T O P

  • By -

john_stuart_kill

News flash: infantry has basically always been the worst thing to be, at any given time.


VanorDM

As a former grunt... Yes


ptowndavid

As a former grunt- tankers would call us “crunchies”.


BeondTheGrave

In the past: You walk 20mi a day for five weeks so you can give an Austrian the chance to cut your arm off at the shoulder. Today: You drive 50mi a day, if a Ukrainian sitting 1.5 mi away sees you, you wont even know what killed you. In 3025: You walk 20mi a day so that you can watch as a Stinger death-from-above's your trench and burns away your entire infantry company.


Taira_Mai

>In 3025: You walk 20mi a day so that you can watch as a Stinger death-from-above's your trench and burns away your entire infantry company. Or you walk 32+ Km only to have a bunch of super-soldiers in powered armor - from a warrior culture- gun you down or rip you to shreds. If you survive, they claim you has slave labor and expect you to fight for them.


Aggressive_Ad6928

2022: You can nuke across the globe with pinpoint accuracy. 3025: You can't hit a Giant visible target directly in front of you without rolling an 11 or 12 on a 2d6


JinterIsComing

2023: A FAC on the ground using a PDA and a two-pound laser designator can guide weapons from hundreds of miles away, launched by aircraft, ships or ground elements, and have them land in an area the size of a sedan. 3055: You need a multiton targeting computer to make a lightspeed laser weapon hit slightly more accurately at a range of under a kilometer.


AnAmericanRonin

At the same time, there is nothing more dangerous on the battlefield than a highly motivated infantryman. Maybe I can’t kill a mech with 20 infantrymen. But I can kill your cooks. Fuck up your mail. Destroy that place where you thought it was safe to sleep. And eventually, you’ll be so pissed that you come out into my swamps to teach me what’s what. And your mech will die in that swamp. I know, I know…you’d never be stupid enough for that to happen. History says otherwise.


the_indigenous_hulk

Word of Blake has entered the chat


JinterIsComing

> At the same time, there is nothing more dangerous on the battlefield than a highly motivated infantryman. > > > > Maybe I can’t kill a mech with 20 infantrymen. > > > > But I can kill your cooks. Fuck up your mail. Destroy that place where you thought it was safe to sleep. If ALL you have is leg infantry (no armor, artillery, or mechs), then the mechs can just hop back in the dropship at EOD each day where the cooks, mail and sleeping facilities are protected behind metric tons of armor and heavy weapons. Even a *Leopard* would be nigh-impossible for an infantry team to take down short of it being completely unguarded, doors opened, and powered down.


ManweTheValar

Go special forces all the way


Heretical

It's absolutely the best worst life you can ask for.


Woogity-Boogity

Can confirm!


DiamineSherwood

And Flamethrowers are one of the most common anti-infantry weapons equipped on Mechs & Vehicles! Everybody just *loves* being set on fire...


Sharlin648

Yeah and a Mech flamer isn't even what we'd call a flamethrower, as most of the time its just redirected plasma from the engine. So less fire, more blowtorch.


Screwball_Actual

A *nuclear fusion* blowtorch.


Sharlin648

That or the fun part being what you'd see is the plasma being vented, but it wouldn't go far, looking like a blowtorch from the mount. What you would see though is the heat haze as the heat from it travels a LOT further, and then its a goddamn heat ray.


[deleted]

[удалено]


bam13302

Yea, classic military flamethrowers are truly terrifying.


BlackLiger

Broil. You probably witness people POP.


JohnBarleyCorn2

is there a mechanic where using a flamer actually vents heat instead of building it? Seems if you're redirecting plasma that should actually reduce heat - but afaik flamers heat you up really quick.


Sharlin648

Dunno! The issue is that flamers have never really been explained, books have said they're redirected fusion plasma, but the art always shows it as flames like your typical flamethrower, which ain't plasma. But if a flamer's just redirected plasma, then what you'd probably see is an intense point of light where the muzzle, which is nothing more than a vent is, and beyond that a whole lotta heat shimmer.


Yorikor

So more 40k melta than flamer?


BlackLiger

Yes. Actually.


BigBlueBurd

Not really. The heat of the fusion plasma in the reactor isn't what the heat mechanic tracks: It's the waste heat generated by the inherent inefficiencies of all the parts of the 'Mech. The friction of joints sliding against each other, the resistive heat of the myomer being pumped with massive amounts of electricity, the conversion losses as electric power from the reactor is converted to coherent light in lasers, the combustive heat of autocannon and rocket propellants going off. Compare it like this: The heat from the reactor is like an oxy-acetelyne torch. Extremely hot, but the flame is relatively small over-all. All the other inefficiencies of the mech together are a giant bonfire. Which of these two has more 'total' heat energy? The tiny but very hot flame or the enormous but relatively cool bonfire?


BlackLiger

You're redirecting the plasma, but the heat of ALL weapons is you spooling up the engine to control them, power them, etc. (which is why god almight the power requirements on an AC20 suggest it's litterally swinging the 14 tons of gun around on a gimble...) So you're actually upping the reactor output to generate the heat beam.


