Re: A complete turn-around of attitude...(david has nailed the issue)
From: db-ft@w... (David Brewer)
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 1996 00:16:23 -0500
Subject: Re: A complete turn-around of attitude...(david has nailed the issue)
In message
<Pine.SUN.3.91N2x.961212121655.28988A-100000@byse.nada.kth.se> Oerjan
Ohlson writes:
> On Thu, 12 Dec 1996, Bob Blanchett wrote:
>
> > On Thu, 12 Dec 1996 02:59:01 GMT, you wrote:
> >
> > >> nearly so... the main difference was that it had very complex
ship
> > >> construction rules. all in all, I think this was a good thing...
> > >
> > >I disagree completely. A space-ship in FT is a game-token like a
> > >piece is in chess. Simple tokens can make for very complex games,
> > >and for very enjoyable ones.
> > >
> > David has hit the issue on the head. The addition of this sort of
> > detail in combat resolution or movement won't make the underlying
game
> > better, it'll *just add more detail*
>
> But neither combat resolution nor movement would be affected by more
> complex design rules!
If having more complex design rules doesn't affect anything... then,
clearly, there would not be any point having them.
But in my experience with games like Car Wars, complex design rules
totally dominate the game... they are usually riddled with
exploitable flaws and encourage people to add huge lists of extra
gee-gaws and "cool ideas". FT is bad enough in these areas already.
> I agree with Brian, and disagree with David; FT space ships aren't
mere
> chess pieces.
That's exactly what they are. They fulfill the same roll as do pieces
in chess, or platoons in Dirtside, as the game's tokens. Play with
the tokens to exert their resources. The more complicated the
resources held by each token, the slower and messier the game. IMHO
that's a bad, bad thing.
Like Adam, most of the widgets in More Thrust appeal to me little.
The only real area of interest there is the sparse EW rules, which
could probably be beefed up profitably. This, at least, adds a new
dimension to the game, rather than streching existing ones to
little benefit.
As regards fighters, I'm quite happy to have all fighters launch in
one turn. I see no need to distinguish carriers from other ships.
--
David Brewer