Re: Something I Don't Like
Jay Gischer (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Tue, 13 Sep 94 09:05:17 -0700
Walt Pesch writes:
> At 2:10 AM 9/12/94 -0400, DAZCapn@aol.com wrote:
> >Of course, a minimum "get away" percentage would be good, say 10% no matter
> Hmm... This defeats the purpose of a large operation against an
> individual. If a stack of 2000 is looking for some[one,thing] in a
> province, they should have a much better chance than a stack of 50.
> Likewise, the size of the object being looked for should affect the chances
> of avoiding capture.
> I guess that it could be argued that this is supposedly a heroic game
> rather than a board game with ZOC, so I will agree that there should be
> some chance, though tending toward zero. But if I spend months
> manipulating a trap, and sanre my prey, I should get it (one way or
I can see both sides of this issue. I see it as a matter of
preference -- do you have "hunter" mentality or a "hunted" mentality?
What is troubling about the current rules is that the game system
purports to support something which it actually doesn't. All the
business about fleeing, and chance of capture, etc. make it look as
though this is a game where losing in combat isn't necessarily fatal. But
actually, against competent human opponents, it is. I see this as a
design problem, in that the goals of the design can be easily