserlight@quixnet.net wrote:
Norse and other pagan cultures treated women reasonably well. Yes, they were
expected to stay at home, but then so were women in 1950s Britain. And yes, it
was considered okay for vikings etc to rape women, but then it was also okay
to kill the men.
> On Wed, 22 Dec 2004, John Atkinson wrote:
> On Tue, 21 Dec 2004 18:33:08 EST, Warbeads@aol.com <Warbeads@aol.com>
wrote:
> > Laserlight, so I can know for my IF mercs in the IC service -- does
As other have already pointed out, "Islamic culture" isn't quite that
monolithic... I know they're a minority, but some of the Sufi groups have
very 'modern' ideas about women & society - female saints & religious
leaders, for instance.
The Muslim woman who taught the Islamic History course I took at
university was Sufi; they're the Quakers/Protestants of the Muslim
sphere.
The Wahabi (sp?) & Talibastards aren't, thankfully, the whole of Islam.
> And they havn't changed, nor can they change as they are explicitly
There's lots of bumpf 'explicitly stated' in the Bible that nominally
Christian western societies have always ignored; interpretations of the
Quran also differ - currently Islam has a large reactionary element to
it, but this hasn't always been the case...
Take a look at Moorish Spain, for instance. You could almost argue that Spain
was never better of than when the Moors ran the place...
> Perhaps in the more enlightened emirates women might be permitted to
And in the few Sufi colonies - which may be part of the Alarishi
wierdness
- you might be surprised what women are 'allowed' to do...
In a message dated 12/22/04 5:00:05 PM Pacific Standard Time,
> laserlight@quixnet.net writes:
> > Laserlight, so I can know for my IF mercs in the IC service --
Yes, if you want them to. It may not be 100% realistic, but we're just talking
about lead. I believe Egypt actually had some female infantry in the 1950's or
60's, although I don't know that they ever
got deployed. Muammar Khadafi has (or had) an all-female bodyguard
although I think they may have been infidels, originally East Germans or such.
Okay, here's what I will assume for my campaign. The IF Mercs might have women
soldiers but in an all female unit.
Not that anyone I know of makes female IF type figures in any scale.
If It fits in easily I will consider it as a possible rear echelon unit for a
scenario. Unlikely but possible.
Gracias,
G'day,
> It would take a total sea change in Islamic culture for there to be
It would take a seachange in some kinds of radical Islamic culture, moderate
Islam enjoys the contribution of women who can hold down many different jobs
and make great contributions to society... as we're talking a future history
that nearly 200 years from now I reckon we can't exactly write it off;)
> Islamic views regarding women are worse than European views on women
Thankfully for middle eastern women, the Islamic views of the time were far
more enlightened with women as leading jurists, professors, authors, medics,
business inspectors, activists and soldiers. The role of women as active
members of the strongest Islamic nations was crippled only
within the last 200 years - conincidentally when the greatest colonial
powers of the western world were doing their level best to keep "women in
their rightful place";)
Working as a woman in science I have first hand knowledge of how much
sex-based prejudice still exists in the west, though I remain eternally
grateful for the readjustments our societies have made within the last 50
years. Given it has only taken 50yrs in the west, and that it was once a vital
and accepted part of Islamic culture for women to be equal members of society
in every way, then I think its not a hard push to see at least some largely
muslim nations of the GZGverse with women in all roles. So from my viewpoint
at least female IF units wouldn't be too unusual. But as with all gzg future
history items its up to the individual to paint them as they will;)
Cheers
> Not that anyone I know of makes female IF type figures in any scale.
GZG's militia figures in 15mm could be painted in an IF pattern (or plain
khaki) and includes females
In a message dated 12/23/04 5:37:40 AM Pacific Standard Time,
> laserlight@quixnet.net writes:
> Not that anyone I know of makes female IF type figures in any scale.
GZG's militia figures in 15mm could be painted in an IF pattern (or plain
khaki) and includes females