jmlima -> RE: Suply - little question (11/5/2008 9:04:10 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Curtis Lemay quote:
ORIGINAL: ColinWright I've seriously developed or been involved in the development of five scenarios. In only one of these did TOAW's supply deficiencies not impose a serious burden and limitation. I've developed ten different topics and I'm working on an eleventh. Only one (CFNA) would benefit sufficiently to justify the cost (to Matrix, myself, and players) of discrete supply handling. And CFNA's problem really hinges on the current infinite supply line thing. We may be able to fix that within the current abstract system - negating even CFNA's need. I think your reasoning, specialy the bit about benefit/cost to Matrix falls apart when even people like Jamiam recognized that the system would benefit from a new supply system, and indeed that would be the case in TOAW 4. You may like , or you may not like it, but the fact remains, all scenarios would benefit, to a lesser or bigger extent from a revamped supply system. When you say that only CFNA would benefit, then allow me to add another one. I made an Indochina scenario. Without discrete supply, it plays like a beer and pretzels game. In fact, all scenarios in TOAW play more or less like that. Have you eve played OCS? If yes, you know what I'm, talking about. I've never, ever, in TOAW refrained from sending units wherever I wanted. In OCS, quite simply not possible, since minor things , like lack of fuel, or of ammo get in the way. OCS is far from perfect, but it's an excellent example when it concerns supply handling.
|
|
|
|