Re: [GZG] Gzg-l Digest, Vol 37, Issue 24 (Ground Zero Games)
From: Sean Schoonmaker <s_schoon@p...>
Date: Thu, 30 Sep 2010 07:58:17 -0700 (PDT)
Subject: Re: [GZG] Gzg-l Digest, Vol 37, Issue 24 (Ground Zero Games)
Gzg-l mailing list
http://mail.csua.berkeley.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lI'm an avid
fleet designer myself, and even though I prefer to design to a story
or theme rather than min-maxing things to death, I totally understand
impulse to do so.
However, even in a story-driven design intent, it's important to me that
be balanced points-wise, so that pitting X points of Design-Theory-A
Design-Theory-B makes for a good scrap.
Likewise, all other things being equal, X points of A versus <X points
should typically result in a victory for A.
I know that sound sort of sterile, but when you attach names like NAC,
ScanFed to them it get's much more interesting!
There is a fundamental decision to be made here before going too far
down such routes, though - and that is, do we go all-out to make the
game as "munchkin-proof" as possible, or do we accept that there will
always be a certain percentage of players for whom the fleet design
stage IS the game, and their enjoyment comes from bringing their
perfectly min-maxed fleet to the table and beating the cr*p out of
We may not agree with their gaming style and mindset (I sure as hell
don't), but does that mean we should just ignore them as a valid part
of the fanbase and try to legislate them out of the game?
I'm not arguing one way or the other here, just playing Devil's
Advocate and getting the discussion rolling to see what comes out....