EF 1915 scenario bug

[06 Maestro]

For some unkown reason the replacement rates of this scenario were altered after playtesting was completed. The effect of this is that the Central Powers players' probability of winning is zero.
When complaints about this scenario surfaced recently I thought it was unfounded; as the game I had play tested was well balanced. I began a game against ER Chaser to show that the game was fine. Less than halfway through it became evident that something was quite different from the game that I played earlier. A little bit of investigation led to the changed replacements rates. The Russian side is currently 60 to 100% higher than what it was originally.
As Todd Klemme is completely TOAW-less now, I am going to repair this very interesting scenario. Todd said that he would give whatever help I needed and Chuck, another play tester and designer has already pointed me in the right direction. The game will be re-tested and resubmitted when ready.
I am also withdrawing my "OV" ladder report from a game against Brevet (CP player). Any other Russian player who is rubbing their hands in glee should consider this also. You could always do it again, right? :cry:

[Sheik Yerbouti]

Thanks for the info!

[Menschenfresser]

Chuck and I have a PT game going on. Should we cancel it?

Right now I am taking a beating as the Russians, but it's far from over. And I haven't looked at the replacements recently...

[Chuck?]

Chuck and I have a PT game going on. Should we cancel it?


Probably. The Russians are getting too many replacements. It likely works out to 15,000 extra rifle squads during the course of the scenario. :confused:

[Menschenfresser]

Shite! Alright...let's put the game off then. What's the use in playtesting a botched scenario anyway. If you want to, we can fire up a repeat once the corrected version comes out.

[Chuck?]

OK, it shouldn't take too long.

[Chuck?]

The playtest is currently on turn 21 after going past the official 20 turn length. The result is a draw. This may be misleading because the Russians had an OV on turn 19. Unlike most WW1 scenarios, the results of this one can change very quickly. Russian losses seem to sky rocket the last five turns or so.

The scenario currently favors the Russians a bit more than it should. The first turn Russian bonus victory points may be pared down some. Also some on map victory points might be juggled to even things out some.

[Chuck?]

The playtest is over and the result is a draw. A tough, bloody, standup fight. Both sides have to work pretty hard to get a good result.

[ER_Chaser]

which side were you, chuck?

[Chuck?]

which side were you, chuck?

Central Powers. It was pretty tough but I got all the way to Pinsk. I managed to take the two Warsaw hex on turn 20 & 21.

[ER_Chaser]

ic thx... that is very impressive :)

[Chuck?]

ic thx... that is very impressive :)

You may restart your match with Mr. Finland soon.

[06 Maestro]

The East Front 1915 scenario is about ready for re-posting. The replacement rates have been restored to the original levels. The results of additional play-testing of this scenario lead to a few minor changes. The changes are as follows;
1. Russian controlled victory point locations have been spread out closer to the start line.
2. Some CP controlled victory point locations have been moved closer to the start line.
3. The game length is extended by two turns to 22 turns, still with the variable ending. This was done to give a successful CP player the option to go for deep objectives and also to give the Russian player an opportunity to punish the CP player for faulty/unrealistic deployment of the German 11th Army, a key formation, which is largely withdrawn on turn 20.
4. The Russian victory point bonus is reduced to 50 points from 100.
5. Starting supply for the German 11th Army and the Austro/Hungarian 3rd Army is now at 150%. These formations were being built up for the attack for weeks in advance and so it seems reasonable that they have the additional supplies to help them get off the line.
6. The Briefing is updated to reflect the changes.

The last playtest only included change # 5 above. Before the game is re-posted it should be re-tested. If you are interested in helping to finalize this scenario contact me atmarino@cox.net

I would like to thank Chuck and Todd for their assistance and suggestions, which without I would no doubt still be toiling away at the editor.