OK, I'm sick of the damn 2LTs (Subalterns for you Brits) sitting on their side
of the board immobile, next to the EW guy and "leading" via FM. These rules
aren't playtested, but I propose:
1)Use the varient PSG rules, allowing both the PSG and PL to pass activations.
If your background doesn't
include long-service professional NCOs with a
tradition of and training for battlefield leadership, then you're just plain
assed out for a second reactivation. (ESU, FSE conscript troops [not Colonial
Legion], IFed, etc.) Note: This means you REALLY have to be careful when
balancing scenarios involving crap troops. The second reactivation could be
badly unbalancing.
2)Simulataneous Movement/Commo permits LTs and PSGs to
move while passing an activation. Reduced move
(4"/6"/8", instead of 6/8/12), and cannot do
simultaneous movement if he has been fired on since his activation in the
previous turn. Once he is stuck in, his attention is a bit more distracted.:)
3)Tagalong. An officer or PSG can 'tag along' with a squad. Tagging along
makes a leader part of the squad for movement purposes and exposes him to a
chance of being hit when the squad is fired on. If a leader is tagging along,
he can only use 1 action and the only thing he can do with that action is
Communicate (to include passing activations).
4)Follow Me! If an LT or PSG wishes to pass an activation to a unit within 6"
of himself with a clear line of sight between each other, then he may declare
"Follow Me" and move with the unit (yes, even if they use both their actions
to move) and go in position if they do so. He cannot take any other actions as
part of the squad, not even firing his weapon, EXCEPT that he may participate
normally in Close Assault.
5)A unit being led by an LT or PSG of quality 2 or better in declared "Follow
Me" automatically adds 1 to all Confidence Checks.
6)If a unit is fired on during or immediately after a bonus activation passed
via Follow Me, the leader counts as 3 soldiers for purposes of determining
chance of being wounded if the fire is effective. IE, if an LT is leading an 8
man squad and they get fired at, instead of a 1 in nine chance, he has a 3 in
11 chance.
7)Note: A single leader may not take advantage of
Tagging Along, Follow Me, and/or Simulataneous
Movement/Commo in the same turn.
Thomas Barclay has many of these rules (slight variations from what you have
posted) on his website, Stargrunt.ca
(http://www.stargrunt.ca/rules/rules_index.htm) [Platoon Sergeants,
Leaders as Individuals, Head to Head Rallying].
I have played in a game where some of these are used and it does not seem too
unbalancing. But both sides had PSGs. Intuition points to having more squads
on a side without PSGs to maintain balance (but I do not know how
many. 2-5 to make up for the reactivations?).
---
Brian Bell bbell1@insight.rr.com ICQ: 12848051 AIM: Rlyehable YIM: Rlyehable
Cygnus X1.info
http://www.cygnusx1.info/
---
[quoted original message omitted]
--- "Bell, Brian K (Contractor)"
> <Brian.Bell@dscc.dla.mil> wrote:
I know. It's where I got the idea.
> I have played in a game where some of these are used
Depends on which side has superior equipment and total numbers invovled. I
hate to try to isolate 1 single factor and try to "balance" that factor
individually (which is yet another beef with the whole Point Cost discussion).
Offhand, I'd say possibly as heavy as 2-1, depending
on how experienced the players are in using their reactivations.
On Sun, 14 Apr 2002 14:37:00 -0700 (PDT), John Atkinson
> <johnmatkinson@yahoo.com> wrote:
> OK, I'm sick of the damn 2LTs (Subalterns for you
TomB and I went at this problem from the other end. We thought of how to make
leaders lead from the front. We did this by changing the rules for
communications rolls, making it harder to transfer an action if the leader was
out of LOS of the receiving unit. My version of the rule can be found at:
http://home.att.net/~agoodall/sg2/sg2-house-rules-transfer.html
Your rules make it easier for the leader to move forward with the troops in
order to do transfers. However, if a leader is moving with the troops and is
suppressed or wounded/killed, the player loses chances to transfer an
action. So, there is still an incentive to move the commander into the corner
of the board and keep him there with the EW guy.
Your rules making it easier to move the leader and to give extra transfers are
interesting (I'm not sure I like two figures transferring actions at the same
level, as it makes for a whole lot more transfers). Combined with our transfer
of command rules I think the "commander in the corner" problem is effectively
wiped out.
> --- Allan Goodall <agoodall@att.net> wrote:
> order to do transfers. However, if a leader is
Hey, you gotta take chances to win.
> Your rules making it easier to move the leader and
Nope. 2 per PLT. I just break them up between PL and PSG.
On Mon, 15 Apr 2002 10:40:53 -0700 (PDT) John Atkinson
> <johnmatkinson@yahoo.com> writes:
<snip>
> Depends on which side has superior equipment and total
Thank you for the coherent point about the fluid nature (fluids roll down
hill) of point systems inherently.
Gracias,
> --- Glenn M Wilson <triphibious@juno.com> wrote:
> Thank you for the coherent point about the fluid
How do you quantify something like reactivations that allows me to drive the
tempo of the game and psychologically throw my opponent off balance?
Especially when some people can't do that?
I mean, if your scenario is about a deliberate reduction of a strongpoint,
reactivations are less useful because there's no finesse, there's just a
methodical carrying out of a plan. If you have a good plan, adequate assets,
and don't blow your dice rolls too badly, you will do alright.
A battle of maneuver based around seizing key terrain and destroying the enemy
using fire an maneuver, then if you use your reactivations right you can push
your opponent offbalance and keep him that way by changing the tactical
situation faster than he can react.