Miniatures and Temporary Army Lists
- Thread starter Hiromoon
- Start date
docrailgun
Mongoose
Type 99 card?
Please?
Please?
Rick nice work on the Aussie stuff 8)
i think the Inf sections are short a guy thou, and the ACIW should be a little more nasty (may be letting it fire 2 times a turn, but not as a reaction) and give the F88A4 24" range to put it along side the M4 and L85A2
also, Aussies (note, this part is VERY second hand, in month or 3 ill be able to help out ALOT more on this side
) tend to split there sections into 3 fire teams
Section:
1st Fireteam
Corporal with F88A4
Private with AICW
Private with F88A4
2nd Fireteam
Lance Corporal with F88A4
Private with F89
Private with F88A4
3rd Fireteam
Senior Private with F88
Private with F89
Private with AICW
I reckon the section would be around 190pts to 195pts, (5pts more than the yanks, same about of men, better GL, more flexibility but lack of intel feeds)
Also i reckon Land 125 will not be up to the same standard as Land Warrior (but thats just me ) perhaps dropping the Aussies 5+ save and giving them 5" move would work?
i think the Inf sections are short a guy thou, and the ACIW should be a little more nasty (may be letting it fire 2 times a turn, but not as a reaction) and give the F88A4 24" range to put it along side the M4 and L85A2
also, Aussies (note, this part is VERY second hand, in month or 3 ill be able to help out ALOT more on this side
) tend to split there sections into 3 fire teamsSection:
1st Fireteam
Corporal with F88A4
Private with AICW
Private with F88A4
2nd Fireteam
Lance Corporal with F88A4
Private with F89
Private with F88A4
3rd Fireteam
Senior Private with F88
Private with F89
Private with AICW
I reckon the section would be around 190pts to 195pts, (5pts more than the yanks, same about of men, better GL, more flexibility but lack of intel feeds)
Also i reckon Land 125 will not be up to the same standard as Land Warrior (but thats just me
) perhaps dropping the Aussies 5+ save and giving them 5" move would work?
Rick
Mongoose
Hi Chiwie, this was based on a possible future orbat I picked up, still unsure of the provenance but i'm still digging! I do know that the Aussie military is undergoing extensive re-organisation, and this may be the orbat for Aussie units in 2012. I had a choice to go with what I know about the existing orbat, or use a hypothetical future one. I chose the latter.
We may have to compromise on the Land 125, maybe drop the save to 6+ for the body armour, not sure about the 5" move, it's still as bulky as Land Warrior gear.
I had a look at the effective ranges of several different assault rifles, and I think thats what Mongoose used to work out comparable ranges in the game. Using those, the F88A4 didn't have the range of the M16, it was comparable to the AK, hence the 20" range. I will look at it again though. Good idea on the AICW!
We may have to compromise on the Land 125, maybe drop the save to 6+ for the body armour, not sure about the 5" move, it's still as bulky as Land Warrior gear.
I had a look at the effective ranges of several different assault rifles, and I think thats what Mongoose used to work out comparable ranges in the game. Using those, the F88A4 didn't have the range of the M16, it was comparable to the AK, hence the 20" range. I will look at it again though. Good idea on the AICW!
i have to admit i like the old org better (being able to go into 3 fireteams would make them different to use than the USMC) is there any way to confirm your info?
by the sounds of it the sights going onto the F88A4 will bring it to the level of the M4 and SA80 at the minimum! the sights will apparently be 4x mag :twisted:
Yeah maybe keep Land 125 as it is, ive thought about it and i reckon ether A: we will buy or B: make our own armour that will be the equivalent to the yanks so 5+ armour and 4" move, i don't think we should get thermal sight rules ether, only one will be issued per section in 2007... (damn tight ass MoD!) Maybe a option would be to 'ditch' the heavy armour of the Land 125 and go for no save but 5" move while keeping the 12" command (keep the personal radios ditch the armour)? considering the Aus Army's traditional playground is the Jungle, and the realistic view that we will be a support fraction for the US why not use the Aussie infantry as light infantry supporting the slower moving more heavily armoured US marines?
Edit:
what about this pic for the a "Hiromoon" style unit card (which look )
by the sounds of it the sights going onto the F88A4 will bring it to the level of the M4 and SA80 at the minimum!
the sights will apparently be 4x mag :twisted: Yeah maybe keep Land 125 as it is, ive thought about it and i reckon ether A: we will buy or B: make our own armour that will be the equivalent to the yanks so 5+ armour and 4" move, i don't think we should get thermal sight rules ether, only one will be issued per section in 2007... (damn tight ass MoD!) Maybe a option would be to 'ditch' the heavy armour of the Land 125 and go for no save but 5" move while keeping the 12" command (keep the personal radios ditch the armour)? considering the Aus Army's traditional playground is the Jungle, and the realistic view that we will be a support fraction for the US why not use the Aussie infantry as light infantry supporting the slower moving more heavily armoured US marines?
