Author Topic: If you had to build a BT base . . .  (Read 1404 times)

Colt Ward

  • Lieutenant General
  • *
  • Posts: 29004
  • Gott Mit Uns
    • Merc Periphery Guide- Bakunin
If you had to build a BT base . . .
« on: 20 July 2017, 23:18:50 »
With the Succession Wars books following the Jihad, we have a lot of setting information where military infrastructure could have taken a pounding.

So . . . pick the timeframe- during/post 1SW, during/post 2SW or during/post Jihad . . .

You are the commander of a House unit (single mech regiment, conventional brigade, RCT) and are going to take over garrison of a world.  The previous base is no longer habitable (nuked, chemical, Ortillery, wrecked in fighting) so you need to set up a new base as part of taking over the garrison.  Where would you want to position it? - island (Malta/Johnson Atoll), top of a mesa (Masada), mountain valley (Ft Irwin closest example I can find), plains, heavy forest/jungle, or other terrain feature?  Would you want to be near or far away from a civilian population (close allows them to support the garrison with other benefits, far makes your position more secure)?  What sort of support might you request or system to build into the base?  What would be your priority in setting up the base?

Would your choices be different if you were a mercenary commander given the same task?
Colt Ward
Clan Invasion Backer #149, Leviathans #104

"We come in peace, please ignore the bloodstains."

"Greetings, Mechwarrior. You have been recruited by the Star League to defend the Frontier against Daoshen and the Capellan armada."

AlphaMirage

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 3670
Re: If you had to build a BT base . . .
« Reply #1 on: 21 July 2017, 01:17:26 »
I would pick post 2SW, I would build it something like Joint Base McGuire-Dix-Lakehurst in NJ. 

Primary reasons
It is central to three major metro areas and industrial zones
It combines all services (in this case Tanks, Mechs, Infantry, and Aero would all be there) which simplifies things
Relatively isolated by vast swathes of forest but close enough that off-base housing and amenities are available
Far enough away from civilians that they won't be overly bothered with drop-ships showing up
Easy to access by road, rail, river, or air with room for marshaling yards and motor pools

More generally if I have Aero I want it to be within easy striking range of the most targets and still have room for training my forces.  Priorities are transportation, communication, and detection.  I want to be able to know that there is an enemy dropship inbound, disperse forces for protection, and then concentrate them rapidly again.

As a mercenary I would build my base to be semi-portable and put it in a field somewhere near wherever my contract target is, we don't get paid to protect anything but that
Once planetside I'll put out advertisement that we are there so Amenities come to us, its cleaner that way

Iron Mongoose

  • Lieutenant
  • *
  • Posts: 1473
  • Don't you know, you're all my very best friends
Re: If you had to build a BT base . . .
« Reply #2 on: 21 July 2017, 01:23:29 »
I'd be near enough to the big city my guys could go on R and R, and I could get supplies, but far enough away that we could have some security and privacy.  Probably a hundred km or so. 

I'd still probably concentrate my forces for the most part.  I fear raids less than having my component units isolated and destroyed (though in the 30th century this might change). 

By and large, I'd like open terrain, so that I could go where I needed to defend whatever part of my world was attacked.  The key exception might be if there was a terrain feature that defended a key city or factory, but even still I don't think I'd base there, but rather just establish some prepaired defences and base an hour or two away. 
"For my military knowledge, though I'm plucky and adventury,
Has only been brought down to the beginning of the century..."

Kovax

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2421
  • Taking over the Universe one mapsheet at a time
Re: If you had to build a BT base . . .
« Reply #3 on: 21 July 2017, 08:42:55 »
In the modern or futuristic eras, anything seen or detected can be hit.  You really can't hide an active base from air recon or satellites, so it's going to be visible.  Local trade and supply means that the public is going to be well aware of its presence, so again, you can't pretend it's not there and figure that potential opponents won't find it.

As previous posters have pointed out, access to one or more metropolitan areas and manufacturing centers is a big plus on many levels, but you probably don't want them within much less than an hour's drive for security reasons.  I'd prefer to have at least a mile of open plain around the base, where nothing can move without being easily seen, and a few small advanced guard and surveillance posts beyond that to at least complicate the process of sneaking up within artillery range undetected.

That puts it effectively in a low or no-population zone 50-100 km from a major city, most likely meaning that the terrain is not suitable for agriculture, or else it would be inhabited.  The exact composition of the post depends heavily on the terrain and available materials.

Empyrus

  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 9121
Re: If you had to build a BT base . . .
« Reply #4 on: 21 July 2017, 09:39:24 »
In the modern or futuristic eras, anything seen or detected can be hit.  You really can't hide an active base from air recon or satellites, so it's going to be visible.  Local trade and supply means that the public is going to be well aware of its presence, so again, you can't pretend it's not there and figure that potential opponents won't find it.

