Journal 4

[WesN]

If you do not login guest we have no idea who you are really. I guess we can narrow it down to people who wrote articles in J4, but other than that we don't know your identity.

Wes

 

[Matt Shostak]

J4 stuff

Sorry, that was me. I thought I had logged in.

Matt

 

[Roy Connelly]

scenarios

The thing I have noticed about scenarios the last couple of years is that Pete Shelling has the right idea. Scenarios with choices rock. Even scenarios with variables rock. This was started long ago with scenarios like Timoshenkos Attack, Morgan's Stand etc..... Urban Guerillas is the biggest splash scenario in a very long time, one of our clubbies has played it at least a dozen times. The only variable in it is the Partisans, and they rarely make a huge difference....but they are a random occurence and can make the game different each time.

Now, the Kursk mini campaign (another Shelling offering) gave us real choices. Two years ago at the Austin tourney, these scenarios were the rage, and most conversation centered around the choice of tigers in Dress Rehearsal.

I think Youse is seeing the light regarding these scenarios, his designs in J4 offer one as a variable and the other as a conditional occurance.

These scenarios are the future of our game, players are getting better and some of the old board 1 scens just don't cut it anymore.

And I know Shelling was working on a Desert campaign similar to Kursk, with choices. Not a lot of us play desert, but I bet we'd give those a go. :mrgreen:

 

[Matt Shostak]

What makes a good scenario/Journal?

I agree with Roy that giving the players choices really makes a difference
in scenario enjoyment. However, those choices don't always have to be
in which units to use. They could be in the victory conditions. They could
simply be that the tactical situation gives someone several potential approaches
to the problem. If there's only one smart, obvious, way to do something in
a scenario then that's the way everyone will play it. It will get boring and
ultimately left behind.

I suspect that multiple choices make playtesting that much harder.
Then again, in the Kursk thing there are so many different choices that it
would be easy to bid in some way to balance a scenario, or make up for
difference in experience levels between the players. The Kursk thing was
a great idea, but some of the choices were no-brainers, and then those
really aren't choices (although they could be used as handicaps).

 

[J. R. Tracy]

Has anyone played any of the funky carrier scenarios? They all look interesting to me. Hard choices for the Brit on a couple - set up dismounted, or stay mobile?

JR

 

[Roy Connelly]

Funky carrier scenarios

Played Moses Blazes. I had Brits, rode in mounted, stayed in motion, drove off for the win in 3 movement phases. Never stopped, never dismounted, never shot my weapons.

Truly hated it, so did my opponent. :?

 

[Harold]

Just taking the new forum for a test drive . So far I have played J67 and J68 and found both to be quite interesting. Personally these scenarios are the right size for me in counter density, rules and time. If I can't set up, play and take down a scenario in less than 6 hours I really don't want to touch it.
In both cases I had the Germans while my opponent had the Brits. In one he kept the crews in the carriers. In the other they dismounted once he was able to flank. Both were close and went down to the last player turn and although it would have taken a bit of fortune for me to win either one neither was too much of a stretch to not see it to through.

 

[Anonymous]

Re: Funky carrier scenarios

Played Moses Blazes. I had Brits, rode in mounted, stayed in motion, drove off for the win in 3 movement phases. Never stopped, never dismounted, never shot my weapons.

Truly hated it, so did my opponent. :?

Yeah, right - you were playing Bud, and as usual, you were both stoned. :wink:

What about that one we played? Came down to the last roll. I think the big problem here is that you're just a big crybaby.

 

[Mike768]

Re: Funky carrier scenarios

Played Moses Blazes. I had Brits, rode in mounted, stayed in motion, drove off for the win in 3 movement phases. Never stopped, never dismounted, never shot my weapons.

Truly hated it, so did my opponent. :?

Yeah, right - you were playing Bud, and as usual, you were both stoned. :wink:

What about that one we played? Came down to the last roll. I think the big problem here is that you're just a big crybaby.

Oops - forgot to login.

Roy and I played J67 The Lawless Roads, if I recall (no J4 handy). This is the one with a buncha hedge overlays - Brits gotta roust the Squareheads outta the bd 12 ville. My 9-2 broke on an NMC and then shot himself in the head trying to rally on about - oh, turn 2, and Roy managed to trash 3 of my AFV's in short order, forcing me to keep the rest of them back, due to an auto victory condition (kill 4 AFV's, win a prize). Superior British firepower saved the day (ahem) as I was able to clear out one side of the town, keep his ATG smoked in and rushed fwd on the last turn to lock 4 of his guys in melee for the win.

