Grumble
Posts: 471
Joined: 5/23/2000 From: Omaha, NE, USA Status: offline
|
Well it's a slow Friday afternoon around here (for a change), so I'll add my 3 Pfennig worth.
Have to agree with Mr Vebber, especially concerning "heroic" AFV crews. I think what we're seeing is a couple diamterically opposed views of reality. Some gamers want total control over everything-"how come my troops can't do xxx?". Related to this is a tendency to see casuality literally, ie "kill" rate. Another group, one of which I'm a member of BTW, looks in terms of simulation. I know I can't control what happens in small unit combat-in my view I shouldn't be able to- so I tend to ascribe strange things that occur to fortunes of war. A crew ignores fire from a Spec Ops squad and "kills" three of the enemy, fine. If one ASSUMES "kill" means non-combat effective, then yes, the unexpected resistance from an AFV crew caused three men to go to ground for a few minutes. Seems plausible to me. Related to this is the fact of game design that detail and accuracy are NOT synonymous. I'm not saying that one group is more right than the other, just that one must keep the design philosophy of the system in mind when critiquing it.
FWIW I played ASL since it was first released (yeah I'm that old). I think SPWAW does a much better job SIMULATING small unit combat than ASL ever could.
off my soapbox,
_____________________________
"...these go up to eleven." Nigel Tufnel
|