Legacy Scenarios and Transport Values

[K K Rossokolski]

As you know, the scenario dB is replete with hundreds of legacy scenarios going back to the original Talonsoft games. These are a mixture of stock and custom scens. Some are laughable, many more are good solid games, more than a few are superb. They probably remain the backbone of our club. Most of the early scens were, I understand, balanced for play against the AI, and it is perhaps fortuitous that so many have proved to play so well at PBEM
Take, for example "WF Kucher's Ragtag Circus. Played 285 times, Axis 135/Draw 24/Allies 126. 14 results this year so far. Or EF "Tank Graveyard at Minsk" 520 played, 228/69/223, 15 for 2010.. RS "Hurricane on Biak" results break 80/11/76 (4 this year). This is "balance"
But many, such as WF "Test of Courage" while popular (183 played) do not meet this standard Axis 33, draws 19 Allies 131 Yet many comments indicate 'Well balanced"
On the other hand, we can find nearly six pages of CS scens that have never been touched since being uploaded. Great shame.***

There have been a lot of changes since these scens were built, most significantly the radical change in transport values and capacity a couple of years back. How this has effected the legacy scens is yet to be seen. We might hope that reducing the numbers needed, will balance the greater VP value........who can tell?
I have undertaken, with management agreement, to work through the legacy scens and adjust transport numbers. These will NOT replace the legacy scens as they will have new file names and indications in the title. The originals will remain in the database.

For example that very popular EF stock scen KKR's Folly".... KKR Folly.scn... becomes ** KKR's Folly[Tr]... KKR Folly-Tr.scn This is the new scenario title and file name. The original is still where it was. The TR indicates the scen has been modded ONLY for transport values.

In some cases, as in the example of "Test of Courage" above, I plan to do a bit of tweaking with a view to bringing the sides closer.
The naming then becomes **KKR's Folly [Tr]{ModRC}.....KKR Folly-TR-Mod RC.scn
I willl add a new first sentence to the description in the scen itself.
I have set the following rules for myself
A. Start with WF (my preferred game)
B. Work through the early war years first
C. Try to complete the simpler ones first eg scens without reinforcements, then move onto code stuff, with Jason's assistance.
D. For a transport mod, change only that factor.
E. I do NOT intend to touch the work of current designers.
F. ALL legacy scens will remain in the DB in their original form.
G. I won't be doing any tweaking with the real classics like Kucher's Ragtag Circus. Why draw a moustache on the Mona Lisa?

*** An idea for a tournament, perhaps?

[Crossroads]

Something we can accommodate with the World in Flames tournament?

While at it(!), what about the fixed units in games designed vs AI? If the target is a better balance for H2H, how about unfixing them to give both sides the freedom to move? Too little too late, Tightening the noose, spring to my mind.

[K K Rossokolski]

That's my plan, Petri, but I have to start with those I can do. Which means scens without transport, and scens with simple reinforcement schedules that I can do without getting into the codes..I have yet to acquire that skill. Fixing/unfixing of itself will affect the way a game plays ( as indeed will changing the transport values. But I for one dislike fixed units unless historically mandated. I hope to put my first efforts up on the board tonight.
All will start with **
I figure a scen with about 25 results is probably a reasonable sample. Take WF A New Threat.. 24 played, breaks down 4-2-18,favouring Axis. This is
> 4:1,IMO a candidate for a bit of a tweak. I don't plan on doing anything much unless the win/loss ratio is >3:1.
Too Little Too late (18/11/38) is a terrific scen which does favour the Allies by 2:1. Maybe a little tweak wouldn't hurt. But that won't be needed until 1944!!!

[Huib Versloot]

IMO it would be best to rebuild the "non" classics from scratch, or forget about them. The old legacy scns contain a lot of imbalanced sh*t scenarios, that are 1. not balanced. 2. have idiotic oobs. 3. have fantasy ugly maps. For example all old stock scenarios about the battles in the Rhineland are completely terrible (Rhinelander, Bonninghardt Ridge, Bleijenbeek castle etc). There is simply no way that these scns can ever made into something decent because they contain nothing good.

Rod, I just fear you are going to put a lot of energy where you can achieve a mediocre result at best. I would concentrate on new scns.

[Herr Straße Laufer]

I agree with Huib ... on both points.

Normally things sort themselves out. Dead weight is only a problem if someone has OCD.



HSL

[Von Earlmann]

IMO it would be best to rebuild the "non" classics from scratch, or forget about them. The old legacy scns contain a lot of imbalanced sh*t scenarios, that are 1. not balanced. 2. have idiotic oobs. 3. have fantasy ugly maps. For example all old stock scenarios about the battles in the Rhineland are completely terrible (Rhinelander, Bonninghardt Ridge, Bleijenbeek castle etc). There is simply no way that these scns can ever made into something decent because they contain nothing good.

Rod, I just fear you are going to put a lot of energy where you can achieve a mediocre result at best. I would concentrate on new scns.

Well said!

[Crossroads]

While I agree with what Huib wrote as well - and it would be terrible if Rod could only have time to work with stock scenarios for the say next 12 months and nothing else - I believe there might be a balance to be achieved?

Using the good old 20/80 rule for priorities (as Rod would seem to be implying is what he plans to do anyway), I could see it being worth the effort to take those 20% of the stock scenario that have 80% of the fun factor involved, and convert them to a even better gaming experience.

Early war scenarios, and let us say that would include 1939 as well, as a next step, tweak and improve the 20% of the stock that are the creme de la not-creme, and we could then include them in the WiF experience that has just started, to get an idea how they play out.

I very rarely bother to play against AI, and would appreciate the H2H effort Rod is talking about. I would agree that not all scenarios should be touched, but the best stock (ie. original TS and early add-on scenarios) could be picked and improved.

I was quite surprised to find out, for an example, there is a lot of scenarios regarding Hitler's campaign at Norway, and while I have no idea how they play, how accurate the OOBs or the maps are, but if there would be some glaring errors it would be quite easy to fix them.

[K K Rossokolski]

Time I have. Retired, not a gardener, prefer to allow the fish to live in peace, have no interest in vintage machinery. Recently got a good price for my extensive collection of 14th Century English pornography, so that obsession is out of the way...but I do miss it! And I don't play many CS actual games these days.

I am a latecomer to scen design, having frigged around for years with silly hypothetical crap. I am interested in the desert, andthe peripherals such as Abyssinia and Japan/Russia. I try and do good history,and in my limited way am able to make some use of modern mapping technology available where I sit right now. I prefer big, long battles at formation level. I have about six under development. No good at the smaller battles which dominated the early days.
My time is my own. The best is the enemy of the good. I take Huib's point about the Rhineland. But it seems to me that someone needs to "modernise" the old classics, and the truck value thing provides a good spark. I do make the assumption that the early stock designers went to some effort to get the map and the history right. I know very well also that there is a lot of crap in the DB.

What would be better value to me, gents, is to suggest which of the legacy stuff is better off leaving to wither on the vine, and which should be touched up. I use WF "Test of Courage" as an example. Well reported subjectively ...lots of "Well balanced" comments..... but plays around 4:1

Ed,you wrote "Normally things sort themselves out. Dead weight is only a problem if someone has OCD." It's early here...0610....and still on my first cuppa, but I have no idea what you mean.

[junk2drive]

Obsessive Compulsive Disorder

If you lay awake all night knowing that there should be a fix for a scenario, you may have OCD.

[K K Rossokolski]

Obsessive Compulsive Disorder

If you lay awake all night knowing that there should be a fix for a scenario, you may have OCD.

Personally, I believe a bit of obsession and compulsion is a good thing.
I sleep very well.