Re: Star Grunt 2 : Whenit finaly comes together.

On Mon, 26 May 1997, Darryl Adams wrote:

> 2. Different weapons have different abilities between DSII and SGII.
> RFAC-2 kicks ass in SGII! I have almost abandoned them in DSII as they
are
> like popguns, but in SGII our APC's where very vicous. The only tank
in
> the game was a light GEV tank killer that was taken out by a RFAC-2 in
the
> first turn!

That's because you typically send things of different scales against
RFAC-2's in DSII and SGII.  A Medium Tank with decent armour shrugs
off a RFAC/2 like rainwater, but in SGII, you seldom go against Med
Tanks, you go against lightly armoured shells.	Add that to the slight
boost they give infantry (because its the focus of the game) and you
have RFAC/2s being a tad more lethal.

> 3. Ranges for vehicals are almost meaningless. Whiel my friend argues
that
> all the weapons are too short in SGII, I feel that any target bigger
than
> size 2 makes ranges almost obsolete (again my Tank killer was taken
out at
> reasonably long range IMHO)

Ayup; the ranges for infantry are /effective/ ranges, not complete
ranges for the weapon.	If you can see it, and its not dispersed, you
can probably hit it.  But can you hit it hard enough, with enough
firepower, to do meaningful damage?

> 4. POINT SYSTEMS! This is needed for competive play. I tabled 1 squad
(8
> men) of NAC trrops , 2 squads (4 men) Power Armour, 1 tank killer
(size 2)
> 1 command vehical (size 2)1 Inf walker (size 1) 2 grav APC and 1
Attack Grav
> vehical. The Enemy was 4 sqauds (6 men) (1 support squad with 2  size
1
> mobile weapons) , 4APC's, 1 missile APC. I honestly thought he would
win, and 
> since I set the senerio that my squad was a recon force against a
recon in
> force, I gave him a round head start till I brought in th power armour
(by
> grav). It ended up a draw with myself as a partial winner as I manage
to
> halt his company.

BZZT, thank you for playing.  A point system wouldn't have helped you
form a more reasonable force balance.  I don't know /what/ made you
think that your friend would win, I'm impressed he made a partial draw
of it.	Of course, he should have had clearer mission objectives; if a
recon in force had hit a recon unit that big (in SGII, more than a
couple of vehicles is /big/), they would have withdrawn shooting, and
fast.

> 5. Weapons : The use of Heavy weapons as man portable weapons is not
> clearly defined, and makes things like close assults against them hard
to
> interprate (We desided that since I did not reach him in the firt
combat
> move, his free shot allowed it to be used, but it got confused in the
> actual close combat).

Heavy Weapons cannot be used in close assault, as I recall.  Side-arms
and rifles, but not heavy support weapons.

> 6. Power armour rules!

You have them; what more do you want?

> 7. GMS Missiles against infantry is a good thing, better than heavy
> weapons, especially if you have multable launchers	 

As the rulebook says, GMS can't lock onto dispersed targets ... like
squads of men.

-- 
[  Alexander Williams {thantos@alf.dec.com/zander@photobooks.com}  ]
[ Alexandrvs Vrai,  Prefect 8,000,000th Experimental Strike Legion ]
[	     BELLATORES INQVIETI --- Restless Warriors		   ]
====================================================================
		      "There are no innocents."