Prev: Re: Attack fighter versus shields Next: Re: Attack fighter versus shields

[FMA] Unengaging game

From: "Tom McCarthy" <tmcarth@f...>
Date: Fri, 3 Sep 1999 08:51:08 -0400
Subject: [FMA] Unengaging game

Played an uninspiring game of FMA skirmish last night for about 2 hours
(2
turns) then talked for an hour about what would have made it better.

Table size / concentration of forces: The table was 8' x 4' (240cm by
120
cm) and each 'side' had only 12 figures in 3 teams which started about
3'
(90 cm) apart.	Each team engaged their direct opposites with no
support.
At 12 figures a side, a 6' or even 4' wide board might have been
appropriate.

Isolation:  Isolation distances seemed very short.  It really hit home
when
a Green trooper 7" from a visible friendly had to test to act.	That's
about
14 yards.  You may think in the rush of combat that's quite a distance
but
to compare it to an American football game, I'd think most passes go
further
than that.

High Explosives, Long Grenade Throws and no Spotting:  No spotting meant
each model acted as if all target positions were perfectly known.  Long
Grenade Throws meant you could throw a grenade 30" (60m ground scale), a
significant fraction of the board width after a combat move.  Since
they're
grenades with a 12" radius of effect and scatter less than 12",
targeting
the ground in the middle of a squad was quite effective.  After all,
they're
all within 6 to 10 inches of each other to avoid being isolated...  8
grenade casualties and one guy shot after 2 turns.

Seriously Dangerous Overwatch:	A bit extreme perhaps, but we were
allowing
as an activation a combination of Combat Move/Overwatch and then
resolving
overwatch as a full automatic shot.  One guy who tried to draw line of
sight
to the enemy got hit 5 times and by some fluke was only suppressed 3
times.

On discussing the game, one comment was that the game scale was within
the
close range band of SG2, but these two forces on that terrain would have
not
have closed to that range until having decisively pounded each other. 
They
were just too well-armed to risk closing with each other like that.

We agreed that denser terrain or urban terrain might have made for a
better
game.

We definitely needed spotting to reign in grenade strikes against hidden
troops, and to open up isolation distances (quality OR 2x quality + line
of
sight ?).

We also noted that it's rare for a single unit to wipe out multiple
units in
SG2 or other GZG games; a prevalence of grenades made that a common
threat
in this game and meant those who weren't cautious on turn 1 (of their
first
game of FMA skirmish, for some) paid a very heavy price.

I am assured that many people enjoy FMA skirmish.  Without those
reassurances, I would not play the game again.

Prev: Re: Attack fighter versus shields Next: Re: Attack fighter versus shields