Battlefield Integrity

ToxicShock

Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2003
Messages
350
Reaction score
0
Location
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Country
llCanada
Jack said:
In your opinion would the Red Barricades Historical game been better served if the standard ELR gain/loss was droped for the rule book edition of Battlefield Integrety?
It would be interesting to try it out. However, with the length of CGIII, I would surmise that the CG would end much quicker due to "cardboard fatigue" than the 30(?) CG scenarios listed.


NOTE: I used the term "cardboard fatigue" for ELR = 0 back when I was using BI.
 

Priest

Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2003
Messages
2,132
Reaction score
2
Location
Denver, Colorado
Jazz said:
Also, something to consider is that to my knowledge, no body these days playtest scenarios using Integrity. I would think that it would unbalance a whole bunch'o scenarios... Especially those scenarios (Polish vs German in '39 comes to mind) were the defender is gonna get spanked but can win by making the attacker take too much in the way of time and/or losses doing it.
Hello Jack and ToxicShock, Jazz brought up a point that BI may actually unbalance a lot of scenarios. Your take on this?
 

ToxicShock

Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2003
Messages
350
Reaction score
0
Location
Calgary, Alberta, Canada
Country
llCanada
Priest said:
Hello Jack and ToxicShock, Jazz brought up a point that BI may actually unbalance a lot of scenarios. Your take on this?
No, using BI will definitely 'unbalance' scenarios. It is an optional rule which will never be used in a tourney in comparison to the optional IIFT which has a smaller 'effect' on the game and can be 'safely' used in a game in comparison. It is interesting to note that this section of the rules is still in Chapter A but ' * ' out as an optional rule even in the 2nd edition.

Also, you never hear the grognards spouting off about using BI with their IFT either. But, I digress... time for another home-brew.
 
Last edited:

WaterRabbit

Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2004
Messages
2,566
Reaction score
27
Location
Somewhere
Country
llGreenland
Priest said:
This is listed as an optional rule in the ASLRBv2, does anyone actually use this rule? Is this rule used enough that it would be worth my while to learn it?
When I lived in the San Francisco Bay Area back in the late '80s the people I played with all used BI. We used BI occasionally in our playtests for The Last Hurrah and West of Alamein. I haven't used it since 1989 however – mainly because I no longer found opponents that used or were will to use it.

The record keeping is minimal – especially if you use the BI chart and counters to track it. In general, BI favors the Attacker for two reasons. The first is that the Attacker usually has a higher ELR and better leadership. The second is the Attacker usually has more squads. That means it takes more effort to cause a BI loss. The defender conversely, is more fragile since even the loss of a single squad can cause a BI check. BI also plays a greater role in longer scenarios than in shorter scenarios.

Having said that, I found that BI reinforces the side that has momentum. Once a given side's ELR drops to 1, the game is essentially over. Because of that, BI also has the side effect of reducing the time required to play a scenario. People tend to resign if their ELR drops to 1 or 0. ;)
 

Priest

Member
Joined
Aug 18, 2003
Messages
2,132
Reaction score
2
Location
Denver, Colorado
Thanks for the input WaterRabbit. I'd like to ask you a question. Jazz also brought up the point that scenarios in which the defenders take a bad spanking and that the only way that they can win is by holding off the attackers just long enough that the attacker can't fulfill his victory conditions. How would BI affect these scenarios?
 

Chris Milne

Member
Joined
Jan 29, 2003
Messages
675
Reaction score
3
Location
Letchworth, UK
Country
ll
Well, can't see it helping the defender out much.

I think ASL scenarios have evolved over the years so that they're now increasingly short and reward aggressive mobile play more. Does that make them more vulnerable to BI unbalancing?
 

alanp

Philosopher of ASL
Joined
Sep 27, 2003
Messages
2,998
Reaction score
93
Location
Alki Point
Country
llUnited States
Don't forget, too, that BI isn't to be used unless both sides have at least 10 squads each. There may be scenarios where the Defender has 10 and the Attacker has, say, 20(or more) squads which makes the Def.'s MMCs more 'valuable' for BI but then a scenario like that probably has other characteristics--lots of OG for Attacker to cross, great 'kill-stack' potential for the Defender--which makes it likely that the A will lose twice as many MMCs as the D.

Chris' point about the scenarios changing is a good one. The quicker and smaller ones probably won't have BI for them, though. Hopefully, the larger scenarios are play-tested using BI; if not, BI shouldn't be used. It'd be kinda like using concealment in an ASLSK scenario--could unbalance the game.

Alan "I use BI once a decade" P.
 

