Re: DS2 Balance and stuff.

>From: Graeme Bradbury <graeme.bradbury@btinternet.com>
>Reply-To: gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
>To: "'gzg-l'" <gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU>
>Subject: DS2 Balance and stuff.
>Date: Tue, 25 Apr 2000 13:14:43 +0100
>
>I can't see why Hi tech's need an advantage such as this more shots or
>move-shoot-move.

Because some of us feel that, given the difference in cost for a
Superior 
system over a Basic system, the advantage should be a little greater
than 
just a slight increase in the odds of hitting. You should get what you
pay 
for.

Since i'll agree a LoTech Tank force vs. Hitech Tank
>force will virtually always go to the LoTechs. A Lo v Hi
Army/Corp/whatever
>will go to the general with the better tactics.

Granted, the superior tactician has an innate advantage, but I disagree
that 
the playing field is level and that tactical brilliance alone will win 
games.	Again, the advantages you get with high tech should be enough to

bring you even with the player who spends his points on a mass of low
tech 
fodder.

>
>But Hitech has the firepower increase. And i dont mean bigger guns. A
>High tech HKP/4 has more firepower than a loTech HKP/4. Because
>the high tech is on a better chassis. It will tend to be firing at
closer
>range, at side or rear armour, etc.

How so? FireCon levels don't improve the quality of the chassis in the
game 
at all. Last I checked, according to the rules, a Low tech tank, with
basic 
firecon, basic ECM, no stealth, and an HVC 3, if it's Fast Tracked, has
the 
exact same movement ability as a High Tech tank, with Superior FireCon, 
Superior ECM, full stealth, sporting an MDC 5.	And this gives IT the 
advantage, since closer ranges actually favor the Low Tech side (Their
odds 
of hitting go up, while the High Tech side wants to hold the low techs
at 
bay, out where the Hi Tech guns can hit and the Low Techs can't).
>
>High tech is also far more dependant on being combined arms. It can't
>afford to use tanks to hold objectives. It's tanks can't fire fast
enough 
>to
>wax a superior number of enemy tanks, so it has to call in its planes
and
>arty.

And Infantry, and engineers... I do agree with you here.

>I would also like to see the stats for hte two forces that started this
>discussion Since, from what i could tell, they were rather
multi-purpose
>toys.
>
>Just my 2 pence
>Graeme

Ditto.

Brian Bilderback
________________________________________________________________________
Get Your Private, Free E-mail from MSN Hotmail at http://www.hotmail.com