Non-historical scenarios

WaterRabbit

Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2004
Messages
2,566
Reaction score
27
Location
Somewhere
Country
llGreenland
I agree with 'Design for Effect'. ASL scenarios are defined by how interesting they are to play and not by their historical accuracy.

I have played many DYO scenarios that were more interesting than the "historically designed" ones.

Also if Mark had paid attention to his own interview with John Hill he might be singing a slightly different tune here. None of the original ASL scenarios approach any degree of historical accuracy. The setup and aftermath are complete fluff text. I guess that John Hill must have been ‘lazy’ as well.

If someone designs a fun, interesting, and balanced scenario and retrofits it to a ‘particular action’ does that make it less enjoyable than a designer that painstakingly researches a particular action an chooses exact forces down to the half-squad and draws a map that is accurate to each tree?

Chances are much higher that the historical approach will produce a dull scenario that few people with play twice. Frankly almost all of the Pegasus Bridge scenarios fall into this category.

‘Historical research’ can be done by any idiot with a reference library and the ability to read. The hard part is to create fun, interesting, and balanced scenarios that get several hundred replays posted. In this respect, historical designers seem to have trouble thinking outside the box.

Robin said:
PROLOGUE

- One ought to make some historical research.
- One ought to try to find as much historical data as possible (whithin the time and the reasonable ressources one has in reach).
- Choice of units, terrain, VCs, should be in tune with the historical situation he tries to depict.

DEVELOPEMENT

- Common sense and playtesting must guide some adaptation of the project, so there is no aberration (historical or about the game mechanics). SSRs can be created to adjust things. VCs can be tweaked.
- Playtesting should guide other adaptations, to make the scenario the most balanced and the most fun possible.

PRODUCTION

- Presenting the result, one should have the humility not to consider his work as a perfect simulation, but one should be proud enough to offer his work as something he tried to make the best whith what he could - balancing fun and historicity.
This looks like a recipe for a dull scenario to me.

PROLOGUE
One ought to find something that really interests them and gets their creative juices flowing.

PRODUCTION
Did you enjoy playing you own scenario? Did your testers? Is it balanced (i.e. did you put it in front of players that really tried to break it)?

POST-PRODUCTION
Humility? Bah. Toot your own horn and tell everyone this is the best thing since Red Barricades. Get as many people as possible fired up over it and get your scenario played, debated, analyzed, and criticized. Build up the buzz in the community and bribe TDs to get it on this year’s play list -- better yet get a Replay in one of the Annuals. That is the only way you will know if your design was a success – people play it and talk about it.

Case in point, has anyone besides Mark played any of his scenarios? Buckeyes! for example, has a pathetic number of reported results for how long it has been published. I have yet to hear anyone even suggest a single scenario out of that pack for a game. No analysis, debate, or criticism of it either. So this could be the proverbial gem in the rough or it could be complete dog excrement, who knows. Either way, up to this point it looks like a flop, so people really out to be skeptical on any advice Mark might have about scenario design. He does make some pretty play aids. :)
 

Robin Reeve

The Swiss Moron
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Messages
19,593
Reaction score
5,557
Location
St-Légier
First name
Robin
Country
llSwitzerland
WaterRabbit said:
Case in point, has anyone besides Mark played any of his scenarios? Buckeyes! for example, has a pathetic number of reported results for how long it has been published. I have yet to hear anyone even suggest a single scenario out of that pack for a game. No analysis, debate, or criticism of it either. So this could be the proverbial gem in the rough or it could be complete dog excrement, who knows. Either way, up to this point it looks like a flop, so people really out to be skeptical on any advice Mark might have about scenario design. He does make some pretty play aids. :)
Well, I did appreciate that pack and I read good comments about some of its scenarios on this forum.
But as I must be somehow "dull", my "humble" advice must amount to nothing for you...
 

Robin Reeve

The Swiss Moron
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Messages
19,593
Reaction score
5,557
Location
St-Légier
First name
Robin
Country
llSwitzerland
Tater said:
Since all ASL scenarios are unavoidably ahistorical why should anybody be critical of anyone else's designs?
I wouldn't say they are fully devoid from historical reference.
The critics just cannot be "exact science", just as designing isn't...
History is allways a question of debate, and I think that some analogy can be found between history book critics and ASL scenario critics.
Both ask some interpretation, speculation, etc.
Both try to portray something of what really happened, and both will be approximative here and there.
Even a history book has a "fun" factor.
I am finishing the IWM book about the War in Burma and I did really appreciate that, beside the description of the operations, there are a lot of personal, anecdoctical reports of those who fought the battles... Now, another reader, more specialized in that ToO would perhaps criticize the book because he would like more precisions.
All is a question of taste...
 

