Can the Soviets win in Kursk?

[Gordons HQ]

I look at these games rather differently than some I think and perhaps I'm wrong, but this is what I expect from Campaigns.

Firstly I believe we are playing or trying to recreate to some extent a simulation of a battle that historically took place generally in WWII.

Although we probably don't use the exact same plans and methods of executing these as were used in the real battles.
All the same I expect to have as reasonable a chance as they had if I am playing the historical winning side.

Likewise if I am playing the historical losing side, then I expect to have a real difficult time of it. In many cases having only the slightest chance of being able to win to turn around the historical result.

I believe this is the great attraction of wargaming, trying to see if you can do as good or even better than history.
I don't look for an even game, just a challenging one.

I praise all the scenario designers who try to make them this way and change the often distorted view of history, sometimes these games turn out to be.

Gordon

[Mr Grumpy]

Gordon,
The thing that a lot of players struggle with is that in PzC you can lose the scenario as a historical situation, but win the scenario according to the vp tables, so you can have balance and a historical simulation, the fact is not many players like playing the losing side despite the vp conditions being stacked in their favour and i am sure that many CG's are given up as lost when a result could have been achieved.

So we must not confuse balance as in chess with all things equal and balance as in a unequal struggle but using the VP conditions as a leveler. ;)

[Volcano Man]

Well said. The trick is always in the VP levels. First comes the desire to make the campaign play out at least semi-historically, or at least influence a historical behavior. We can probably remember a point in which the K43 campaign was such that the German attacker always chose to attack northwest, away from the historical pincer axis of advance. The addition of heavier fortified positions and more VPs along the historical route helped address this. After the Germans were basically "forced" along a more historical axis of advance, then the VP levels need to change and so on.

Probably the best approach as to VP levels, in the case of the attacking side, is where a historical result could be considered a high "draw" or low "minor victory". Doing something better than historical can be considered a victory, and something worse would be a defeat. Of course it all depends on the campaign too, and whether or not the other side was decisively defeated. For example, Compass '40. You would think that it would make a terrible campaign, but the approach was to say that the British victory was a stroke of genius and that a historical performance would yield a victory. Anything less than this would yield a draw or defeat, so the British are constantly racing against the clock. I don't know how the approach turned out, because I haven't yet played it myself -- but even a historical approach like this still yields a "chance" for balance for the Italian player.

[Mr Grumpy]

Probably the best approach as to VP levels, in the case of the attacking side, is where a historical result could be considered a high "draw" or low "minor victory". Doing something better than historical can be considered a victory, and something worse would be a defeat. Of course it all depends on the campaign too, and whether or not the other side was decisively defeated. For example, Compass '40. You would think that it would make a terrible campaign, but the approach was to say that the British victory was a stroke of genius and that a historical performance would yield a victory. Anything less than this would yield a draw or defeat, so the British are constantly racing against the clock. I don't know how the approach turned out, because I haven't yet played it myself -- but even a historical approach like this still yields a "chance" for balance for the Italian player.

Yes Compass is the best example of this in the titles i own, as a battle the Italians don't stand any chance at all of holding the CW forces back and you accept that before you start, but as Ed says a clever Italian player can still achieve a victory as the vp levels require the CW player to play a almost flawless game. ;)

As i have stated the trick is finding a defender who will not go into a deep depression when things seem to be going wrong, that is why i was glad (in a perverse way) that Rick played Italians in our Compass CG, i knew he would be a right pain in the butt and not give up and i have not been disappointed! :rolleyes: :(

[Gordons HQ]

Both Foul & VM make really good points and I have no problems with what either of you say.
I fully understand how difficult it must be to create scenarios and I know we are all indebted to your efforts.

I was only trying to point out my own private expectations to the fun I get from the games and perhaps put a different perspective on things.
I do however realize others have different expectations and certainly playing the losing side is not at all easy. However someone has to play the underdog and someone generally has to lose.

I am in agreement with you when you say many campaigns are probably given up far too early. often if they were persevered with they would perhaps reap rewards.

Cheers
Gordon

[Mr Grumpy]

Gordon,
I have no issues with what you had to say :) your opinions are just as valid as anyone else's and always welcome.

And i agree 100% different players have different desires out of these titles and it is a good job there is normally something to everyones taste in the 20 or so PzC titles.

[Al]

...I am in agreement with you when you say many campaigns are probably given up far too early. often if they were persevered with they would perhaps reap rewards.

Cheers
Gordon

Well put.

[von Waldenburg]

The best campaigns generally have S|O included, it makes the game less predictable, otherwise we have too much info already on history and the PzC series to make the games interesting enough in my view.

regards