John, No your not, I love doing scenarios with lots of militia trying to fend
off a superior force. Also mixed tech battles can be very entertaining and not
as one sided as some may assume. Of course you do have to work it out so there
is some balance on the table but, it can be done.
Don
Okay, am I the only person who ever designs sub-optimal units? Not
everyone is going to have the best available technology and systems to work
with; I work under the assumption that Superior is the cutting-edge
technology, advanced beyond the average. And even the powers that *have* such
advanced tech aren't always going to be able to get it to the front lines
right away. I think that it's a safe assumption that some worlds are going to
be well behind the technology curve.
Besides, it's kinda boring to make every single unit as good as it can
possibly be. I try to give each force that I design a personality all its
own -- that usually means making some inefficient choices. Like 'mechs,
for example. Or buying slow tracked instead of fast.
My DS2 stuff grew then separated from my Starguard campaign scenario set up
(just was too much work to try and put that and Ratner's Space marines into
GZG terms. Oh well, two very fun backgrounds to create scenarios
from...
I design the campaign, the nations, the technology (for DS2) preferred and
other 'style choices' such as twin mounts over single (etc.) then the TO&E for
said group, then the vehicles.
My Low Tech (CFE, Basic FCS, Basic GCS, HVC, Some specialist reactive or
ablative armor other wise 'normal', GEV for swampy terrain (most of what they
hold and Tracked for those vehicles too big to go GEV) forces do get a% bonus
in points balance compared to the
High Tech (FPG, MDC, GRAV/GEV/FTrk, Superior FCS, Enhanced GCS (not a
preferred technology,) get a reduction in points for last stage scenario
'tweaking'.
Generally I like to run the PHR (HVC) versus NPC (GMS) or IJK (HEL)
The NEA (MDC) versus RRR (HKP)
LLP (SLAM) and SAI (DFFG) vary in between the low and high end.
And yes, it's mostly subjective 'scenario design' supplemented by post stage 1
design "point value" tweaks.
Expect a large, heavily supported force of PHR to be tangling with the NEA
guys. When I try for balanced scenarios. Not all scenarios are balanced
though, the victory conditions supply a fair proportion of the 'balance' in
High versus Low tech encounters...
Gracias,
Actually the TO&E in Space Marines (1st or 2nd Edition) work for SG or DS.
Terran Union Guard and Star Guard are about the same organizations. They are
just leaner than the NAC or NSL.
Michael Brown
[quoted original message omitted]
Actually the TO&E in Space Marines (1st or 2nd Edition) work for SG or DS.
Terran Union Guard and Star Guard are about the same organizations. They are
just leaner than the NAC or NSL.
Michael Brown
[quoted original message omitted]
That makes too much sense. Actually considering the objective rather than
just killing 'em all? You're going to have your gung-ho card
revoked......
Okay, then I need to try again (or buy Hostile Contact!)
Gracias,
Glenn/Triphibious@juno.com
This is my Science Fiction Alter Ego E-mail address.
Historical - Warbeads@juno.com
Fantasy and 6mm - dwarf_warrior@juno.com
On Tue, 20 Nov 2001 21:51:13 -0800 Michael Brown <mwbrown@veriomail.com>
writes:
> Actually the TO&E in Space Marines (1st or 2nd Edition) work for SG or