RE: [SG2] morale/CC

Tom Barclay wrote:

> 2) Close Assault
> Close assault has lots of little idiosyncratic behaviours. 
> Think on these ones:

	Close assault is a bit weak.  Hopefully Bugs Don't
Surf or SG3 will clarify a bunch of this stuff.

> 1) Why do you retreat from CA before you even know the enemy 
> will reach you?

	Err?  What do you expect the grunts to do, wait until
the other guy's hand grenades are rolling into their foxholes
and then decide to get up and run?  The time of decision is
when it looks like the other guy is coming, not when it's
apparent he won't make it there.

> 2) Why do whole units retreat or stay?

	Simplicity, just like why can't I have a unit with some
green members and some veteran members.

> 3) Why do you have to be base-to-base when close assault is 
> grenades and high volume fire at close range? Would 2" away,
> 4" away or 6" away not be close enough?

	I agree that base-to-base is unreasonable, but I think 
6" away is a bit much - that's short range for green troops!
	I'm going to push for some house rules around here such
that 3" is the minimum distance between unfriendly, unsuppressed
units - any closer and the non-moving unit gets a free shot
(possibly at reduced firepower or quality) on the moving unit.
But I don't think performing close assault on an unsuppressed
unit should be allowed by the rules.
	Regardless, 2" should be more than enough for close
assaults.

> 4) Why do you find your Nike's when fleeing? Or when advancing
> against opposition? You move far faster than you might in an 
> unopposed advance. 

	Given that SG2 has standard movement rates of 120 meters
per 5 minutes, I don't see a problem that units can sometimes
move much faster when they need to.  If anything, I think the
restrictions on travel movement should be reduced quite a bit.

> 5) Why can you pull up short and shoot the crap out of your 
> pursuers without any sort of leadership test to rally your
> routing troops?

	You can't.  Routing and broken troops can't fire on anyone
who hasn't fired on them first.
	Oh, you mean why can a unit voluntarily fall back from a
position and then turn around and shoot people?  This makes sense
to me - it's a fighting withdrawal and some booby-traps.  Sure,
it's abstracted a bit, but so are a lot of things in SG2.
	As a house rule, I agree with the idea that close assaulted
units should be suppressed or activated or both, and units that
perform an involuntary retreat should be disorganized at the end
of the retreat and automatically out of coherence.

> 6) Why is the retreat 6" and the follow through a combat move?

	To guarantee that fleeing units have a good chance to get 
away.  Isn't retreat supposed to be faster than pursuit, anyway?

> 7) Why are odds not accounted for in the close assault 
> combat? 

	Good question.	I like the "extra fighter reduces opponent's
die" house rule, myself.  Simple, and reasonable, but a good fighter
can still get lucky and take all his opponents down.  (We also play
that you beat everyone who rolls under you, even if you get beaten
by someone else.  Simulates what I've seen of large melees and other
close actions).

> 8) Does anyone else notice that CA rules seem to have been written for
> assaults on fixed positions/points of tactical significance? 

	Yep.

> 9) Why are units running from close combat still combat 
> effective? 

	See above.  Also, a unit that drops down to BROK by failing
morale tests (happened to me) is no longer combat effective, and
that's a single bad roll on the morale test for a ST unit.