From: | Deird'Re Brooks <deirdre@***.ORG> |
---|---|
Subject: | Ivy's replies to the List |
Date: | Sun, 5 Dec 1993 03:05:53 -0800 |
re: Cyber-soldiers
I read your post (61/93) about the cyber-troops. War starts and you don't
have cyber-troops. . . You Lose!
to: Robert M. Hayden
re: Cyber-troops
I read your post about the troops too. War starts between your non-cyber
troops and cyber-troops. . . You lose!
to: David West
re: Cyber-cops
And just where are you going to find the people who are going to go out on
the streets every day when they *know* that if they run into a Samaurai, or
anyone else with serious cyber, they will never see the draw that kills
them? Just think back to 1968s "Long, Hot summers" and the police reactions
to the idea that the blacks in the cities had rifles! Actually, look into
the back newspapers and *read* the reactions. Whole sections of cities were
just plain ignored by the police for weeks at a time.
to: The Deb Decker
re: Cyber-troops
Yeah, I think it's played out too. I do agree that conscript troops won't
be cybered, of course, I don't think any serious country will use them
either. As for Barbarossa, the Germans were up against the worlds *best*
medium tank, (Yugo, hell!) the T-34, with much more lightly armed and armored
tanks. Fact, the German tank guns were too small, and too low velocity to
even penetrate the T-34 from the front or side, most of the German tank guns
wouldn't penetrate it from the rear. The Germans had to use the 8.8cm
anti-aircraft gun to knock out the T-34s. The T-34s gun could penetrate any
German tank of the time from any angle.
Yeah, I *know* that most of you don't agree.
Here's a thought. Take any Primary First World country. They build up
their Army with cyber-troops. When the cyber-troops retire they simply
remove the Tactical Computer, downgrade their Wired Reflexes (by changing a
single chip), and remove their Crypto Circuit HD chip. Then the trooper
goes out into the world with a nearly guaranteed job waiting for him/her at
a Security firm. This gives, say, Knight Errant a supply of combat trained,
already wired, people to draw on, keeps the trooper in a job, and really
makes life terrible for the criminals. (A "primary" First World country
would be UCAS, Aztlan, Japan, or the CAS. Countries with *serious*
manufacturing and technological bases.)
To make that sort of thing easier the C-punk 2.0.2.0. system of having
everything in a main module would probably be devloped. I visualize 5
modules, two of which would be easily accessible for changes. The whole
system would be installed only after the troopers first year of training
and everything but the main "wiring and backplane" parts could be changed
*without* operations. Given the economies of purchasing large lots, and the
facts that the "street price" doesn't reflect the "actual" price of
anything
this would be a very cost effective system. Plus the only really *critical*
items are easily removable. In fact, depending on the troopers prospective
job, there would probably be chips to give the departing soldier anything
from Wired Reflexes 0 (normal reflexes) to Wired 2 (for duty with Security
or Police outfits the gov't liked). Wired Reflexes 3 would remain Military
only as it is currently in the rulebooks.
The nice thing about a package deal like this is that they may be designed
to a "one-size-fits-all" standard which also saves on cost.
to: ChriZ Dane Pedersen
re: Bullet Damage
OK, the simple answer is that the damage a bullet does is a function of it's
velocity, it's mass, *and* it's design. If two bullets weigh
the same, and are the same size, the faster one will do more damage. If two
bullets are going the same speed, the heavier one will do more damage.
Bullet design is about expansion and penetration. Generally the more expansion
you get the more damage a bullet will do. There *is* a theory that the
bigger the diameter of the bullet for the weight the more damage it will do
but that theory seems a bit iffy. The larger the diameter for the weight
the faster the bullet sheds velocity and damage is directly related to
velocity.
Hollow Point bullets generally expand well and do massive damage, as do
controlled expansion bullets such as Silvertips, Cirillo Grabbers, Cor-Bons,
Black Talons and the like. Normal hollow points have the dis-advantage of
being very poor penetrators against solid items like walls, car doors, and
body armor. The other named ones penetrate much better. To damage a person
enough to get the almost mythical "one-shot-stop" you seem to need about
8 to 13 inches of penetration and about 700 to 1000 foot pounds of *delivered*
energy. (I would go for the 8" penetration range, 13" of penetration means
that you probably hit the innocent bystander *behind* your target.)
The other thing is that the design of the bullet has a lot to do with how
fast it slows down at range. A blunt round nose slows down much quicker
than a pointed nose with a boat (or tapered) tail. Given equal weights the
more streamlined bullet will go farther accurately. The length of the
bullet in comparison to it's diameter also has a lot to do with it's long
range performance as does the rate of twist in the firearms rifling. It's a
very complex subject actually. A simple formula will let you rate bullet
performance against each other though. Multiply the bullets mass, in
grains, times its velocity, in feet-per-second, and divide the result by
45,000. The answers will allow you to compare different rounds and their
bullets performances.
