RE: SG II Paradrop, orbital drop

I would say that *most* of our group (we have about
five regular SG II players) interpret it the same way
you guys do. We do have one guy that likes to nit-pic
and find an advantage anyway he can. 

He also *never* takes any big chances. After losing a
squad in its apc, he *never* uses his apcs to deploy
his squads, only as support vehicles. After having one
jump go wrong, he *never* uses jump troops.

Not that there's anything inherently wrong with that. 
:-)

I'll tell you, this scenario didn't go well at all for
me.

On the jump, the command squad got the squad leader
down ok, then lost the GMS/P, AGL and EW troopers.

The next squad lost the squad leader and one rifleman,
but the two suppression that were "forced" on me
pretty much left them in the lurch.

My power armor squad also lost its squad leader and
one other trooper.

I believe that if not for losing five actions from
those suppressions, things would have gone in a
different direction.

--- "Glover, Owen" <oglover@museum.vic.gov.au> wrote:
> Well, i think our group interprets the Suppression a
> little differently. If
> teh Squad Leader was injured then a Suppression is
> appropriate due to the
> effects of a lost leader; confusion etc. Otherwise
> the simple breaking of a
> leg or arm is not going to send the whole squad into
> a grounding hugging
> confused fit.....I'm not a jumper but I've spent a
> lot of time on LZs and
> often a guy injured on landing isn't noticed until
> he doesn't make it to the
> rally point or someone hears his screaming! In
> peacetime, safety
> requirements usually lead to a flurry of activity as
> medics and ambo's look
> after the guy. On operations though I'm betting it
> will be a different
> story. Rally, Head Count, find the injured. This
> doesn't sound like an
> example of a Suppressed squad/section.
> 
> In game terms the repercussions would include a
> necessary Re-Org action as
> well as I would say the dispersed troops would need
> to rally on the injured
> troopers location rather than some other location of
> choice.
> 
> Was the rest of the game played in the same vein?
> The pointing out of of
> 'obscure' rules or was this a one off?
> 
> How did the rest of teh sceanrio go?
> 
> Owen G
> 
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: Cleats Balentine
> [mailto:kevinbalentine@yahoo.com]
> > Sent: Thursday, 27 January 2000 5:45 AM
> > To: GZG Forum
> > Subject: SG II Paradrop, orbital drop
> > 
> > 
> > All right, I used an air drop for just the second
> time
> > over the weekend, and my opponent sprung a rule
> change
> > on me from what we have played in the past.
> > 
> > In the rules section that covers the drops, it
> says
> > that when a '1' is rolled, the soldier is wounded
> just
> > like if the squad had been fired upon. So, my
> opponent
> > says that means they get a suppression. If sarge
> buys
> > it in the drop, two suppressions.
> > 
> > Is that the way you guys play? I can see an
> argument
> > for both sides.
> > 
> > 1. Your buddy is injured in the drop, of course
> that
> > leads to some confusion.
> > 
> > But,
> > 
> > 2. At the rate injuries occur in airdrops, some
> > injuries are expected to occur.
> > 
> > I always interpreted the "just as if the squad had
> > been fired upon" to be a modifier to the
> "wounded."
> > But I could well be wrong. I don't really care
> which
> > way the rule is supposed to be ... I just don't
> like
> > it when the other guy knows what a scenario calls
> for
> > and waits until something happens, then says, "Oh
> > yeah, btw, you're boned because I found this rule
> that
> > says, 'you're boned.'"
> > 
> > :-)
> > __________________________________________________
> > Do You Yahoo!?
> > Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
> > http://im.yahoo.com
> > 
> 
__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Talk to your friends online with Yahoo! Messenger.
http://im.yahoo.com