CS Game Scale - Manual Style

[Mike Abberton]

I think you can also explain the difference in scenario length versus engagement length in history (or at least part of it) as "skipping over the boring parts" rather than a floating game scale.

Therefore when modeling a 6 hour engagement in something like 15 turns (i.e. 90 minutes of combat time), you're skipping over 4.5 hours of reconsolidating forces after capturing each objective, calling and waiting for more orders, waiting for the ammo trucks, waiting for someone to bring you your pack that you left behind (rather than sprinting into combat with a full pack), catching your breath, etc. You don't need 24 minute turns to do that (6 hours/15 turns).

Does that explanation require some abstraction, too. Sure. But with this method, it keeps the hex scale consistent with travel speeds (even if infantry are all marathoners). I think the big problem with this explanantion for scenario designers who want to design huge scenarios is that this model breaks down when you have multiple independent forces on the map working semi-independently over long periods of time. You end up with groups of units who are accumulating "downtime" at different rates.

Does all that make the 6-minute game scale "wrong". No, it means you're designing out of the game's "sweet spot". Can you do that and "tweak" the game scale to compensate? Of course you can. But just because it is possible to design a 1,000-turn scenario with 4 divisions worth of troops on each side, and a 500x500 hex map, doesn't mean the game was designed to model that.

Based on the manual, I would say that game was designed for 6-minute turns and relatively small (say regimental size plus support)/short (say up to 25-30 turns) scenarios. The fact that scenario designers (who may or may not have had anything to do with coding the basic game engine) chose to deviate from the sweet spot from day 1 doesn't change the basic design concept at all.

Anyway that was my one rambling comment on the whole game scale debate. In the end, I agree with the saner people on the thread who have said "design and/or play what you enjoy, and let the other drown in the details".

Mike