Hawk Kriegsman Wrote:Correct me if I am wrong, but can't any unit with a firepower of 1 or greater fire starshells as long as the have 20 AP available?
Thanx!
Hawk
Erik, You are correct sir. :smoke:
I was not able to find it in the Matrix manual but, I had an old Rising Sun players guide and that is what is written.
I was under the impression that starshells had limited units that were able to fire them.
After I read the rule I am now gaining an impression that starshells availablility and use may need revamping all together. ;)
mwest Wrote:Changing original daylight scenarios to night is a HUGE "modification" that will severally alter the scenario game flow, tactics and the ability of forces to obtain various victory levels. Then, throw in other "oversights" like forgetting to include units that can use star shells, and you have a real mess! You have essentially "broke" the scenario!
Yup! That is what I thought. And, it would render the Blitz dBASE as a limited resource when checking for scenario balance, etc. when mixed, before and after, results are included?
Just the effect on movement alone goes a long way?
Though, as Erik pointed out, there are units in the scenario that can fire starshells. It was my misunderstanding that said there were none. :rolleyes:
- Any unit with an attack factor > 0 can fire star shells
- Base level of success = 40% + 5% x Co-located leader's Command Rating
- Each attempt (successful or not) requires 20 AP from the firing unit and any assisting leader
- If successful, starshell is fired (max range = 2 or 1/2 max range for indirect units) and number of star shells is decreased by 1. Starshells fired by indirect units appear immediately, not the next turn.
- If unsuccessful, APs are still spent, but no star shell is used.
- Star shell has a 40% chance of landing in the selected hex. Otherwise it drifts to one of the 6 adjoining hexes.
- Star shell illuminates the target hex and the 6 adjacent hexes. Illuminated hexes are considered "in LOS" similar to a day battle, but you don't spot units in those hexes unless they move or fire.
If you want more info, the rules for star shells are in section 5.22.2 of the manual (5.22 is Night Combat).
MrRoadrunner Wrote:Yup! That is what I thought. And, it would render the Blitz dBASE as a limited resource when checking for scenario balance, etc. when mixed, before and after, results are included?
Just the effect on movement alone goes a long way?
RR
Agree Ed.
Having both original and "modified" scenarios in the Blitz database will skew game results.
Also; as a scenario designer and player, I have issues with "modified" scenarios, that go through no play testing and no quality assurance checks - but are still uploaded into the Blitz database.
Looks to me like we have two "standards" when it comes to scenario design.
Standard #1: Take your original scenario design through the H2H process with play testing.
Standard #2: "Modify" an existing scenario without the original scenario designer approval with no play testing.
Both are acceptable methods of scenario design at the Blitz? :chin:
I'm really at a loss here gents. :conf:
Regards, Mike / "A good plan violently executed now is better than a perfect plan executed next week." - George S. Patton /
In the previous post, Guberman makes a good point....Who are the "authorised representatives", who perhaps we could officially title the "Scenario Gestapio", short title SG.?
There appears a concensus that modifying existing scens is reasonable, as long as this does not mean replacement of someone else's work. This I believe is reasonable,indeed necessary in many cases.
Jason Petho, (with whom I often disagree strongly), hits in the gold in #18, where he correctly points out that a modified version of an existing scen is in fact a new scen, which may well play very differently from the original. This can hardly corrupt the database, as we are merely adding a new entity.
All that is needed to clear this up is:
1. Restore the original scens in their original form with their original names and filenames
2. Clearly rename the stealth culprits eg XYZ Night Mod, and rename .map, ,.org and .scn (dependent on changes) filenames so as they do not conflict with or overwrite the original. This is important
3. Perhaps publish an amendment to club procedures, reflecting the above.
If there is any difficulty recovering the originals, I bet Jim Watt (Pip Roberts) has them in his amazing library.
07-31-2009, 11:22 AM, (This post was last modified: 07-31-2009, 11:22 AM by Jason Petho.)
K K Rossokolski Wrote:In the previous post, Guberman makes a good point....Who are the "authorised representatives", who perhaps we could officially title the "Scenario Gestapio", short title SG.?
There appears a concensus that modifying existing scens is reasonable, as long as this does not mean replacement of someone else's work. This I believe is reasonable,indeed necessary in many cases.
Jason Petho, (with whom I often disagree strongly), hits in the gold in #18, where he correctly points out that a modified version of an existing scen is in fact a new scen, which may well play very differently from the original. This can hardly corrupt the database, as we are merely adding a new entity.
All that is needed to clear this up is:
1. Restore the original scens in their original form with their original names and filenames
2. Clearly rename the stealth culprits eg XYZ Night Mod, and rename .map, ,.org and .scn (dependent on changes) filenames so as they do not conflict with or overwrite the original. This is important
3. Perhaps publish an amendment to club procedures, reflecting the above.
If there is any difficulty recovering the originals, I bet Jim Watt (Pip Roberts) has them in his amazing library.
Archived Forums
Help
Calendar
Member List
Search
){kind=link}
