Which direction for publishers

[Anonymous]

I like the idea of selling ASL in Packets as mentioned by SSA415. It makes sense that you could buy the entire Russian OB for $50 (or whatever). Then you wouldn't have to worry about what module will give you what counters, scenarios, boards, etc. You could also sell the scenarios in 20 (or some number) packs and each pack will list what nationalities and boards you need to play all of the scenarios included.

I must agree with Harold that we are dinosaurs. Todays generation seem to be a lot more interested in Duke Nukem and computer shoot em ups than with a boring cardboard game that recreates a war that they don't care about. The interest of ASL for me was directly tied to my interest in WW II history and still is. Todays kids don't hardly even know about WW II so the interest isn't going to be there. I draw from my 6 nephews and other kids and this is what I hear. They don't want to read a rule book. They want to turn a computer on and play. I don't have a lot of good ideas on how to fix this other than to keep trying to draw in new players with demo games and tournaments and things like that. However, once I start talking to some one about the game and then show them the rule book they usually quickly lose interest. Just one man's opinion, but I love the idea of selling the game in modules by nationalities, etc. as mentioned above.

 

[Klaus Fischer]

VASL Map for FireFights! Teaser

We have just posted a ZIP file of the Teaser Map for VASL to the website
http://www.heatofbattle.com/ff.htm
or
http://www.heatofbattle.com/downloads.htm
The ZIP file is 186KB.
All you have to do is unzip the contained "bdff9" file into your VASL boards directory and start a new game. In VASL 4 you'll find "ff9" in your drop-down map selector while in VASL you you have to type in "ff9".
Enjoy it.

The Guys from Heat of Battle

 

[Wolkster]

Returning to Evan’s original question, here is what direction I want ASL to take:

Extended scenarios. Last year I sent two extended scenarios ideas to Tom Morin for VotG. What is an extended scenario? Lot’s of players are complaining that scenarios are too short or too long. Why not make them both! For example, create a scenario that is 5 turns long with a specific Victory Condition. Extend the same scenario another 3 turns with new Victory Conditions and one side (or both) getting reinforcements on turn 6 (or turn 7).

This solves two problems. First, if players only want to play a short scenario they can use the 5 turn scenario. But, what happens if they finish early and still have a couple of hours to kill? That’s too short to start another scenario, but it’s perfect if they want to play 3 more turns. Second, as you look into designing scenarios you see that some battles ebb & flow. It looks like one side is winning early, but later on as reinforcements arrive or a key unit is destroyed and the battle turns. Extended scenarios allow you to show this flow by using multiple Victory Conditions over different time frames. For example:

Turns 1-5 - The victory condition is whoever holds building X & Y.
Turns 6-8 - The emphasis has now changed to the cross-roads at hex M6.
Turns 9-11 - The Germans got a bunch of reinforcements, so they need to get 15 CVP off the west edge.

By using Extended scenarios players must keep their eyes on all parts of the battlefield and not just a single goal. The winner of the 11 turn scenario from above is the player who won 2 of the 3 victory conditions at the end of turns 5, 8 and 11.

How about a 5, 7 and 9 turn scenario where reinforcements arrive on turn 5 and 7, but the Victory Conditions of turn 9 switch back to the same VC as Turn 5? Or a 4, 6 and 8 turn scenario with no reinforcements, just different Victory Conditions. The possibilities are endless.

I want to see designers think outside the box. Give us three scenarios in one. Three Victory conditions, three different lengths and three different sets of units on one map. Then let us decide which one we want to play.

 

[TankDawg]

Rob,

Great idea! I like the concept. Send em HoB's way if nothing happens with MMP. :lol:

And welcome to forum!! Good to see you here.

 

[Perry]

I assumed Rob was referring indirectly to J73 and J74 from J4. Tired and Unsupported (J73) where the the turn lenght depends upon whether the German decides to bring on reinforcements, and Priests on the Line (J74) where the turn of arrival for the US reinforcements depends upon the on-board Americans hanging tough up front.

 

[Wolkster]

>I assumed Rob was referring indirectly to J73 and J74 from J4. Tired and Unsupported (J73) where the the turn lenght depends upon whether the German decides to bring on reinforcements

Not at all. About 6-8 months ago I sent Tom Morin two examples of how to extend two of his Valor of the Guard scenarios. These would be on separate scenario cards and could appear in a later issue of a Journal after VotG was released.

I want to see a whole scenario pack of extended scenarios. Picture a regular scenario with the turn length track, victory conditions, available units, etc. If the players want to play that scenario, then fine they play that scenario. But, if they want to play to extend the scenario, turn the scenario card over and you see an extended turn length track, new victory conditions, more units that will enter as reinforcements or whatever designers can dream of adding.

I’ll use Urban Guerillas as an example. If my memory serves me it’s a 6 turn scenario and the Russians win by taking 2 of 3 buildings. Two players decide to play Urban Guerillas for 6 turns and the Russians win. Great, they’re tired and Joe goes home.

But what happens if they’re having a GREAT time, they’re on turn 5.5 and they look at their watches and see they have 3 hours left to play? They then decide that they want to play the extended version of the scenario to turn 8. They turn over the scenario card and see the extended turn length track to show turns 7 and 8. They see that the Germans receive 3 squads, an 8-1 and a Panther on turn 7 from the South edge. The Russians receive 6 squads, MMG, 9-1 and two T-34/85 from the West edge (but North of the river) on Turn 7. The victory conditions now state: The Russians win by controlling all 3 of the buildings. Wouldn't that be cool?

