Dyo

[BigDog]

I have noticed dyo is like highly frowned upon. This was our favorite way of play in the military. I also notice that most players mention balance when dissing DYO. This really puzzles me. VERY few actions in any conflict have been "BALANCED" Supperior terrain, leadership, troops, equitment, logistics, it all plays a part.

Is it that perhaps if people get spanked down in dyo it hurts there image as a leader of troops? The game is called Squad LEADER after all.

 

[Fred Ingram]

Why in the world would I sit down to play someone for 8 hours by just throwing a random amount of units in a pile for OOB and then cobble together some vauge and ill thought out victory conditions when I could play one of the thousand or so fully playtested scenarios already designed for me by individuals who have demonstrated thier talent for doing just that. The odds of having a real doggy time seems to go down by many orders of magnitude when you avoid the DYO route.

But hey, whatever floats your boat.

 

[karl]

Hi

I would like to try DYO sometime. I think the skill comes down to your force selection based on how many points you have to buy your units and what your objective is.

A poor choice, random selection, will result in a poor game as you say, but with some thought and a little bit of pre game intel, it should be quite fun to see if your force choice was the correct one. :cheeky:

Cheers

Karl

 

[WaterRabbit]

If you think DYO is bad, I know some guys that used to play "counter-mix" games. In essence, they would setup about 6 or more boards and then randomly draw counters from a bag. Those units would then enter on their side of the map. The winner was the guy that exhausted the other guy's OB. I don't think they ever finished a game -- they were "process" gamers not "goal" gamers.

I don't mind DYO. One of the best tournament formats I played in was DYO. The TD would specify the board setup for each round and the nationalities involved. Each player would have x number of points -- usually around 100-120. Each player would have to create a design for both nationalities. Players could setup within 5 hexes of their board edge and/or enter on their board edge. Sides would be determined when opponents were selected. Victory conditions were based as follows: Most EVP, if tied, most CVP, if tied, having a unit farthest from your own board edge.

 

[BigDog]

Sheesh. You choose equal orders of battle. That in Platoon vs Platoon on up. Hell if you wanted you could do brigades. Choose some turf, set up and go. Alot of times we even discussed what forces we were going with as we set up.

 

[zgrose]

Probably depends on what you played before playing ASL. If you like chess/checkers than perhaps only balanced games fit your style. If, like me, you come from a Combat Mission background then random battles (on random maps no less) probably seem more natural.

Winning a balanced scenario is ok (after all, you should win 50% of the time against an opponent of equal skill) but winning when the outcome is less certain is that much better. Likewise, losing can still be fun if you can revel in your "local" victories even in defeat.

But without a doubt, YMMV.

 

[Priest]

I think that I would like to try a DYO sometime....when I learn to play a little better.

 

[Jack Dionne]

More Fun with DYO

I think that I would like to try a DYO sometime....when I learn to play a little better.

Before the historical modules came out that was all we used to play was the big 10 or 16 board DYO scenario. First thing we did before picking sides was establish victory conditions and determine where reinforcements could come in. The reinforcements where usually handled the same way as a scenario we liked (Action at Baltercamp) it was in Norway with the Germans, Brits, and Norwegians. The Germans got to pick which board edge before set up and then had to roll during the rally phase.
Some of my most memorable ASL moments came in the big DYO scenario highlights include: my 200mm(US) OBA rubbling a building hex and the chain reaction almost took out an entire German coy. We also did what if scenario, with the US vs. Russia and the UK. That was cool too, Churchill VII vs. T-34. As the Russian player I remember purchasing 200mm rockets and calling down on some Pershing, I was lucky with my roll and it landed perfectly for the most amount of damage, he ended up loosing about 4 or 5 of them. It is much too good a system not to use. One thing I do remember doing was doubling the cost of SAN and we like the ELR at 4 because we found it speed up the game especially when your playing huge scenarios.
Something else I noticed about ASL that is highly under rated and everybody takes for granted, is the BPV of units and consistencies in strength values of units. I don’t know how many people play games like Steel Panthers World at War on the PC but there is this constant tweaking and modifying point values for units and also capabilities. Sometimes you think it will never end. To me that’s a big plus for ASL, the DYO system is just as good now as it was when I first started playing the game back in 1985.
It’s all a matter of priorities. If fun is your priority play DYO you can’t go wrong.

 

[Bryan Holtby]

I couldnt think of a better way to waste a day myself. There are just too many published and playtested scenarios out there, hundreds and hundreds of 'em. My ASL playing time is so restricted now I just dont have the time to play something that doesnt have some form of balance.

 

[WaterRabbit]

Also, if you are playing a double-blind game it really benefits from using the DYO rules.

