Traveller-digest    Tuesday, September 21 1999    Volume 1999 : Number 1113



(R)1996. Traveller is a registered trademark of FarFuture Enterprises.
All rights reserved.

The following topics are covered in this digest:

Re: Ground Forces...>
Re: Ground Forces...<
check out the gdw sign
Re: Ground Forces
Re: Ground Forces
Re: OT: ping
RE: GT: Ground Forces
Re: Milieu 0 questions (reposted, apparently lost)
RE: Ground Forces
Re: Ground Forces
Re: Ground Forces...
Re: Ground Forces Stuff
GDW sign and Shrinemobile
re: Time Questions
RE: Time Question(s)
Re: Ground Forces
Re: Ground Forces...
Gurkhas - Correction
RE: Gurkhas - Correction
Re Ghurkhas
Re: Ground Forces
Re: Ground Forces...<
Re: Gurkhas - Correction

----------------------------------------------------------------------

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 16:15:05 +1000
From: "The Roc" <roc@kewl.com.au>
Subject: Re: Ground Forces...>

- ----- Original Message -----
From: Mark Watson <markw@antares.demon.co.uk>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 1999 6:52 AM
Subject: RE: Ground Forces



>
> I think those are "British" Gurkhas - there are 270 in Interfet. I don't
know
> if Australia also maintains a Gurkha force - India certainly does.

No, Australia does not maintain any Ghurkha troops outside of the odd
exchange soldier/squad (as little as 1-person, to as many as a dozen or so)
who undergo jungle warfare training in Canungra (as a rule), while we send a
recipracole "unit" to train in the U.K. or with Nato in Europe.

>
> And 30 British Special Boat Squadron troops (probably) have gone in as well.
> Interesting article on the SBS here:
>
> http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/uk/newsid_452000/452319.stm

I don't believe we have SBS in Aus anymore... but we do have SAS :^)

>
> Detail on the make up of Interfet here:
>
>
http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/world/asia-pacific/newsid_445000/445404.stm
>
> Mark


Thanks Mark, I will look up those URL's, they sound interesting

- -- The Roc

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 16:43:29 +1000
From: "The Roc" <roc@kewl.com.au>
Subject: Re: Ground Forces...<

- ----- Original Message -----
From: Craig Berry <cberry@cinenet.net>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com>
Sent: Tuesday, September 21, 1999 4:00 PM
Subject: Re: Ground Forces



>
> Amen!  It's a shame that wargaming seems more or less dead as a hobby just
> as computers and networking are reaching the point where it would be easy
> to have really cool c3i simulation.  (Computer "war games" are out there,
> but I don't know of any that approach the scope or complexity of e.g.
> Squad Leader or The Next War, or Boots & Saddles for that matter.  And
> please, if I'm ignorant, tell me!!)
>

Craig, I loved SL and used to play it in stints from a couple of hours to
complete long weekends (Friday night to Sunday arvo, or Saturday morning to
Monday arvo, depending), but the only gamer I knew who played it drifted
away before he died.  The closest I have come to it in a computer game is
Microsoft's "Close Combat" and "Close Combat: A Bridge to Far," both of
which I have read reviews calling them "(the board game) Squad
Leader-like..." or "Based on the board game, Squad Leader..." to which they
may be right?  There is also on the shelves at the moment, but I haven't
been able to get yet, is "Close Combat: Russian Campaign" which is supposed
to be bigger than the other two put together!

If you like SL, I recommend the CC series.

