Re: [GZG] Stargrunt II rules questions
From: "Allan Goodall" <agoodall@h...>
Date: Sat, 8 Apr 2006 21:55:01 -0500
Subject: Re: [GZG] Stargrunt II rules questions
On 4/8/06, firstname.lastname@example.org
> Date: Sat, 08 Apr 2006 21:04:49 +0200
> From: Oerjan Ariander <email@example.com>
> No, IAVRs are unguided. That's what sets them apart from GMS/P (and
> the reason why IAVRs aren't affected by the target's ECM).
> Sorry, you lost me there. As far as I can see there's no contradiction
> between what I described and the revised mechanic you mentioned...
Okay, I understand. My initial reading of your description was
different from my revised method. I think I understand now.
> My vote would be for replacing *all* the SG2 heavy weapons to-hit
> with the corresponding DS mechanics, but the way you phrased your
> questions kinda excluded that option...
Do you mean to use the DS2 mechanics, or the suggested DS3 mechanics?
I haven't paid much attention to the DS3 discussions. I have played
DS2 exactly twice, and both games were with GW Space Marines figures I
no longer own. I have quite a few Renegade Legion vehicles as well as
some Brigade turrets to use to modify the RL figures. One of these
days I intend to paint them up for DS2. It's going to be a while
before I get to them, though.
So, should I look at the DS2 mechanics as written, or those found in
DS3? If the former, do you recommend using chits or converting it to
dice (which would be my preference).
I have no objections to converting the SG heavy weapon mechanics to
those of DS, other than the fact that I'm not very familiar with the
DS mechanics. There are lots of advantages to using similar mechanics.
> As long as the smoke doesn't blow back towards the launching
I wonder if there will ever be a way to create smoke that can be
penetrated by one side but not another. Perhaps some kind of molecule
that scatters light unless polarized properly, and all a vehicle would
need to do to polarize the molecules is emit some sort of electrical
signal. I don't know, I'm just brainstorming. The point is that we're
talking about combat 200 years from now. The list has no problem with
FTL drives and biological spaceships, so they should be able to handle
a "smoke screen" that's opaque from the outside but somewhat more
transparent on the inside.
I'm just thinking out loud. I suspect that even if this is feasible it
would make for a fairly unbalanced game unless there's some sort of
> Which is one of the reasons why current smoke screens are as wide as
> are, covering roughly a 90-degree sector.
That's good to know.
Allan Goodall http://www.hyperbear.com
Gzg-l mailing list