Good Try Mr. Rutherford! and Infantry and Vehicle Flamers

2 posts ยท Mar 29 2001 to Mar 29 2001

From: Barclay, Tom <tomb@b...>

Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 14:18:31 -0500

Subject: Good Try Mr. Rutherford! and Infantry and Vehicle Flamers

Item the first:

Rick, aka weasely "bulletproof" sneakster, you tried to catch me out! For
shame!

Technically, you mentioned a way where a squad could be activated 4 x (by
himself, by his PL, by his CC activating the PL activating the squad, then by
the CC activating the squad). This would work EXCEPT that it violates the very
first statement in my amended wording of Jon's original:

"No squad may be activated in one turn more times than there are command
levels present on the table."

That automatically limits a squad to a max 3 activations if CC is highest
level present. Thus, you could use only 3 of those 4 methods on the same
squad, though all are legal approaches.

Item the second:

On another front (personal and vehicle flamers):

You'd be appauled at some of the ranges possible even as of WW2 for some of
these systems, but I think Jaime might have proposed too much in his zeal for
"template weapons".

Keep in mind guys "shoulder to shoulder" in SG2 can still be 30 feet apart (1"
= 10m). In order to be packed close enough for a SWAT entry team, you'd need
to use just one figure to represent all of them....

Here was my interpretation:
http://fox.nstn.ca/~kaladorn/Gaming/TechToolbox.htm (vehicle flamer)
http://fox.nstn.ca/~kaladorn/Gaming/AGreyDayToDieForumPage.htm (exposed
weapons rules about half way down.... and the infantry flamer about
4/5ths
of the way down)

Flamers are nasty. My FSE assault squads have 2 each. But they are not a
substitue for rifles or SAWs. The vehicle weapons are horrific. I can't
imagine something I'd like to face less (that isn't an nuke or bioweapon)

From: Jaime Tiampo <fugu@s...>

Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2001 11:29:45 -0800

Subject: Re: Good Try Mr. Rutherford! and Infantry and Vehicle Flamers

> "Barclay, Tom" wrote:

Oh probably. I wasn't really putting together a well thought out design. I was
really trying to start a discussion on it to get a more balanced view on it,
which has happened so at least it's working:) Though more concrete numbers and
ideas would help:) I'll wait for the group to read the latest hack of the
flamer before heading back into it.

> Keep in mind guys "shoulder to shoulder" in SG2 can still be 30 feet

Yeah but if you sweep the stream of fire you get a pretty big area of effect.

> Flamers are nasty. My FSE assault squads have 2 each. But they are not

Definately. Nothing beats old fashion firepower when in combat but if you have
to clear out places there's nothing like a good old fireball to make'em run
and give up.