Prev: FW: Bigger not always better--Take 2 Next: RE: GZG questions

FW: Bigger not always better--Take 2

From: Paul Calvi <tanker@r...>
Date: Fri, 28 Mar 1997 14:40:29 -0500
Subject: FW: Bigger not always better--Take 2

Yes, we keep waiting for a nice, clean, playable, operational level game
that would generate 
engagements for FT but still be enjoyable enough in its own right to
make it worth playing.

Most of the operational level games out there (at least that I'm aware
of) focus on economics and expansion (MOO, MOO2, Stars!, Stellar
Conquest, etc...) more than real operational fleet actions.
 Give me a game where I can take a "front" or "sector" and defend it (or
attack it) with limited 
resources and supply. I think that would make for a fun few months of FT
gaming!

Just my two cents anyway,

Paul
----------
From:  hosford.donald [SMTP:hosford.donald@email.acd.net]
Sent:  Wednesday, March 26, 1997 11:09 AM
To:  FTGZG-L@bolton.ac.uk
Subject:  Re: Bigger not always better-Take 2

Paul Calvi wrote:
> 
> 
> 
> Thanks,
> Paul
Sounds like you (and your play group) should get into a space empire
building game.	In Empire games, you have to build a balanced fleet. 
This allows you to have enough ships everywhere you need them.	An all
Capital fleet would be impressive in battle, but you wouldn't have
enough ships to guard your boarders.  Your enemies could pin your fleet
down in one or two battles, and then send their light stuff to take your
empire!
Donald Hosford

Prev: FW: Bigger not always better--Take 2 Next: RE: GZG questions