Small Unit Formations - Q. for a Warhammer 40K Fanfic

[Purple]

What about using lighter mortars thou? In particular, if he used something like light 60mm mortars he could probably pack two mortar teams inside the same vehicle and still have a decent ammo count.

[Sea Skimmer]

What the would be the point? A 60mm mortar is more of a big grenade launcher then anything else, heck the things have triggers in real life so they can be used for direct fire. The bombs are not very effective at all, main value is smoke and flares, I have a picture at home of some Libyan rebels jumping away from one exploding a couple feet away in the sand totally unharmed, and this isn't that unusual. If you have a huge vehicle your going to carry something a lot more effective. The only point of 60mm is it is man portable. This is also why many armies never adapted such a caliber, or abolished it when better grenade launchers appeared.

[Rogue 9]

Because it's the grim darkness of the far future, where there are only uber-explosive miniature warheads? Whatever the reason, it's apparently done. To go to the miniatures (not the rules, but the sculpts) for a moment: This is the page for miniatures for airborne mortar teams, and as you can see they can pick up the damn thing and run with it. More traditional ground-pounder regiments like Zinegata's, though, have a simpler muzzle loaded tube-and-bipod arrangement rather than the revolver magazine in the first link, looking like this.

Though on the other hand, 60mm mortars being so useless might explain why infantry mortars are so useless in tabletop.

[Purple]

What the would be the point? A 60mm mortar is more of a big grenade launcher then anything else, heck the things have triggers in real life so they can be used for direct fire. The bombs are not very effective at all, main value is smoke and flares, I have a picture at home of some Libyan rebels jumping away from one exploding a couple feet away in the sand totally unharmed, and this isn't that unusual. If you have a huge vehicle your going to carry something a lot more effective. The only point of 60mm is it is man portable. This is also why many armies never adapted such a caliber, or abolished it when better grenade launchers appeared.

Well for two reasons.
#1 He is making a mobile defense force so what he needs is rapid fire, light indirect fire capable close support weapon. Something he can pack up or lay down quickly and unleash close up rapid fire on what ever enemy gets to close to his lines before scooting off again. He does not need a lot of HE to get the job done because he won't be blasting people out of fortifications but engaging enemy infantry and light vehicles that his force engages.

#2 There are 60mm's and there are 60mm's. You have stuff like the M224 that a person can fire with one hand and than you have things like the Chinese WW90-60L that can fire off a shot as far as a regular 82mm mortar.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M224_mortar
http://articles.janes.com/articles/Jane ... China.html

Than again, given the kind of weight reduction we are seeing in mortars today there is no reason to believe that a 40K grade 82mm one would be as heavy as modern ones. Indeed, they might be capable of making one that weighs as little as a normal 60mm.

PS. What are you talking about? Armies did adopt and do use 60mm mortars. Just observe the links provided.

[Sea Skimmer]

Because it's the grim darkness of the far future, where there are only uber-explosive miniature warheads? Whatever the reason, it's apparently done. To go to the miniatures (not the rules, but the sculpts) for a moment: This is the page for miniatures for airborne mortar teams, and as you can see they can pick up the damn thing and run with it. More traditional ground-pounder regiments like Zinegata's, though, have a simpler muzzle loaded tube-and-bipod arrangement rather than the revolver magazine in the first link, looking like this.

Though on the other hand, 60mm mortars being so useless might explain why infantry mortars are so useless in tabletop.

Looks like they are running with what six rounds of ammo in the absurdly retarded revolver cylinder, that is so overwhelmingly useful! Its also plainly not 60mm caliber, more like five or six inches. Retardation like this should go under the bus if someone is working on a fic.

The US Army actually tried to abolish the 60mm mortar after WW2, only to have it come crawling back like the plague when the special forces/airborne crazy commenced in the later 1950s and demanded low weight no matter how limited the resulting product was. Stupid thing was, a lighter weight 81mm airborne mortar actually already existed in WW2 but was completely forgotten about (standard US Army ordnance corps procedure) as was the fact that Japan had fielded an even lighter 81mm during the war with a cut down barrel. Still a lot more weight then 60mm, and less range then a full on 81mm, but vastly more effective. Germany and the USSR both abolished lightweight mortars during the war itself and never looked back. Apparently in Afghanistan the US is trending towards issuing all mortar crews 120mm mortars, this is already standard in Stryker brigades.

