My Optimum Prep Time for a Scenario is...

[witchbottles]

preparing a setup is one of the pleasures of ASL. No reason to make it in hurry and badly. Besides it is a form of respect of the opponent try to have the best possible setup because you offer a better playing experience to the other player.

Thus I usually prepare my setup in advance well before I meet my opponent. And if I'm the attacker I ask the defender s'setup at least the day before. Of course if it is a not pre-planned game (something that tends to happens very seldom ) I can try to make a setup in a reasonable time.

For tournaments I have always my defensive setups ready and done in advance.

I have seen many players that does not spend too much time on setup, as if it is a secondary problem. I think instead that a good setup increases the chances to win and for sure improve the level of the game and of the fun.

In most tournaments I have been to, this would have been impossible, as the scenarios were either ones never seen before by anyone, or an unannounced until the round begins scenario list of 3 choices each round. Either way, no advance time to set anything up either attacker or defender.

 

[rdw5150]

As always with ASL, "it depends" . If I am setting up a CG or very large scenario, I want time to absorb it all (say a week). If I am playing some small scenario or at a tourney. Give 15-20 minuted depending on size and lets go.

Peace

Roger

 

[Jacometti]

As the attacker I can set up a simple (15 squads/5 AFVs) attack in 5 minutes.

I assume this includes picking the counters from your opponent's mysterious and unfathomable storage system.

Otherwise, it seems an excessive amount of time.

 

[Steven Pleva]

As with most things in ASL, it depends. Some scenarios need more time to grok, others less so. Scenarios like FrF's "To Ashes" could be the subject of a doctoral thesis. Generally, scenarios that do not have obvious setup and/or play lines are more likely to be picked for Albany. I got a playtest scenario that I've been scratching my head on for a few days...

Steve

 

[FrankJ]

preparing a setup is one of the pleasures of ASL. No reason to make it in hurry and badly. Besides it is a form of respect of the opponent try to have the best possible setup because you offer a better playing experience to the other player.

Thus I usually prepare my setup in advance well before I meet my opponent. And if I'm the attacker I ask the defender s'setup at least the day before. Of course if it is a not pre-planned game (something that tends to happens very seldom ) I can try to make a setup in a reasonable time.

For tournaments I have always my defensive setups ready and done in advance.

I have seen many players that does not spend too much time on setup, as if it is a secondary problem. I think instead that a good setup increases the chances to win and for sure improve the level of the game and of the fun.

I agree, I enjoy the setup process as much as I enjoy the game action. I think this rings true when a player is thinking using a combination of experience and new tactical understanding to set up a clever defense. I do challenge myself to make setup decisions quicker each game in order to better get a feel of pressures a commander would face in this type of situation. Great fun!!!

 

[Paolo Cariolato]

I assume this includes picking the counters from your opponent's mysterious and unfathomable storage system.
Otherwise, it seems an excessive amount of time.

No, that's extra.
I'm used to educated defenders that take out also the attacker counters, and put their defence with the right map-orientation.

 

[Jacometti]

Scenarios like FrF's "To Ashes" could be the subject of a doctoral thesis.
Steve

That includes the so-called Deller-Struijf variant, which involves a complete absence of movement for both OBs for 2.5 full Game Turns.

Played at Albany two years ago, still one of the most memorable games of my entire ASL life.

 

[MajorDomo]

That includes the so-called Deller-Struijf variant, which involves a complete absence of movement for both OBs for 2.5 full Game Turns.

Played at Albany two years ago, still one of the most memorable games of my entire ASL life.

I was at that Albany tourney, playing some PTO barker, Breaking Backs or some such name, and I kept walking over to look at your To Ashes game.

Every turn looked like the last, it was like the Steve McQueen movie - The Cincinnati Kid. I couldn't decide who had the better hand.

Initially, figured that you would need to abandon your everything stopping German entry defence to run back and eliminate the garrison defenders. Then, I thought that you had waited too long and would not be able to wipe enough of them out. Finally, walked over and missed the garrison's quick demise.

Interesting to see it unfold.

Rich

 

[Philippe D.]

Hopefully you only do that when allowed. A6.11.

