Re: My own comments on Re: mixing technology force in Dirtside

> >
> > Which mini is that?
> >
> 
> It's the Combine Yankee light tank.  You can likely see a pic of it at

> warehouse 23.  The ones I'm using as Tank Destroyers are actually
larger 
> (Ral Partha) than the warehouse 23 ones, but are designed about the
same. 
> I have no idea of why the ones from SJG are smaller, but I use the
smaller 
> ones as MICV/command tanks.
>
   The RP light tanks are virtually the same size as the regular "heavy"
tanks,
 but are supposed to be smaller one man tanks along the lines of the
GEV-LGEV
 idea.	SJG made the newer ones smaller to be more in line with their 
 description.

 
> 
> >> I agree with that as well.  However, most rules
> >> don't.  Thus, if you're
> >
> > Is it just me or can you sit down with every single
> > in-print Nappy game (and all the OOP ones too) and
> > determine which nation the designer has stacks and
> > stacks of lead for, and which ones he just can't work
> > up the interest to buy lead for?
> >
> 
> It's not just you.  Most napoleonic rule writers think that Napoleon
was 
> infallable, and that his troops were better than anyone elses around. 
> Then some will be Anglofiles, and that's about it. :)
> 
> J
> 

   Considering that Nappy managed to kick all of Europe around for the
better
 part of 15 years, I'm not sure that the rule writers are that far off. 
Since
 most gamers actively dislike modelling command and control at all,
blending
 the poor commanders of the non-french into their troops is the only way
to
 get close to a semi-historical result for those troops.  The individual
French
 trooper may not have been much better than his foes, but his commanders
were
 *much* better than almost everyone they faced for an extended period of
time.

  grant