Infantry Ideas and positive vibes

[malek77]

I just have to get this out - I've wished for a game like this for years - a hard-SF military sim with real ranges and concepts. I'm delighted to see it happening!

*!!much positive vibes!!*

And so as not to just have a thread entirely devoted to wild praise - for the future upgrade to including infantry : assuming you're interested in suggestions. Throughout my gaming experience, there are some things I've rarely/never seen but thought would make excellent sense.

Feel free to pick prod and mutate.

> Infantry Teams/sections

Rather than individual infantry elements (ala C&C), how about squads of the size of a fire team? 5 men, one with a heavier weapon, selected and commanded as a single unit. This avoids 'lone scouts' running rampant on the map in a suicidal fashion.

> Infantry as engineers

Real troops can entrench themselves - would it be possible to give infantry limited terrain modification abilities?

> Infantry as Boarders...

This is going a little beyond the original concept - but imagine a map of the interior of a LiveShip, used Space Marine boarding party style?

> Powered Armour

This is a bit wierd this one - but from tabletop gaming with a realistic near future system using powered armour, there were a few unexpected lessons I found...so I suppose this counts as a form of experience!

1. Up to twice man size can still effectively use cover, but larger needs to assume vehicle like visibility.

2. Given the size of the PA suits, the weapons they can carry are between normal infantry support weapons and light Anti-Vehicle weapons.

This puts them in the interesting position of being effective against infantry and other PA/light vehicles, but little heavier.

AT missiles that PA could carry, can also be moved by ordinary infantry.

It's like a class of vehicle designed specially to destroy itself!

They are basically an anti-personnel assault platform, that will take fewer casualties than a Platoon charging a position.

Or so my games tell me.

[Caseck]

On armored exoskeletons/powered armor:

Powered armor is an interesting concept. In many ways, I'd agree, it's like infantry magnified.

Mobility, protection, and firepower are enhanced out of all proportion to regular infantry. Powered armor could allow low bounding flight or "jumps" for properly equipped armor. (limited by reaction mass/fuel) Heavy weapons--especially recoiless or missile weapons make them able to deal serious damage. Armor could be sufficiently thick to make them effectively immune to small arms fire, if not lighter anti-tank weaponry. If sufficient technology exists, these units could even deploy mobile point defenses. [networked point defenses are an interesting concept, especially in an infantry formation context.]

Regular "foot" infantry can still be sneaky when equipped with either fuel-cell powered exoskeletons, or unpowered combat armor with "chameleon" type EM surfacing. Either way, these armors would evolve to provide not just environmental protection, but also ballistic, radiation, and stealth protection.

One thing that would seem to remain the same between such future infantry and current infantry, is that powered armor would still suffer from limited ammunition supply dictated by the limited volume available for what they can carry.

On the same note, however multiplied the capabilities of such armour becomes, it is still limited in it's weight and ground pressure and thickness of it's armour, and if the armor is too large, operations in urban areas become progressively more clumsy. Vehicles would in all probability still outrun and outgun such units. It is only in the basic infantry staples; taking and holding ground, reconnaissance, and fighting from an ambush, that such units would still outfight AFVs.

John Steakley's novel "Armor" specifies two types of powered armor:

A) Light highly mobile scout armors (stealthy and jump capable, with enhanced detection capabilities, but still protected against virtually all small arms.)

Heavier "Grunt" armor, much greater protection and firepower, but significantly less mobility, and generally not jump capable.

The powered armor in Heinlein's "Starship Troopers" (not to be confused in any way with the awful movie of the same title) is equipped with a variety of small yield nuclear missiles and bombs, as well as being jump (and drop) capable.

[ July 17, 2005, 11:01 PM: Message edited by: Caseck ]

[ClaytoniousRex]

Thanks very much for the positive vibes, malek77.

Both you and Caseck have made many excellent points regarding infantry - it sounds like you've both been sitting at the design table with us. MajWest has also made some thoughtful posts about infantry in past threads (you might need to clear the "past 20 days" filter to see them.)

Infantry Teams/sections

Yes, this is exactly what we're doing. Infantry are deployed and work as squads and there are different types of squads.

would it be possible to give infantry limited terrain modification abilities

Yes, that is in fact quite simple for us to do and it's a great idea that we hadn't considered.

but imagine a map of the interior of a LiveShip

A creative mod'er could actually do this on his own without additional help from us.

Good points about powered armor, too.

networked point defenses are an interesting concept

Sounds very interesting! What did you have in mind?

Regular "foot" infantry can still be sneaky

Exactly right. Use of anti-matter and presence on the enemy's sensor network is a big part of the game, so "regular" infantry have a powerful advantage in this respect.

