Is this a bug/mistake?

[Scud]

Operation Market Garden:

"In Valkenswaard engineers were moved up to construct a 190 foot (58 m) Class 40 Bailey bridge over a stream, which was completed within 12 hours."

Not sure about the six minutes, but many designers in the past have claimed they don't follow that timeline, anyway. IMO, the first rule of thumb in a fictional scenario is to make it fun. If the looseness of the timeframe or the abilities of the engineers are questionable, so what?

In a historical scenario, that's something else. What makes a good historical one, again IMO, is it's general accuracy in the men and material, the map, and its ability to illustrate to the player what decisions had what affects on the outcome of the battle. In that case, the use of including building engineers might not be such a good thing(?)

Rod Coles once said to me that he'd play tested a scenario where the designer put material into the battle that hadn't even been invented yet. Which says to me that the proper use or improper use of building engineers should fall upon the scenario designer. Since they're not included in older scenarios, I don't see them having an affect anyway? Again... ? Whether new designs use them in a good way, playability-wise, is up to players to decide and will be reflected in the scenario's ratings and comments.

Personally, I like them, but I'd much rather play a fun game than an accurate one. Just me. I should add, the few scenarios where I had bridging engineers, they never got one built, so it's not a guarantee.

Dave