What side in SS scenarios?

[cujo8-1]

I have no preferences. I generally will alternate between the attack and the defense each week I play. I try to find those scenarios considered "balanced" in the various literature.

 

[Chas]

This is kind of an interesting thread, as sometimes guys complain about the number of SS scenarios. I have found that people tend to go for these. A good action with some SS, FTs, Crocs, etc and people want to play them.
I agree about how situations should be more desparate, as in a general way the SS are easier to play. Ironically Firestorm in St. Manv is just like this, but some guys have commented that they feel like they cant/couldnt win as the Germans....yet ROAR currently has it at 5-4 Germans

Chas

 

[Chas Argent]

Wow-I disagree. I won as the Germans, though had some good luck. But I would play either side in that one.

But it's a sign of a tight scenario, if both sides think they'll lose

 

[Pitman]

There *are* too many SS scenarios. However, by the same token, there are too many scenarios involving airborne and various other elite forces. There is a serious bias in ASL scenario design away from normal units or low quality units and towards elite units.

 

[graydo]

There *are* too many SS scenarios. However, by the same token, there are too many scenarios involving airborne and various other elite forces. There is a serious bias in ASL scenario design away from normal units or low quality units and towards elite units.

Maybe there just aren't enough other scenarios!

dave

 

[Gunner Scott]

One question I do have and everybody please be honest, or close to the facsimile of honest.

If your sitting down with your opponent and spy a scenario in 1939 with 658 SS vs another scenario with 468 SS, which one would you play? Also put your mind in SL mode, it might then make the leap of faith more Palatable.

Of course I would play the 658 one.

Scott

 

[Nat Mallet]

There is a serious bias in ASL scenario design away from normal units or low quality units and towards elite units.

That's not really surprising. Low quality units aren't interesting to play. Because low quality units tend to break far more often, I feel like I'm watching the game, rather than playing it.

I prefer scenarios where elites are facing elites, or at least, 1st line vs 1st line. Makes things far more interesting.

I haven't played an SS scenario yet, so I'm not sure what the big appeal is. I typically favor American forces in all my wargaming (not just ASL).

Nat

 

[Dr Zaius]

That's not really surprising. Low quality units aren't interesting to play. Because low quality units tend to break far more often, I feel like I'm watching the game, rather than playing it.

Exactly.

 

[Chas Argent]

That's not really surprising. Low quality units aren't interesting to play. Because low quality units tend to break far more often, I feel like I'm watching the game, rather than playing it.

Nat

I TOTALLY disagree with this. I think there is a much greater challenge-and a great deal of excitement and fun to be had- in using your skills to keep lower-quality units effective. To me, that makes for great ASL.

 

[Roy]

I'm with you Chas. I like to play them all, but if you want to sharpen your ASL skills, low quality troops MAKE you learn about placement of leaders, rout paths, when to bug out, etc...

I think it's funny how many people say they don't want to play late war tanks, because they are too powerful, one hit one kill....and prefer the little early tanks. But with infantry they want the big firepower, and higher morale.

To each his own, I guess. If you learn to play the feebles well, you'll be able to play the powerhouses well...... but it doesn't work vice-versa.

In my opinion.... :smoke:

 

[Pitman]

Chas is exactly right. It doesn't take that much skill to have a 6-5-8 be effective. It takes a great deal of skill to use that 3-3-6 well. Give me conscripts, Italians, Chinese, and Axis Minor Allies any old day of the week.

Too many ASLers are, in my opinion, pretty shallow when it comes to loving the Big Penis units. Big Penis units are the 6-5-8s, 6-4-8s, 7-4-7s, 7-6-8s, 8-3-8s, and so forth, as well as the Big Penis tanks: Tigers, Panthers, etc.

While I am sure that Big Penis units exert a certain lure, I have to wonder if the lure is some sort of compensation factor. I think that secure ASL players have no issue with playing with low quality troops, because they have no worries about inadequacy.

 

[Gunner Scott]

A very scary statement Mark. But I have to strongly disagree, I think playing elite troops are so much more fun then the dregs of society. How much fun are you gonna have playing for example playing "Able at Cesaro" A13 vs "the Battle for Rome"? I'd take the Battle for Rome anyday for the neat toy's and cool elite troops.

Scott

Chas is exactly right. It doesn't take that much skill to have a 6-5-8 be effective. It takes a great deal of skill to use that 3-3-6 well. Give me conscripts, Italians, Chinese, and Axis Minor Allies any old day of the week.

Too many ASLers are, in my opinion, pretty shallow when it comes to loving the Big Penis units. Big Penis units are the 6-5-8s, 6-4-8s, 7-4-7s, 7-6-8s, 8-3-8s, and so forth, as well as the Big Penis tanks: Tigers, Panthers, etc.

While I am sure that Big Penis units exert a certain lure, I have to wonder if the lure is some sort of compensation factor. I think that secure ASL players have no issue with playing with low quality troops, because they have no worries about inadequacy.

