IPB

Welcome Guest ( Log In | Register )

4 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 >  
 Reply to this topicStart new topic
> Killing Rommel, How do you kill overcomplicated plans?
toturi
post Aug 11 2006, 08:37 AM
Post #51


Canon Companion
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 8,021
Joined: 2-March 03
From: The Morgue, Singapore LTG
Member No.: 4,187
QUOTE (Snow_Fox)
QUOTE (Kagetenshi)

And as Toturi said, more time spent planning should mean a broader plan tree, not merely an ever-deeper single branch.

It should, but again look at the Japanese planning during WW2. They were terminally guilty of doing what Napolean called "Painiting a picture." They were sure they knew exactly what was going to happen and built up all sort of eleborate plans to go along with this but once the plan hit a snag, the whole thing tended to fall apart like a house of cards. The British stand at Kohima was a great example as the Japanese supply lines fell apart because their movement was meticulously planned to go through ground the British still held.

The best example is Midway, a huge battle plan stretched across the ocean with hundredes of ships hitting mulitple targets. and the momment the Japanese realized the Americans were not playing the game the Japanese had expected, the Japanese command froze, there is no other word for it. When they finally settled on a course of action it was too late. Ameircan strike gorups found the main Japanese fleet and inflicted crippling wounds on Japan's navy.

Japanese aviators were well trained ofr particular jobs-such as the Pearl Harbor bombing where exactly to go, but they lacked the training and inclanation to think on their feet. The adapatability was one of the things which led to the American victory.

That would be a doctrine problem, not a planning problem. The way the Japanese planned was limited by their operational doctrine, which fortunately for the Allies was rigid and inflexible. Rigid and inflexible thinking does not result in too much planning. It simply causes the planning people to plan along a single(or a small number) path.

Players as shadowrunners are limited by their own experiences - their "doctrine". How the GM runs his game will influence how the players plan. If the GM dislikes "overplanning", then players will overplan or their PCs will die again and again or they will leave.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dog
post Aug 11 2006, 12:38 PM
Post #52


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 903
Joined: 7-February 03
Member No.: 4,025
Kudos to Stainless Steel Rat.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
TheOneRonin
post Aug 11 2006, 01:32 PM
Post #53


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,109
Joined: 16-October 03
From: Raleigh, NC
Member No.: 5,729
QUOTE (mmu1)

To paraphrase a favorite fictional character (bonus points for anyone who knows which books I'm talking about): "Having no plan is better than having a bad plan. At least without a plan, you might get lucky."


It's been a long time since I've read it, but my guess is Lazarus Long in Time Enough for Love.

That sounds JUST like something he would say...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
mmu1
post Aug 11 2006, 01:47 PM
Post #54


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,070
Joined: 7-February 04
From: NYC
Member No.: 6,058
QUOTE (TheOneRonin @ Aug 11 2006, 09:32 AM)
It's been a long time since I've read it, but my guess is Lazarus Long in Time Enough for Love.

That sounds JUST like something he would say...

Nope... Not Lazarus Long. (though it does sound like something he'd say)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
James McMurray
post Aug 11 2006, 02:02 PM
Post #55


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,430
Joined: 10-January 05
From: Fort Worth, Texas
Member No.: 6,957
QUOTE (The Stainless Steel Rat)
you have to give them what they like

Gotta partially disagree on this. It's up to the GM to give the players a game they can enjoy, but it's also up to the players to give the GM a game he can enjoy. It sounds like some compromise is needed in this case.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
toturi
post Aug 11 2006, 04:18 PM
Post #56


Canon Companion
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 8,021
Joined: 2-March 03
From: The Morgue, Singapore LTG
Member No.: 4,187
QUOTE (James McMurray)
QUOTE (The Stainless Steel Rat @ Aug 11 2006, 12:50 AM)
you have to give them what they like

Gotta partially disagree on this. It's up to the GM to give the players a game they can enjoy, but it's also up to the players to give the GM a game he can enjoy. It sounds like some compromise is needed in this case.

Actually the GM has to give the GM a game he'd enjoy(That's according to SR3 SRComp, so until the SR4 Comp comes out, this is what is written). So the GM has to produce a game that the players and himself will enjoy.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
James McMurray
post Aug 11 2006, 04:34 PM
Post #57


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,430
Joined: 10-January 05
From: Fort Worth, Texas
Member No.: 6,957
That statement assumes the players have no control over how the game goes. It doesn't matter how much the GM tries to cover both bases, if the players don't cooperate it's wasted effort.