Well for two reasons.
#1 He is making a mobile defense force so what he needs is rapid fire, light indirect fire capable close support weapon. Something he can pack up or lay down quickly and unleash close up rapid fire on what ever enemy gets to close to his lines before scooting off again. He does not need a lot of HE to get the job done because he won't be blasting people out of fortifications but engaging enemy infantry and light vehicles that his force engages.

I'm not kidding that 60mm rounds can land feet from people and not even wound them if the ground is soft. Rate of fire for 81mm and 60mm mortars is effectively identical, actually you can basically get 120mm firing just as quickly too though maybe not for as long. Quick setup and transport is pretty well irrelevant when the weapon is being operated with a heavy tracked vehicle. They'll all be the damn same. Higher firepower and greater is an enormous advantage on the defensive, as it is in near any situation because it lets you inflict more damage further away, meaning you smash the enemy before he actually reaches your lines. The claimed weight for the carrier is near 40 tons, talking about 'light' in that context is retarded.

#2 There are 60mm's and there are 60mm's. You have stuff like the M224 that a person can fire with one hand and than you have things like the Chinese WW90-60L that can fire off a shot as far as a regular 82mm mortar.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/M224_mortar
http://articles.janes.com/articles/Jane ... China.html

Than again, given the kind of weight reduction we are seeing in mortars today there is no reason to believe that a 40K grade 82mm one would be as heavy as modern ones. Indeed, they might be capable of making one that weighs as little as a normal 60mm.

Actually you have a serious minimal weight limit if you don't want to give up range, because if it gets too light for the muzzle energy it will start bouncing in the air. This is why mortars must have serious base plates in the first place, which tend to be a third of the weight or so. Existing designs for mortars and field howitzers are already running into this stability issue, and it will only get worse if you want to fire some ultra supercharges, which also add to ammunition weight. Supercharges also lead to much more rapid overheating, which is a very serious issue with any mortar firing rapidly, and a good reason to want a bigger mortar (also random liquid cooled concepts show up now and then). If you have two weapons that fire at the same rate and overheat after the same number of rounds, the one with the bigger bomb is clearly superior, all the more so if a vehicle is involved and the number of men is going to be the same either way. The Chinese WW90 series has to use a recoil system to be stable because of this energy-recoil issue, weighs more then a standard 60mm because of it, and isn't actually in use by the Chinese Army that I've ever heard of. They spam out weapons concepts like crazy, being listed by Janes doesn't even mean a weapon exists in hardware let alone has passed trials and been adapted. In any event, lightweight 81mm has in fact existed since WW2, it just had to be range restricted as no modern design has been recoiling; some WW1 German mortars of about this size were. accuracy from a 60mm bomb going that far is going to be pretty bad, which is another reason why heavier designs gained favor. As I recall the CHinese do have an advanced 100mm mortar which has gained service acceptance, but the reason was because they decided 120mm bombs were just too heavy to be rapidly drop loaded by small Chinese troops. Kind of strange, since Japan made 150mm drop loading work in WW2.

PS. What are you talking about? Armies did adopt and do use 60mm mortars. Just observe the links provided.

Some did, many never did, and a number of users abandon them. See for example, entire Russian-Soviet military, the gods of artillery, have never used this caliber and abolished all mortars smaller then 82mm in 1942. Actually its mainly the France and the US, which bought the original French design, and people using weapons from these two nations that have ever favored 60mm. Trends elsewhere favored a very lightweight mortar of 50mm or less, which could truly be carried with ammunition and a rifle by one man instead of a crew, plus the usual 81mm and up types which definitely need a crew but can also actually be taken a serious area bombardment weapons. Now most people have given up all the small stuff because it actually does very little one cannot do with a 40mm grenade launcher for less money and effort. 60mm does have its place, that place is certainly not on a vehicle so big it could easily be configured to carry a 240mm mortar and ammunition... as in Soviet 2S4 Tyulpan.

[Zinegata]

M125 mortar carrier, M113 based, has four men and around 115 rounds of ammo as I recall. It holds 13 men including the driver as an infantry carrier.

Hmmm, in that case I think the Chimera IFV can be modded into a pure APC (it isn't fighting on the frontlines anyway) - which means taking out the gun turret, most of the other armaments, and a fair amount of armor. The space and weight savings will be allocated to more space for mortar ammo.

