Re: Another POINTless Argument

In message <9704231007.ZM14043@sake.zycor.lgc.com> "johnjmedway" writes:
> On Apr 22, 23:17, Allan Goodall wrote:
> > 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 hopeless/heroic delaying missions have been replaced by that most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.

Err... doesn't the above paragraph apply to most periods?

I think it is unfair to ascribe this to GW. Not everything is their
fault. I may not be as old as Allan, but I'm sure points values and
tournament games pre-date the GW-boom.

> > 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.

I believe the justification for fighting Samurai and Romans is that,
well, it's a *laff*. I've got one army, you've got t'other, play a 
game. The points are there to keep thing as honest as one can keep 
them with a points system (not very). 

In this case the Samurai get some Irr Cv(O) that dismount as Bw(S) 
which some people might claim are a bit cheesy.

I think the DB* games are a relatively good example of how a points
system isn't necessarily crap, or irredeemably broken. It is 
definately worth noting that there is a sort of context generation 
aspect to game set-up where it is determined who attacks/defends/
sets-out-the-terrain, what time of day/night the battle is fought, 
what sort of terrain can be used, what sort of weather conditions 
prevail. Players chose to send out flank marches and have to defend 
their baggage train. A player can gamble on buying defensive 
barriers and naval units. That sort of context elevates the game 
from being just another bland meeting engagement (and, hey, armies 
*did* go looking for each other). Also the game resolves into a 
range of Victory Points with 10 points shared between the players.

-- 
David Brewer