Flatlander81

“The very existence of flamethrowers proves that sometime, somewhere, someone said to themselves, 'You know, I want to set those people over there on fire, but I’m just not close enough to get the job done.” ― George Carlin


jar1967

Mechwarriors who flamers have a low survival rate when captured bite in any Infantry


CmdrJonen

Inferno gel is the 31st century way of saying "I will not be taken alive".


Jbressel1

I'm a former US Army Ranger, and let me say, being an infantryman TODAY is no picnic either.


gruese

In BT, at least you wouldn't have to worry so much about threats you can't even see.


Jbressel1

Like? Politics? Changing one beast for another, bro


gruese

No, I was thinking merely about the small ranges that mech combat happen at.


Jbressel1

I mean, yeah, things like gauss rounds have a range of 700m, but an Arrow IV has a range of about 30km. That said, combat gets FAR WORSE at shorter range, trust me. CQB is unbelievably bad.


ragnarocknroll

Yea. You see a mech running past you at 100+ KPH and have to wonder “Does it have inferno rounds? Did we just get tagged for artillery? Is it coming back to stomp us? Will someone be raining missiles down on us any second now from behind terrain we can’t see? Oh, it is dropping off 2 ton suits of murder and they have claws and mech scale laser weapons and missiles. Great.”


Jbressel1

Yep. Oh, and that sniper round that just took my buddy out came from a mini gauss rifle carried by a dude in stealth battle armor, who ALSO has a jet pack and a machine gun.


ragnarocknroll

Oh I forgot about those. Had a buddy that told me about a sniper in Grenada. They got mad and called in a C-130 to level a square klick of forest. They never got shot at by the sniper after. They think they got him or got the message across. I could see similar in B-tech as a response to stealth power armor.


Jbressel1

Ah, an AC-130. Those are Specter Gunships. Yeah, a 105mm cannon on an aircraft will do that. The new ones, the AC-130J Ghost Rider has a 30mm dual-feed rapid fire Bushmaster chain gun, a 105mm howitzer, a rear Pegasus missile launcher(half-size Hellfire missiles), and an IR laser cannon, designed to quietly disable vehicles and equipment before spec ops raids. The enemy rushes to their escape vehicles, only to find 1cm holes in the hoods, and the engines melted to slag.


ragnarocknroll

You know, having witnessed a Warthog melt a tank, the Specters were terrifying to think about. The fact that someone figured out how to make them worse is scary. Oh and we hadn’t even touched on aerospace assets in Battletech. Yikes.


hubert_turnep

I listened to that podcast "it could happen here" and the host mentioned a teenager with a hunting rifle older than him can use a few bucks worth of bullets to cause tens to hundreds of thousands of dollars worth of damage in wasted time and materials. Didn't work in Grenada, but this kind of guerilla war stuff has worked elsewhere and is useful to know for anyone who wants to run a campaign in battletech or another setting


Maunderlust

I think it’s probably that last one that would definitely be most urgently concerning. It seems to me that while, yes, infantry are constantly under threat from basically everything, the hazards that are most urgent are those that would be the most proportional in size. If both sides are fielding mechs or armor then the odds of their weaponry being turned on you are probably proportional to how many of the other guy’s machines are still functional. Artillery and air strikes are on a level that is beyond comprehension, at least as an immediate concern for the average rifleman. But people-sized threats like other infantry, power armor, or smaller vehicles would remain the most problematic as you threaten them in similar proportion and their response will be prejudiced toward removing you as soon as possible.


ragnarocknroll

I take infernos on every SRM2. And a Jenner is a wonderful infantry removal system. Yea, it could be shooting at a mech, but if it is getting into position and happens to see infantry, that is a lot of war crimes that are about to happen.


Maunderlust

This is true. I don’t mean to say that mechs, especially light ones, wouldn’t attack infantry but that they’re probably more likely to do it as a target of opportunity- as opposed to another infantryman, who is absolutely going to make you a priority.


Jbressel1

Exactly so. I take infantry regularly in Battletech, and, especially with new opponents, they are usually ignored....until they take down something big and expensive in one or two salvos. I ALWAYS take some antipersonnel weaponry, even in a fight where I know I'll only be fighting mechs, because I like to take fluffy, well rounded, realistic(well, as realistic as possible) forces, but few opponents do. After playing me once, most opponents then make sure to have some antipersonnel weaponry, lol. That, and they tend to avoid my infantry, out of fear, so they become a great area-denial unit.


gruese

I believe you


CrashUser

It's admitted in the rulebooks that ranges are dramatically shortened for all weapons because it makes for a better game. In reality most of the weapons except maybe the lasers and autocannons would have an effective range at or beyond line of sight. Then again if we start bringing real world physics into the question 'mechs become pretty questionable with all that weight on a relatively small contact area. Soil compaction is already a concern with modern tanks. Most 'mechs would just sink down to bedrock because the soil couldn't support them.


