Re: Re: [GZG] John's Shipbuilding

["Grant A. Ladue" <ladue@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

   I agree, whether a *race* would surrender or abandon it's ships is more of
 a campaign or setting issue.  I think that the issue of whether it's 
 *possible* to surrender ships in battle is something we can talk about in 
 general game terms.  
   What I'm getting at here is that the major problem for surrendering your
 damaged/sinking ship in modern times (WWI -> ) seems to be communicating that
 surrender to the other side.  Combat from WWI onwards was frequently not 
 fought at the kind of ranges where a visual "white flag" was feasible, and
 the comm equipment on a ship is often knocked out along with it's fighting
 ability.  It's in these circumstances where abandoning ship may be the only
 way to demonstrate that you are no longer a combatant.  Off hand, I can't 
 think of a single surface ship that surrendered during combat from WWI on.  A
 few submarines did, but they could demonstrate their surrender by moving from
 their normal fighting position (underwater) to the surface and then not 
 manning the quite visible guns.  Surface ships don't have that luxury.  I 
 would think that spaceships have the same problem.  It seems like the 
 convention that has evolved is the "honorable" way to surrender is to abandon
 your ship after ensuring that it will be destroyed after most of the crew is
 off.  It gives the crew a shot (perhaps just a long long shot) at survival
 without handing over valuable property and info to the enemy.  I would expect
 that space combat would be similiar, although I can see an argument for 
 having the surrender mechanism be to eject the power core and subsequently
 destroying any secret weapons or info on board.  This would be so that the
 life support of the remaining vessel could be used for the crew until other
 arrangements can be made.

   grant


> 
> I think these thoughts play into the adopted conventions and combat honor o=
> f
> the govenrmental/racial powers involved. If a gov't power/race is known  to
> send up the white flag of surrender, and then fire upon the victors, it is
> very likely that future surrenders - whether or not legitimate - would even
> be honored.
> 
> At the same time, on the flip side, you can then start modelling races who
> will fire at a target until dead ("It's the only way to be sure"*, refusing
> to take prisoners. ;-)
> 
> * translated from whatever language originally spoken into language
> understandable for readers of this thread
> 
> However, I think this really is outside the scope of FT games, and more in
> the realm of campaigns.
> 
> Hmmm, campaigns. Is that this thread or another? :dazed&confused:
> 
> Mk
> 
_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l