Re: [FT] Avalanche's Imperium

--- Laserlight <laserlight@quixnet.net> wrote:

> You could arbitrarily say something like "maximum
> rate of economical
> production of B3s is 15 units per year", with extras
> being allowed at
> an increasingly high surcharge.  IIRC the main
> limitation on building
> battleships (for someone--don't recall which
> nation(s)) was producing
> the guns.  Doesn't matter if you can crank out 100
> hulls a year, if
> you can only arm 10 of them.	Put that kind of limit
> on several
> systems and you have something like the constraint
> you want.  Of
> course, it also gets to be less of a "beer and
> pretzels" game.
> Operations is probably easier.

Well, you also get into "Sure, we can theoretically
build 150 battleships, but we havn't got the senior
and mid-level officers, nor the Petty officers to man
them" and you start having to balance crew quality
with naval size.  How much can you ramp up your
training programs and how much with that cost?	Is it
better to open a new school for engineering officers,
or lay down a dreadnought?  

Also, capital warships have a stupidly long lead time
to build, and I've never seen a game that adequately
enforces that limitation on 'em.  Or how about "Look,
we just invented the Uberbeam.	I want to retrofit it
to my 90% complete battleship, but it's going to
require redesigning the power distribution net from
the ground up.	That'll take another year. . . "

Or maybe your people are just bloody sick of the draft
requiring them to spend 5 years in space getting blown
up.  
 
Infrastructure investments are rarely handled well.  I
mean, if you've got a big military, but crap education
systems, health care, and other infrastructure, you
start looking a lot like Iraq.

Oh, and shall we discuss domestic politics?  

John

__________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Yahoo! Mail Plus - Powerful. Affordable. Sign up now.
http://mailplus.yahoo.com