Sealion July 13 campaign balance

[Liebchen]

I'm playing Germans in Sealion's July 13 scenario.

Two days in and I control 90% of Essex. Point-wise, it's already a German major victory.

Looking at the stats, this has only been reported a few times and each instance has been a major German victory.

I'm thinking that the objectives may need some tweaking. Has there been any discussion of this among designers?

[dukemat]

I agree.......I have played two different players and the Germans (if patient) can easily get a major victory in the large campaign game.

#%0924_01

Maybe if the victory hexes were reduced by 50% it would make for a more competitive game.

[Green]

Liebchen/Dukemat

This is not currently being discussed by designers. But based on your comments I think it should be reviewed.

You are talking about two different campaigns, one in July and one in September, which have some important differences. But they have the same total objective points, of just over 24,000, and the same victory conditions, with 5500 points required for a major German victory. This certainly looks pro-Axis but the Germans do have to overcome the Invasion Penalty losses and presumably the objectives are intended to allow for victory to be achieved using alternative strategies.

There is a big difference between the versions in terms of the invasion penalty values. The average losses in July would be around half of those in September. This equates to thousands of points and so definitely has a balance impact. There are other differences but it appears the July campaign is more pro-German and the Notes in the game do refer to the "easier July campaign".

There is also a big difference between the stock and ALT versions. They use the same victory conditions and objectives but the invasion penalties are the mirror opposite of those used in the stock versions. In other words the July stock values are used in the September ALT and vice versa. In his Alternative Campaign Changes document Ed Williams explains his rationale for why he felt that the Axis losses would have been greater in July when the Battle of Britain was commencing as opposed to in September when it is hypothetically assumed that the Luftwaffe had effectively suppressed the RAF sufficiently to make the invasion feasible.
   
So, all four versions would play quite differently but all use the same victory conditions and all would seem to be pro-German to varying degrees. In addition there is a long version of the scenario (both stock and ALT) that adds 208 turns, uses the same objectives, the same Allied forces and some additional German forces. The victory conditions are higher, with 8000 points required for a German major victory. It seems reasonable to infer that these scenarios are also pro-German.

Regardless any adjustment would be a stab in the dark without additional information. The small number of results reported does not give much to go on and anyway we do not know the actual results in terms of points or how many turns were played or what optional rules were used, etc. So any additional details you can provide would be useful.
       
Generally speaking I think the Sealion scenarios are exceptionally well balanced (and great fun) but I have no experience with the campaigns. Of course, 'balance' in a campaign is a slippery concept. Rigorous testing is not possible so there is an element of guesswork in the design. And even if the players are of similar skill levels, the complexity, size and length allow for dramatic variability in results. But that is not an excuse for not trying to improve balance, if it is clearly off. 

John