 |
|
Type of scenario - Printable Version +- Forums (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards) +-- Forum: The Firing Line (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/forumdisplay.php?fid=1) +--- Forum: Campaign Series (https://www.theblitz.club/message_boards/forumdisplay.php?fid=8) +--- Thread: Type of scenario (/showthread.php?tid=37470) Pages:
1
2
|
Type of scenario - Jason Petho - 10-26-2006 A few questions. 1. What are the type of scenarios that you find most challenging? 2. What are the type of scenarios you find least challenging? 3. What is your ideal type of scenario? Thanks in advance! Take care and good luck Jason Petho RE: Type of scenario - Huib Versloot - 10-26-2006 1. Scns that are historically correct in both map and oob 2. "Historical" scns that have an incorrect map. Before I start a scn I always look at the map first and then decide if I play. 3. Historical scns where all victory levels are possible for both sides in a match of 2 equally skilled players. RE: Type of scenario - Tide1 - 10-26-2006 The most liked : Hypothetical with both sides well balanced so either side can win. The least liked : Historical with exact oob's. RE: Type of scenario - Jeepster777 - 10-26-2006 Most Challenging.......a good RS U.S. Marine beach landing..... Least Challenging.....early war scenarios that have the Germans atacking the French with Pz II's and captured Czech Armour..... except WF Push to Perrone wich is quite interesting..... My Favorite type of scenario is a good size 5+ EF2 scenario from 16 to 35 turns long....with lots of IS2's and Panthers..on a map with lots of options.something like EF2 Dance with the Devil or EF2 Kursk1..... Eddie Jeepster777 RE: Type of scenario - Pip Roberts - 10-26-2006 MOST CHALLENGING --Scenarios with lots of uneven country and forest which allow ambushes and Rear Area Penetration raids LEAST CHALLENGING-- Badly unbalanced scenarios where it is impossible to win. For me at least these include scenarios with interconnected blockhouses (like Anzio) or hopeless situations where early Axis armour without 88's or enough engineers is matched against KV1's and KV2's (Like Terror at Borisov.) Night scenarios are of not interest and I find aircraft of limited use IDEAL -- Historically accurate scenarios (like Death of a Legend) which give us a feeling for the real actions and help us to understand the complex decisions that commanders have to make. Personally I prefer Eastern Front scenarios with mixed forces of Artillery, Infantry and Armour, and plenty of concealment opportunities Complexity about 7 as I lke to look at each unit possibilites before I combine them into the master plan. Good on yer Jason. A great idea to ask the players RE: Type of scenario - Hog of War - 10-26-2006 1. Meeting engagements with lots of toys on both sides and a very fluid situation 2. Attacking static defensive positions with overwhelming odds 3. One where I CRUSH my opponent....I mean.... ones that come down to the last one or two moves with heavy fighting around the vp hex(s). I also like being in their boots type of historic scenarios, however who's to say what is historic and what is not. I used to think I was there when playing a stock scenario. Right. RE: Type of scenario - The General - 10-26-2006 MOST CHALLENGING: Early war scenarios with weak AT capabilities against T-34's and KV1's!. LEAST CHALLENGING: Relatively flat, wide open desert scenarios. IDEAL: Historically based scenarios, mid to large size, 1943-1945 with a variety of forces for both sides. RE: Type of scenario - XLVIII Pz. Korp - 10-26-2006 What Huib said.  Couldn't have said it any better. Don Fox, and Huib scenarios are great examples. RE: Type of scenario - Mike Abberton - 10-26-2006 Most Challenging - Armor heavy engagements where the other side has a marked material edge (e.g. early war German armor vs. T-34s/KVs or late 43 T-34-76s/KV vs. Panthers/Tigers) Least Challenging - Overwhelming force against a static defense Ideal Scenario - A scenario where both sides have an active chance to influence the outcome. That doesn't have to be a meeting engagement, but in an attack/defense situtation, the defender should have some ability counter-attack, choose where to defend, etc. Historical scenario rebuttal - First let me say that I like historical scenarios, but I don't completely agree that "every" historical battle can be balanced by choosing the correct victory levels. Or more accurately, they can probably be balanced, but are they going to be enjoyable? Not by me. I don't really want to spend 20 turns getting ground down by a vastly superior force while inflicting minimal return damage but getting a draw because my opponent "only" scored 2,000 points instead of 2,200. That is something of an exaggeration, but not a wild one. I understand that this would be my personal preference only, and that some people would find this scenario very interesting. To each his own. RE: Type of scenario - H.v.F. - 10-26-2006 Hello Jason ! Gio here. 1) Mechanized. With good weather and ground. Historical. 2) With poor ground conditions which hind the movement (mud, extensive forests, ecc.) 3) Blind, big, prolonged missions with a successive series of OBJs, scaled reinfs and various terrain, accurately balanced chances to win for both sides, historical. Hope this helps |
){kind=link}