I give Hollow Point and Controlled Expansion bullets plus one Damage Code
and Hollow Points also take a penalty of +50 percent to the rating of any
armor/barrier that they hit. I use the published damage stats for the
common "military ball" version of the bullet. But YMMV.
To: What?
re: Cars, and Bikes.
Loved, and am using, the cars, can't wait for the bikes.
Speeds: Oh, you caught that too. Ridic^3d.
Question? Did anyone *else* actually figure out the KPH/MPH on FASAs
vehicles?
Anyone wonder what they did in 61 years to get sooooo sloooow?
Does anyone have an answer?
to: Robert Watkins
re: cyber-grunts
Warfare: The name of the game is opponents morale, as well as death toll.
And resupply under fire is why *all* the troops have the same cyber.
Scopes, etc: That's why they have Electro or Optical mag in the EYE
Odds and etc: Morale! They don't HAVE to kill them if they can scare them out of
effectiveness.
Kuwait: The fields are already back in production, most of them far quite
a while now.
>Germany is a series of city states now: Really? What an idiot idea! I
have seen nothing to give me that idea so far, They do say that southeast
europe, italy, and france are, but the france part is countered by the
write-up in the London Sourcebook. But, then again, anything is possible with
FASA. In that case, It's Hard to find competitors as weak as England is
written up in the FASA book.
Missiles vs LAAPCs: First your normo troops have to survive standing up to
aim, then they have to get the missiles past the ECM, then they have to
damage the Low Altitude *Armored* Personnel Carriers. The normos probably
won't survive step one. As for elementals, what do you think the
cyber-grunts magical support will be doing?
Maginot Line: The Germans went through the Ardennies (sic) Forest, not just
around by the sea. Franch couldn't afford to built the line farther. Of
course, they really couldn't afford not to, but that's hindsight. Parts of
the line held out till 1940 but as a defense it turned out to be as useful
as normal troops will be in a cyber-troop world.
>In a war there will a lot killed, even more unhurt, and very few wounded,
because of all the firepower:
Wrong again! Most of the casualties in combat will be just as they have been
for the last couple of wars. WOUNDED, not killed. Right now it is *hard* to
kill someone, in combat, with an M-16 but really easy to disable them. That
was the idea behind the original design. A wounded person takes at least one
other person out of action, to care for him, so it is much better to wound
people. From the point of view of an army that wants to win, it is better to
have the troops functioning at full ability in spite of wounds. Armor the
troop, add the Damage Compensator 9 and the Trauma Damper, and they will be
more useful longer than any other troops.
Infantry in the 21st century: Yeah, and the German Paratroops and Pioneers
didn't take out Ft. Eban Emael either. In fast, and hold it is the way it
will be.
re: Nanotech
Read up on the projected uses of the things. I'm trying to use my
imagination in a logical direction.
to Install a Datajack: Use several types of specialized nanotypes,
one type removes bone, another replaces the removed bone with the proper
materials, one type per material, and so forth.
I do have a real good idea of the price
difference between the item you buy and what it cost to produce. The Army
will, due to the sheer amount they buy, pay what would look like a lower
price than production costs. The rest of the difference is because of the
guaranteed sales which allow even more savings to the producer due to
scheduling and the like.
Essence=Organic support for the brain? Funny, Shadowrun II calls it the
measure of the "spirit". It's a game mechanic, nothing more.
Nukes=Cost effective? Losing is a lot less cost effective. Nukes deny
resources to both the loser *and* the victor. Real bad deal. Plus, in the
Shadowrun game, it has already been established that nukes, and their
stockpiles, have already been destroyed. Lighting *that* fire is really a
bad idea anyway. The overkill isn't really justifiable.
Essence: A rule that is simply there to cheat the players. Book definition.
Israel and Conscript troops: Last I heard females *cannot* join the Israeli
army any more, at least not in a front line outfit.
Israel *had* one of the best armies on the planet, up till about 76.
<INTEL Eval as of mid 1991>
Finally, going by the past Israeli performance, they would probably be one
of the first, if not *the* first army to cyber up. They need it.
BTW, there are ways, and quite some people take them, to stay out of the Army
there. Advanced degrees is one, foriegn study is another, religious reasons
are yet another.
to: all
re: cyber-military
Well, it's been real, and part has been fun. I'll be around to read some of
this stuff every so often. Those of you who are so sure that cyber-troops
are impossible, well, you'll be alive to see whether or not it's true. So
will you Reverend, and Ben Jordan too. I'm nearly fifty now so I'll never
know. Hope I'm wrong, but that sure isn't the way it looks from here.
Cheers, you lot!
Ivy K.