QLM questions

[Jeff Conner]

I think you are correct in your assumptions about using QLM in scenarios that were not designed for it; that it may affect the play balance. However, my understanding of the rule is that it does not reflect increases in technology, but that more experienced (and to some extent, better trained) troops are going to make better use of cover, use move and fire techniques not covered in the game, move when they should and not when they shouldn't. The rule tries to simulate this by modifying the casualties based on morale. Since these advantages for elite troops are pretty much timeless, the rule can be used with just about any time period.

I personally like it very much. I think that one of the weaknesses of SB is that it is more of a weapon based simulation rather than a troop quality simulation; one man (or tank crew) is almost as good as any other. This does not seem to be overly historical and I think QLM helps balance that out a bit. Falklands is a pretty good example of what I am talking about. At Goose Green (just one example, there are many others), a single battalion of elite British troops drove back and eventually forced the surrender of a force twice its size. Both sides were somewhat surprised by size of the opposing force. That battle would be difficult to simulate with SB without QLM, and even with it, the British player will be hard pressed to duplicate the historical losses suffered by the British.

That's just my two cents worth on a Sunday afternoon, I yield the pulpit.

Jeff