Jump to content

elementalwarre

Members
  • Posts

    148
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

Contact Methods

  • ICQ
    73590497

Converted

  • Location
    cupertino, ca, usa

elementalwarre's Achievements

Senior Member

Senior Member (3/3)

0

Reputation

  1. hmm. googling finds - TROPHY reportedly weighs 1/3 of a stryker's slat armor, or 1/5 of reactive armor - RPG-29's meant to penetrate reactive or slat armor, aka an active standoff defense seems to be the next counter - the tactic i wrote of multiple RPG's means even with RPG-7, firing a group at the same point is a way to penetrate armor that would withstand a single RPG. not multiple at different points on the vehicle but multiple at the same point, most accurately done by firing from the same point. will TROPHY defend against that? again, i don't know arming range, fire control, maintenance, etc so no opinion. just noting what google finds
  2. one anti-AFV tactic is fire an RPG group, very possibly with one or more RPGs leading the rest. does trophy's shot column work against this? fielding a trial seems reasonable enough logistically. how reliable/rugged/etc is trophy? aka how well would it scale up into large-scale use? say there are too many friendlies/civilians/etc nearby so troops want to switch trophy off, or better to have it active only in an arc? is this ability part of trophy or can trophy be easily modified to do so? i have no axe to grind. i'd just like to know more about the system before forming an opinion about it or its politics
  3. operation flashpoint's a first-person shooter simulating squad-level combat as others have noted, equivalent-sized units in CMBB - a squad, vehicle, crew-served weapon, etc - rarely actually fights for longer than that in a given scenario
  4. don't know if the workload's any better but i'll change the scenario to still be recon: say your team's observing activity at a base, but they find a gas-tipped missile being prepped for launch. say you've reported and are awaiting a reply when a shepherd and his son happen upon your hide now what? it's breaking news, so to speak. it needs a response soonest whether by your team or by air assets your team guides in or by something else...and there are two bonafide noncombatants you're holding
  5. ok, exfil if POW, combatant or not sounds to me that assumes your side has resources/time to redo the mission or assign your task to other deployed units say your team's sighted the preparing-to-launch weapon of mass destruction that's THE top priority target for the operation, but is still doing target recon let alone deploying to attack. your opponent still doesn't know you're there, aside from your prisoner(s) now what do you do? i say a problem with the traditional laws of war is the possible asymmetries between resources needed for an attack vs the attack's probable effects vs a reaction's possible side effects. i think rules created for nationalistic wars simply don't fit armed conflict in general well at all
  6. er. just to be boring, i'll merely comment on IMHO 'why wargamers are so friggin' pissy' if you even try a wargame, you're already looking for more realism about historical events/objects than most people ask from games if you actually prefer wargames, you may well -demand- historical veracity more realism often means more attention to detail. more detail means more rules. detailed rules means deciding what's correct because the game design often must choose between conflicting authoritative sources that means the design's often subjective. presto! instant argument, just add free time look, i wasted time posting this because i was waiting for a turn to compute, ok
  7. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SFC Matrix: I don't condone the shooting of innocent civilians, but I seem to hear alot of opinion from someone who doesn't do alot of shooting. (snip) I like the fact that you have an informed opinion, but unfortunately it doesn't hold alot of water with a vet like me.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> SFC Matrix, some civilians have been shot at. i've been caught in a firefight with full-auto assault rifles on both sides. i shot my way out and swore to never be that close to war again. i very clearly remember what i felt. ease off, ok? is morality a luxury for a policeman too? the next time police face terrorists with hostages, i hope not i realize i'm trying to be objective and abstract about something which is damn harsh and whose details can kill you. maybe a scenario gives a better feel for what i'm trying to say: say there's a US marine patrol in lebanon, early 1980's. they're caught in a crossfire between militias. an APC is hit, brews up and kills the crew before they can bail the US commander does not know which group hit the APC. it's a running firefight, several groups chasing each other and civilians everywhere. until the APC was hit, no fire seemed to be even close to the patrol regardless of ROE, who should the US commander now fire at? everyone he sees who's armed? that's a clear rule but may only convince all sides to cooperate in killing his patrol should his patrol hold and fire? bug out? how does the commander know if a given civilian is helping a given group or just going home with water? on the other hand, if a militiaman had been more careful with target ID, maybe his group would not risk getting hosed by US forces hope that makes my viewpoint clearer
  8. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by Carter: Modern war is pretty much no holds barred. I could see that it would be very dangerous if you stopped to think about morality on the battlefield. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> i strongly disagree for most low-intensity conflicts (LIC). LIC fighting is frequently around friendly or neutral civilians -and soldiers-. achieving the intended goal while fighting under those conditions means being -very- careful about where bullets go. that's anything -but- no holds barred
  9. (lots snipped out before and after this) <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SFC Matrix: You're raised with them or your not, and when you are in a bad situation, you will hope the morals you were raised with will kick in.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> SFC Matrix, please reread what i posted earlier i favor the idea of an ethics test, but as i've said elsewhere i don't know of a provably effective scientific test, and i want kids to learn -before- combat i'm not talking about trying to figure out the right thing while under fire i'm talking about demonstrating that you place your country's welfare above your own before being allowed to vote or hold public office. a way that may do this is by serving your country. i realize service does not give someone a well-developed sense of ethics and if anything may severely test them. it's simply a suggestion made by heinlein which i think may serve to show what someone's priorities are note it's a -test-, not an education
  10. this sunday, aka 7/22, 10pm eastern yes it's only an hour so they can't show all that much yes it's cnn so i expect sound and video bites, not the depth possible if they could assume a knowledgeable audience yes it's apparently looking at a training exercise simulating a village held by OPFOR, not a city block but what the heck, it might still be interesting
