Re: [MISC] [OT] Bring and Battle

>This, in theory at least, sounds good. It would need a lot of very
careful
>thought and planning to put into practice, because it wouldl have to be
>generic enough to be useful with most forces that players will have
>available, heowever that isn't to say it couldn't be done. The main
thing
>that I've gathered from the recent discussion is not that we need a
points
>systems for its own sake, but that what is needed is a way of at least
>roughly balancing ad-hoc games; how many people would be happy with
>achieving this in a non-points-based way, such as suggested here?
>
>Jon (GZG)

I for one would be very interested in such a non-point based system.

Though I have used point systems in the past, I find that in my
experience
the players play to the point system, not the game. While optimizing the
forces is certainly understandable, it does shift the emphasis from
learning the strategy and tactics of the game to victory through
ruthless
exploitation of the points system. For example, I've observed this in
BattleTech, Full Thrust, and the various permutations of the WRG
Ancients
rules.

My solution, at least in Full Thrust, is to use the pregenerated ships
in
the rules. These are not maximized (or so my players complain), but
rarely
is real life military hardware. It is often (at least in the US) a
product
of political compromise and expediency rather than strict military
needs.
As much as possible, I try to set a series of linked scenarios against
the
backdrop of an ongoing campaign, often without the players knowing they
are
particpating (I run the campaign for my own amusement: don't have to
worry
about getting folks to turn in moves, or replacing them when they drop
out). Anyway, then I assign fleets to the players i.e., whomever shows
up
(the more realistic option: few Commodores, in real life or SF get to
custom design their squadrons/task forces/fleets), or give them a pool
of
predesigned ships to draw from. Once chosen, they are stuck with them.

Am I anti-custom design? Nope. More power to those who enjoy it. Just
that
I don't have the time and energy to check each player's design, fuss and
fight with the designer of the rejected ships, as well as design/referee
the games.

Anyway, just my two francs worth...

Eric Ackermann
eackerma@vt.edu

BTW, it is the overall laissez-faire attitude of the FT/DS/SG rules that
I
enjoy so much (well, besides the generic flexibility built into the
rules).
Reminds me of how much I enjoyed SF gaming in the dark ages of late 1979
when strict rules conformity wasn't required. Can make the game more
hard
SF or Space Opera to suit one's tastes. Creativity and fun, that's for
me.

Eric