That wacky OBA. I was playing a Frozen Hell CG (essentilly directed DYO) as the Russians. I had been having trouble getting my OBA into play. Finally, I landed it in the perfect spot (10DD6) right on top of his units with my units just outside of the blast radius (DD4). I rubbled DD5 with snake eye followed by a 1 on the rubble DR (82 mm OBA) and got falling rubble to boot (DR 6,1). Unfortunally, the falling rubble landed in DD4 which was where my 10-2 and a couple of 458s were hiding. Doh! Chances 1 in 36 x 1 in 6 x 1 in 36 = 0.013% chance. Talk about snatching defeat out of the jaws of victory.

 

[Jack Dionne]

Also, if you are playing a double-blind game it really benefits from using the DYO rules.

That wacky OBA. I was playing a Frozen Hell CG (essentilly directed DYO) as the Russians. I had been having trouble getting my OBA into play. Finally, I landed it in the perfect spot (10DD6) right on top of his units with my units just outside of the blast radius (DD4). I rubbled DD5 with snake eye followed by a 1 on the rubble DR (82 mm OBA) and got falling rubble to boot (DR 6,1). Unfortunally, the falling rubble landed in DD4 which was where my 10-2 and a couple of 458s were hiding. Doh! Chances 1 in 36 x 1 in 6 x 1 in 36 = 0.013% chance. Talk about snatching defeat out of the jaws of victory.

That's why we play ASL, the random aspect of events.

 

[da priest]

.. You choose equal orders of battle. ... Alot of times we even discussed what forces we were going with as we set up.

Hmmm, sounds like a "designed" scenario with set limits, counters, etc., sorta like those 1000+ scenarios we already have. :cheeky:

Played very few DYOs, guy that picked the most flame weapons usually won. :bandit:

 

[Jack Dionne]

Hmmm, sounds like a "designed" scenario with set limits, counters, etc., sorta like those 1000+ scenarios we already have. :cheeky:

Played very few DYOs, guy that picked the most flame weapons usually won. :bandit:

Your post brought back another DYO ASL memory. In my previous post I mentioned the randomness on where reinforcement could come on. The large DYO I was the Russian and I purchased 9 OT-34’s (flame tank). I picked a board edge they would be coming in prior to set up but just didn’t know the turn. Had to roll for it during the Rally phase less than or equal to current turn. Anyway my German opponent emplace an 88 AA gun on top of (hill621) a third level hill hex on board two. I did not know about it obviously but in essence that one gun took out all nine of my flame tanks in two turns. What a game.

 

[The Purist]

I think DYO might be good for trying out more historical OoBs. The average 44 German rifle coy (supported and tweaked for the nuances of ASL) being attacked by a US or Russian unit (same tweaking) supported by a platoon of tanks or some OBA is an interesting idea. However, how do you set VCs?

I think the CVP cap is good answer in a situation where one side may have, potentially, devestaing firepower. If trying to represent a breakthrough, clearing a road network of ADJACENT enemy units is another. Using ideas (VC for missions) from SASL and DYO format may allow you to represent little known/poorly covered aspects of the war. It may be useful for a DYO HASL battle but you would have to research units available and then limit the players to those types of units (i.e: no King Tigers in the seige of Brest).

The critics of DYO do have a very good point about time, availablity of scenarios, etc. Another criricism is also the costs of vehicles (for example). Is a Panther worth 89 BPV at rarity factor 1.1 in 1944 really that readily available? Afterall, a Sherman M4A3(75)W is worth 73 BPV, 78 w/ gyro. Is this an accurate representation of a typical scrap in late 44'? Maybe if a panzer unit is represented but not a 'typical' action along the West Wall. By the time you research enough info about such an action you have probably got enough to design a historical scenario. So,...why not go for a full scenario.

 

[WaterRabbit]

One of the Generals (the one with the Streets of Fire cover, I think) had some very good DYO rules.

The current DYO rules limit the availability of vehicles, guns, etc. The only tweak I used is to have both players use the same RF for their purchases. The way this is commonly done is to have a list of DRs made up. Each player can use one of the DRs for different aspects of the purchase.

It sounds like da Priest and his crew didn't understand the DYO rules. To get flame weapons requires that you purchase Assault Engineers for FT SWs. Assault engineers cost double and must be elite, which for most nationalities is about 26 points per squad (Italians can get AEs for 16 but you have to buy 3 squad to get a single FT). To get 2 FTs with the German for example requires that buy 3 AEs which costs you 78 points -- you could instead buy 7 1st line squads and a 2nd line squad.

Almost all vehicle FT have a high RF -- generally 1.4 or higher. That means you have to make a DR =< 4. Finally, they are expensive (especially American optional BFTs 24/30 extra points per tank IF you make the roll).

FTs have a high terror factor, but almost never get to attack -- they are just to vulnerable. The best use of FTs is to kill broken units and act as a diversion so you can move other units freely. I guarantee that if you tied up a significant portion of your points in flame weapons, I would mop the floor with you. None of them would get into action since I would have a significant numerical advantage. The only place FTs really rule is in very dense terrain where you can keep concealment with infantry and don't risk long range shots against your vehicles.

