Oerjan,
I always thought SG2 was 2-5 minutes, and I tend to favour 2, based on
movement rates. In
fighting order, even doing "Advance to Contact" (up/he-sees-me/down)
style of movement that we were trained to use in open terrain, I could
probably cover 100m
in 30-40 seconds.
That's sort of normal. So that equates to about 10" which is more than one
average combat move of 70m. But lets say it was 70m and I was a bit slower (a
third or so). Then 140m in
two moves (one activation) would be about right, and that'd be 60-80
seconds. So that, to me, spoke of 2 minutes. Also, I guess after Goose Green
and some other places, that style of movement was somewhat deprecated as it
was found to be *too slow* for the fast pace of
in-contact movement in many situations. So modern forces are probably
*faster*.
5 minutes would be an eternity, and in that time you can only engage one enemy
squad? Hmmm. As I recollect, in five minutes, even firing deliberate (one
trigger pull every 3-5
seconds), which is probably a bit unlikely in an actual fight, I'd have
expended my
personal ammo allotment (if I was unwise enough to do so) in 4-5
minutes. I'd sure hope I could engage more than one target in that time.
Perhaps, on a smaller scale, SG2 suffers from the same problem DS2 suffers
from. If you can run 20 second firefight turns in DS3, perhaps some similar
mechanic needs introduced. But if you think troops don't move far in SG2 turns
and the game sometimes bogs down into
hunker-down-and-shoot rather than manouver, then 20 second turns (even
with more realistic movement rates) would surely amplify this.
I'm not sure what the answer is, but I find having 15 minute turns that
telescope in to 20 second tactical combat rounds to be a bit jarring. Maybe
I'm alone in that. I understand the logic for it, I just find it an
uncomfortable mechanic, which is why I was suggesting
2-3 minute turns (and maintaining the TCR). This makes the ration of
normal turns to TCRs either 1:10 or 1:15 rather than 1:75.
When actions were being conducted, things tend to happen pretty quickly. A 5
minute turn length in SG2 (even notionally) just seems too long. <shrug> And a
75:1 change of time frame in DS3 just seems a bit much. YMMV.
> TomB wrote:
> I always thought SG2 was 2-5 minutes,
Quoting the SG2 rulebook, page 5, "Timescale":
"If it is necessary to determine how long a battle has lasted in game terms
(...) then treat each full turn as being equivalent to approximately 5
minutes; hence a six-turn game would represent a battle lasting about
half an hour of campaing time..."
I agree that the 5-minute turn doesn't make sense either from a movement
rate or a rate of fire point of view, but it is what the rules themselves
claim.
> and I tend to favour 2, based on movement rates.
Based on infantry movement rates I'd call each SG turn either 1 minute or
3-4 minutes long, but not 2 or 5...
Based on *march* movement rates I'd call each SG turn 3-4 minutes long:
Average infantry using Travel Movement (ie., marching in a column without
making any attempt to take advantage of cover, etc.) can move 32 inches (320
meters in the SG2 ground scale) per turn, so if the turn is 2 minutes
long they'd be jogging at about 6 mph (nearly 10 km/h). That's *very*
fast
for humans - I'm a fairly fast long-distance walker, yet my sustained
marching speed with heavy equipment is only a little over 4 mph (7
km/h),
and I've been told that most soldiers march slower than that - typical
marching speeds are around 3 mph (5 km/h). Using my marching speed to
"calibrate" the SG2 game turn would give a turn length of 3 minutes; using
typical soldiers' marching speeds would give a turn length of 4 minutes.
> In fighting order, even doing "Advance to Contact" (up/he-sees-me/down)
> style of movement that we were trained to use in open terrain, I could
> But lets say it was 70m and I was a bit slower (a third or so). Then
> seconds. So that, to me, spoke of 2 minutes.
Um, TomB? 60-80 seconds is roughly *1* minute, not 2. If an SG2 squad
uses both its actions on movement it can't shot at all that turn, yet based on
your recollection of moving 100 m in 30-40 seconds (which agrees with
what I've seen and done) it has only moved about half as far as it should have
(~300 meters)... yet it is unable to do anything else that turn. Too winded,
maybe? <g> This is where the "1 minute turn" length I mentioned above comes
from.
