Re: [GZG] Gzg-l Digest, Vol 37, Issue 24

On Thu, Sep 30, 2010 at 11:23:22AM +0100, Ground Zero Games wrote:

>We may not agree with their gaming style and mindset (I sure as hell
>don't), but does that mean we should just ignore them as a valid part
>of the fanbase and try to legislate them out of the game?

Speaking purely for myself, I'm interested in producing a game I want to
play. While I think rules should be free of blatant loopholes, I reckon
people who want to munchkin out will always do so, and telling them
they're playing it wrong is a mistake.

In the hypothetical game I'm talking about, this fleet/engagement
generation stuff would be an optional rule module like the campaign
system - it's not a core part of the tactical game, but like the
campaign system it's a way of setting up and scoring tactical games in a
way that makes sense in a larger context. (Except in this case, unlike
the campaign, the larger context doesn't really exist.)

R
_______________________________________________
Gzg-l mailing list
Gzg-l@mail.csua.berkeley.edu
http://mail.csua.berkeley.edu:8080/mailman/listinfo/gzg-l