> Question: If I have a squad of, let's say, 6 troopers, can they be
> ie: one trooper with a Guass Rifle w/GL, four troopers with Advanced
The rules do not prevent you from having a squad with mixed small arms.
However, as you describe above, you can work out the Firepower die OK but it
gets tricky when you come to resolving any potential hits. One way would be to
use the "Quick and Dirty Option" on p36. This doesn't use Impact vs Armour die
rolls. Otherwise you will have to decide somehow which Impact
die type to use (say a random choice?).
Yes, its possible, but is it worth the effort? Its up to you and your
preferred background. In practice, I think you'll find that its a lot easier
to have units with only one small arms type (or at any rate only one Impact
Die type).
Date sent: 11-SEP-1996 11:29:14
> Question: If I have a squad of, let's say, 6 troopers, can they be
Yep.
> ie: one trooper with a Guass Rifle w/GL, four troopers with Advanced
> The rules do not prevent you from having a squad with mixed small arms.
> However, as you describe above, you can work out the Firepower die OK
As much as I hate to disagree with the great Mike Elliot, but I took it as
read that you'd use whichever weapon the majority of firers had, just as if
the odd man had a support weapon rather than a different type of rifle. So
you'd use the AARs. If the number of weapons is a draw, use the lowest impact
(serves you right).
I'd only give Gurilla, Partizan, Tororist or Criminal forces mixed armament
though. Regular armies will tend to have the same type of weapon to ease
supply problems (eg. weapons use NATO rifle ammo and M16 boxes for most
Western armies). And most Gurilla and Partizan forces will use the same type
of weapon as their opponent (so they can 'liberate' ammo).
> Adam Delafield wrote:
> As much as I hate to disagree with the great Mike Elliot,
Me? Great? Much as I appreciate the accolade Adam, I think its a bit
misplaced. How can I be great if the only wargames I win are the ones I
play solo? 8-)
Seriously, though, my policy to answering any questions regarding GZG games
here is based on firstly, the "spirit" of the game (ie what Jon and I
originally intended), secondly, a careful reading of the rules as they stand
(not always entirely accurate, though, as I've been caught out by one of you
on more than one occasion), and thirdly my own gaming experience.
That way I hope any answers I give are as open and honest as possible. Add to
that the caveat that "you can always do your own thing anyway", which
means that you all can ignore us totally if the mood takes you....
> but I took it as read that you'd use whichever weapon the majority of
I think this is a neat idea that I admit I didn't think of. Thanks Adam.
Again, my view is that if you are going to use mixed small arms you need to
decide how you're going to resolve their fire combat. You've now got three
ways to do it - you choose. Anyone got any more ideas?
> I'd only give Gurilla, Partizan, Tororist or Criminal forces mixed
> same type of weapon as their opponent (so they can 'liberate' ammo).
I would agree with this completely. It would be VERY unusual for any regular
forces to have mixed small arms. Good point.
> On 12 Sep 1996 M.J.Elliott@uk22p.bull.co.uk wrote:
> Adam Delafield wrote:
It depends a little on the army. Stealing examples from That Other
Company, Tyranids (with lots of various bio-weapons) or Eldar (with
lasguns and shuriken catapults; both use the same power source, but the
shuriken catapults need additional ammo) could have mixed squads without
excessive supply problems... and if you go to armies with all-energy
weapons, you could have the same ammo for all weapons - including heavy
support weapons - and mix them freely in a squad.
Of course, that's for BDS...
> Oerjan Ohlson wrote:
> On 12 Sep 1996 M.J.Elliottà uk22p.bull.co.uk wrote:
> Adam Delafield wrote:
> I would agree with this completely. It would be VERY unusual for any
> It depends a little on the army. Stealing examples from That Other
Shouldn't that be That Other Company (tm) (after all we don't want any law
suits :-)
> lasguns and shuriken catapults; both use the same power source, but the
> shuriken catapults need additional ammo) could have mixed squads
> support weapons - and mix them freely in a squad.
