Re: Another POINTless Argument

On Apr 22, 23:17, Allan Goodall wrote:
> Subject: Another POINTless Argument (was Re: Scatterguns and SMPs...
and P
...
> I haven't seen a point system yet that isn't broken. In fact, it's
near
> impossible for a single number to represent the ability of a unit.
Take the

Bingo.

> Point systems, once an aid to scenario design, have resulted in the
Games
> Workshopping of the hobby. Grand defenses, stunning offenses, and
> hopeless/heroic delaying missions have been replaced by that most rare
of
> modern military occurances: the balanced meeting engagement.	Instead
of

You need not restrict yourself to "modern" here.

> someone designing a memorable scenario where--shudder--one side might
be
> better off than the other (thus requiring some actual tactical
THOUGHT), the
> hobby has devolved into an endless march of "bring 2000 points of
Orks, I'll
> have 2000 points of Squats" slugfests over even terrain. Why they
don't just

Even that is more sane and sensible than the WRG Ancients/DMA/DBM folks
who use
their points system to justify battles beween Samurai and Roman
legionaries.

What I would find useful, rather than any sort of scenario-points sort
of
system, is an economic cost system. Regardless of how effective X is vs.
Y, I'd
like to know how much it costs _to _produce. Bugger how well it works.
This
would be very useful for campaigns, where scenario points are, well,
pointless.

-- 
------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
|  john_medway@zycor.lgc.com  |  Landmark Graphics Corp  |  512.292.2325
 |
------------------------------------------------------------------------
---
|		 "I am not a user. I am a human being." 		
 |
------------------------------------------------------------------------
---