Re: [DS] Genetically Enhanced Infantry

----- Original Message -----
From: "Fulton, Beth (CMR, Hobart)" <Beth.Fulton@marine.csiro.au>
To: <gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu>
Sent: Monday, September 03, 2001 7:08 PM
Subject: RE: [DS] Genetically Enhanced Infantry

> G'day Noel,
>
> >When determining costs for a unit,
> >GE Rifle Teams are worth 100 points.
>
> I'm assuming you use the DS infantry costings as rated as a basis for
this,
> not an "updated" version right? Just having a quick glance at them (so
sorry
> if I've goofed here) they look like super PA (PA range, damage
capacity)
> that can range fire close assault and call in artillery. On top of
that
> their effectiveness is greater. If you're going with that I'd say
something
> closer to 140pts is probably more appropriate, though 100 would be OK
if
you
> drop the artillery observer ability - which I'm not sure I agree with
> anyway.

I was thinking of this applying in two ways - and really it is the only
"Noel" stretch in the lot. First, it is meant reflect a much higher
degree
of training and awareness amongst the troops. Second, it is meant to
make
them a bit more feared force on the battlefield - frankly, I like my
tanks
and scoff and infantry - I wanted them to be something that any
commander
think twice about. I restricted the average element to the d6 simply as
a
way to keep it from _too_ unbalancing a game.

> Another thing that came to mind is, why they should get 5 damage
> capacity? I agree that their "enhanced ability" may make them move and
fire
> further with greater accuracy but I can't see why it should give them
an
> armoured hide... they still bleed right? I don't know the references
you
> gave so sorry if I'm barking up the wrong tree here.

Evans nailed this one. The GEs would exhibit much higher pain
tolerances,
increased ability to take action with debilitating wounds, etc. It was a
hallmark of some of fiction reading I have done, so that is why it has
crept
in here. For game play, I see them as an infantry unit that would relish
close assaulting powered armor.

> Personally (so feel
> free to ignore) I would've gone for something more like the following
for
a
> GE rifle squad:
>
> Confidence as you state

Nice to see that seems to work - it morphed a few times to reach that
point.

> More effective fire as you state

I had a little trouble with that for a bit also.

> 8" range
> close combat and ranged fire ability
>
> I just think you're trying to do too much with one squad.

Could be.

> >A GE APSW TEAM...(GE ANTI-ARMOR TEAM)
> >Any non-command GE APSW
> >Team (GE Anti-Armor Team)
> >can request artillery
> >fire, rolling as if it were a
>
> Once again I'd drop the artillery observer ability and then your
costings
> would be about what I'd say off the top of my head.
>
> >A GE LOCAL AIR DEFENSE TEAM ...
> >are worth 115 points.
>
> I would've said about the same.
>
> Do you intend on writing up any "history" for these guys?

Yes. I have a basic setting with the intention of inserting them into
our
group's developing campaign. I was also picturing that the occasion
platoon
inserted into the ranks of the major powers. Remember I noted they were
rare - I do not intend them to replace our infantry - merely to become a
couple of indentifiable units to carry through our campaign, and add
some
story.

> I'd love to hear how they play out.

I should get my website sorted out sometime here in the future, and they
should get some background included therein.

> Cheers
>
> Beth

Thanks for the comments.