Re: DS II: Capitulation (was point balancing)

Just think of me being a little hyper-sensitive when it comes to this
topic--I REALLY want to avoid a serious number-crunching system like
Striker
was--I just don't have the inclination to fiddle with annoying stuff in
my
hobby when it's all I do for work.

And there would be a lot more difference in an FB-type design system for
DS
than you're letting on--or have I missed something?  You know, there's
the
fact that in FB there's really only one drive system (okay, with FB2,
there's 2).  In DS, we're talking how many?  And how 'bout ground
pressure
being used to determine speed in addition to P/W?  Especially since most
movement will be cross-country and NOT on roads.  And in FB, you only
have
total armor, not on facings.  I guess I could go on, but I think you get
my
point.

Then again, I think that my level of required detail may just be a bit
less
than your preferred level :-)

Oh well, each to his (or her--sorry Beth) own.

Rob

----- Original Message -----
From: Oerjan Ohlson <oerjan.ohlson@telia.com>
To: <gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>
Sent: Wednesday, May 03, 2000 12:46 AM
Subject: Re: DS II: Capitulation (was point balancing)

> Robert W. Hofrichter wrote:
>
> >In other words, make it more like the original Striker rules.  Nicely
> >detailed, and kind of fun to design vehicles, but only if you are
into
> >number-crunching.  Personally, I think I'd rather stick to something
a
> >little less complicated (like DS2--duh!).
>
> Doing it the current DSII way can work, but in this case armour needs
> to be *very* much more expensive than it is now. Personally I find the
> Fleet Book design system - which my DSII variant would resemble quite
a
> bit - to be both less complicated and a lot more intuitive than the
> current DSII system.
>
> >Not that the current system is all that great in terms of realism--I
> think
> >it could be improved, without adding too much complication, by having
> >armor use up space in the design, but to do the design by the
> different >facings, etc, is probably going a little too far for me.
>
> You can always use the current standard (front is 1 stronger, bottom 1
> weaker than everything else). However, the past eight months has seen
> at least four requests for customizable armour in DSII from other
> players than me <shrug>
>
> >And I like the idea of speed being a factor of P/W ratio, but I can't
> off >hand think of an easy, simple, way to do it that wouldn't f-up
the
> current >simple design process.
>
> Look at the Fleet Book system. Complicated? <g>
>
> Regards,
>
> Oerjan Ohlson
> oerjan.ohlson@telia.com
>
> "Life is like a sewer.
>   What you get out of it, depends on what you put into it."
> - Hen3ry
>
>