Prev: Re: [SG] Discussion about weekend questions - Vehicle HW's Next: Re: [SG] UNSCMC Interface Company TO&E

Re: [SG] The Tuffley 500

From: Adrian Johnson <adrian.johnson@s...>
Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2002 00:03:01 -0400
Subject: Re: [SG] The Tuffley 500

>Subject: Re: [SG] The Tuffley 500

>And, a vehicle should be able to move, stop, disembark troops, and move
to a
>slightly better position. This can't happen because the rules don't
have a
way
>of stopping one unit's activation to allow the activation of another
unit.

A vehicle *can* do this, just not all in the same activation.

Using your "look at the overall game view..." or the "overall turn view"
idea, while it might take a couple of activations to do this, it can
happen
and not in an unrealistic way.

>>No.  What I don't like is that a vehicle which stops and unloads
troops can
>>move every bit as far as one which spends the whole turn driving as
fast as
>>it can.  If the vehicle has to slow/stop to let the troops out, then
it
>>shouldn't move as far as one which doesn't.  
>
>And Adrian and I believe that since the vehicles are moving _so_ much
slower
>than they could realistically, the extra movement could easily be made
up in
>the five minute game turn. 
>

yep.  that's how I see it.

any way we look at it, this mechanic is going to feel somewhat
"artificial", and I like it better with the infantry paying the cost of
disembarking.  It feels better.

there certainly isn't a "right" answer for this one - good points on
both
sides.

>>On the other hand, the troops can't get back and load up in one
activation
>>(unless they luck out on combat move)
>
>Sure they can. They only have to be within 6" of the transport. In
fact, they
>can fire at the enemy and move back 6". They can then be loaded into
the
>transport on the transport's turn. The squad gets an extra 6" movement
for
>free.

that's what bugs me about the vehicle paying the cost.

Having said all that, this discussion was in response to Tom's original
question about who pays the action, the vehicle, the squad, or both.  I
like least the "both pay, and both get activated at the same time"
approach.  I could live with the "vehicle pays" over that, but I think
it
makes most sense having the troops pay.

Oh well.  YMMV.

***************************************

Adrian Johnson
adrian@stargrunt.ca
http://www.stargrunt.ca

Prev: Re: [SG] Discussion about weekend questions - Vehicle HW's Next: Re: [SG] UNSCMC Interface Company TO&E