[DS] New points system? Nah... new design system.

Glenn M Wilson wrote:
> 
> How fitting that my e-mail should self-re-construct itself in time for
a
> message from Oerjan!
> 
> Much as I love DS2 I must admit the points system (which I use only to
> tinker with a scenario) either should be dropped (My personal
favorite)
> or recreated.

The problem with points systems is that they never really work.
Balancing a points system is a bit like balancing a wobbly table
by sawing the legs down... as you saw down one leg you create a
different imbalance, so you saw down another one and so on
recursively.

The major problem here is that some of the DS2 design system is
"descriptive"; balanced only with a points system and some is
"constructive" and, to a degree, self-balancing. Old Dirtside had
a purely descriptive system where you just wrote down what the
vehicle stats were (based on inspecting the miniature you already
own because it looks cool) and compute a points cost. New Dirtside
has moved to where FT2 was, some aspects are descriptive (mobility
and armour in DS2, thrust in FT2) while some require spending from
a finite number of capacity points.

FT has now moved to spending capacity for thrust and this is where
DS should go. Real-world discussion of AFV design rather labours
the point that there's a trade-off between mobility, armour and
firepower. If DS forced you to spend capacity points on armour and
mobility (and stealth) rather than on just systems, there would be
a very strong force balancing some of the problems.

Why have less than the maximum armour?... because you want to put
something in the tank other than the enormous engine that
generates the power to shift around a 120 tonne GEV, and you can't
just throw points at the problem.

Why have a slow vehicle rather than a fast one?... because you
want to fit enough armour for the AFV to be survivable, and you
can't just throw points at the problem.

...and so on.

-- 
David Brewer

"It is foolishness and endless trouble to cast a stone at every