Prev: Re: [OT]Anti-americanism? (FMA) Next: Re: [SG2] The Eyes Have It.

Re: Now on topic previously was Re: [OT]Nukes... tunnels.... boom....

From: Phillip Atcliffe <Phillip.Atcliffe@u...>
Date: Tue, 12 Mar 2002 09:09:56 +0000 (GMT)
Subject: Re: Now on topic previously was Re: [OT]Nukes... tunnels.... boom....

On Tue, 12 Mar 2002 02:46:06 -0600 Don M <dmaddox1@hot.rr.com> wrote:

>> Which recalls to mind the way a certain board war-game, (NATO war 
or some-such?) answered the "problem" of gaming nukes in tactical 
combat.

>> (Rule number forgotten) If using optional Nuclear Battlefield 
weapons, follow the following procedures:

>> 1. Set out mapboard.
>> 2. Defender sets out pieces.
>> 3. Attacker sets out pieces.
>> 4. Liberally apply lighter fluid to mapboard and pieces.
>> 5. Apply match.
>> 6. Stand by with fire extinguisher.

Yes, that was NATO, an old SPI game -- one of their first WWIII games, 
a genre of which they were rather fond. But weren't those instructions 
meant to "simulate" STRATEGIC nukes rather than tacnukes? Well, that's 
what Murphy's Rules says, anyway... <g>

Phil
----
"Sic Transit Gloria Barramundi"
   (Or, So Long and Thanks for All the Fish!)
   -- not Douglas Adams, but me: Phil Atcliffe


Prev: Re: [OT]Anti-americanism? (FMA) Next: Re: [SG2] The Eyes Have It.