Forums

Being an historian forced by circumstances to make my living as an environmental scientist, who comes to these boards, when I can... exhausted and somewhat inebriated (on occasion very inebriated)...I must find myself agreeing with Huib's frustrations.

That is not, however, an adequate representation of the feelings aroused when one finds himself reading critiques of one's scenario's (oh...I can tell you brother...). More or less, each scenario is a labor of love, frustration, hate or damnation...and any perverted mix of those...prior to being completed.

A few weeks ago, I mentioned the subject of playing scenarios without the use of the "victory conditions" check being used, and that post drew very little attention. Specifically, that was introduced because of my love of playing (and somewhat feebly designing) historical scenarios.

I became a wargamer because of my love of history...conversely...so many, know a little (...or a lot...granted) of history because they are wargamers. Very good, and cheers to that lot, in my oppinion. We are, indeed, a mongrel crowd. ...and there (!) becomes evident the dichotomy...I believe was being expressed in the original post...

My concentration of designed scenarios focuses on; the early Pacific fighting, the East African campaign and the France '40 period...because of (fortunately) good references and good people who are available to me. Other portions of the war seem to be adequately (if not expertly) handled by the aforementioned and other deservedly credited individuals...too numerous to mention.

In playability, balance, interest and et al, ad nauseum, according to the Blitz boards, my scenarios suck and bite. My interest of the period(s) does not wane, however...and it is the loss to the "gamers", perhaps, who look for something else, not provided in "Amba Alagi" (for example). That, however, is not, or ever will be, of my concern.

But I will say, for most of my scenarios, especially the later ones...I cannot agree more with Huib...: to alter an order of battle is sacrilige; the map must be as accurate as possible (ugh... again ugh...and so help me, my least favorite part), the environment must be adequately represented...

...and the victory conditions are up in the air, to a point...and CAN BE QUIBBLED (fist fought?) OVER.

Sincerely

Curt

...P.S. Huib...truely thanx...so much

Bravo, I agree wholeheartedly..if the map, fortifuications, the OOB and the placement of units is accurate then the only thing that remains is to make the scenario a contest and only the Victory Conditions and the value of the Victory hexes can achieve this.

Well said!

<deleted>

Nicely said, Curt.

I do agree!

Take care and good luck
Jason Petho

wow...

...Dire Straits.."Tunnel of Love"...reminds me of what I was doing...

Having played Herr Gubermans Polish scenarios and Huibs also. I would have to say they did not bite ;) and I've played plenty of other custom scenarios some do bite :rolleyes: But everyone has an opinion and we all know how that can be interpreted :cool:

A feature I would love to see is the ability for scenario designers to leave
their own comments, to be able to argue their case as to why certain design desisions were made in a scenario. I'm not sure how H2H works but one can feel a little impotent rage when ones scenario is dismissed by somebody in the ratings section without being able to leave a comment to justify the decisions made.

The ironic thing is that the comments I'd most like to counter from the Cross of Lorraine scenario were made by Huib :)

Cheers, Chris

With all due respect to those who have labored over creating and refining HtH over the years, I must say that, as a designer, I gave up on it in the very early stages of its development.

Once I have a scenario completed, I turn to a small a cadre of people who I think I can count on for quality ...and timely ....feedback (alas, Jim Puff was one of my best resources... boy, do I miss him, in so many respects).

As was mentioned previously, if your passion is historical design, then there isn't a lot to change. The map "is what it is". The feedback you will typically pick up is in regard to mapping errors, or the the possibility of a minor tweak or two that can be made without moving beyond the historical geography (there are some aspects of transpoing a map that are subjective, and comments along those lines are fair game). Same thing with the OB: it is what it is (or more precisely, what it was). If someone can point me toward historical evidence for making a change, I'm on it in a hearttbeat.

One of the things I enjoy most about playtesting other designer's scenarios is that I WILL dig into my research library and try to validate aspects of the OB, map, or situational elements in the scene. Doing the research is the most rewarding part of scenario design, and for me, the most rewarding part of playtesting.

The one area that every designer needs input on is the construction of the victory conditions. Any scenario... and I mean ANY scenario...can be "balanced". It is a matter of setting objectives that are commensurate with the forces available to each side. After all the hard work of map creation and OB research is completed, this becomes one of the most challengin aspects of the design. Top get it right, it takes a lot of repeat testing. My experience is that this is best done rapid-fire with a slate of playtesters that you feel confortable working with.

I would add that, when a scene I have done gets criticized, I don't get alarmed about it. As has been noted, we have players with a wide rnage of playing interests, and what appeals to one will surely not appeal to another. The scenario that I recently worked with Huib on is a classic example (Across the Seine). I predicted up front that some players would find the lack of German armor in the scenario to be objectionable. Clearly, that tpe of scene isn;t for every player. But for those that appreciate the challenge of an urban brawl, and the excitement of trying to frantically blow bridges to thwart and American armored thrust.... this scene is for you.