There are so many possibilities. If Pete Shelling wanted to turn Urban Guerillas into an 11 turn monster he can add 4 more turns onto the end of turn 7 and give both sides a few platoons of reinforcements and let them go at it for even a longer length of time. A whole scenario pack of extended scenarios would be cool, but no one says that designers can’t go back and extend their old scenarios. I’d buy a pack of extensions (only) from MMP, Schwerpunkt or HoB that took 12-15 of their previous scenarios and created extensions for them.

It just never made sense to me why a scenario was always X turns long. Did the Germans turn around and retreat after losing 2 of 3 buildings? The battle is still there waiting for further developments. Keep it going. Or not. But, let the players sitting at the table decide.

 

[Fred Ingram]

I’ll use Urban Guerillas as an example. If my memory serves me it’s a 6 turn scenario and the Russians win by taking 2 of 3 buildings. Two players decide to play Urban Guerillas for 6 turns and the Russians win. Great, they’re tired and Joe goes home.

But what happens if they’re having a GREAT time, they’re on turn 5.5 and they look at their watches and see they have 3 hours left to play? They then decide that they want to play the extended version of the scenario to turn 8. They turn over the scenario card and see the extended turn length track to show turns 7 and 8. They see that the Germans receive 3 squads, an 8-1 and a Panther on turn 7 from the South edge. The Russians receive 6 squads, MMG, 9-1 and two T-34/85 from the West edge (but North of the river) on Turn 7. The victory conditions now state: The Russians win by controlling all 3 of the buildings.

Wouldn't that be cool?

Yes - that specific example would be cool (and do-able).

BUT, if the extended victory conditions vary wildly from the original (ex: take 3 buldings and a crossroads 10 hexes away from those buildings), then the extended scenario would stand well on its own, but may not really work that well for simply continued playing. That would be because the players may never have considered allocating troops for attacking/defending that crossroads when the game began. Of course, maybe that is what the reinforcemtns can do .

Of course, that is what playtests are for. I hope I got my opinion across well. The extended scenario concept is novel and just needs to be tried and poliashed.

 

[Dr Zaius]

Some very interesting comments in this old thread. Some of these have proved to be right on the money and others...well they were not as close. Although there is a lot of discussion in this thread about particular products and release dates, the original question is still a relevant one. I wonder if the folks who responded to this thread when it was started still feel the same way or if their positions have evolved over time.

 

[cujo8-1]

I want to see a whole scenario pack of extended scenarios. Picture a regular scenario with the turn length track, victory conditions, available units, etc. If the players want to play that scenario, then fine they play that scenario. But, if they want to play to extend the scenario, turn the scenario card over and you see an extended turn length track, new victory conditions, more units that will enter as reinforcements or whatever designers can dream of adding.

I never commented in this thread before. I'm glad it has been resurrected.

I like the idea of extended scenarios and believe the best and quickest way for MMP to get product out is to continue creating Action Packs (APs)with these types of scenarios and new maps/playing aids. Would these not be cheaper in price than HASL modules?

Also, large historical simulations seem to take too long to get the the public. Not to mention that some have not been great sellers. I believe APs probably wouldn't stay on shelves or in inventory very long.

 

[Kevin Kenneally]

Direction for publishers

Go EAST my friends :nuts:

There is plenty of room to expand and conquer.......

Vast plains of grain to feed our people.....

Wealth of riches from the soil......

Cheap Labor to be had for all..........

We will all be Kings

 

[paulkenny]

Go EAST my friends :nuts:

There is plenty of room to expand and conquer.......

Vast plains of grain to feed our people.....

Wealth of riches from the soil......

Cheap Labor to be had for all..........

We will all be Kings

<<<<<SUBLIMINAL MESSAGE SENT TO KEVIN KENNEALLY>>>>

<<<<LENINGRAD PACK, FANATIC ENTERPRISES>>>>>

 

[Dr Zaius]

Seems you missed the point, iASL is stand alone, no ASLRB needed, no BV needed, no other module needed. Just suck'em in and then sell the ASLBv2 and BV to them. By the time the iASL module is out bet the ASLRBv2 and BV, along with the rest of the "missing" core modules will be out.

Only problem is AoO will still be languishing in the pending file---Green Meanies now!

I guess it didn't quite work out that way. Still, it looks like 2005 is going to be a good year for MMP and ASL.

 

[da priest]

I guess it didn't quite work out that way. ...

Don,

Err, check the date of the post old chap. iASL is still not out. :laugh:

And ASLSK was not even in the works/known of, as far as we peasants were concerned.:smoke:

 

[Dr Zaius]

Don,

Err, check the date of the post old chap. iASL is still not out.

Okay, I was equating iASL and the ASLSK. :shock:

 

[Pitman]

Two very different things. But iASL was dropped while still in development and playtest, in favor of the ASLSK.

 

[dspurlock]

What’s sad is a lot of what was typed 2 years ago still holds true……

 

[Chas Argent]

Two very different things. But iASL was dropped while still in development and playtest, in favor of the ASLSK.

Yes, but I still have the boards, rules, and scenarios :cheeky:

Actually I would like to see the boards released as they are quite nice. They are reminiscent of boards 1-4 in their own way.

 

[da priest]

Yes, but I still have the boards, rules, and scenarios :cheeky:

Actually I would like to see the boards released as they are quite nice. They are reminiscent of boards 1-4 in their own way.

Smells like an almost ready for prime time scenario pak?:cheeky:

 

[Georgii2222]

Two very different things. But iASL was dropped while still in development and playtest, in favor of the ASLSK.

Then what the heck *is* iASL? I always thought that SK *was* iASL, they just decided to change the name. Why would they have been working on TWO introductory products in parallell?

 

[Pitman]

They weren't sure which way to go, and they didn't know at that time how successful the ASLSK would be.