Prev: Re: Re: [GZG] DSIII q Next: Re: Re: [GZG] DSIII q

Re: Re: Re: [GZG] DSIII q

From: <laserlight@v...>
Date: Mon, 13 Mar 2006 15:12:12 -0600 (CST)
Subject: Re: Re: Re: [GZG] DSIII q

>Well, there *could* have been more turns if folks hadn't just jumped
into combat. [snip] That said, I find that in many cases recon becomes
an activation or two, if it's done at all. ;)

Gonna need some really good hidden movement rules to make recon more
important, then.

>> Which reminds me, on Friday night at ECC we had a unit in Company B
break, and the morale penalty was applied to the whole force (ie company
A and the HQ platoon). Is that the way we should have done it, or should
it only have applied to Co B units?

> I'll let OA be definitive on this one, but my guess is that I screwed
up. 

I said "we" because I've read the rules too, and I think it may be a
phrasing issue.  Don't have a copy with me but IIRC it's something like
"when a unit breaks, stress is applied to the other units in the same
command", and "same command" got interpreted as "battalion" instead of
"company" by you, me, Indy, and anyone else there who'd read the rules. 
_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l

Prev: Re: Re: [GZG] DSIII q Next: Re: Re: [GZG] DSIII q