Prev: Re: Full Metal AAR and more FMA thoughts Next: Re: [OT] The Ythri

Re: Full Metal AAR and Other Thoughts

From: Los <los@c...>
Date: Thu, 05 Aug 1999 11:13:16 -0700
Subject: Re: Full Metal AAR and Other Thoughts

Thomas Barclay wrote:

> ** It does say figure scale is ground scale and if you can hide behind
> terrain, you are hidden. This I assume also applies to fellow figure
> (ambulatory sentient (or mostly so) terrain elements).

By the way, one thing I'd like to see more of from the Foundries of
GZG/Eureka/Geohex are prone figures. There are already standing and
kneeling figures. If we have some more prone poses (I know there are
some), then given the small number of guys in a FMA scenario, you could
have a depiction of each posture for each figure. (standing, prone,


<snip good summaries>

> FMA is in the process of being formed. What makes sense here?
> Well, a fixed move should exist. We'll call your base move a walk or
> march. Then their should exist the variable combat moves - but there
> really should be more than a single kind. There is a distinct
> difference (in terms of max distance coverable) between a dash from A
> to B and a bounding advance, or a combat crawl. These distinctions can
> (if you are happy with that) be subsumed in SG2 as being part of the
> combat move. But in FMA, they really should be represented.
> I think I might recommend something like this:
> 2-move actions:
> ASSAULT/RUSH (Charge to enter close assault) (2dX for movement in each
> move action) (2d6" for std troops)
> FLEE/ROUT (Race madly away) (2d(X+1 shift) for movement in each move
> action) - you can run faster scared than angry! (2d8" for std troops)

I quick question, doesn't one of your actions in the assault to CC have
be CC? (The flee is cool)

> 1-move actions:
> MARCH/WALK (Normal Movement, non combat)  (X+1 shift") (d8" for normal
> troops)

Would there be a stipulation that the second action cannot be a firing

> PATROL/BOUNDING (Normal Combat Move) (1dX per move) (1d6" for normal
> troops)

If not, then why would anyone ever do this one? (Unless you get a free
In-position or a modifier to your in position attempt)

> CRAWL (Combat Crawl) (d(X - 1 shift) per move) (d4" for normal troops)

Auto in-position or some other defensive or firing advantage?

> DASH (Run from A 2 B full tilt) (2dX per move) (2d6" for normal
> troops)

But you can't fire in your second action.  ?

> If executing any manouvre type that involves rolling more than one
> dice (FLEE, DASH, or ASSAULT), figure must make a roll against
> motivation with his quality die (to represent physical training). If
> he fails, he is gains a suppression (winding). This means if in the
> open, he follows the rules for suppression in the open.

Sounds good. Also how about when a unit routs it automatically must use
Flee for movement if it's going to move at all.

> As a benefit to those executing any combat movement (Bounding, Dash,
> Assault, Rout, Crawl - anything but a normal march or walk basically),
> enemy fires at 1 RB further. (or alternately, you could argue this is
> the normal state of affairs, and marching is the "odd man out" and
> that fire at a unit walking or marching should be at 1 RB closer).

Ahh Ok that's good. Nix everything I asked about various defensive
benefits of your various move types, though my question of which should
support subsequent fire actions still stands...

You have made many good points. I'm heading up to Cape Cod this weekend
for several days and will be bringing all my stuff with me. I got my
10-year old cousin into warhammer 40k a couple of years ago( hey it's
easiest way to get a kid into wargaming so back off!), so with these FMA
rules to test out, it's time to subvert him into some real gaming.



Prev: Re: Full Metal AAR and more FMA thoughts Next: Re: [OT] The Ythri