Pitman

Forum Guru
Joined
Jan 27, 2003
Messages
14,104
Reaction score
2,371
Location
Columbus, OH
Country
llUnited States
crabe tambour said:
Honestly, Mark, there is a "subtle" difference between what you said at the begining of this thread (something like "non historicity designers are lazy") and what said your "official opinion" posted here ("It is important to understand that both approaches are equally valid. ") ;)
I think if you had posted this at the beginning, this thread would have a other content today...

I'm very curious of your designer's guide. It seems very interesting to me. Do you expect to publish it?
What I said at the beginning of the thread was about an issue that I did not address in my quote above: people who design scenarios without doing any research at all and instead claim that they are somehow "representative" of a typical action. I believe that such people are lazy.

That is an entirely different subject from the issue of historicity designers vs. playability designers, which is what I addressed in the piece I quoted above.

Re the designer's guide: it is a very detailed (60+ pages) guide to designing ASL scenarios. It does not provide a formula or a set of "rules" for designing scenarios, but rather outlines the problems that come up for scenario designers and describes many of the different solutions that have been used to get around those problems. It also includes many resources for scenario designers, such as collections of useful SSRs and Victory Conditions. Moreover, it also includes two very cool scenarios, complete with designers notes.

The guide was substantially finished some time ago (the only uncompleted thing are the designers notes). However, moving into a new house and other ASL projects got in the way. I really need to get it out the door and get it published. My goal is to have it published like a stand-alone magazine.
 

Tater

Elder Member
Joined
Oct 25, 2003
Messages
9,827
Reaction score
542
Location
Ardmore, TN
Country
llUnited States
Pitman said:
What I said at the beginning of the thread was about an issue that I did not address in my quote above: people who design scenarios without doing any research at all and instead claim that they are somehow "representative" of a typical action. I believe that such people are lazy.
Horse pucky!!!

This is what he actually said:
"To me, "representational" scenarios (defend the generic crossroads, etc.) just reflects a lazy designer." - Pitman

For a guy always whinning about having words put in his mouth, you don't seem to mind putting them there when it serves your purpose.

Nothing about research at all. In fact the question of "research" wasn't raised until "Pitman" began backpedaling from what he had said (see above..."lazy").

I don't think anyone was confused then and I don't think anyone should be confused now."Pitman" expects designers to live up to his standard for scenario design or their to be considered "lazy" and/or "open for criticism".

Why a guy designing a fun to play scenario should be "criticized" or called "lazy" for any reason is beyond me.
 

Pitman

Forum Guru
Joined
Jan 27, 2003
Messages
14,104
Reaction score
2,371
Location
Columbus, OH
Country
llUnited States
Tater said:
Horse pucky!!!

This is what he actually said:
"To me, "representational" scenarios (defend the generic crossroads, etc.) just reflects a lazy designer." - Pitman
You are right. That is EXACTLY what I said. And it corresponds EXACTLY to my description of it in my above message.

For a guy always whinning about having words put in his mouth, you don't seem to mind putting them there when it serves your purpose.
Tate, you don't have any reading comprehension at all, do you?


Nothing about research at all. In fact the question of "research" wasn't raised until "Pitman" began backpedaling from what he had said (see above..."lazy").
I have backpedaled from nothing. I have been entirely consistent. You are once more simply engaging in fantasy, having entire conversations in your own head, divorced from reality.
 

wrongway149

Forum Guru
Joined
Aug 25, 2005
Messages
9,403
Reaction score
2,099
Location
Willoughby, Ohio
Country
llUnited States
WaterRabbit said:
I agree with 'Design for Effect'. ASL scenarios are defined by how interesting they are to play and not by their historical accuracy.:)
Not quite what I meant to say. The 'effect' is a big part of the simulation, rather than merely the paper values.

I prefer the term 'historically appropriate' to 'historically accurate'

-Pete
 

wrongway149

Forum Guru
Joined
Aug 25, 2005
Messages
9,403
Reaction score
2,099
Location
Willoughby, Ohio
Country
llUnited States
Pitman said:
Re the designer's guide: it is a very detailed (60+ pages) guide to designing ASL scenarios. It does not provide a formula or a set of "rules" for designing scenarios, but rather outlines the problems that come up for scenario designers and describes many of the different solutions that have been used to get around those problems.
Yikes! Well, for those who beleive it's more art that science, I have submitted a short article to the Journal called 'Scenario Design in six easy steps'. Maybe two pages. Three, tops.

Wrongway's Rule #3 of scenario design:

Brevity counts, so keep it simple.