This part is, obviously, unenforceable in these times of multiple simultaneous games. If you happen to have an ongoing game on a board, but happen to plan on playing another (or even are preparing your setup for another game using the same board), then nothing can prevent you from checking some LOS and learning about them, then using the knowledge in another game. In fact, given enough experience, you are bound to remember some results of tricky LOS checks, and act upon them.

I admit I didn't remember this rule, but I'll go further - I'm unlikely to follow it in the future, or to expect an opponent to follow it. So once the boards are out for a particular FtF game, I have no problems with following A6.11 (provided I remember it - now I should), but when preparing for a game, days or weeks before, it just seems silly to me.

 

[Eagle4ty]

If you have a Gun/SW that can boresight you may check out several LOS free-of-charge so to speak; but even then, I would not check out a LOS from a location that I had no intention of putting that type of weapon system in. Even with PBEM where you're temporarily absent from your opponent for an extended period of time, I hold myself to that standard as cheating is cheating even if no one knows about it (it's also called self discipline to remain consistent). If one can remember certain LOS's more power to you. With 70+ official boards and TPP ones as well, I would commend you on a prodigious memory, though I'm sure we all remember a special LOS or two that came back to bite us once or twice. If I found an opponent was consistently checking out all LOS's, I would drop them a friendly reminder about A6.11 and express my take on playing a "tactical" game. If they persisted in doing so and I became aware of it, I would mention they may want to find an alternative opponent in the future as I would be unavailable for future endeavors.

 

[bprobst]

If you remember a LOS is clear from a previous game, well, then you remember that. Good for you. Nobody has control over that. Me, I have trouble remembering LOS is clear from a previous turn.

Deliberately checking whether a LOS is clear or not when the rules specify that you're not allowed to do that is not, however, "personal circumstance" or "convenience" or even "silly". There's a different word for that: it's called "cheating". You should not do that. Your opponents should not do that. If you were my regular opponent and you told me you were doing that, I would ask you to stop. If you then indicated that you had no intention of stopping, you would no longer be my regular opponent. It's not rocket science. Only check LOS when the rules allow you to do so.

 

[bendizoid]

That includes the so-called Deller-Struijf variant, which involves a complete absence of movement for both OBs for 2.5 full Game Turns.

Played at Albany two years ago, still one of the most memorable games of my entire ASL life.

I saw that to, back in the corner. I did't know what the hell they were doing, then the Bren guns carriers were cruising everywhere, lol. I had a great game of Ashes with Chad Cummings but I lost as the Germans.

 

[sfcmikej]

To answer the original question I have yet to find my optimal prep time. Perhaps it is less than 5 minutes. I have spent a LOT of time preparing for an upcoming game only to lose it on turn 5 of 7. I have thrown counters on a board in a rushed preparation for an unexpected game and won handily. Go figure. I like time to prep but it doesn't seem to give me an advantage.

Mike

 

[von Marwitz]

I like time to prep but it doesn't seem to give me an advantage.

I am quite convinced that on average thorough preparation will give you an advantage. The question is, if one considers it worth the effort. Some people must set up quickly and play quickly to enjoy the game. Others want the considered and thorough approach to meet the same end. Probably it is mostly a matter of one's style of play.

Personally, my estimate is that a thoroughly thought out defence or plan of attack will yield me roughly the equivalent of one half turn of time to my benefit. Of course, this is only a rule of thumb for my personal play and dependent on numerous other factors which need not be detailed here for the sake of the argument.

von Marwitz

 

[Jacometti]

I saw that to, back in the corner. I did't know what the hell they were doing, then the Bren guns carriers were cruising everywhere, lol. I had a great game of Ashes with Chad Cummings but I lost as the Germans.

Extraordinary game of ASL bluff poker.

I moved ALL my units to block German entry on Turn 1. German decides to enter nothing.

I do nothing for all of Turn 2. German enters nothing.

I do nothing for all of Turn 3. German enters nothing.

By this time, the time pressure on both of us had reached extraordinary levels. I was deeply concerned whether I would be able to crush the German strongpoint on the other edge of the board. Sean was getting worried whether his entering Germans (the bulk of his force) would ever make it to the VC area.

After that, we enjoyed three full Turns of high octane action......with my Brits coming out on top at the end, but not without huge highs and lows for both sides.

A classic ASL encounter against a skilled, well prepared and gentleman opponent. Absolutely thrilling.