Re: [GZG] Re: Points systems

[Oerjan Ariander <oerjan.ariander@xxxxxxxxx>]

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@xxxxxxxxx

"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@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l