 

[Pitman]

I haven't played either, so I can't say. But there is absolutely nothing intrinsic to a 7-4-7 or 6-5-8 that makes me enjoy it more. And when it comes to vehicles, it all depends on context. There are scenarios in which Stalin tanks don't raise eyebrows, while in other scenarios a Mk II tank is a terror on the battlefield.

Some of my most fondly remembered scenario playings involve poor quality troops. Do you know what happens when a 6-5-8 squad passes a 1MC? The answer is nothing.

But you know what happens when a 3-3-6 passes a morale check? The player is shouting "Yes! I'm SUPERMAN, baby!" and doing the Axis Minor Allies Victory Dance around the table.

Is it remarkable when a Tiger tank kills another tank? No. Is it remarkable when a halftrack does? Sure.

 

[Gunner Scott]

Ha ha-
ok I see what your saying, but you see, I prefer LOW quality elite troops like the 447's or jap 448's.

Scott

I haven't played either, so I can't say. But there is absolutely nothing intrinsic to a 7-4-7 or 6-5-8 that makes me enjoy it more. And when it comes to vehicles, it all depends on context. There are scenarios in which Stalin tanks don't raise eyebrows, while in other scenarios a Mk II tank is a terror on the battlefield.

Some of my most fondly remembered scenario playings involve poor quality troops. Do you know what happens when a 6-5-8 squad passes a 1MC? The answer is nothing.

But you know what happens when a 3-3-6 passes a morale check? The player is shouting "Yes! I'm SUPERMAN, baby!" and doing the Axis Minor Allies Victory Dance around the table.

Is it remarkable when a Tiger tank kills another tank? No. Is it remarkable when a halftrack does? Sure.

 

[Legion]

Some people get a kick out of an early-war theme where an ATR is a threat, others need to have some heavy metal.

The LAST thing i care about when i choose a scenario or CG is whether i can wheel out my sweet black counters! I prefer to play a balanced game, with OBA and AFV presence.

Personally my favorate theme is late a war German mish-mash (SS down to conscripts) in a desperate defence against the Allied or Russian tidal waves pouring onto them...

In that way Pitmann is right, when an old man on a bike is able to take out a Stalin with a PF, then i have been known to dance!

However, historically, when it comes to late-war the SS are going to figure in any major battle and expecially when there are serious toys to play with.

 

[The Purist]

I'm with Chas and Pitman on this one. Early and mid-war scenarios are far more interesting with the smaller AFVs and regular infantry. Panther vs. IS-2,.... :bored: . Give me Crusaders and M13/40s or Mk IIIHs vs. T-34/M40 anytime and I'll have more fun than gathering kill stacks of high FP squads with a half dozen support weapons and then sweeping the map clean.

 

[Nat Mallet]

It doesn't take that much skill to have a 6-5-8 be effective.

To the contrary, my friend, it does take skill. My first few games were against a vastly superior player, and while I had the elite units, I got *creamed* by half his force, which was composed of 2nd line and conscript troops.

Elite units won't save you if you really suck. A minimum amount of skill is required.

For experienced players, elites vs low quality troops may not be a huge deal, and like you've stated, it may even be more fun to play the lower quality troops.

Elite units have as much to do with the size of what's in my pants as my Camaro.

Nat

 

[Dr Zaius]

Interesting comments. For me wargaming has always been somewhat of an extension of my military career. While certainly not the same thing, many of the lessons that I learned from professional wargaming can be directly applied to enthusiast wargaming. To a lesser extent I have found the opposite to be true as well.

In real life no self-respecting officer or NCO wants to lead or command crappy troops who wimper at the first sound of gunfire. You want to train with the best and fight with the best unit possible. Granted, it's not exactly the same in wargaming and I understand that. I enjoy all sorts of different wargaming experiences with troops and equipment of varying qualities. I don't think it has anything to do with my ego or skill level, it's just what I find to be more interesting. That may not be the case for other people.

Again, ASL is a great system because it can cater to so many different tastes.

 

[Jazz]

Chas is exactly right. It doesn't take that much skill to have a 6-5-8 be effective. It takes a great deal of skill to use that 3-3-6 well. Give me conscripts, Italians, Chinese, and Axis Minor Allies any old day of the week.

.

If a scenario is designed correctly, the side with the supermen should take as much skill as the side with the dregs. Of course, it is often a very different type and style of skill required to play these different types of units.

The scenario should give the SS a big hill to get over, have them be out numbered, etc.... Otherwise, it's not much of a scenario is it?

 

[Pitman]

Scenario balance is a completely different issue.

Look, to a certain degree, you can "play reckless" with elite troops. There is far more "give" there. If you have an '8' morale, you can take risks that you simply can't if your morale is '6'. Furthermore, if you have high firepower, and especially if you have assault fire, you can do a lot of moving and firing and still be effective.

That means a lot of things are inherently easier for elite troops.

You want to capture a building with conscripts? Go across the street with conscripts? You'd better put your thinking cap on, because you can't just waltz up to the enemy.