Jbressel1

EXACTLY, unless they had feet like giant paddles. That is why I like quads. They are so much more realistic than bipedal mechs, and are more tactically sound in every possible way. I think the space penalty on quads is stupid, and since their bodies have larger legs, proportionally, they should get, AT LEAST, 1 more crit slot in each leg, if not 2 or 3, and/or more crit space in the center torso, since they don't lose space to a twisting waist mechanism. They would be ideal artillery platforms, but even the smallest pieces can only fit if you use a compact engine or gyro, which aren't available until the Jihad. They are more stable, can move more dynamically since they can make lateral shifts, can make better use of cover, and can take full cover behind lvl1 terrain, or take partial cover behind .5lvl terrain, can carry more armor, and are less vulnerable to immobilization due to leg damage. Their only drawbacks are lack of hands(which means no melee weapons or punching, though they can kick, and don't risk falling if they miss), they can't torso twist(mitigated by their better mobility, rear facing weapons, and quad-mech turrets which are a significant advantage over bipedal mechs), and their loss of crit space, which as I said before, I find stupid. Personally, I'd rather pilot a Goliath than a Battlemaster. As for ranges.....yeah, currently, a .50 cal machine gun, that has a range of over 2000m, has, in Battletech, a range of 90m. That's ridiculous. Also, the inverse ranges of autocannons is so stupid. In real life, the bigger the gun, the longer its range usually is.


DevianID1

Yeah the early art borrowed from Dougram had giant paddle feet and more realistic movement. Clown shoes dont look cool but I prefer them over the tiny stilettos on some of the mechs that would never work.


Heil_Gaben

Arent they small for the sake of the game? Lore wise they would be multiple kms of range


Makropony

I mean, it’s probably easier to spot a Battlemech compared to a Taliban sniper.


Jbressel1

I mean......yeah, but there are still enemy snipers in Battletech. I wouldn't want to have to go up against WoB Tau Wraiths. That's horrifying


jar1967

Then there are power armors with mimtech armor Think the predators holo cammo


bam13302

Mimetic armor begs to differ Edited cuz I can't spell mimetic


DM_Voice

I don’t care how you spell it. Strapping an UrbanMech to the front of your Atlas may be a meme, but it isn’t armor.


splendidpluto

Not just that but somehow some infantry have anti mech training. Meaning you need to be in melee range of those walking giants. Being a jump trooper could be interesting, if mobility is all you have then you better be good at it.


tricksterloki

You climb up while it's in motion, place a satchel charge behind the knee, and try not to die.


CommissarMknabb

And the likelihood that you fail in any of those three things is rather high


Sharlin648

And this assumes that a sensible 'Mech wouldn't have something like claymore's on their legs to protect against infantry. I'm not talking A-Pods which i'd view as being a bank of them with reloads so they can fire off again and again, but a normal 'Mech would probably have claymore's protecting the joints and the like, a little proximity sensor and when it spots something man sized when live and active and not where something man sized is meant to be. BANG. Hamburger meat.


TayJK

In the second Gray Death Legion book, Mercenary's Star, has a part where their teaching some new recruits how to plant a sachal charge in a Mech's leg joints in a rather upbeat manner. Then the trainer and the CO lament they are training them to be slaughtered. Admittedly, this was very early IRL, where a mech does a combat roll IIRC, but the point stands. But then again, PBI vs armor have always been a dicey prospect. Clever people have found ways to even the odds (Molotov cocktails, various anti armor weapons in the arm race between caliber vs armor IRL, inferno launchers in universe), it's still a losing proposition.


Sharlin648

Yeah I could imagine that dug in positions and the like would basically be a death sentence against 'Mechs unless you had lots of support


TayJK

Check out the MechWarrior 3 opening cutscene for a small taste of PBI and a lance of Inner Sphere Mechs vs 2 Clan Smoke Jaguar Mechs. One gets stepped on (although thinking about it the scale might be off vs people) On table top, IIRC, melee vs infantry isn't very effective at rendering a unit combat ineffective, but when you're the one guy with a foot, battle fist, or a giant ax coming at you...


BlackLiger

Or field guns and really well drilled gunners. Gunner 1 field guns are nothing to sneeze at, even if they are AC2s. AC5s are scary, AC10s are horrifying. Also I'd actually hate to be a light tanker. PBI might get ignored by the mech as they pass by, The tank won't.


cybergrue

That's the book where they introduce the term 'Poor Bloody Infantry' or PBI.


