Okay, call me a heretical fool, but I haven't yet gotten either of these two
and I'm wondering what the general overlook of them is without having to
buy one and/or break the shrink wrap over at Military Corner.
Generally, I think I'd want to play out ground actions with at least a fair
amount of scale. As far as I can tell, Dirtside works better for this than
Stargrunt -- i.e. Dirtside seems to be more of unit-based actions
whereas
Stargrunt seems like it's man-by-man. This seems further borne out (a
little) by the descriptions on the back of the books, where Dirtside says it
works for "a few platoons up to a batallion" whereas Stargrunt works for "a
few squads up to a company". In addition, Dirtside has support for actions of
scale like aerospace landings and the like, whereas Stargrunt proclaims itself
to be a Full Metal Anorak system which (based on both the movie metaphor and
what I see on this mailing list) seems like it's pretty microscale in the way
the action unfolds.
So, if I'm aiming at linking the game in with Full Thrust troop-landing
actions and want to put at least a bit of large scale into it, the way I
understand it is that Dirtside is closer to what I'm aiming at than Stargrunt,
no?
While I'd hardly call Stargrunt a man-to-man game, for anything over 50
men on a side, use Dirtside. For anything with more than 5 vehicles, look to
Dirtside. For vehicles larger than modern tanks, look to Dirtside.
That's my impression, based on more than a score of Stargrunt games, and
relatively few Dirtside games.
For GW veterans, it's like Warhammer 40K (SG2) vs. Epic / Space Marine /
Titan Legions / Adeptus Mechanicus / Epic 40,000 (DS2), and games like
Mordheim and Necromunda relate to the FMA Skirmish systems under discussion
/ development.
> So, if I'm aiming at linking the game in with Full Thrust
Yep sounds about right to me.
> Generally, I think I'd want to play out ground actions with at least a
Stargrunt IS unit based, but as you say, by squad. It doesn't go down to
individual man scale in a big way (beyond casualties and an individual's
contribution to the firepower of the squad).
> So, if I'm aiming at linking the game in with Full Thrust troop-landing
Yes, that would be correct.:)
> So, if I'm aiming at linking the game in with Full Thrust troop-landing
I'd say that you solved your own question, but I'll add a bit anyway.
Dirtside is the next logical step down in scale from FT, and there are
existing rules for integration of the two (albeit somewhat rough).
Then if you find you need to downscale from DS, you can pick up SG later.
> stiltman@teleport.com wrote:
Well, I'd probably say "get both." I've played (and enjoyed) both, and found
them to be really good games. I actually play both with the same miniatures
(1:300), which also saves money (and table space, at least for SG) (and
painting time, which is my LEAST favourite part of miniatures gaming). For
integration with FT, I'd choose Dirtside first (although, of the two, I
SLIGHTLY prefer playing Stargrunt), mostly because it has integration rules
(although I think that the MT
integration rules are out of date - does anyone have updated
space/volume rules for troop storage?).
As for "FMA System" that refers to the die roll mechanics, NOT the scale. DSII
also uses (at least most of the) FMA system, which means primarily that it
uses polyhedral dice from D4 through D12, and handles relative abilities by
shifting die type instead of by die modifiers (at least, that's the brief
explanation).
Either way, welcome to the surface, where the REAL wars are fought...:)
Well, seems like I'm a little behind everyone else in adding my thoughts....
I'd actually say that Stargrunt is a better game for playing out the
troop-landing side than Dirtside.
Dirtside is heavily armour oriented whereas Stargrunt is infantry oriented.
So, the questions to ask are do you want to play out the landing of a
Company, Battalion or a Brigade/Division? Do you want to play it all on
one table?
Look at your FT Fleets that you are going to play and their carrying
capability. Can you land a whole Battalion in one hit? And is that a Battalion
of Infantry, Mech Inf or Armour?
My recommendation would probably be to use both! Otherwise you might limit
yourself perhaps a bit too much.
Cheers,
Owen G
> -----Original Message-----
> Brian Quirt <baqrt@mta.ca> wrote:
How you base your infantry to do this? SG infantry are usually based
seperately and DS are usually grouped in 3 or 5's. So if one is going to use
the same little guys for both games what do you do? I'd think that using a
bunch of individually base guys for DS would end up being very fiddly. But on
the SG side, it wouldn't look as nice to have your squad loose three soldiers
but still have all eight minis on the board. I've been
thinking about using my 1/300 infantry for both games (and maybe FMA
Skirmish!), but they've been sitting unfinished until I figure out how I
want to base them.
> On Mon, 10 Jul 2000 10:49:32 EDT, "A Scruffy Drummer" writes:
> least for SG) (and painting time, which is my LEAST favourite part
> using a bunch of individually base guys for DS would end up being very
> loose three soldiers but still have all eight minis on the board. I've
I'm planning on doing this as well (at least for now), and my answer is:
Just don't use the same figs for each game. Just the same scale figs.
1/300 infantry are really cheap. I'm willing to leave 40 or 50 of
them in seperate bases for SGII, and simply buy more for DSII. Compared to the
cost for 25mm or even 15mm, its worth it.
Perhaps basing them as some have done fighters. Use earing post
on/through
the base and the clip on the bottom of the figure?
-----
Brian Bell bkb@beol.net
-----
> -----Original Message-----
> fiddly. But on the SG side, it wouldn't look as nice to have your
I've
> been
Perhaps basing them as some have done fighters. Use earing post
on/through
the base and the clip on the bottom of the figure?
I think I once saw a post by Andrew Skinner (sp?), he was using GW epic troops
and taking a paper hole puncher and punching out little circles from magnetic
stripping. He'd then base the 6mm troops onto the little circles with super
glue. I remeber
seeing a picture of a space marine based this way on his/a
website.
I think he said he was going to paint a cookie sheet green, and
make some hills/forests/terrain using more magnetic sheeting on
the bottom (and top for places that figures would stand on).
He called it a travel version for miniatures.
I thought it was a cute idea. You might be able to do something similar (using
20mm square steel sheets for bases in dirtside).
Daryl
> Perhaps basing them as some have done fighters. Use earing post