- -- The Roc

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 16:30:49 +1000
From: david.d.jaques-watson@centrelink.gov.au
Subject: check out the gdw sign

- ------------------------------

Date: Mon, 20 Sep 1999 23:03:04 EDT
From: JLAROSEE@aol.com
Subject: GDW Sign

   Well, today I traveled to the center of the universe, Normal, Illinois,
and stood beneath the GDW sign. After a brief reflection on all that grew
out
from this spot, I got to work-  ladder, wrenches, hacksaw- an hour and a
half
later, the sign was in the back of a U-Haul truck.
   Next stop- Keven Walsh, my spouse Barb, and I retired to a local Irish
pub
and some dark Guinness. Two toasts: to GDW and the game we all love, and to
absent friends who could not join in the moment.
   Now, before any fear some desecration has taken place, consider this.
The
sign had advanced symptoms of decay; heavy rust, faded out letters, sag in
the support brackets (check out the photo at downport.com). Left
unattended,
its days were numbered before the building owner tore it down as an
eyesore.
Now it has a chance at a fresh start. It will be rehabbed and hung in a
place
of honor in my FLGS. It is a piece of our heritage as fellow Travellers and
now, will be there for the next generation of gamers.
   Photos of the event will soon be available on line. Also, anyone in the
O'Fallon, Illinois area (just 15 miles from the Archon convention) is
invited
to stop by Medieval Starship to check on the rehab progress.
J. LaRosee
Medieval Starship

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 00:08:23 -0700
From: Evyn MacDude <wmacdude@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Ground Forces

Fred Hood wrote:

> "Douglas E. Berry" <gridlore@mindspring.com>
>  >I've been informed that I will be writing the GT: Ground Forces book.
>  >Cheer or grumble as you wish.
>
> What about 'GURPS: Striker'?, or is that too merc-like?
>

 That is even better.

- --
Evyn...
Wish I was a better person...   with more control...
Turn the other cheek...   and when the punch comes, roll...
Wish I was a kinder person...   could see the others pain...
Not over react, not judge...   and shrug off the spreadin' stain.
Damaged, by John Shirley/Donald Roeser, BOC, Heaven Forbid 1998.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 00:10:24 -0700
From: Evyn MacDude <wmacdude@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Ground Forces

Mark Cook wrote:

> Doug Berry <gridlore@pop.mindspring.com> writes:
>
> > 2.  I'm soliciting titles. SJG definitely wants to change Ground Forces.
> > Right now, I'm leaning towards Imperial Regiments.  Suggestions?
>
> Hey, Doug!  You were in the military.  I'm surprised you didn't already
> think of this one: "Beach-head."  (Oh, wait; you were in the *army*.
> Never mind.) :^)
>

 Now that was COLD.......

<Evyn shaking his head that a Jarhead got that one in.>

- --
Evyn...
Wish I was a better person...   with more control...
Turn the other cheek...   and when the punch comes, roll...
Wish I was a kinder person...   could see the others pain...
Not over react, not judge...   and shrug off the spreadin' stain.
Damaged, by John Shirley/Donald Roeser, BOC, Heaven Forbid 1998.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 00:12:18 -0700
From: Evyn MacDude <wmacdude@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: OT: ping

Erwin Fritz wrote:

> I've just implemented a bunch of anti-spam measures on my email server, and I
> want to test this to make sure I've not lost my beloved TML feed.
>
> Please ignore this message.
>

 Consider it ignored.

- --
Evyn...
Wish I was a better person...   with more control...
Turn the other cheek...   and when the punch comes, roll...
Wish I was a kinder person...   could see the others pain...
Not over react, not judge...   and shrug off the spreadin' stain.
Damaged, by John Shirley/Donald Roeser, BOC, Heaven Forbid 1998.

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 03:11:26 -0500
From: "Slack, Andy" <andy.slack@gb.unisys.com>
Subject: RE: GT: Ground Forces

I vote for "Into the Mud". _Love_ that quote!
Andy

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 03:22:59 -0500
From: "Slack, Andy" <andy.slack@gb.unisys.com>
Subject: Re: Milieu 0 questions (reposted, apparently lost)

Terry C replied to this:
>>I am trying to set up a campaign based on the Long Way
>>Home/Gateway adventure, to introduce some friends to Traveller,
>>but am missing a few details (like what year it should be set
>>in.  I'm guessing near 0.)
>The M:0 text and map are inconsistent. The references in the
>text are written with reference to the placement of the Sylean
>Federation as in the T4 main rulebook, NOT in the M:0 Referee
>data for Core sector.

