Re: Sources for factual combat statistics, was Re: Modern Close

I saw the same system.	More complexity doesn't necessarily produce more
accuracy or better results.  The game was unplayable - unless you got
your rocks off on charts.  Being an actuary would probably be a plus
with that game, IMHO.  Others may like it but, I couldn't abide it.

--Peter M.

----- Original Message -----
From: devans@uneb.edu
Sent: Tuesday, November 21, 2000 8:01 PM
To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Subject: Re: Sources for factual combat statistics, was Re: Modern Close

Can't help you much here, though I'm aware that the US Army has done
much.
I just don't know where to look.

I'm aware that there are some fans of the now-defunct Leading Edge's
Phoenix Command system on this list, and perhaps they can support or
deny
the following.

I recall that the weapon effect and wounds allocation were based,
according
to a con demo-player whom I respected greatly, on just such excruciating
number crunching. I remember playing a Vietnam game where he'd explain
in
gruesome detail just how a wound had occurred, and the range of time
until
I'd go unconscious and finally dead. But that I should go ahead and
finish
my action. ;->=

Having seen the table lookup and the die-rolling to get the results I
described, I never really wanted to try and learn enough to RUN a game.

The_Beast

-Douglas J. Evans, curmudgeon

One World, one Web, one Program - Microsoft promotional ad
Ein Volk, ein Reich, ein Fuhrer - Adolf Hitler<br clear=all><hr>Get more
from the Web.  FREE MSN Explorer download : <a
href="http://explorer.msn.com">http://explorer.msn.com</a><br></p>