Dumpshock Forums > Japanese Imperial Marines

Omer Joel

Nov 7 2005, 10:16 AM

Is there any Shadowrun books that lists the stats for the Japanese Imperial Marines (and especialy of Saito's forces), or their equipment, cyberware and armament?

If not, what do you think these would be?

Birdy

Nov 7 2005, 11:57 AM

IIRC no book gives the stats. As for what they are, well, the old yoke says it all:

Muscles A Requirement Intelligence Not Essential

Actually slightly above average (those are Japanese, so their baseline is lower than SR's "western" one IMHO) physical stats. Average intelligence (Slightly higher in officers). They will have a lot of skills instead of exceptional attributes

BattleTac System is standard (IRL Japanese forces are quite modern)

Weapon will be an Ares Alpha copy or an Assault rifle with one GL/squad if you prefer that

Armor will be the 5/3 Camouflage combi with some additional stuff like
Helmet from the security armor
Chemical seal armor mod
Respirator
Radio
Vision enhancements
HUD
Signal tracker / locator

LBE or Vest with the typical load

Assume a rather high number of drones / robots for recon and AntiVehicle work. Those drones will likely compose most heavy firepower

Few vehicles and mostly light ones (Jeeps not Tiger tanks)

I don't see much Cyber. A Nano-Doc (Guardian) might be nice to keep them alive and some basic bioware (Enhanced Articulation and Stomach) might be found

Rather low on magical support since the Japanese screen out large parts of the society from military service (Female, Metas)

Birdy

Velocity

Nov 7 2005, 03:28 PM

I'd suggest better armour: at least Light Security Armour, if not Medium.

Currently, NATO military forces can be equipped with a Close Quarter Battle Assault System capable of repelling submachinegun fire and which covers three-quarters of the wearer (head, torso, upper arms, groin and thighs). The outfit looks and sounds like Shadowrun's Security Armour, and this is 2005 stuff.

Regarding weapons, I concur with Birdy: the Ares Alpha (or similar, Japanese-built version) would be ideal. Ditto for the BattleTac, which is absolutely essential. Make sure you read the BattleTac rules and have Marine squads use it every chance they get. The military doesn't only have better gear than security forces, they also have better training.

Apathy

Nov 7 2005, 03:56 PM

There are a lot of old threads on military unit stats, although I haven't seen one specifically for the Japanese. I would probably just use the stats I threw together for US Army forces:

[ Spoiler ]

Birdy

Nov 7 2005, 04:11 PM

QUOTE (Velocity @ Nov 7 2005, 03:28 PM)

I'd suggest better armour: at least Light Security Armour, if not Medium.

Currently, NATO military forces can be equipped with a Close Quarter Battle Assault System capable of repelling submachinegun fire and which covers three-quarters of the wearer (head, torso, upper arms, groin and thighs). The outfit looks and sounds like Shadowrun's Security Armour, and this is 2005 stuff.

Regarding weapons, I concur with Birdy: the Ares Alpha (or similar, Japanese-built version) would be ideal. Ditto for the BattleTac, which is absolutely essential. Make sure you read the BattleTac rules and have Marine squads use it every chance they get. The military doesn't only have better gear than security forces, they also have better training.

Only Problem I have with SecArmor is that according to the rules you can't wear LBE with it. Might be issued for assault operations (Storm that beach/hill) but where to carry the gear for longer ops?

Otherwise I'd take med Security anytime.

@Apathy:

I liked the basic drift of the Spoiler stuff. But some questions:

+ I always considered Firearms skill to include the basic cleaning so is B/R really useful? Isn't that better left an Armorers speciality. Same with vehicles

+ I'd go with weapons specialisation giving the soldiers a Specialisation in their service weapon

+ Pistol skill for officers might be ok

Birdy

Critias

Nov 7 2005, 05:08 PM

It's impossible to have a 0/1 in a skill/spec, for the record.

Apathy

Nov 7 2005, 07:42 PM

QUOTE (Critias @ Nov 7 2005, 12:08 PM)

It's impossible to have a 0/1 in a skill/spec, for the record.

No, just against the player-character creation rules. Since these are NPCs, I didn't feel bound by those rules.

However, for consistency's sake, I'm happy to change it to Polearms 1 for everybody and Polearms/Fixed Bayonet 1/3 for the elite guys.

[Edit]
Looking at this now, I see how I made these stats to be in line with the skill levels real people in today's Army might have. SR puts a lot more focus on melee combat; do you think soldiers in the 2050's and 2060's should have a higher melee weapon skill to account for this? If so, what weapons would they focus on? Bayonets for combat scenarios and shock batons for riot control?

