Re: [GZG] Stuart Murray's Games at GZG ECC IX

["Allan Goodall" <agoodall@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 3/20/06, gzg-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<gzg-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
> Date: Sun, 19 Mar 2006 16:52:08 -0500
> From: "Laserlight" <laserlight@xxxxxxxxxxx>
> Subject: Re: [GZG] Stuart Murray's Games at GZG ECC IX
>
> Which brings up a point I noticed in Stuart's Saturday morning game.  I had
> a unit of cavalry which took a suppression...and they stayed there in that
> spot, adding and removing suppressions, for the whole rest of the game.

Now you know why I did away with Suppressions in Hardtack.

Suppression just doesn't represent 19th century combat properly. The
steady volume of fire that results in suppression isn't present in
linear tactics. Even in terrible killing fields like Fredericksburg
you didn't have the type of suppression that happens in SG2.

So, instead of suppression I do Confidence Tests. Shaken, Broken, and
Routed Confidence Levels better model 19th century combat.

> Now, I can see an infantry unit going to ground and freezing under fire, but
> it doesn't seem to me that cavalry would be "suppressed"--or at least I
> can't picture horses diving for cover.

No, there's that, too.

I've seen people add a house rule to SG2 that allows a unit suppressed
in the open to automatically head for cover (i.e. act like Shaken) and
then go suppressed when they reach that cover. I'm not sure I agree
with it, but it would work for a cavalry rule.

--
Allan Goodall            http://www.hyperbear.com
agoodall@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
awgoodall@xxxxxxxxx

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l