How do you choose/eliminate scenarios to play?

[Evan Sherry]

A one of our recent gatherings, the Tampa Group talked a little about how players choose to play a given scenario and what disqualifies a scenario from being played at a particular time. We came up with a lot of reasons to eliminate a scenario as you flip though the scenario book. Here are a few common remarks heard during scenario selection:

1. "no night"
2. "10 turns! Too long! I told my wife I'd be home at 7:00 PM"
3. "Rice Paddies, forget it'
4. "No desert! I hate the desert; it has no mercy"
5. "Partisans, screw that!"
6. "PTO, I don't know Japanese rules"
7. "No Bocage!"
8. "...no beach assaults or para landings"
9. "too many SSRs...you need a degree in Logic to play TOT stuff"
10."too many vehicles"
11."too many overlays'
12."Minors hummmmm, only if I get the Germans"

The most common scenario eliminator seems to be time. Usually players will say they have to leave at a cetain time and that will eliminate a whole bunch of scenarios. If you only have 2-4 hours, your choices are fewer.

How do you choose or eliminate a scenario?

Evan Sherry
Tampa ASL Group

 

[paulkenny]

cool toys,

or next up in the Chronology of War

 

[Priest]

With me a lot of times it's a mood thing.

 

[mgenberg]

I think it's very situationally dependent.

If the game is to be played at a neutral site where cleanup is necessary, then time can be a limiting factor (can't leave it setup to finish later).

If it's a pickup game and there are rules I don't know or aren't comfortable with, then I'll pass.

Other than that, one of the strengths of the system is the tremendous variety so I'll give just about anything a go.

 

[Countertroll]

It varies due to a large number of reasons, but here are a few of common reason of mine:
Pros:
Cool toys
From a source that I have not played before (I want to play once scenario from every pack/module/etc that I own)
A rule that I am interested in trying (landing craft, ABN, gliders and their ilk)

Cons:
Turn length
Counter Density
ROAR Dog (not always accurate, but a good litmus test)
Evan designed it. <thanks, I'm here all week>
My opponent has played it a number of times
Night (I get the rules, but they add a lot of duration to a game, and I still struggle with the inability to use probing fire)
I forgot to bring the counters/map that the scenario requires

 

[sgtono]

Too many SSR's,
Too much OBA,
Are my mainstay criteria, otherwise it is a mood thing, time thing, or material thing.

Keith

 

[Bryan Holtby]

I dont enjoy night scenarios, the time:action ratio doesnt satisfy my ASL needs

Since I play primarily on VASL, time isnt an issue and neither are the number of turns.

Balance is an issue, any scenario that suffers from a worse than 2:1 ratio and has more than 30 playings I will stay away from.

PTO stuff I stay away from as I have yet to get into the PTO rules with any consistency. I also stay away from 'specialty' scenarios such as para drops, gliders and beach landings, UNLESS I've got a bit of time to prepare for the game.

I'm not big on bocage either.

I am well aware of the fact that I am missing out on some of the finer points of the game but at the same time thats the beauty of the system, there are lots of scenarios to chose from.

 

[Tork]

If my opponent has played the same scenario before, I _really_ need to know that. If I haven't and he has, then there had better be some good explanation for playing it again.

Quote I never want to hear again, after doing my defender setup: "I've played this scenario seven times, won twice as the German and twice as the American, and I don't think I've seen this type of setup before". Just cut my throat and get my suffering over with at that point...

Otherwise, I'll try just about anything. Except Axis and Allied minors, those are obnoxious.

 

[Roy]

1. "no night"

I don't play a lot of night, but it's usually because my opponent doesn't want to. :argh:

2. "10 turns! Too long! I told my wife I'd be home at 7:00 PM"

I love the big scens.

3. "Rice Paddies, forget it'

Rice paddies rock...... Play "OP Hill"

4. "No desert! I hate the desert; it has no mercy"

Luv Desert.

5. "Partisans, screw that!"

Dig the Partisans.

6. "PTO, I don't know Japanese rules"

Finally started winning some PTO as the Japanese. PTO Kicks ass.

7. "No Bocage!"

Getting the hang of Bocage. Got a couple on my play list.

8. "...no beach assaults or para landings"

Beach Assaults are alright, but you don't play them on the spur of the moment. Paradrops and Gliders are a piece of cake.

9. "too many SSRs...you need a degree in Logic to play TOT stuff"

Ok, I don't like a page of SSRs. :surprise:

10."too many vehicles"

The more, the merrier!

11."too many overlays'

I don't get the attitude with overlays. What's so hard or irritating about them?

12."Minors hummmmm, only if I get the Germans"

Nah, I'll play anything. I even like to give the DOGS a play. :thumup:


I agree time is crucial. I play a lot on VASL PBEM so scenario size is not a concern, neither are special rules. At tournaments, I like to play as many people as possible, it's not about winning, it's about meeting other players. At our club, we have about 6 hours, so I like to keep it around 8 turns. Other than those reasons, I can't think of why I would turn down a game.

 

[WaterRabbit]

I try to pick scenarios based upon how interesting a tactical puzzle it will be. The very first time I play someone I lean toward short, simple scenarios. After I have gauged their comfort with the system, I try to move toward more tactically interesting situations. I really don’t mind breaking a game in multiple sessions.

The best scenarios are the ones that go right down to the wire. I prefer scenarios that have been playtested toward the higher end of the skill spectrum. Nothing is more disappointing than playing a scenario that didn't take into account "expert" tactics. Unfortunately, too many of these exist.

By the same token, it is kind of frustrating to hear someone decry a scenarios as a three-legged dog just because they didn't "get it". I have watched many games and 9 times out of 10 the loosing player’s made several tactical errors which cost him the game.

Finally, I pick scenarios that have an interesting mix of units and/or uncommon units/rules/situations. I also like scenarios in which both sides have an active role. Scenarios in which one side is just a punching bag tend to get old real fast.

I just finished playing J88 Road to Wiltz. A fairly simple scenario (zero SSR), but it had a different tactical feel than most. A weak German force chasing a strong American force off the map. If the Americans stand and fight they will wipe out the Germans. However, the Americans have to get 28 EVP so they have to stay on the move.

Of course, the very best of scenarios you want to play again -- right away.

I absolutely hate scenarios that use random elements as a substitute to real playtesting balance; random reinforcements, random OBs, random OBA, randomly breaking units during setup; etc.

 

[Rilie]

The biggest thing I look for as a relative newbie to ASL is a 'progression of rules application', ie- am I going to learn anything playing this scenario. If you limit yourself by what you already know, or what you're comfortable with you're never going to improve as a player.

Wow, that load of crap sounded like the first chapter in my upcoming ASL self-help book....

 

[ON TOP ASL]

The most common scenario eliminator seems to be time. Usually players will say they have to leave at a cetain time and that will eliminate a whole bunch of scenarios. If you only have 2-4 hours, your choices are fewer.

Yes, I agree on this one. I like combined arms ETO, T-series scenario! BTW, I am going to play "Soldiers Of Destruction", I chosen this one just because I really want to win it. ;-)

 

[Mark Warren]

Time is definately a factor when playing face to face with someone but when playing a VASL (PbEM) game then its not really an issue. Although for me, with counter density it seems strangely reversed. It doesn't put me off with face to face games (although time might come in again with this) but for some reason too many counters using VASL does tend to put me off for some reason. I guess its because I just don't seem to get the same perspective as I would looking down over a board. Or maybe I'm just strange. :nervous:

 

[Chris Milne]

VASL doesn't work so well with counter-heavy games because of all the time delays. You lose track of who's moved/fired, and what nifty trick you were going to pull off with squad A once you'd moved this lot over here, etc.


Things I like to see in scenarios:
Unusual weapons (e.g., the RCL in that BtB scenario);
Both sides can be active in their play (i.e., not set-piece defence);
Scope for a variety of different plans (can come through size or through varied VCs).


Things I dislike in scenarios:
Wholesale terrain changes (apart from PTO, which is becoming hardwired into my perceptions);
OBA which might cause a major imbalance in the scenario.

 

[St Just]

For me, the scenarios are the main experience that makes ASL a community. I can instantly relate to someone talking about Hill 621 or Acts of Defiance, even if I haven't played them in years. So if I see a scenario getting a lot of plays on ROAR, and I haven't played it, it goes right to the top of the playlist. It's interesting how there are scenarios that are played so much they're taken for granted. For instance, looking at ROAR, the number two in total plays is Zon with the Wind. I have yet to ever see an analysis or an AAR of this scenario in print - it's not really needed. This is meat-and-potatoes ASL, a basic experience of the game. You should be able to walk in anywhere, set it up, and be totally involved in the play of the game in minutes. It's instant gratification in a game that is usually the opposite of that.

 

[Pitman]

It is so funny that I have the exact opposite reaction. If I see that a scenario is really popular on ROAR, I have an automatic disinclination to "go with the crowd." Rational? Not necessarily. But what I enjoy is finding the neglected gem.

 

[CPRad]

I love the big scens.

Luv Desert.

Getting the hang of Bocage. Got a couple on my play list.

Beach Assaults are alright, but you don't play them on the spur of the moment. Paradrops and Gliders are a piece of cake.

Ok, I don't like a page of SSRs. :surprise:

The more, the merrier!

I don't get the attitude with overlays. What's so hard or irritating about them?

Nah, I'll play anything. I even like to give the DOGS a play. :thumup:


I agree time is crucial. I play a lot on VASL PBEM so scenario size is not a concern, neither are special rules. it's not about winning, it's about meeting other players. /QUOTE]


These are the reasons I'd play TheBigBad (Roy) again and again .. : )

 

[Jack Dionne]

It is so funny that I have the exact opposite reaction. If I see that a scenario is really popular on ROAR, I have an automatic disinclination to "go with the crowd." Rational? Not necessarily. But what I enjoy is finding the neglected gem.

Pitman
Have you a negleted gem that the rest of us can enjoy(scenario)? I try and play scenarios that have many playings to see if they are balanced.

 

[ON TOP ASL]

I try and play scenarios that have many playings to see if they are balanced.

Well, then I guess you have to play in Front of the Storm, 134 Playings registered on ROAR:
In Front of the Storm [A104] French 67 German 67

 

[paulkenny]

Well, then I guess you have to play in Front of the Storm, 134 Playings registered on ROAR:
In Front of the Storm [A104] French 67 German 67

Come on we can find a better balanced scenario than that!!!