Logs for ShadowRN and Associated Mailing Lists

From:	Erik Jameson <erikj@****.COM>
Subject:	Re: more on lethality problems
Date:	Fri, 27 Mar 1998 13:22:05 -0500

Message no. 1 At 06:47 AM 3/27/98 -0600, you wrote:

>The only gripe is, why does the delayer always go first?

Let me give you an example of sorts. No, paintball isn't a realistic gun
fight, but it's as close as I hope any of us ever really get to one. And
it's close enough that the military and police forces see it as a useful
training tool; if the only firefights you've seen are on TV and you think
you are damn near invulnerable, try paintball with that attitude. You'll
be bruised and spending a lot of time in the staging areas and not on the
fields (read an account in a recent magazine of an Army reserve unit of
about 30 men that got hammered by 8 or 9 experienced paintballers in a
Reserve training exercise; those soldiers learned the easy way that combat
it deadly).

Sorry, back on topic.

One of the newer field types are speedball and it's variants. Basically,
it's a more urban setting than crawling around in the woods. Wooden
barricades, hay bales, giant wire spools, even giant inflated barricades in
some cases. One of the things that happens a lot on these fields is the
"Jack-in-the-box" affect. People take cover, pop up to squeeze off a few
rounds, then duck back behind cover. What experienced players try to do
(and I'm not experienced enough to remember this tactic all the time) is to
find a position, wait until it's their turn to pop up, then stay there,
paintgun still pointing at the other player to pop up their head like a
Jack-in-the-box, then fling some paint at their head.

Basically, you have one player waiting, or delaying, for the other person
to do something so that they can react. The delayer nearly always get the
first shot in, even when it is nearly simultaneous. That's because they
know where their target is, roughly, and they are just waiting to pull the
trigger. The other player has to move their entire body (pop up) and then
try to sight in in a heartbeat. Only the best tourny players can have any
expectation of doing that.

So I really don't see any problem with the delayed action person getting to
go first in SR. Seems to match up pretty well with my experiences.

Erik J.

"Oh, the silent helicopters and the men in black fatigues? They're just my
car pool to work."

From:	"Paul J. Adam" <shadowrn@********.DEMON.CO.UK>
Subject:	Re: more on lethality problems
Date:	Fri, 27 Mar 1998 23:28:40 +0000

Message no. 2 In article <3.0.3.16.19980327095352.085f6d66@****.fbiz.com>, Erik
Jameson <erikj@****.COM> writes
>Basically, you have one player waiting, or delaying, for the other person
>to do something so that they can react. The delayer nearly always get the
>first shot in, even when it is nearly simultaneous. That's because they
>know where their target is, roughly, and they are just waiting to pull the
>trigger. The other player has to move their entire body (pop up) and then
>try to sight in in a heartbeat. Only the best tourny players can have any
>expectation of doing that.

This is why the British Army doctrine is that you change position every
few rounds in a firefight, even if only by a few feet.

Stay put, get shot.

--
There are four kinds of homicide: felonious, excusable, justifiable and
praiseworthy...

Paul J. Adam paul@********.demon.co.uk

From:	Erik Jameson <erikj@****.COM>
Subject:	Re: more on lethality problems
Date:	Fri, 27 Mar 1998 19:54:41 -0500

Message no. 3 At 11:28 PM 3/27/98 +0000, you wrote:
>In article <3.0.3.16.19980327095352.085f6d66@****.fbiz.com>, Erik
>Jameson <erikj@****.COM> writes
>>Basically, you have one player waiting, or delaying, for the other person
>>to do something so that they can react. The delayer nearly always get the
>>first shot in, even when it is nearly simultaneous. That's because they
>>know where their target is, roughly, and they are just waiting to pull the
>>trigger. The other player has to move their entire body (pop up) and then
>>try to sight in in a heartbeat. Only the best tourny players can have any
>>expectation of doing that.
>
>This is why the British Army doctrine is that you change position every
>few rounds in a firefight, even if only by a few feet.
>
>Stay put, get shot.

That's actually one of the hardest habits, at least initially, to break in
paintball. I've been on both sides of the barrel doing this. Damn
embarassing to pop up, not even had a chance to squeeze a shot off, when
you go blind because a paintball has splattered all over your goggles.

You really have to either train yourself or be able to actually think
rationally in the middle of the heat of combat (which is hard to do) to not
turn yourself into a Jack-in-the-box target.

Erik J.

From:	losthalo <losthalo@********.COM>
Subject:	Re: more on lethality problems
Date:	Sat, 28 Mar 1998 11:57:39 -0500

Message no. 4 At 11:28 PM 3/27/98 +0000, you wrote:

>This is why the British Army doctrine is that you change position every
>few rounds in a firefight, even if only by a few feet.
>
>Stay put, get shot.

The Two Rules of BattleTech:
Concentrate Firepower.
Don't sit still.

(and they're not numbered because they're equally important :)

losthalo

From:	Wafflemiesters <evamarie@**********.NET>
Subject:	Re: more on lethality problems
Date:	Sun, 29 Mar 1998 13:58:33 -0600

Message no. 5 >
> (losthalo , Sat 10:57)
> The Two Rules of BattleTech:
> Concentrate Firepower.
> Don't sit still.
>
> (and they're not numbered because they're equally important :)
>
> losthalo

I read a mathematics book that had an essay about concentration of fire
and such given various weapons technologies (it was bassed of naval and
infanty combat,andwritten by, I believe, a brittish navy officer to
expalin thactic of "splitting the line"). It proved those two rules
mathematically.

I wish I could remeber the book's name, because it was increadably easy
to apply the mathmatic principles to battletech and almost any other
combat system to figure out aproximately equal forces, and even a
probabilityfor victory / defeat, if you knew the relative strenghts of
indvidual units.

For B-tech, the rules translated simply- a force can take on an equal
number of smaller (but qualitatively equal) forces equal to the sum of
thier sqares (in tons). For example, a 100 ton force should equal 4 50
ton forces taken on more or less seprately (100x100 = 4x50x50).

This is the basis of "divide and conquer"- if you can concentrate force
on a small unit, and not worry about other units, you obliterate it
before it does harm, and move onto the next group with an advatage. This
aplies more strongly the better the individual units are- its not so
valid for roman foot soldiers in formation, but very valid for men with
guns (close combat infanty can't concentrate fire as esily).

In the aproximately "1 shot, 1 kill" world of SR, this is totally
aplicable. Its part of what makes speed so nasty- acting multiple times
basically allows you to act as multiple units- if you can act 3 times a
turn, you are (almost) 9 times as effective as somebody acting once per
turn.
The essay similary showed that a single unit that was twice as deadly
(per encounter) was about 4 times as effective, I believe. Survival
ability is somewhat less important, as it does not eliminate threats
quickly and thus give a "fire concentration" advantage early in a fight.

This might partly explain why a team with good gear cuts though security
"almost" as good so easily- they are better per unit, and encounter the
guards in small groups (usually). Better defensive positions reduce
those advantages (by reducing concentration of fire) and allow time for
grouping of forces to equal the threat.

Naval battles ,and ot an extent, B-tech, are generally "clean" fights,
where pure balance of power is a legrer issue, and strategy out weighs
tactics. (or is that the reversed)?

Once stealth, ambush, diversion, and pshycology cloud the picture, these
rules become very hard to apply.

Mongoose

Mailing List Logs for

Further Reading

Disclaimer