Re: [GZG] QUESTION: are SAWs becoming less significant...?

On Mon, Feb 2, 2009 at 4:24 AM, Ground Zero Games <jon@gzg.com> wrote:

>
> I guess the question is whether anyone really wants to play with very
> low-tech forces (I'm talking early-mid 20th century level here, not
> "archaic" tech)? Obviously there are the alternate-history games to
> consider, with aliens vs WW2 troops and such, but how common might
> these be compared with "straight" SF games with future-tech forces?
>
> Opinions, anyone?  ;-)
>

It really depends on what the high tech gives the high tech force.  If
the aliens have a personal armor that is proof against 'five rounds
rapid', than it will not be much fun to game.  If it is a more
flexible command structure, better CCCI, and faster mobility, than
there is the fun of achieving your objectives while you still have
enough units to keep the low tech juggernaut from overrunning you.
There is also the intriguing scenario of luring the high tech enemy to
a battlefield where difficult conditions hamper him more than you.
Jungle warfare with 200m sightlines is bad, but it really sucks for
the unit trained to engage at 4000m.  If trees and foliage interfere
with your point to point secure communications, better mobility may be
harder to employ.

_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu
http://vermouth.csua.berkeley.edu:1337/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l