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 8:01 PM
Subject: RE: [DS] Genetically Enhanced Infantry

<<SNIP>>
>
> >I restricted the average element to the d6 simply as a
> >way to keep it from _too_ unbalancing a game.
>
> That is some concession, but personally I still wouldn't have it in,
but
> that's just me.

And you make a fine argument at that. I will remove it for our first
test
and see what we think.

> >Evans nailed this one. The GEs would
> >exhibit much higher pain tolerances,
> >increased ability to take action with
> >debilitating wounds, etc.
>
> I think he also had a point about having to be in one piece to get to
use
> those abilities ;)
> To me the resolution of DS kind of makes it hard to capture this facet
of
> what you're after. If you're really stuck on the idea try 4 chits
instead
of
> 5, I still think a guy in full PA is gonna be harder to take down than
a
> flesh and blood human no matter what his lineage or training.

I do see PA and GE abilities as comparable. Afterall, the rules even
indicate that the chits do do not represent "losses" but "...causing
sufficient casualties that the team is no longer an effective combat
entity." Shots that would wing an unarmored human and put them down (leg
or
arm shots) that would leave a PA trooper functional would also leave a
GE
gunning for more. This is pretty significant compared to normal line
infantry, and hence the increased chits.

But, I will give you that with a straight shot to the head or chest 
your
money is best bet on the PA.

We will probably stick with 5 for our first test(s) - probably only a
single
platoon in the company - and see how it goes. I have been wrong before.
:)

> >For game play, I see them as an
> >infantry unit that would relish
> >close assaulting powered armor.
>
> That can have more to do with being insane than tough ;)

That too. :-)