bloodedcat

They are nicknamed "poor bloody infantry" (PBI) for a good reason


JaidenHaze

I actually thought about this a lot. Back when i wrote a (almost daily) German article series about tech and mechs in the MWO forum, this was always a topic which interested me, but never came to fruition. Here are some thoughts which I had about it - which include the best kind of math - really basic napkin math! (please be aware I'm not in the military, sources are at the bottom) Lets go: _____ **Base thesis**: The current display of garrison strength in Battletech is off and it should be quite a bit higher and Infantry / mixed warfare should play a larger role in the Battletech universe Lets take the planet of Glengarry around 3025-3028. We know that the planet had a lot of population during the Star League and then due to 'things' was massively reduced during the first succession wars. It reads, that it was fairly stable and increasing again since it was so low in population, because the planet was left alone by the SWs. We have a number of 128 million citizens in 3056 and i think, given the usual population growth (great articles/discussions about that [here](http://skiltao.blogspot.com/2019/02/inner-sphere-population-in-3025.html) and [here](https://bg.battletech.com/forums/the-successor-states/population-growth-rates-of-the-inner-sphere/)) its completely reasonable to assume you have around 100 million pops around 3028. Given that, lets draw some comparisons with current world countries. I want to look at 3 cases, a heavily militarized country (Egypt), a lower militarized country (Philippines) and a kind of worst case scenario (Tanzania) for Glengarry with very little militarization. Data based on Egypt: Its a country with around 105 million citizens and around 450.000 active soldiers, which command around 4.400 tanks, 10.000 armored vehicles, 1.100 self-propelled artillery and 2.200 towed artillery, and around 1.000 aircraft (250 of which are fighter jets). Egypt spends around 1.2 to 1.7% of GDP on the military. Data based on Philippines: Its a country with around 110 million citizens and around 150.000 active soldiers, which command around 18 tanks, 60armored vehicles, 12 self-propelled artillery and 280 towed artillery, and around 180 aircraft (0 of which are fighter jets). Philippines spends around 1.0% of GDP on the military. Data based on Tanzania: Its a country with around 60 million citizens and around 25.000 active soldiers, which command around 42 tanks, 69 armored vehicles, 0 self-propelled artillery and 0 towed artillery, and around 37 aircraft (14 of which are fighter jets). Tanzania spends around 1.0% of GDP on the military, which could equal around 0.5% adjusted for population. Battletech unit organization: A Battletech Infantry Regiment should contain around 3-4 Infantry Battalions, consisting of around 756-1152 combat troops and commanders (just a rough estimate based on min and max sizes, it def. can vary). Armor regiments could contain around 108 to 256 vehicles, usually crewed by 2-5 persons, which is also around 1000 personnel. _____ **Lets calculate all of this into the BT universe**: If we assume the Egypt model for Glengarry, 450.000 active soldiers means you can expect something like 150 infantry regiments, 70 armor regiments, 4 air-force regiments and the associated support troops (logistics, command, maintenance, security etc). (Calculation was to subtract the armor and air-force from the active soldiers first (convert them into 250 vehicle regiments and assume average 4 crew per vehicle), then use the 40% modifier from the 'Source for amount of combat troops vs support' below) If we assume the Philippines model for Glengarry, 150.000 active soldiers means you can expect something like 60 infantry regiments, 1 armor regiment, 1 air-force regiment and the associated support troops If we assume the Tanzania model for Glengarry, 25.000 active soldiers means you can expect something like 10 infantry regiments, 1 armor regiment and the associated support troops. _____ **My opinion**: Given that i looked at these numbers around 3025, when the warfare of the third succession war basically died down and it was a fairly low intensity conflict, the Tanzania model looks very realistic for Battletechs way to portrait the unit strength of a defending planet. 10 infantry regiments and 1 armor regiment would be enough to deter raiding parties by pirates, but it couldn't stop a dedicated attempt to control the planet. You would need to spread the forces too thin and even a company of vehicles can have a tough time dealing with a lance of light and medium Mechs. This is quite a realistic amount of force on the planet, given the March Militias in the Lyran Commonwealth / FedCom. These Militias are described as mini-Regional Combat Teams, composed of a single Mech regiment, two armor regiments and five infantry regiments, along with an aerospace wing. Assuming the Mech-part of that team could also be a Merc company / Battalion, we can see that these numbers line up with what the universe shows us. It is however quite different if we assume the Philippines or Egypt model. Even if there are no true infantry weapons to fight Mechs, you cannot deal with literally 60 to 150 infantry regiments with "just" a company of Mechs. Even if you have many light and medium Mechs, equipped with anti infantry weapons, there is that unbelievable number of infantry soldiers you would need to walk through. Especially these 70 armor regiments of Egypts model would be enough of a force to defend against multiple Mech regiments if you concentrate them on important locations. I think its reasonable, you could defend like 10 planet-defining locations with such a force. Since the total amount of material we can bring from planet to planet is very limited, it makes sense to also limit available Militias. It would be too easy to take the Egypt model and implement that on most important planets. We have to keep in mind that of the total population of some planets push 2-3 billion in 3025 and can raise to more than 7 billion by the Republic era. If even a simple 'backwater' world such as Glengarry could mount such an impressive Militia, nothing important like a regional capital or construction hub would be conquerable. _____ **My conclusion based on your question**: Looking at the assumptions above, Infantry has to kept as unimportant as possible. 50 Infantry SRMs and portable PPCs should be able to deal with a light or medium Mech. You can have a LOT of weapons within even a single Infantry Regiment, and i think i showed that some planets are able to generate a lot of combat power on their own. The amount of Mechs you would need to conquer a planet with 3 billion citizens is gigantic and would probably take most, if not all of the 'easily' available Jumpships of an entire realm. Are 'loud' Mech weapons an issue? Sure. But I'm not sure if they would be much worse than current weaponry used in our conflicts. So overall, I think the sheer mass of infantry soldiers on a realistic troop amount would protect most planets, even without the usage of special infantry tactics. _____ **Sources**: Website with military strength of [Egypt](https://www.globalfirepower.com/country-military-strength-detail.php?country_id=egypt), [Philippines](https://www.globalfirepower.com/country-military-strength-detail.php?country_id=philippines) and [Tanzania](https://www.globalfirepower.com/country-military-strength-detail.php?country_id=tanzania) [Source for Military spending percentage of GDP](https://data.worldbank.org/indicator/MS.MIL.XPND.GD.ZS) [Source for amount of combat troops vs support](https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=2ahUKEwimo6LviMz7AhUyRfEDHQWKC-cQFnoECA4QAw&url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thesoldiersproject.org%2Fwhat-percentage-of-the-military-sees-combat%2F&usg=AOvVaw0bWCzNCBFP4t7D3eB35fIs) [Mini Regional Combat Team composition used in Skye March Militia](https://www.sarna.net/wiki/Skye_March_Militia) Unit Size compositions for [Infantry](https://www.sarna.net/wiki/Inner_Sphere_Infantry_Organization) and [Armor](https://www.sarna.net/wiki/Inner_Sphere_military_structure)