John Steakley's novel "Armor"

Always good to meet another Steakley fan! You've probably already seen it, but there's actually an early excerpt from Armor 2 that Steakley has made public here: http://www.johnsteakley.com

Overall, I would say Heinlein had a much more fleshed out vision of power armor than Steakley. Steakley's fantastic book was mostly a visceral CHARACTER story, not so much a technical story about the armor itself.

[Caseck]

Networked point defense: Basically, the idea of a very mobile, small caliber based point defense interwoven on a unit level.

Especially with very high velocity weapons with rapid rates of fire. (Read: Gauss or Rail type weapons, on a small scale.) This combined with even todays computer technology, makes a lightweight microwave point defense system a possibility. When combined with the additional weight available to a powered armor/exoskeleton type of system, it would allow an infantry type unit to field point defenses.

In an infantry formation, with designated sectors of fire, a unit could give itself a resonable point defense against lighter weapons systems. (Like mortars, and smaller ATGMs and rockets.)

Hardening of heavy artillery shells/ATGMs could get around this, but lighter weapons systems would probably have a more difficult time doing this. Three ways around a point defense. Either bash through it with hardened rounds, or oversaturate it with the number of rounds. Or sneak a round in that it can't see.

Didn't know Steakly wrote a second Armor book. I'll have to look for it.

In a way, you folks are walking in the footsteps of an old pen & paper "Sci-Fi" wargame for miniatures called Striker by long defunct GDW. It had a sophisticated set of rules for design sequence and engineering based on real physics. (The bigest leaps the game made was in the field of fusion power generation, and gravitics.) But all the weapons systems were based on real power outputs/shell velocities and 1/2mv2, and penetration of solid steel. Good old Newtonian physics.

The game never needed balancing, because the design tables were completely balanced, so you could design to your heart's content and never worry about creating "A Mysterious Zapotron Ray" that would screw up the game.

Using that base you could design anything from tanks to aircraft to helicopters and even to a limited extent, boats. Anywhere from WWI tech through the fusion age.

Good food for thought if you can find a copy. If you don't stray too far from Newton, you can't go wrong as far as realism.

[ August 01, 2005, 06:36 AM: Message edited by: Caseck ]

[Gen. Lee Annoying]

Point defences.... wow what a thought but instead of making them availble to infantry why not the dropship??????? It would add the ability for the dropship to be used in a hot environment without turning it into a gunship........ maybe I'm just dropship crazy but that could be an answer to arming dropships make it a defensive armamaent!!!

[Caseck]

I would argue that point defenses are simply based on having the volume for a suitable weapon system to have it installed as fire control. In other words, YES. They SHOULD have them, as well as supressive weapons! But here's the asterisk:

At the same time, the cost differential of an airframe versus a ground vehicle is extreme. You lose a dropship, you just cost yourself a butt-load of resources. Do you understand how much "money" in resources would go into making a suborbital ship like that? In effect you're asking to put rocket pods on the space shuttle, if you think of it in an aggressive role. Not to say it couldn't be done by someone with the cash. But just because you CAN do something, doesn't mean you SHOULD!

I agree dropships should be armed. I agree point defenses are perfectly feasable for ANY kind of ship. But I disagree that anyone would want to take one straight into combat. It is your escape route, and an expensive one at that. To a certain extent, I would trade some internal volume for SOME kind of defensive capability. I'd have the best bang for the buck. But I would hesitate to step over the line from supressive to offensive, just based on cost. Money=resources. Remember that.

Especially if these ships are equipped with fusion, much less antimatter engines, you're talking the difference in cost between an M1 tank and a B2 bomber. Would you fly a B2 into small arms range?

I would field smaller surface craft on the ground, rather than risk my trip home! Those would be the gunships! More conventionally powered, flying below any surface beam weapons, hiding behind terrain and the curvature of the earth.

If Newton sets the rules dictating HOW things work, remember, good old Ben Franklin (The almighty dollar) should dictate the WHY! When you get lost in the technological playground, and don't know who to turn to, remember, Ben Franklin is always there to guide you! You just have look at the numbers and let him talk!

Work it on a design basis, and these things become apparent! Without a design sequence to ground you in the practicalities, it's easy to get lost on the "Balance" battlefield!

On that note, a caution on point defenses. Regardless of how big or small they are, point defenses exponentially move a weapon system up to the "Big Ticket" item. They are PRICEY! The cost of the M61 20mm gun on CIWS (Phalanx) is irrelevant compared to the price of the radar and fire control system and computers... (Not to mention maintenance.) They will get cheaper in time, but they'll still be PRICEY!

My word of caution: All weapons and systems should be DESIGNED ON PAPER, before anyone gets to model them... Play it by the numbers, and you won't go wrong!

Two sets of laws should dictate: Newtons laws, and the law of supply & demand...

I hope I'm still providing food for thought...