Alternatively I could go for some other pure transport vehicle, but I like the idea of having only one type of chassis for most of the vehicles in the regiment to ease maintenance.

The only reason I can see for more then one mortar per vehicle is if they are different caliber. That is done in real life some, giving a 60mm or 81mm mortar to a 120mm mortar team along with a small amount of ammunition so they have an emergency ability to setup on the ground and fire very close to themselves, something a 120mm mortar cannot do as minimal range can be around 250m. It also gives a capability to send a mortar off on special missions, sometimes dismounted direct fire is useful, but this by far works better with a 50-60mm mortar then a 81mm.

Why wouldn't more than one mortar of the same calibre per vehicle make sense? Is is because mortars fire so fast that having three 81mm tubes firing together is not that big of an advantage versus having just one tube?

[Sea Skimmer]

Yes, they fire so quickly its no reasonable advantage. 115 rounds at 20-30rpm doesn't last long. Even if you had 250 rounds you can still fire that off absurdly quickly. All the more so since at least a small amount of ammo will be special stuff like IR illuminating or smoke rather then all HE or DPICM. If you take out the turret then make the mortar be mounted the way it is on an M113, able to fire out the roof without dismounting. This is vastly superior to any kind of dismount system. All the more so since now, mortar mounts for vehicles exist which have computer controlled aiming. So the crew can get fire missions via computer datalink and all they have to do is drop load.

Overheating will slow you down with really large amounts of ammo, but you can pour water or piss on the tube to keep it cool. You carry three mortars and three crews you are just wasting a massive amount of space to fight for a couple of minutesor less. If you want massive instant firepower, forget about mortars and field a vehicle with a small multiple rocket launcher like the Chinese WZ303.
http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3446/3979 ... ca54_b.jpg. Several sets of reloads are carried inside the hull and rockets have even greater payloads then thin walled mortar bombs.

Limitations on ammo supply are one of the things that distinguishes infantry mortars from proper artillery in the first place. Mortar units expect to fight with only the ammunition they organically carry and expend it very quickly, just like a tank or IFV and attached infantry does. Basically you have ammo for one good fight and that's it.

Artillery units expect to fight with ammunition carriers on hand or close by, and able to cycle back to depots while combat is ongoing, and not be subject to the same kind of limitations. This is made possible by different organization, and the fact that artillery has more range so it can fire from further behind the lines and keep those ammo carriers in at least somewhat safe hands. You could have forward mortar unit with ammo carriers but it doesn't make any sense, certainly not if you had more then one mortar on one vehicle.

[Gunhead]

There's also AMoS (Advanced Mortar System) that has two 120mm tubes and carries ready rounds in the vehicle. From the same same branch there is the NEMO (New Mortar) that is a single barrel weapon. The two tubes do increase the rate of fire, specially when this weapon is meant to be fired from inside the vehicle with the weapon loaded from the back opposed to dropping the round into it. The drawback is the two weapons add complexity to the whole system, but as it is it also provides another barrel to use and this lessens the heating issue in prolonged combat. The single barrel is mechanically less complex, but does heat and the rate of fire isn't as high. FDF still employs the 81mm mortar as a fire support weapon for jäeger platoons and these ride with an apc and are only really used for observed fire with FO riding along. Due to the lightness of the tube itself and the apc they have good mobility, can carry a lot of rounds for their weapon and even though they do need to dismount to use their weapon, this is not a big deal since the jäegers need to dismount to fight too.

I think the Russian Tulpan is a bit of a novelty item. Yea the 240mm does produce a huge bang but has a low rate of fire, the ammo weights a ton and the vehicle can carry a limited number of rounds on it due to size and weight. I'm hard pressed to find a use for it. Maybe if it employed guided rounds as a sort of super big precision bombard. Artillery has a tough time in urban environments too, so it might find some use there.

-Gunhead

[Rogue 9]

If you take out the turret then make the mortar be mounted the way it is on an M113, able to fire out the roof without dismounting. This is vastly superior to any kind of dismount system. All the more so since now, mortar mounts for vehicles exist which have computer controlled aiming. So the crew can get fire missions via computer datalink and all they have to do is drop load.

For 40k, you just described a Griffon mortar carrier. Which he said upthread they don't have, but that might be worth reconsidering.

