Re: [GZG] DSIII q

At a convention, where folks may not be familiar with
the rules and the ramifications of a continued
firefight, this might be a good place for the referee
to step in and "strongly suggest" that one side seek
cover.

This might be enough to address Grants' concerns. It
certainly helps that it is being brought up and so
will make it easier to identify if and when it
happens.  

Bob Makowsky

--- Laserlight <laserlight@verizon.net> wrote:

> > To get around this I simply turned the Crossfire
> game into a team 
> > exercise-- each player on a side has their company
> of infantry or platoon 
> > of tanks (or whatever) but they as a side
> determine who will activate 
> > next.
> 
> I don't think you've quite hit what Grant is
> concerned with.  It doesn't 
> matter how you divvy up forces or decision-making
> between players--if most 
> of the evening is one firefight between Red's 1st
> Platoon and Blue's 3rd 
> Platoon, then everyone else is going to be out of
> the action for most of the 
> evening.
> 
> I think, however, that as people get experience with
> the game, they'll 
> realize which side of the firefight is likely to be
> the losing side, and 
> they'll go ahead and pop smoke, or take cover,
> pretty quickly. Not always--I 
> saw a couple of units in the Friday night game which
> shouldn't have gotten 
> involved in a slugfest--but they died pretty quickly
> too. 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Gzg-l mailing list
> Gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
>
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l
> 

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l