RE: [SG] at 15mm (The Joys of Sixmm) [CLEAN STAMP]

Correct me if I'm wrong but it sounds like you are playing all your
games
along the approach of 'last man standing' style? Are you using scenarios
with diferent objectives for each side?

We regularly play Coy level games (as part of our ongoing Esperance
Campaign)with one side having perhaps a Mechanised Infantry Coy with
some
support elements; a dozen or so squads and vehicles and will often throw
in
two or three tanks as support (and targets for the oppositions GMS!).
The
defender will have usually about half of this but some sort of balance
element; artillery, Air support mines etc. In most of these games we
generally find the board breaks into 2 or three separate game spaces; as
long as we keep track of the game turns accurately the play continues
almost
as three simultaneous games. Otherwise some players can end up waiting
for
over half an hour to move their few squads...

Carefully thought out and balanced scenarios seem to go a lot further to
the
game success rather than the size of the game. Anyhow, that's how we
find
it.

Cheers,

Owen

> -----Original Message-----
> From: sportyspam@harm.dhs.org [mailto:sportyspam@harm.dhs.org]
> Sent: Sunday, 27 February 2000 2:50
> To: 'gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU'
> Subject: RE: [SG] at 15mm (The Joys of Sixmm) [CLEAN STAMP]
> 
> 
> 
>   Well, I have to admit I have a pretty limited SG2 
> experience, maybe 20
> or so games, but from the games I've had...
>   3 small squads/side [or less] pretty much breaks down into who gets
> lucky/unlucky with the clear suppression rolls.
>   6 squads 4-10 members and a couple vehicles/side seem to be too
> dependant on dice rolls still.  A couple lucky penetrations 
> on the armor
> and maybe a squad advantage means the other side unlikly to be able to
> recover.  Spending a couple hours to have a game basically 
> decided by a
> couple 1's being rolled, and at non-critical times to boot, isn't
> really cheering.
>   We've had a lot of success with 8+ squads + armor/side.  I 
> want to play
> an 18 squads [100 infantry] + armor /side game to see how it goes.
> 
>   Thats my impression anyway, others in the same games might have had
> different impressions...  I guess it depends on who rolled 
> those '1s'.  :)
> 
> 
> 
> On Sun, 27 Feb 2000, Glover, Owen wrote:
> 
> > OK, I've got to ask, why are smaller games of SG 
> unsatisfactory? By smaller
> > do you mean smaller than Coy/10 suads a side? Or smaller 
> than Pl/4 squads a
> > side?
> > 
> > Owen G
> > 
> > > -----Original Message-----
> > > From: sportyspam@harm.dhs.org [mailto:sportyspam@harm.dhs.org]
> > > Sent: Sunday, 27 February 2000 11:30
> > > To: gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
> > > Subject: Re: [SG] at 15mm (The Joys of Sixmm) [CLEAN STAMP]
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > 
> > > On Sat, 26 Feb 2000, Allan Goodall wrote:
> > > 
> > > > On Sat, 26 Feb 2000 08:02:03 -0500, "Imre A. Szabo" 
> > > <ias@sprintmail.com>
> > > > wrote:
> > > > 
> > > > >The biggest problem with SG is that it takes too much time 
> > > to field battalion sized forces...  And 6mm let's you field 
> > > battalion sized forces...
> > > > 
> > > > Well, SG isn't intended for battalion sized games. That's 
> > > what DSII is for...
> > > > *S*
> > > 
> > >	Well, smaller games of SG II are often unsatisfying.  Of 
> > > course, having
> > > to call it a night half way through a game is even more so.  :)
> > > 
> > 
>