[Purple]

What was that about a magazine fed mortar you mentioned a while back? Because I can't get the page to load but the thing might have been inspired by this: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2B9_Vasilek

So it might not be useless at all.

[Sea Skimmer]

There's also AMoS (Advanced Mortar System) that has two 120mm tubes and carries ready rounds in the vehicle. From the same same branch there is the NEMO (New Mortar) that is a single barrel weapon. The two tubes do increase the rate of fire, specially when this weapon is meant to be fired from inside the vehicle with the weapon loaded from the back opposed to dropping the round into it.

AMOS rate of fire is basically the same as a single mortar drop loading, in no small part because it still requires manual reloading inside the turret, the ready magazine is fairly small. The main point of the twin barrels seems to be to make MRSI missions work better with the rounds in said ready magazine. The main advantage is you get that rate of fire while also being able to use it as a direct fire weapon. Russian 2S9 and 2S31 Vena also exists, both fairly simple breach loading 120mm mortars but in fully amphibious vehicles intended to destroy tanks, several western 120mm single turrets exist intended for LAV series vehicles too. But yeah, you do pay a lot more money for this sort of system while loosing the elegant simplicity of an infantry mortar. That's why I wasn't pushing the idea out of hand. It is very appealing if money is no issue and you have no requirement for minimal range indirect firing or dismount operations at all.

I think the Russian Tulpan is a bit of a novelty item. Yea the 240mm does produce a huge bang but has a low rate of fire, the ammo weights a ton and the vehicle can carry a limited number of rounds on it due to size and weight.

Actually the vehicle carries 40 rounds of ammunition which is as much as some 155mm self propelled howitzers carry, only at three times the weight per shell. So its like having 120 x 155mm shells onboard, I think anyone can live with that. Rate of fire is one round a minute, but when you consider weight of fire this compares well with sustained fire from 155mm. At least unless you have a water cooled autoloading 155mm like Crusader. Also its all power loading and laying, except for getting the ammo into the autoloader which is done with a ( I think power assisted) hand crank specifically to prevent the crew from firing too quickly after emptying the drum magazines and overheating it. Not a the worst idiot proofing feature I've ever heard.

Also, it and its ammo are cheap, and the bursting charge is about half that of a 16in HC shell which is a fucking big bang for artillery. Disadvantage is the crew is exposed firing, but it can setup and pack up very quickly and only needs a four man firing crew.

I'm hard pressed to find a use for it.

It blows crap the hell up? Almost any field fortification can be destroyed, with a near miss no less, bridges dropped, targets in heavy tree cover hit without excessive amounts of ammo, armored vehicles wrecked by near misses (also it makes craters so deep they'll block the advance of tanks), you can of course air burst for soft targets, and its cluster shell is a much more efficient way of delivering bomblets then small diameter howitzer rounds which is a cheapness factor.

Also keep in mind 2S4 is just a mechanized version of the M240 towed mortar which has existed since the middle of WW2 and was deployed in massive numbers. Its possible for people to make field fortifications in a day or two that can take 155mm shells.. If you dont have unlimited access to precision air strikes, or a advanced guided missile like GMLRS the capability of a heavy mortar or other very heavy artillery like this is irreplaceable. 2S4 also only weighs 27.5 metric tons, of which over 5 tons are the projectiles. So its not like having such a system around is a huge burden aside from ammo.

Maybe if it employed guided rounds as a sort of super big precision bombard. Artillery has a tough time in urban environments too, so it might find some use there.

The Russians do in fact have a laser guided 240mm mortar round, it was used in Afghanistan and in Chechnya.

[Connor MacLeod]

Hellguns are nice, but aren't they more known for having powerful armor-piercing shots as opposed to high RoF like a SAW / BAR?

There's like umpteen-kajillion variants of a Hellgun like every other weapon in 40K. Some have greater (or less) range than a lasgun, or greater punch. Or higher rates of fire. Some have armour piercing, and some are treated as synonymous with hot-shot lasweapons (which is just yet another 'whole nother category' thing.) You can probably come up with some sort of variant that fits your purposes just by mixing and matching from the source.

