Too many Brians... not quite so bad as too many Toms

[Bri] True, but the same weapon firing at a size 1 target would only
have a maximum effective range of (5x12"x1=) 60" SG or 6" DS2. EXACTLY
the same as the PA-carried weapon. Granted, if the target is larger,
then vehicle weapons gain an advantage. The breakdown in the system is that
SG2 has 2 different mechanics for firing weapons. One for Infantry and one for
vehicles.
I wish that the ranges were left as stated in DS2. A MDC-1 should be
able to target infantry at a SG range of 160" (DS 16"). Bad news for anyone
caught by it, but then again it SHOULD be bad news. Now, if that were broken
down into 5 range bands, it should be 32" to the
range band for MDC-1. Against non-infantry targets, it would have a
SG range of 240" (DS 24"), and range bands would be at 48".

In the Grey Day scenario, I was TROUBLED to see a tank with a
HKP-5 or MDC-5 (can't remember) not be able to target a vehicle that
would have been at short range in DS2 (30" or 36" [300" or 360" SG inches]).

** I have to admit to some preplexity here. On the flank I was running, there
was a human tank, a human tank destroyer, and three KV tanks deployed. Once
LoS was established, there was no weapon which was not in range. The KV
railguns (Equivalent of an HKP-5) on the heavy tanks had a 60" range as
did
the HKP/4 and DFFG/4 on the human vehicles (as did the DFFG/3 on the
light KV tank). Not one of them was out of range IFF: 1) They had successfully
spotted their target or been handed on, 2) The target had not moved out of
LoS, 3) They had any actions left to use to shoot. The entire tank combat
occurred (due to dense terrain, at about 350m). If one was firing at a small
target (ie the Tank Destroyers remote casement turret and the tank destroyer
having stealth) it might be that a shot couldn't be had considering the cover
present, but I don't recall that event occuring.

** From my recollection, the human tank had the KV spotted ahead of time, came
out to engage, destroyed one enemy tank, then was itself immolated in the
following activation. The TD fired once, was either not spotted or no one had
activations left to fire at it, and it backed down a hill out of LoS. Later it
reappeared for another shot. It seemed very much to me (due to the long weapon
ranges (smallest target was effective class 2 so minimum HW range was 120")
that he who could bear and recognize his target could hit.

[Bri] Many of the rules are beautiful. However, I object to the game
divergence between DS2 and SG2. One would think that two SF ground combat
games from the same company would fit the mechanics in such a way that given 2
identical situations in both games that the results would be similar. This,
unfortunately, is not the case with DS2 and SG2.

** Never seen it done. Not by GW (contrast space hulk, 40K, and space
crusade). Not by FASA (RL/Leviathan/Interceptor - not a particularly
smooth integration). Not by any other company I am aware of. If one tries to
represent all of these situations to produce similar results, then one loses
the intricacies. And generally the games are less fun. I suspect this is why
it is not often done.

I originally purchased FT. Then MT. Then DS2. While on the list, I kept
reading posts that used the same terminology as the DS2 game, but the
mechanics and results seemed skewed. Eventually I purchased a copy of SG2 just
to be able to look up the references from the Mailing List posts. I expected
some differences, since the scales of the games are different. What I was not
expecting is that tactics used on one game, if used in the other game, bring
about VASTLY different results.

** From what I've seen, because the domains aren't terribly compatible (one
is an infantry squad game, the other is a combined arms/combat team game
with an armour emphasis), you have a hard time writing a scenario for each
which would be within the context of both games which will give you a fair
point of comparison.

** I believe sound tactics apply in both. YMMV.

When the long awaited 'Bugs Don't Surf' comes out, I hope that there will be a
section that brings the two systems closer together (in results if not
mechanics).

** If it does, I hope it leans towards SG2. I'm not interested in ruining SG2
by making the entire game board a deathground in which armour prevails.