Allan said:
> Brian said:
Actually, it was me. *L*
[Tomb] Mea Culpa. I stand corrected.
> Ultimately, too many people I have gamed with have found the idea of an
Funny, but I don't find it all that wrong. I've seen several historical
accounts of units retreating from a position of close combat in a fairly
orderly manner, regrouping a short distance away, and firing.
[Tomb] I'll bet you'd find far more of those retreating in disarray. I
didn't say this should not be possible, just that it should be the exception
not the rule.
The problem with the normal activation rules is that they don't let you
retreat before a unit close assaults.
[Tomb] If you had the option to be activated and retreat, then yes they
do.
For instance, a close assault could happen up to 120 metres away (12", the
extreme of a combat move) with the defender having no redress but to sit and
wait for the enemy to move that distance. What's the minimum requirement for
football players, 40 yards in ten seconds? That's 30 seconds minimum at a run
for a man with gear. For 30 seconds the defender sees him coming and can't do
a thing about it.
[Tomb] This presumes an unactivated unit. If this is the case, then they
should probably be able to flee. But if the unit has already activated, fired
etc, it has already filled its several minutes of activity! It therefore could
be presumed to be doing something else when it should have been falling
back....
So, I have no problem with the voluntary retreating and the unit able to
respond on its next activation. I see it as the unit withdrawing in those 30
seconds it takes the enemy to advance on their position.
[Tomb] I think this is possible, but uncommon. You had (generally) the
option to withrdaw that unit and chose not to, therefore you opted to remain
there when a close assault could have been inbound. Similarly, I can't break
off the pursuit 20m into my assault if the enemy flees....
I would also argue that tactically speaking you really ought to be close
assaulting a unit only after you have dropped two suppression markers on it,
just to be safe. There's a tactical challenge in the game, and one that I take
to heart when I play: I try not to close assault a unit that hasn't been
suppressed with two suppression markers.
[Tomb] Agreed.
For simplicity sake, and to keep it in line with the regular rules, I'd
probably modify the written close assault rules thusly: if the unit wants to
retreat voluntarily, it must make a second Confidence Test at a TL of
2/1/0
for low/med/high motivation troops after it has retreated. Retreating in
the face of the enemy can break a unit.
[Tomb] That isn't bad. I may take this to heart.
I do think the close assault rules need to be revised. The way they are
written, odds of greater than 2:1 seem to favour the side with the fewer
troops. The smaller force rolls one die versus multiple dice for the larger
force, but if the single die wins it beats ALL the other dice. The odds are
against the smaller force, but the first side to make a Confidence Test is the
side with the MOST casualties. It's actually possible for the smaller side to
lose the most dice rolling contests, but lose the fewest figures.
One thing I'm thinking of trying with my Civil War variant is taken from the
"Brother Against Brother" rules. In a close assault, the most you can have is
two on one. If a defender defeats all attackers, only one attacker is removed
(This last rule can be used even without limiting odds to 2:1).
[Tomb] I drop the outnumbered figures die type by 1 for every increase
in odds (2:1 downshifts it one type, 3:1 two types, etc). This means a figure
outnumbered 5:1 has a very rough day.
> More to the point, it has meant that a more effective tactic than close
Which, in modern combat, is actually the case. Modern combat does not stress
hand-to-hand combat.
[Tomb] Whereas from conversations with several people in Canadian and US
SF, I know this to be true even in elite units, undoubtedly if we consider
what
SG2 close assault is, it is high-rate close-range fire, hand and rifle
grenades, and only in very rare cases is it actual bayonet assault. Since it
represents the close in fire fight, using the mechanistic trick of stopping 2"
away and rolling fire dice kind of reeks of cheese. I'd be tempted to let the
enemy unit (if unactivated) attempt reaction fire or to initiate a
counter close-assault if someone tried to pull their squad up 20m short
and engage...