Ultimately what a hellgun is is just another modded lasgun variant. Like a long las. Or those wide-aperture lasguns that can behave like flamethrowers (seen in Legion.) Hellgun was just one option because I could see it filling a role that might be overkill for plasma weapons or meltaguns but still where you need range (meltaguns) or rate of fire (plasma.) But if it really bugs you, then go with backpack hotshot powerpacks hooked up to a more powerful, variable output lasrifle, or something. Longer, reinforced barrels probably could simulate machine gun greater ranges.

Also, given Skimmer's comments on the Chimera, maybe a Centaur is not a good idea as it'd have even less space for ammo. They might be good for the Enginseer though.

If ammo is an issue you can probably hitch up a trailer or something to carry more. Or assign each Mortar crew (and a single driver) to each Centaur to save on storage.

The big problems I see with Chimeras is that they're supposed to be so unusual or rare (hence the supposed rarity of mechanized infantry and their small size.) Centaurs evidently do not suffer from thsi limitation (not if you can afford to equip the Meat Droids of Krieg with them in any numbers). Plus, they're significantly faster than a Chimera unless you up-gun the engine, so they can get where they need to (or bug out) faster. and if each Mortar crew has ts own Centaur, they can operate together or independently as needed.

[Connor MacLeod]

Because it's the grim darkness of the far future, where there are only uber-explosive miniature warheads?

Problem with that is that it assumes such are part of the reliable logistics. It's not impossible to argue, but given the mentality and approach of the Munitorum, its more likely they design shit so it could fire 'sophisticated' as well as 'crap' ammo, simply because they can't guarantee a steady supply of the good and oyu might have to make do with the crap. This is also why you have slow ass tanks that can run on anything from gasoline to plants and bark to steam, after all. If they could get away with making their tanks solar powered like they did Lasguns, I'm sure they'd have done that as well.

Looks like they are running with what six rounds of ammo in the absurdly retarded revolver cylinder, that is so overwhelmingly useful! Its also plainly not 60mm caliber, more like five or six inches. Retardation like this should go under the bus if someone is working on a fic.

Welcome to Forge world. IIRC the elysian mortars were supposed to be automated or something. Basically you set them up and they'd keep firing until they ran out of ammo, for whatever value that was.

And using models for scaling anything is pretty silly, given my favorite leman russ example (apparently 120mm in the 40K universe is something like 300-400mm in real life, if we went by that.)

If portability were an issue stopping the use of bigger mortars then the obvious solution the guard would use is to assign the bigger guys in the regiment to carrying mortars, like they sometimes do with other heavy/support weapons like autocannons and shit. If some guy can heft and fire a heavy bolter or autocannon and fire/load it without support (Accuracy is another story...) I am certain they could lug around a mortar bigger than 60mm without problems.

[Sea Skimmer]

Some really good reasons exist why you'll almost never see a military tracked vehicle with a trailer. It kind of defeats the point.

[Simon_Jester]

Let me see...

Well, a tracked trailer is a ridiculous idea. A wheeled trailer means you lose the all-terrain capability of the tracked vehicle. And a tracked vehicle has inherently shorter range and more maintenance problems than a wheeled prime mover of the same horsepower, so if you're going to use a wheeled trailer you might as well make it a wheeled tractor-trailer combo and stick to the roads where it belongs.

Did I get that right?

[Zinegata]

If you take out the turret then make the mortar be mounted the way it is on an M113, able to fire out the roof without dismounting. This is vastly superior to any kind of dismount system. All the more so since now, mortar mounts for vehicles exist which have computer controlled aiming. So the crew can get fire missions via computer datalink and all they have to do is drop load.

For 40k, you just described a Griffon mortar carrier. Which he said upthread they don't have, but that might be worth reconsidering.

The Regimental Enginseers are an eccentric lot who aren't above wrenching turrets off Chimeras to make their own variants, even if they technically don't have the license to make their own Griffons .

Connor->

But if it really bugs you, then go with backpack hotshot powerpacks hooked up to a more powerful, variable output lasrifle, or something. Longer, reinforced barrels probably could simulate machine gun greater ranges.

It doesn't bug me so much as I also plan to use Hellguns, but largely as "heavy assault" rifles for anti-Spess Mahrine work.

Probably a backpack-driven special las variant then with some funky XYZ-Pattern name then .

The big problems I see with Chimeras is that they're supposed to be so unusual or rare (hence the supposed rarity of mechanized infantry and their small size.

