Re: still FMA-40k

Thomas Barclay wrote:

> > You have just described the difference between Veterans and
Regulars,
or
> > better still Elites and Regulars - they are a lot more confident
than
> > their opponents. This is in the rules already. Sure, they're better
at
> > shooting as well *IF* you give them long-ranged weapons - but if
their
> > ranged weapons are pistols, the emphasis will be on close range
fighting.
> 
> Not that I want to enter a 40K discussion, but in general terms, I 
> don't have a problem with specialist assault troops getting close 
> combat shifts without upping troop quality.  I don't want my Assault 
> Squads to be expert long range fire troops just because they've had 
> CC training. 

<G> My point with the post you quoted was that in *WH40K*, the only
difference between elite CC troops and elite ranged troops is the
equipment they have - *not* weapon skill or morale (true for Space
Marines, Imperial Guard and Eldar; haven't had time to check Orks yet,
and I don't think it is true for the 'Nids or Chaos).

A SM Devastator has the same WS and BS, and Ld, as an Assault trooper. A
Dark Reaper has the same WS and BS, though lower M and I (both due to
heavier armour - ie, equipment rather than training), as a Striking
Scorpion or Howling Banshee (again Shooter vs Close Assault).

The same effect applies in SGII. If you give your assault squads close
combat weapons - swords, pistols, shotguns, flamers - instead of assault
rifles, they won't *be* very effective long range fire troops *because
they don't have long-range fire weapons*.

Why do we need to introduce special morale rules for assault squads in
SGII, when not even WH40K has such rules for them?

Regards,

Oerjan Ohlson
oerjan.ohlson@nacka.mail.telia.com

"Life is like a sewer.
  What you get out of it, depends on what you put into it."
- Hen3ry