> Which, in modern combat, is actually the case. Modern combat does not
Since it
> represents the close in fire fight, using the mechanistic trick of
Correct application of ortillery would solve this whole discussion. Yes, I
know atmosphere effects can cause ortillery to deviate from small targets, but
if you choose to occupy a planet where the atmosphere is external instead of
internal, that's your own fault.
On Mon, 20 Nov 2000 10:39:09 -0500, "Barclay, Tom" <tomb@bitheads.com>
wrote:
> [Tomb] I'll bet you'd find far more of those retreating in disarray. I
My ACW rules assume they will be in disarray. *S*
> [Tomb] That isn't bad. I may take this to heart.
Playtesting so far shows it working fine!
> [Tomb] I drop the outnumbered figures die type by 1 for every increase
I've been testing it with just eliminating a single figure in the outnumbered
group. It seems to work fine, too.
Some thoughts about possible things to tighten up CA/CC:
- modifier (when you fight) to the die type the defender uses if he's
outnumbered (ie numbers against you do count)
- an assaulted side's activation is consumed (I think DS2 does this)
even if it hasn't acted (motto: don't be on the receiving end)
- limit of one pursuit/retreat, both are rolled as combat moves (Yes,
SG2
troops aren't moving very fast at 120m per turn - could be a minute,
could be 5, common thought was 2 mins I thought), but if you are restricting
normal movement, retreat movement should be scaled similarly and one combat
move is more than fair.)
- if you retreat, at the end of your retreat movement, I'd say you make
a
leadership role (perhaps modified by the same odds-modifier that was
used when the close assault was launched). If you make it, your troops can
pull up, even though they are disorganized. Yes, your activation is gone (due
to being CA'd), but if your commander reactivates you, you can reorg and then
try to shoot the enemy. If you fail, your troops must spend their next action
retreating and then they can halt to and reorg.
- singly suppressed units may retreat. Multiply suppressed units (2-3
suppressions) MAY NOT retreat - they are just too heavily pinned to get
up and bug out.
<essentially, if you are being chased by an enemy and you broke away from them
and they are behind you chasing you, it might be very difficult for you to
draw up the fleeing force to pull a fast one on the guys chasing
you....>
- overwatch and reaction fire should be in place in the rules to allow
units
to engage enemies trying CA/CC in foolhardy ways
- close combat can be engaged if unit centre-centre is within
ATTACKER_UNIT_QUALITY/2". Thus a regular unit would have a 4" range
centre-to-centre. This probably equates to about 2" or less between unit
figures in many situations. Yes, untrained might have a tough time, but the
truth is, they probably should....
- A unit that is close assaulted and takes casualties should have a
suppression counter at the end. One that retreats after taking casualties
should have a suppression PLUS be disorganized.
That's my 0.02. I'm probably gonna try some of these soon. Close assault
done right (against a suppressed foe) is an excellent coup de grace -
they can't flee due to the fire, and they can't execute final defensive fire.
They might even already have casualties. Executed versus a unit with a bunch
of other nearby unactivated friendly units - none of which are
suppressed -
should be a recipe for getting the attacking squad cut to ribbons.
It's all in the timing.
> -----Original Message-----
[snip]
> - singly suppressed units may retreat. Multiply suppressed units (2-3
[snip]
> That's my 0.02. I'm probably gonna try some of these soon. Close
On the other hand, would any unit really close assault (CA) an area that has
that much friendly fire in it? If the friendly fire is cut for the CA, then
the defenders have the chance to make a break for it or perform final
defensive fire. It not the assaulting forces should have a chance to be hit
by friendly fire. I would think that a unit could not/would not do a CA
on a unit with more than one suppression (too much fire in the area).
My.02.
---
comments inserted in *****.
Dave
> [quoted text omitted]
Date: Wed, 24 Jan 2001 22:56:15 -0500
From: "Barclay, Tom" <tomb@bitheads.com>
Subject: SG2 close assault
Some thoughts about possible things to tighten up CA/CC:
- - modifier (when you fight) to the die type the defender uses if he's
outnumbered (ie numbers against you do count)
*****
I would also say that the reverse is true. if the defender outnumbers the
attacker, the attacker die type is reduced. this covers situations where
foolish (or desperate, surprised) small
squads overrun larger ones, or a small PA squad CAs a larger non-PA
squad.