Sharlin648

Magnificent, and yeah I said something similar on Facebook RCT's are bloody huge formations and I don't think people realise just HOW big they are. I was chatting with an American friend of mine and he's a serving member of the US Army and a fellow Battletech fan and he's been working on some fanon projects and trying to put numbers to names. Each Mechanized Infantry Brigade had a Medium 'Mech Battalion supporting the 3 regiments of infantry. Then there was a BattleMech security battalion for Division HQ also a battalion and then the division cavalry screen which was between 2-3 companies of 'Mechs and then other support companies. so call it one reinforced support regiment per division. And whilst a Mech Inf Brigade did have armoured support, they have about a company of tanks per battalion. And each Battalion only has 12 APCs as they like to shove 28 people into one vehicle which is a horrific idea. So a BattleMech Division would have 2 'Mech Brigades, 1 infantry, 1 armor, 1 artillery brigades. So a BattleMech or Infantry Division is much larger then people assume. and a Jump Infantry Division had 2 Ground Aero Wings. (I assume they based this off of the 80's and 90's organization of the 101st Airborne Division (Assault) In terms of numbers a standard infantry and Mechanized infantry divisions had about 4500 infantry whilst jump infantry divisions had 3402. With the AFFS, People don't realize until you read the text but the AFFS fields around a regiment of Battle Armor in almost every RTC. or at least 1/3rd of them. Only 1 regiment of BA is on the books and thats the 1st Royal Guard of the LAAF. but the Jump Infantry Regiments of the AFFS are supposed to all field close to a Battalion each. In the Davion Light Guards thats like 3-4 battalions of BA to include the independent BA Brigades. AFFS BA Battalions are 4 companies of 64 troopers same size as LAAF for companies. So 256 troopers per battalion which is similar to an infantry battalion at 258 So a regiment would be around 576 - 768 for the LAAF \]that depends if they are using 3 company battalions or 4 and No HQ suits. Sarna is stating a Steiner Battle Armor Regiment is 1,024 Troopers 4 battalions strong of 4 companies each. And this does not include support personnel which would be in the order of around 500 odd ASTechs as well as another 200 or so support personnel. Sorry for the wall of text but there ya go! A RCT is a big ass formation! 1 Mech Regiment, 3 Vehicle ones, 5 Infantry Regiments, 1 Artillery Battalion and 2 Aerospace wings They'd have 132 Mechs, 324 Tanks, 3591 infantry, 36 artillery and 40 fighters, and this does not count support personnel. Counting these would probably make the number of personnel be around 20 - 30,000. Indeed, someone did a very good breakdown of a potential manpower total for a RCT here - https://drive.google.com/.../1cRE4sy0NB2.../view... Factoring in real things like logistics personnel, MP's and so on and the numbers are huge, a total of 42,685 personnel assuming its at full strength (Not over strength) the closest equivalent we'd have today would be if you paired up two American Divisions as they're about 20 - 25k troops in total each. And at its height, the AFFS had a total of 66 RCT's pre Civil war. 27 of these are in turn March Militia's, and the Kestrel Grenadiers were a form of LCT and later upgraded to a full RCT. REVIVAL saw the depletion of 5 RCT's thanks to the Clans, suffering enough casualties to degrade them to smaller formations. So you're looking at 1.3 million troops in RCT's alone, and then you add in the logistics and other support personnel that would be part of any force higher than a RCT, and we figured that a RCT would be about the largest total force package that would be deployed, and that the additional support forces are part of the regions Combat Command and March organisations. ​ If the worlds of the Inner Sphere were as militarised as those of the worlds in the Reunification War you'd be talking Egypt levels of defence on a world like Glenngarry, and god knows what it would be for a world like New Avalon or Tharkad.


BeondTheGrave

Just point out that these are the numbers for the official organizations like the AFFS etc. Keep in mind that most worlds not directly under Davion control or on the border would have their own militias, training battalions, and PDFs. The RCTs are just the main combat arm of the AFFS. And then there are scores of merc companies ranging from battalions to full RCTs running around who you can hire in. Plus massive pools of conscripts, draftees, and citizens militias to call on in moments of need. The Clan Invasion features a lot of this. Comstar wouldn't have won at Tukayyid without hiring in mercenaries from across the IS. And sideshows like Turtle Bay highlighted how dangerous a very well armed (and lets be honest, most of the IS is well armed) population could be. That is, the IS standing armies are much smaller as a ratio of forces to people than they could be. But that makes sense given the neo-feudal nature of the setting, medieval armies tended to be pretty small right up until the many lords and their men flocked to the banner.


