Re: going to try SGII (long)

Glover, Owen wrote:
> 
> > ----------
> > From:	  Andy Skinner[SMTP:askinner@avs.com]
> > Subject:	  Re: going to try SGII (long)
> >
>	  >> Basically, your 'main' group would use one action to fire
and
> the >commander
>	  >> would use the other action to activate the detached group,
> who could >then
>	  >> fire at a separate target. The main rules tend to imply
that
> if a squad
>	  >> targets something, they all shoot at it.
> 
>	  >I get the impression that this is correct as well, but I
agree
> with your
>	  >use of the word "imply".  I'm not at all sure what it is
> intended to be.
> Actually you need to look at target priorities. And in the majority of
> cases you will probably find that they would have to fire at the same
> target. The exceptions might be if the detachment is closer to a
> different enemy unit. This again limits to some degree the on table
> Godlike omniprescence.

That helps, thanks.  I was really trying to find out how to reach the
same conclusion everyone else was from the rules, and I still don't
quite see how I was supposed to get the correct definition of "weapon". 
I agree this principle helps in the majority of cases.

I have a priority question, though I agree this is usually a judgement
call based on the situation.  If you have two squads near you, but one
nearer than the other and in general more of a threat, what about after
some shooting, and the nearer squad has been suppressed pretty well (say
2 suppression markers).  Can you tell that a squad is suppressed, so
that they don't seem to be such a threat?  I'd think not, and that you'd
keep pounding them.  What do you think?  Can your squad tell the nearer
enemy isn't likely to shoot back soon and go on to someone else?  Of
course, keeping them under suppression is a good thing, too.  

andy

-- 
Andy Skinner
askinner@avs.com