Bear in mind mixed small arms are only a problem if the different weapons have
different Impact Die types. So in the end it depends on how you work the stats
for the weapons concerned.
> Of course, that's for BDS...
Mmmm.... but of course it will all be generic weapon types since we don't want
to infringe TOC's (tm) copyrights now do we? Anyway, there's probably enough
in SGII already for you to work out stats for additional weapon types. The
main emphasis in BDS reagarding aliens will be how different "stock" alien
types handle Confidence and Reaction and Command and Control (AFAIK at the
moment).
Anybody got any suggestions?
> On 12 Sep 1996 M.J.Elliott@uk22p.bull.co.uk wrote:
It always seemed to me that "stock" alien types don't have any problems with
morale, but are extremely difficult to command and control.
This applies both to the aliens in the Aliens movies, and to the Ewoks in
Return of the Jedi. In both cases, the alien types act more like a ravaging
warband than anything else.
The bugs from Starship Troopers would be similar, but I think they would
have to be controlled by a Brain Bug in order to do anything -- i.e.
the (possibly unseen) Brain Bug would need to give orders to its units in
order for them to do ANYTHING except for possibly moving forward.
Other than the ravaging warband model, most designers seem to apply World War
II stereotypes to their aliens in order to characterize them, i.e.. Germans
are methodical but lack initiative, Japanese are fanatical fighters (Banzai!),
Russians are poorly equipped and trained but far too numerous for anyone's
comfort, etc.
Date sent: 12-SEP-1996 14:32:29
> Mmmm.... but of course it will all be generic weapon types since we
> "stock" alien types handle Confidence and Reaction and Command and
> Anybody got any suggestions?
> Mike Elliott, GZG
I here a call for mindless rambling. So here it is.
Traits could be 'Aggression' (Effects starting Moral level? Modifies certain
moral tests by a positive or negative shift?), 'Technology (Just a choice of
what weapons taken, or something more?)', 'Intelligence' (Helps in
communication), 'Terror'(Affects Close. Do they cause Terror? Does Terror
effect them?) as well as Movement, Armour and Weapon Stats. Perhaps one or two
new weapon types could be included (Though they are not needed) such as 'Ray
Gun' or 'Disintegrator'.
This would cover most aliens, like 'Greys', Mutons, Martians, Daleks,
Terminators, Tyranids, Kryomek etc.
Bugs and Blobs are so different that they would not fit regular SG2 model, and
including them would require Close Combat to be much more clearly worked out.
Bugs (Our lovable, cute, Acid for Blood friends) will probably be the one most
people are after, so should be as fully explored as possible, and playtested a
lot.
The Command structure might be retained in a 'Hive' structure. Bugs probably
wouldn't give a hoot for suppression, but this would also knock their casualty
rate way up, as they will not be taking cover. (Though they might go 'in
position' and lie in ambush) They would certainly have to significantly
outnumber a foe to stand a chance in the open battlefield.
Anyway, I think an in depth look at the way close assault works would be the
first step in developing Bugs.
> On 12 Sep 1996 M.J.Elliott@uk22p.bull.co.uk wrote:
(I wrote:)
> >It depends a little on the army. Stealing examples from That Other
Depends - TOC can be different companies, depending on the circumstances
<g>
Of course, with the example above it is pretty obvious which one I meant!
> >lasguns and shuriken catapults; both use the same power source, but
That's exactly why I choose lasgun/shuriken catapult as my example - the
lasgun has a far lower impact when it hits (but is more accurate, IIRC) than
the catapult.
> >Of course, that's for BDS...
I don't think they can get a copyright for 'lasgun', really <g>
> Anyway, there's probably
> types. The main emphasis in BDS reagarding aliens will be how
Not for SGII, no. My Eldar (well, the Survivors of Tel-Aearon Star
City, to avoid trouble with TOC(tm) <g>) conversion for DSII plays up the
importance of psykers - Survivor units have no unit commanders, but
_all_
units suffer the effects of leader loss every time a psyker is lost (in
addition to the fact that the psykers are equivalent to army command units).