Hi,
It strikes me that there is no advantage to staying still as you fire, so
defensive fire and attacking fire have the same level of effectiveness. I feel
that if I am running forward I have a huge disadvantage while attempting to
shoot anything (I have attempted to run and shoot paintballing, although this
is nothing like warfare in almost every important respect, you do have to pull
a trigger and aim which I have found
nigh-on impossible while running hell for leather to a bunker).
What about allowing one of the dice to be rolled twice taking the better of
the two values if a squad uses both activations to shoot at an enem targtet?
> On Wed, 30 May 2001, "Richard Kirke" wrote:
> It strikes me that there is no advantage to staying still as you fire,
I see what you mean. Moving while firing should give you a disadvantage.
I think that SG2 is aimed at less detail. The game turn represents anything
from 30 seconds to a few minutes. Moving and firing isn't necessarily firing
while moving. It could be short dashes, some fire, and another short dash. Or
it could be half the squad moving while the other half fires, then vice versa.
There's a lot abstracted into it.
It would make a good house rule, though, to give defensive fire from unmoving
troops an advantage. In the FMA Skirmish game there is an Aim action that
doubles the range bands of the weapon. This is probably a bit much for
Stargrunt.
I suggest an Aim action for SG2 that decreases the range by one range band. I
suggest it as a separate action, because I don't think this bonus should just
be for moving. For instance, troops that spend their first action removing
suppression and then spend the second action firing shouldn't get the same
bonus as units sitting still, unharmed, for an entire turn.
> What about allowing one of the dice to be rolled twice taking the
If you decide to go this route, I wouldn't just make it "any" of the dice. I
would make it the quality die. Roll the quality die twice, and choose the best
of the two. Would you allow vehicles the same benefit? Most vehicles today can
fire on the move fairly accurately. In the future there will probably be no
difference if the vehicle is moving or stationary.
Would you allow troops with special weapon stabilizing gear to move and fire
as though stabilized? I'm thinking, in particular, Power Armour here.
> On Wed, 30 May 2001, "Richard Kirke" wrote:
Doesn't SG2 have "in position" as a defensive benefit? I grant you that it's
not subtracting accuracy from the moving firer, but I woudn't think
your troops are at an all-out run anyway--during the turn, they're