GreenAsJade Posted July 27, 2003 Share Posted July 27, 2003 Something I got to thinking about just now is the fact that I often find myself using my own force makeup to deduce something about the opponent's force makeup. "Gee, I have 2 whopping tank destroyers, better be careful about getting exposed to his big tanks then". Hang on! Who ever said the opponent was going to have big tanks? One argument is that "the intelligence back at HQ reported that there were big tanks in the area, and that is _why_ you have the TDs at your disposal". But in that case, why did I get only just enough to maybe defeat the alleged big tanks? Why not give me plenty? Um, because then you and your opponent would not have a "balanced fight". Well, isn't that a bit "gamey"? I noticed that tournament rules solve this by saying that not all scenarios _will_ be balanced, and resolve it by a neato scoring system. Would this extend into general PBEM play somehow? Could we have a site where people register the results of their battle for a set of scenarios in an ongoing way, so that then the next pair of people playing it can judge how well they went not by whether they won or not, but how they did compared to how everyone else has done for a particular scenario? Would this lead to the creation of more varied scenarios? I guess I'm asking if a sort of "ongoing tournament" would be practical and fun, and might extend the kinds of battles we all get to play... 0 Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.