[Ultra Tech] Shortening Range

[Anthony]

Originally Posted by Xplo

Also, as someone said above, if combat takes place in areas with limited visibility - broken terrain, forests, indoors - then ranges will necessarily be short.

To be honest, 95% of infantry combat should take place in situations of limited visibility, open-field combat is not a strength of infantry and hasn't been since at least TL 6.

[Agemegos]

Originally Posted by Mailanka

What remotely believable suggestions do you have for keeping ultra-tech combat to visual range? Bonus points of the option already exists within UT or a Pyramid article.

Run mysteries.

[Vynticator]

Firstly: great thread idea.

Secondly: love the orgone shield idea. Reminds me of Dune. Knives can get through where lasers cannot. Nice.

[vicky_molokh]

Originally Posted by Vynticator

Firstly: great thread idea.

Secondly: love the orgone shield idea. Reminds me of Dune. Knives can get through where lasers cannot. Nice.

People who equate Orgone Shields with Dune Shields are missing the point. Orgone Shields aren't there to negate usefulness of ranged weapons. They're there to negate the dakkadakkadakkaDEAD effect, protect the infantry from frag shells, and give mêlée weapons a slight usefulness in close-quarters battles (only). They sort of draw out the fights without providing immunities against a determined opponent.

They also very clearly do not negate sniper fire, which is still pretty dangerous.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by Brett

Run mysteries.

Or crime or policing or espionage or any of several other sorts of scenario where rules of engagement/target identification/legalities/sight lines/etc mean that no combat actually takes place over long ranges.

[Agemegos]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Or crime or policing or espionage or any of several other sorts of scenario where rules of engagement/target identification/legalities/sight lines/etc mean that no combat actually takes place over long ranges.

Yep. Thrillers, and capers, and mysteries, and espionage, and horror, and exploration, and cliffhangers, and crime drama, and martial arts tournament, and court intrigue….

I never run infantry combat campaigns or even scenarios. In fact, almost nothing that is primarily combat. Just not my cup of tea. Discussions on these forums in which other people make it plain that they consider it an advantage of zombies that there is nothing to do but kill them keep me constantly aware of the diversity of the hobby.

[Ulzgoroth]

Originally Posted by Brett

Yep. Thrillers, and capers, and mysteries, and espionage, and horror, and exploration, and cliffhangers, and crime drama, and martial arts tournament, and court intrigue….

I never run infantry combat campaigns or even scenarios. In fact, almost nothing that is primarily combat. Just not my cup of tea. Discussions on these forums in which other people make it plain that they consider it an advantage of zombies that there is nothing to do but kill them keep me constantly aware of the diversity of the hobby.

Well, it doesn't have to be primarily combat for it to include professional combat capabilities.

An SF'd western or cliff-hanger-alike in which you're sometimes out trecking in some wide-open space, you're entirely likely to be doing so while packing an automatic laser rifle or some such that's effective to the limits of your vision. If you happen to be in a situation where one side or the other is prepared to shoot on sight...

(Tintin certainly drew rifle fire from afar a fair few times. [Look, I haven't read much non-webcomic cliffhanger-ish media...])

[Agemegos]

Originally Posted by Ulzgoroth

Well, it doesn't have to be primarily combat for it to include professional combat capabilities.

Indeed not. But I find it vastly more interesting if there is some option for prevailing on an adventure other than having a fight and winning it.

I find "and then there was a fight, which fortunately we won" to be a rather unsatisfactory conclusion to most adventures, and it keeps me young and supple to bear in mind that many gamers and audiences prefer the reverse.

[Mailanka]

Originally Posted by Brett

Run mysteries.

That's not really useful to the discussion. It's sort of like the joke about the guy who goes to the doctor and says "My neck hurts when I turn it like this" to which the doctor says "Don't turn it like that."

Yeah, I could skip all this mess just by running a murder mystery in space, but if that were the case, I wouldn't actually need to ask how to fix an element that isn't necessary to my genre. I want to run action. Really epic, powerful action that centers on the individual hero and really emphasizes how cool future-tech is... only future-tech tends to de-emphasize the individual hero except as master of industry and infrastructure, which is a fine idea, but not (in this particular instance) what I'm looking for.

I don't want to get into specifics, because I don't want to stymie conversation, and other people might have slightly different interests and still find the topic useful. But "Well then, don't run action" isn't that useful to me or to them, I should think.

[Dutch_Wolf]

This discussion actually reminds me of something I have heard about modern combat ranges - since I don't know where I heard it or when I can't prove it but it is interesting - that these ranges have become shorter in recent years (averagely spoken that is). The reason seems to be more urbanised combat environment combined with a descent size non-target populace (civilians mostly), so the only way to find and defeat the targets is to go from door to door, house to house.

Of course the above is only true when fighting something that is not a 'total war' (a war wherein every resource is made available for the war effort).

In short to have relative close and personal combat with normal high or ultra tech equipment the following seems to be needed:

• Some reason why a place can't be shelled/nuked/shot from orbit reasons can be

  • Civilians in the area (when it is illegal or otherwise not a good idea to destroy them)
  • Infrastructure you intent to capture and use(like harbours, airfields, spaceports, etc)
  • Some defence mechanism that can only be destroyed by a small team of specialists (like the earlier mentioned shields)
  • Some or all of the above

• Urbanized environment or any other environment with short lines of sight
• At least somewhat mobile warfare (trenches are not really the thing I am thinking of when I am imaging close and personal combat)