From: Captain Violet Hawthorne-Smythe, OSRCT 2nd Team
To: *Ground Force Armored Transport Committee
Subject: Rapid Zone Armor Deployment
During the deployments carried out by units under my command in yellow and red zones across the planet, we have accumulated a substantial amount of experience enabling direct field comparisons of zone armor and standard infantry performance. I have summarized the attached findings and hope they will be of use to the committee.
1. Zone Armor provides substantially more firepower with greater loadout flexibility than standard infantry. Between the integrated weapons systems of the Raider and Marauder-class suits and hand-held weapons systems operated by Raider, Trooper and Defender-class suits, the average squad is guaranteed at least a 100% percent firepower increase over a conventional infantry squad when taking into account the suits' targeting systems.
2. Zone Armor provides substantially more protection for their operators than the composite body armor worn by standard infantry. While modern Brotherhood weaponry, especially of the energy variety, has closed the gap considerably, an individual operating Zone Armor can absorb substantial amounts of small arms fire. Field experience shows an increase in firepower absorption of between 50 and 100%.
3. Zone Armor provides a substantial improvement in mobility over standard infantry gear, with the exception of Defender-class suits. The power-assisted musculature increases movement speed by approximately 100%. When combined with the built-in jump jets and life support systems, a unit composed entirely of zone armor equipped individuals can stay out in the field for days at a time while moving at speeds comparable to Predator tanks, with the exception of perfectly flat or paved terrain. The jump jets allow unparalleled maneuverability while the advanced sensor and communications suites mounted on the Captain-class command suits rival those used by sniper teams. Although the sniper teams do have an easier time concealing themselves.
4. Maintenance and supply in the field is an on-going concern. During our deployments, our unit addressed the issue by employing Guardian-class APCs and Hammerhead-class VTOLs to run supplies, spare parts and engineering teams to zone units operating in the field. The latter because, while most zone armor operators are capable of routine maintenance and low-level repairs to their suits, some battle damage requires dedicated expertise. Standard infantry require less on-going "maintenance", but are not capable of navigating Tiberium fields or rapid movement without transport assistance.
5. A Predator tank requires significant modification in order to transport the volume of supplies necessary for continued operation of zone armor in the field, moves approximately 13% slower than the Guardian and is considerably more expensive to construct and operate. Other GDI-operated armored units are considerably slower and more expensive and thus were not considered for this evaluation.
Although the equipment of an equivalent number of troopers with zone armor increases the raw material costs involved by approximately 260-320%, the force multiplier granted by the equipment is significantly greater. Thus, it is my recommendation that the adoption of Zone Armor continue across the board and that Guardian-class armored personnel carriers be used as the primary unit of logistical support.
Sincerely,
Captain Violet Hawthorne-Smythe
[Attachment{scanned/cleared}: 358_mechanized_yz_13_combat_log_and_statistical_analysis.cf]
[Attachment{scanned/cleared}: 187_combined_yz_8_w_combat_log_and_statistical_analysis.cf]
[Attachment{scanned/cleared}: 187_combined_yz_8_e_combat_log_and_statistical_analysis.cf]
[Attachment{scanned/cleared}: 2_osrct_yz_13_combat_log_and_statistical_analysis.cf]
----
[AN:
@Ithillid A hypothetical email from Platoon Commander's character weighing in on the Zone Armor transport/deployment debate, assuming she remains with OSRCT to Q2-2062]