With careful planning and knowledge of satellites, you can hide stuff for a time. In 90's, when India was preparing for nuclear tests, they did most work at night and had vehicles parked in same spots by the time satellites would be above taking pics so that it would look like nothing was happening. And everyone was more or less surprised when the tests happened, so it worked.

But, this is obviously a matter of scale. Hiding a relatively small operation is possible. Hiding an active military base is probably impossible, unless all supply lines and the base itself are underground or underwater. No comment on how you build such a base without anyone noticing.
« Last Edit: 21 July 2017, 10:55:09 by Empyrus »

Vonshroom

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 703
Re: If you had to build a BT base . . .
« Reply #5 on: 21 July 2017, 12:02:52 »
Lets assume later succession wars era. I mostly play with '25 level tech & mechs.

As a house commander I suppose someone would expect me to protect those "pesky civvies". So as the leader of a house unit the question of where, and how to build your base is a complicated one. If I am assigned to protect objectives on (planet X) with the strength of a Regiment or RCT, I am assuming nasty things are probably in store for my posting. Why else would my commanders send me there with that much material? I imagine things that I would need to protect would include; civilian population centers, manufacturing facilities, drop port(s), etc. Also likely enemies plays a big role, am I going to be facing down pirates? House Units? Mercs? Guerrilla warfare / Civil unrest? I'll estimate a little bit of all of those... So with these assumptions what I would go for.

First off the base gets put near a city, but not in it, you dont want your base in a major population center. (Read Dagger Point if you don't know why) yet short travel time for mechs and vehicles. Think about 20 Kilometers or so. This allows even the slowest mechs 3/5 to get there in less than half an hour (anything slower doesn't leave the base). I am going to assume that my objectives are within the primary city, so I'll assume that the Drop Port is in the city, as are the major manufactures, and the primary population base. I would want a large open field around my base so my defense systems can work properly. I am assuming I have access to a decent amount of arty, and LRM turrets. Ideally I would have my base on a hill, with rough (but open) terrain and mine field all around with high walls that I can indirect from my mechs and LRM carriers over the top. Basically anyone attacking head-on would get wrecked. All but the roads and maybe a few choice approaches would be mined, or very hard to traverse. A field is ideal as it allows them to come to you, and you can see them the whole way there. You aren't going to hide from aerospace anyways so LOS is your friend. If possible I would have a good amount of underground bunkers and positions to maximize my protection from the air. Ideally just an air traffic control tower above ground and everything else gets built underground. Now the enemies have to guess at what is actually there.

If there aren't any hostile units on planet currently I can sit and wait for something nasty to show up. Once they show up in system I'll send my fighters after their drop ships and see what I can whittle down. Dealing with whatever lands is the difficult part. Assuming they aren't complete idiots they are going to avoid your highly defensible base and attack one of the targets you are preparing to defend. This means at some point they are going to attack the nearby city. I would move some units in to guard the key positions and leave the rest of my detachment back at the base. Able to respond fairly quickly. I'd be able to track them fairly well I suppose so honestly I would just wait for them to make their move. The hard part at this point isn't actually defending your base, but your objectives. Which really isn't the topic of the thread.
For The Archon!

Vonshroom

  • Warrant Officer
  • *
  • Posts: 703
Re: If you had to build a BT base . . .
« Reply #6 on: 21 July 2017, 12:12:15 »
As a merc things get more difficult, If I am paying for the base then simply put I'm just not building one. I am going to assume I have a dropship or dropships depending on size and wealth of my unit. I can tell you building bases for other people does not contribute to your statement of retained income. :)

I realize this kind of breaks the thread... but my dropships would be a base. I would have some support structures I'd build, like bunk houses, and a mess hall, stuff like that, but that is all cheap, and I wouldn't bother defending it. Sure I'll build a good fence to keep the locals and various critters out, but again that is cheap. Also I'd post ample signage.
(Attention Anyone Coming Closer Than This Sign Gets a Bullet. Not a Warning, Not A Question, A Bullet. ) I'm going to park my drop ship close to my objectives but out of any civilian centers, and I can move them around when I figure out where the enemy is going to attack.
For The Archon!

Cybertec

  • Corporal
  • *
  • Posts: 83
Re: If you had to build a BT base . . .
« Reply #7 on: 31 July 2017, 23:47:59 »
I'm loving this line of thought.
A lot of good points. but a few questions, of the least.

1.  What is the radius or proscribed limit of proximity for a Dropship pad?
As I assume they are like airports today and oh so more noisy.

I agree with the point of a base within close enough placement to points of interest, and yet far enough away to be secured and separated from the lovely rabble the unit is to support. Now to crack open some books and check for prices.
"Where ever you go...there you are." -Dr. B.Banzai

Forever a loyal son of Davion.
Long live the Fox!
Davion will rise again

Peter Smith

  • LBI Shareholder
  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2389
Re: If you had to build a BT base . . .
« Reply #8 on: 01 August 2017, 08:53:27 »
1.  What is the radius or proscribed limit of proximity for a Dropship pad?

