Good and Bad Scenarios

[Hawk Kriegsman]

By that I mean that both sides may be able to obtain a victory of some sort without distorting the historical content of the scenario.
The positioning of the VP's certainly seem to hold the key to the success of this.

Possibly the single best point in the whole thread.

Please make the scenarios as historically acurate as possible. Just give me a chance to win. That is done through VP allocation.

For some good examples of this I would highly recommend you look at Curt Cabbage's RS scenarios dealing with the Dutch East Indies and Burma in 1941-1942.

The KNIL, Brits and Americans routinely get their butts handed to them by the Japanese. The Japanese are superior and will take the bulk of their objectives and cause more damage.

The forces are not balanced at all.

However the Allies can win by holding an objective or two that was historically lost or by making the Japanese pay extra for the objectives they take.

The scenarios are balanced.

Balance is achieved if both sides feel they have a legitimate chance to win, not by have the same amount of units on each side.

Victory points are the key.

And one final point. Glint may be many things, but a cheat he is not. I have battled him via PBEM and he has never been anything but a stand up opponent. I would play him again without reservation if given the chance.

I truly look forward to seeing and playing his scenarios. And rest assured I will judge the scenario, objectively on its merits alone.

Thanx!

Hawk