I have this covered in the backstory, wherein Brennus was the final destination of an Imperial Guard "colonization" army (i.e. a large mechanized army which was finally getting mustered out). So they have stocks of old tanks and Chimeras to equip their PDF. That's also where they get their Leman Russes from.

For spares and eventual refurbishments, the world has close ties with the two local Forge Worlds as Brennus is rich in rare metals (the whole reason for the colonization) so there's a considerable Mechanicum presence on the planet to help oversee the mining operations. One of those two Forge World is known for particularly eccentric Enginseers, and has supplied most of the regiment's needs (mostly so they stop embarassing the upper echelons of the orthodox priesthood)

Really think of it as something of a mix between post-Civil War America and Meiji Japan. The world is transitioning from an age of Knights and Wizards (literal Wizards - that's where they get the Sanctioned detachment) to a more "modern" age, and there was a huge influx of new blood from off-world looking for a better life.

[Rogue 9]

The big problems I see with Chimeras is that they're supposed to be so unusual or rare (hence the supposed rarity of mechanized infantry and their small size.)

Chimeras are described as "the most commonly used armored troop carrier" and "ubiquitous" in the Guard codex.

[Dr. Trainwreck]

I have this covered in the backstory, wherein Brennus was the final destination of an Imperial Guard "colonization" army (i.e. a large mechanized army which was finally getting mustered out). So they have stocks of old tanks and Chimeras to equip their PDF. That's also where they get their Leman Russes from.

I have an even better idea: if you suspect that this justification slows down the pace of your fic, cut it without giving a shit. Despite what the 'HOW THE FUCK DO YOU EXPLAIN THIS I HAVE TO NITPICK EVERYTHING FOR MISTAKES' crowd says, you actually can remove it from the narrative and put a little chart or something at the end if you're inclined. Remember, you're dealing with magical interstellar travel with the help of wizards by another name, a reality coexistent with our reality and body modification that can make you 3m tall, give you mechanical limbs and reduntant organs, help you live 300 years or elevate you, body and mind, beyond the homo sapiens species entirely. Is it really farfetched for you to have three more tanks than standard?

[Rogue 9]

I have this covered in the backstory, wherein Brennus was the final destination of an Imperial Guard "colonization" army (i.e. a large mechanized army which was finally getting mustered out). So they have stocks of old tanks and Chimeras to equip their PDF. That's also where they get their Leman Russes from.

I have an even better idea: if you suspect that this justification slows down the pace of your fic, cut it without giving a shit. Despite what the 'HOW THE FUCK DO YOU EXPLAIN THIS I HAVE TO NITPICK EVERYTHING FOR MISTAKES' crowd says, you actually can remove it from the narrative and put a little chart or something at the end if you're inclined. Remember, you're dealing with magical interstellar travel with the help of wizards by another name, a reality coexistent with our reality and body modification that can make you 3m tall, give you mechanical limbs and reduntant organs, help you live 300 years or elevate you, body and mind, beyond the homo sapiens species entirely. Is it really farfetched for you to have three more tanks than standard?

Besides this, and besides the actual source material contradicting the notion that Chimeras are especially rare, that mechanized regiments are a minority of the total Guard force (which is true) doesn't mean they don't exist or have had Black Library novels written entirely about them; they do and they have. There's no reason, no matter how nitpicky one wants to be, for there to not be a mechanized regiment in his story.

[Sea Skimmer]

Let me see...

Well, a tracked trailer is a ridiculous idea.

Actually thats the only way it works, make it tracked, make the tracks powered, and have powered articulation to connect the pair. The problem is well, that just cost so much money you might as well built the initial vehicle larger, unless you want to operate in deep snow or marshland in which powered articulation can be the only way to effectively steer. This is why the Sweden Bv 206 and Russian DT-30 exist. But in those conditions you also have to keep ground pressure as low as possible, which rules out a serious amount of armor.

A wheeled trailer means you lose the all-terrain capability of the tracked vehicle. And a tracked vehicle has inherently shorter range and more maintenance problems than a wheeled prime mover of the same horsepower, so if you're going to use a wheeled trailer you might as well make it a wheeled tractor-trailer combo and stick to the roads where it belongs.

Did I get that right?