By saying:
>One might almost think that the various sources were records from over a
>thousand years ago, found in some old TAS database. :^)

SCENE: Interior, day. IISS Bureaucracy Office on HiPop, 1105.
A BUREAUCRAT speaks into a comms device.

BUREAUCRAT: Yes, sir, we will meet the deadline after all. No sir,
no problems, we'll just use the last set of data files, from '50.

[Hangs up]

BUREAUCRAT [worried]: I wonder if he realises I meant OH-FIFTY, not
TEN-FIFTY? Oh well, they're all hick planets nobody ever goes to, anyway.
At least, no-one who counts. [Brightens] And if they do, I can claim this
is deliberate misinformation to protect against copyright infringement.
Or Zhodani spies. Or something. I'd better not tell Survey, though...
Computer! Advise Survey Branch that through great personal effort I
have persuaded the Duke to extend the deadline for survey data to
1135. Anything can happen by then; heavens, we may all have been
killed by a mutant Virus. At any rate, I'll be retired by then; let
young Eneri worry about it when he's in charge.

Andy

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 03:26:55 -0500
From: "Slack, Andy" <andy.slack@gb.unisys.com>
Subject: RE: Ground Forces

"Terry Carlino" <carlino@home.com> said:
>I like GT:Imperial Sword and Shield
However, since this is a reference to Regency Era material would that be a
problem for SJG. My understanding was that they were limited to CT
references.<

My understanding is a bit different. They are limited to GDW references
because of the DGP copyright thing, but given a conflict between CT and
any later work appear to have a preference for CT.

ANdy

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 01:40:39 -0700
From: "Tom" <tbergman@brawleyonline.com>
Subject: Re: Ground Forces

> Jeff Zeitlin wrote:
> >
> > On Mon, 20 Sep 1999 18:10:19 -0400 (EDT), Black ICE
> > <wombat@premier.net> wrote:
> >
> > >I think that the title "Into the Mud" would be a good one.  That way,
if
> > >you see fit, you can include the following quote from T.R. Fehrenbach's
> > >_This Kind of War:  A Study in Unpreparedness_ (AUSA hardback edition,
> > >pg 290):
> >
> > >**begin quote**
> >
> > >Americans in 1950 rediscovered something that since Hiroshima they had
> > >forgotten: you may fly over a land forever; you may bomb it, atomize it,
> > >pulverize it and wipe it clean of life -- but if you desire to defend
> > >it, protect it, and keep it for civilization, you must do this on the
> > >ground, the way the Roman legions did, by putting your young men into
> > >the mud.
> >
> > >**end quote**
> >
> > DAMN! I think you've just hit the jackpot.

Amen Jeff!  This is the best and "deepest" of them all so far.  IMHO.
Although I have to admit that I am partial to "Sword & Shield".

Oriontwin
orion 0609 C36AA84-A hi- va+ vi+ so++ A633
tc+ tm+ tn t4+ tg-- ru+ he+ 3i!(+) c+ jt- st++ pi+ ta ge

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 07:54:29 -0400
From: Mark Urbin <eclipse@ultranet.com>
Subject: Re: Ground Forces...

"Terry Carlino" <carlino@home.com> writes:
[snip]
>Moving to another fine area of discussion: The Marine Cutlass. The idea that
>the Marine Cutlass is made of some kind of superdense/steel laminate has
>been discussed on the list. It is a reasonable suggestion, it's one failing
>being that it would most likely require the Marine to have one weapon for
>actual battle (where a suit of BD would make the heavy blade usable) and a
>lighter steel alloy ceremonial blade. I have a short dissertation on the
>Marine Cutlass on my website at:
>http://members.home.net/carlino/imperial.htm
>Hope I've given you something to ponder.


