Re: [GZG] John's Shipbuilding

[Allan Goodall <agoodall@xxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

On 1/17/06, gzg-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
<gzg-l-request@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:

> Date: Mon, 16 Jan 2006 23:08:38 -0800 (PST)
> From: "Jaime Tiampo" <fugugaipan@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>

> Something like 50% of the points is retained if the ship withdrawals
> instead of the 0% you keep is it's lost. Or inversely, your opponent only
> gets 50% is you successfully retire the ship instead of hte full amount.

That can still end up with "gamey" results. The player figures out
he's lost the scenario on points. He knows there is a small, but real
chance that keeping his SDN on the table could destroy the other guy's
ships (for instance, he rolls a bunch of 6s on his last beam attack).
So, the player keeps the ship on the table. He would lose if he
removed it, just not as badly. Since it's a one-shot game, he's still
going to do a "death ride" because of the small possible chance of
winning from good dice rolling.

Your idea does help a lot, particularly in the early stages of a game.

Probably a better bet would be to tie victory conditions to the number
of ships destroyed. A player may have to inflict X points of damage on
his opponent to win, but automatically loses if he lost Y ships.

A better idea is various levels of success/failure (Avalon Hill's
Panzer Leader had Decsive, Tactical, and Marginal victories and
defeats). You could assign numbers to these and keep a total going
between games. In a metagaming sense, your total across the games
becomes your campaign system. At least it would encourage a player to
minimize his losses.

--
Allan Goodall            http://www.hyperbear.com
agoodall@xxxxxxxxxxxxx
awgoodall@xxxxxxxxx

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