Prev: OT:Re: Memories of PBS (Was:Re:S:AAB USS Saratoga specs) Next: Off Again...

RE: Dirtside vs. Stargrunt?

From: "Owen Glover" <oglover@b...>
Date: Sat, 8 Jul 2000 11:49:15 +1000
Subject: RE: Dirtside vs. Stargrunt?

Well, seems like I'm a little behind everyone else in adding my
thoughts....

I'd actually say that Stargrunt is a better game for playing out the
troop-landing side than Dirtside.

Dirtside is heavily armour oriented whereas Stargrunt is infantry
oriented.

So, the questions to ask are do you want to play out the landing of a
Company, Battalion or a Brigade/Division? Do you want to play it all on
one
table?

Look at your FT Fleets that you are going to play and their  carrying
capability. Can you land a whole Battalion in one hit? And is that a
Battalion of Infantry, Mech Inf or Armour?

My recommendation would probably be to use both! Otherwise you might
limit
yourself perhaps a bit too much.

Cheers,

Owen G

> -----Original Message-----
> From: owner-gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
> [mailto:owner-gzg-l@CSUA.Berkeley.EDU]On Behalf Of
stiltman@teleport.com
> Sent: Saturday, 8 July 2000 1:21 AM
> To: Full Thrust mailing list
> Subject: Dirtside vs. Stargrunt?
>
>
> Okay, call me a heretical fool, but I haven't yet gotten either
> of these two
> and I'm wondering what the general overlook of them is without having
to
> buy one and/or break the shrink wrap over at Military Corner.
>
> Generally, I think I'd want to play out ground actions with at
> least a fair
> amount of scale.  As far as I can tell, Dirtside works better for
> this than
> Stargrunt -- i.e. Dirtside seems to be more of unit-based actions
whereas
> Stargrunt seems like it's man-by-man.  This seems further borne
> out (a little)
> by the descriptions on the back of the books, where Dirtside says it
works
> for "a few platoons up to a batallion" whereas Stargrunt works for "a
few
> squads up to a company".  In addition, Dirtside has support for
actions of
> scale like aerospace landings and the like, whereas Stargrunt
> proclaims itself
> to be a Full Metal Anorak system which (based on both the movie
> metaphor and
> what I see on this mailing list) seems like it's pretty microscale in
the
> way the action unfolds.
>
> So, if I'm aiming at linking the game in with Full Thrust
> troop-landing actions
> and want to put at least a bit of large scale into it, the way I
> understand it
> is that Dirtside is closer to what I'm aiming at than Stargrunt, no?
> --
> =-=-=-=-=-=-=-=
>  The Stilt Man		stiltman@teleport.com
>    http://www.teleport.com/~stiltman/stiltman.html
>    < We are Microsoft Borg '98.  Lower your expectations and	  >
>    < surrender your money.  Antitrust law is irrelevant.	  >
>    < Competition is irrelevant.  We will add your financial and >
>    < technological distinctiveness to our own.  Your software   >
>    < will adapt to service ours.  Resistance is futile.	  >
>

Prev: OT:Re: Memories of PBS (Was:Re:S:AAB USS Saratoga specs) Next: Off Again...