That site looks way familiar...

check out http://www.ultranet.com/~eclipse/SV/TRAV/TravSwords.shtml

for a post I made in May of 1997


- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
eclipse@ultranet.com -- These opinions are mine, no one else wants `em.
           I can't remember if I'm the good twin or the evil one.
                    http://www.ultranet.com/~eclipse/
- ---------------------------------------------------------------------------

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 08:11:14 -0400
From: "Thom Harris" <thomharr@mediaone.net>
Subject: Re: Ground Forces Stuff

From my days as a student in a number of NSA schools where they were doing
all services training comes "Ground Pounder". The Navy was the "Squids", the
Marines "Jarheads" and the Air Force was "Wing Nuts". Usually I was the only
"Pounder" in classes of 8-10 students and had to defend myself mightily.

Thom

- ----- Original Message -----
From: Mark Urbin <eclipse@ultranet.com>
To: <traveller@lists.imagiconline.com>
Sent: Monday, September 20, 1999 10:26 PM
Subject: Ground Forces Stuff


> From my sig quote collection (Military Sigs
> http://urbin.homepage.com/sigs/mil-sigs.html)
>
> Taking and holding land. It's been the job of infantry ever since one
> caveman took a dislike (and a leg bone) to another; and will remain so.
> Infantry alone can't do it; but no force without infantry can either. --
> Matt Clonfero
>
> "Superior firepower is an invaluable tool when entering negotiations." --
> General George S. Patton
>
> "Well it's Tommy this, and Tommy that, and 'Throw 'im out the brute!', but
> it's 'Special train for Atkins!' when the guns begin to shoot..." --
> "Tommy", R. Kipling
>
> "The political object is the goal, war is the means of reaching it, and
the
> means can never be considered in isolation from their purposes." -- Karl
> von Clausewitz, 19th Century Prussian General
>
> "Always use a piledriver to crack a nut. The piledriver doesn't take much
> damage, and the nut stays cracked." -- USMC maxim
>
> "...an imperfect plan implemented immediately and violently will always
> succeed better than a perfect plan." -- Gen. George S. Patton
>
>
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
- -
> eclipse@ultranet.com -- These opinions are mine, no one else wants `em.
>        Smith&Wesson -- The Ultimate "Point & Click" User interface.
>                   http://www.ultranet.com/~eclipse/
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------
- -
>

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 08:50:37 -0400
From: "Sword Worlder" <swordworlder@clinic.net>
Subject: GDW sign and Shrinemobile

I look forward to the "after" pictures.  The "before" picture
 http://www.downport.com/ct/index.html ) shows that a bit of TLC is needed.
We have talked about that thing several times over the past few months on
the TML channel (undernet IRC) and it was Kevin, aka shadowcat, who took the
initiative and got the ball rolling.

Now, while Jay does the resto, some of us need to be working on the design
for the shrinemobile.  We need a design that we can bolt the grav units onto
in the future, but that has an ATV chassis under it for now.  Then, someone
needs to work out an algorithm for the route that the Traveller Shrinemobile
will take so that everyone on the TML will have equal opportunity to visit
it. (Might I suggest the Santa Claus algorithm as a good starting point?)

Kudos for a job well done.  Now I have yet another reason to make the
pilgrimage to Medieval Starship :-)

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
The TRAVELLER Domain
http://www.downport.com
Colin Michael, WebDev

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 09:31:45 -0400
From: Walter Smith <SmithW@HARTWICK.EDU>
Subject: re: Time Questions

Black ICE wrote:
>>>>>>>
> The astrogator has to worry about the fractions of a second involved.
> Passengers don't.

Good point, especially since the values involved seem to be too small to
perceive by basic human senses.
>>>>>>>
Many mid to high tech passengers may have personal electronic devices
that will have minor problems from a few seconds lost here and there,
but I'd expect the devices to have some simple recalibration function -
perhaps receiving a standard timestamp signal at each starport.

"At the sound of the beep, it will be exactly 12:01:17.00/001-1105,
standard Imperial time..."

