Discussion: playing HtoH standalone scenarios versus campaign scenarios

jztemple

Member
Joined
May 11, 2005
Messages
253
Reaction score
0
Location
Florida
I've been thinking about this subject and thought I'd throw it out there for some discussion.

When two people play a standalone scenario, either historical or variant, the starting situation is known, assuming the player has played the scenario before or just loads it up solo and looks. I don't think anyone considers this cheating or taking unfair advantage to prepare like this, since it's a fixed situation.

So I was wondering, what about campaign scenarios? For instance,I'm playing the Ozark Pea Ridge campaign..

NOTE: THE FOLLOWING COULD BE CONSIDERED A SPOILER IF YOU HAVEN'T PLAYED THIS CAMPAIGN AND WISH TO IN THE FUTURE. STOP READING IF YOU DON'T WANT TO KNOW WHAT HAPPENS!!!
.
.
.
.
.
In the final battle, there are three choices available to each commander. For the union player, it's deploy forward, deploy back, or split the difference. For the rebel player, the choices are to assault frontally, take the entire army around in a flanking movement, or split the difference and do both with each half of the army. If you had never played the campaign before, you will be unaware of the choices avaiable to your opponent, and you would also be unaware of the consequences to your own troops of the choice you make. For instance, in this example if the rebel choses the full flanking manuver he incurs substancial fatigue.

So I'm wondering, do players who play HtoH or PBEM regularly play any campaigns, and if so, is it considered honorable to preview all the possible scenario choices so as to be aware of the advantages and consequences of each choice? Just wondering about this...
 

CyberRanger

Member
Joined
May 1, 2003
Messages
1,984
Reaction score
6
Location
NC, USA
Country
llUnited States
jztemple said:
...or PBEM regularly play any campaigns, and if so, is it considered honorable to preview all the possible scenario choices so as to be aware of the advantages and consequences of each choice? Just wondering about this...
I don't think it would be dishonorable but I do think you should discuss it with you opponent before you do so he has the same opportunity. I know I'm still figuring out how the campaign tree works. If you'd posted this three weeks ago, I'd had no idea what you were talking about! So, if you want to peek, tell your opponent so he has a level playing field.

That being said ... I like to not peek! For me, it makes the game more fun. :)
 

jztemple

Member
Joined
May 11, 2005
Messages
253
Reaction score
0
Location
Florida
Thanks for the reply. I was just wondering about this since the campaign structure is so interesting. I'm an engineer and even back in the days of board games and printed rules I'd love to analyse the "system" of a game. With computer games it's a lot more fun :).

The campaign editor and files of ACW are pretty interesting, and if you have Gettysburg and have downloaded the 19,000+ additional campaign scenarios, you know how powerful the campaign system can be. I've been doing some small tests to see how hard it would be to expand Ozark to provide that spectrum of random campaign choices that Gettysburg has. For Pea Ridge, for example, a union general might be faced by a confederate player that's not only approaching from several directions (instead of one or both of a total of two roads right now) but also with the possibility of a great variation in fatigue levels for the rebels.
 
Top