Re: [GZG] [SG3]: What if?

> 3) Hordes, gangs of civilians portrayed in a meaningful way. I don't
> think you could portray something like "Black Hawk Down" with SG2. If
> you have lots of troops that have not had basic training they use a
D4.
> I find they're not at all effective or fun to play.

Do people really want to play ultra horde armies?
They take ages to play, at least at the start of the game, because there
are 
so many models to deploy and move.
Do you really want to have to remove casualties with a bucket and spade 
every phase?

I can see the endless hordes of zombies (militia) as GM controlled
villains 
in a participation game but not as a viable army except for the
perversely 
inclined.

You need to ensure that infantry vehicles and artillery all have a
balance 
and use. If any one of the 3 is too good people only take that thing.
Its 
very easy to overestimate the effectiveness of artillery and make them
the 
god of the battlefield. Then you have the sci-fi version of WW1.

When looking at modern games people still play a lot of cold war 1980s
style 
games. No one I have seen tries to war-game desert storm because who
wants 
an army of 3 Abrams against 100 T55s, that not a war-game its a shoot em
up 
video game with models and dice.

Technology is likely an exponential curve, heck 50 years and you go from

Sherman tanks to Abrams. You can't wargame that much of a differential. 

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@lists.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU
http://mead.CSUA.Berkeley.EDU:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l