Prev: [FT] SML absorbers Next: Re: Counter Battery

Re: FMA SG2 CC Question

From: Los <los@c...>
Date: Wed, 25 Aug 1999 11:35:13 -0700
Subject: Re: FMA SG2 CC Question

Thomas Barclay wrote:

> My decending list of preferences...
> 1. I say no CC. The guy didn't plan it out ahead. He gets there and
> takes
> a point blank in the face. Maybe next turn he can get a  leader to
> give
> him an action. I don't think a firefight a point blank is cheesy. I
> have
> friends to whom this has happened to for real. After all firefights
> take
> place at 1 or 2 meters just like they do at 50 meters. (remember the
> apricot story?)
> ** Problem is the other unit had already activated - which probably
> really means was on his way to that position. So he has no action
> left. Let him fire anyway? Makes the defender look like a flying
> Wallenda, with two full move actions then a fire action (effectively).

When you say "other unit" do you mean the attacker that started this
inthe first place or are you talking about the defender? If both are
activating for the turn then there is no porblem either a leader sedns
of them another activation or they just pick up where they left off last
turn. (I'm probably missing something here...)

> ** My problem with a firefight at under 2m (10m in SG2) is that I was
> under the impression that in FMA systems that close assault implies
> knives, pistols, and in SG2 grenades. So you really are having a close
> range FF by running a CC.

My impression of CC is that they are using any and everything, just
happens to be at point blank. CC in games is already far more prevalent
than it is in real life.

> 2. He can CC after a +2 reaction check but the defender gets a free
> reaction fire on him. (maybe no threat check on the defender or an
> option
> fora free withdrawl?)

> ** Even if the defender has activated?

A defender can always fire on a attacker entering CC If the attacker
to make it to the CC during a combat move (per rules) so this is just an
extension of that situation. The defender has had plenty of time to see
the enemy coming since it took an entire activation to get there as
opposed to a successful first action combat move. No difference. Of
with them both arriving in theame turn then a reaction test is in

> Why penalize the defender for poor planning on the attacker's part?
> ** Well, I wouldn't really want to, but the defender was (probably if
> we look at this as continuous rather than broken up by fake
> activations) moving to that positions, and the attacker just moved to
> it too.

Well the defender got there first hence the importance of initiative and
picking who gets activated when.

> Here is what I eventually decided made sense:
> If you will be moving to within 3" of an enemy squad or figure (6m in
> FMA, 30m in SG2), then effectively you will be going for CC. If you
> decide to try this kind of a movement on the second half of your turn
> after doing something else, I'll let you make an initiation check
> normally (your normal roll). When you arrive however, your opponent
> will be allowed to attempt to engage you coming in - a free reaction
> fire.

OK this is more or less my option two.

> Note, in general, if you can't see the close assault coming (it comes
> through woods or around a corner), I make you automatically stand for
> it - no roll required. Otherwise, after the enemy initiation, you
> should test to stand.

I do this too, hence that messy situation with the Kra'Vak and that
vehicle the other night.

> Here is another question:
> You resolve CC initiation and stand-for-charge depending on odds
> ratios. If playing with spotting or double blind, you have no idea how
> many guys you are charging. So how do you resolve this? Buddy could
> think he's charging  one guy, or he could be charging a platoon - he
> has no idea. I'd say if you don't have a good idea, test at +3
> (simulates the fact uncertainty is worse than knowing in some cases).

Interetsing. You know if you use hidden units then  low spotting
(successful) rolls could only reveal some figs (Gotta work on that one).
Anyway a good rule.


Prev: [FT] SML absorbers Next: Re: Counter Battery