Re: [FT] CPV vs. NPV

On Wed, Feb 12, 2003 at 09:40:46AM -0600, Allan Goodall wrote:
>The way the current point system works, 1500 points of big ships will
always
>defeat 1500 points of smaller ships. Okay, you don't have a problem
with this.
>However... how do you know how _many_ small ships equal a big ship? The
whole
>purpose of a point system is to give a point balance so that two fleets
of
>about the same number of points will be equal in ability to win the
game.
>Otherwise, why have a point system at all? 

The "realist" argument here is to say "but equal-value battles very
rarely happen in reality. A commander won't normally engage unless he
has force superiority or can't evade; the classic 'two fleets shoot it
out in the middle of nowhere' is simply unrealistic. Therefore don't
even try to balance battles."

I have some sympathy with that view. However, points systems still have
a use: if you have a system that _does_ accurately reflect force
strengths, you can use it to evaluate the performance of each side after
the battle. If my three tin-plated DDs actually scored significant
damage on your carrier battle group, that suggests I was pretty good; if
I had the carrier group and wiped out your DDs, I may have won the game
but that doesn't imply that I was particularly clever. A points system
can help to evaluate this.

Roger