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

["John Atkinson" <johnmatkinson@xxxxxxxxx>]

On Feb 11, 2008 12:37 PM, Binhan Lin <binhan.lin@xxxxxxxxx> wrote:


> The issue of ranges is a little misleading - just like the discussion of top
> speeds of aircraft being stagnant for the last 50 years.  Although a 19th
> century rifle has similar range to a modern assault rife, the overall
> effectiveness of the modern weapon is way higher - faster rates of fire,
> increased reliability, decreased logistics (for a given amount of
> firepower), increased accuracy, more consistent manufacturing.

Firepower increases.  Range does not.  A man with a Martini-Henry can
put effective fire to the same range as a man with an M-16, perhaps
better with the right optics.  Remember that sniper rifles are
basically the same weapons that line Soldiers were carrying during
World War I, but with better manufacturing, and better optics.

> Extrapolating that to a future wargame, I don't think that ranges are the
> solution.  Either by using firepower dice, defensive modifiers or some other
> mechanism, top line weapons should be more effective than "primative"
> weapons.

I agree entirely.  That's not the point that I'm arguing, however.

John

-- 
"Thousands of Sarmatians, Thousands of Franks, we've slain them again
and again.  We're looking for thousands of Persians."
--Vita Aureliani

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