Re: SG II Snipers and the spirit of the game

>>    Allan, that really doesn't address the problem, though.  We've
been
talking about
>>ways to get around the AUTOMATIC suppression of a sniper's target.
>
>Oops. That's what I get for reading the list when I have a bad head
cold!
*L* 
>
>I thought the problem was whether automatic suppression could occur
beyond
the
>furthest range band.
>
>I really don't have a problem with the automatic suppression. Based on
what
>I've read about World War 2 combat, it seems reasonable. 
>
>But don't mind me... it's the Dristan talking! *L* 
>

Hope you're better soon :)

I agree - I don't have a problem with the automatic suppression rule
either.  I follow that up by saying that I almost never use the actual
sniper rules in a SG game, and when I do, they are entirely driven by
the
scenario.  I never allow snipers as per the rules to appear in an
"ordinary" game - since I'm of the Canadian/UK/Australian "snipers are a
specially trained element available at battalion level or above" school
of
thought.  Now, I add in my whole discussion on Marksmen here at the same
time, though (I discuss this in my last post, as did Tom Barclay,
yesterday/the day before).  The marksmen rules we propose account for
the
"better than average rifleman who is told to go off and be a sniper"
situation, and take care of the complaints about "automatic supression"
(gets rid of it all together, actually) in most games, other than ones
in
which, for scenario driven reasons, you bring in "SNIPERS" in all their
glory and with all the rules as written.

Hopefully this accomodates everyone and doesn't require more complexity
than necessary, but then again, if that were the case this list wouldn't
be
any fun and we'd have nothing to debate :)

Adrian

Adrian Johnson
ajohnson@idirect.com

***************************************

To win one hundred victories in one
hundred battles is not the highest 
skill.	To subdue the enemy without
fighting is the highest skill.

Sun Tzu

***************************************