Yup. This is also why armies around the world use big rigid frame 8x8 trucks for front line logistical purposes instead of semi trailer trucks which are used in the rear. Anything with a trailer just sucks off road, doubly so for semi trailers. That also goes for towed artillery.

[Zinegata]

I have an even better idea: if you suspect that this justification slows down the pace of your fic, cut it without giving a shit. Despite what the 'HOW THE FUCK DO YOU EXPLAIN THIS I HAVE TO NITPICK EVERYTHING FOR MISTAKES' crowd says, you actually can remove it from the narrative and put a little chart or something at the end if you're inclined. Remember, you're dealing with magical interstellar travel with the help of wizards by another name, a reality coexistent with our reality and body modification that can make you 3m tall, give you mechanical limbs and reduntant organs, help you live 300 years or elevate you, body and mind, beyond the homo sapiens species entirely. Is it really farfetched for you to have three more tanks than standard?

I could, but I'm known for my attention to detail (well, not in this forum, but in others). I like having good justifications for the choices I make in fics. I have a reputation to keep .

Hell, my old Gundam fics had entire Org Charts tucked away in the Appendix and with a reasonable explanation of how I was able to "borrow" 20+ rare fighting machines when there were just 300 of them in the entire universe at the time .

Besides, Org chart discussions are fun for some people.

[Dr. Trainwreck]

Warhammer is not Gundam. If something is 'rare', it means 'using it in a fic will make you a special snowflake'. Rarity is measured in the galactic scale, and thus rarity status gives us hundreds of thousands or low millions of individual pieces. Fuck, try to create the logistics for a Space Marine chapter: for them to operate in their proper role, you need to include at least one (perhaps two) 'rare' battle barges and at least four 'rare' strike cruisers -I should know, I've done it.

Now, if you want to make a fully detailed army, make a chart somewhere, lists et cetera, and draw from there as you're writing without detailed explanations that will slow the work down. You want the justification, the reader might not; don't shove it in their faces. You might include those things separately, at the end or even the beginning of the story. Thing is, in the narrative itself, no exposition. Brevity. You know the drill.

[Purple]

As Dr. Trainwreck said, rarity in 40K is something that is really measured on the galactic scale. For example the fact that all mechanized regiments are rare does not mean that there are a handful of them. It means that among the trillions upon trillions of guardsmen serving in billions upon billions of regiments in the IOM there are going to be trillions of guardsmen serving in billions upon billions of mechanized regiments. The number of the later will indeed be smaller relative to the number of the former. But it will still be f'ing big.

[Zinegata]

Now, if you want to make a fully detailed army, make a chart somewhere, lists et cetera, and draw from there as you're writing without detailed explanations that will slow the work down. You want the justification, the reader might not; don't shove it in their faces. You might include those things separately, at the end or even the beginning of the story. Thing is, in the narrative itself, no exposition. Brevity. You know the drill.

Trainwreck, you may need to take a step back and realize that the point of this thread isn't to solicit writing advice (because I don't plan to write a technical manual in lieue of a story). But the point of the thread IS to make that "accompanying chart" that you say I should tuck away somewhere.

Because like I said, I LIKE those kinds of charts. Some people LIKE talking about theoretical formations.

So stop worrying about me bending over to nitpickers or something.

As Dr. Trainwreck said, rarity in 40K is something that is really measured on the galactic scale. For example the fact that all mechanized regiments are rare does not mean that there are a handful of them. It means that among the trillions upon trillions of guardsmen serving in billions upon billions of regiments in the IOM there are going to be trillions of guardsmen serving in billions upon billions of mechanized regiments. The number of the later will indeed be smaller relative to the number of the former. But it will still be f'ing big.

Honestly, what worries me more isn't getting Chimeras. It's justifying how Brennus has its own Psyker Scholastica facility.

[Dr. Trainwreck]

Heh. The joys of overreaction. Sorry 'bout those things.

For the psykers, I guess you could make Brennus (I'm guessing that Brennus is also the name of the regiment's planet) to be important. Maybe really rich in resources, politically important in some way, etc. The Dark Heresy book states that there is such a school on Scintilla, but that's a hiveworld and sector capital, and the Ravenor novels point to a secret heretic organization which trains psykers, with some baddies being graduates. So, you can twist it to give the homeworld its own facility.

Unless you're talking about the regiment itself having a psyker academy. If so, you are irredeemable even by my standards .