> From: Allan Goodall <agoodall@sympatico.ca>
I too would like to see more for SG2 in particular, including some sort of
point system to aid in designing secenarios at least. As for FT2 - it
isn't really broken, seems to be spreading (at least here in Aust.), and from
reports the competition games that are being played seem to be going well.
My feelings on SG2 are for a 'points system' that is of a type that has a
per squad/unit value in the vein of DBM/DBA/DBR, rather than an "Evil
Empire"(tm)(c)(etc.) system where you seem to have a value for every button on
a figure's uniform.
> On Thu, 28 Aug 1997, Bruce S. R. Lee wrote:
> My feelings on SG2 are for a 'points system' that is of a type that
Ah. So you want an undetailed broken points system instead of a detailed
broken points system...
Sorry, couldn't help it. I don't play DBR (yet), DBA doesn't have a points
system and the one in DBM works reasonably well, but it has certain flaws.
However, the basic assumptions behind the DB* points
system (ie, lots of troops with roughly equivalent equipment/training
- 50+ per element, enough so the statistics average out and one
single warrior isn't horribly important to the fighting value of the unit)
don't really hold in a skirmish game. In a small fight, the weapon's prestanda
matters far more than in a big battle (where their
effects can be subsumed in a single die-roll). Is a squad of 10 men
stronger than an identically equipped, trained and led squad of 9 men in SGII?
Should the points system reflect this?
Just some thoughts,