Re: [sg] Starting Forces

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1

On 21 Mar 2001 agoodall@canada.com wrote:

> On Wed, 21 March 2001, Derk Groeneveld wrote:
> 
> > I was wondering about this. Should one use these specialists as
> > individuals or as members of the command squad? In the latter case
having
> > EW active will eat up half the command squad's activations?
> 

> Yes, it does eat up the activations. So, putting them as a separate
> squad results in more flexibility.

Seperate squad or individual figure? (a la sniper and such)

> If your group allows free form force creation (that is, you can choose
> your own organization) then there's no real reason to put them in the
> command squad. If you create scenarios, this can be an interesting
> tactical problem to throw at a player. 

Except that it makes sense for them to be there ;) And yeah, we do
pretty
much free-form. But if things get out of hand I'm sure people will
pounce
on me ;)

And as for the scenario, yes it makes for interesting dillemma's.
   
> > Since the gurkha's all carry IAVR, I was wondering how to use this?
Do you
> > have, for a squad of 8, an effective 8 shot IAVR, which doesn't
'die'
> > until the last figure?
> 
> That's a good question. The distribution of IAVRs in a squad isn't
> covered. It seems odd that, as strictly written, it is implied that a
> trooper with a SAW getting killed means the squad loses the SAW, but
> that miraculously all the IAVRs in a squad are carried by the last
guy. 

It seemed odd to me as well, but I couldn't think of another useful
alternative. In my pathfinder squad there's only one guy with a tube,
then
this is much easier.

As for the SAW gunner etc, I rather like the cross-training rules on the
stargrunt website.

> One way to do this is not to worry about it! That's usually what I do.
I
> assume that within a game turn, a soldier can be easily stripped of
his
> IAVR. It makes things simple. 

Makes sense...
 
> This leads to the question of letting one figure pick up the weapon of
a
> downed comrade. I have house rules on my web site to handle that. 

I think those are the ones I ran across. The ones where quality
determines
the amount of cross-training?

> Another is to give each figure an IAVR (or find some other way of
> distributing them) and if the figure is a casualty, you lose the IAVR.
> But, then you need to use missile figures to indicate the figure that
> fired the IAVR. 

All ghurka figures have IAVRs, hence my question. Otherwise it would be
the same as all other support weapons. I really think there's too many
counters on the table already. Do we really want more? 

> > I think below 7 figures, you'll find yourself seriously lacking
firepower,
> > especially after the first casualty.
> 
> Although there is a question of 2 small 4-man teams having twice the
activations as 1 8-man team. And 1 suppression marker eats up an action
for all 8 figures, while if you had a smaller squad it takes two
actions. I think you'd find that smaller squads will result in more
suppression results, and are more effective.
> 
> I haven't heard a reply from Jon as to my asking how he envisioned SG2
being played. I wonder if fireteams should be modelled as small squads,
or if a squad is considered to have fireteams but just isn't modelled as
such.
> 
> > Also, is there anything to stop me from putting more SAW's in my
squad,
> > thus getting more dice? I'm not planning to, but I'm curious what
the
> > thought on this is. (I'd say 'munchkin' ;) )
> 
> Two SAWs per squad is actually necessary to model some historic squad
> formations. I wouldn't have a problem with 2 SAWs per squad. More than
> that and you are getting into munchkin territory. 

True... However, with two SAWs _and_ cross-training, you get rather
endless firepower?
 
> Having said that, there's a scenario on my site, "Plasma Ambush" that
> has one side consisting of 4 power armour guys carrying nothing but
> plasma guns. They were nasty against the APCs in the scenario, but
were
> not overpowering against infantry. Plasma guns have a D6 firepower, so
> they were rolling Quality die plus 4D6. That sounds nasty, and it was
if
> they hit, but at any kind of range or in cover they had trouble doing
> damage. They didn't come over as unbalanced at all. 

Mmmm. Interesting :) We haven't really used power armour, yet, over
here.
I'm still looking for nice figs, myself.

> So, while outfitting all your squads with D10 firepower SAWs is
> definitely munchkinism, you might find other support weapons to result
> in interesting situations. For that matter, it's not munchkinism if
you
> give one guy a squad of 8 SAWs but that's his only squad against
> overwhelming odds. The scenario set up can fix any kind of
> "munchkinism". 

Well, I have no problem with two support weapons. I rather like SAW and
plasmagun combination myself. It's just that when you got two SAWs, AND
a
plasmagun in every squad, I think I'll have all my opponents turn pale
when I start rounding up dice ;)

Cheers,

  Derk
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Made with pgp4pine

iD8DBQE6uQNfJXH58oo6ncURAvzZAKCIVSDfBWOVjANwoCJZ0ULR44q/xQCZAXdH
Dt6Px4wf6Q36kxNDfI5sP58=
=4x0L