Prev: RE: Was re: RFACS but diverging into philosophic ramblings about future tech... Next: RE: Was re: RFACS but diverging into philosophic ramblings about future tech...

RE: DSII Cavalry

From: "Glover, Owen" <oglover@m...>
Date: Wed, 16 Feb 2000 08:51:23 +1000
Subject: RE: DSII Cavalry

Hmm, I agree with Brian here. For Stargrunt, I'd say yes you need
horseholders but for Dirtside why? The Base represents 3 to 5
men....What is
the difference in a 3 men and 5 men infantry team firing? So we have a 5
men
mounted stand that fires as three men with 2 horseholders?

DS is an abstraction so let's leave it simple eh?

Owen G

> -----Original Message-----
> From: Brian Bilderback [mailto:bbilderback@hotmail.com]
> Sent: Wednesday, 16 February 2000 7:44 AM
> To: gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
> Subject: Re: DSII Cavalry
> 
> 
> Isn't that a little bit overly strict? The purpose of the stand is to 
> represent the element... as long as I can look at that stand 
> and tell, 
> "That's a cavalry rifle element," I'm not going to quibble 
> that there aren't 
> enough horse holders represented on the stand.
> 
> Brian Bilderback
> 
> "The Irish are the only race of people on Earth for which 
> psychoanalysis is 
> of no use."
> 
>				   - S. Freud
> 
> ----Original Message Follows----
> From: Popeyesays@aol.com
> Reply-To: gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
> To: gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
> Subject: Re: DSII Cavalry
> Date: Tue, 15 Feb 2000 15:29:42 EST
> 
> In a message dated 2/15/00 2:26:18 PM Central Standard Time,
> Aron_Clark@digidesign.com writes:
> 
> << I don't think that's necessary to represent at the 6mm 
> DSII scale. >>
> 
> If you don't represent the horse holders, you'd better 
> decrease the fire
> power of the stands. One third to One fourth of the men in 
> the unit are
> otherwise engaged.
> 
> 
> 
> ______________________________________________________
> Get Your Private, Free Email at http://www.hotmail.com
> 


Prev: RE: Was re: RFACS but diverging into philosophic ramblings about future tech... Next: RE: Was re: RFACS but diverging into philosophic ramblings about future tech...