Does Starfleet Ground Force realy exist?

[Tobian]

Ok let's go down the list:

1) wearing 'camoflage' is UTTERLY useless when the enemy has sensor technology - such as the venerable tricorder - and if Starfleet go on covert missions they have special technology and outfits pertaining to that...

2) Klingons wear body armour because they fight each other - using 'swords' and firsts - which DOES make a difference - in that context - a Klingon hit with a phaser still goes down just the same!

3) energy weapons don't have flack - yes some of the ground forces were wearing flack jackets in a few episodes for those reasons - but untilatelly it makes no difference.

4) tanks can be melted by Phasers

Yes you could have 'evolved' the tanks - several cultures have but with regards to that your 'evolution' in a Starfleet sense would be a bog standard shuttle, as they have shields and highly potent energy weapons - If you faced off a modern era tanks and a shuttle - the shuttle, weedy as it is would win because it could melt the tank in a single hit... The other point is that people can carry weaponry which is more potent than a modern day tank - a Tank, even in todays age is an enormous sign that says 'hit me' - it's a great superiority tool, but a lucky person with an antitank weapon can wipe it out.. now imagine everyone can do that from 10 miles away ... and you have a problem!

It's not that anything has went backwards, it's that the rules of engagement have changed. Stick a military officer from the 1800's in the second world war and he'd not understand what was going on - and get mown down by machine fire - the rules of engagement have changed because technology has changed.

[Tobian]

Originally posted by UDT/Frogman
the land warrior is not weaponit its a basicly a computer thats atached to a solders its allows u to see where ur gys are and where are enemy have been seen its also incorporates night and thermal vission devices and video camera attached to solders rifle so in urdan environment u dont have to stick ur head out of cover and shoot the enemy u just have to stick ur rifle out of cover and see enemy thro the eye peas on ur helmet and also accuratly engage tangos if u want to
why does starfleet doesnt have somethind like that

it's called a Tricorder

[Sea Tyger]

As Tobian has pointed out, rules of engagement change as technology changes. Case in point: a single F/A-18E/F Super Hornet can take out the same size of a target as a squadron of F-4's could in Vietnam, and a fleet of B-17's could in WWII. Technology has made aircraft munitions extremely precise, causing the Air Force/Navy to change their tactics to adapt to it.

Also, you're forgetting the setting!!!!!!! This is Star Trek! Starfleet doesn't operate like today's modern military. It's an exploratory organization with defensive capabilities. At it's most militant, it's Horatio Hornblower in space.

If you want to play "Space Marines" or "Starship Troopers," buy Warhammer 40,000 or Traveller. They have giant grav tanks and powered battle armor. Star Trek isn't about that; not even the MACOs are about that.

Get out of your thinking that just because we do something some way, that Star Trek has to do it the same way, with phasers!

[Phoenix]

Slight divergence from topic, but what does MACO stand for?

[Sea Tyger]

Military Assault Command Operations

[Balok]

Originally posted by Sea Tyger
2. You're not thinking in the context of the setting. It's been shown (TOS "A Piece of the Action") that shipboard phasers can be used for planetary bombardment....that means these massively powerful beam weapons can be used to support troops like heavy artillery.

True, but in a war situation, space vessels would be dealing with other space vessels. They could probably not spare the power to support ground assaults, who would need their own equipment for that. In addition, military ground targets would be hardened or shielded. And there would probably be planetary defense batteries (in fact, we know at least some races employ these as of TOS).

To reduce hardened ground targets in a battle against an equivalent force, you would need some sort of ground artillery.

To keep troops alive, you would need some kind of close air support. It would likely be some kind of hardened shuttlecraft, but it would exist. Maybe the hoppers can fill this role.

Originally posted by Sea Tyger
As has already been mentioned, light, man-portable weapons (phaser rifles, disrputors) can vaporize relatively large objects. That means tanks and other heavy vehicles are at a high risk on a battlefield from every soldier with a phaser/disruptor rifle, which is decidedly not the case on modern-day Earth.

When those targets aren't shielded, yes. Shields reduce that advantage considerably. Shields also prevent you from beaming ordinance or troops directly onto the target. Any serious military installation would have to be shielded or it wouldn't last long.

Any sort of heavy weapon would have to be mobile, or it would quickly fall victim to counter-battery fire -- something we have *now*. And it would have to be shielded. Remember that the RPG was originally developed to make the tank obsolete. Modern tanks aren't much bothered by them unless the guy gets really lucky. Weapons designers came up with the discarding sabot shell. And tank designers countered with reactive armor. And so it goes.

I suspect a 24th century tank would hover, not roll on treads, and would have deflector shields. It could easily mount a small M-AM reactor, which would be sufficient to power such things. The main gun would likely be some variation on that clunky phaser cannon we last saw in "The Cage" / "The Menagerie".

Originally posted by Sea Tyger
3. In one of the TOS episodes (and I can't recall the name at the moment),

That would be "Arena", the first and so far only Gorn appearance. You're welcome.

