Re: [GZG] Help me, Obi-Wan Kenobi!

In DSII, artillery can be powerful, but in my opinion it's not nearly
responsive enough.  You need to be fighting the whole 'deep battle'
with counterbattery assets if you don't want artillery to dominate.
The right house rules that alow aviation assets to attack artillery
would also help.  Besides, as written, artillery is really expensive
and the ammo is as well.

Stargrunt:  What attracted my attention was a couple factors.

First, the supression mechanic.  That simulates what you are really
trying to do on the battlefield quite well.  You keep their heads down
while you maneuver close enough to either apply decisive firepower or
assault the objective.	It's pretty much the basis of all small unit
tactics since the invention of repeating firearms.

Second, realistic depictions of automatic weapons in support of small
arms.  I dislike the representation of "heavy weapons" in 40K.	I also
found that the 40K versions were far less reliable than they are in
real life.

Third, realistic assumptions about close combat that don't overvalue
melee weapons.

Fourth, no demons or heros/psykers.  The version of 40K I played
seemed to be largely about heroic duels with the troops as essentially
window dressing.  I deliberately chose not to emphasise that in my
troop selection, but that was sometimes a handicap against armies that
were built around heroic characters.

On 7/7/08, John Tailby <john_tailby@xtra.co.nz> wrote:
> A tournament is typically 50 or so gamers getting together for a
weekend of
> gaming and having fun. There's some element of competition and
bragging
> about achievements. There's an opportunity to meet some new gamers and
try
> some of your tactics, maybe learn some things about the game and the
hobby.
> The competitive aspect isn't any different from a poker night. If
that's not
> your thing then you are not alone, but it's an aspect of the hobby
people
> enjoy.
>
> Principles apply--whether a tank flies or not is surprisingly
> irrelevant to how one uses it.  Flanks are flanks, massing fires is
> massing fires, and keeping a reserve ALWAYS matters regardless of
> whether you've got WWII paratroopers or orks riding pigs--unless
> you're playing with some sort of extreme time limit.	The
> tactic-breakers tended to be the more fantastic elements--teleporting
> eldar commandos with instakill weapons that ignore cover, giant
> demons, etc.	Seriously, is a Vindicare assasin (that's the one with
> the spiffy rifle, right?)  that much different from a sniper team on
> the rooftops of Baghdad? At least when it comes to effects, that is.
> Space Marines are tougher than normal infantry, but WWII and modern
> tactics generally worked with them.  Then again, my force was built
> around tactical squads with heavy weapon and armor support, rather
> than flying chainsaw troopers.  And even those are easily equated to
> the traditional cavalry role, just with technological replacements for
> the horse.
>
> You are right, I have seen many historic and modern tactics applied in
40k.
> Refused flank, attacking in escellon, concentration of fire, use of
APCs to
> protect the dismounts from anti personell fire. Combined arms with
infantry,
> vehicles and supprting gunships works really well. Sniper teams make
> excellent cover fire units and can pin down enemy units.
> The teleporting commandos of doom are now gone. The speed of attacks
has
> gone down now and really fast attacks have to be conducted by very
lightly
> armoured vehicle mounted units. They are a tough army to field if they
get
> it wrong they get caught in the open and shot to bits. An aerial
assault in
> Huey's Nam style won't work if you end up going into a hot landing
zone.
> It is possible to field armies that are hordes of fanatic infantry
hopped up
> on drugs with ill maintained equipment "Orks". It is also possible to
field
> jump troops with short range assault weaponry but they can be
countered by
> supprting you frontline units with counter assault units.
> Some realworld tactics have been simplified to try and make it a fun
game.
> Some of my gaming group tried dirtside and enjoyed the generic nature
of the
> rules but found after a few games that the games seemed to have
artillery as
> the god of the battlefield producing some very WWI games where you
needed
> heavily concealed infantry to sport for ther artillery that then
hammered
> anything that was seen.
> What mechanisims attracted and retain your enjoyment in Stargrunt?

-- 
"Thousands of Sarmatians, Thousands of Franks, we've slain them again
and again.  We're looking for thousands of Persians."
--Vita Aureliani

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu
http://vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l