Quote:
Originally Posted by Anthony
And, well, if your side has, say, 3 offensive characters (and 2 non-offensive) and their side has 5, on average after the shooting stops your side has zero offensive (and 2 non-offensive), their side has 3 offensive.
|
And three pure-offense guys who can't hit your two guys have lost if, as sir_pudding said, the goal is maneuver and not attrition. Having a purely offensive force that can't stop me from walking in and doing what I need to do isn't that useful. It's why light infantry can just
drive past artillery and even armor to blow something up or take a city. The point being that in a combined-arms situation, the side that's all
anything generally loses, dollars being equal. A $4 billion army of armor will lose to an army that's, say, $1 billion air cav, $1 billion armor, $1 billion artillery, and $1 billion mech inf.
Getting back to supers, this is
why it can be fun to play a zippy ninja, hefty tank, long-ranged blaster, or supporting role (healer, hacker, etc.). Your side will win against unbalanced forces and not lose so easily to balanced ones. Granted, individualist players won't see the goals of their side as important to their fun, but that's not a rules issue . . . that's a personal hangup.