[SG2] Morale Suggestion: Enfilade

9 posts ยท Sep 7 1998 to Sep 10 1998

From: Allan Goodall <agoodall@a...>

Date: Mon, 07 Sep 1998 14:59:16 GMT

Subject: [SG2] Morale Suggestion: Enfilade

I knew there was something bothering me about the morale rules in SG2,
something missing. Enfilade fire is missing! Being shot at from an unexpected
direction has no effect on morale.

I suggest the following: if fired on from the rear of the squad (that is, from
back 180 degree arc based on the "average" direction faced by the squad),
there is a TL 0/1/3 test (for high/med/low motivation) even if no
casualties were taken. If there were casualties from this fire, there is a TL
modifier of
0/+1/+2.

Note that this might result in players placing their figures in circles in
order to eliminate a rear "arc." This is allowable, however the figures facing
the rear can not participate on firing at enemy units to the front.

This is just a house rule I came up with, untested as yet. I'll try it and see
how it goes. It does push players to try for enfilade fire (or at least give
players who do it an advantage).

From: Tim Jones <Tim.Jones@S...>

Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1998 09:49:13 +0100

Subject: RE: [SG2] Morale Suggestion: Enfilade

> I knew there was something bothering me about the morale rules in SG2,

I agree, when this happens in a paint ball game is really
freaks you out, real bullets/beams must be real bad juju.

> Note that this might result in players placing their figures in circles

This is/was Army doctrine after over-running a position, makes sense.

> This is just a house rule I came up with, untested as yet. I'll try it

Its seems logical on paper, and in even mock combat going for enfilade fire is
a common effective tactic.

From: Owen Glover <oglover@b...>

Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1998 20:37:45 +1000

Subject: RE: [SG2] Morale Suggestion: Enfilade

[quoted original message omitted]

From: Tim Jones <Tim.Jones@S...>

Date: Tue, 8 Sep 1998 12:14:19 +0100

Subject: RE: [SG2] Morale Suggestion: Enfilade

Not my idea I was following up to AG's original.

Thanks for the definition of Enfilade anyway.

From: Allan Goodall <agoodall@a...>

Date: Wed, 09 Sep 1998 00:18:53 GMT

Subject: Re: [SG2] Morale Suggestion: Enfilade

On Tue, 08 Sep 1998 20:37:45 +1000, "Glover, Owen"
<oglover@mov.vic.gov.au> wrote:

> Well Tim, I certainly agree with the idea of a morale rule here; but I

Quite true. However...

> Receiving fire unexpectedly from the front OR rear would be a cause for

... I did think of this but thought it would be a bit cumbersome...

> We play a modified terrain rule for some games; instead of clumps of

...which is why I didn't want to get into sighting rules. I have a number of
games with sighting rules. I find they drag things a bit. Of course, an easier
way to handle it in SG2 terms is to simply force a morale check when a unit is
attacked from the rear OR attacked by a heretofore hidden unit. You don't need
sighting ranges and such, just a hidden unit. I think I'll incorporate this
into my "enfilade" rules.

Mind you, I think your sighting rules are nice and straightforward.

> So the idea of a "surprise" morale check for taking fire from an

Yes, I hope Jon incorporates something like this into Bugs Don't Surf.

> Anyway, Tim. I do like your idea. More thoughts on the die modifiers?

I haven't fully tested these rules, so I'm not sure how the die modifiers work
in practice. The next SG2 game I play (within a month) will incorporate these
rules.

From: Owen Glover <oglover@b...>

Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1998 10:44:06 +1000

Subject: RE: [SG2] Morale Suggestion: Enfilade

[quoted original message omitted]

From: Ground Zero Games <jon@g...>

Date: Wed, 9 Sep 1998 08:27:49 +0100

Subject: RE: [SG2] Morale Suggestion: Enfilade

[snip]

From: Thomas Barclay <Thomas.Barclay@s...>

Date: Thu, 10 Sep 1998 16:25:23 -0500

Subject: Re: [SG2] Morale Suggestion: Enfilade

Allan spake thusly upon matters weighty:
> >We play a modified terrain rule for some games; instead of clumps of

I hope you have some other categories of woods. I've run into woods where I'd
be lucky to see or conduct effective fire beyond about 20m! It would seem to
me that rating any given thicket or copse of trees with a "woods fire rating"
(say 1 to 5? or even 1 to 10?) and then dividing unit ranges by this value (to
represent limits to hearing and sighting imposed by the thick undergrowth)
would be the most reasonable way to run woods. A similar value (perhaps on the
scale of 1 to 5 also) would be the "woods movement rating" and would
be a divisor for movement. A class 5/5 thicket would mean that
movement through such a thicket was brutally slow and fire was pretty much
point blank only.

> ...which is why I didn't want to get into sighting rules. I have a

1. SG2 uses 'abstract positioning' so therefore there is no front or back.
Given the suggested length of a game turn, it would easily be possible for a
unit to watch all its flanks even without having the figures pointed every
which way (assume some movement, scanning around etc). 2. Since everyone
(AFAIK) in a unit that has LOS can engage an enemy target, and given the
abstract nature of unit placement, the unit effectively has no front or rear.

Both of these may change in FMA. Skirmish games tend to represent things more
as is. But most range bands will be short!

> >So the idea of a "surprise" morale check for taking fire from an

Fire from a hidden unit, yes. That should cause a morale check. Fire from the
side or back seems meaningless unless we implement the
'the-figure-is-where-he-is-and-looking-where-he-is-looking' rules.

On a separate note, I still think any unit fired on (even if casualties are
not inflicted nor are formal suppressions) may attempt to go to ground (and
cease moving for the turn). This represents our natural reflex to go to ground
when fired on. I'm working out some draft rules for this. This will help
address some of the issues of extreme mobility that I have sometimes seen (a
unit under fire
sprinting around the board - not impossible, just pretty unlikely).
/************************************************

From: Owen Glover <oglover@b...>

Date: Fri, 11 Sep 1998 08:09:40 +1000

Subject: RE: [SG2] Morale Suggestion: Enfilade

Hi Tom,

[quoted original message omitted]