Prev: Re: What about the UN? - Longish Next: Pre-GenCon GZGs Bash.

RE: SG2 Vehicle Questions

From: "Glover, Owen" <oglover@m...>
Date: Fri, 24 Jul 1998 14:04:54 +1000
Subject: RE: SG2 Vehicle Questions



-----Original Message-----
From: Gary Kett [mailto:gkett@adan.kingston.net]
Subject: Re: SG2 Vehicle Questions

>	 I am having some problem with the SGII  being labled as an
purely an
>"Infantry" game, and therefore its ok to make other elements of the
battle
>less effective. That's like playing a WWII navel wargame and making
aircraft

Gee Gary I don't think anyone has tried to make vehicles LESS effective.
Personally I think the balance for vehicles is fine. I take exception to
people trying to make vehicles MORE effective in the game just because
(well it appears so to me) that they want MORE emphasis on vehicles.
Have you played a game with a single tank on either side? We've done a
number of these and if the vehicles are size 4 or 5 then the turn that
they both are on the board they are at CLOSE range (48 or 60 inches)!!
Generally one of them is destroyed on that turn! So how do you play a
Vehicle on Vehicle game on a 6x4 board?? We use vehicles as a combat
multiplier in a scenario and that works fine.

>less effective, as they will take away from the navel fighting. (If you
>don't want tanks, then don't put them in your senario. They are a very
>important part of that land combat and should not be pushed aside. From
much
>of the writing about snipers and so on I had the idea people wanted to
make
>the game more realistic and detailed. Yet now I read statments saying
that
>by making armoured vehicle preform correctly, the game would become

"perform correctly??" as far as I'm concerned they already pretty much
perform correctly in Jon T's 23rd century.

>unblanced or something. I think any problem that would arise from the
use of
>vehicles in a game would rather come from a poorly planned senario,
than the
>fact that a vehicle is present. It is also difficult to use the
argument,
>that SGII occurs in terrain where vehicles would have difficulty.

Haven't seen this argument yet.

We use vehicles in quiet a few scenarios (at our club Open Day in May we
had a full mounted NSL Panzergrenadier Company - 16 APCs in all!!) and
so far we haven't found the need to modify vehicles and weapon systems. 

It may pay to note that most of the discussion seems to be centring
around TANK main guns and use argumennts based on 1990s technology (ie
autoloaders versus human gunner etc). I tried to point out that there
are a LOT of other weapons systems in the game set. 

The other point is that Trevor Dow started this thread with a query
based on his 'Aliens' style APC. This has the twin turreted PPGs and
twin turreted SAWs. This is a VERY heavily armed APC and is driven by a
Synthetic Person!! All of the standard vehicles in SGII rules are far
simpler in design than this and are a better guide to typical vehicles
in SG.

Owen G


Prev: Re: What about the UN? - Longish Next: Pre-GenCon GZGs Bash.