Re: Star Grunt 2 : Whenit finaly comes together.

Darryl Adams wrote:
> It was a throw together game, with models we had available. I honestly
> thought numerical suriority in people and vehicals would rule the day.
> Technolagy and leadership had a big impact, but it was a close assult
of
> power armour against a support platoon that defined the engaagement.

Well then, you learned something, didn't you?  Further, you had an
enjoyably balanced game that you just happened to win.	Hmmmmm,
interesting, complaining about things /working/.

> What about the free attack?
> 
> "Oh sorry old chap, you can not use that RFAC/1 on a tripod. Not
sporting
> you know"
> 
> Bzzt. Realism check.

Bzzzzt, realism check.	You want to fire an RFAC/1, essentially a
honking-big autocannon, into the mass of your troops fighting hand to
hand (or at least /very/ short range), intermingled with your own squad?
Helllooooo.  This is a Bad Idea(tm).

The free attack vs the incoming CAers is not /yet/ a CA, so I have no
problem with it.

> What about geographic locations. The rules we saw stated that they
could
> be used, and are treated as normal combat, with impact the same as an
art
> strike.

Eh, no, I don't seem to recall the use of GMS vs arbitrary ground
locations; buildings, bunkers, things with signatures, yes, but not
arbitrary ground locations and expecting to do as much damage as an
/arty/ barrage.  Methinks you saw House Rules.

-- 
[  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."