Fog of War poll.

[RobZagnut]

ASL is slanted towards the attacker, which is why most players prefer to attack. Should there be more Fog of War rules or SSRs that give back some surprises or advantage of being the defender?

Are there any other Fog of War ideas that you think should be implemented in scenarios?

 

[Watson]

How about a modified version of Red Star Rising’s determination of Russian strength? Say, both players use concealment counters until contact is made (i.e., they fire). Then the type of squad is determined by drawing a counter from a cup. The cup would have a range of squad types. You wouldn’t really know what you had until they got into the fray. Obviously, it would not work for a “balanced” scenario in a tournament, but it might make for an interesting afternoon.

 

[Tater]

ASL is slanted towards the attacker, which is why most players prefer to attack. Should there be more Fog of War rules or SSRs that give back some surprises or advantage of being the defender?

Yes...the more fog of war the better. Personally I think the defender should always start '?' regardless of whether the attacker sets-up on board or not. I also think there should be more HIP...sort of like the Japanese get.

Are there any other Fog of War ideas that you think should be implemented in scenarios?

I don't remember where I saw it but I recall an interesting idea where you would use only 1 '?' counter to represent the whole stack. The units/SW/etc would all go in a cloaking box. You would only see individual '?' counters set-up/moving. Would also exponentially increase the effectiveness of your dummies as well.

 

['Ol Fezziwig]

Should there be more HIP for the Defender, but they are then revealed by a certain turn?

Sorry, but I HATE this sort of rule, SSR, whatever...JMHuO.

I think an SSR utilising the SAN dr as a reinforcement generator (humbly acknowledging Pete, here) would add a bit of unforseen friction to a scenario.

 

[Bob Holmstrom]

I voted for all of them. Scenario designers take note, there are some good ideas here for SSR's.

 

['Ol Fezziwig]

I don't remember where I saw it but I recall an interesting idea where you would use only 1 '?' counter to represent the whole stack. The units/SW/etc would all go in a cloaking box. You would only see individual '?' counters set-up/moving. Would also exponentially increase the effectiveness of your dummies as well.

That's in the footnotes, I believe, of the ASLRB. It's an option I'd like to see have more universal acceptance, but, alas, it does not.

 

[A/CSM Bird]

Fog of War tests your skill.

I voted for more HIP. More FoW is desireable and it tests your skill at our game more than anything else. Dealing with surprises and hidden enemy forces has been the undoing of many a player. I have seen guys come completely undone when surprised by HIP forces and fail many a PMC as a result.

More FoW.

I have participated in several double Blind ASL games and they were all great for the most part. I would like to see an 'official' set of Blind rules for ASL.

 

[alanp]

I've enjoyed playing scenarios in which Passengers are HIP/'?' until they fire/unload. Keeps ones opponent from cherry-picking the half-tracks with the juiciest targets.

Then again, I guess you may see this as yet another advantage for the Attacker.

 

[Barber]

I don't remember where I saw it but I recall an interesting idea where you would use only 1 '?' counter to represent the whole stack. The units/SW/etc would all go in a cloaking box. You would only see individual '?' counters set-up/moving. Would also exponentially increase the effectiveness of your dummies as well.

Yes. A modified version of cloaking for both sides would be ideal to me. Combine that with variable OBs and/or variable VCs and you can get some real battlefield confusion. That's a good thing.

JB

 

[ecz]

I would see more fog of war in VC.
More choices, more doubts, more fun.

 

[MrP]

There have been some good things tried in the team tank rumbles, with mis-sightings etc.
"You see a tank 200m to your NE. It looks like a german medium tank". What kind of medium tank you think - is it even one of yours? Is it moving, turning, stopping, getting set to fire? Fab, but really only available when there's a GM....

I like all yr ideas though, plus the HIP HT guys, that's always been a personal bugbear.

 

[Vinnie]

I like FoW but it does lead to a very different game. If you increase FoW then you will need to alter scenarios using it.

 

[Markdv5208]

Good poll but...

Good poll, good questions, but too many scenarios already have what they have, so I voted for NO CHANGES.


Having said that, I HATE certain things when I'm attacking
--MINES
-HIP units that conduct the perfect ambush
-HIP units that go back and grab a VC location 3 turns after you overran the position and checked every hex but 1 (and that's the one he was hiding in)

JMHO..


Mark DV
Ada, MI FINALLY

 

[Blackcloud6]

I don't agree that ASL is slanted toward the attacker. That kind of slant depends upon the scenario.

I think the concelament and HiP rules add just the right amount of "fog-of-war" for a tactical game (not a simulation).

 

[Hugh Downing]

I like the current level of FoW in ASL. Too much FoW is one of the reasons I do not play tactical computer games.

I voted No

Hugh

 

['Ol Fezziwig]

I've enjoyed playing scenarios in which Passengers are HIP/'?' until they fire/unload. Keeps ones opponent from cherry-picking the half-tracks with the juiciest targets.

Then again, I guess you may see this as yet another advantage for the Attacker.

This, IMHoO, should be part and parcel of the rules anyway. Letting the defender pick and choose which transport is most lucrative is grossly gamey: Enigma wasn't used at the tactical level...

 

[alanp]

and I have a hazy memory of the LC rules being written taking this into account.

Seabee Mark and I did the J52-54 series this way--both sides can use it (to some extent.)

 

[A/CSM Bird]

I've enjoyed playing scenarios in which Passengers are HIP/'?' until they fire/unload. Keeps ones opponent from cherry-picking the half-tracks with the juiciest targets.

Then again, I guess you may see this as yet another advantage for the Attacker.

This, IMHoO, should be part and parcel of the rules anyway. Letting the defender pick and choose which transport is most lucrative is grossly gamey: Enigma wasn't used at the tactical level...

Winnipeg ASL Club House Rule #3.Passengers/Riders of vehicles may be kept off-board in a cloaking box until:
. They perform any action while on the vehicle.
· The enemy has LOS to the vehicle in question and any passengers are CE.
· Once they dismount/bail out/abandon the vehicle.

 

[Stalwart]

I like Tater's idea of 1 concealment counter representing the defeder's stack at the beginning of a scenario. The attacker knows there is something there, maybe

 

[WaterRabbit]

I have played many games using footnote A18. They were interesting for awhile and they kept down the "counter-intelligence" due to people knocking over concealed stacks with wild dice rolls or finger spasms.

However, for most scenarios, the effort of keeping items in a cloaking box isn't really worth the pay-off.