Originally posted by Sea Tyger
Kirk and Spock are in a combat situation at the beginning, and are forced to use a photon grenade and mortar-like launcher to take out an enemy position. So, even with ultra-powerful beam weapons the size of an M-16, Starfleet also makes use of miniaturized photon weapons as a form of lightweight, portable artillery support for troops. That further reduces the need for heavy artillery in a highly-mobile force such as Starfleet ground forces.

I agree that emplaced heavy artillery is unlikely, because counter-battery fire is likely to be more effective, more accurate, and faster every year.

Originally posted by Sea Tyger
4. Mobility isn't as much of an issue, given that a squadron of ships, carrying ground forces, can beam troops, en masse, wherever they need to go. (Ever hear of those 22-man emergency transporters that reportedly have been around since TOS?

See "shielding", above. Also, rememeber the remat detonator from DS9? Little thing the size of a pea that turns a person into organic refuse on rematerialization? If that exists, surely it's possible to inhibit transporters using something similar.

My point is, as offensive power advances, so to does defensive power. Given two forces that are roughly comparable, wars will still be won the same way then that they are now: with strategy and tactics.

My $0.03. (Opinions cost more since the weak dollar policy went into effect )

[UDT/Frogman]

Fesarius
u got it right on target



and its just pisses me off that starfleet ground force doesnt show any sign of advances exept tricorders and phasers

[Dan Gurden]

Originally posted by UDT/Frogman

and its just pisses me off that starfleet ground force doesnt show any sign of advances exept tricorders and phasers

Ahhh.

I see.

The personal attack of it all...

So there are no advances beyond a universal scanner and phaser capable of levelling a mountain.

Other that is apart from Photon Morters, and presumably grenades, cloaked mine-fields (requiring the Tricorders to find and reprogram them BTW), Hopper vehicles, transporters (mobile transporters too, although how this makes a difference I dont know?) Man and vehicle-portable heavy weapons (possibly designed to take on targets with shields? After all, Phasers can level mountains, but are often un-shielded), Shuttles with up to MkV Phasers and Micro-Torpedos... Exo Scanners and shotgun combos, Mobile forcefield generators and both Transporter Inhibitors and Enhancers...

Other than those, there is nothing for ground troops to use...

Really, there is no need to take it so personally, and if their absence is causing you personal grief, you are really in a bad place and should step away from the subject matter for a day or two.

But as this is a Roleplaying site, and thus indicates that many of us are likely to run our own versions of Trek, this makes things really simple. Add them

Really. Its that simple.

But to stand in one place and tell everyone that the canon evidence is wrong, and you are right is just voicing an opinion. One that several debates on the existence of Starfleet Marines (or marines) has shown that neither side will change their mind on...

[UDT/Frogman]

Originally posted by Dan Gurden
Ahhh.

I see.

The personal attack of it all...

So there are no advances beyond a universal scanner and phaser capable of levelling a mountain.

Other that is apart from Photon Morters, and presumably grenades, cloaked mine-fields (requiring the Tricorders to find and reprogram them BTW), Hopper vehicles, transporters (mobile transporters too, although how this makes a difference I dont know?) Man and vehicle-portable heavy weapons (possibly designed to take on targets with shields? After all, Phasers can level mountains, but are often un-shielded), Shuttles with up to MkV Phasers and Micro-Torpedos... Exo Scanners and shotgun combos, Mobile forcefield generators and both Transporter Inhibitors and Enhancers...

Other than those, there is nothing for ground troops to use...

half of the stuff u mentioned were never seen so they might not exist

BTW what tha hell is hppper i never seen one on tv but i keep on hearing about them

[Dan Gurden]

Originally posted by UDT/Frogman
half of the stuff u mentioned were never seen so they might not exist

BTW what tha hell is hppper i never seen one on tv but i keep on hearing about them

OK. so half the stuff I listed saw no screentime;

Lets see. I will now take out everything that has never seen any on-screen time.

Other that is apart from Photon Morters, cloaked mine-fields (requiring the Tricorders to find and reprogram them BTW), transporters, Man and vehicle-portable heavy weapons, Shuttles with up to MkV Phasers and Micro-Torpedos... Exo Scanners and shotgun combos, Mobile forcefield generators and both Transporter Inhibitors and Enhancers...


No Screen Time;
'Hopper vehicles' - referred to in 'Nor the Battle to the Strong'
'mobile transporter units' - Directly referred to by O'Brien, I think in 'The Wounded'
'Phasers can level mountains' - True, we never see this, But Worf specifically warns Picard that setting level 16 is designed for massive geological displacement, and all Published material refers to this and its ability to level small mountains. but technocally, not on-screen.
photon grenades - Well, this was speculation, and I did say 'and presumably'...

So only 4 items, one of which most definately exists, and the other two specifically referred to.

So I can guarantee that it is all there somewhere... Amongst various films and TV shows. If you expand to account for novels and RPG produce, you will have everything you want...

