Prev: RE: Anti Grav...... Next: RE: Anti Grav......

Re: Scatterguns and SMPs... and PDAF

From: Brian Lojeck <lojeck@r...>
Date: Tue, 22 Apr 1997 17:32:39 -0400
Subject: Re: Scatterguns and SMPs... and PDAF

> Mikko Kurki-Suonio wrote:
> > Yeah, scenarios, umpires and all that... but in practice most of our
> > gaming sessions are rather impromptu "let's play X". Without points
> > system the only real choice is two identical forces -- and that gets
> > real quick.
> I have to argue this.  You only have to accept identical forces if you
> really care about being `perfectly fair' and not having a good game. 
> it says in STARGRUNT, if you have a superior force in numbers or
> technology, set up the scenario so that you're at a disadvantage. 
> Change their motivation.  Decrease their morale for one reason or
> another.

You're talking out of both sides of your mouth there. By your second
sentence, a good game isn't "perfectly fair", yet in your 3rd, you talk
about ways to make a game fair with uneven armies, so obviously you like
some degree of fairness in your games too...

While I agree that a point system isn't the be-all and end-all of
fairness, a good point system at least gives you a rule of thumb to
stuff by when designing a scenario. For a scenario I'm designing now for
Planetstorm (Legions of Steel and Planetstorm have by far the fairest
point system I've ever seen, even if it isn't totally perfectly perfect)
I've designed the shock troop attacking a static position. Based on my
experience, I know that the ability to remain stationary and in cover
very nearly double the point value of a figure, so I tell my friend to
design an 800 point force to defend in the scenario. I have no doubt I
will need to tweak the scenario in playtesting, but at least we have a
to communicate the sort-of relative power of our forces. That way any
tweaking can be done in playtesting rather then before hand AND in

> Myself, I find using systems without point systems actually
> my enjoyment, because I've actually had some input into what's going
> There are reasons for the battles, aim, /context/.  That makes all the
> difference, win /or/ lose.

context, aim, reasons, stories, input are all totally seperate from a
point system. In the year plus I've been gaming with my current group
(with a point system in all our games) I've not played one single
non-scenario game. At times we make the scenario up as we go along, but
the point system doesn't remove that aspect of the game at all... what
does is give a yardstick (as loose a yardstick as it may be) to judge
relative strengths...

Brian Lojeck
Entertainment Technology Center

Prev: RE: Anti Grav...... Next: RE: Anti Grav......