Re: [GZG] [SG2] Momentum

I think that the Crossfire concept of Movement/Initiative/Interruption
should work well enough. 

IMHO I think you could still carry on with the Single action for each
squad as that very much equates to the actions in Crossfire.

Loss of Initiative and Reactive Fire are the two elements that is the
basis of the game mechanism in Crossfire. Failure to get a Suppression
in Direct Fire results in loss, as does fail to Rally. In Stargrunt
would this equate to No Casualties or perhaps a result of Potential
Casualties but doesn't matter if you cause the casualties?

For the other player I think you would need to permit continuous
Reactive Fire but how to represent the No Fire result if the reacting
unit fails to get a PIN?

The other major feature element of Crossfire is the "no ruler" concept.
That is there is no limit to movement and no range restrictions on most
weapons. As you mentioned Initiative is lost once the activating player
has failed in some task and that includes Suppressing an enemy in ranged
fire or losing a close combat. Implications to Stargrunt? Well, on a 6'
x 4' playing area with reasonable amount of terrain most troops are
within at least extreme range so the range comparison shouldn't cause us
too much issue.

Overall I think a few playtest games would sort out a few kinks but on
first impressino I think it might work very well indeed!

Good catch Damo!

Owen

> -----Original Message-----
> From: gzg-l-bounces@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU 
> [mailto:gzg-l-bounces@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU] On Behalf Of Damo
> Sent: Monday, 4 February 2008 9:26 AM
> To: gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
> Subject: [GZG] [SG2] Momentum
> 
> 
> Background:
> 
> I've played quite a few games of Crossfire (CF) both per the 
> rules as  
> well as using various 1:1 tweaks.  I find the games to be very  
> dynamic and fun.  CF seems to generate two responses among 
> people who  
> try it out.  You either get "Love It!" or "Hate It!"	I love it.
> 
> For those who have not played CF the basic concept of the rules is  
> that you continue performing actions until you fail at something or  
> are suppressed with reactive fire.  "Failure" typically means you  
> tried to roll to un-pinn or un-suppress one of your stands 
> and failed  
> to do so.  Other sorts of failure include failing to score a	
> suppression on an enemy stand when you fire.	There are other sorts  
> of "failure" but you get the idea.
> 
> Reactive fire occurs while you are moving.  If an enemy stand can  
> draw LOS to your stand as it moves the enemy may open fire on you.   
> If the enemy fire results in a suppression your stand stops where it	
> is and initiative passes to your opponent.  Initiative flips 
> back and  
> forth between the players until the scenario objectives are complete.
> 
> The Question:
> 
> If you were to apply this concept (which I'll call "momentum" 
> for the  
> time being) to SG2 how would you do it?
> 
> Would you perform single actions with your squads until the opponent	
> does something for initiative to pass?
> 
> Would you keep the game as-is and allow the activating squad the  
> ability to make a motivation check to continue performing additional	
> actions?  If this motivation check fails the game passes to your  
> opponent...., etc.
> 
> D.
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gzg-l mailing list
> Gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU 
> http://mead.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU:1337/cgi-> bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l
> 

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
http://mead.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l