FMA Skirmish test results

Ran some sessions of FMA Skirmish at the club over the weekend. Each
game was 
two sides of 5 figs which was very manageable. One was a defense attack
and 
one was 'advance and hold'.

Several points came up
1) COMBAT move is mentioned at one point, but the rules for it are
missing. 
:)

2) Single supression. The DSII players said they preferred the 'two 
suppressions' system. As it stands you can't actually 'slap a figure
down' - 
they will usually have at least one action. If that is the game intent
then 
fine but if people aren't really 'suppressed' in this game as they are
in 
DSII

3) Isolation rules - we nbeed to have some small list of exceptions to
this 
rule - one player in the defense/attack game wanted to deploy a lone
sniper 
on the defensive side -as the rules stand that's not really feasible.

3) This is the major one - everyone feels there is a distinct imbalance 
between Reaction and Overwatch fire. It was generally though they should
have 
if not actually the same 'cost' then approximately the same. As things
stand 
this is not the case. To elaborate :-

Reaction fire : Cost - 2 actions (one activation). Gain - 1 action (FIRE

action)

Overwatch fire : Cost - 1 action and a restriction on the other. Gain -
2 
actions (AIM and FIRE actions).

People couldn't see why Overwatch fire gets the benefits of an aim
action 
whereas reaction fire doesn't. Furthermore as it stands Overwatch fire 
'breaks' the 'fire once every so often' idea - it was felt that the rule

about firing should be changed so that once a figure has fired, it may
not 
fire again until it's next 'full' activation - a further restriction
upon the 
'other' action in Overwatch that was felt would balance things a little
more.
Also on this topic, there was confusion about exactly when things are 
resolved. Reaction fire as stated happens between the targets first and 
second action - does the same restriction apply to Overwatch or does it
have 
the further advantage that it can be imposed at any point in the targets

activation?  It is feasible that a target could end it's first move in
cover 
or out of sight - negating reaction fire. If it then moves out of cover
in 
it's second action does it then become vulnerable to Overwatch fire but
*not* 
Reaction fire? Why should that be? 

So there you go. The core move and fire rules worked well and were
quickly 
picked up - even the detailed fire rules being easily followed. However
it 
was felt that Overwatch fire was too 'strong' - I have to admit I 
particularly got scragged by it due to the AIM benefit, but I also
managed to 
rule double 1's twice on armour rolls when I only needed 2's so I guess
it 
just wasn't my night.

			TTFN
					Jon