"Inferior", was Re: Just wondering.....

On Mon, 7 Jul 1997, Mikko Kurki-Suonio wrote:

> On Fri, 4 Jul 1997, Oerjan Ohlson wrote:
> 
> > As long as the points cost reflects the poor designs, I don't
mind...
...
> I use "inferior" here to mean "not worth the cost". Even the best ship
in 
> the universe can be an inferior design if it's hideously overpriced.
> 
> Thus clarified, would anyone *buy* a product filled with knowingly 
> inferior designs, just for the flavor or maybe for the challange of
it?

Sure. Of course, once I figure out roughly how badly overpriced they
are, 
I'll adjust their costs downwards for use in friendly games.

The module "Warhounds" for SD:TNM springs to mind here...

> Thus as a designer you're faced with the hard task of inventing
something 
> new and different but equal, or simply raising the stakes and erring
on 
> the side of making newer stuff superior.

There is a third alternative: inventing something superior, but more 
expensive (in game points terms). In that way you can maintain some sort

of balance. Of course, if it _is_ correctly priced/sized, it isn't 
"superior" any longer :)

Later,

Oerjan Ohlson

"Life is like a sewer.
 What you get out of it, depends on what you put into it."
 -Hen3ry