Re: Blue Sky Thinking (was: Re: [GZG] re: Wanted)

>On 11/3/06, Robert N Bryett <rbryett@mail.com> wrote:
>>  > Even then, as anyone who has done it enough will tell you, the
only
>>>  way to get a really good scenario is to playtest the dickens out of
>>>  it. There is no way to balance a scenario otherwise.
>>
>>Great advice for those who have a large enough group of players to
>>provide play-testers who are not the same people as will be playing
>>the scenario in an actual game. Not especially useful otherwise.
>
>You seem to be missing my point. I'm agreeing with you. I _understand_
>that it's a rare group who can "playtest the dickens" out of a
>scenario. That was the reason I was leading up to the rest of the
>e-mail, suggesting we need a point system and/or a repository for
>scenarios.
>
>Allan

For what it's worth, as the [OFFICIALtm] viewpoint, I pretty much 
agree with everything said by Allan AND everyone else on this 
subject...... while I don't want SG3/SG-AC/G-CAV2/whatever to be 
dominated by a rigid points system that stifles creative scenarios, 
we DO need SOMETHING to make pick-up games and newbie induction a lot 
easier. What form that takes in the end is something that's still 
open to a lot of debate, but personally I favour some sort of system 
that allows you to build your units, then a scenario generator that 
determines your mission for that game and how much of your force you 
can actually use on table to accomplish said mission.

Jon (GZG)

>
>--
>Allan Goodall		  http://www.hyperbear.com
>agoodall@hyperbear.com
>awgoodall@gmail.com
>_______________________________________________
>Gzg-l mailing list
>Gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
>http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l

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