What makes a good HASL?

Joined
Apr 1, 2018
Messages
13
Reaction score
28
Location
San Diego, CA
Country
llUnited States
With the recent releases of Hatten in Flames and Red October, along with several other HASLs in the works, I'm curious what elements in a battle designers look for when selecting a subject for a HASL. (HASLing? HASLification? HASLization? HASLed?)

Are there any requirements? (Other than the dedication of designers and playtesters, balance, accuracy, proof-reading, nice map art, etc...)
Multiple phases?
Unique elements?
Historical significance?
Historical balance?
Allied victory? (Okay this one is tongue in cheek, but there appear to be fewer Axis victory HASLs)

What makes something like Hatten a good choice?
 

Fiedler

Member
Joined
Jun 2, 2003
Messages
668
Reaction score
142
Location
Malmö
Country
llSweden
from my standpoint I am looking for variation. Both in terms of available forces and attack/defend for both sides.
 

Major Issues

Elder Member
Joined
Apr 27, 2018
Messages
325
Reaction score
1,102
Location
Secane, PA
First name
Vince
Country
llUnited States
Reduced number of special rules, especially if they contradict standard ASL rules. If there are two pages of SSRs, a lot of people are not going to want to be bothered to wade through them to play it, especially if they are looking for a tournament or weeknight game.

I have neither the time nor inclination for CGs, so that part holds no attraction for me. But I understand that a lot of people love them.
 

'Ol Fezziwig

Repressed Dissident
Joined
Nov 18, 2004
Messages
6,640
Reaction score
725
Location
hazy fold of reality
Country
llUnited States
Good, interesting situation that allows variability in play options to explore. I also think a generous dollop of scenarios for players who constrain themselves against the CGs time investments. I'm still appalled at the 4 scenarios included in KGP 1.
 

Jazz

Inactive
Joined
Feb 3, 2003
Messages
12,188
Reaction score
2,739
Location
The Empty Quarter
Country
llLithuania
Minimum: Historical action over a period of days fought over the same terrain.

Desirable: Both sides attack, balance,


Are there any requirements? (Other than the dedication of designers and playtesters, balance, accuracy, proof-reading, nice map art, etc...)
I would remove "accuracy" from your list. There are a number of historical ASL modules that are slavishly accurate to historical units/situation that ended up being mediocre and less than fun ASL. Of course a minimal level of accuracy is required, but its not as critical as folks seem to think....IIMHO as always.
 

GeorgeBates

Elder Member
Joined
Jan 22, 2009
Messages
2,377
Reaction score
1,294
Location
Live at Budokan
Country
llJapan
I would remove "accuracy" from your list. There are a number of historical ASL modules that are slavishly accurate to historical units/situation that ended up being mediocre and less than fun ASL. Of course a minimal level of accuracy is required, but its not as critical as folks seem to think....IIMHO as always.
Let me agree with you and attempt to elaborate:
- When designers use VC, OB, setup, SSRs and other devices to in an attempt closely recreate what took place they may introduce too much rigidity - either the dice take over or players lose interest, often both​
- When the terrain, VC and OB offer players a choice of tactical options that may include decisions simliar to those of actual participants, but allow players an opportunity to test themselves against the outcome, that scenario is likely to be a hit​
 
Last edited:

Gunner Scott

Forum Guru
Joined
Jan 27, 2003
Messages
13,737
Reaction score
2,669
Location
Chicago, IL
Country
llUnited States
Officially, ya only four scenarios came with KGP I but the designer Phillippe Leonard had designed additional scenarios for Tacktiques I think and ToT had a bunch of scenarios designed for KGP 1 in their Battle of the Bulge pack. All excellent scenarios that have stood the test of time. My personal fav is Staumont the Break in.

Good, interesting situation that allows variability in play options to explore. I also think a generous dollop of scenarios for players who constrain themselves against the CGs time investments. I'm still appalled at the 4 scenarios included in KGP 1.
 

Craig Benn

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 7, 2013
Messages
637
Reaction score
508
Location
Liverpool
Country
llUnited Kingdom
1) Both sides getting to attack and defend. I think I prefer one side attacking and the other side receiving massive reinforcements after a certain point (e.g Kampfgruppe Peiper, Op Veritable) to one side counterattacking at night (e.g Valor of the Guards). It's not vital though - Onslaught to Orsha & Kampfgruppe Scherer good examples.

2) Reasonable length. 6-8 dates is optimum to get that CG feel. 30 day Red Barricades is far far too long. It gets so samey it gets boring.

3) Real purchase choices to make. If it's obvious that the most cost effective purchase is infantry, infantry and more infantry and no toys...then there are no toys. I want an armour game too.

4) It must feel different. There's a sliding scale of chrome people are comfortable with. But I'd distinguish between well thought out chrome that adds flavour and chrome that is fiddly without giving bang for buck. Aside from that the battle itself should be an area Asl hasn't really touched. I have zero interest in Red October. I'm looking forward to Dinant. I'd love an Imphal or Kohima CG.
 

'Ol Fezziwig

Repressed Dissident
Joined
Nov 18, 2004
Messages
6,640
Reaction score
725
Location
hazy fold of reality
Country
llUnited States
Minimum: Historical action over a period of days fought over the same terrain.

