From: Barclay, Tom <tomb@b...>
Date: Fri, 5 Jan 2001 20:16:58 -0500
Subject: FMA Skirmish Questions
Getting ready for Lancaster.... Thinking about FMA (from the manuscript) has formed in my little cranial cavity some questions about the game, about what the original draft manuscript means in a couple of places and about areas it is contradictory or silent. You'll note some of them are reflections on similarities/differences with SG2 and some oddities that these produce. I realize FMA Skirmish is a different ruleset, but I prefer that rules that can be homogenous (DS2/SG2/FMAS) are homogenous where possible. So, here are some questions/thoughts for feedback. Perhaps even St.Jon^3 will have something to add. 1) GROUNDSCALE Quote: in FMA,everything is as it appears to be on the table - if you can hide your figure behind something, he is hidden - if not, then he isn't! Thought: Does this mean we must have kneeling, standing and prone versions of every figure? It sure seems to me that I'd want to be able to kneel behind a brick wall or go prone if out in the open (or perhaps behind the same wall so as not to be seen). If this is a totally WYSIWIG game, Jon's foundry better crank up to make some of the popular figs (mercs, NAC, ESU, etc) in lying and kneeling poses.... or this had better be rethought a little. Also, note the game system currently has _NO_SUPPORT_ for kneeling or going prone. That seems like a huge shortage in a skirmish game. 2) RANGE BANDS Thought: Even with doubled range bands (aimed fire) a combat rifle can only fire 72" which translates to 144m. This would be 14" in SG2, which isn't even the end of the second range band of regular troops. It is far short of 400-500m commonly acheived today on ranges with standard rifles like the Steyr or M-16. Even if we assume that the figures aren't hitting as well as they would on a range (reasonable), 144m seems a bit short for a rifle! Thought2: Range bands as a product of troop quality would be much more appropriate (or so went the logic in SG2, and I agreed with it there). Base a range band off of unit quality like in SG2 and have each weapon have a multiplier. It wouldn't make a lot of sense that in SG2 troop quality had enough impact to affect range (because it is the training of the troops shooting, not the quality of the weapon system like in DS2) but that the same quality would not play a big role in range in FMA. 3) SKILLS Questions: How do skill levels and experience level/quality of a figure relate? Do I use the quality/experience die or some weapon skill die for firing my weapon? 4) MOVEMENT Question: No combat move? Are all move modes (crawl, duckwalk, walk, jog, run, run-for-your-life) equivlanet? Thought: Moves have been setup differently (8" reg infantry, 10" light inf) than SG2 where many other things parallel. Yet PA still moves 12". This is interesting. But Slow PA moves 8". So the fastest PA is now not twice as fast as normal infantry, only 50% faster. There are a number of rationalizations for this but it is an interesting point. 5) SUPPRESSION Question: Wasn't there a discussion of multiple suppressions? Was there any consensus? Thought: Allowing up to 3 like SG2 does would effectively allow you to pin a figure. If you did this, more than 1 suppression should pin a figure in the open (rather than having them flee for cover). The figure would, if the game system supported it, go prone of course! Note: There is a reference to a COMBAT MOVE die in the suppression in the open section when no such move exists in the movement section. Also there is a reference to supression marker(s) in this section... suggesting the thought of multiple suppressions was in mind when this was written. Thought: In urban warfare, you might choose to suppress a doorway or window by firing through it to cover an advance (rather than just overwatching). This should be an option - you could then place a suppression counter on that opening and anyone using that opening to engage a target or to move through would be attacked at the point where they became visible. Question: Which is right? Suppression vs. Heavy armour Quote: Example: a trooper in Heavy Powered Armour has an armour rating of D12x2 (ie: a multiplier of 2). Later in the work, heavy PA is given a d12 for armour. Which is correct? 6) DETAILED FIRE RESOLUTION Thought: If the game was to support kneeling/prone characters, your cover die would be determined by a combination of how much of you was exposed and the type of cover you are using. 7) CLOSE COMBAT Question: If CCs are resolved immediately, you can't quite ever get a "furball" or gang up on someone - they only ever end up fighting one at a time (so a PA trooper can't be swarmed by five guys with sticky mines...). Is this correct? If so, should there be coverage of "joint activation for close assault"? 8) OVERWATCH Thought: The rules as written let you trade an action (which might have followed a fire action!) with an OVERWATCH action - which is both an AIM and a FIRE effectively. Considering how harsh the reaction fire rules are (penalizing you an action effectively), it seems overly generous to make overwatch fire aimed fire if the action beforehand was not an aim! It also would be good to stipulate the action preceding OVERWATCH can't be a firing action. 9) ISOLATION Thought: Try this excercise. Put the newbie green guy at the back of a squad. Move the squad in order. The newbie will probably become isolated whereas in actual real-life he'd just be humping along behind the other guys glad to be the furthest from danger (being a newbie, he wouldn't realize the danger to tail-end charlie). The rules make Isolation rather easy to acheive. I might be tempted to up the isolation distance to greater than one move distance! I understand the goal with this rule, but I think the implementation leaves something to be desired. Plus isolation in the open would probably have you seek cover rather than just stand there (it does happen, but as many people go for cover or back away as just stand stupidly). 10) COMMAND RADIUS Thought: In SG2, the squad leader can activate his whole squad from 60m without a communications roll. In FMA, it's limited to 24m if he's elite, 16m if he's regular. Something seems askew. Killzone or Warzone (always confuse the two)had a concept of forces with or without headsets and such a concept might apply here. If you have local comms, you should be able to activate for say 50-100m in urban terrain or 250m otherwise. At least the 60m in Stargrunt (I assume they have in mind for you to use local short range commo for this... I can't imagine yelling 60m - yelling should be 2"). 11) VEHICLES Thought: In SG2, vehicles were intentionally made weak - the game wasn't about vehicles. So they could move and fire one gun generally - the whole crew treated as one unit. Fasinatingly, I'd have thought FMA would keep them weak but with each crew member allowed to act (far more realistic, I might say), they are WAY more dangerous than in SG2. Won't this hurt the Skirmish feel of FMA? <assuming that powerful vehicles would have hurt SG2>. Doubly so given the crew commander can reactivate his people. 12) LAW/IAVR: Thought: Max range is 100"... 200m. That's okay for an IAVR (still short of what it is in SG2, but tolerable) but it is waaaay short for a shoulder fired GMS. And you'll be far more accurate with one of these in SG2 I suspect than under the model proposed in FMA. 13) GAS ROUNDS: Question: The rules mention that a sealed environment guy must spend some time clearing his filters or whatever if he blows his quality roll. But nowhere does it say what happens to unprotected forces. That covers my questions/thoughts about the printed rules. I still have a number of thoughts about rules not written or features that are missing (HEY, I'M NOT COMPLAINING - it's a beta and it was only 14 pages!). But I'll work those into another email later.