Re: [GZG] Re: Points systems

John A. wrote:

> >of pocket greasing) to name just a few. As a result, the weapons and
> >vehicles that give the most real-world bang per real-world buck for
nation
> >A might not be cost-effective at all for nation B (if they're able to
> >operate it at all)!
>
>Was it you [...]

No, Zoe did. It was one of the examples I was thinking of though.

> >Unfortunately, the only way to reflect all these strategical and
> >operational factors in Full Thrust *tactical* games and thus get the
> >players to "voluntarily" design "realistic" weapons and vehicles is
to play
> >a campaign with very detailed rules for the campaign economics... or,
like
> >Hugh said, use army/fleet lists. 'Course, even with army lists you'll
still
> >get players who only field SS divisions (because there were battles
with
> >only SS divisions involved, so the lists have to allow for forces
like that
> >too) :-(
>
>Hmph.	German WWII players who play with the entire production run of
>certain heavy tank models represented on the table at once. . .
[...]
>The only time you'd see a full strength division was if a few
>were pulled off the line and reconstituted to serve as the striking
>force for an offensive.

Yep. That type of player tends to be *very* specific as to what day the
OOB 
used to justify their forces is taken from - for some reason they always

manage to field those divisions which have been especially equipped for 
some particular operation... :-/

>It also depends on the difference between the best and the worst.  In
>Full Thrust, where the difference between human-tech ships is all a
>matter of taste and design choices, there may be relatively little
>difference.

As long as you play similar-points battles, that is. Eastern front
battles 
in late '44 would probably see the Soviets fielding at least 4-5x as
many 
points to spend on troops as the Germans - even before weighing in any 
difference in troop and equipment quality (which would most likely
increase 
the ratios of men or tanks even further in favour of the Reds).

> >[The only other comment I had to Hugh's post was the same one John A.
> >already made, so I don't have to :-) ]
>
>Two compliments on one week.  Either you're getting soft in your old
>age, or I'm getting better at this.

I'd say you're getting better <g>

/Oerjan
oerjan.ariander@telia.com

"Life is like a sewer.
  What you get out of it, depends on what you put into it."
-Hen3ry

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