Pete 'that's maybe one rule too many already" Shelling
 

Gunner Scott

Forum Guru
Joined
Jan 27, 2003
Messages
13,737
Reaction score
2,669
Location
Chicago, IL
Country
llUnited States
wrongway149 said:
And I did, Scott!
ya I kinda thought you must have played D&D, what with the teleporting partisans in Urbane Gurrilla's. ;)

Guy's, designing scenarios aint rocket science, it just takes some expairience and knowing the basics. Believe me, my first scenario I ever designed was "Bloody Cavalry" for an old rag called At the Point and boy did that turn out to be a resounding dog.

What I'm trying to say is, no amount of tips or "By the Book" publications are gonna help you design the perfect scenario, ya gotta just do it and playtest and then submitte it.

Scott
 

WaterRabbit

Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2004
Messages
2,566
Reaction score
27
Location
Somewhere
Country
llGreenland
Robin said:
Well, I did appreciate that pack and I read good comments about some of its scenarios on this forum.
But as I must be somehow "dull", my "humble" advice must amount to nothing for you...
Martyr alert! :halo:

Reread what I wrote. I in no way said that you were dull (while it might be true, I really have no way of knowing). I wrote that the recipe was dull. Perhaps you might concentrate on English instead of Greek or Hebrew. :cheeky:

However,

Well, I did appreciate that pack and I read good comments about some of its scenarios on this forum.
is neither a resounding endorsement nor a concrete analysis nor a link or reference to one, so it is on that basis that I find your opinion to be ... shall we say ... somewhat lacking.
 

Robin Reeve

The Swiss Moron
Staff member
Moderator
Joined
Jul 26, 2003
Messages
19,593
Reaction score
5,557
Location
St-Légier
First name
Robin
Country
llSwitzerland
WaterRabbit said:
Martyr alert! :halo:
Reread what I wrote. I in no way said that you were dull (while it might be true, I really have no way of knowing). I wrote that the recipe was dull. Perhaps you might concentrate on English instead of Greek or Hebrew. :cheeky:
I was just pulling your leg.
I don't feel a martyr at all.
I sure understood you were calling "dull" my attempted design protocol. Though English is not my first language, I understand it enough not to miss that sort of things...
What I was proposing was not about the "fun factor", but trying to find a way of agreement between parties in a heated debate. So, it is logical I was rather "technical".
Now, the fact I don't appreciate your blunt statements and your superiority complex is just a personal feeling and, I admit, can be wrong.
Eat carrots : some say they make people become kind.
Chaire and Shalom.
 

Ole Boe

Member
Joined
Apr 21, 2004
Messages
2,874
Reaction score
12
Location
there...
Country
llNorway
Pitman said:
You are right. That is EXACTLY what I said. And it corresponds EXACTLY to my description of it in my above message.
It is pretty fun to read, but I think Tate and Mark should consentrate on other topics to quarrel about now. ;)

Mark, if you in the first thread that started it all, really only meant to criticize those who "design scenarios without doing any research at all", then I think you expressed yourself very poorly, since very many of us thought you also reffered to those who makes scenarios from more general sources and therefore make a more representional scenario than one where you knew exactly which forces that participated.
 

Pitman

Forum Guru
Joined
Jan 27, 2003
Messages
14,104
Reaction score
2,371
Location
Columbus, OH
Country
llUnited States
I do not think I expressed myself poorly, but what is more, in the thread/argument, I repeatedly restated and clarified what I meant.
 

MrP

Senior Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2003
Messages
4,866
Reaction score
418
Location
Woof? Bark? Whine?
Country
llNew Zealand
Surely it's the readers choice as to whether something was expressed poorly or not? If people think it was expressed poorly then there's a communication problem somewhere, and all the assertions that everything was explained clearly ain't going to help!

As Ole said, lets move right along here, in fact I'm disappointed in myself for replying to this thread - bad Ian!

Cheers

Ian
 

WaterRabbit

Member
Joined
Jul 25, 2004
Messages
2,566
Reaction score
27
Location
Somewhere
Country
llGreenland
Pitman said:
I do not think I expressed myself poorly, but what is more, in the thread/argument, I repeatedly restated and clarified what I meant.
Of course not, you never express yourself poorly. :rolleyes:

Hint: Pick-up and read a copy of Strunk & White. Pay special attention to Rules 14, 15, and 17. Frankly, Paul is a much better writer than you (admittedly he needs a good editor). He follows rule 16 very well (intended or not).
 

Pitman

Forum Guru
Joined
Jan 27, 2003
Messages
14,104
Reaction score
2,371
Location
Columbus, OH
Country
llUnited States
Thanks for the writing advice. I will put it in the same file where my grandmother put the advice she was given about how to suck eggs.
:rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes: :rolleyes:
 
Top