Desirable: Both sides attack, balance,




I would remove "accuracy" from your list. There are a number of historical ASL modules that are slavishly accurate to historical units/situation that ended up being mediocre and less than fun ASL. Of course a minimal level of accuracy is required, but its not as critical as folks seem to think....IIMHO as always.
Disagree with 'balance' in a HASL but only to a point: I think it better to hold the historical outcome as the as the baseline and hold the players' performance against that, even if the VC for each are asymmetrical. Being able to improve on the historical result should be rewarded, even if the player might tactically/technically 'lose' the CG.
 

witchbottles

Forum Guru
Joined
Feb 26, 2010
Messages
9,100
Reaction score
2,254
Location
Rio Vista, CA
Country
llUnited States
I have very little experience in designing HASL's (only advising/ co-authoring on two projects so far.)

"I'm curious what elements in a battle designers look for when selecting a subject for a HASL. (HASLing? HASLification? HASLization? HASLed?) "

From that limited perch, this is my view:

1. It needs a "hook" - something to catch the players eyes and interest. Stalingrad does it by way of being so well published in history books and examined from almost every angle in wargames. Ruw Ridge does it with the total DTO Cptr F being used hook, Gavutu-Tanambogo- Seaborne assaults and total PTO as a hook. Cem Hill, a full on airborne assault, and so on (just mentioning a few prominent examples). As a designer, I need an area that has enough of a variation to capture players interest enough to have them want to try it.

2. A variation of battles occurring over the same, or similar, terrain. Attacks, counterattacks, night assaults, rain or mud or snow in play, mist like KGP in play, and so on. There needs to not only be enough variation for the CG(s) on the historic map(s); there must also be enough to include a showcase of 6-10 scenarios that help players explore any new rules that come with the HASL. (I personally prefer the idea of say 4-5 sens on the HASL map and 4-5 more on geo boards - going the HSASL approach route, myself.)

3. It needs to be contained as a battlefield. Doing all of Kursk in a single HASL is impossible. Doing sections of it, however, is quite feasible.

4. There need to be some new rules sections, but not too many. More than 3-8 pages of new rules are going to make it hard to get players to bite and try it out.

5. it needs to be something not overcooked in ASL. We don't need ANOTHER stalingrad HASL, (well, I do, but that's because HALS CGs are my own niche of enjoyment in this hobby), and so on. Bring something new to the table.

6. It needs to be timely. ABtF has been published for ages, so let's not do one now on say, the LZ fighting that the 1st Airlanding Brigade did on days 1-4 of Market-Garden, and so on. (Regardless of whether or not is "new" in the sense of a HASL CG and map designed around farm fields and sparse wooded areas with irrigation ditches.)

That's about all I got as a (quite limited) designer for HASL stuff. When I found these kinds of things all present in one package (twice now), I got with a few other like-minded ASL designers and we got busy working on those ideas to see what could become of it.

KRL, jon H
 
Last edited:

Jazz

Inactive
Joined
Feb 3, 2003
Messages
12,188
Reaction score
2,739
Location
The Empty Quarter
Country
llLithuania
Disagree with 'balance' in a HASL but only to a point: I think it better to hold the historical outcome as the as the baseline and hold the players' performance against that, even if the VC for each are asymmetrical. Being able to improve on the historical result should be rewarded, even if the player might tactically/technically 'lose' the CG.
I guess what I read as "balance" is beyond VC win/lose balance (Which can be tuned late in the process). More a balance between both sides with respect to motivations to attack/defend, balance of OOB, etc.....IOW a balance in what it takes to play both sides. If one side is dramatically smaller/weaker than the other, no amount of tweaking VC will turn into fun ASL such a situation where one side a punching bag, even if it is easy for them to win.

Or at least it cannot be done easily and would take some really creative design to make up for it.

BTW GREAT to see you again 'Fez!!!!!
 
Last edited:

DPetros

Member
Joined
Jul 13, 2007
Messages
152
Reaction score
77
Location
vista, CA
Country
llUnited States
A HASL, to be good, has to:
  • have unique and ASL interesting terrain that can't be replicated using the standard boards
  • have a decent CG that covers the terrain over multiple turns
  • should appeal to a wide audience (ie. a Finnish HASL may not work well) so that it's economically viable and interesting to many
  • given the complexity caused by the larger terrain size and attendant OB should have simple - not complex SSR
So far, Red Barricades still holds the top spot.
 

Will Fleming

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 22, 2003
Messages
4,410
Reaction score
425
Location
Adrift on the Pequod
Country
llUnited States
HtH close combat!

Not talking about the ASL version, but in real life over the map as rules disputes come up. Not really a good campaign game unless my opponent starts looking on Craig's list for hit men to take me out with a garrote!
 

mi80j

Member
Joined
Jan 16, 2015
Messages
332
Reaction score
110
Location
New York
Country
llUnited States
With the recent releases of Hatten in Flames and Red October, along with several other HASLs in the works, I'm curious what elements in a battle designers look for when selecting a subject for a HASL. (HASLing? HASLification? HASLization? HASLed?)

Are there any requirements? (Other than the dedication of designers and playtesters, balance, accuracy, proof-reading, nice map art, etc...)
Multiple phases?
Unique elements?
Historical significance?
Historical balance?
Allied victory? (Okay this one is tongue in cheek, but there appear to be fewer Axis victory HASLs)

What makes something like Hatten a good choice?
Are you asking what makes a good (finished product) HASL, or what makes a good choice of subject for an HASL to be composed on?
(apologies if I am missing anything obvious)
Thank you.
 
Top