Decent scenario. My lads stayed in their carriers, which proved to be a mistake. I think if I had it to do again, I'd jump 'em out, as I could have used an extra 3 HS/LMG's.

Btw, Roy and Bud weren't stoned - I made that up. Parole violation, y'know.

Mike Rose
Southern Ks ASL

 

[Brian W]

Has anyone played any of the funky carrier scenarios? They all look interesting to me. Hard choices for the Brit on a couple - set up dismounted, or stay mobile?

I played Unlucky 13th with Carl Nogeria(sp?) via VASL. I won very handily, but I think that it is simply a brittle scenario, especially for the british. With only 3.5 squads on board for the first three game turns, almost any bad luck can put them well behind the curve.

However, the VC are tough on the german and those carriers can be hard to deal with. In fact, if there is a problem I would say that it lies with the sleazy possibilities for last minute wins by the carrier crews. I suspect that many british players give up before then, making the scenario seem more unbalanced than it is.

Actually, it kinda felt like an SP scenario, which is a high compliment .

 

[J. R. Tracy]

Re: Funky carrier scenarios

Played Moses Blazes. I had Brits, rode in mounted, stayed in motion, drove off for the win in 3 movement phases. Never stopped, never dismounted, never shot my weapons.

We tried this last night, and the drive-off strategy sure wasn't going to work - the Germs knocked out three Carriers, including both Wasps. The surviving Carrier Cs and a dismounted Rider HS were able to push the Germans over the CVP cap for the win, though. I think the Brit has an edge here but it doesn't look way out of line. I'd like to give it another shot.

JR

 

[Anonymous]

I think Army at the Edge of the World (J69) and Just an Illusion (J70) are must plays, may become PTO classics and are welcome tourney additions. The carrier article was very good and it took courage to take a theme such as carriers and develop it in articles and scenarios. I think The Lawless Roads (J67) and Moses' Blazes (J77) will prove to be unbalanced (Brits in both cases).
Nevertheless, it would have been easy to throw in a bunch of Panther/Tiger/T34(85)/JS2 one shot one kill scenarios, but Ill take new themes every time.

 

[Stevedeth]

Rich said, "and Just an Illusion (J70) are must plays, may become PTO classics and are welcome tourney additions."

I am playing J70 and it is interesting in the fact that with the short board width the fight is more of a Civil War line-abreast. We are just standing up and shooting it out. The thing I do see is that there should be some replay value but I suspect it will show some Pro-French numbers.
I really like it so far.

SD

 

[Anonymous]

Played Army at the Edge of the World at WO, and loved it even though I lost. Came down to the last turn. Highlight. French 8-0 stacked with squad breaks, so does squad, rolls HOB, Goes berserk, jumps out of foxhole, charges the IJA MG crew that broke them, eliminates said crew in CC, and then returns to foxhoel to recover its postion and stave off more IJA onslaughts.

 

[LtDan]

I'm planning to play Lawless Roads and Unlucky Thirteenth this weekend. Will post AARs on the board with impressions. They both look interesting and I am a big fan of anything with the British in it.

 

[Brian W]

Ultimate Treachery

I played Ultimate Treachery today and it was over in two turns. I can see how it is supposed to play out, but I do think it favors the French. My problem is that I got one WP smoke round from my mortars without getting any other smoke, and the French HMG had ROF like mad, liquidating anything that moved. I played what I thought was a very conservative game for the Japanese, but I could not budge anything. Finally, I tried for an ambush on a two squad stack (due to CC) the french had. Despite net -3 drm, I failed to ambush and lost two squads, leaving me with

Not my cup of tea. Low firepower troops in stone buildings that cannot afford to go into CC due to CVP cap is not my idea of fun.

 

[da priest]

Well I've played Ultimate Treachery twice and one was a French blow out, but the other came down to the last turn with the japan-dudes pulling it out.

In the blow out the J-guys came in on a narrow front(for the scenario), and walked into the HMG. The close J-guy win came in on a broad front, found the HMG and avoided it. Did get more smoke than Brian but not much, as the rain started on turn two.

J-guys may need some help, but the balance is too much, maybe one more CVP.