Edit:
what about this pic for the a "Hiromoon" style unit card (which look
)
I'm all for the USMC or US Army having Australian units. From a faction point it's certainly plausible by the BFEVO time frame that we will be a closer ally to the US over Britain. We may be a Republic by then and possibly had just had a battle against Indonesia over West Papua. I don't think Australians would have appreciated that Britain supplies Indonesia most of its weapons so it can commit its human rights violations and shoot at Aussie soldiers. The US on the other hand have already demonstrated their willingness to support Australia in placing embargos on Indonesia during the East Timor crisis. They stopped dealing with them after Indonesia committed a new wave of massacres using Hawk aircraft, Saracen APCs, Scorpion tanks etc happily supplied by Britain. By BFEVO, our alliance with the US would have grown stronger while that with Britain widened. Even now we're in Iraq and Afghanistan to support the US. If it was a solely British or European operation I doubt we would have troops there aside from training purposes.
Rick
Mongoose
Downside of orbat is that you lose the extra man per section, but the upside is that the entire platoon gains 3 manouevre support teams, so that it has the effect of increasing the section size to 3 teams of 4.
From what I understand, this will be the "standard" light infantry format, Mechanised or motorised infantry will be a variation of this.
I think this would be a standard infantry unit that would see service in Kerakhistan, we could go with a lighter variant that had the option of dropping the armour and increasing movement for other theatres.
The source is http://www.armchairgeneral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=35810&goto=nextnewest but although i can find general articles relating to restructuring in the Australian Defence Force Journals, nothing specific.
From what I understand, this will be the "standard" light infantry format, Mechanised or motorised infantry will be a variation of this.
I think this would be a standard infantry unit that would see service in Kerakhistan, we could go with a lighter variant that had the option of dropping the armour and increasing movement for other theatres.
The source is http://www.armchairgeneral.com/forums/showthread.php?t=35810&goto=nextnewest but although i can find general articles relating to restructuring in the Australian Defence Force Journals, nothing specific.
Rick
Mongoose
As a quick update to the last post, I haven't been able to confirm the exact organisational details of the new restructuring, although i have been able to confirm that it is real, it is based on the principle of 4, and that its the 5th/7th RAR that is currently reorganising along these lines.
This was taken from a PDF on the Hardened and Networked Army initiative.
This was taken from a PDF on the Hardened and Networked Army initiative.
Rick
Mongoose
Also, I've just found this piece from "The Australian", 2nd hand unfortunately, as the original article is no longer on their website. Still, interesting in a background sort-of way.
I think I've found what I was looking for now, all I need is to find out how the vehicles fit in with this new structure.
I think I've found what I was looking for now, all I need is to find out how the vehicles fit in with this new structure.
"In the last ten years, most of Indonesia's military equipment has come from the UK. From 1994 to the end of 1990s Indonesia bought over half its military equipment from the UK. During the first three years of the Labour Government 83% of Indonesia's arms imports were from the UK. Since Labour came to power, the UK has delivered over £393 million worth of military equipment to Indonesia (see table below). In 2001 and 2002, the UK issued over three-quarters of all EU arms export licences for Indonesia, with the value of these export licences responsible for over half the total financial value of EU arms deals to Indonesia. In 2002 two-thirds of arms deliveries from the EU to Indonesia came from the UK.
The Indonesian military has a human rights record that few others in the world can match. It instigated and participated in the killing of up to a million people in a few months after the Suharto takeover in 1965, and went on to invade East Timor, where it was responsible for the deaths of around 200,000 people in the late 1970s. It also has a terrible human rights record in its operations in West Papua since 1963.
In the 1990s, the military killed thousands of civilians in Aceh and West Papua. In East Timor, before, during and after the independence referendum in August 1999, the army orchestrated a campaign of violence against the civilian population, which involved crimes against humanity and the killing of hundreds of independence supporters. Indonesia's largest military operation since the invasion of East Timor has recently been prosecuted in the province of Aceh. According to the country's National Commission on Human Rights, the martial law offensive, which began in May 2003 and ended in 2004, resulted in gross violations of human rights, including arbitrary arrests, torture, kidnapping, sexual abuse and extra-judicial killings. At least 2,000 people, the majority civilians, were killed. Hawk aircraft, Scorpion tanks, and Stormer and Saracen APCs were used during the offensive in breach (despite denials by the UK Government) of end-use "assurances" given by Indonesia. Currently UK-supplied Tactica vehicles are being used in West Papua, where serious human rights abuses are occurring."
This post will probably be deleted soon so read it while you can.
Rick
Mongoose
Chiwie: mod to the way I worked the AICW -
Its a compromise, and a bit more complicated, but I think it will work. What it does mean is that if any part of the squad fires reaction fire, you lose the ready action and are back to firing normally.
And from what I've read the US and Australian govts are very interested in strengthening ties and military working relationships based on perceived shared interests in the Pacific rim region. This at least seems more practical than basing it on a shared history!
Its a compromise, and a bit more complicated, but I think it will work. What it does mean is that if any part of the squad fires reaction fire, you lose the ready action and are back to firing normally.
And from what I've read the US and Australian govts are very interested in strengthening ties and military working relationships based on perceived shared interests in the Pacific rim region. This at least seems more practical than basing it on a shared history!