Re: [FT] CPV vs. NPV

On Wed, 12 Feb 2003 15:51:13 +0000, Roger Burton West
<roger@firedrake.org>
wrote:

>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."

This is the reason most of us playing SG2 have no problems with it not
having
a point system...

I find a point system doesn't survive contact with a scenario that isn't
a
typical meeting engagement. The moment you start throwing in other
victory
conditions (destroy such-and-such a ship, get to such-and-such a point,
bombard Planet X, scout out Planet X and escape with Y ships, etc.) the
point
totals don't mean much. For a scenario to be balanced, the forces (and
thus
the points in a properly balanced point system) may have to be
_unbalanced_. 

>A points system
>can help to evaluate this.

Very good point, I hadn't thought of that.

Allan Goodall		     http://www.hyperbear.com

"We come into the world and take our chances
 Fate is just the weight of circumstances
 That's the way that Lady Luck dances
 Roll the bones." - N. Peart