As for what a Hopper is. As it was not seen on screen, we truely do not know. But common perception of the specific reference (rather than as a more generic 'shuttle'), and this script referencecontext as Troop Carrier and Medivac vehicle... means that it is viewed as some sort of inner atmosphere/Possibly LEO transport vehicle, filling the roles that Helicopters, Lorries, Taxis and Jets fill in our own society...

But this perception is decidedly non-canon.

[Tobian]

NB: Dan, I beleive that a Photon grenade was used in TOS by Kirk and Spock, or at least I read somewhere else on these forums, as I can't recall them myself.

You've also missed out the isomagnetic disintergrator and the Tetrion pulse launchers both mentioned in insurection (and the former seen in use, but Worf) - both were *BIG* weapons.

You also have the 'wide beam' setting on the Phaser, which is often overlooked.

The phaser is also more than just a 'point and click' device too, it can be set to overload, which is a pretty effective explosive, and there are long range / high powered versions of it, such as the pulse compression version of it.

From the screentime and the context it's mentioned in, the Hopper is a 'transport' - but then generally most things are meant to be multifunctional - so in all honesty it could just be a shuttle, or maybe one without space worthiness. - Startrek vehicles don't have much problem going speeds of several dozen mach (as described in the TNG technical manual.)

[UDT/Frogman]

ok what about body protection and personal camuflage camuflage?

[Dan Gurden]

Originally posted by UDT/Frogman
ok what about body protection and personal camuflage camuflage?

OK, well, in the Kirk movies security often went out in a pansy arsed bit of plastic that looked like hybrid of a kids dress-up outfit and baseball catcher gear... This could have been body armour.

But not only would this have been ineffective against any personal energy weapon that would be capable of taking out a city block from a point outside the targets vision, but children would point and laugh at you too.

Outside of Starfleet, we have several versions of body armour.

Klingon leather/padded, designed mostly for hand-to-hand combat as they also know that a disintegrate function on a phaser will simply take out their armour too... So only limited use against energy weapons...

The Cardassians seem to favour a clamshell design...

And the hunters seem to use an energy absorbant strip about 1n inch wide, that they block the incoming beam with. Must take a very skilled user to learn that one...

And totally non-canon, Star Trek DS9 did drop a hint at Starfleet Body Armour. Now there were what appeared to be Ground Troops in both 'Nor the battle to the strong' and 'The seige of AR-588'... In both of these, the non-star ground troops appeared to be wearing a large quilted black garment over their uniform...

Now oddly it has been theorised that this might be armour, designed to burn away under low level energy weapons fire rather than the indivual underneath... Its also worth pointing out that the vast majority of people wearing these garments were playing corpses.

As stated previously, when dealing with energy weapons the best defence seems to be mobility to leap out of the way (Which is a conon on-screen event, over and over, so best not mention that energy weapon beams should be travelling at the speed of light...)

OK, how about personal camoflage.

This is particularly easy.

Use your tricorders to fool sensing devices, so standard electronic warfare. After all, it doesn't matter how well your hidden, a hand held sensor in your opponants hands is like standing up when John Cleese asks.

And if you actually want to be hidden as well, then you will need holographics.

Of course, then you need to hide the power signature, a whole other ball game!

In the hands of oppoonants in this aspect we have seen interohasic travel/cloaking devices and even personal cloaking devices.

Again some of this is speculation, but again the vast majority is all canon. And all worth exactly the same when it comes to what you want to use in your games...

[Owen E Oulton]

ok what about body protection and personal camuflage camuflage?

It's spelled "camouflage."

We've seen the ultimate in visual camouflage in the movie Star Trek: Insurrection. Combined with the screen-mentioned used of sensor-suppressing and -jamming fields (You really should check out all the references in Nor the Battle to the Strong and The Siege of AR-559 - there's a lot of info in the throw-away dialogue), this would be of immense use to infantry soldiers, although to what extent this might violate the Treaty of Algeron's ban on Federation cloaking technology is a matter for the individual GM/Narrator.

The simple fact is that Star Trek is a ship-based show, as I pointed out earlier. If you want to run a game using only screen-shown technology, you're going to have to forget about depicting ground forces in any depth. On the other tentacle, a reasonable amount of extrapolation can extend the available to suit most needs.

[Antonsb214]

I think camo would be nice, after jamming all those fancy sensors, then you just need camos that will hide you from the visual sensors (eyes) of the enemy, tailored to their vision spectrum.
As for the much used "blow a mountain away" line, well, I don't think a power pack will last long on that setting. And your average rock is easier to vape than tritanium. I think what vapes a few hundred cubic meters of rock only gets about 5 cubic meters of tritanium. And if it's shielded, well, they know you're there and where you are from the phaser beam. As for "armor" I suppose starfleet would use something that deflected the blast or ablated away, at least taking the lethal sting and leaving the troop alive with a treatable (by 24th century standards) wound. And there is still shrapnel in the 24th century, at least exploding rock and ship bulkheads, I wouldn't be surprised is the standard uniform had some ballistic armor properties, but that's just what I would do, because it doesn't matter how peaceful you would like to be, there's always someone out there who'll try to hurt you. It happens. Now I'm rambling... oh.. 0130
better sleep