On the
next part here,
Ever heard of the Kobayashi Maru ?
This occasionally used among Star Trek fans or those
Ever heard of the Kobayashi Maru ?
This occasionally used among Star Trek fans or those
familiar
with the series to describe a no-win
scenario,
or a solution that involves redefining the problem.
The Kobayashi Maru scenario is used as an example of the need to redefine the foundation upon which a Nerf game/war competes—changing the rules rather than playing within a rigged game—as an example of successful tactic.
James T Kirk explains in Star Trek that the test is meant to
reveal how the subject deals with a no-win scenario, as how one deals with
death is as important as how one deals with life.
Later in the film, Kirk says
that the exercise is a true "no-win scenario," because there is no
correct resolution--it is a test of character.
Which brings to the famous "300" Nerf Game
scenario of NerfSG.
Yes, it is unashamedly takes the name from Zack Synder's
film, "300". :)
The setup used is to be used as an approximate reference, please tailor accordingly :)
"300" Nerf Game setup
6 players ( Defenders )
18 players ( Attacker)
The defender = YOLO ( You Only Live Once ) = Once tagged, Out of the Game
The attacker = Once tagged, exit arena & re-enter at a designated point.
Game Time : 5 minutes duration
Objective: The attackers is to tag all the defenders within set time.
Attackers tag all the defenders to win.
Defenders are to hold out for entire duration to win.
For added handicap, the defenders can be allowed to barricade or choose a favoured defensive ground to hold.
5 mins to set up and dig in for the ATTACK.
6 players ( Defenders )
18 players ( Attacker)
The defender = YOLO ( You Only Live Once ) = Once tagged, Out of the Game
The attacker = Once tagged, exit arena & re-enter at a designated point.
Game Time : 5 minutes duration
Objective: The attackers is to tag all the defenders within set time.
Attackers tag all the defenders to win.
Defenders are to hold out for entire duration to win.
For added handicap, the defenders can be allowed to barricade or choose a favoured defensive ground to hold.
5 mins to set up and dig in for the ATTACK.
Ultimately the significance of the "300" scenario is not to embarrass or haze players. It is to be used as stark reminders that, not matter how kick-ass, pro-ness or how tricked up the blasters they are having in their hands they are will be tagged, either from aimed, luck or overwhelming odds. It is also good fun and a good game strengthen their nerves in the face of Great Odds.
Yes, there are teams who actually hold off the attackers and won this scenario.
It is not unwinnable.
But it needs to think outside the box :D
This is BS, signing off for now :)
This is BS, signing off for now :)
