data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/0ac9e/0ac9e1dfe343cf5428ff0343d77a84ffed848226" alt="Old"
January 21st, 2003, 02:21 AM
|
data:image/s3,"s3://crabby-images/47958/47958856def3ef18fbd42b8b11477dc2810d07f6" alt="Wanderer's Avatar" |
Corporal
|
|
Join Date: Dec 2002
Location: UK
Posts: 69
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
|
|
Re: PBW ethics, opinions please.
Quote:
Originally posted by Dralasite:
So by loading up a bunch of all defense troops first followed by all weapon troops, you get to fire at full power until all the defense troops are gone.
This seems to qualify as gamey, but maybe the advantage is not so huge that people really get upset about it.
|
Not really. The first troops you send down to an occupied planet would be infantry cannon fodder to set up and hold a beach-head. Only then can you land the heavy stuff and start kicking ***. It's no good landing heavy artillery pieces if they all get shot up on arrival.
Consider the use of lightly-armed paratroopers (and airborne troops in gliders) to capture important bridges ahead of D-Day and Operation Market Garden. Although some tanks were equipped to land with the first waves on D-Day, the vast majority of heavy gear didn't arrive until the beaches had been taken, held & cleared by the 'grunts'.
It might seem gamey at first (especially if the assault troops have no weapons!) but it's fairly realistic.
__________________
*insert impressive 50-line signature here*
|