Re: (OT) Rules "inspiration" (was [OT] Bring and Battle

On Fri, 25 Sep 1998, Ground Zero Games wrote:

> We're getting into realms of personal preference again here, I think,
and I
> (not being a computer programmer or career mathematician) tend to
prefer
> systems that don't actually let the players easily calculate exact
odds;

The problem is that unless you get into the computer game business,
someone will always be able to do the math. I don't do probability calc
during play (nor would allow anyone else), but I like to analyze a
system
offgame to see how it works, what kind of tactics might be viable (e.g.
"mongol style" all cavalry tactics often don't work in fantasy games --
not because they didn't work in real life but because the game models
cavalry poorly for a stupid reason like that cavalry models are more
expensive dollar-wise)

> I
> find it adds to the "fog of war" and feeling of simulation - in
reality,
> does a tank commander or gunner stop to figure out "hey, I've got a
24.67%
> chance of killing that big tank, but a 27.2% chance on that lighter
one a
> bit further away - think I'll shoot at the little one..." or does he
just
> let fly at the most obviously threatening target?

...and then get fried by the bigger threat? If you think this is a
problem, that's what target priority rules are for.

If you are opposed to people knowing their chances exactly, how come
you're not opposed to people knowing that the little tank is actually
0.000001mm out of range through pre-measuring? 

My take on this is that off-game, you're free to measure, calculate and
analyze as much as you like. That's what they do in real life all the
time. But in-game represents the actual battle -- you must be able to do
snap decisions based on eyeball judgement. 

> Similarly, why do infantrymen often fire their rifles at aircraft and
> helicopters? Is it because they have worked out that they might
actually
> have a 0.0003% chance of damaging it, or just because it makes them
feel a
> little bit less like fish in a barrel...?

I was *trained* to. The army trained a lot of dumb things, but this one
actually has something going for it.

- While it is virtually impossible to damage a modern attack helicopter
with rifle caliber fire (they're built to withstand 20mm hits, rotors
included), the chance to screw up the attack run is very real
- You're supposed to do it only when you have nothing better to do (i.e.
when you're not the target and nobody's shooting at you)

[GRW]
> This is a minor cock-up, obviously - the designer couldn't have had a
> mailing list full of gleeful number-crunchers to run this stuff
past.... :)

IMHO, if you can't do this much math, or don't have someone in your team
to do it for you, you shouldn't be designing games. 

And that's you in the passive sense ;-)

> Ah, the Hidden Munchkin Trap (TM)......The bigger they are, the more
often
> they break!  :)
> I don't have a problem with this, it just adds to the fun.

I don't have a problem with the effect (let's leave realism out of
this),
but I do have a problem with hidden agendas, built-in anti-newbie bias
and so on.

> Exactly. If it really doesn't matter a damn, why worry about it? We
had to
> state one way or the other about returning the chits to the pot or
not,
> otherwise everyone would have argued about it forever....

You could have told the truth: "It doesn't really matter. We play this
way, but you're free to use whatever you feel most comfortably with.
You're unlikely to notice the effect it has."

A really interesting variation might be not to return the chits at all,
until they're all pulled... especially for solo play.

> Let's just say I've deliberately stayed out of certain on-list
arguments,
> and watched the pretty fireworks.... <BIG GRIN>

Opinion are opinions, facts are facts. I can be pretty stubborn about my
right to express either.

-- 
maxxon@swob.dna.fi (Mikko Kurki-Suonio) 	   | A pig who doesn't
fly
+358 50 5596411 GSM +358 9 80926 78/FAX 81/Voice   | is just an ordinary
pig.
Maininkitie 3C14 02320 ESPOO FINLAND | Hate me?    |	      - Porco
Rosso
http://www.swob.dna.fi/~maxxon/      | hateme.html |