RE: [GZG] RE: FT Scenarios

["McCarthy, Tom \(xwave\)" <Tom.McCarthy@xxxxxxxxx>]

The only thing that kept me from trying to write an FT/VBAM book was the
knowledge that Jon usually does all the writing for the FTverse, and
he's got too many other products to write first (FT3, DS3, SG3, BDS).

There was a lengthy post on the list in 2005 about an FT/VBAM
conversion, though I found it a bit too fine-grained.

> -----Original Message-----
> From: gzg-l-bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx [mailto:gzg-l-
> bounces@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx] On Behalf Of Nyrath the nearly wise
> Sent: Thursday, January 12, 2006 9:23 AM
> To: gzg-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> Subject: Re: [GZG] RE: FT Scenarios
> 
> McCarthy, Tom (xwave) wrote:
> > I've taken more than a casual look at Victory By Any Means.  It's a
> > campaign game with politics, espionage, trade, economics,
manufacturing
> > and combat.  They have guidelines for when a battle is not worth
> > resolving (too one-sided), when it should be resolved as fleet
combat
> > (abstract), and when it should go to the table.
> 
> 	Me too. I haven't actually played it, but the
> 	rules look clean, and it looks like a good
> 	match with Full Thrust.
> _______________________________________________
> Gzg-l mailing list
> Gzg-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
> http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l

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