Re: [DS2, SG2] Sci-Fi Flavor in Games

"Bell, Brian K" wrote:

> Greetings,
>   One of the things that I have noticed in DS2 games is a distinct
lack of
> Sci-Fi flavor to most of the games (I suspect the same would hold true
for
> SG2). Most of the DS2 games could just as easily be accomplished by
WW2
> tanks and troops.

    Which I think is one of the strengths of both games.  It uses real
tactics
and stresses the importance of the man behind the gun.

>   Yes there are differences. But most of them are not different enough
to
> add a SF flavor. Hover & Grav units are just faster (unless near open
> water).

    But that is a real difference in many scenarios.  Try Operation
Market
Garden historically.  Then run it through with grav tanks using DSII. 
You get
completely different tactics when bridges are no longer choke points.

> HELs, DFFGs, etc. could just as easily be different types of
> conventional shells. Power Armor is just infantry with body armor.

    Right, but infantry wasn't running around with body armor in WWII. 
Already
it gives a different feel, because you have troops that are inherently
tougher
than others.

>   SG2 may not have this problem as Power Armor is much tougher in SG2.
(I
> have not played enough to tell).

    Don't forget, if you have fast power armor, you can really move
across
terrain.  Again, this is a completely different feel from WWII.

>   Ogre and Battletech do not have this problem because they step
outside
> what would be considered possible (Indestructible Tank/Giant Robots).

    If you want those features in your games, design the scenarios so
that they
are included.  The focus of SGII is on infantry, though.  So any other
scenario
focus is going to be a mismatch.  DSII focuses on the tank platoon, so a
similar
caveat applies.  It can be done, though.  For SGII, I'm currently
working on a
scenario that has a big hovertank (class 5) moving through a town.  The
defenders have a few tank killers, but they do not have the mobility of
the
hover tank.  Of course, the hovertank has infantry support, so it's not
as
simple as rushing the hovertank with all of your tank killers.

>   And I am not saying it is the entirely the problem of the DS2 game
design.
> It was designed to be generic, and therefore it conforms to known
ideas and
> stretches belief less than some other games.

    Right, but that also leaves room for you to stretch your belief as
far as it
will go.  Nothing in the rules prevents you from building a scenario
with unique
features and unbelievable weapons or vehicles.

>   I am also not saying that it was entirely the fault of the scenario
> designer either. I have played games where there was a good SF flavor.
> However, these games usually involved aliens or an exotic environment
> (Moonbase Xi).

    Yes, these are some simple ways to drive home the fact that "we're
not in
Kansas."  "Xi" was a great example of an exotic environment taken to the
extreme.  It also looked great, btw.

>   I would like some input on how to create a greater SF flavor to
these
> games other than by using aliens or exotic environments.

    OK, what I've done in my SGII games (I haven't started gaming DSII
on my
own.) is to set up situations that simply wouldn't have occurred in
historical
settings, or at least were extremely unlikely.
    In SGII, I figure most of the supply lines for the aggressor are not
on the
ground.  If they are attacking the planet with ground forces, I'm
assuming they
have control of near-orbit and drop a great deal of the supplies
directly to the
companies and battalions in the field.	Consequently, many of my
scenarios
center around isolated units securing a good drop or landing zone for
resupply.
I also have an inordinate number of scenarios where the supplies missed
the drop
zone and two squads or platoons are rushing to get the supplies.  OK, I
admit,
it's not a heavy sci-fi feel, but it's not very historical, either.
    Another feature of the sci-fi setting is that most units will be
spread thin
and many will not have the luxury of being supported by artillery.  This
is just
a consquence of the greater mobility in the sci-fi setting.  In a WWII
game, it
would be unusual if you didn't have arty support, but in DSII/SGII, I
can see
units moving out of arty range on a regular basis.  Even if you control
near
orbit, there's no guarantee they can swing the ortillery platform around
in time
to help you, even if it is available.
    But beyond those specific scenario design parameters, there are also
the
different types and mixes of troops.  Even in the GZG universe, there is
a
different feel if you're running a NAC Royal Marines platoon or FSE
Colonial
Legion platoon.  Both of them run very different from historicals. 
However,
once again, the systems were designed with modern combat in mind, so
you're
never going to stray too far that model.
    Brian, I agree with what you're saying, though.  There is a sci-fi
flavor to
DSII/SGII, but it is not as heavy as some of the competition.  You might
try
designing more EW units into your scenarios.  Nothing screams sci-fi
more than
an EW, ECM, ECCM, ECCCM, ECCCCM duel. <g>

-Mike

--
Michael Sarno

http://vietnam.isonfire.com
Check out the Charlie Company Discussion Group:
Info, resources, and links for RAFM's miniatures
skirmish wargame of infantry combat in Vietnam 1965-1972

"The world has no room for cowards.
 We must all be ready to toil, to suffer, to die.
 And yours is no less noble because no drum beats
 before you when you go out in your daily battlefields.
 And no crowds shout about your coming when you
 return from your daily victory or defeat."
 -Robert Louis Stevenson