RE: [DS2] High/Low Tech (was: DS2 fire control modification)

I would hate to play in a game of DS2 where you can't do anything and
you
opponent can do everything. High on Low tech battles (such as you
described), make for a very boring battle unless the low tech have
overwhelming superior numbers.

I think (and Jon or Mike can chime in and nix my argument) is that DS2,
intended or not, is set, technologically, at the beginning of the Grav
era.
CFP is at maximum efficiency for that type of powerplant. HMT is
established
technology, but still growing in efficiency and power output. FGP is a
new
technology. It has been around in city power plants, starships, etc. for
a
long time, but Grav AFVs were not used enforce until 2110. 

I also think that in the error of DS2/SG2 sensor technology has reached
a
plateau. The best FCS is not that much better than the cheap FCS.
Stealth
can be done, but sensors are good and diverse enough, that it has become
expensive. ECM & PDS are about a crap shoot with equivalent levels of
missile guidance. EW is about even on both offense and defense.

Just about any power in the GZG universe has the ability to travel from
star
to star. The technology has lifted many other technologies and made the
differences somewhat flat. The point system assumes that all of those
coming
to a battle are either space-faring or have access to the technology.

To make a High on Low tech battle, you will have to handicap the low
tech
side. Limit them to CFE. That eliminates Fast GEV (except for small
vehicles
[size 2 and less]), Grav, and Walkers. It limits the size of HEL and
MDCs
(the longest reaching weapons).  If you then limit them to Basic level
FCS,
Guidance, ECM, and/or PDS (or a 80/20 split of Basic/Enhanced). Limit
the
size of weapon in a vehicle to the size of the vehicle (no
tank-killers).
And limit the class of armor to 1 less than the size of the vehicle. You
will still have to look out for the massed attack, but they will be at
shorter range and have a lower chit validity, they will be out gunned
and
slower. Of course they would have to have a large numerical superiority
to
have a balanced game.

---
Brian Bell
bbell1@insight.rr.com
ICQ: 12848051
AIM: Rlyehable
YIM: Rlyehable
The Full Thrust Ship Registry:
http://www.ftsr.org
---


-----Original Message-----
From: Thomas Barclay [mailto:kaladorn@fox.nstn.ca]
Sent: Tuesday, July 17, 2001 2:40 AM
To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Subject: DS2 fire control modification

[snip]

The problem is high tech increases the lethality 
of the unit, but doesn't particularly increase the 
survivability. ECM increases help, I admit, versus 
GMS. Stealth helps versus guns. But stealth 
costs through the nose! 

For the same amount of bucks as you can build 
a high stealth large tank, you can build a lot of 
small GMS/H armed jeeps which are just as 
hard to hit, don't lose all of their firepower if 
one goes boom, and can put out far more fire. 

In the real world, hi-tech generally means you 
can attack the enemy when 
1) he has no idea what is going on
2) his ability to respond is limited (suppressed 
comms, attack from further range, armour he 
can't penetrate from the front, etc)

But in DS2, unless you actually restrict it in 
game setup, anyone can mount a long range 
weapon, anyone can buy high value armour, 
and confusion and whatnot caused by messed 
up comms and tacint systems aren't 
represented. So a lot of what constitutes 'high 
tech advantage' in the real world is somewhat 
mitigated. And the BOOM chip is the great