Are you trying to say that's RAW, or just pointing out that it's in a book? Either way, it's SR3 and has no bearing on SR4. If you're trying to say it's RAW then I pity your GM> :)
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Kagetenshi
post Aug 11 2006, 07:17 PM
Post #58


Manus Celer Dei
**********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 17,012
Joined: 30-December 02
From: Boston
Member No.: 3,802
Where did the camera image pseudoformat come in?

It is canon.

~J
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
HullBreach
post Aug 11 2006, 07:21 PM
Post #59


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 366
Joined: 9-August 06
From: Holiday Florida
Member No.: 9,055
QUOTE (Kagetenshi)
Where did the camera image pseudoformat come in?

It is canon.

~J

This is such a photography in-joke its priceless!

<The RAW image format was proprietary to Canon digital cameras IIRC>
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Kagetenshi
post Aug 11 2006, 07:28 PM
Post #60


Manus Celer Dei
**********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 17,012
Joined: 30-December 02
From: Boston
Member No.: 3,802
I call it a pseudoformat because it isn't actually a standardized format—Canon may have started it, but now any high-end camera has a format that they call RAW, but that is inevitably utterly unlike the format from any other manufacturer's cameras (and sometimes unlike other models from the same manufacturer).

~J
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
toturi
post Aug 11 2006, 11:46 PM
Post #61


Canon Companion
**********

Group: Members
Posts: 8,021
Joined: 2-March 03
From: The Morgue, Singapore LTG
Member No.: 4,187
QUOTE (Kagetenshi)
Where did the camera image pseudoformat come in?

It is canon.

~J

:rollin: Oh, man, that' funny... :D
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
The Stainless St...
post Aug 12 2006, 04:07 AM
Post #62


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 257
Joined: 25-May 05
Member No.: 7,414
QUOTE (James McMurray)
QUOTE (The Stainless Steel Rat @ Aug 11 2006, 12:50 AM)
you have to give them what they like

Gotta partially disagree on this. It's up to the GM to give the players a game they can enjoy, but it's also up to the players to give the GM a game he can enjoy. It sounds like some compromise is needed in this case.

Let's take another look at what I actually posted (emphasis new):
QUOTE (The Stainless Steel Rat)
Part of the job of the GM is to provide the style of game that the players want to play... I think it's great to make them flex their playstyle now and then, but overall you have to give them what they like or you'll have an empty table.


But way to take a partial quote out of context to change it's meaning! I feel like I've been nailed by Stephen Colbert! Consider yourself On Notice!


...and that's the Word.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Pendaric
post Aug 12 2006, 12:02 PM
Post #63


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 993
Joined: 5-December 05
From: Crying in the wilderness
Member No.: 8,047
My players weakest point is planning, they know this but they do the job. I punished them when they did no planning against a exsperienced shadowrunning team and they did plan simply for the corp exstraction. Over planning is fear or obsession with looking clever. The first is a matter of calming the player in question down the latter simply let contact the enemy, it wont survive long.
I, as ref, like to plan defensive protocols for the sec guards, they will do something according to threat, so the players then have to adapt accordingly. Job done usally.

Just don't get to the point where you have a player declare,"Plans? We dont need plans! Plans go wrong!"
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dog
post Aug 12 2006, 03:02 PM
Post #64


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 903
Joined: 7-February 03
Member No.: 4,025
Excellent point, Pendaric, about considering why the players (over)plan. Because they think they're "supposed to?" Are they trying to do something clever?... for the karma? Are they procrastinating? Or are they really just trying to find the best way to do the job? I suppose each reason might require a different response.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
ShadowDragon8685
post Aug 12 2006, 03:21 PM
Post #65


Horror
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,322
Joined: 15-June 05
From: BumFuck, New Jersey
Member No.: 7,445
Maybe they just like the thrill of a black-ops planning and execution? I dunno.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Dog
post Aug 12 2006, 03:24 PM
Post #66


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 903
Joined: 7-February 03
Member No.: 4,025
That too...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
James McMurray
post Aug 12 2006, 06:29 PM
Post #67


Great Dragon
*********

Group: Members
Posts: 5,430
Joined: 10-January 05
From: Fort Worth, Texas
Member No.: 6,957
QUOTE (The Stainless Steel Rat)
QUOTE (James McMurray)
QUOTE (The Stainless Steel Rat @ Aug 11 2006, 12:50 AM)
you have to give them what they like

Gotta partially disagree on this. It's up to the GM to give the players a game they can enjoy, but it's also up to the players to give the GM a game he can enjoy. It sounds like some compromise is needed in this case.

Let's take another look at what I actually posted (emphasis new):
QUOTE (The Stainless Steel Rat)
Part of the job of the GM is to provide the style of game that the players want to play... I think it's great to make them flex their playstyle now and then, but overall you have to give them what they like or you'll have an empty table.