I've played 40+ DYO games; mobility and combined arms rule the day.

I like the approach of the Platoon Leader rules (which is essentially a generic version of the AH campaign rules used in KGP), where you buy platoons from a divisional/regimental organization. This gets rid of some of the DYO sleaze. All of the Historical campaign games use a structured version of the DYO rules (1 CPP = 10 BPV). [Obviously, fortifications purchases have been tweaked.]

 

[Dr Zaius]

I would beg to differ on some of the points made above as to the merits of random-type battles in wargaming. They do have some drawbacks, but they also have some major advantages over traditional scenarios. First, and I can't stress this one enough, FOW. As a senior instructor in the Army, I taught basic courses in small unit tactics and the one thing that would almost always disrupt the student's plans was the FOW. They didn't know exactly what they were up against and we had tons of fun manipulating them (way too much fun :devious: ) into all sorts of nasty situations. We really were teaching leadership, not tactics, but putting them into these situations was a fascinating way for us to evaluate their leadership potential and decision making skills.

This type of "wargaming" is not at all disimilar to what we do here at Warfare HQ. Wargamers love being put into challenging and interesting situations where information on the enemy is incomplete. That's half the fun! It's also one of ASL's true weaknesses and why the system is of very limited value to military trainers vs. something like TacOps. It's a failing common to all boardgame designs, although ASL makes the most valiant attempt I've seen to date of simulating a few of the effects of FOW within a boardgame setting. Nevertheless, you always have 90% more information than you would have in real life (even if you were the TF commander).

I'm not suggesting that DYO could replace traditional scenarios as they are the meat and potatoes of the system, however, I am saying DYO ("quick battle" in Combat Mission and "scenario templates" in TacOps) do have a valid place. Since you can only have a very vauge idea of what you are up against and what they may be trying to do, your decision making process rapidly gets an order of magnitude more complex.

Balance? DYO does have a system of balance built right into it and this can certainly be used to generate some interesting situations.

 

[Dr Zaius]

I just checked WARS and it appears we completely forgot about this aspect of ASL when we designed the system. Reepicheep and Chas, we need to talk about this some more in the staff forum.

 

[da priest]

..It sounds like da Priest and his crew didn't understand the DYO rules. ...

Err.. check the thread out.. don't think it started with ASL's DYO Rules, but a homegrown variety. :shock:


From the thread starting dude: "You choose equal orders of battle. That in Platoon vs Platoon on up. Hell if you wanted you could do brigades. Choose some turf, set up and go." That sound like ASL's DYO? :argh:

If you want to talk official DYO then the VCs really s*ck in about 2/3rds of the fights. But Kitchen's Program allows you to zip thru those and get to the better VCs...but that's a whole nother story. :smoke:

 

[WaterRabbit]

Hmmm, sounds like a "designed" scenario with set limits, counters, etc., sorta like those 1000+ scenarios we already have. :cheeky:

Played very few DYOs, guy that picked the most flame weapons usually won. :bandit:

The thread is about DYO ASL. You didn't specify that you weren't playing ASL DYO, so it is a natural assumption to make that you were -- maybe you were confused and thought we were discussing Panzer Leader/Blitz? And if you weren't why did you bother posting in a thread about ASL DYO?

As for choosing platoon vs. platoon, etc. that is certainly possibly within the DYO system. All the official DYO system specifies is the actual purchasing of forces. It is silent as to scenario design, weather conditions, victory conditions, nationalities involved, etc. So to a large extent all DYO is "homegrown" -- both players have to agree on the conditions of battle.

What VCs are specified in the DYO rules? Please give rule #. A26 is the only discussion about VCs that might pertain to DYO. Again, both players have to agree to VCs even before they purchase forces. I'm not sure how you can say they suck. They are totally up in the air for the players to decide. Perhaps you have spent too much time :argh: -- it seems to have affected your logic.

On anther note: One major point about DYO, it is all about having fun and falls more toward the simulation part of the spectrum. The whole fun of DYO is designing your OB. It isn't designed for competitive play as there are too many things that aren't nailed down. To use DYO in competitive play, you really need a third party to create the design boundaries. Thus we have RB, KGP, PB, ABtF, BRT, etc.

If you are a Goal-oriented player then DYO is not for you. If you are a Process gamer then DYO is great. DYO is not about wining -- it is about style. DYO is great for historical 'What ifs'; Patton's War, Invasion of Japan, US takes Berlin instead of USSR, etc.

 

[Jack Dionne]

:
If you are a Goal-oriented player then DYO is not for you. If you are a Process gamer then DYO is great. DYO is not about wining -- it is about style. DYO is great for historical 'What ifs'; Patton's War, Invasion of Japan, US takes Berlin instead of USSR, etc.

I could not have said it better myself. It's a matter of priorities. Having fun is mine. My best ASL memories come from DYO.