From: Barclay, Tom <tomb@b...>
Date: Fri, 19 Jan 2001 13:09:55 -0500
Subject: SG2 lessons
Mark L. said: Lessons learned: Morale is surprisingly unimportant in SG2. Out of 13 units (8 CO and 5 ST), only 2 went to broken or worse, and only another 1 or 2 went to SH. [Tomb] The one thing that SG2 does poorly is deal with the situation of gradually increasing casualties - nowhere is there a persistent modifier for casualties previously taken. Additionally, in few games would we be comfortable with the realities of many conflicts - we like to play. In real life, a lot of warfare is about morale. It is a hard to model thing - sometimes men will fight to the bitter end, other times, a single casualty can stop a platoon. Real casualty counds in excess of 10% are pretty stiff. Taking 50% or more casualties, not uncommon in normal by-the-book SG2 games, can absolutely destroy a unit in the real world. The one thing SG2 does have going is a good mechanic in the form of mission motivation levels. What it needs is persistence of casualties as a factor in morale. Allan has taken a reasonable cut at fixing the shortcomings in the system - not the only approach, but a reasonable one. Suppression is amazingly important in SG2. There were 2 or 3 turns when no one could shake suppression counters fast enough to move. [Tomb] Having lost entire squads at GZG ECC-I to Minbari power armour as a consequence of suppressions, I have to agree. But this is one of the strengths of the system. In real life, suppression and pinning are key parts of manouvre warfare. Killing someone is good, but suppressing can often let you set them up for the kill, or let you accomplish other mission objectives. Don't use crappy troops or leaders to go into position in open terrain. I had a Reg 3 fail the test 4 times, the rat bastard. [Tomb] I must admit I find some bits of this rule rather questionable. Going in-position is something most soldiers are trained for. It really doesn't take that much to get a squad to go to ground and find good cover. Heck, most infanteers do this as second instinct. Digging slit trenches, shell scrapes, or just piling up rocks and other debris for cover is not that much more involved. Now, I can see a roll for it the FIRST time you try it, after that I think (if you're still trying in the same spot), it should be automatic. Eventualy your guys will get dug in and settled. Something tells me a Vet-3 might blow this test a few times, even though that is utterly unreflective of the quality of the force... Close combats are very decisive, but final defensive fire can make your day suck. [Tomb] And of course, one of the shortcomings here is no "weight in numbers" advantage for an attacker. One good roll for the defender on a big die type and the attackers (even if they number 10:1) might as well just stay home. Myself, I give negative die shifts to the side that has a numerical inferiority. 1:1 is no shifts, 2:1 gives a negative shift to the smaller force, 3:1 gives two negative shifts. I don't go any further. Numbers only add up so far... and this isn't strictly hand to hand - it is close range gunfire, hand grenades, bayonets, the whole shebang.