Siege

Nov 7 2005, 09:06 PM

With all the bells and whistles being strapped to ARs these days, I don't think a bayonet is going to see common use.

The rank and file probably won't see a lot of specialist training in melee skills, assuming the UCAS military is still built around the Cold War doctrine.

I seem to recall reading somewhere that the USMC had discontinued formal training in knife-fighting for the rank-and-file?

-Siege

Edit: Of course, then you have things like The USMC Martial Arts Program

Apathy

Nov 7 2005, 09:49 PM

Yeah, but SR has tweeked reality to put melee weapons on an even footing with firearms, in order to encourage more katana- and cyberspur-weilding melee monsters. Since this is the paradigm for how the SR world works, wouldn't the Army (Marines, whatever...) adapt their tactics to compensate?

Birdy

Nov 7 2005, 10:16 PM

QUOTE (Apathy)

Yeah, but SR has tweeked reality to put melee weapons on an even footing with firearms, in order to encourage more katana- and cyberspur-weilding melee monsters. Since this is the paradigm for how the SR world works, wouldn't the Army (Marines, whatever...) adapt their tactics to compensate?

To quote Mr. Blackhand:

10mm beats Kung Fu - Anytime!

Birdy

Apathy

Nov 7 2005, 10:40 PM

In the real world, absolutely.

But in the SR world, not always.

Siege

Nov 8 2005, 12:26 AM

QUOTE (Apathy)

In the real world, absolutely.

But in the SR world, not always.

If you can bring the 10mm to the target and hit the target, sure.

If the unarmed guy is already on you, that could be a little problematic.

Who was it who made the comment about shooting a guy with a knife at 10 feet?

Part of the problem lies in the amount of time it takes to train a person in hth combat skills versus marksmanship. But there are situations that crop up from time to time where CQB gets really close and personal.

Anyway, the introduction of spirits and their pesky resilience to firearms would be a good incentive for combat sorts to have at least a passing familiarity with melee skills.

-Siege

hyzmarca

Nov 8 2005, 03:42 AM

QUOTE (Apathy)

QUOTE (Critias @ Nov 7 2005, 12:08 PM)

It's impossible to have a 0/1 in a skill/spec, for the record.

No, just against the player-character creation rules. Since these are NPCs, I didn't feel bound by those rules.

With the explicit exception of the 1/3 specialization at chargen, specilizations cannot be greater than twice the base skill.

What is twice nothing?

SL James

Nov 8 2005, 04:43 AM

Two? No, wait. My mistake.

Four.

Birdy

Nov 8 2005, 08:52 AM

QUOTE (Siege)

Who was it who made the comment about shooting a guy with a knife at 10 feet?

Part of the problem lies in the amount of time it takes to train a person in hth combat skills versus marksmanship. But there are situations that crop up from time to time where CQB gets really close and personal.

-Siege

Wasn't the MARINES prefered CQB gear during the Beirut operations the USS IOWA? Maybe they got back to that type of tool. According to Russian and german sources MRLS work quite nice also.

As for the knive at 10 paces, ask the Russians and they will provide.

Birdy

SL James

Nov 8 2005, 07:08 PM

No, the New Jersey was suppressing fire.

Austere Emancipator

Nov 8 2005, 07:20 PM

QUOTE (Birdy)

Wasn't the MARINES prefered CQB gear during the Beirut operations the USS IOWA?

Well, at least you can't complain about the "stopping power" of a 2700lb, 16" steel shell at 2800fps. Although, according to the people who like glaser rounds, it overpenetrates too much to kill people.

blakkie

Nov 8 2005, 07:53 PM

QUOTE (Austere Emancipator @ Nov 8 2005, 01:20 PM)

QUOTE (Birdy)

Wasn't the MARINES prefered CQB gear during the Beirut operations the USS IOWA?

Well, at least you can't complain about the "stopping power" of a 2700lb, 16" steel shell at 2800fps. Although, according to the people who like glaser rounds, it overpenetrates too much to kill people.

It's not so much the overpenetration of the body that reduces an 16"ers effectiveness to kill a person, it's that it is going too fast and is too stable in flight to start tumbling before exiting the other side of the torso [and then reducing the building behind him to rubble]. :^)

Siege

Nov 8 2005, 08:59 PM

QUOTE (Birdy)

QUOTE (Siege @ Nov 8 2005, 12:26 AM)

Who was it who made the comment about shooting a guy with a knife at 10 feet?