Damage drops off out to six hexes, so 200 meters seems to be the minimum safe distance to the pad. This is the case for both Aerodyne as well as Spheroid DropShips.
Power corrupts. Absolute power is kinda neat.

"Now I've got the image of a Haywire pod that's broadcasting "stop hitting yourself" over and over." MoneyLovinOgre4Hire

jimdigris

  • Catalyst Demo Team
  • Lieutenant Colonel
  • *
  • Posts: 8785
Re: If you had to build a BT base . . .
« Reply #9 on: 01 August 2017, 10:19:04 »
If at all possible, I would have my base  built into a hillside or mountain so that air attacks are useless and forcing your way inside creates a kill zone.  It would be within driving distance of major population centers.  I would also have several smaller facilities on other continents for quick deployment.

Kovax

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2421
  • Taking over the Universe one mapsheet at a time
Re: If you had to build a BT base . . .
« Reply #10 on: 01 August 2017, 10:32:56 »
200 meters.  That's the "safe distance" where it doesn't damage armor, strip exposed skin off the bone, and do other nasty things that your insurance company hates.  It's still not a "safe distance" to put anything that isn't hardened ferro-crete or armor plated.  You probably want at least half a kilometer (if not a full one) radius around that site with nothing but flat pavement, and the noise and vibration of a dropship takeoff or landing is probably going to be painfully apparent even 5-10km away.  That means an actual base perimeter around a landing pad will likely be a couple of kilometers across, with another kilometer or more around that as a "no man's land" secured by wire and sensors.

On the other hand, the starport may be well separated from the military base, and possibly one of the "targets" that you're paid to defend, so that may not even be an issue impacting base size or layout.  I can't picture ANYONE putting a starport inside of an urban center, as the noise and shock wave would tend to make life fairly miserable for the residents several times a month, every time dropships come or go.

If, as Vonshroom suggests, a dropship is available to the mercenaries, having the base built around it makes sense, as it can serve both as a repair facility and as a hardened fire support tower at the center of operations.

Cheap pre-fab construction (reusable, or cheap enough to abandon or bulldoze afterwards) would be the norm, if a pre-constructed base isn't provided (most likely built by the previous contractual defenders).  Believe it or not, it makes a big difference in how much you're going to do if you're going to be there for 3 months, or for a year or two.
« Last Edit: 01 August 2017, 10:35:59 by Kovax »

guardiandashi

  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4828
Re: If you had to build a BT base . . .
« Reply #11 on: 01 August 2017, 14:50:59 »
If I were going to design and build a "true base" I would likely start with layered and combination defenses.

the "core and critical" portions of the base such as command center, several "hangers" for combat units and barracks would be underground, and heavily reinforced.  I would also have "deployment" hangers and barracks connected by multiple access paths, including "hidden ones" I would also have a number of layered security checkpoints, to try to limit unauthorized access. and also make it difficult for a single "mole or traitor" to completely open up or lock down the base.

snewsom2997

  • Captain
  • *
  • Posts: 2187
Re: If you had to build a BT base . . .
« Reply #12 on: 01 August 2017, 15:17:00 »
What base you build really depends on what is on the world and where, by default I would say any base would need to be no more than a couple hours from the star port. However if you have industry spread far and wide, I would recommend smaller bases near those assets.

Other than that, run with what works, Castles Brian.

As far as geography, mesas and mountain tops were great pre-airplane, after the invention of the airplane, there is really only one choice, underground, with hidden exits, self contained power, water, and waste recycling.

As far as defense, Hidden Turrets, Mix of LRM, Medium Laser, and AC/5. Once inside lots of Medium Lasers, Flamers for infantry, ability to flood portions of the base and then drain them. Your defense is mostly being hidden that is what matters. However that is still only going to work once, unless you take lots of time, making the hidden entrances and exits far from the actual base, even then eventually they will find you.


If you really want to have fun, a Giant Sub like the Wyrm that WOB used on earth. Took the Republic Years to hunt down, it moves, it can be big enough to house basically anything in numbers. You just have to make sure it is not so big, that it limits where you can take it, or how close you can get to shore. You don't really want to drop you mechs 100 miles out to sea and make them walk ashore. Post Jihad though there is the Tonbo, Air Cav for Mechs.

mbear

  • Stood Far Back When The Gravitas Was Handed Out
  • Major
  • *
  • Posts: 4498
    • Tower of Jade
Re: If you had to build a BT base . . .
« Reply #13 on: 04 August 2017, 08:47:33 »
There are some fortifications listed in the free hexpack promo tile download. It should be listed on the Downloads page.

Not useful for your strategic positioning question, but useful when it comes time to actually build the base on the map.
Be the Loremaster:

Battletech transport rules take a very feline approach to moving troops in a combat zone: If they fits, they ships.

You bought the box set and are ready to expand your BT experience. Now what? (Thanks Sartis!)

 

Register