[ August 01, 2005, 06:16 PM: Message edited by: Caseck ]

[Gen. Lee Annoying]

WOW...... LOL..... now is the cost in rim dollars or core???????

[Caseck]

Really, the biggest question regarding this game is simple. How cheap is LIFE? Or does it vary by faction?

If life is cheap, you'd see little emphasis on survivability for infantry.

If life is NOT cheap, you would see much more emphasis on things like networked point defenses for infantry and powered armor.

How cheap is a life in Drop Team?

[Gen. Lee Annoying]

That one should be easy

(Cost of game)/(Max # of infantry possible on screen)= cost of a life in drop team.....

[Redcon-5]

For any serious fans of powered armor a must have is John Ringo's series (Legend of the Aldenata) he give some very detailed ideas of how to fight powered armor with some good designs. He even gave them digging charges to make "instant foxholes" with. But please just look at it before you guys put the final stamp on infantry.

Besides anyone who likes Sluggy cant be all bad.

[Redcon-5]

Hate to sound like a fanboy but an earlier post mention networked point/area defence for the infantry, well John Ringo (give credit were it is due) had two thoughts on this as well one was called the Man Jack , basical a M-60 on motorized tripod with a LADAR for aiming. The Second you have to see for your selves look up www.metalstorm.com for some really nice add ons for infantry.

[DragoonXXIV]

Glad to see another Ringo fan. I have a few ideas 'bout infantry too if you don't mind. First of all, as much as i'd like to see un-armoured infantry in this game, i think they'll be a bit silly. Considering the extremely varied conditions in which the fighting occurs i doubt a human could survive outside of a sealed enviroment (kinda hard to breath if the atmospheric density is 2.3).

So going off the armoured idea, just how mobile are the infantry? Jump jets and bouncing is entirely up to the design team but i think it would be really cool if the infantry didn't have a radar signal unless they bounced.

Either way the next question is about armament of the infantry. Considering the large amount of armour on the battlefield the infantry have to be able to care for themselves. As much as i'd love for them to be the king of the battlefield, thier weapons have to be in proportion to the weapons that currently exist, so i'm thinking mostly unguided rockets (cheap but effective, probably low ammo count too).

As for the deployable PDW i would stay away from them, infantry's (especially mobile infantry if they are implemented) greatest assest is manuverability so please don't tie them don't to need fixed positions. Also i don't think the grunts want to carry more gear than they need. I would recommend having an engineer squad that could drop the standard turrets and capture buildings, but please don't give deployables to the regular troops.

Just throwing some ideas around, feel free to ignore me (most people do). And to address the issue of cost, modern soldiers are expensive to train and equip. But no matter how cheap the soldiers are in comparison to the tanks, humans are always more expensive in terms of time.

[aittam]

don't forget that those GI shoul fit inside some of the vehicles avaiable in game so if you comapre the size of the cockpit with the infantry space they can not wear heavy armour/mobile suit unless there will be two kinds of GI a deployable one from the mother ship with mobile suit, let say a three to five man platoon capable to carry heavy weapons with out mobility decrease and a second type deployed from APCs with limited manouvre range and a couple of antitank weapons, may be their engage range or fire direction could be determined by the APC player to set ambushes and/or point defense

[cool breeze]

Cool, good ideas.

[ScottDT]

I need a clarification: did I read correctly that there is going to be infantry squads in this game? If so, I am VERY pleased. I've been playing the demo and I miss the presence of infantry---even if they are strictly bot controlled. There really isn't much of a point for mortar vehicles if there aren't any grunts to pound! Also, I am becoming very intriqued by the OGRE / GEV possibilities with this game and, as you no doubt know, that game does have powered infantry for OGRE fodder. LOL!

So, is there going to be infantry too?

EDIT: I found the older posts on this topic so now I know that, yes, there will be infantry! Awesome! Which leads me to the next logical question:

How long before the game is ready to be released?!? LOL!

BTW: Can you elaborate on the OGRE scenario? That is the one that really has my blood up, so to speak. Is it just a multi-player scenario, or can it be played solo as well (ideally both, but I'll take the latter ).

[ April 26, 2006, 10:31 PM: Message edited by: ScottDT ]

[Wodin]

I also need clarification.

I just wasnt interested in this game ue to the lack of infantry untis.

Just seen the word infantry mentioned so decided to have a nose.

If this is the case I shall go forth and spread the news to as many forums as possible as Im sure it will prick up ears.

[DrWoood]

I'm already plotting on ways for infantry to be used for securing drop locations...

[ClaytoniousRex]

Infantry is still scheduled to be released *after* the 1.0.0 retail release. They will be added for free as an update (just like the 0.9.4x series of updates have been so far in the Public Test).

[cool breeze]

Any idea when?