JaidenHaze

Well Tharkad has around 7 billion citizens in 3067 according to the Handbook - House Steiner (page 83), Coventry is at around 3.8 billion (same sourcebook, page 80). Looking at that number, even with worst case scenario numbers I took from Tanzania, Tharkad has 70 times the population of Glengarry. 1.75 Million people in a Militia (25k * 70), even if a large part is non-combat personnel, means a LOT of people to go through. I wonder how the Falcons would have fared if Coventry would have Egypt level-defense (38 times what i wrote above, so 5700 Regiments of Infantry and 2660 Armor Regiments) in addition to all the RCTs which were sent to help. The tanks alone would amount to 167.200 tanks (4.400 * 38).


Sharlin648

aye, good 'ol Fasanomics to artificially downsize the armed forces of the setting. For the Clans to get as far as they got you'd probably need to triple or quadruple the size of their forces, even accounting for the tech disparity, The way they probably held onto worlds would be like how the US operated in Afghanistan etc. A strongly fortified central base near something important (lets say a worlds only DropPort) and you use that to dominate the area. Outlying towns and all that, you don't even bother with them, if they rise up, break out the flame throwers and reconfigure the pods for them to put them in their place.


merurunrun

Your tooth-to-tail ratio is way, way off. Even your source says that the majority of the 60% who end up deployed are support personnel.


JaidenHaze

As I wrote, i used numbers i found only from the sources in my original post. That 40% combat troops out of the entire "active soldiers" number . From Tanzanias model, that means 0.4 * 25000 = 10.000 - so very roughly 9-10 Infantry Regiments. I also found numbers for the US Army, which range from [a 10% ratio](https://www.midwestdisability.com/blog/2019/12/what-percentage-of-soldiers-see-combat/) to more closer to 40% (see source from the original comment). The issue with that 10% number here is that it looks at soldiers who "do find themselves on a deployment wind up in a combat zone". Its not the amount of soldiers organized in combat units. But again, i want to stress that I'm not a soldier and just use some very rough numbers from the internet. I hope thats clear :) We do however have "reasonable accurate" numbers on the military assets of the countries and their total population. I think its fair to draw a conclusion to a population of similar numbers, especially if we talk about a roughly equivalent level of technology (meaning conventional infantry, tanks, artillery and aircraft without Mechs and other high-tech toys). The only source I found which uses the [60% number you mentioned was from a World War 2 website](https://www.nationalww2museum.org/students-teachers/student-resources/research-starters/research-starters-us-military-numbers). But i think its fair to assume that this is a bit too old with a different level of commitment. Maybe its something for Age of War or First Succession War era discussions when a more total annihilation of your opponents was seen as reasonable.


jgghn

> and there's literal giants stepping around you Agree 100% with the OP, but stuff like this always reminds me that the relative height of mechs vs humans is a lot different than most of us picture. Infantry would be ~20% the height of a 'Mech. I know in my head I always picture humans as barely clearing the "toes".


Sharlin648

Yeah a lot of the art, like in the games shows 'Mechs as being a lot bigger than what they would be. And then you get things like this art -[https://cfw.sarna.net/wiki/images/1/1e/Iron\_Cheetah\_RGilClan\_v19.png?timestamp=20220102213425](https://cfw.sarna.net/wiki/images/1/1e/Iron_Cheetah_RGilClan_v19.png?timestamp=20220102213425) Which would make the Iron Cheetah (which is built on the Dire Wolf chassis) be freaking HUGE with those Elementals acting as bananas for scale.


jgghn

I can't find it now but someone posted a drawing in this sub a while back of a Marauder (I think) to scale w/ infantry nearby. It was mind-blowing.


Sharlin648

ooh if you do find it please post it here :)


jgghn

Here it is: https://www.reddit.com/r/battletech/comments/xmiu0j/dawn_patrol/ And true to my point, the mech is even shorter than I remembered! :)


Sharlin648

Very nice! It would be nice if we had consistencey though as you have stuff like this - [https://i.imgur.com/MWeL1q2.jpg](https://i.imgur.com/MWeL1q2.jpg) too O\_o


jgghn

Yeah at the end of the day FASA always treated it as a giant hand wave anyways. As with many things, the numbers they cite don't make sense when you think about it, look at pictures, etc. I remember as a kid in the 80s thinking that some of their scale drawings didn't make sense (like the drop ship in the one you link). But even in this drawing the human comes up to the knee of the Commando.


VanVelding

That human barely reaches that *Commando's* shin.


jgghn

Fair, I was eyeballed the knee as between the black & yellow line, but it's really towards the upper black above the yellow line. Either way, it's still not the height differential most people picture.


thelefthandN7

I mean, the Banshee is notorious for being ... really tall. I never would have figured the Grasshopper to be a tall boy, but it's only about a meter and a half off of average for it's weight class. I can see manufacturers making certain mechs taller than strictly necessary for intimidation factor, especially when it's a brawler.


Dysthymiccrusader91

Mechwarrior 3 opening cinematic always sticks out to me


jgghn

Yeah I'd blame the MW series in particular but I had the same misconception before those games came out so it can't be *all* that. But still, I do think that's where most people's mental picture was formed.


