Re: [SG2] New Rules Playtest Results

On Thu, 05 Jul 2001 21:40:38 -0400, adrian.johnson@sympatico.ca wrote:

>Hi,

Hey, there.

>I think this is probably too much - though I would certainly have to
try it
>in play to see.

I've changed my mind and think it's too much. *L*

>The section "Casualties to Vehicle Occupants" on page 39 discusses
this.
>If crew or passengers survive, they are out of the wreck (bailing out
comes
>as part of the survival roll).  
>
>"...thus in the example above the MDC/3 would have an effective class
fo 6,
>and only troops rolling 7 or better would get out of the wreck..."
>
>The important bit is the "get out of the wreck" at the end there.  If a
>figure makes their survival roll, they "get out of the wreck".  

This is where I asked the question. The rules don't specifically say how
the
figures get out of the wreck, whether it's on their own activation or
automatically. You're inferring that they get out for free with bailing
out
being part of the survival roll.

The only mention of "getting out of the wreck" is during that example.
The
reason anyone rolling 6 or less won't get out is because they are dead
or
wounded. I read that as part of Jon's "plain speech" writing style,
emphasized
by it being in the example, not specified as a rule. No mention is made
if the
unit is considered suppressed, activated, or anything like that. 

Having said that, I originally played it that squads got a free bail
out. I
think I was inferring the same as you. However, I saw some weirdness in
this,
where a vehicle blew up, the squad bailed with casualties, immediately
activated and attacked the squad that shot the vehicle. They took a
Confidence
Test, but the rules suggest they do NOT get a suppression (at the very
least).
So, therefore I let them bail for free, but they got suppressed for
being shot
at.

>But what happens if the vehicle is attacked again, by an enemy who
knows
>there is a squad hiding in it?

The attacker can attack the vehicle even if its disabled. I let them do
this
anyway, as there are times when you might want to completely destroy a
vehicle
for victory conditions.

>Would you roll as normal, and have "disabled" or "destroyed" results as
>normal?

That's what I've done in the past. Although I think for one game I had a
second disable count as a destroy to take into account the fact it's
just a
sitting duck at that point. This makes some logical sense, as it's the
vehicle
equivalent of two wounds equalling a death.

>How many times could you "disable" a vehicle with a squad hiding in it
>before it doesn't provide cover, or is too dangerously damaged for a
squad
>to stay in.

As per the above rule, twice. *L* The second penetrating hit would
destroy it.

>if a vehicle is disabled, the occupants can stay in it (if they pass
their
>confidence test).  ANY further penetrating hit on the vehicle (either a
>disable or a destroy result) causes the vehicle to be destroyed, and
the
>occupants have to make another set of survival rolls.

*L* Okay, so I'm answering as I read and we've just concurred!

Allan Goodall		       awg@sympatico.ca
Goodall's Grotto:  http://www.vex.net/~agoodall

"Now, see, if you combine different colours of light,
 you get white! Try that with Play-Doh and you get
 brown! How come?" - Alan Moore & Kevin Nolan, 
   "Jack B. Quick, Boy Inventor"