Re: [GZG] [OFFICIAL] Question: was Re: [SG3]: What if?

[Phillip Atcliffe <atcliffe@xxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Ground Zero Games wrote:
> [...] do folks WANT the small high-tech infantry force to be able to shoot and kill enemy infantry at twice or three times the range that lower-tech troops can, or do you just want their fire to be more effective but at the same sort of ranges throughout?
>   
I'd say one question is can you have a flexible enough game at SG scale 
and force size if the high-tech grunts have the extra range and/or 
firepower? At present, SG allows for much of the usual kind of infantry 
combat that players (and historians) are used to -- everything from 
long-range exchanges of fire to melee, depending on scenario. Can you 
still do that with a high/low tech match-up if high-tech = much longer 
range? Or will such a match-up become the 22nd century equivalent of 
spear-carrying natives walking into machine-gun fire? If the latter, 
then the kinds of scenario that give both sides a decent chance become 
human wave attacks, in which the low-tech side needs a huge numerical 
advantage to cope with the fact that most of his troops are going to end 
up as mincemeat, or must involve ambushes or terrain that negates the 
range advantage -- in which case, it's not much use as a game mechanic.

There are lots of ifs, ands and buts about that, but it makes the point, 
I think. Do players have games in which extra range can become decisive, 
or is it moot because a Lee Enfield has the same range as a plasma rifle 
in an urban/jungle/forest/wbatever environment? I wouldn't know, I'm a 
vacc-head. :-)

Phil



_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
http://mead.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l