VoyForums
[ Show ]
Support VoyForums
[ Shrink ]
VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: [1] ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 15:58:39 02/03/04 Tue
Author: Alan Yngve
Subject: Re: And a few more, for good measure ...
In reply to: Mark Dyson 's message, "And a few more, for good measure ..." on 14:59:15 02/03/04 Tue

And Mark continues:
>Okay, as promised, here are a couple more questions …
>
>In your reply above you hinted that the release of GI
>didn’t exactly thrill you. I’ve encountered other
>such feelings, even to the point of calling GI the
>expansion that “broke” Squad Leader. In that vein,
>I’m curious to know a couple of things:
>
>1. What aspect(s) of GI did you find problematic?

My personal problem was with the changes to the MG
penetration rules, because the "newer" versions took
much of the mental fear away from an enemy machine gun.

Others have their own "beefs" and perhaps they will
pitch in their comments here.

>2. Given that you have the full range of all four
>games from which to pick and choose, what subset of
>the game do you prefer to play with? Can you speak
>for any group of gamers who might share the same
>preferences?

I prefer to play at either the SL or the CoI levels.

The basic SL rules system provides a pretty good
presentation of the challenges of a Company Commander
in the field, complete with combined arms
considerations that are suitably complex while still
simplified sufficiently to be managable. JIMHO

It should be noted that well over 2/3 of our internet
community plays at the SL level. There are many
reasons for this, but those reasons aside, this is
why I've invested most of my scenario design efforts
at the SL level.

The CoI rules system permits a more detailed "study"
of ordnance and vehicle issues that were often the
framework consideration for dealing with these weapons
on the WWII tactical battlefield. Its also fun
playing at this level and there are quite a few who
prefer to play with (at least) the CoI rules.

There is also a (smaller) group of players who like
to play at the CoD or GI level. CoD is often desired
because of the additional nationalities. My opinion
on CoD are two-fold: I dislike the bypass rules
because they make the boards too open (although there
are others that like them for the exact same reason),
I also feel that the AFV to_hit/to_kill system breaks
down in CoD ... lightly armored AFVs should be about
as easy to kill with the lighter guns of the time,
but this proves not to be the case. A minor problem.

>I’m asking from the perspective of someone about to
>get back into the game after more than 20 years away,
>and who’s seeing the collected lore and wisdom of
>those decades as a valuable resource on which to draw
>as I decide what to draw from the original rulebooks
>and what might best be omitted from the start. At
>present I possess only a tattered old copy of the COI
>3rd edition rules, a printout of the V1.04 “Classic
>Squad Leader” compilation by Ian McDowall, and an
>impatient demeanor as I wait the week or so before my
>copies of the full game arrive. I’m especially
>interested in the AFV rules sets, and how I’m best
>going to integrate the COI and GI versions as a whole.

These thoughts can only be "solved" by individual choice.
On this site (see player tools) I have typed up the
changes made in subsequent editions of the rules. This
should be of great help to you.

Most folks who return to the game after a long lay-off,
(and thats a substantial number of us!) will re-start
with "straight" SL. When I went through this process I
was bemused to realize that I had a general recollection
of what I used to do but no clue as to the "why" ... it
was a fascinating (and fun!) process to claw my way back
up the learning curve! :-)

Do keep in mind that the greatest joy of this great
game system is to play other scheming commanders. To do
this "efficiently" really requires all of us to play
by a consistent set of rules. This is the "price" that
we pay for having near-ready access to opponents, giving
up some of the rules freedom that we had when we played
amongst a small group of FTF gamers. Perhaps in my own
biased viewpoint, it is well worth that price. :-)

>Hopefully I can spark some discussion here that’s
>valuable to others who might be in a similar position.

I also hope that others will add their own comments.
Hey guys, that means YOU! Type up some comments for
everyone else in our community!

-- Alan

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]
[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-8
VF Version: 3.00b, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2019 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.