Re: [SG2] morale/CC

At 11:53 AM 1/23/01 -0500, you wrote:
>Morale:
>	Morale is weak in SG2. Some people like having a game where
units
>don't route with 10% casualties like real units sometimes will. Some
people
>like fighting to the last man. And others don't. (Me included). Allan
took
>some good steps towards remedying the problem with morale. There was a
>cascading morale rule suggestion (don't recall if Allan was using it)
but it
>seemed like too much rolling to me. 
>	Platoon morale is actually a good idea. Platoon commanders
sometimes
>also bug out without losing that great a percentage of their force...
(This
>isn't such a big deal in platoon sized forces... victory conditions can
>serve well here)...and this matters most in a company sized game.
Although I
>would certainly NOT do it as the recent suggestion was made by rolling
for
>every squad on the board.... that isn't how it happens. If one platoons
>morale reaches a point where they refuse to advance or will pull out,
then
>test other platoon commanders for morale (and possibly the company
>commander). You don't need to test the units. If the company commander
>decides then is the time to withdraw the force, then everyone goes. If
other
>platoon commanders morale drops to the point they don't feel they can
>advance, then they don't and the company commander may have to
withdraw.
>Individual squads in other platoons leave or stay based on their
platoon
>commander or the company commander (and of course, their own
casualties, but
>that is a whole separate issue).
>	In a case like this, any higher level of command (platoon
commander
>if it is a platoon, company commander if it is a company) should be
able to
>rally his broken forces (or attempt to) and get them back into the
fight.
>History has plenty of stories of units that rallied, returned to a
fight
>after an initial fright/retreat, and gave a good accounting of
themselves. 
>
>2) Close Assault
>Close assault has lots of little idiosyncratic behaviours. Think on
these
>ones:
>1) Why do you retreat from CA before you even know the enemy will reach
you?
>2) Why do whole units retreat or stay? (I think this is simplicity
reasons,
>but in real life some retreat, some stay to the bitter end from time to
>time)
>3) Why do you have to be base-to-base when close assault is grenades
and
>high volume fire at close range? Would 2" away, 4" away or 6" away not
be
>close enough? <Make ALL combats under 6" close assaults???>
>4) Why do you find your Nike's when fleeing? Or when advancing against
>opposition? You move far faster than you might in an unopposed advance.

>5) Why can you pull up short and shoot the crap out of your pursuers
without
>any sort of leadership test to rally your routing troops?
>6) Why is the retreat 6" and the follow through a combat move?

>7) Why are odds not accounted for in the close assault combat? <I mean
the
>actual fighting, not the die roll to stand>. One elite trooper can
pretty
>much slaughter 20 untrained soldiers.... or 2000... if he rolls a 5 or
>better...

What we do is roll against each defender : In your example, the elite
trooper will have to roll 20 times (1 time against each defender). I was
playing that way until I notice that the rule said only 1 roll per
soldier... We tried the official way to do it for a while but revert
back
to what I said. What I like about this way is that you can still hope to
kill the elite trooper until your last untrained guys is down.

>8) Does anyone else notice that CA rules seem to have been written for
>assaults on fixed positions/points of tactical significance? They seem
to
>assume that the defender WANTS to hold. Many times, I see them used to
rush
>units in the open who have ZERO interest in holding their piece of
grass
>(usually because the attackers outnumber them). The parts that speak
about
>"moving to the objective" for the attacker before a followthrough don't
make
>much sense if your objective is _the_enemy_unit_ rather than a piece of
>ground. Perhaps the idea of assaulting units in the open was not really
>considered when these were put together. But it is the most common use
I've
>seen for them so far. 
>9) Why are units running from close combat still combat effective? I'd
think
>a re-org might be necessary as a first action after a retreat from CA.
Heck,
>if the retreat was involuntary, many times in history, soldiers have
>discarded weapons, armour, ammo, packs, webgear, etc. when trying to
beat
>feet from an onrushing enemy. 
>
>Interestingly, I've seen many green forces advance to 2" from the foe
and
>fire, because at that range their fire IS dangerous, whereas a CA would
get
>them killed. And the difference is what? Their opponent doesn't fight
back
>(until after he's shot), no rolls to initiate, more chance of killing
the
>enemy.... and all when within a distance I'd call "close combat range".
>Fascinating....
>

We had try a game where one side had only PA and the other had mostly
lots
of untrained and green. What you describe tend to happen a lot. The
untrained were at 2" most of the time...

>Anyway, I can see areas to work on here. 
>------------------------------------------
>Thomas R. S. Barclay
>Voice: (613) 722-3232 ext 349
>e-mail: tomb@bitheads.com
>
>2001: To the New Millenium! The next thousand years
>are MINE. 
>------------------------------------------
>
>
>