SG2 terrain

3 posts ยท Mar 13 2002 to Mar 13 2002

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

Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 12:04:13 -0500

Subject: SG2 terrain

Brian said:

I have played in about 5 SG games and all of them had a _lot_ of
terrain. I would estimate that 75%+ of the board was in forest or hills
of some type.

This seems a little overkill for most areas in the world that I have been in.
Most areas (except national parks, forests, etc.) have less than 25% of their
area covered by plant terrain.

Tomb: Do you live in a midwest state? This statement matches most of
Alberta/Sask/Manitoba, but not Northern Ontario. Northern Ontario is
largely forest and hills. Southern Ontario (not Urban) is largely forest,
hills, and cleared fields (I'd guess at 50% clearance, accounting for rock
upthrusts, trees, sloughs, swamps, lakes and ponds). In Alberta, you could do
a whole game board with one yellowish felt and NO other terrain in some
places. Even in Southern Ontario, cleared regions are likely to be hilly
(Welcome to the Canadian Shield). Depends on your geogeny. If you're on a
sedimentary plain, then you tend to not have hills. If you're on Canadian
Shield or somewhere near a plate boundary, you tend to have hills and
mountains (continental collisions also produce these). Lots of offworld sites
with thin atmosphere have loads of craters from meteoroid impacts. Go to some
of these online sights and take an area about 1km x 0.5km. If you picked it
from some areas, this would involve multiple hills... (use the orthophotos as
other models often obscure details by picking limited # of altitude levels).

In cities, it may be different. Downtown would have a _lot_ of building
terrain. But it would also have _long_ corridors and large areas of
empty space. It would be interesting to see a SG game in an urban setting
(anyone willing to take up the challenge for ECC?).

Tomb: Considered. But moving large volumes of foamcore buildings seemed to be
space expensive. And wood is too heavy. I've got hardboard, but I'd need to
make breakdown buildings. Coming from Canada, this is a bit of a challenge.
Grey day required an entire stationwagon plus whatever Los came in.

But in a suburban/rural setting, how much ground cover by plants/trees
is necessary for a good game? 10%, 25%, 30%,...?

Tomb:

Depends on taste. SG2 has infantry fire ranges up to 40-60". Vehicle
fire longer. If you have clear fire lanes... people will shoot. Infantry
tends to move 6-7" per movement. Cover spaced further than 10-12" tends
to allow shots at infantry in the open leading to more losses.

PS: For the record, we ran Change of Orders in about 4 hours and it was using
a platoon on each side split into fireteams, plus some individual
figs (Sgts/officers/snipers) and then later some vehicles. It seemed to
work fine. Ultimately, for a con game, I'm not in favor of players having only
1 manouver unit as suppression or bad luck can ruin the
game. I think 2-4 manouvre units per player is good.

From: KH.Ranitzsch@t... (K.H.Ranitzsch)

Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 18:41:57 +0100

Subject: Re: SG2 terrain

[quoted original message omitted]

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

Date: Wed, 13 Mar 2002 16:17:20 -0600

Subject: Re: SG2 terrain

On Wed, 13 Mar 2002 18:41:57 +0100, KH.Ranitzsch@t-online.de
(K.H.Ranitzsch) wrote:

> For urbanized spots, you don't have just buildings or vegetation.
Walls,
> fences, parked cars, advertisement boards, telfone booths etc.etc. can

Fully agree! Not to mention park land. Toronto has a lot of parks in it, even
in the downtown core there are small "parkettes".

Once you start "rubbling" some buildings, you get far more cover in a city
than anywhere else. It's one reason city fights are so nasty.