But way to take a partial quote out of context to change it's meaning! I feel like I've been nailed by Stephen Colbert! Consider yourself On Notice!


...and that's the Word.

Let's take another look at what I actually posted...

QUOTE
Gotta partially disagree on this.



Hmmm...
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Conskill
post Aug 12 2006, 08:06 PM
Post #68


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 153
Joined: 7-November 04
Member No.: 6,811
I think of it as the Farscape Method, since what always comes to mind is Crichton ducking behind a wall while under intense fire and yelling out to his comrades, "Why do our plans always suck?!"

In my SR games, like in so many of those Farscape episodes, the twist of the run is usually something that can't be reasonably accounted for in planning. It's not a failure on the character's part, it's simply a component of the game's drama when they learn a pretty vital piece of information way too late to do anything but react now to it.

If the players express a desire for a slower and more methodical game (they never have), I'd be willing to provide it. However, this method seems to promote much more straight-forward and flexible planning, and puts the impetus of decision making where it always is in good action movies and drama: in the field of fire, instead of around a map.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
LilithTaveril
post Aug 12 2006, 08:09 PM
Post #69


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 451
Joined: 8-May 06
Member No.: 8,533
There's an easy way to kill Rommel. All you need is Longarms (6), Agility (6), a Ranger Arms SM-4, and a good rooftop.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Kagetenshi
post Aug 12 2006, 08:20 PM
Post #70


Manus Celer Dei
**********

Group: Dumpshocked
Posts: 17,012
Joined: 30-December 02
From: Boston
Member No.: 3,802
I always thought you just gave him the choice between committing suicide and having his family disgraced and possibly killed…

~J
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
LilithTaveril
post Aug 12 2006, 08:38 PM
Post #71


Moving Target
**

Group: Members
Posts: 451
Joined: 8-May 06
Member No.: 8,533
Depends on which Rommel you're trying to kill.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Fix-it
post Aug 12 2006, 08:44 PM
Post #72


Creating a god with his own hands
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,405
Joined: 30-September 02
From: 0:0:0:0:0:0:0:1
Member No.: 3,364
QUOTE (BookWyrm)
Uh hey. That should actually be "Montgomerys", not Rommels.

heh. bears repeating.

Market garden was NOT a good idea.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BookWyrm
post Aug 12 2006, 09:28 PM
Post #73


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,379
Joined: 16-April 02
From: the LI shadows
Member No.: 2,607
Hence my point. While Rommel was deriled for being the enemy, Montgomery was worse, him being a snooty, upper-class-superior, prima-donna-know-it-all. I've seen all the documentaries to at least say this; if Monty had been on the Nazi's side, the war in Europe would have been over in half the time.

I'm just making an observation. Everyone got into the conflict with more than enough arrogance & presumtion to begin with, it just took a few bloody noses on both sides to get their heads clear. Despite what the movie Patton tells you.

Over-complicated plans are one thing, but it's the implimentation that things get bogged down. Don't be the monkey-wrench, just learn to know when to apply said tool.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
Butterblume
post Aug 12 2006, 11:02 PM
Post #74


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,150
Joined: 19-December 05
From: Rhein-Ruhr Megaplex
Member No.: 8,081
QUOTE (Fix-it)
Market garden was NOT a good idea.

Basically, it was a good idea. Only the intelligence (aka legwork) sucked.

QUOTE
Hence my point. While Rommel was deriled for being the enemy, Montgomery was worse, him being a snooty, upper-class-superior, prima-donna-know-it-all.

As far as I know, this description also fit Rommel.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
BookWyrm
post Aug 13 2006, 12:02 AM
Post #75


Running Target
***

Group: Members
Posts: 1,379
Joined: 16-April 02
From: the LI shadows
Member No.: 2,607
Granted, Butterblume. I guess it's more of a personal choice whether to call such things by either.
Go to the top of the page
 
+Quote Post
« Next Oldest · Shadowrun · Next Newest »
 

4 Pages V  < 1 2 3 4 >
Reply to this topicStart new topic

 

Display Mode: Standard · Switch to: Linear+ · Switch to: Outline

Track this topic · Email this topic · Print this topic · Subscribe to this forum

RSS Lo-Fi Version Time is now: 14th August 2025 - 01:09 AM
Powered By IP.Board © 2025  IPS, Inc.

Topps, Inc has sole ownership of the names, logo, artwork, marks, photographs, sounds, audio, video and/or any proprietary material used in connection with the game Shadowrun. Topps, Inc has granted permission to the Dumpshock Forums to use such names, logos, artwork, marks and/or any proprietary materials for promotional and informational purposes on its website but does not endorse, and is not affiliated with the Dumpshock Forums in any official capacity whatsoever.