So Then What Does One Do When........

[umbro]

It seems to me that there are generally two types of scenario:
1) Competition, with roughly "even" forces.
2) Historical, with asymmetrical forces.

In both cases, good designers alter the objectives and victory conditions as best they can to produce a "balanced" scenario. Changing the way a fundamental of the game is executed necessarily effects the balance of all existing scenarios.

Arguing that players should simply "use proper tactics" has as much validity as arguing that folks who don't like the TS assaults "use the proper tactics" to defend against them. [On a side note, in all the games I played I don't remember losing more than a couple of units to SDC, but that might be the Alzheimers kicking in.]

Undeniably the 104 assault rules will slow attackers down and thus unbalance old scenarios. We have to assume that the balance of old scenarios is a bell curve and that the whole curve will move somewhat. True, some old unbalanced scenarios will now seem balanced but the majority will not.

However, the smart folks responsible for JTCS have provided a solution for us. The 104 assault rule is optional. For all old scenarios turn it off. For new scenarios with the official "designed for optional 104 assault logo" (or perhaps text in the scenario description saying so) turn it on (if you want).

The arty effectiveness rule has only a relatively small effect (and why are your tanks standing still anyway?)
The hidden shooter rule helps the defender a little but probably not enough to change scenario balance.
(I have to admit that I am basing the previous paragraph on the volume of noise created by 104 assault compared to the two changes above).

Finally, the one other rule change that really effects the balance of old scenarios (and thus really should have been optional) is the ability of regular engineers to build light bridges. You will have to add to your house rule list to address this one.

umbro