Re: going to try SGII (long)
From: Andy Skinner <askinner@a...>
Date: Mon, 09 Mar 1998 08:18:51 -0500
Subject: Re: going to try SGII (long)
First, let me apologize if I got over-defensive last week. I bought the
game because of the squad level, so wasn't surprised that that's what it
was about. But I didn't need to feel like you were gunning for me.
Second, customer service kudos to GeoHex. KR sent me a replacement for
my book, which had some smeared pages. I'll use my smeared copy as a
loaner, to get people interested.
> No. According to the rules an individual can only fire once per
> activation, not once per "action", therefore you have to choose where
> you'll utilize him.
OK, let me make this a suggestion, then, and leave it at that. When I
read the rules, I saw that a squad might have (for example) 4 rifles and
1 support weapon. Then I read that no "weapon" may be fired more than
once per activation. Both the dividing fire question (and I did assume
that if it was allowed it would take another action, so it wasn't
something for nothing) and the power-armored guy firing both weapons
were me trying to figure out how a squad could use its resources, not
firing a weapon more than once per activation. I'd suggest a
clarification to what "weapon" means. I think my problem, rather than
trying to use the guys as individuals, was that I was abstracting the
squad stuff too much. :-)
I'm tending to agree with you now about the support weapon/small arms
guy, even though I think the powered armor guy does begin to be
believable.
[about splitting fire]
> No. And once again this probably more of a playability issue. With
> our rules we want you to get through an entire game each time you
> play.
I'd also agree about playability. We ourselves didn't like that we got
into cover and then just sat and shot.
> Look up the rules on detachments if you want to lay down this type of
> fire. The rules allow you to do it, just not in the way you've
> mentioned. You have to remember that the two "actions" you've
> mentioned are "gaming abstractions". In real life I doubt a squad
> leader can know that the fire of half his men has pinned the enemy
> and now he will get a morale loss by firing the other half!!
Not sure what you meant here. I certainly wasn't suggesting splitting
fire so I could roll the quality die twice against the same target! I
haven't read through the detached elements stuff much yet, so I'll take
a look. I guess it makes sense to me that, if they are going to shoot
at something different, they'd have to take some time first to tell
everybody who they're supposed to be shooting with and at.
Even though we didn't finish the first game, we (my wife, too) enjoyed
it, and could see some of what we want to be different.
I expect our games will:
*continue to use sides that differ somewhat, though some will be more
similar than others. The two most similar will probably be the old
Imperial Guard figures vs the new ones.
* not use any special characters
* not emphasize close assault (though I'm torn here, because I will want
to use it for my tyranids, and I do realize that it represents something
realistic in getting an enemy that's in cover)
I _might_ reduce the Space Marines to full light armor, not powered.
But I like the tacticals as light and the termies as heavy, so I'm not
sure.
And when I get pictures of our battle, I'll put them on my web page.
andy
--
Andy Skinner
askinner@avs.com