Prev: Re: FT Scenarios (was: Re: [GZG] Re: Points systems) Next: RE: FT Scenarios (was: Re: [GZG] Re: Points systems)

RE: [GZG] RE: FT Scenarios

From: "McCarthy, Tom \(xwave\)" <Tom.McCarthy@x...>
Date: Thu, 12 Jan 2006 09:01:10 -0500
Subject: RE: [GZG] RE: FT Scenarios

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lI've taken more
than a casual look at Victory By Any Means.  It's a
campaign game with politics, espionage, trade, economics, manufacturing
and combat.  They have guidelines for when a battle is not worth
resolving (too one-sided), when it should be resolved as fleet combat
(abstract), and when it should go to the table.



I've considered using JUMP (Justified Use of Military Power) in a
similar way, but the game mechanics of JUMP don't line up well with FT.

Prev: Re: FT Scenarios (was: Re: [GZG] Re: Points systems) Next: RE: FT Scenarios (was: Re: [GZG] Re: Points systems)