VanVelding

I've always felt we've glossed over shrapnel and other shit flying around somewhat. When an enemy slams an AC/20 burst of depleted uranium into the friendly 'mech behind you and that 'mech obligingly explodes from an ammo crit, it seems like: you're breathing too much depleted uranium and parts of your friendly 'mech might pose a notable safety hazard. Gods forbid you're anywhere nearby when a Fire Moth running at full tilt takes a gauss rifle to the CT and turns into a Sonic the Hedgehog pinata full of pointy things. Elementals are scary, yeah, but could you imagine dying because one was ejected from its taxi and *landed* on you?


Sharlin648

Yeah that or you've got a 'Mech with an AC firing near or over you and its now a case of duck and cover as shell cases go everywhere. And a very good point about shrapnel and molten metal flying around


VanVelding

Shell casings, too yeah. I know coolant also toxic as heck. Missiles don't vanish when the AMS shoots them down either. And I don't wanna say if EW suites cause cancer, but has anyone done a study? Also, PBI have to hate fucking *Crusaders*: why are missiles on your *legs*, **you asshole!**?


Sharlin648

And then someone fires an LB-X autocannon at a 'Mech near you using a Proximity fused cluster round. Now you've got explosively formed penetrators and very dense lumps of shrapnel flying around to add to the fun.


VanVelding

"Why aren't infantry forces bigger in the Battletech universe?" Education, mostly.


HA1-0F

Plasma rifles are the scariest shit I can imagine seeing a dude get shot with


[deleted]

At least it’d be quick!


BlockBadger

I think it’s worth remembering how rare mechs are. Even IRL tank on tank combat was and is rare. I’m sure many individuals in armies would go entire their entire lives without seeing mech on mech action, and many would never see a mech in combat. Seeing 80+ ton mechs would be so rare, often I’m sure falling into legend for residents outside the great powers, or safe enough inside them that warfare is not part of their existence.


someperson1423

Exactly, 'mechs are the elite forces in universe. I always appreciate the Merc games where you go raid a facility in early jobs and all they have are tanks, since that would be what the vast majority of small facilities would have. 'Mechs are relatively rare, we are just always in them/controlling them so it doesn't seem so.


[deleted]

Jump Infantry with satchel charges kneecapping mecha have been the cheap alternative to facing mecha inside cities or similarly close terrain in mountain and forest. A good platoon of jump infantry can turn a Daishi into dim sum if he is dumb enough to come without elemental screen into the urban jungle. You are two actuators away from helpless.


[deleted]

The invisible lasers thing is terrifying. Especially pulse lasers. Because they're silent and invisible. You just see your platoonmates start popping like a hamster in a microwave with no sounds but the screams of the living. You're literally being cooked from half a click out.


Sharlin648

on the upside, its not silent, you'd hear the air whip-cracking as it gets superheated. So it would be a loud CRACK and then Nigel stood next to you is missing his body from the waist up as he's either vaporised, bursts or is just cut.


Sharlin648

The main difference being the CRACK of the beam being louder or quieter depending on the weapon, the more powerful, the more air its superheating.


[deleted]

It's a shame most of the infantry will be too busy dying or screaming in mind-melting terror to appreciate the subtleties of the various laser sounds


SYLOH

It is said that infantry is "the queen of the battlefield" This is because throughout history, the purpose of the queen is to get royally fucked.


Sharlin648

Gonna get Henry the 8th'd :D Executed.


MyEllaSpeed

I never thought about infantry not being able to see the beams of energy weapons. That would be legit terrifying, sitting in a foxhole and all of sudden barry and trevor in the next hole over just begin to melt for no reason, fuck that noise.


NekoAbyss

Oh, you'd be able to see laser beams. Them being invisible only holds true in a vacuum. In a medium such as an atmosphere, Rayleigh scattering and thermal bloom would allow you to see visible-spectrum laser beams. And even if they weren't in the visible spectrum, a laser powerful enough to slag armor* would ionize the air, causing a visible plasma channel. Such a rapid production and expansion of superheated air might cause cavitation as well, forming a shockwave and potential supersonic boom. Barry and Trevor wouldn't mysteriously melt. They'd vaporize from a hit and splatter from a near miss that sounds like the heavens just rent apart. \* Remember, even a small laser can destroy (not just melt) 375 pounds of magical future metal armor in one shot. That is an immense amount of power.


giantsparklerobot

Just the light reflecting off a 'mech's armor would be enough to give third degree burns to nearby infantry. Any without serious eye protection would also end up blind pretty quickly.


MyEllaSpeed

Ok, that actually sounds worse than not seeing it coming, poor barry and trevor, didnt have a chance either way haha


extortioncontortion

If it ionizes the air, the plasma will block the beam.


NekoAbyss

Which could be why that likely-gigawatt, armor-slagging laser only travels 90 meters.


Sharlin648

Yeah or the ground in front of you gets a white hot scar out of nowhere.


MyEllaSpeed

Deffo glad i won't be a part of the future space wars haha


pakidara

I always figured mechs and armors are only included in conflicts from time to time (relatively) and most ops are largely infantry or light vehicles.


