Jack Dionne
Member
Having been an avid ASL player for 25 years now may I make some suggestion for alternate victory conditions?
First thing I should say is that ASL stands for Advanced Squad Leader and is a board game with the same top down view as SP and same unit scale but is entirely WWII.
There is literally hundreds of different Victory Conditions (VC) that different scenario designers will use. Here are a few examples:
The attacker wins by having more good order units within road boundary (as determined by map, the grid would be written out). If the attacker doesn’t have more good order units then the defender, the defender wins buy default. You can change the wording to Player 1 and Player 2 rather than attacker and defender.
The rule book for ASL also has an index with definitions of specific terms: Good order means any armed, unbroken unit not held in melee and any mobile armed AFV with functioning main armament.
Notice the word “mobile” in the sentence, this implies a vehicle which is not immobilized in any way.
Some people have been known to read between the lines when it comes to winning in ASL so scenario designers would have to modify the wording of VC as follows:
The attacker wins by having more good order infantry units within road boundary (as determined by map, the grid would be written out). In the special rules section of the scenario it would be clearly stated that crews may not voluntarily abandon their vehicles.
There is VC that can be two fold as well, another example: Player 1 must have more good order unit on any hill hex of Hill??? Without losing twice as many casualty victory points as player two.
I think this type of VC would work, what do you guys think?
First thing I should say is that ASL stands for Advanced Squad Leader and is a board game with the same top down view as SP and same unit scale but is entirely WWII.
There is literally hundreds of different Victory Conditions (VC) that different scenario designers will use. Here are a few examples:
The attacker wins by having more good order units within road boundary (as determined by map, the grid would be written out). If the attacker doesn’t have more good order units then the defender, the defender wins buy default. You can change the wording to Player 1 and Player 2 rather than attacker and defender.
The rule book for ASL also has an index with definitions of specific terms: Good order means any armed, unbroken unit not held in melee and any mobile armed AFV with functioning main armament.
Notice the word “mobile” in the sentence, this implies a vehicle which is not immobilized in any way.
Some people have been known to read between the lines when it comes to winning in ASL so scenario designers would have to modify the wording of VC as follows:
The attacker wins by having more good order infantry units within road boundary (as determined by map, the grid would be written out). In the special rules section of the scenario it would be clearly stated that crews may not voluntarily abandon their vehicles.
There is VC that can be two fold as well, another example: Player 1 must have more good order unit on any hill hex of Hill??? Without losing twice as many casualty victory points as player two.
I think this type of VC would work, what do you guys think?
