RE: [SG2] close assault: more of the same

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Barclay, Tom [SMTP:tomb@bitheads.com]
> Sent: Friday, November 17, 2000 10:30 PM
> To:	Gzg Digest (E-mail)
> Cc:	Barclay, Tom
> Subject:	[SG2] close assault: more of the same
> 
> On one level, I agree that SG2 and DS2 should be harmonized. I think
that
> spending the activation of an assaulted unit makes sense. It makes
both
> rulesets equivalent, and on the other hand, it actually makes sense
that
> your action is gone - you actually did something - you fought a fierce
> close
> range combat! As for this being a penalty to unactivated units, I have
two
> thoughts: 1) What were you doing with an unactivated unit in CA range?

> 
[Bri] Unexpected move by the opponent. A hidden unit was activated after
you activated your unit. A unit uses its activation to combat move to
within
CA range and then Command reactivates the unit for the CA.

> and
> 2) He who hesitates is lost. This might actually require shrewd choice
> from
> the attacker because he might choose to assault a unit waiting to
act...
> which also places a choice before the defender when activating if this
is
> a
> risk! 
> 
[Bri] This is especially true if you are using house rules for Overwatch
such as yours (see http://www.stargrunt.com/rules/ovwatch.html).

> And I'm pretty confident that a unit that has taken a close range
> charge and engaged in a short range melee is likely to be incapable of
> action. 
[snip]

[Bri]
Or even if they had to make a quick withdraw from a CA.

> ------------------------------------------
> Thomas R. S. Barclay
> -----------End Orignal Message-------------------------------
 
My comments above marked by [Bri]

---
Brian Bell
bkb@beol.net
http://www.ftsr.org/sg2/
---