Re: [GZG] Point Systems

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu
http://lists.csua.berkeley.edu/mailman/listinfo/gzg-lOkay, let me amend
this.

When battles that are lost because one side was vastly underpowered and
got run over get remembered, it's because it pissed off the people who
lost that particular battle but won the overall war.  And even then,
nobody usually remembers it other than that particular people.

E
  ----- Original Message ----- 
  From: Charles Lee 
  To: gzg-l@lists.csua.berkeley.edu 
  Sent: Saturday, November 04, 2006 1:28 PM
  Subject: Re: [GZG] Point Systems

  Let me add Little Bighorn One side was led by an enept leader against
a supperior force in numbers, weapons, and intell. Who won that fight.
Most battles that are lost and remembered are done so to invoke emotions
, other wise mistakes of realy bad battles are forgotten by the overall
winner if it makes them look foolish.

  Eric Foley <stiltman@teleport.com> wrote:
    From: "McCarthy, Tom (xwave)" 
    > I've played in several games run by a GM who believes that all
even
    > engagements are examples of intelligence failures by both sides.
Since
    > he strives to give the players an even fight, he habitually lies
to or
    > hamstrings both sides.

    This not only makes for some rather silly and frustrating games, but
it also 
    isn't even historically true for the most part. Although at the
tactical 
    squad level it could be argued that most fights are one-sided, most
decisive 
    battles in history have involved fighting forces where the victor
didn't 
    really have much, if any, advantage over the vanquished.

    The Americans had three fleet carriers to the Japanese's four at
Midway, and 
    won.
    The Americans had two fleet carriers to the Japanese's two in the
Coral Sea, 
    and won.
    The Greeks were ludicrously outnumbered by the Persians at Marathon,
and 
    won.
    Alexander the Great was outnumbered by Darius III at both Issus and 
    Gaugemala, and won.
    The Scots under William Wallace were somewhat outnumbered by the
English at 
    Stirling Bridge, and won; the comparison was similar against Edward
I at 
    Falkirk, and they lost. When they fought under Robert the Bruce at 
    Bannockburn against Edward II, they were outnumbered again and won.

    Most serious battles don't have a gross advantage for one side over
the 
    other. The ones that do where someone just rolls over the other are
the 
    ones you never hear about. Wargames are generally designed to
simulate or 
    recreate the battles that you _do_ actually hear about.

    E 

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

------------------------------------------------------------------------
------
  Check out the New Yahoo! Mail - Fire up a more powerful email and get
things done faster. 

------------------------------------------------------------------------
------

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