![]() |
![]() |
|
#1
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
IRL, the govt dropped M16's and ammo off to A-Teams without manuals or cleaning kits in Vietnam. |
#2
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
Not ever having fired an automatic weapon, how hard would it be to convert skill over?
Could a manual be placed with the weapons and have the Team upgrade their knowledge? (Project Teams are supposed to be self-starters by definition) |
#3
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
I think I’d go with something akin to the method used for the 2nd and 3rd retrofits (as described in 4e) and drop the original premise of replacing everything in the boltholt.
Leave the boltholes as they are and “… new caches were buried and the location was transmitted to the bolt-hole computer using references to existing cache locations.” This retains the familiar equipment with the team as they wake and provides access to upgrades when/if they are needed. This also means a number of additional caches must be sited for each of the three upgrade cycles. Some of which could be very large if the team vehicles were part of the upgrade package. An alternative to adding cache sites could be storing the upgraded equipment and vehicles at a regional base. Then the teams could be trained on the new items when/if they find said base. |
#4
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
@Desert Mariner - I think your idea is the best solution and it's the one I would use whenever I can get a game started (nobody in my area is interested, they all want to play D&D type rpgs).
I really cannot see the sense in giving a Team new gear that they have no experience in when they wake up fresh from their bolthole - except for use as a game plot (and it's a nasty trick, one deliberately made to mess with the Players). It also strains my disbelief, I have a hard time believing the Project would risk the lives of Team members by creating a situation where they may have to wake up in an emergency and defend themselves with gear they don't know how to use. To each their own but I personally would not go the way described in canon. There's plenty of other ways to mess with the Players and their characters during the course of a game but to kick them in the head just as they emerge into the new world just seems spiteful. Last edited by StainlessSteelCynic; 02-23-2019 at 10:24 PM. Reason: spelling |
#5
|
||||
|
||||
![]()
I like Desert Mariner's method as it's a good roleplaying way; it gives the PCs a logical upgrade in a world where upgrades are tough to get.
However I also feel that sometimes The project is portrayed as a little too sensible and not prone to the mistakes that plague real life organisations as well, so maybe they do make well intended mistakes like everyone else |
#6
|
|||
|
|||
![]()
A few more comments:
In many areas, the Project is already so needy that upgrades or excessive spares make an astonishing security challenge even harder. The organization of the Project likely requires more combat vehicles in some categories than the US Army, each more complex in the categories of power, communications, and computing, and expected to operate under conditions that would make any defense contractor break into tears. Doing all that twice, with twice the cost and twice the secrecy borders on the absurd. The primary reason to upgrade equipment is to maintain or achieve a degree of superiority over your prospective opponent. The expectations of the Project's opponents aren't changing during the planning and preparation stages, so upgrading caches would require that the initial solutions were acknowledged as inadequate when they were placed, or the improved value of those new supplies is so great as to justify the expense and risk. In most cases, it would be better to provide new capabilities or additional consumable supplies or replacement parts than to to provide a marginally improved replacement in a category where the Project already has dominance. I still maintain that the knowledge of the approximate date of the war is the single most important piece of data the Project could ever have. Among other things, it makes these questions of upgrades irrelevant. But if for some reason that is unacceptable, then it is still worthwhile to remember that every time you touch a secret in public, you make it more vulnerable - don't do it more than you have to. |
#7
|
|||
|
|||
![]() Quote:
And that is probably unfair too. Professional writers need to produce, and can never spend all the time a project really deserves. It may be unfair to blame them for flaws (even ones obvious to me) that occurred because they had X hours to produce the game and couldn't fit a serious analysis of this idea into that time. But don't do it. |
#8
|
||||
|
||||
![]() Quote:
But in regards to the writing, yes I agree with all the points you made. But your last sentence, it gave me a wry smile. It reminded me of the anti-smoking campaign from the 1980s featuring Yul Brynner where his parting comment was: - "Don't smoke. What ever you do, just don't smoke". |
![]() |
Currently Active Users Viewing This Thread: 2 (0 members and 2 guests) | |
|
|