Walt Smith

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 09:33:02 -0400
From: Ian Ferguson <ian@vax2.concordia.ca>
Subject: RE: Time Question(s)

Craig Berry  writes:
>> 	I hate to step into a thread that I haven't been following,
>And this'll teach you why you hate it. :)

	I hate it when I'm right... :)

>> 	but here it goes: Has anyone pointed out that it is velocity
>> 	rather than acceleration that is pertinant to time dialation?
>Sorry, incorrect.  General relativity shows that acceleration (or
>equivalently, being in a gravity field) also causes time dilation,
>independent of the relative-motion-induced dilation covered by special
>relativity. 

	D'uh.  Thanks for waking up my brain.

>> 	Even if a vessel reaches "reletivistic speed" on the way to
>> 	jump diameter, it will only be moving that fast at the end 
>> 	of the trip (By the way, even at 6G from a size A world, a 
>> 	vessel will only be moving at about 0.000046 c).
>Quite true, and it turns out that for reasonable accelerations and trip
>times, the GR (acceleration-induced) component is also vanishingly >small.

	That works for me.  Just how much acceleration is required
	for 'noticable' time dialation effects?

Peez

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 09:42:07 -0400
From: "Thomas Schoene" <TomSchoene@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Ground Forces

- ----------
> From: Craig Berry <cberry@cinenet.net>
> To: traveller@lists.imagiconline.com
> Subject: Re: Ground Forces
> Date: Tuesday, 21 September, 1999 2:00 AM
[snip]
> > > I'm reminded of the old GDW game "Boots & Saddles", which I
> > > could never get myself to remember was about air cav, not *cav* cav.
:) 
> > 
> > Oh, I liked "Boots and Saddles" as a title, but then I'm a sucker for
> > tradition.  Nice game too, although it just screamed for
computerization to
> > sort out the C2 rules.
> 
> Amen!  It's a shame that wargaming seems more or less dead as a hobby
just
> as computers and networking are reaching the point where it would be easy
> to have really cool c3i simulation.  (Computer "war games" are out there,
> but I don't know of any that approach the scope or complexity of e.g. 
> Squad Leader or The Next War, or Boots & Saddles for that matter.  And
> please, if I'm ignorant, tell me!!) 

If you can tolerate Microsoft and some real-time play, Close Combat and A
Bridge Too Far are really very good games at the Squad Leader level.    At
higher levels (from Company to Division level) _The Operational Art of War_
is very impressive.  I've only gotten to fiddle with it for an hour or so
but it looks to be surprisingly flexible and the AI is pretty smart. 
When/if then modern version appears, I'm going to spend some serious time
with it. 
 
[snip]
 
> > Sorry, am I missing something? 
> 
> Douglas (the guy writing the ground forces supplement for GURPS
Traveller)
> is my brother.  

Ah hah.  Me being a bit slow, the Berry brothers were sort of blending
together.  Got it now. 

He was also an 11-bravo in the US Army, and rated as a
> sharpshooter with various weapons.  Our father was in the British Army
for
> a time before emigrating to the US, and was also a sharpshooter.  I, on
> the other hand, was rejected by Navy ROTC for poor vision -

Hey, a comrade.  I did a year of NROTC myself, before I messed up my knees
beyond recognition and they let me go.   It's not a total loss, I ended up
working for the Navy as a contractor.

Tom Schoene

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 09:43:51 -0400
From: "Thomas Schoene" <TomSchoene@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Ground Forces...

- ----------
> From: Terry Carlino <carlino@home.com>
> To: Traveller Mailing list <traveller@mpgn.com>
> Subject: Re: Ground Forces...
> Date: Monday, 20 September, 1999 10:45 PM
> 
> I like GT:Imperial Sword and Shield
> However, since this is a reference to Regency Era material would that be
a
> problem for SJG. My understanding was that they were limited to CT
> references.

No, the preference if for CT feel, but much of the MT and even TNE
backstory is there, with a twist. (For example,, Longbow II is there, and
Strephon's reason for being there is the same as in MT/TNE, but what that
is is still a bit murky)

The phrase "Sword and Shield" isn't specifically tied to the Regency
setting. Although it appears on the back of the RCVG, the Regency is s much
a continuation of the Imperium that the phrase could easily have been in
use in the Imperium as well. 

