Re: [FT] CPV vs. NPV

I feel like the point system is great, and there are a lot of good
reasons 
for its use and existence, but I do feel like it is often abused. I
think 
that soapbubbles are abuses of the intended design rules, like break
point 
exploits. I love being able to design my own ships, but I think a great 
solution to this would be to stick with the stock ships if either party
is 
not happy with the designs.. My philosophy for this is that I cannot
think 
of a single time in history when the battlegroup commander (the player)
got 
to design and build his own fleet. The State designed the vessels (based
on 
its current and forseeable situation), and in this case John is pretty
much 
the State, seeing as how he came up with the background for each faction
in 
FT. "If it aint broke don't fix it." I don't think the point system is 
broken, I think those who are building soapbubbles are.
Joe

>>>>
Well, as always, the idea of a space game either being historical or
real
is delusional at best, but we've covered that before. ;->=

***
  while on the other hand there are people who don't think it
  matters as much and who express themselves better than I:

The_Beast wrote:
 >However, they're nice to get ball-park balanced games. I just don't
take
 >them as 'biblical', no matter how many numbers Oerjan crunches.
***

Which isn't to say I don't admire, and prize, his endeavors. A good
point
system IS useful, and I support everyone's trying to make it more so.

Perhaps what's important here is not their focus on the point system,
but
yours. The ships won't work differently if the points are set otherwise.
You'll still get the same number of small ships as expanding gas for the
same number of large ones. The point system will say a balance-adjusted
battle should have MORE small ships, but there's no law saying you have
to
follow the point system in any battle you set up.

My point was there tends to be certain assumptions in the point system
no
matter what. Firstly, I think it ignores any special set up other than
straight meeting engagement with enemy destruction as the only goal, no
terrain, etc.

This makes sense, as these are 99% of the game I've played. These games
are
also the reason I can't keep some folks interested over the long haul,
but
they are the games you learn on, and are the easiest to set up.

And quick and easy are what we LOVE about this game.

The_Beast

P.S. I was going to suggest a way of making it more 'historical' might
be
to check for crit hits with every weapon hit that does multiple damage
reduced by threshold, i.e. a class 3 at 12" might cause 3 without
rerolls,
adjusted  by size or shields, but it's getting a little complicated.
;->=

_________________________________________________________________
MSN 8 with e-mail virus protection service: 2 months FREE*  
http://join.msn.com/?page=features/virus