Re: Re: [GZG] John's Shipbuilding

   I agree, whether a *race* would surrender or abandon it's ships is
more of
 a campaign or setting issue.  I think that the issue of whether it's 
 *possible* to surrender ships in battle is something we can talk about
in 
 general game terms.  
   What I'm getting at here is that the major problem for surrendering
your
 damaged/sinking ship in modern times (WWI -> ) seems to be
communicating that
 surrender to the other side.  Combat from WWI onwards was frequently
not 
 fought at the kind of ranges where a visual "white flag" was feasible,
and
 the comm equipment on a ship is often knocked out along with it's
fighting
 ability.  It's in these circumstances where abandoning ship may be the
only
 way to demonstrate that you are no longer a combatant.  Off hand, I
can't 
 think of a single surface ship that surrendered during combat from WWI
on.  A
 few submarines did, but they could demonstrate their surrender by
moving from
 their normal fighting position (underwater) to the surface and then not

 manning the quite visible guns.  Surface ships don't have that luxury. 
I 
 would think that spaceships have the same problem.  It seems like the 
 convention that has evolved is the "honorable" way to surrender is to
abandon
 your ship after ensuring that it will be destroyed after most of the
crew is
 off.  It gives the crew a shot (perhaps just a long long shot) at
survival
 without handing over valuable property and info to the enemy.	I would
expect
 that space combat would be similiar, although I can see an argument for

 having the surrender mechanism be to eject the power core and
subsequently
 destroying any secret weapons or info on board.  This would be so that
the
 life support of the remaining vessel could be used for the crew until
other
 arrangements can be made.

   grant

> 
> I think these thoughts play into the adopted conventions and combat
honor o=
> f
> the govenrmental/racial powers involved. If a gov't power/race is
known  to
> send up the white flag of surrender, and then fire upon the victors,
it is
> very likely that future surrenders - whether or not legitimate - would
even
> be honored.
> 
> At the same time, on the flip side, you can then start modelling races
who
> will fire at a target until dead ("It's the only way to be sure"*,
refusing
> to take prisoners. ;-)
> 
> * translated from whatever language originally spoken into language
> understandable for readers of this thread
> 
> However, I think this really is outside the scope of FT games, and
more in
> the realm of campaigns.
> 
> Hmmm, campaigns. Is that this thread or another? :dazed&confused:
> 
> Mk
> 
_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l