Re: data saturation on in future combat Was:rules "inspiration"

On Mon, 5 Oct 1998, Los wrote:

While we agree on most things, let me stress one point:

> I think this can be addressed as a function of crew quality. The short
> answer to your question is yes, most of the time you do. 

*Always*. Not most of the time. Not even 99% of the time. Always.
*Most optimal*. Not pretty good choice. Not one of many nearly equals.
Most optimal.

Out of an arbitrarily high number of choices. 

One could argue that sophisticated battle computer could evaluate
threats,
highlight the best choices etc. -- but then we really need to think: If
your systems are this good, what the heck do you need a human crew for?
All but the most experienced crews are going to pick the computer's
choice
nr.1 anyway. Even the vets might do it, if that's what kept them alive
long enough to get veteran.

There are many unknown factors on a real battlefield. There are unknown
factors on a miniatures table. Unknowns contribute to "fog of war",
which 
I think is good for atmosphere.

While these factors are admittedly *not* always the same, *I* think it
is
preferably to retain those onboard unknowns in place of the battlefield
ones, instead of allowing players to stop action, pre-determine onboard
unknowns and then add extra rules to simulate the battlefield ones. 

-- 
maxxon@swob.dna.fi (Mikko Kurki-Suonio) 	   | A pig who doesn't
fly
+358 50 5596411 GSM +358 9 80926 78/FAX 81/Voice   | is just an ordinary
pig.
Maininkitie 3C14 02320 ESPOO FINLAND | Hate me?    |	      - Porco
Rosso
http://www.swob.dna.fi/~maxxon/      | hateme.html |