Re: DS3 points systems and features

--- Ryan Gill <rmgill@mindspring.com> wrote:
> At 12:45 PM -0800 4/5/02, John Atkinson wrote:
> 
> >
> >Hrm. . . So what you're saying is that any pretence
> at
> >point balance is inherently flawed and depends on
> >scenario design and usage?
> >
> 
> BINGBINGBING

In that case, why are we spending so much bandwidth
discussing it?

And more to the point, why does the litany go like
this?

"I want the design system to be 100% effects based (on
a varying scale, either additive, multiplicative,
exponential, or logarithmic), able to handle
everything from the Roman Legions to TL15 Norris Grav
Tanks with fire support from the USS Enterprise, along
with John Ringo's GalTech and Dune's Sandworms, and
Heavy Gears, and OGREs, and, and, Klingons, and David
Drake's Hammer's Slammers, and Star Wars
Stormtroopers, and dogfighting space fighters from
Star Wars, Star Trek, Babylon 5, and Battlestar
Galactica, in the same airspace over the battle. . .
and I want it all to be as simple as Full Thrust's
design system!!!"

The only reason for a points system in the first place
is running pickup games. . . but that's been slammed
as well since you should "negotiate basic
gamesmanship" before a pickup game. . . 

So exactally what's the argument?

> a 3000 pt force with zero ADS vs a 500 pt force of
> ground and 2500 
> VTOLS and Aerospace will get wiped from the table.
> 
> Some points costs are exceedingly relative.

All points costs are relative.

Hell, in the right circumstances, a light infantry
company which costs just over 1,000 points can stop
cold a short armored batallion of roughly 5,000
points.  Things just happen.
 
John

__________________________________________________
Do You Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Tax Center - online filing with TurboTax