*****
- - an assaulted side's activation is consumed (I think DS2 does this)
even if it hasn't acted (motto: don't be on the receiving end)
- - limit of one pursuit/retreat, both are rolled as combat moves (Yes,
SG2
troops aren't moving very fast at 120m per turn - could be a minute,
could be 5, common thought was 2 mins I thought), but if you are restricting
normal movement, retreat movement should be scaled similarly and one combat
move is more than fair.)
fully agree on one retreat/pursuit. I like both sides using combat
moves as it has the full range
of escape/caught choices, reflecting the uncertainties and stress of CA.
- - if you retreat, at the end of your retreat movement, I'd say you
make a
leadership role (perhaps modified by the same odds-modifier that was
used when the close assault was launched). If you make it, your troops can
pull up, even though they are disorganized. Yes, your activation is gone (due
to being CA'd), but if your commander reactivates you, you can reorg and then
try to shoot the enemy. If you fail, your troops must spend their next action
retreating and then they can halt to and reorg.
*****
okay, this seems reasonable, but does the retreating squad face away or toward
the pursuer if the "halt" roll succeeds??? or does the facing change occur
during
"ReOrg"?
*****
- - singly suppressed units may retreat. Multiply suppressed units (2-3
suppressions) MAY NOT retreat - they are just too heavily pinned to get
up and bug out.
*****
since I have been struggling with implementing a "Disengage" order, I like it.
this allows units to retreat and change their angle of attack when they bump
into unexpected enemy positions or are getting mauled by superior forces.
*****
<essentially, if you are being chased by an enemy and you broke away from them
and they are behind you chasing you, it might be very difficult for you to
draw up the fleeing force to pull a fast one on the guys chasing
you....>
- - overwatch and reaction fire should be in place in the rules to allow
units
to engage enemies trying CA/CC in foolhardy ways
*****
yep.
*****
- - close combat can be engaged if unit centre-centre is within
ATTACKER_UNIT_QUALITY/2". Thus a regular unit would have a 4" range
centre-to-centre. This probably equates to about 2" or less between unit
figures in many situations. Yes, untrained might have a tough time, but the
truth is, they probably should....
*****
I gotta think/playtest this one....
*****
- - A unit that is close assaulted and takes casualties should have a
suppression counter at the end. One that retreats after taking casualties
should have a suppression PLUS be disorganized.
*****
seems reasonable to me.
*****
That's my 0.02. I'm probably gonna try some of these soon. Close assault
done right (against a suppressed foe) is an excellent coup de grace -
they can't flee due to the fire, and they can't execute final defensive fire.
They might even already have casualties. Executed versus a unit with a bunch
of other nearby unactivated friendly units - none of which are
suppressed -
should be a recipe for getting the attacking squad cut to ribbons.
It's all in the timing.
*****
right. CA should not be the first option, unless it is a racial
characteristic. it should be one of
the last. therefore, the design should reflect this -- trying to
encourage units to carry thru with CA whether attack or defense.
*****
<<<<<<<<<<
Dave
Someone suggested that at CA initiation time, odds should be factored into
both the attacker and defenders tests. I'd agree. If I was asked to charge a
much huger unit.... well... I'd think twice.
OTOH, they also suggested that die shifts in combat shouldn't be applied. I
can't agree with that. Numbers count for more than just morale. More people
means that you can have someone suppressing your target while you close to
lob a grenade or execute point-blank fire.... that is what close assault
covers in SG2 and having numbers _IS_ a benefit from the "fighting" side
of it. I don't think a few limited die shifts are at all outrageous.
Close assault is one of those areas I am quite likely to sit and write an
entire FAQ-like treatise on shortly. There have been so many question
and so much good information generated that I'd have to say it is worth a
detailed treatment with mention of optional rules and with several clear
examples of each stage. <Listed as item number 3489 on my Things To Get
To....>