[snip BD comments; I'm not going there again :-)]

> Moving to another fine area of discussion: The Marine Cutlass. The idea
that
> the Marine Cutlass is made of some kind of superdense/steel laminate has
> been discussed on the list. It is a reasonable suggestion, it's one
failing
> being that it would most likely require the Marine to have one weapon for
> actual battle (where a suit of BD would make the heavy blade usable) and
a
> lighter steel alloy ceremonial blade. 

Actually, it doesn't.  Under GURPS, a standard Cutlass has a minimum ST of
7.  Switching to hyperdense material increases minimum ST by 50%, to 11. 
This dovetails nicely with 11 being the minimum recommended ST for the
various Marine templates. 

Tom Schoene

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 09:28:41 -0500
From: "Smart, David J (David)" <dasmart@lucent.com>
Subject: Gurkhas - Correction

As a number of people have pointed out, the Gurkhas currently
stationed in East Timor are U.K.-based troops, not Australian.
I assumed, based on the wording of the article, that Australia
had picked up members of the 3rd Royal Gurkha Rifles which was
disbanded by the U.K. back in November, 1996.

My mistake and my apologies for it.

This does lead me to ask, though, if it would even be possible
to have provincial units become "elite" when so much combat
capability in a high-tech society, such as the Imperium, depends
on technology. There's already been a discussion on how the use
of battledress could, in some campaigns, result in troops who
would be ineffective if their suits were unavailable.

Could such elitism disappear when battledress, combat robots,
grav tanks, and PGMPs/FGMPs rule the battlefield? If not, how
effective would it be against High Stellar tech?

BTW, if anyone wants to read up on the Gurkhas and their
history, check out the following link:
http://www.army.mod.uk/army/organise/infan/gurkha/

David

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 15:57:06 +0100
From: "Trevor, Peter" <Peter.Trevor@rb.cwplc.com>
Subject: RE: Gurkhas - Correction

David Smart wrote:
> This does lead me to ask, though, if it would even be possible
> to have provincial units become "elite" when so much combat
> capability in a high-tech society, such as the Imperium,
> depends on technology. There's already been a discussion on how
> the use of battledress could, in some campaigns, result in
> troops who would be ineffective if their suits were
> unavailable.
>
> Could such elitism disappear when battledress, combat robots,
> grav tanks, and PGMPs/FGMPs rule the battlefield? If not, how
> effective would it be against High Stellar tech?

IIRC Striker, Striker II, and 5FW  differentiated  between  troop
quality and equipment TL.  So within those systems  if  the  high
tech toys were removed it should be possible to determine the new
combat effectiveness at the new TL.

The implication is that the 3I (and  other  states*)  maintain  a
training regimen that does  not  omit  low-tech  combat.  Or,  in
other words, Imperial troops are not  at  a  complete  loss  when
deprived of their battledress.  Check out  Striker,  et  al,  for
combat effectiveness changes.

(* = The exception being the Hivers.)

IMTU the Aslan Guard on Capital have the same reputation  as  the Gurkhas do
in RL.



Regards PLST
"Rome wasn't burned in a day."

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 14:31:50 +0100
From: "Peter  Scarrott" <peter@myhelliconia.freeserve.co.uk>
Subject: Re Ghurkhas

"Smart, David J (David)" <dasmart@lucent.com> said
>It seems Australia is sending in the Ghurkhas.

Actually the British (not the Australians) are sending in the Ghurkhas, as
our contribution to the operation.
As an aside the Ghurkhas can be considered a mercenary unit in the pay of
the British army, however they are definitely considered an elite fighting
unit by anyone who has met them or read of their exploits.

Peter
http://www.myhelliconia.freeserve.co.uk
peter@myhelliconia.freeserve.co.uk

IMTU: tc+ tm tn++ ru+ !3i+ c+ jt- au- ls ta- hi++ ith++ va+ as- so  zh+ vi-
      And life is harsh and rarely fair.