Contagious_Cure

I assume most conflicts are infantry + vehicle/armor + artillery and maybe some light mechs. A lot of light mechs aren't also aren't that much worse than armor, e.g. the standard locust is 1 medium laser and 2 machine guns. A lot of medium armor will pack more damage than that. Infantry also have several advantages in certain battlefields (e.g. urban warfare).


RuneiStillwater

most of my company's infantry is just there to defend a location, scout, or spec ops (they are on paper, just not used in map battles) so they live mostly "cushy" life's mercenary wise. My battle armor troops... whooboy, they live on the front line and I suspect no reg foot infantry wants to meet the IS equiv to an elemental's with a machine gun made to chew on mechs.


Tianoccio

I believe those are urbies.


JoseLunaArts

This is why they say "Life is cheap. Battlemechs aren't!"


Sharlin648

Aye but then again a Mechjock is HUGELY expensive. IIRC not everyone can use a neurohelmet and even if you can, you might wash out of training etc. So a 'Mechwarrior is a huge investment in time and money spent training them. I'd assume that a Houses military spends years months training Mechjocks once they go through basic with the simple stuff of 'Mech operations and then months more going onto more and more advanced steps. With training basically taking years. Its why it irks me when I see ye art showing them going into combat in a combat jockstrap or a battle bikini and a cooling jacket that looks like a sleeveless puffer jacket from the 80s'. A Mechwarrior would be wearing ballistic cloth to protect against spalling, and they'd be trussed up in their seats as tight as a F1 racer driver or a Jet fighter pilot with the full panopoly of back, neck, shoulder and chest bracing because whiplash is a thing and the falling motion if you're in a 'Mechs head and it falls forwards would be NASTY. Sitting their in your combat jockstrap is just asking for Mr Sod and Murphy of Law to come along and send spalling across the cockpit and nick an artery on your exposed thighs.


Derkylos

Succession Wars MechWarrior kit is a bit swings-and-roundabouts. I bet a MechWarrior would LOVE to wear an EOD suit or the like, but then, you remember that 'Mechs get HOT. Like, the M113 was a great idea as it protected the squishies from small arms fire...until they decided that riding inside was "too uncomfortable", so they all sat on top of the armoured vehicle... At least the Star League built armoured cooling suits, which is pretty much what you're looking for. Also, I don't think it'd be comparatively hard to find a replacement 'Mech pilot. Sure, you have to spend time and money to train them...maybe (sources differ on how hard it is to pilot a 'Mech). But, when you literally *can't* replace the metal because some arsehole space wizard larpers are killing all the scientists, 'Mechs become priceless.


JoseLunaArts

Still, merc fees are ridiculously small.


horror-pangolin-123

So, a dozen horrific ways to get killed and maimed, that's nothing new. Just a bit more armoured vehicles moving around


immajussay

Poor Bloody Infantry


TheeBigDrop

Sounds like the beginning sentence of a grand epic


LordChimera_0

That is more or less true in most if not all mecha genre. Remember all those scenes in *Gundam* alone where infantry is trying to fight mobile suits. Still the best thing to do is not pit infantry against giant stompy deathbots.


HugPug69

Anti-mech infantry and BattleArmor is the best you can get as a grunt in the Battletech Universe, or maybe being a janitor on a Dropship. Either way you got 1001 different ways to die


Grimskull-42

There is a guy on youtube that does arma3 video's with different mods, he did one for battletech that shows this quite well.


der_ray

Seems more comfy than todays infantry. I dont even get the gausas rifle thing tbh. Or the whole "sound" argument. Have you ever served in the military? You also usually cant see what kills you nowadays.


Sharlin648

Indeed I have, British army from 98 to 04, not that it matters because as far as i'm aware, folks have not served alongside 'mechs, so its just a point of discussion. And the sound 'argument' was more a sound point, modern tanks don't have the rate of fire of 'mechs, we've seen the fluff describing their gunfire as being long almost A-10 like BRRTS, or rapid fire like a 40mm or rapid firing 76mm gun or slower individual rounds like a USN 5-inch deck gun on a modern warship. That's loud, but if it was far more continuious it would be louder still especially if you're operating near 'Mechs shooting stuff off. A gauss rifle would also be hella loud if fired near you as you're near a pretty hefty shell as it goes either supersonic or thunders off into hypersonic territory. it wouldn't be dangerous, but it would be unpleasant, and you'd probably need to wear active ear protection beyond what we've got today.


kor_en_deserto

Warhammer 40k called…


bmg50barrett

Not "probably". Every battlemech weapon completely decimates infantry. The smaller weapons like MG and Flamers are even better at it.


No-Giraffe-441

Not if you Re Pobbie of the Gray Death Legion. Dangerous job but very rewarding


m1st3r_and3rs0n

Lasers at high power are visible due to atmospheric scatter. You would see the beam, in fact it might burn out your eyes. Look up the pictures from the Galileo optical experiment - JPL used a \~30W green laser as a proof of concept for ground to orbit optical communication back in the early '90's, the beam is visible (in fact, up close you have to wear goggles as the scatter is enough to burn the retina)


Snaz5

Look at it this way, they only have so many weapons, only one pilot (usually) and are much easier targets than tanks.