  11. carter - whoa! how did you infer support for mob rule from what i wrote? i have criticized (mostly) unrestricted democracy i have suggested the same test given in Heinlein's Starship Troopers for the right to vote or hold public office i have -not- said what i support read heinlein? nah, i haven't - aside from every anthology i could find, every novel and quite a few essays. if anything i'd say he was anarchist a la bakunin - even more individualist than libertarianism i suggested compulsory service because the US has a mandated right to vote for almost everyone who's over 17 the Starship Troopers society only gives the right to vote or hold public office to successful -volunteers- for civic service, -not- everyone big difference there, i believe as it happens, i prefer heinlein's idea. i only suggested required service beyond a certain age because the US confers a mostly unrestricted right to vote beyond a certain age. unless that right changes, requiring demonstrable responsibility seems to me a clear corollary IMHO natural rights are those a person has if no other people affect them, ie no society. to the extent a society constrains a person's behavior to less than what they could do alone, the society infringes on their natural rights that definition obviously has limits - people generally use -some- ethical framework for dealing with one another peacefully, being a member of a society seems to require some constraint on rights, immature people generally have restricted actions, etc - but i think that's where rousseau started from MajorH - thank you for indulging us in a thread that's WAY off-topic by now. feel free to tell us to squabble via email instead!
  12. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by SFC Matrix: High School, Grade School, doesn't matter, they're just kids. Its the kids just out of High school who bother me on the subject of morality and war. I tell them to get a video of what happened in Somalia and I'll explain to them in detail what happened. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> a tangent - just saw the trailer for Black Hawk Down, the film version of the book by that title. here's hoping the movie's no rosier than the book! anyway - 'they're just kids'? sorry, i -cannot- agree for one thing, look at what we ask of them. in the US, once you're 18 you can vote or join the military. big responsibilities, which IMHO means 'just kids' should have a bit more developed morality than whatever pop culture throws at them for another, i say it's entirely possible for kids to have a well-developed sense of ethics - not just what's right, but much more importantly -why- an action's moral. i say it's possible for kids to do so without enduring a life-threatening moral dilemma. lastly, i say i'd much rather have kids learn -before- they might legally vote or kill as for 'involuntary servitude' - if you want power i say you should demonstrate responsibility to use the power wisely. IMHO a US citizen can claim rights without accepting corresponding responsibilities how is that moral, -regardless of the constitution or other current US law-?
  13. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by minmax: No this program would not be popular with teens but what makes teens today happy? They would moan and groan and cry about their precious freedom. Freedom is not valuable until it is threatened and or taken away. Maybe it would piss these kids off enough that they would get involved in politics and elect officials to get rid of this harebrained scheme. All the better. Take a look at the stats of people under the age of 20 who vote. Its appalling. The best way to change the world is with a vote not a bullet. <HR></BLOCKQUOTE> minmax, here's another stab at this argument: - americans have the right to vote when we turn 18 - corollary of power is responsibility - a vote is power - to demonstrate that a citizen is responsible enough to vote, they should demonstrate that they can place their society's needs above their own - a suggestion for how to demonstrate this is that they should serve their society for some period of time in whatever capacity the society needs if americans have a guaranteed right to vote, our society should have a demonstration that we can vote in the society's best interests whether kids learn civics or not, we currently have at best dubious proof of the theory without some practice as it is, we have no check or balance on the right to vote. i'm not at all sure that uninformed, uninterested universal suffrage is what the US founding fathers had in mind, even if they did design a republic instead of a democracy
  14. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by minmax: Gyrene, I agree with the stereotype people have of Marines in particular and the military in general. I came to the realization that the 'protected' may abhor violence but they will holler for a military when the poop hits the fan. I made good grades in college and had some very intellectual discussions with people who did not neccesarily support the idea of a military. I gave them the poem that talks about things in terms of that veterans garuntee things like freedom of speech, press, religion, and protest. They understood that their luxury of opposition to the military is assured by the military. People are funny they don't like those who garuntee their most basic rights. In a sense I believe it is guilt. I have always stated that all Americans should give up two years of their lives at a minimum to give back to a nation that gives them so much. Not neccesarily a draft but something like Roosevelt's NRA with CCC camps and public service. I think working for the benefit of others you may never know is a common theme for a voluntary military and something most younger Americans don't get in their education or jobs. Well, that is about my two cents and a few dollars. Keep the faith...<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> that's exactly what the -book- starship troopers advocates. too bad the point was mutated by the movie into voluntary -military- service. also too bad that so many only read the book or see the movie and think author robert a. heinlein was some kind of fascist gyrene - i agree actions over time can change people's minds. however, i don't think there's enough people around to give most others the time to change their mind. at least in the US, most people now alive - have only experienced peace - heck, most people get no closer to intentional force than a bar brawl - have not been in the military if they also do not understand that peace is maintained by more than good intentions, how long will the military be left to work on "focusing its energy on doing its duties as well and honorably as it can"? OTOH, while i disagree with US president bush on many things, i'm glad his administration is proposing more money for armed services pay, benefits, and maintenance. about time!
  15. <BLOCKQUOTE>quote:</font><HR>Originally posted by MajorH: Not soon. The Army will have it first in the early fall. The retail version will follow by two or three months.<HR></BLOCKQUOTE> the additional features you list in the thread will have me screaming with frustration by then however - MajorH, didn't anyone tell you how to hit the christmas season? by then you'll miss most of it of course, i'm not all that convinced that a wargame as solidly professional as TacOps need care much about mass market timing
×
×
  • Create New...