I've seen things you people wouldn't believe. Attack ships on fire off the
shoulder of Orion. I watched C-beams glitter in the dark near the Tannhauser
gate. All those moments will be lost in time, like tears in rain. Time to
die."

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 11:20:28 EDT
From: Sethkimmel@aol.com
Subject: Re: Ground Forces

How about GT: The Emperor's Hammer? 

This comes from Sriker II; being the nickname for the Imperial Household Grav 
Cavalry Regiment of the Imperial Guard. 

BTW, does the Imperial Guard have the same reputation as Napoleon's Old Guard?

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 11:29:56 -0400 (EDT)
From: jg42@cornell.edu
Subject: Re: Ground Forces...<

On Tue, 21 Sep 1999, The Roc wrote:
> Craig, I loved SL and used to play it in stints from a couple of hours to
> complete long weekends (Friday night to Sunday arvo, or Saturday morning to
> Monday arvo, depending), but the only gamer I knew who played it drifted
> away before he died.  The closest I have come to it in a computer game is
> Microsoft's "Close Combat" and "Close Combat: A Bridge to Far," both of
> which I have read reviews calling them "(the board game) Squad
> Leader-like..." or "Based on the board game, Squad Leader..." to which they
> may be right?  There is also on the shelves at the moment, but I haven't
> been able to get yet, is "Close Combat: Russian Campaign" which is supposed
> to be bigger than the other two put together!
> 
> If you like SL, I recommend the CC series.


Close Combat is an awesome game.  IMHO, it's the best software Microsoft 
ever put out.  I actually prefer the original to "A bridge too far" as it 
feels a bit more realistic to me.  In ABTF, they made the weapons more 
deadly and the troops more accruate with them, probably in an attempt to 
make the gameplay more exciting, as the original game is on the slow side 
for a comptuer game, but just right, IMHO, for a comptuerized war game.

I haven't playe russian front.

Juliean

------------------------------

Date: Tue, 21 Sep 1999 11:35:16 -0400
From: "Thomas Schoene" <TomSchoene@worldnet.att.net>
Subject: Re: Gurkhas - Correction

- ----------
> From: Smart, David J (David) <dasmart@lucent.com>
> To: 'traveller@mpgn.com'
> Subject: Gurkhas - Correction
> Date: Tuesday, 21 September, 1999 10:28 AM

[snip]
> This does lead me to ask, though, if it would even be possible
> to have provincial units become "elite" when so much combat
> capability in a high-tech society, such as the Imperium, depends
> on technology. There's already been a discussion on how the use
> of battledress could, in some campaigns, result in troops who
> would be ineffective if their suits were unavailable.
> 
> Could such elitism disappear when battledress, combat robots,
> grav tanks, and PGMPs/FGMPs rule the battlefield? If not, how
> effective would it be against High Stellar tech?

I don't quite see the problem.  Provincial does not necessarily mean
low-tech.  The Gurkhas themselves, for instance, are equipped with exactly
the same technology as other UK infantry units.  They are elite because of
their reputation, their esprit d'corps, and their selectivity.  (Thousands
of Gurkhas volunteering for a few hundred billets.)  

You could easily have elite provincial forces recruited from some low-tech
world but trained and equipped to High-stellar standards. 

Tom Schoene
 

------------------------------

End of Traveller-digest V1999 #1113
***********************************

To unsubscribe to Traveller-Digest, send the command:

unsubscribe traveller-digest

in the body of a message to "traveller-request@lists.imagiconline.com".
If you want to subscribe something other than the account the mail is
coming from, such as a local redistribution list, then append that
address to the "subscribe" command; for example, to subscribe
"local-traveller":

subscribe traveller-digest local-traveller@your.domain.net

A non-digest (direct mail) version of this list is also available; to
subscribe to that instead, replace all instances of "traveller-digest"
in the commands above with "traveller".

Multi-Player Games Network http://www.mpgn.com
