Prev: Re: [GZG] Armoured utility vehicles and IEDs in SG/DS Next: Re: [GZG] Armoured utility vehicles and IEDs in SG/DS

Re: [GZG] Armoured utility vehicles and IEDs in SG/DS

From: "Tom B" <kaladorn@g...>
Date: Thu, 17 Jul 2008 15:40:05 -0400
Subject: Re: [GZG] Armoured utility vehicles and IEDs in SG/DS

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu
http://vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lJoh
n:
<snip all the stuff I concur about>
The game has perfectly good rules for mines.  It doesn't matter for
game purposes whether the mines are built in a factory in runs of
100,000, or assembled by a religious loon in his goat shed.  You can
treat
anti-armor devices as MAK, other devices as HEF, and small shit as
boobytraps from Stargrunt.
--------
[Tomb] I have to re-read the SG2 rules for mines. I've used CDMs and AP
mines but I don't recall the rules for AT mines. I didn't really think
they
had the same flavour as a command-detonated roadside or under-road
explosive
that your driver could dodge or spot. I'll see if what you say makes
sense
for SG. I think it does for DS likely enough.

BTW, victim-operated is a really odd description. Makes it sound like
something you'd do intentionally. <ick!>

I'll likely use something pretty close to what you suggested for the
spotting of mines and maybe for the initiating, though I'll probably
assume
the lengthy aftermath is not germaine to the sorts of scenarios that
would
be interesting as a game. Due credit will be attributed. :0)

T.
-- 
"Now, I go to spread happiness to the rest of the station. It is a
terrible
responsibility but I have learned to live with it."
Londo, A Voice in the Wilderness, Part I

"To argue with a person who has renounced the use of reason is like
administering medicine to the dead." -- Thomas Paine

Thomas Paine


Prev: Re: [GZG] Armoured utility vehicles and IEDs in SG/DS Next: Re: [GZG] Armoured utility vehicles and IEDs in SG/DS