> 5 minutes would be an eternity, and in that time you can only engage
> expended my
2 minutes is also close to an eternity in combat, yet you only allow a squad
to move half as far as you recall yourself moving in that time and
you only allow a squad to engage one enemy squad in that time... :-/
15 minutes is *definitely* an eternity in combat, yet DS2 only allows each
tank to engage one single enemy tank in all that time.
Which is of course why DS3 uses telescoping time scales instead <g>
> Perhaps, on a smaller scale, SG2 suffers from the same problem DS2
IMO there's nothing "perhaps" whatsoever about it.
> But if you think troops don't move far in SG2 turns and the game
Not if you also give the troops means to advance without being seen or
attacked by the enemy. If you can't find a route of advance that's hidden from
enemy view, deploy a smoke screen or put enough suppressive fires on the enemy
that he doesn't dare stick his head up; then you can use the
larger-time-scale movement rates to advance. It works quite well in 15mm
scale; I haven't tried it in 25mm scale yet though :-/
Later,
On 3/19/06, gzg-l-request@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
> <gzg-l-request@lists.csua.berkeley.edu> wrote:
> Quoting the SG2 rulebook, page 5, "Timescale":
<<snippage>>
> I agree that the 5-minute turn doesn't make sense either from a
Yes, but Oerjan you left out the part that was relevant to what Tom was
saying. First of all, in the quoted text you left out a bit:
"If it is necessary to determine how long a battle has lasted in game terms
(eg. it is part of a campaign)..."
And, quoting the SG2 rulebook, page 5, "Timescale":
"Although a game turn might contain only a few sections of actual combat, the
full turn may safely be assumed to occupy one or even several minutes of
elapsed time."
I talking with others on the list, and in reading what Jon has stated,
I always believed -- like Tom -- that the SG2 game turn was some
nebulous, changing time frame that ran from about 1 minute to 5 minutes. Jon
has said this on at least one occasion, that an SG2 turn is not a fixed amount
of time. The part you quoted where it said that a turn was 5 minutes I always
took as a rough guess for those who wanted a simple calculat for the purposes
of a campaign or the like.
I don't think you are wrong (the part that says a turn is five minutes is
pretty clear), but I don't think Tom is wrong either (the part that says a
turn is 1 minute to several minutes is pretty clear, too.)
Oh, and don't expect Tom to reply, as he has dropped off this list and the
playtest list, or is at least planning to.
> Allan Goodall wrote:
> >I agree that the 5-minute turn doesn't make sense either from a
I left out the "(eg. it is part of a campaign)...", because campaigns are only
one example of situations where you might need to know how long the
battle lasted; but I did quote the "If it is necessary... game terms" part.
> And, quoting the SG2 rulebook, page 5, "Timescale":
Yes, but note that this "one or even several minutes" discussion comes
*before* the "If it is necessary..." bit. The SG2 timescale section discusses
the SG2 game turn as being nebulous, but this discussion lands
with a statement that the turn should - in those cases where it is
important to know the "real-world" time elapsed - be treated as
"approximately 5 minutes".
> Oh, and don't expect Tom to reply, as he has dropped off this list and
Ouch. Was it I that drove him away, or were there other reasons? :-(
Regards,
> Ouch. Was it I that drove him away, or were there other reasons? :-(
Other reasons. Real life, etc.
> Oh, and don't expect Tom to reply, as he has dropped off this list and
Purely due to Real Life issues
On 3/20/06, gzg-l-request@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
> <gzg-l-request@lists.csua.berkeley.edu> wrote:
> Date: Mon, 20 Mar 2006 17:44:24 +0100
> Yes, but note that this "one or even several minutes" discussion comes
That's why there's debate about it. It's a matter of interpretation, with
regard to a contradictory piece of text. I'm pretty sure Jon has said on the
list that the game turn in SG2 doesn't represent an actual fixed time period.
Oh, well.
> Ouch. Was it I that drove him away, or were there other reasons? :-(
There were other reasons.