WaterRabbit

Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2004
Messages
2,566
Reaction score
27
Location
Somewhere
Country
llGreenland
Priest said:
Thanks for the input WaterRabbit. I'd like to ask you a question. Jazz also brought up the point that scenarios in which the defenders take a bad spanking and that the only way that they can win is by holding off the attackers just long enough that the attacker can't fulfill his victory conditions. How would BI affect these scenarios?
IME, that depends upon how bad a spanking they receive. :) In general, ELR doesn't really start to drop until you have lost between 40-50% of your initial force (baring other factors like armor superiority, etc.). In some scenario designs, the defender can win with less than 20% of his initial force by holding off the attacker. This just doesn't happen with BI since all of your MMC will be broken, disrupted, conscripts by that point due to ELR loss.

IMO, BI is best in meeting style engagement type scenarios or in DYO where it can be planned for in advance. Also, BI makes little difference if your initial ELR is already really low. I once played in a DYO scenario using Historical ELRs. I played with the Italians with an initial ELR of 0 against the Americans. As you can imagine it didn't turn out very well. :eek:

Again, the big difference I observed playing with BI (btw, probably over two hundred games -- I played almost every night back then) was games rarely went to the last turn. A seven turn game would be finished by turn five -- just about the time once side took drop in ELR by two. We played mostly German/Russian scenarios (about all there was) and ELRs were typically 4/3 respectively.

I also think BI would hurt the Japanese more than most other nationalities. This is because of a quirk in BI. For most nationalities, few squads are killed outright -- most break. Often suffering quality reduction due to ELR failure. So, for example, that first line German squad that was worth 10 points if you killed him outright is only worth 7 if he first "scummed" before he was eventually killed. The Japanese rarely "scum" -- at least in the games I have played. So that Japanese squad is worth the full 13 points when it eventually withers away through multiple step reductions. Because of this, hand-to-hand combat is even more necessary as the Japanese. I am fairly certain that BI was never considered when the Japanese were being designed.

Even though I like the concept, I doubt I would ever play another scenario using BI unless it was either 1) a DYO or 2) listed in the SSR for that scenario.
 

John Bark

ASL 4 FUN only!!!
Joined
Feb 28, 2003
Messages
717
Reaction score
15
Location
American !!!
Country
llUnited States
I know the rule, but since it's optional, i've never used it because

of the extra record keeping!

:devil: :devil:
 

WaterRabbit

Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2004
Messages
2,566
Reaction score
27
Location
Somewhere
Country
llGreenland
John "Bark" said:
of the extra record keeping!

:devil: :devil:
If you play with the Chapter K divider the "extra record keeping" is truly minimal. A squad/half-squad dies, you move a counter on the divider a few squares. If the counter lands on or passes the BI mark counter you then make a BI check. Hardly an increase in record keeping since many scenarios require you to keep track of CVP. You use the same divider to track that as well. So every time a side takes a casualty it adds 5 seconds to the game to reach over and move the chit. If a side exceeds the BI mark it adds 10 seconds as they have to make a DR.

As I have pointed out in earlier posts, BI actually reduces the amount of time a scenario takes -- usually by an hour or more since someone concedes well before the turn limit of the scenario.

I just don't see "the extra record keeping" to be an issue at all unless you record everything that happens in a scenario on paper. Heck there is more record keeping in a scenario that has a couple of guns or other HIP units than with BI. The average PTO scenario has much more record keeping than an east-front scenario using BI. Also, any scenario that uses BI has done the upfront work for you. On each scenario card it lists the point cost for using BI in brackets on the Turn Record Chart. Just divide this number by 10 FRU and place a chit on the corresponding box on the chapter K divider. The only complication that could arise during the scenario is reinforcements -- and that takes two minutes to adjust for. :rolleyes:

There are many reasons not to use BI (scenario balance being the prominent), but the record-keeping argument is just a straw-man.
 

Legion

Member
Joined
May 3, 2004
Messages
1,427
Reaction score
8
Location
Picton (NSW)
Country
llAustralia
Hmmm... I REALLY dont think that the book-keeping is an issue with BI.

I have played ABtF once and KGPI twice all using the BI and have found the record keeping to not be a bother at all, nor has the BI unbalanced the game - i would go so far as to say that a Cg should be played with Bi to get the full measure of play from it.

Remember that with reinforcements there is the provision of A16.3, sure the BI can plummet if there are consistant disasters or bad DR's, but if one is smart with their reinforcing then it usually can not be too overwhelming.

I appreciated the comments form WaterRabbit about the Japanese, i have yet to play BRT and with BI i am sur this could be an issue... will let you know once we get around to it! :devil:
 
Top