Re: [SG] Luring players

On Mon, 26 Aug 2002 00:18:25 -0400, "Laserlight"
<laserlight@quixnet.net>
wrote:

>And this brought to mind the second question.	ASL is more complex
>than SG--but the introductory "Guards Counterattack" has a couple of
>companies per side.  In SG, that would be an all day event.  Aside
>from the difference of moving 1 counter vs moving 10 minis, what makes
>it possible to play that scenario in a few hours in ASL when you can't
>in SG?

This is the thing I have against SG2's pace of play. A fairly short
scenario
(say a couple of hours) is about a platoon per side. Even then, I've run
scenarios at GenCon where a platoon per side plus vehicles has taken 3
hours.
Two platoons per side works out to about a good sized game, as far as
the
number of maneuver elements and time to play is concerned. But two
platoon
just strikes me as an odd level of play. I would prefer up to a company
per
side, but SG2 just takes too long. So, there isn't enough detail for a
platoon
per side (unless you adopt house rules and model fire teams) but the
game is
too slow for a company per side.

Squad Leader's main difference is the sequence of play. If I remember
correctly it's something like Rally (Player 1, henceforth called P1),
Prep
Fire (P1), Movement (P1), Defensive Fire (Player 2, or P2), Advancing
Fire
(P1), Rout Phase (P1), Advance Phase (P1), Close Combat Phase (P1 and
P2). In
other words, a player rallies, then fires his guys who aren't moving. He
then
moves his guys, the other guy fires at them (either during movement or
afterwards), then the active player gets to fire anyone left over. He
handles
figures that rout, can move any of his guys one hex, and then both sides
do
hand-to-hand combat. ASL adds more to this, though...

Why is SL faster? 

The sequence of play is one, and probably the main thing. A player
decides
what he's going to do and does it. Prep fire means that those squads
that fire
don't move. Once Prep Fire is done, those squads fall out of the
decision
loop. The player then moves his squads, but he's already pretty much
decided
what he's doing for the turn. No reaction. He's already figured out what
he's
doing for the turn. By the time he's prep-fired and moved, he's
committed most
of his guys. 

In SG2, I've noticed that players tend to react a lot. They decide what
to do
in a turn, but end up having to react to what happens per activation.
The
"sitting back and thinking about what they will do" process happens more
frequently in SG2 than in SL.

A second reason is the combat resolution system. SL uses 2D6 and a
combat
results chart. Now, for the most part the speed of the two systems is
similar.
SG2 requires you to hunt up dice. It also requires a tape measurement,
some
mental work for die shifts, and then finding the right dice out of all
the
different polyhedrals. The dice are rolled and compared. In SL, there
are more
modifiers (and _way_ more in ASL). However, this is offset by the fact
that
you count hexes on a board and roll 2D6. You can give both players two
dice
and they will always roll those. In fact, you can roll dice then work
out the
results. In SG2 you have to work something out to find out which dice to
roll.

Once the dice are rolled, the combat results are much faster in SL. The
chart
tells you what happens. In SG2 you have to roll for armour penetration,
then
roll for which guys are casualties and mark them. Then you have a morale
check. In SL the range of results is less.

The third big reason is that SL isn't a miniatures game. A whole squad
is
moved as one little cardboard chit. LOS is usually a lot easier to
figure out
just by looking at the board. Measuring movement is easier, as you don't
need
a ruler (you just add up hexes). It would be interesting to find out how
quickly SL plays as a miniatures game (lots of folks play it as such).
I'd
guess it's still faster than SG2.

_Hardtack_ (or what will probably be called "The Hardtack Plug-In for
SG2"),
plays much more quickly than SG2. Even though I converted the figure
scale
from 1:1 to 1:3 or 1:5, I can still play a game with 100 figures a side
in
_Hardtack_ in two to three hours.

The reasons for this, using essentially the same system as SG2, are as
follows: regimental formations, wound resolution, no suppressions.
Regimental
Formations allow a player to activate all the companies (think squads)
at
once, as long as they meet certain criteria. This means there is one big
point
of decision, then the player activates almost all of his figures at
once. As
for wound resolution, figures that are wounded are simply removed (which
is
more in keeping with the American Civil War). Finally, by replacing
suppressions with Confidence Tests, morale drops more quickly while
players
don't have to make suppression removal tests.

It could be possible to change SG2 to reflect a SL style turn sequence.
I
think if that was done, you'd have a faster paced game. My personal
belief is
that the alternating activations, which cause us so much grief in FMA as
far
as modelling some real-world situations, is what slows down the pace of
the
game.

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: