How often do you play point-purchase DYO?

[Michael Dorosh]

I tried to search for DYO polls, but of course the forum software excludes anything under four characters; a distinct disadvantage. Sorry if this has been covered before; is someone wants to point me to a previous poll, I'm happy to see the results there.

Otherwise, the question is self-explanatory I think. How often do you make use of the point-purchase rules in Chapter H to make a Design Your Own (DYO) scenario for ASL?

 

[RobZagnut]

Never have, never will. Too many great scenarios available to play by great designers who have worked hard to bring them to us.

 

[larth]

Never have, never will. Too many great scenarios available to play by great designers who have worked hard to bring them to us.

And that is probabluy the biggest reason. Especially compared to SL, where our DYO games were 25 - 50% or so of total. Played a lot three-player games that way.

 

[trevpr1]

I've done it once, must have been in the late 80's. At the time we'd pretty much played every scenario available a couple of times.

Board 3 placed between the players sideways.

Each player then chooses a board that will be on the opponent's side of the play area and which way round it is. So their opponent will have to cross the board they chose (there weren't all that many back then).

Set point total, enough BPV to buy a couple of tanks each. Set Rarity Factor. Set time frame (we chose mid '43 just before PF came in). One side Soviet the other German. Set number of turns.

Game was a meeting engagement, no one set up on board. First side to move had only half available MF/MP. VC were control of building locations on Board 3 inside the ring of road.

And you know what? it was a fair to good gaming experience!

 

[King Scott]

It's a dinosaur...developed back when ASL had, what, 20 scenarios? It served a need 20+ years ago...but with the hundreds and hundreds of scenarios/HASLs/CGs out these days, I can't see that it would draw anyone any more.

Semper Fi!
Scott

 

[Michael Dorosh]

I expect to see very few people report that they do play this way, but am genuinely curious. I did this a lot back when ASL first came out. The Beyond Valor scenarios were, in our opinion, lacklustre and there wasn't much else to choose from at that time. The Streets of Fire scenarios weren't doing it for us either, and I had a whole stack of non-urban boards from SL, COI, COD and GI just itching to be used. So we DYO a lot while waiting for the other modules to come out.

I agree with Rob that the situation has changed tremendously now with so many premade, balanced, playtested scenarios available.

Edit to add that I posted this while King Scott was posting; I agree with him too, obviously. It is a nice touch to have this included, though, and I do think it has the advantage of unpredictable force compositions, something the scenario cards for the most part obviously lack.

 

[trevpr1]

It's a dinosaur...developed back when ASL had, what, 20 scenarios? It served a need 20+ years ago...but with the hundreds and hundreds of scenarios/HASLs/CGs out these days, I can't see that it would draw anyone any more.

Semper Fi!
Scott

That would sum up my feelings about it today.

 

[alanp]

Michael, I'm just starting a DYO with a regular PBeM VASL opponent in Austria. We're approaching it with a 'fun' attitude, I think, and making up some things like VCs/Turn Length/Rules to include as we go along. Haven't done any DYO for 20 years.

We have done everything but desert and Night before and it's my impression it's something he's always wanted to try. We're both really looking forward tot he Fog of War aspect.

I can't imagine it being anything but fun, so I'm looking forward to it.

 

[pward]

I think the unpredictability of it is both a blessing and a pain at the same time.

EX: I buy for a static defense, and get one or two AT guns just in case he gets armor, only to find I really needed another dozen squads and their leaders and SW more because the opponent went all infantry.

Likely to be a heck of a lot more interesting than something that's "balanced", when warfare is seldom actually a balanced thing. The completely unknown factor may well be a better "learning mode" for this particular game rather than knowing "he's only got 3 tanks and no FT"... The unknown element will force you to react with what you have, vs knowing the balance of forces.

Deciding the VC and setup conditions could be quite difficult to have it a good chance for either side to win. Meeting engagements aside, an assault scenario at 2:3 (or 1:2) ratio sounds like a good idea in practice, but might not be enough depending on terrain and player skill.

 

[Danno]

I have actually only played it in the Nebraska Shootout (after the Sioux City Tournament).

Like Glennbo I heard it was illegal in most states. Nebraska being a more "progressive" state :laugh:

Dano

 

[Michael Dorosh]

I recall reading that Glennbo was a fan of DYO back in the day also. I was a big fan of the Schmittgens-Kibler DYO "system" that was published in The General - Vol 21 No. 1 I think. It was a bunch of tables that let you roll for front, nationality, weather, boards, VC, all the stuff Chapter H didn't cover. In a nostalgic mood last year, I updated this to include the desert and PTO and all the new boards up to 52 and sent a draft copy to MMP to consider for inclusion in The Journal. No idea if it will ever see print, but I still like the concept.

I just received in the mail today a copy of The Comprehensive Guide to Board Wargaming by Nicholas Palmer. It's a hardcover that was published in 1977. An interesting little book; there is a copy of SPI's giveaway tactical game Strike Force One included in the back cover, and Appendix C talks about the unit values (DYO) charts that Tom Oleson did for Panzerblitz. This would have to be the very first DYO system ever created for a tactical wargame. Palmer says of the system that "...this transforms the game to such advantage that no Panzerblitz player ever plays a regular situation again" (!)

What a difference from ASL, where the scenario designers have so much to choose from, and so much influence on who plays what. I look at PC games like Combat Mission which have large scenario design follows in the tradition of ASL, and even there, the use of random "purchase" scenarios (Quick Battles) seems to be just as popular as the large library of premade scenarios.

It's interesting that ASL's scenario designers have been able to stake such a solid claim and cast such a huge shadow over DYO. It seems to me that even when GI: Anvil of Victory was released, the lack of DYO values for American troops was considered a major gaffe because people really did want them.

 

[pward]

I recall reading that Glennbo was a fan of DYO back in the day also. I was a big fan of the Schmittgens-Kibler DYO "system" that was published in The General - Vol 21 No. 1 I think. It was a bunch of tables that let you roll for front, nationality, weather, boards, VC, all the stuff Chapter H didn't cover. In a nostalgic mood last year, I updated this to include the desert and PTO and all the new boards up to 52 and sent a draft copy to MMP to consider for inclusion in The Journal. No idea if it will ever see print, but I still like the concept.

I would like to see such a system.

Till then, I would suggest using SASL missions to lay the groundwork and roll for terrain etc. Use the DYO for purchase and skip the rest of the SASL framework of RE and activation etc.

 

[MrP]

Never ever. Just don't have the time or leisure or inclination.

 

[alanp]

Till then, I would suggest using SASL missions to lay the groundwork and roll for terrain etc. Use the DYO for purchase and skip the rest of the SASL framework of RE and activation etc.

In my current DYO game we're using SASL charts to pick boards. We're talking about having RE#s as well(!)

 

[Tuomo]

If, however, you asked how well people enjoy scenarios where they get to pick part of their OB from a predefined set, THEN I think you'd see a lot more enthusiasm.

LOVE it when I'm given X points to spend on various options. Although, as someone pointed out WRT Showtime, it's hard to go against picking the Tigers.

 

[ASL Couple]

FWIW, I'm pretty sure the Schmittgens-Kibler DYO article was in General 24-1.

Greg Schmittgens.

:laugh:

 

[Steven Linton]

FWIW, I'm pretty sure the Schmittgens-Kibler DYO article was in General 24-1.

Greg Schmittgens.

:laugh:

I believe, Mr Dorosh, that this constitutes being pwned.

And a bloody good article it was too.

We have a few players in my local group who are developing a purchase-based 3 player scenario using the principles in that article.

 

[Michael Dorosh]

I believe, Mr Dorosh, that this constitutes being pwned.

Meh. I have my Generals on the shelf two feet from my desk. If I cared enough, I would have gotten up to check, and not written "I think" when I posted the issue number. It was the one with the Streets of Fire box art on the cover.

FWIW in return, Greg, you and Charlie provided my friends and I with a lot of entertainment back in the day. It was innovative, creative and useful. I sent off my draft of the update to MMP and they mentioned getting in touch with you, given your presence at consimworld. FWIW also, certainly was not an attempt at plagiarism but a way of keeping a very useful tool relevant. Still, one wishes your grandfathers had been Smith and Jones, as Schmittgens-Kibler DYO System doesn't have much of a ring as an article title. Probably go over big in Bavaria though.

 

[JG53_Jaguar]

I think DYO is cool, there I said it. I like it and I'm glad it's part of ASL. You can come up with some wild/crazy scenario configurations to have some fun. What can I say, to me it adds different flavour to ASL.

 

[Whizbang1963]

Never have, never will. Too many great scenarios available to play by great designers who have worked hard to bring them to us.

Amen to this! DYO was great when there was just a trickle of new stuff coming out, but now? Not a chance...