Re: [SG] Assaulting from IP and another thought

On Wed, 3 Jul 2002 12:31:36 -0400, "Thomas Barclay" <kaladorn@magma.ca>
wrote:

>2. There should, IMO, be a modifier (an 
>additional +1) for attacking IP troops. Why? 
>Those IP troops have a clear advantage in the 
>early going of the close assault and their IP 
>status is easily assessible. Anyone attacking is 
>doing so at a disadvantage. A penalty to the 
>attack initiation test seems indicated to me. 
>Discussion?

I personally think it adds "yet another modifier", the kind of thing
that adds
to creeping game complexity. 

I also debate the "easily assessible" part. If a squad is dug in behind
some
bushes and is IP, it's quite possible that the attacker wouldn't see
them as
being in IP. They would see bushes, they would see muzzle flashes from
the
bushes. They wouldn't know the squad had dug some shallow rifle pits
behind
the bushes, for instance. 

Then you get into the question of whether a squad out in clear terrain
in IP
should require a modifier or not. I wouldn't think so. Seeing a squad
hugging
the ground out in the clear shouldn't make you more "fearful" of
attacking
them. For that matter, why give a modifier for IP troops when you don't
have a
modifier for troops under hard cover. Assaulting forces in a bunker, or
behind
a stone wall, should be scarier than assaulting guys in some shallow
rifle
pits out in the open.

This opens up the idea of adding modifiers to the close assault Reaction
Test
based on the circumstances, thus the "creeping complexity" I fear.

I can see your point, and I suspect you'll end up using it with your
group
(*grin*) but I wouldn't bother, myself.

Allan Goodall		       agoodall@hyperbear.com
http://www.hyperbear.com

"At long last, the earthy soil of the typical, 
unimaginable mortician was revealed!" 
 - from the Random H.P. Lovecraft Story Generator: