Prev: Re: Honor Harrington Ships Next: Re: [SG] Overwatch

[SG] Overwatch

From: kaladorn@m...
Date: Sun, 10 Nov 2002 16:25:32 -0500
Subject: [SG] Overwatch

I wrote:

>[Tomb] Misquote :)  (I only ever called OW a single action and a 
>action that I recall, this two action thing is either something you 
>or Sr. Fulton dreamed up - I don't see it as unbalancing as 1 

Adrian responded: 

Hang on a minute, if your OW requires only a single action, then 
couldn't I fire and go on overwatch?

[Tomb] RTFP (Read the foregoing paragragph I wrote). OW is quite 
clearly indicated therein as a fire action. 

If that is the case, then that opens the door to breaking the 
"weapons can't fire more than once per activation" rule.

[Tomb] Were that the case, yes. Note that was not what I suggested. 

s that what you intend to be the case, or did you have some other 
kind of limitations on going on overwatch, like:

1. Overwatch is the last action a unit may take in any given 
activation (if you go on overwatch, your activation ends).

[Tomb] This isn't a necessary limitation, but any other action will 
remove an overwatch counter, so this is usually how you do it. It 
would be not terribly useful to place it, then do another action. 
(Now, I might bend this to allow comms while on OW, etc but no squad-
style actions - spotting might be appropriate). 

2. Overwatch requires only one action.
3. A unit may NOT go on overwatch if it has already fired during the 
same activation.

[Tomb] Explicit in what I said originally, OW is a fire action. Since 
it is illegal to take two fire activations in one activation, that 
was covered. 

So, you couldn't go on overwatch and then move.  Nor could you shoot 
and go on overwatch.  You could, however, move and go on overwatch, 
or go into position and go on overwatch.

[Tomb] Here, in a short list, is what I'd allow with OW on:
1. Reorg (you can do it while suppressed)
2. Treat wounded (note, this means the medic isn't also able to fire 
on OW... every person treating a wounded teammate I would rule out of 
3. Spot (This is part of what OW is!)
4. Leader using transfer commands or executing comms. 

I think that's about it. 

I think having overwatch cost one action under these circumstances is
reasonable.  I don't think you should be able to shoot and go on 
overwatch in the same activation.  

[Tomb] You never could. :) 

Otherwise, overwatch should indeed cost two actions - to prevent 
people shooting and going on overwatch in the same activation...

[Tomb] I don't think I'd want it even under that description. 1 fire 
action per activation per figure period. 

You might respond "Ok, my rifles fire (action 1), but my SAW goes on
overwatch (action 2)".	This is too complex - keeping track of which 
weapon in which squad has fired and which hasn't.  I'd rather keep 
the rule as simple as possible, and say "the squad is on overwatch or 
it isn't".  That way, the squad could use its overwatch action to 
fire a special weapon (like a GMS/L) if an enemy vehicle came into 
view, or its smallarms against an enemy squad.

[Tomb] Utterly and completely disagree. I can fire support weapons 
separately, ergo I can go on OW separately. But in the same vein, 
each costs an action. SAW goes on OW, 1 action. Rifles go on OW, 1 
action. Total, 2 actions. Just like firing SAW and Rifles separately.

[Tomb] Overwatch should be limited to not allow multiple fires from 
the same figure in a turn. It should be voided by suppression. It 
should be voided by MOST other actions. If split up, it should follow 
a paradigm similar to that of split fire (since you are separately 
commanding some of the troops, it requires another action to put in 
place). Adrian, we agree on most of the details. (And if you'd caught 
the "fire action" part of my original paragraph, you'd have realized 
that! *grin*). 


Prev: Re: Honor Harrington Ships Next: Re: [SG] Overwatch