Re: Low Vs High Tech :was grav

My DS2 stuff grew then separated from my Starguard campaign scenario set
up (just was too much work to try and put that and Ratner's Space
marines
into GZG terms.  Oh well, two very fun backgrounds to create scenarios
from...

I design the campaign, the nations, the technology (for DS2) preferred
and other 'style choices' such as twin mounts over single (etc.) then
the
TO&E for said group, then the vehicles.

My Low Tech (CFE, Basic FCS, Basic GCS, HVC, Some specialist reactive or
ablative armor other wise 'normal', GEV for swampy terrain (most of what
they hold and Tracked for those vehicles too big to go GEV) forces do
get
a % bonus in points balance compared to the 

High Tech (FPG, MDC, GRAV/GEV/FTrk, Superior FCS, Enhanced GCS (not a
preferred technology,)	get a reduction in points for last stage
scenario
'tweaking'.

Generally I like to run the PHR (HVC) versus NPC (GMS) or IJK (HEL)

The NEA (MDC) versus RRR (HKP) 

LLP (SLAM) and SAI (DFFG) vary in between the low and high end.

And yes, it's mostly subjective 'scenario design' supplemented by post
stage 1 design "point value" tweaks.

Expect a large, heavily supported force of PHR to be tangling with the
NEA guys.  When I try for balanced scenarios.  Not all scenarios are
balanced though, the victory conditions supply a fair proportion of the
'balance' in High versus Low tech encounters...

Gracias,
Glenn/Triphibious@juno.com
This is my Science Fiction Alter Ego E-mail address.
Historical - Warbeads@juno.com
Fantasy and 6mm - dwarf_warrior@juno.com

________________________________________________________________
GET INTERNET ACCESS FROM JUNO!
Juno offers FREE or PREMIUM Internet access for less!
Join Juno today!  For your FREE software, visit: