RE: [GZG] Re: Points systems

G'day,

> Most tech-imbalanced or scenarios have to involve the technical
advantages
> being nullified by blindingly stupid decisions at all levels from the
grand
> stategic to the guys on the ground.  

Actually they don't have to involve that kind of thing, we've had plenty
of games where we've left the blunders to the players. Maybe you're just
an exceptional player ;)

On top of which the example you gave (Isandalwala and Little Big Horn)
are examples of extreme tech differences, which I said would not be the
ones happening regularly. 

> Your comparison to propellor tag with Aussie diesels is hardly an
example of
> a large technology gap.  As I understand it, the key factor in sub
warfare
< is sensor quality and crew quality.  While an Aussie diesel may not
have all
> the latest land-attack cruise missles and round-the-world-submerged
capability,
> they do have quality crews and I doubt that anyone is skimping on the
sonar suites. 

Not intentionally, but as we tend to buy US offcasts... ;P (that was a
joke before you all descend on me from on high... especially Zoe).

> At the granularity of Full Thrust or even Dirtside, it would be
utterly
> indistinguishable.  We aren't exactally playing Harpoon.

If you're trying to fit the third world into the same scheme all in one
go you're probably right. If you're playing a scenario just between the
US and Australia and you want to capture the differences, then it would
be fine. That's the beauty of re-scaling and abstraction ;)

Have fun (well ok take care I guess fun won't be much on the menu)

Beth

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l