Kill Points or VP Points

[Marquo]

So - all good conversation but a difficult one - I ultimately think it comes down to the scenario designer determining what is the key thing the player has to do (almost singular) and then reward them for actions that take them along that path. Easier said than done!

David,

I agree with the caveat that the constraints are simply imposed by the gaming system/program, and the idea of dynamic versus static VPs is a good idea, and would make for much more interesting and intruiging campaigns.

You referenced my version of the Backhand Blow/FSR; I did agonize over the VP levels and struggled with many iterations. There is a tension between what STAVKA wanted to achieve, and what could be achieved. There is almost no way of expecting poor Popov to capture the bridges over the Dnepr, and to reward the Soviet for attaining the deepest penetration possible only to be slaughtered does not sit well with me. I read, and reread multiple accounts, and finally decided that Belgorod is the key to the campaign. Afterall, when this is where Von Manstein finished his offensive in March, 1943. So what if the Soviets take Kharkov - the current engine offers no rewards for this or even capturing Dnepopetrovsk....if it is lost again Axis.

It is time for tired old work horse to get an overhaul.

Marquo :)