RE: [DSIII] was RE: [OFFICIAL-COMMERCIAL] More Slammers figs out !

I see what your saying, however, doesn't the point system compensate for
this by raising the points on high armor, faster speeds etc...?

Jason

-----Original Message-----
From: Bill Brush [mailto:bbrush@unlnotes.unl.edu] 
Sent: Friday, February 21, 2003 5:33 PM
To: gzg-l@csua.berkeley.edu
Subject: RE: [DSIII] was RE: [OFFICIAL-COMMERCIAL] More Slammers figs
out !

I think you're reading too much into my comment.

"Have a bearing" does not necessarily mean that heavy armor, high speed,
and maneuverability are mutually exclusive.  Look at the M1A1 for a
mondern
day example of a fast, heavily armored, and comparatively agile AFV. 
Now
what is the downside of the M1A1?  It's EXPENSIVE compared to a slower,
less armored AFV.

I don't care if someone builds the "ultimate" AFV, but it should be
balanced in such a way that it's not unbeatable.

Consider also that "light", "good" armor is relative.  At one point
light,
good armor would have been bronze.  Now it's kevlar.  In the future our
nifty CHOBHAM armor will be considered excessively heavy and clunky but
that doesn't mean that something similar won't still be used.

Bill

>>"I.e.  amount of armor should have a bearing on speed,
maneuverability,
>>etc."
>
>
>Why is this a must?  It is  a sci fi game after all and you could
reasonably
>explain good armor that is light in weight without having to get into
the
>fantastic.
>
>
>Jason

This message (including any attachments) contains confidential
information
intended for a specific individual and purpose, and is protected by law.
 If
you are not the intended recipient, you should delete this message.  Any
disclosure, copying, or distribution of this message, or the taking of
any
action based on it, is strictly prohibited.