Part of the problem lies in the amount of time it takes to train a person in hth combat skills versus marksmanship. But there are situations that crop up from time to time where CQB gets really close and personal.

-Siege

Wasn't the MARINES prefered CQB gear during the Beirut operations the USS IOWA? Maybe they got back to that type of tool. According to Russian and german sources MRLS work quite nice also.

As for the knive at 10 paces, ask the Russians and they will provide.

Birdy

I wasn't clear - I fully support and encourage the notion of teaching soldiers CQB. Frag, for that matter, I support a heavier instruction course for police officers on the same subject.

The people making the decisions in training programs don't share my viewpoints, however.

There was an observation regarding a showdown between a gun and knife - at 10 feet, the man with the gun is likely to be stabbed or cut at least once. Take that with a grain of salt because I can't find the quote now.

-Siege

mmu1

Nov 8 2005, 09:34 PM

QUOTE (Siege)

QUOTE (Apathy @ Nov 7 2005, 10:40 PM)

In the real world, absolutely.

But in the SR world, not always.

If you can bring the 10mm to the target and hit the target, sure.

If the unarmed guy is already on you, that could be a little problematic.

Who was it who made the comment about shooting a guy with a knife at 10 feet?

Part of the problem lies in the amount of time it takes to train a person in hth combat skills versus marksmanship. But there are situations that crop up from time to time where CQB gets really close and personal.

Anyway, the introduction of spirits and their pesky resilience to firearms would be a good incentive for combat sorts to have at least a passing familiarity with melee skills.

-Siege

Sure, a guy with a gun might end up getting stabbed or cut by someone who started with a knife 10 feet away. This always gets brought up in these cases.

What invariably seems to get overlooked is how many times the guy with the knife is likely to get shot in the process.

"Kung-fu" might beat a gun on occasion, but that's just making the best of a bad situation, and it doesn't make going unarmed a preferable alternative in any realistic set of circumstances.

Siege

Nov 8 2005, 09:44 PM

I think the underlying assessment is, the guy with the knife _will_ get shot. And likely die from multiple gunshot wounds, but not before getting at least one good cut in.

I don't think anyone has advocated going completely unarmed instead of carrying a weapon.

However, I will point out that having options in a bad situation is always preferable to having no options.

-Siege

RedKnightSpecial

Nov 8 2005, 09:49 PM

I believe the situation is supposed to be that the officer is caught by surprise, IE, doesn't have his gun in his hand. Gun in hand and aware, Mr Chop-Socky is gonna dirtbite hard.

Siege

Nov 8 2005, 10:11 PM

This is assuming the officer can hit the target.

-Siege

blakkie

Nov 8 2005, 10:14 PM

QUOTE (Siege)

This is assuming the officer can hit the target.

... somewhere that isn't protected by enough body armour to mostly negate being shot.

Apathy

Nov 8 2005, 10:15 PM

I'd absolutely agree that in the real world, melee weapons never beat firearms in the hands of a decently trained shooter. Even in the 'quick-draw at 10 meters' scenario, both combatants might end up hurt but the guy with the knife will be worse off than the guy with the gun. Even small caliber pistols (holdouts?) would have a higher damage code in RL than a knife.

But I don't think SR rules really reflect this reality. In SR, the damage codes of firearms has been drastically cut back. I'd guess this is to make the game more survivable and to encourage a broader range of weapons types used in combat (who's going to use a katana if a pistol is more deadly, even at close ranges, cheaper, and more concealable?).

But does anybody agree that [unlike real life] the SR rules make melee weapons a viable alternative to firearms?

Siege

Nov 8 2005, 10:32 PM

The same basic rules apply.

If a person is fast enough with a sword to gut a man with a gun, he's going to win.

Unlike SR, real life doesn't have wired reflexes, which means odds are the gun bunny will get the first shot off.

In comparing Shadowrun situations:
A melee specialist, needs high Strength, a weapon and skill.

A gun bunny needs a weapon and skill.

A melee specialist needs a lot of successes to stage up damage - a gun bunny only needs one to connect.

-Siege

Critias

Nov 9 2005, 04:58 AM

I think the melee versus shooting number that keeps coming up is a little off -- from what I understand the "official example" or whatever is commonly called "The 21 Foot Rule." As explained in a CCW class; if someone's got a knife and you've got your gun holstered, if he's inside 21 feet he's probably gonna cut you before you can clear your weapon and (then, in close) do your best to get a half-assed shot off. If outside 21 feet, odds are good you can plug him before he slashes you up.

That's all I got.